FreedomJournal.Tv

Victims of Electronic Torture Speak Out

Home
Support FreedomJournal.Tv
Save Our Sewers in Akron Ohio
Victims of Electronic Torture Speak Out
Obama Campaign videos
Elaine Brown Former Green Party Candidate for President 2008
PoliceBrutality Watch the videos
Contact Us
US Labor Against War- Watch the Videos
Cable Tv Programming Schedule
Watch Video Clips from recent Tv shows
Order From Our Extensive Archives
Order from our archives of Anti-war/Peace Action Videos
Learn About Access TV
Federal Motion
Plaintiff's Response
City Responds
Rose's lawsuit -Watch the Videos
Watch the Videos of Akron's "Spygate" videos
Watch More Highlights from past shows
Victims of an Unfair Justice System-watch the videos

Electronic torture victim explains what it's like 
while being tortured in Akron, Ohio. 
 
Suzanne LeBoeuf offers her view about why electronic torture takes place in the U.S. and globally.  More information can be found by going to http://suzstop.googlepages.com
 
Electrowell is a 501 (c) 3 nonprofit, and expresses its gratitude for Rose Wilcher's www.FreedomJournal.Tv
 
FROM OUR ATTORNEY
June 25, 2008
Freedom from Covert Harassment and Surveillance
P.O. Box 9022
Cincinnati, Ohio 45209

Re: Report of Litigation Status

Dear Members:

This law firm represents Freedom from Covert Harassment and
Surveillance ("Freedom"). Since January, we have been looking into
litigation against government agencies and contractors surrounding the
use of directed energy weapons and similar technologies against United
States citizens. We have been conducting factual research based on the
reports of targeted individuals, technological reports, and other
avenues of information. We have also been analyzing the information in
terms of various potential legal causes of action and remedies.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed information to this cause.
The firm has received hundreds of letters, emails and phone calls. Due
to the size of this undertaking, we have not been able to respond to
everyone, however, we appreciate your input, we are taking your
reports seriously, and we are considering your information in light of
the overarching legal analysis.

At this point, we have completed an initial analysis of potential
litigation and it appears the most effective strategy would be to sue
under a small number of plaintiffs rather than as a class. Many suits
based on similar allegations have failed and we have been analyzing
the best strategies to avoid dismissal or an adverse verdict. Based on
the information we have received, the core issues and potential
defendants are too diverse amongst FFCHS members to be limited to a
class action. In other words, a class action is not recommended
because many members are being targeted by different, unconnected
perpetrators, and the reports of targeting techniques, technologies
and methods are too varied to fit into a class action. Therefore, it
makes sense to select the TIs whose abuse is best supported by
evidence. By this manner, the case will also be more manageable. If a
suit is successful, it should open up the courts to other TIs to bring
individual or group actions.

If you are not a plaintiff, this does not mean you are disbelieved.
Rather, TIs who are not plaintiffs have suffered as much as the
others. If just happened that evidence was able to be collected by the
plaintiffs who will further a suit.

In this current stage, we are contacting potential experts and lay
witnesses who may be able to testify in furtherance of a civil action
as well as trying to obtain evidence to be used in court. We have
relied upon representations of members as to the strength of evidence,
but the evidence must be authenticated and admissible in court. We
will recommend filing a complaint only if the witnesses and evidence
are sufficient to proceed. If we were to proceed with too little, and
the case were dismissed, it could jeopardize the plaintiffs' access to
court in the future.

Please continue to submit questionnaires, surveys, reports, records of
evidence, contact information for good expert and lay witnesses, and
useful technological information. Thank you again for helping Freedom
work toward a decisive legal decision in order to stop the inhumane
harassment and surveillance.

Very truly yours,
Jon Wilson


Listen to radio interview on WNIR with Suz LeBoeuf:  5/13/08 This is Suzanne "Suz" LeBoeuf, a "Target" or TI (Targeted Individual) calling in to radio talk show host Tom Erickson, WNIR radio http://www.wnir.com to tell his listener's that U.S. citizen's are being assaulted or attacked by radiological weapons in an attempt to take their lives.
I have been a torture victim since at least 1974 that I know of.
I have filed a federal complaint in the federal court.
http://www.archive.org/details/SuzInterview
 

Suzanne's Torture Videos, Audios (2005-2007). 
Find these by going to http://blip.tv/
then search icsn2202 and electrowell.
 
US Army toyed with telepathic ray gun
12:00 21 March 2008
  • NewScientist.com news service
  • David Hambling
     
    A recently declassified US Army report on the biological effects of non-lethal weapons reveals outlandish plans for "ray gun" devices, which would cause artificial fevers or beam voices into people's heads.
    The report titled "Bioeffects Of Selected Nonlethal Weapons" was released under the US Freedom of Information Act and is available on this website (pdf). The DoD has confirmed to New Scientist that it released the documents, which detail five different "maturing non-lethal technologies" using microwaves, lasers and sound.
    Released by US Army Intelligence and Security Command at Fort Meade, Maryland, US, the 1998 report gives an overview of what was then the state of the art in directed energy weapons for crowd control and other applications.
    A word in your ear
    Some of the technologies are conceptual, such as an electromagnetic pulse that causes a seizure like those experienced by people with epilepsy. Other ideas, like a microwave gun to "beam" words directly into people's ears, have been tested. It is claimed that the so-called "Frey Effect" – using close-range microwaves to produce audible sounds in a person's ears – has been used to project the spoken numbers 1 to 10 across a lab to volunteers'.
    In 2004 the US Navy funded research into using the Frey effect to project sound that caused "discomfort" into the ears of crowds.
    The report also discusses a microwave weapon able to produce a disabling "artificial fever" by heating a person's body. While tests of the idea are not mentioned, the report notes that the necessary equipment "is available today". It adds that while it would take at least fifteen minutes to achieve the desired "fever" effect, it could be used to incapacitate people for almost "any desired period consistent with safety."
    Less exotic technologies discussed include laser dazzlers and a sound source loud enough to disturb the sense of balance. Both have been realised in the years since the report was written. The US army uses laser dazzlers in Iraq, while the Long Range Acoustic Device has military and civilian users, and has been used on one occasion to repel pirates off Somalia.
    However, the report does not mention any trials of weapons for producing artificial fever or seizures, or beaming voices into people's heads.
    Potentially torturous
    Steve Wright, a security expert at Leeds Metropolitan University, UK, warns that the technologies described could be used for torture. In 1998 the European Parliament passed a motion banning potentially dangerous incapacitating technologies that interfere with the human brain.
    "The epileptic seizure inducing device is grossly irresponsible and should never be fielded," says Steve Wright "We know from similar [chemically] artificially-induced fits that the victim subsequently remains "potentiated" and may spontaneously suffer epileptic fits again after the initial attack."
    The acoustic energy device that affects the ear canals, disrupting the motion sense, may require dangerously loud sound levels to be effective, points out Juergen Altmann, a physicist at Dortmund University, Germany, who is interested in new military technologies.
    "[There is] inconsistency between the part that says "interesting" effects occur at 130-155 dB and the Recovery/Safety section that says that 115 dB is to be avoided - without commenting on the difference."
    Weapons Technology - Keep up with the latest innovations in our cutting edge special report.
    Focus on America - Delve into the science and technology questions facing the USA in our special report.

  • -Suz LeBoeuf
     
     
     

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics

    website statistics