The Next Four Dangerous Years

 The danger is not that politicians sponsored by Elon Musk will prevail over those sponsored by Bill Gates and the Getty Family, or vice versa. Because Musk and Gates are not opponents: they are rivals! Both are bent on equivalent inexplicable and irrational objectives and both are completely capable of discarding evidence which fails to fit their narrative. This tendency often goes with great wealth or power and so consistent is the correlation between wealth, power and a determination to ignore, or frig, the evidence that one can only assume that cause and effect in these cases works both ways and leads to a runaway effect every time a man acquires an excess of power or wealth.

The danger is that the world will be conned into thinking it has to pick sides in the battle of the Oligarchs, because they will make the rest of the human race fight to the death on their behalf and not care a jot.

The opportunity is for us, the human race, to realise that we do not have to let either Musk nor Gates get his way, or lend our wealth or power to any Oligarch or despot whatsoever. They have nothing which they did not take from us in one way or another. Gates and Musk in particular are adept devising ways of exacting money for doing little or nothing. (The Hyperloop cost the government of the UAE and Richard Branson much, but it did nothing.) Because no-one ever lives long enough or works hard enough to earn untold billions in their own lifetime, it is actually a defining property of Oligarchs that they devise a means of getting money for little or nothing.

The things they actually do with the money they get from us, are always all about them and their hobby horses or hobbies.

And if one Oligarch or another were to one day have complete and total power, would that be a world in which we could bear to live, even assuming that the Oligarch wanted us to live?

Perhaps the emerging evidence about the regime of "racist" rape and terror exercised by the billionaire Mohamed al Fayed and his brother over his staff gives us a pretty good clue that every day in such a world would be like a private top floor suite in the Harrods department store on a really bad day.

The strange thing is, the assumption of many reporting on the fact that black staff were ordered to leave the shop floor every time al-Fayed visited it, leaving only young, blonde and female staff, is that the black women cleared from his path were victims! This is not the case: the black women were not, as far as has been reported so far, the ones who were raped and then intimidated into silence by the former and serving police officers in his pay.

 

And that brings Medawar to what might or might not be a different matter:

Now that John Cannan, the convicted abductor, rapist and murder of Shirley Banks and the only suspect the Metropolitan Police will accept for the abduction and murder of Suzy Lamplugh has died in prison without even being interviewed under caution in connection with Suzy Lamplugh, there is no known legal reason why the following information from the public domain cannot be restated, and unknown "legal" reasons are unacceptable, as when a Soviet court refused to tell Irina Ratushkinskaya what law it was that she was supposed to have broken, leading Kenneth Baker MP, now Lord Baker, to campaign for her freedom. (As did Medawar in a much smaller way.)

John Cannan may have been a lone murder and rapist, (as with Steve Wright, the "lone" bit has never been proved and in Cannan's case it has never really been tested.) But he was not a lone criminal: he had a defined role within organised crime circles and that role was to provide bigger and more important criminals with vehicles for a particular occasion and purpose that couldn't be traced back to them, first and foremost, with the vehicle not being traceable back to Cannan as a somewhat lower priority. If push came to shove, the buck was supposed to stop with him. He was what a structural engineer might term a "crack-stopper." Part of being a crack-stopper would have been disposing of the vehicle afterward, again in a way designed to be, if it couldn't be untraceable, somewhat less traceable to his client than to him.

The reason why the CPS under more than one DPP never allowed the police to interview Cannan under caution about Suzy Lamplugh, was that the police only presented the CPS with one reasonably-solid piece of relevant physical evidence, and that was DNA evidence which proved that both he and Suzy had been in a particular car with a history of unclear ownership, which police had found in a car-dealer's showroom. The CPS found this insufficient (they did not find it to be invalid) because proving that two people had each been in a vehicle with a chequered past at some point, does not prove that they were both in the vehicle at the same time, however simple and obvious it might seem at first glance that this "must be" the explanation.

Given Cannan's low-level role in organised crime; providing the big fish with their wheels, an equally simple and perhaps equally valid explanation might be that Cannan provided another criminal with a car that was then used to transport Suzy, or that he disposed of such a car afterwards. 

