Targeted Individuals’ 24/7 Nightmare: NSA Whistleblower Tells EU Parliament.
The European Parliament recently got a glimpse of the life-threatening living nightmare that thousands upon thousands of targeted individuals (TIs) experience daily. A high-profile NSA whistle blower’s testimony to the lawmakers included what surveillance really means, far more than government watching every move and listening to every word of every individual.
Government Accountability Project (GPA) client, NSA whistleblower and TI Thomas Drake, 56, testified before the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on September 30, 2013. The Committee designated an inquiry into NSA Mass Surveillance of EU Citizens, according to the GPA.
If there’s anyone who knows firsthand about post 9/11 “surveillance,” it’s Thomas Drake. And if there’s anyone who can testify that surveillance involves far more than conventional media and other NSA whistleblowers tell (and thus, most people naively associate with it: “Big Brother watching”), it’s Drake. He was there in the inception of the surveillance abuse program. He was ”an eyewitness to the very foundations of a persistent surveillance state greatly expanded in the deepest of secrecy right after 9/11,” he said in his testimony.
“I was there at the beginning,” Louisiana born Drake said.
“Put your entire life in a box, your documents, bank accounts, your passwords, everything — and give it to a complete stranger — a fellow American for safekeeping,” suggests Drake in presentations. “Would you do it?”
He’s yet to encounter a “yes” response.
Severe retaliation, reprisal, retribution
In his testimony to the EU Parliament, Drake explained that for upholding the U.S. Constitution and taking a stand for the common good, the United States government targeted him.
Summarizing what every targeted individual known to this author has written or said to her in interviews since 2005, Drake said:
“[T]he government made me a target… and subjected me to severe retaliation, reprisal and retribution that started with forcing me out from my job as a career public servant.”
Blacklisted, no income, wasted attorney fees, financial ruin
“I was subsequently blacklisted, no longer had a stream of income, while simultaneously incurring substantial attorney fees and other huge costs, necessitating a second mortgage on my house, emptying of my bank accounts, including retirement and savings,” explained Drake.
“What I experienced as a whistleblower sends the most chilling of messages about what the government can and will do when one speaks truth to and of power—a direct form of political repression and censorship.”
What every bona fide self-identified TI experiences sends the most chilling of messages about what the government will do and is doing to people who are ordinary law abiding, low-profile people.
While Drake is a high-profile whistleblower, thousands of other individuals have had their names submitted for persecution after far lesser actions.
Even a jilted lover with “the right connections” can add their innocent ex-partner’s name to the government targeted persecution list. Once listed, these law-abiding citizens will be blacklisted, unable to hold an ordinary job he or she is qualified to hold, be financially ruined, and thus suffer a downward spiral of a life in 24/7 invisible prison – misery all TIs know.
In that expanding invisible prison, TIs beg for help. Like in any other U.S. prison SHU, (“Segregated Housing Unit,” better known as solitary confinement), where torture is applied 24/7 and pleas for mercy go unheard, the TI remains an in-home, in-community, tortured captive.
With their families and friends misunderstanding and rejecting their claims, targets remains isolated. In isolated confinement, it is easy to continue the targeting abuses.
To date, no effective legal or emotional support exists for such “ordinary” persecuted targets.
Physical and electronic surveillance
“I was subsequently placed under intense physical and electronic surveillance,” Drake expalined in his testimony. (Emphasis added.)
“Intense” is how TIs typically refer to their treatment: ”24/7″.
“Physical surveillance” is what most TIs typically call “gangstalking” and what stalking experts call “multi-stalking”: stalked by multiple persons, all of who are usually unknown by the target. (This is reminiscent of Nazi brownshirts.)
“Electronic surveillance” is what most TIs typically report, including computer surveillance; repeated password hacking; telephone monitoring; telephone call interception; and in-home monitoring with hidden audio-cameras. A small percentage of TIs have hard evidence of being assaulted with electonic weapons.
In his testimony, Drake recounts his encounter with today’s advanced Counter Intelligence Program, Cointelpro (COunterIINTELigencePROgram). He was “raided by the FBI in 2007 and two and half years later under the Obama Administration, criminally charged under a 10 felony count indictment, including five under the Espionage Act, facing 35 years in prison,” he stated.
The FBI supposedly halted its Cointelpro, a program that had successfully covertly targeted and “neutralized” selected law-abiding Americans. Senator Frank Church’s committee investigated and exposed the scandalous program in 1973.
Congress subsequently condemned and demanded that the FBI halt it. Cointelpro, however, lives on. It’s had over fifty years to refine its violence against innocent people. (See: Suppressed history of FBI Cointelpro war on ‘We the people, Dupré, March 31, 2010 and the YouTube video removed from that article by an unknown person, Cointelpro Documentary Part 1 below.)
In 2011, human and civil rights advocates sounded an alarm over President Barack Obama’s administration intensifying FBI’s old Cointelpro tactics against innocent individuals: FBI agents gaining greater leeway to stalk, or spy on people within the U.S. New guidelines allowed agents to “investigate” people and organizations “proactively” without firm evidence for suspecting criminal activity.
The new FBI rules enabled agents to infiltrate organizations, search household trash, use surveillance “teams” (including gangstalkers), search databases, and conduct lie detector tests – with no suspicion of any wrongdoing – in other words, targeting innocent American citizens.
Once a target is chosen, he or she is “under covert surveillance in their residence, car, place of employment and anywhere else,“ according to targeted man, Robert Wood.
Targeted Individual Austin Crow of Austin Texas applied for Freedom Of Information documents related to his targeting. Through those files, Crow proved that the FBI had:
- Traced license plates of cars parked in front of his home,
- Recorded arrival and departure of his guests,
- Observed gatherings that he attended at bookstores and cafes,
- Tracked his emails,
- Tracked phone conversations,
- Picked through his trash to identify his bank and mortgage companies,
- Visited a gun store where he’d sought to purchase a rifle for self-defense,
- Asked the Internal Revenue Service to examine his tax returns,
- Infiltrated activist groups with which he associated. (See: FBI Cointelpro intensifies against innocent Targeted Individuals, Dupré, June 14, 2011)
Since George Bush’s 9/11 operation, the advanced Cointelpro and subsequently, the targeted individual human rights abuse phenomenon – exploded, as Drake explained to the EU Parliament:
“The extraordinary charges that were leveled against me by the US Department of Justice are symptomatic of the rising power of the national security state since 9/11 and a direct assault on freedom of speech, thought, innovation, and privacy.”
Today’s Cointelpro “war on the people” is more covert, better organized and more lethal under the relatively new FBI - CIA partnership; President George Bush’s 9/11 and Homeland Security; President Barrack Obama’s “targeted killing” authorization; and today’s advanced scientific technology.
Drake included a statement about Cointelpro in his testimony: “The words of US Senator Frank Church during the hearings he conducted on the abuses of national security power in the 1970s are worthy of reminding us what can happen when a state sponsored surveillance regime is used as the excuse to keep us safe at the expense of liberty and freedom:
“If a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of government to know. Such is the capacity of technology.”
In his testimony, Drake also quoted Montesquieu:
“No tyranny is more cruel than that which is practiced in the shadow of the law and with the trappings of justice: that is, one would drown the unfortunate by the very plank by which he would hope to be saved.”