One clue would come from my suspicion that agents of the Federal 
government, in March 1995, lured away the former resident of 7302 Corregidor 
(see  http://www.redfin.com/WA/Vancouver/7302-Corregidor-Rd-98664/home/14565030 
 ), the house immediately to the east of mine, and bought that house.  (In the 
picture provided, my house at 7214 Corregidor is just to the left of the house 
shown.)   The prior resident was a local school (high school?) science teacher, 
and he was hired at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratories in Richland 
Washington, a Federal government laboratory akin to Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, 
Lawrence Livermore, etc.  http://www.pnl.gov/   
    The purpose of this was to be able to acquire that house, and use it as a 
spying location against me. (The names ostensibly buying the house were Daniel 
J. and Dori J. Sabin, and they ran a remodeling operation named "Sundown 
Development Construction Corporation".  
http://www.sundowndevelopmentconstruction.com/   )   Note that the date the 
house was sold is shown as March 10, 1995.  (This is odd, because school 
teachers' lives are oriented around the 'school year', which in most locations 
in America go from about September 1 to about June 1.  They sign contracts with 
the school to work for that year, and are bound to do so.   While I don't 
recall when the prior, lured occupant left, based on the sale date it appears 
that he sold that house months before the end of his school year.  For a school 
teacher, this would have been highly unusual.)   
    The sale price is shown as $180,000, which I think was rather high for that 
time. (But not unexpected if the government wanted to lure him away quickly.  
Presumably he got a large raise, as well.)  They immediately began an extensive 
remodeling and enlargement operation on that house, including adding a second 
floor.  As I recall, this remodel took nearly a year; seemingly the house was 
unoccupied during that time.  Further, during a long period very little work 
was actually being done, as I recall.  (This remodeling would have dramatically 
increased the value of that house; the sale price in 1995 of $180,000 cannot be 
directly compared with the current value of the much-larger and more-up-to-date 
house as it exists today.)
    While I don't remember precisely the date I published the first part of my 
AP essay, I believe that it was no more than a few weeks prior to March 10, 
1995, on the 'Digitaliberty' discussion area.    
http://www.skepticfiles.org/hacker/cud6105.htm   (Hence my reference to 
Digitaliberty in the essay; it wasn't until many weeks later that I'd heard of 
the 'Cypherpunks' list.)  My recollection that the person who initiated 
'Digitaliberty', Bill Frezza, was interested in the use of technology for the 
development of 'liberty', although the first part of my AP essay apparently 
exceeded his tolerance for radicalism.  At some point somebody transported Part 
1 of the AP essay to Cypherpunks, and informed me of the existence of CP; I 
acquired Internet access and joined the Cypherpunks list.
    The acquisition and operation of nearby government spy locations was/is 
certainly not new.  Consider the case of Robert Hanssen,   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen      While this Wikipedia article 
does not mention it, I read contemporaneously various news reports (2001) that 
said the government set up a spy location near Hanssen's house.  How far away 
that location was, those reports did not say.   Presumably, this was a standard 
tactic, and non-controversial. (At least in the case of actual criminality 
being suspected and investigated.)  The difference, in my case, was that not 
only did they not suspect me of any crime, they knew that I was innocent of any 
crime.  It is obvious, therefore, that they engaged in this activity not 
because of any crime (which, had it existed, would have made me a 'criminal') 
but because of my writing and publication of Part 1 of my Assassination 
Politics essay.  (Which made me 'an enemy', 'a
 dissident', an opponent of not merely the Federal government, but all 
governments everywhere.)  In other words, the government engaged in activities 
more appropriate for the former Soviet Union, and seemingly not for America.  

    One question that should be asked, is:  "What what the government did, 
acquiring that house at surveilling me from it, legal?"   They would presumably 
say, "yes".  But why wasn't that "stalking", within the meaning of the criminal 
statute?  After all, in November 21, 2000 I was accused of "Interstate 
Stalking", simply for going around, looking at various locations, not 
confronting (nor even seeing) anyone.  I was investigating things, because I 
knew that something was (and had been) happening.  Was I less entitled to do 
what I did, than what the government was to do what it did?  An 
inmate/informant named Ryan Thomas Lund (his recent activity:  
http://www.localblotter.com/news/oregon/man-detained-on-multiple-counts/8340383.html
  )  was instructed to attack me, which he did on November 25, 1997, because I 
was beginning to resist the plea agreement that I had been offered, and 
initially accepted.
    Don't think that I didn't already suspect the house at 7302 Corregidor 
during that time.  In fact, I informed my (corrupt) attorney Peter Avenia  
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98101-wa-peter-avenia-20216.html  of some of my 
suspicions.  (But, of course, I didn't know at that time Avenia was corrupt.)  
Sometime about December 1, 1997, Avenia visited me at FDC Seatac jail and I 
told him of Lund's attack.  His answer?  "I don't know anything 
about.....that")  (Avenia was also Lund's attorney.)   And in about July 1998, 
after I was re-arrested, ostensibly for a 'supervised release violation', the 
prosecutor Robb London (who is currently the direction of communication at 
Harvard Law School  
http://www.linkedin.com/vsearch/p?orig=SEO_SN&firstName=Robb&lastName=London&trk=SEO_SN
  ) claimed that I 'said that the government was spying on him' [Jim Bell].   
Which, of course, was true:  I DID suspect, and say, that the government was 
spying
 on me!   Problem is, London was using this bare assertion to justify me being 
sent to the Federal Medical Center at Springfield, Missouri, for a mental 
evaluation (!).  Another problem was, London didn't say I was _wrong_ when I 
said (or suspected) that.  (Without at least an allegation that I was wrong, 
what justification is it to claim that I asserted that the government was 
spying on me?!?  Is merely saying that I believed the government was spying on 
me enough to justify sending me to a mental evaluation?  Would an American's 
"suspecting" that all his telephone metadata and email was being copied by the 
NSA, prior to Snowden's allegations, constitute a justification to send that 
'comrade' for a mental evaluation in Siberia...er...Springfield?)    And worse, 
I was not allowed to challenge the (implicit) allegation of falsity in my 
assertion that the government had been spying on me.  However, I used the 
situation (a hearing) to extract a
 promise (only partly kept) from Avenia that he would investigate my 
allegations.  Many months later, perhaps in February 1999, Avenia send 
investigator Sharon Callas to Vancouver.  Mysteriously, Callas was said to have 
'disappeared' (or perhaps 'resigned') later.  I never saw the results of her 
investigation.  Later, in about April 1999, attorney Avenia resigned, but NOT 
at my request.  I suspected then, and still suspect today, that his resignation 
was triggered by something that Sharon Callas discovered during that 
investigation:  Perhaps she confirmed enough of my allegations that Avenia knew 
that I was correct.  http://www.shmoo.com/mail/cypherpunks/jun00/msg00154.shtml 
     