There was then an impasse, for decades, largely because the police seemed to go round in circles attempting to make the CPS accept that their bit of evidence proved what they wanted it to prove, rather than accepting that it proved what the CPS (experts in proof) said it proved and moving forwards from there.

There are two possibilities raised by this which the police seem determined not to even consider:

The first is that all Cannan did was handle a car which someone else used to abduct Suzy. This is possible, and there's nothing that really disproves it, but given Cannan's history it would be a bit of a coincidence. Medawar sees why the police don't like this idea, but he can also see why the CPS couldn't ignore it, because it contains the seeds of a successful defence, albeit one that would amount to a plea of guilty to a charge of assisting an offender.

The second is to consider that if it were normal for Cannan to provide other criminals with a car that couldn't be traced back to them, might he not have been contracted to provide someone with such a car, with a young woman meeting a particular specification, already in it?

Medawar does not go so far as to claim that such a client would have been Mr al Fayed, but the indications are that he was taking advantage of a captive audience for his sexual needs on a regular and organised basis with his employees at Harrods. If there was one billionaire in London corrupted by his own wealth and power into behaving thus, it is not unreasonable to conclude that there might have been and might still be, others. 

Al Fayed is a useful case study, rather than necessarily a suspect, because some of his victims claim to have been transported (on a pretext) to Paris or New York and raped, in a manner remarkably similar to what the veteran News Anchor, Sandy Gall, privately claimed had happened to Suzy. And there are two other prominent corporate figures in the news at the moment, alleged to have done very much the same thing to young men. (Again, Paris tends to feature, along with New York, probably because these are tempting destinations for an adventurous young person.) Had any of these young men or women died during such a misadventure, they would seem to have disappeared without trace from their last known location and the body might have been disposed of a very long way away from where the constant drizzle of "criminal intelligence tips" to police would suggest. Just like Suzy. 

The police have had tip after tip from the criminal community pointing the finger at John Cannan and sites in the West Midlands and South West, where they have looked and found no evidence of any body at all. Medawar would humbly suggest looking East and South East, for a change.

An Answer to Neil Oliver

 The question which Neil Oliver has been asking, is "why now?"

Here is an embedded video in which he asks this question:

 

Well, the "why now?" of suddenly throwing the Pakistani rape gangs whom the establishment protected for so long under a bus, is probably (as many suspect) to protect someone more important. The trouble is, everybody wants this to be a particular senior minister in the present government, or a senior figure at the BBC, or Prince Andrew; that sort of thing.

It is bigger than that, and the reason why we are being offered "action" rather than further investigation, across the geographical UK and across a broader range of offender ethnics and demographics, is that there is an international context to all this, and that is also why very powerful, and very wealthy, individuals from outside the UK are trying to muscle in on the whole issue, supposedly in opposition to the British establishment, but in fact pushing in exactly the same direction: to make sure that all the non-Pakistani suspects remain under the carpet, if not in the closet.

There is a book, which was withdrawn from publication (and appears therefore not to be in copyright!) after the author was shot in the head, allegedly as suicide, and the book is about a number of similarly convenient "suicides" of those involved in an elite sexual grooming scandal, whereas the focus being sought by everyone from Keir Starmer to "Tommy Robinson" is on a very non-elite offending demographic indeed. We are allowed to look, not at the top of the pyramid, or even the whole base of the pyramid, but at one block in the base of the pyramid.

That book has been withdrawn from publication, and Amazon no longer publishes the e--book of it, but secondhand paperbacks of "The Lost Boys of Bird Island" are available on Amazon for £60 and up! On E-bay they can cost £80!

Not only is it true that "the truth shall set you free!" (Attrib: The Lord Jesus & David Icke!) but in this particular case, the truth is itself available for free, as a consequence of the sudden death of one of the two authors.

It is important not to skip the front matter of the book, especially the Forward, because this describes how elite paedophile gangs link the US, UK and Belgium, to South Africa and especially Cape Province. Then read the main text, to get an idea of how far up the greasy pole those involved might be in all four countries.

https://ia601207.us.archive.org/21/items/the-lost-boys-of-bird-island/The%20Lost%20Boys%20of%20Bird%20Island.pdf

It's interesting that the American Oligarch trying (very persistently) to muscle in on the whole issue of paedophile gangs and grooming in the UK, originally hails from South Africa! Mr Musk is never going to answer Dr Oliver's question, so why not let Detective-Sergeant Mark Minnie answer it for him, from beyond the grave?

Legal Stalking

(This is an updated re-post of an article originally posted here in 2016.)

 

The law firm "Public Interest Lawyers" is to close and more than a thousand complaints which it has filed against British soldiers and marines will be reviewed and probably thrown out. See link to Daily Mail article. For more than a decade PIL instigated witch hunts against servicemen (and it was mainly men) on the basis of what are now known to be flimsy or completely bogus cases of human rights violations. Far from PIL being the victim of an establishment plot, the Blair, Brown and Cameron governments were completely happy to hang ordinary soldiers out to dry and they helpfully established two new investigative bodies to process all the complaints which PIL generated. It was only when judges described evidence from some of PIL's Iraqi clients as "lies" (very strong language for judges) -and the Brexit issue coincidentally swept a lot of human dross out of positions of high office in the United Kingdom government, that PIL was finally held to account. 

Whilst the Daily Mail is to be congratulated for having campaigned against the witch hunts, and for years the response of the liberal establishment to the Mail's campaign was to fatuously heap praise and honours (honourary doctorates and "solicitor of the year") on PIL's senior partner, Phil Shiner, the suggestion by some Mail columnists that Mr Shiner now be prosecuted for treason is probably inappropriate. The false cases represent a serious crime, primarily against individual soldiers and marines and the principle of Justice rather than against the State and the most appropriate charge would, therefore, be one of "conduct tending to pervert the course of justice." If Mr Shiner is to face a court himself, then it is only right that he should do so for what he did to individuals with rights of their own. Which was to persecute them using the law as a weapon, often for years, and almost always with the acquiescence of the successive governments that were willing to send those same individuals into harm's way. (Initially they were sent into harm's way with inadequate equipment, too, because the Blair government forbade the army to make detailed preparations for war because Mr Blair didn't want it to look as if war with Iraq was a forgone conclusion.)

A treason charge would only be appropriate if there was evidence that Mr Shiner acted deliberately to harm Britain as a nation by setting the courts against her soldiers, and even then it would probably need to have been on behalf of a foreign power rather than as a sort of personal hobby horse. So far, there is no evidence of this, though investigations into Mr Shiner have only just begun. 

However, it is true that if an officer of the Russian FSB or SVR had concocted a plan that saw more than a thousand criminal cases being sought against frontline British service personnel, making it seem as if the British Army was somewhat worse than the SS -and had that officer managed to get the British taxpayer to completely fund his destablisation campaign, then that hypothetical officer would receive warm praise and prompt promotion.


Update: 5th of October 2016.
The government of Theresa May has indicated that it will close loopholes in the Human Rights Act which have left soldiers open to malicious prosecution on the flimsiest of grounds. Most European countries had implemented the same basic Human Rights Act without exposing their soldiers to malicious legal action, so it has to be concluded that the governments of Antony Charles Lynton Blair and David Cameron intended that British soldiers would be so exposed.

Both Blair and Cameron denuded the British armed forces of vital resources whilst finding a constant stream of controversial and unwinnable wars for them to fight, and the net result was quite debilitating. It is only possible to conclude that a weakening and discrediting of Britain's armed forces was their objective. "Why" is an open question, but it might have something to do with a europhile agenda too radical to be admitted to in public. The early signs are that Mrs May will have no truck with that sort of thing, but it will take a while for the new government to accept that defence has been deliberately underfunded by a significant extent since about 1992. The turnaround has to start somewhere, though, and hopefully this is it.

Update: 3rd of February 2017.
Phil Shiner has been convicted of several professional misconduct charges. There are now calls for him to be prosecuted for breaches of the criminal law that could see him jailed, but this would require a lot more legal work.

 

Update: 2nd of October 2024. 

 Phil Shiner has pleaded guilty to three charges of fraud, in a sum over £3M. So Medawar's previous update, that criminal charges would require a lot more legal work, was something of an understatement. See embedded report from "The Art of Law" below.