     So, what had been going on?  Presumably, the interest in me (including 
local spying) was NOT based on allegations of crime, or even suspected future 
crime, in March 1995.  In other words, no government law enforcement agency 
would have been legally entitled to spy on me.  Presumably, the spying that did 
occur was, itself, illegal:  And, had it become exposed (which it should have 
been if I had not been assaulted by Ryan Thomas Lund on November 25, 1997), the 
Federal government would have suffered an enormous hit of bad publicity.  This 
corruption must have been at an extremely high level:  The forgery of fake 
appeal case 99-30210, initiated secretly and kept from me for 10 months, with 
numerous forged documents filed (at least two ostensibly being from me, but 
they were also forged:  You can see them on PACER:   www.pacer.gov    9th 
circuit court.  One was docketed about November 10, 1999 and the other was 
docketed about March 4,
 2000:   Both dates by my recollection).   That would have taken the 
cooperation of some very powerful people in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 
possibly including a few judges.   Further, every document filed in that case, 
from June 1999 through April 2000, was (illegally) not delivered to me when I 
was at FDC Seatac (until September 3, 1999) and when I was at FCI Phoenix from 
September 10, 1999 to my release on April 13, 2000.  Indeed, there were at 
least two pieces of certified mail described in the docket for case 99-30210 
that were mailed to my then-correct address at FCI Phoenix, which didn't get to 
me, presumably they were stolen by BOP staff at FCI Phoenix.   (Not to mention 
my allegation that this entire docket was RE-forged once they learned that I 
had requested an appeal that I hadn't known was already in progress.)

     Doesn't this begin to sound like the classic "government conspiracy" that 
people who don't like to talk about "government conspiracies" argue don't 
happen.  (Except rarely, say the Watergate incident in 1972).  One of the 
reasons that I look (way) down on a few of the doofuses around here (CP list) 
who don't seem to 'like' me is that they apparently take that position without 
taking the trouble to read my 2003 lawsuit (02-1052; Portland Federal Court) 
and learning what I allege the government and its minions did.  It will be 
interesting to see if any of them step up, apologize, and say, "Sorry, Mr. 
Bell, we didn't know..."

     Jim Bell                      
"jim btc tipjar"      1AzNPQ1NhiD9uG1hU5g5Kdaccb88Dus2Bo
     




________________________________
 From: brian carroll <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2014 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to screw you
 


> Any questions?

observation:  with regard to illegal and fraudulent tactics used in
your prosecution, court case, appeal, etc. it is wondered if the
corrupt actions of individuals may go beyond a severawl government
employees acting this way in isolation, and instead involve a hidden
or structural approach, such as a domestic FISA-like program, where
their actions are protected and so they are not concerned with issues
of their own wrong doing because they are acting as part of a larger
organized, coordinated effort. perhaps beyond normal processes though
still 'legal' due to secret laws or secret hearings or decisions
allowing this activity to occur. it seems more likely that activity
like this is signed-off-on by someone with authority than not, unless
there is total lawlessness within government and bureaucracy. i do not
know enough to know though tend to believe the fraudulent activities
must be structural not anomalous, given their coordination and purpose
to convict and create endless problems with the bureaucracy.


about the V2V cars- what is the likelihood that automobiles are _not
tagged in some way, just like computers, given that location or other
data is critically important and perhaps more easily accessible or
tracked outside of a particular environment, say run-ups to meetings
or whatever, the timeliness of data as it approaches a meeting point,
thus ramps up in criticality, say if a cellphone conversation decides
actions minutes before an encounter. or, to scan a city for someone
via satellites, pinging the missing submarine from satellite. given
highest priority to own every computer, how likely is it that vehicles
are not already being tracked, regardless of 'known technology' that
then brings this tracking into the open. even if via passive means,
giant RFID in the sky/net, say serial #s that reflect back with
vehicle title databases, mapping geographies this way, 100,000
vehicles return signals, as if looking at asphalt and concrete heavens
using astronomy software to parse star/car-names. either installed in
new vehicles by default, or when serviced if a focused customer.
perhaps not advanced beyond passive ping, though are vehicles really
driving around autonomously besides redlight cameras and speed traps?
doubt it.

Reply via email to