Once the criminal proceedings are finally over with the sentencing in December, surviving victims of this man may be able to bring civil claims for defamation, but it is a pity and a glaring omission that no stalking charges have been brought or even, apparently, considered.

 

The Murder of Linda Muegge: Who was "Frank"?

 It is now about seventeen years since Linda Muegge, an animal welfare campaigner who also ran a food kitchen for disadvantaged humans and was otherwise active in her community in a positive way, was stabbed to death in her kitchen, in Fredericksburg, Central Texas, the killer attempting to burn the house down over her head to conceal the evidence. This failed for two reasons: a large amount of non-flammable plaster ceiling material fell on top of the body, preserving evidence of her wounds -and the local fire department were training nearby and were able to attend the scene several minutes earlier than would have normally been the case:

This is a link to a current Fox News article on the case:

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/fredericksburg-woman-linda-muegge-case-missing-in-texas

And this is a link to a blog article (one of several by the same author) posted many years ago by a friend of Medawar, reproducing a lot of articles and local background information not otherwise available online. If you have trouble reading the newspaper cuttings, they are posted as jpegs so you can download them and read them more easily in an image viewer that allows you to zoom in on the text:

https://vocct.blogspot.com/2010/12/muegge-murder.html

Here is the somewhat meagre but still useful article from the Texas Department of Public Safety (who, incidentally, are responsible for licensing private detectives. The State Troopers come under the DPS, too.)

 https://www.dps.texas.gov/apps/coldCase/Home/Details/8

 This murder has occupied the attention of both Medawar and VOCCT for oh so many years, and it is perplexing that the FBI have not yet solved this one because Agents from the San Antonio Field Office have so many friends and supporters in Fredericksburg.

Today, one word in the FBI's updated article on this murder strikes Medawar as a bit of a clue, which those agents really should have been able to follow up on. That word is "Frank" and it is the name used by an individual who Linda complained of, to police, some years before her murder. She did not feel safe with Frank on her land or in her house, and she only knew him because he had been introduced by a mutual friend. See:

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/vicap/homicides-and-sexual-assaults/linda-muegge

The method of approach to the victim is not typical of an ordinary stalker or sex-pest. It is, however, how undercover officers and private detectives tend to do it. SVR and FSB agents also prefer to be introduced to a target rather than to introduce themselves, but the agency involved might be closer to home than that.

It is unlikely that the killer himself was a private detective, because that would be unprofessional as well as illegal and setting a fire to "destroy evidence" is not a favoured technique with professionals because it tends to give investigators an unambiguous timeline which can be more dangerous than just leaving the deceased to their own devices until discovered hours or days later. But since Frank appeared at the beginning of a years-long campaign of harassment, the killer might well have been one of Frank's clients, or an associate thereof. (Well-planned killings tend to have several layers of separation.)

Now, at the time there was a licensed private investigator, based in Fair Oaks (between St Antonio and Fredericksburg) who did quite a lot of work for the great and good of both cities and most of them (and several local FBI agents, police officers and Texas Rangers) knew him as "Frank"  even though that was not the name on his business card. He also claimed to be a former FBI agent and this claim was verified by senior agents in the San Antonio Field Office, although, interestingly, one State Trooper who asked FBI Headquarters to confirm this (in connection with complaints about the private investigator's license) was told, quite clearly and firmly, that the private investigator was NOT a former FBI agent.

It's almost as if the FBI as an institution is currently searching in vain for information already known to many of its former agents!

It could be very embarrassing for the killer, whoever he is, if Medawar had an image of that investigator's business card, would it not?

"Cyber Stalking Leading to Death" will get you life in jail!

 There has been a successful Federal prosecution for this crime, details now released by the FBI. It is worth noting that this was effectively also a gangstalking case insofar as the primary defendant was found to have had help on the night when things progressed to the actual killing and, given the intensity of the stalking (and blackmail attempts) which preceded this, it's quite likely that he would have sought to share the workload before this.

(Note to police, FBI and NCA: if a victim is alleging offences that seem like an impossible amount of work for a single offender, you must give weight to the possibility of conspiracy and/or common purpose as well as that the victim is simply mistaken. The latter course will only reduce your workload and help your career if it is really true: if the victim turns out to be correct you've just blown away your career, reputation and pension. The safest course is to check for this kind of thing, because it's always going to be more common than suggested by official statistics (which are primarily designed to get your political bosses re-elected).

No mention is made of sentences for the two known accomplices, which may indicate either that they still face further local charges in Independence, Missouri, or that they felt the need to cut a deal with the Federal authorities. Had they been proved to have assisted with the cyber-stalking phase of the case, they could easily have faced the same penalty. 

This highlights the enormous risks being run by anyone playing even a minor role in stalking, gangstalking and cyber-stalking offences, because simply by doing what you are told by the sort of person likely to become head of such a gang, you are making yourself legally responsible for the actions of someone not in their right mind!

There's more than one Federal law these days that can be used to prosecute such cases, depending largely on whether or not the abuse of computer technology was involved (bugs, spyware, tracking devices, and tracking apps on the victim's phone all count and not very many stalking gangs fail to use at least one of those!) Even when it's all done by word of mouth, it's still a conspiracy to deny rights and when that results in death (or kidnapping) the penalty can be life imprisonment or death, if the current administration is minded to permit the latter.

In the United Kingdom there is no such thing as a Federal crime; just varying degrees of severity or public interest which might divert a case from Crown or Sheriff's court to the Old Bailey or the Court of Sessions. But there is a an over-arching principle that participants in a conspiracy share responsibility for what the conspiracy does and there is also a law of Common Purpose, which requires even participants in a spontaneous offence to share responsibility for its outcome. Beyond that, a gang member can be and often is, charged with "assisting an offender in..." whatever the crime was. 

The cosy feeling of security in being a gang member or going along with workplace bullying is a legal illusion, because by doing so you make yourself responsible for the final outcome of that activity, however dreadful that might be. And the dreadfulness of the outcome is determined by the most psychopathic or sociopathic personality within the gang, or workplace. Everyone accosted by a bully or participant in a feud of any kind, needs to ask themselves the simple question: "what's the worst thing this person might do?" before doing anything that might help them do it.

There's probably at least a dozen followers in jail for every leader who managed to get himself jailed rather than letting someone else go to jail for him.

Bob Dylan: "don't follow leaders, who rob the parking meters!"

New Year's posts by Victims of Organized Crime in Central Texas

 VOCCT has posted two blog articles for the new year, see:

https://vocct.blogspot.com/2024/

Her remarks about lies are important, because stalkers, organised or otherwise, tend to depend on lies above all other means of manipulation.

Recently in the UK, several police officers (including some of Chief Officer rank) have been exposed as rapists and paedophiles. All of them protected themselves with a web of lies. If you are a policeman and you start tripping over lies told to you by your colleagues, your duty to the public is to find out just what is not only hidden but also enabled by those lies. If the lies you are hearing might seem innocuous and even tolerable, what about the thing that is being enabled by those lies? Might not that thing be something no reasonable person could possibly accept? Perhaps it might be as well to check on that before potentially implicating yourself by turning a blind eye!

There are multiple scandals associated with the pandemic which readers have just survived and so many others didn't, but all of those scandals revolve around individuals for whom lying was, and still is, the first resort.

Multi-generational Stalkers and Baseless Grievances

 All stalking campaigns start with and are sustained by one or more grievances. The Oxford Dictionary (1934 edition in this instance: waste not, want not) defines a grievance as "Real or fancied ground of complaint." The Oxford Academics of the 1930s chose those six words with great precision: a grievance is as likely to be imaginary or falsified as it is to be true. An understanding of this fact might allow a lot of apparently motiveless crimes to be solved: people hate, and harm, other people, not only for things which the other people never did, but for things that never even happened in the first place. And yet, the decisive question which policemen ask stalking victims is almost always "what have you done to make them do this to you?" This question tends to be decisive in getting an investigation dropped or, more usually, not started in the first place.

If a stalking victim admits they do not know of any reason, then the police tend to drop the investigation there and then because it's clear to them that it's not happening. (Unless the victim is female and attractive, in which case they will assume it's sexually-based and it might not be.)

If the victim is inspired to make a guess, then the police might investigate on the basis of that guess until it's proved wrong, from which point on the victim is regarded as a delusional nuisance, never to be listened to again.

With vocational stalkers (and "professional" ones, who do it on behalf of others for money do exist as this is less risky than hiring a killer) the victim will almost certainly have been fed disinformation which inspires them to not only put forward a false reason for the stalking, but also to completely misidentify the stalker(s).

The same applies in murder cases, too: the only difference is that the victim isn't even able to argue with the police when they can't find any motive, or, by getting the motive wrong, identify the wrong suspect. You are never going to uncover a baseless grievance by a close and methodical study of the facts! (For the wrong person to actually get convicted of a murder, the jury only has to buy into the prosecution's concept of either the motive or some other aspect of what took place. Because, although in theory the accused is innocent until proven guilty, the absence of any alternative suspect is often taken as proof of guilt and it really, really should not be.)

But there is a much more fundamental danger with baseless grievances: they do not go away with time. The baseless grievance cannot be settled or resolved: you cannot pay back that which you never stole, you cannot sincerely apologise for an insult or blasphemy which you never uttered. And because no falsely-accused party can "admit the truth" of a baseless grievance, it never gets forgotten either! The most effective form of propaganda is to manufacture synthetic grievances against your enemies: Mr Putin's justification of the Russian invasion of Ukraine was based on numerous baseless grievances, such as Ukraine's Jewish president being an antisemitic NAZI! And this is why there will never be a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia; because Ukraine is required by Russia to right a whole raft of wrongs which never happened. 

Mr Andrew Bridgen MP has been totally cancelled and de-platformed for antisemitism  because he quoted, verbatim, a report by academics at a Hebrew University. Everyone in Parliament now knows this to be the case, all but about twelve members of Parliament continue to ostracise and vilify Mr Bridgen despite knowing that their basis for doing so is false. Future generations may never know the truth because this generation of MPs and journalists simply won't admit it.

And all of the above has been written simply to illustrate what happens within the families and social circles of stalkers, to make stalking multi-generational in many cases:

When a baseless grievance is used to explain, and justify, what the adults in a family are doing to someone else, and they might well be doing something that goes beyond harassment into persecution and mental torture, children growing up with that grievance (and often seeing what their adult carers are capable of) end up with some very limited choices:

They can challenge what is being done and the basis on which it is being done, in which case they will be bullied into submission or even killed.

They can try to escape, but they may be pursued and brought back out of the need of those who have bought into the baseless grievance to preserve it.

They can fade into the background and go along with it all as much as they need to in order to avoid repercussions.

Or, and in most cases this is what happens: the baseless grievance will be constantly repeated and reiterated in order to lend it force and this has a brainwashing effect, not just on those who hear it, but on those who say it. Add to this the fact that there is no good outcome for anyone in such a family or social circle who appears to disbelieve the baseless grievance and learning to believe the false grievance isn't so much the path of least resistance as the only available path.

Furthermore, whatever the baseless grievance is, it might not be spoken outside of the family or social circle doing the stalking, so the victims (and all outsiders) will be left guessing. And the stalking will go on until either the victims, their descendants or even their entire ethnic group, is gone.

Organised and individual stalking are not crimes against humanity on the same scale or intensity as the ongoing genocide against the Uighurs or the historical genocides against the Armenians and the Jewish Holocaust, which was inspired by the Armenian genocide, but they arise out of and are sustained by the same mechanism: the baseless grievance. And in Rwanda, stalking on the grounds of both inflated and baseless grievances was deliberately used by agents of the French Government to prepare the population to commit actual genocide.

(Interesting point: The French plan for the Rwandan genocide pretty much followed Haman's plot in the book of Esther in the Old Testament. And Haman had no substantial motive for his plot at all, really! The alleged but  scarcely believable motive for the Rwandan genocide is that the Tutsis used English as their lingua franca. The motive for both Czarist and Bolshevik repression in Ukraine was that the Ukrainians had their own language. Same story in Kazakhstan and Finland, really.)

Substack article series of note:

 This may interest anyone who suspects that organised stalking mainly serves to harness little psychopaths to the ambitions of bigger psychopaths:

https://spystack.substack.com/p/the-puppet-master-and-the-psychopath

Canada is somewhat further down the road than the USA or the UK, but the destination is still a country run by people with dangerous mental disorders and no moral conscience, manipulated from a distance by even more deranged people who may or may not be in Beijing. It's no longer "democracy versus authoritarianism" but reason versus psychosis.

Official WHO Paper describing a "likely" link between mRNA Covid vaccines and Multiple Sclerosis censored some days after publication.

 

For the whole pandemic emergency (and it has recently been declared "over" by the World Health Organisation), Medawar has given out NO information at all on the pandemic, vaccines or anything else. He would NEVER tell ANYONE to refer to any source other than official WHO documents for their information.

The above screenshot is from just such a document, describing a "likely" link between COVID mRNA and possibly other "spike protein" COVID vaccines and Multiple Sclerosis. There now appear to be ongoing online efforts to suppress this official document and it isn't at all clear who is doing this, or on what authority, or for what reason. 

At the time of writing this post, the report was still available here:

https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/global-literature-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/resource/pt/covidwho-2138820?lang=en

Given that an apparently important document that the WHO saw fit to publish globally is being censored on the orders of some unknown third party, it would perhaps be a sensible precaution on the part of the UK and other governments, NOT TO SIGN the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations 2005 unless and until it becomes clear who it is exercising the power of censorship over the WHO! Because the amendments hand more or less total power over to the WHO, including the power to decide what constitutes an emergency activating those powers, it is completely unacceptable for there to be a hidden hand capable of controlling the WHO as it exercises such extraordinary powers.

UK residents may like to sign the following petition, which seeks a Parliamentary debate before such wide-ranging powers are signed over. This would seem to be reducing the formalities on what amounts to a new global treaty to a minimum, but it's probably better to have that bare minimum than no formalities or debate whatsoever:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/635904

When the number of signatures reaches or exceeds 100,000 the UK government has to allow a Parliamentary debate (in some form; there's a catch) whether it wants to or not. There's no possible harm in letting our sovereign Parliament debate the actions of a government that is supposed to be accountable to Parliament!

Signatories might like to contact their MPs asking them to attend and even participate in the debate, should it occur. To avoid the risk of "censorship by an empty chamber."

VOCT's response to Dr Michael R. Williams

Here is a link to a post by Victims of Organized Crime in Central Texas, responding in a non-adversarial and non-contradictory way to an Op-Ed article " A Message to the People of Fredericksburg and Gillespie County" published in the Fredericksburg Standard Radio Post newspaper (in Texas) on the 22nd of February 2023:

https://vocct.blogspot.com/2023/03/response-to-dr-williams-more-complete.html

Medawar has not yet been able to find a link that will allow readers to link to Dr William's well-written and authoritative article about the decline in the fortunes of Hill Country Memorial Hospital, successful efforts led by himself to revive those fortunes to the point where the hospital was winning national awards -and the rapid and wilful resumption of decline as soon as he moved on. Medawar does have an annotated copy of the article as printed in the newspaper, which he will not publish for copyright reasons and for other legal reasons involving the annotations.

A link would be welcome and if a reader posts one in a comment below (and it checks out as safe!) it will be promoted to the main body of this post. The only person who can properly give (or deny) permission for the article to be reproduced here is Dr Williams himself. He is invited to do this, and he may supply the text as he wants it to be. Although his article was intended, as the title suggests, primarily for those who use and depend on the Hill Country Memorial Hospital, VOCT's thesis is that the shenanigans he bears witness too is more long-standing and extensive than he thinks and has had international repercussions of a lethal nature. It might be in the interests of the people he served so well, to make his article available online somewhere, but it would be unfair to expect him to do this, or allow this, on VOCT's blog which might directly associate him with her views.

see: 

https://medawarscornflakes.blogspot.com/2021/03/how-to-contact-medawar.html

A link to the article a platform under the control of Dr Williams (Blogger is free) would be ideal. Even aside from VOCT's thesis, the story which Dr Williams tells resonates with that of many failing hospitals in many parts of the world. What is so helpful about his article, is that he shows not only that failure of a medical institution be reversed, but he also explains how he did it! That deserves a much wider audience.

Is "Gangstalking Australia" vindicated, more than twelve years later?

Gangstalking Australia is (was?) a talented mixed-race female artist and victim of very intense stalking and harassment, in Australia, who was in contact with Medawar up to 2010. Towards the end of her contact with Medawar, she was living on the road, in a van, in the Northern Territories, because her house had been made completely untenable by stalkers harassing her with both toxic chemicals and directed-energy weapons. One of the latter was definitely some kind of non-visible-wavelength laser which could scorch patterns on the net curtains and indeed the wallpaper of her house. Another energy weapon could penetrate clothing to inflict pain and cause blisters and other indications of burns. 

Toxic chemical explanations are much less favoured by conspiracy theorists, for some reason, but were definitely being used against Gangstalking Australia, and her vomiting attacks are strongly suggestive of chloropicrin, which is officially recognised as a chemical weapon under international treaties intended to ban such things. Do not believe anyone who states that chloropicrin is non-lethal! It was used in the Great War in conjunction with more toxic gases such as Cyanide, Mustard and Phosgene, because it is very fast acting (faster than most modern nerve gases in fact) and by opening a gas barrage with some chloropicrin shells, enemy soldiers could be incapacitated before they could put on their gas masks, allowing them to be killed by the more obviously-lethal gases or even masked soldiers with bayonets, because they would be completely unable to defend themselves. Chloropicrin causes absolutely convulsive vomiting within a few seconds of exposure and it is by no means impossible or even unlikely for this to cause death by asphyxia by itself.

During the same period that Gangstalking Australia was reporting these attacks via her blog, Medawar was in contact with several unconnected individuals in native North American communities who reported the same (and other) chemical attacks. Very few white American stalking victims reported chemical attacks by comparison, which may be why the "TI community" thinks it's all directed-energy stuff and to do with "satellites", but there were some white victims. Also in that period, some Sámi people (native Laplanders) reported similar abuse. Medawar suggested at the time that the objective of the harassment might be to destabilise (non-immigrant) ethnic minorities in preparation for some community-wide abuse; the native Americans thought that this was quite likely. Medawar didn't have enough contact with Sámi or native Australian victims to determine if the same might be true with them. The native American victims were journalists, community spokespeople and so on and so forth. Ideal targets for a destabilisation campaign in other words.

Directed-energy weapons which burn skin through clothing could be working either in the far infrared part of the spectrum or the adjacent millimetre-wave part of the electromagnetic spectrum. The point where these spectra meet is also where a laser becomes a maser, or possibly even just a planar-array antenna (a flat plate, in appearance). So there's a variety of forms such a weapon could take and still inflict the same kind of pain and injury in the same kind of way.

Which brings us up to the present day and reports that demonstrators in Australia have been attacked (and burned by) what look most likely to be planar-array millimetre wave antennae from the published images of suspect equipment.

It could well be that what happened to Gangstalking Australia, the Native North American and Sámi victims a decade ago was some kind of experiment to test prototype weapons on people from marginalised communities (or people against whom individual testers had some kind of a personal grudge) in readiness for the day when officialdom might need to protect itself from the general public, that is, the electorate from whom the officials obtain the right to hold office!

Nonces With Actual Power: a new acronym for the post-Epstein age

There's a funny thing about all the witnesses to Jeffrey Epstein's life and work as a mentor of surprisingly young women entering the hospitality industry. That is, when pressed, they can bring themselves to remember Prince Andrew (a very slow-moving target with no actual power; during the Falklands War he flew a helicopter used as a decoy to protect more important targets from Exocet missiles) but they have so much trouble remembering former Israeli or British Prime Ministers enjoying Epstein's services that no-one is even pressing the issue. There's a similar memory problem with former US Presidents and, even more so, with the founder of one of the world's most powerful Tech companies. 

Medawar thinks that the world needs a new acronym for those so important and influential as to slip the memory of every potential witness and complainant that they encounter.

A NWAP, a Nonce With Actual Power also has magical powers which makes them invisible to witnesses and which erases their name from flight logs and passenger lists. Lesser politicians get mired in scandal and have their careers destroyed because of a small indiscretion such as doing paid work in their House of Commons office, but a NWAP can commit multiple felonies without their Teflon (TM) character being stained.