View Panorama's Scientology and Me at its web site here for a week.

1. Last night's Panorama programme about Scientology was a quite powerful study in fear and loathing. I came away with a sense of the fear that Scientology is trying to generate in its attempts to control and loathing that something like this attracts what are supposed to be reasonable, rational and intelligent people. I concluded that it sought to milk the gullible wealthy by a standard means of purgatory confession. However, unlike institutions similar to the Catholic Church, these are apparently recorded and kept as a database about the people who confessed to be used against them should they not tow the mark and behave as desired. It's the politics of power and control over people. There's not much comfort and the release of tension in that. The BBC, John Sweeney and the Panorama crew did an outstanding job in documenting this control freakery "out of control."

It wasn't actually John Sweeney who lost control although he yelled the loudest finally, but Scientologist Tommy and the organisation who had no self control in far more fundamental and vicious ways. No wonder John Sweeney blew up finally at the "Psychiatry" exhibit after they were at him for an hour and a half of mindless nonsense following on the "noisy investigation" about which he had been warned in advance. If the sample of a woman claiming dogmatically with finger wagging in his face that the Holocaust was created by the psychiatric profession who went into the death camps is any indication of what he was getting continuously at the "Psychiatric" exhibit, it's a wonder that he remained for that length of time. Why is Scientology so afraid of psychiatry as a whole?

Initially, he spent a couple days with Scientologist Tommy at the UK's Scientology castle agreeing terms for the documentary which could not be agreed because they wanted to exclude interviews with negative commentary from former Scientologist who have left the organisation and those who were negative about the organisation including a cult buster who seeks to reconnect the disconnected and a Clearwater, Florida, freelance journalist who was producing his own local cable TV programme about Scientology. No self respecting journalist will ever limit himself to an organisation's propaganda, so that John Sweeney and Panorama could not agree to the Scientology terms which would permit them greater access. The Scientology door was closed. Thus, John Sweeney set off on his own documentary experience of stalking and harassing from Scientology and its resident stalker and harasser, Tommy, who was a Tom Cruise look alike as well as namesake.

I was quite surprised when the returning film crew and John Sweeney arrived back at their Clearwater, Florida, hotel at night to be greeted by none other than Tommy himself who refused to shake his hand when offered in a friendly manner despite the fact that he was the one being stalked. Tommy said that he had nothing to shake hands about. Was he being leaned on from above to disrupt and destroy the BBC Panorama documentary as much as possible? It seemed like it from just this one incident. Without a warning or appointment here was Tommy with his own cameraman in the hotel lobby waiting to pounce and start complaining that John Sweeney was talking with those nasty negative types that Scientology so abhorred. No information had been provided to Scientology about the BBC crew's whereabouts. They were stalking, collecting information and harassing.

Tommy showed up unexpectedly while John Sweeney was talking with the freelance journalist in Clearwater, Florida, who was describing his activity with regard to Scientology and his documenting their activity. Tommy immediately launched into a smear campaign against this freelance journalist from a sheaf of notes he carried a page of which Scientology had also plastered in store windows in Clearwater with the guy's photograph. One of the allegations concerned a prior arrest for cannabis and possession of drug paraphernalia.

The guy asked Tommy if Scientology could help him with his problem since they claimed to have helped numerous addicts in their palatial exercise gymnasiums and drug treatment programme. Without missing a beat Tommy kept up his verbal abuse campaign completely ignoring the freelance journalist. John Sweeney then pointed out that the freelancer was not an animal and wondered if he would answer his question? It would seem to me that any legitimate church or religious organisation would welcome such a question and stop to provide answers and help if at all possible. Not so with Tommy and Scientology.

Tommy also showed up unexpectedly at the opening of something this time shaking hands with John Sweeney who was always offering a friendly hand in greeting. I seemed to recall that this offer of the sword hand was used traditionally to communicate nonhostile intentions. One could not pull out one's sword while shaking hands. John Sweeney, however, being the good journalist that he is seized upon the opportunity in a nonhostile way to ask about others' comments regarding Scientology where these people had described Scientology as a "cult."

Oh, wow, did this use of the forbidden "c" word set off Tommy who then began a diatribe about freedom of religion, how he could believe as he chose and how it was protected by the US Constitution. Like all good debaters who know they have won an argument hands down at least in their own estimation, Tommy began to move away from the field of battle with the arrogance and disregard of one who is certain about the fogginess about which he just spoke.

John Sweeney followed along making note of the fact that he was British and in that enlightened land there was freedome of speech where he could openly and unrestrainedly note that someone else with some particular direct experience had uttered the dreaded "c" word. Could it be that Tommy was actually trying to deny free speech? Had he actually read the US Constitution which he was trumpeting? Personally, I have some questons for John Sweeney about freedom of thought and expression in merry ole England.

Well, John Sweeney had actually been invited to the "Psychiatry" exhibit where he had met Tommy and shouted louder in this third meeting. Tommy was ever present or should I say omnipresent. And, it seems that they were actually also going to be able to talk with some Scientology celebs. After a hard day, where they were filmed as well as filming all day, the BBC three-man crew including John Sweeney took a break, refuge really, in the loo for some peace and quiet while they recovered a bit. It was ludicrously clear what they had to do to escape, and John Sweeney took the only seat in the room to rest while being filmed as Tommy showed up outside the door to harass them again.

They were not to be left in peace, however, because none other than Tommy came along appearing as though he might want to join them in the john (no pun intended). He engaged in some homophobic verbal abuse banter at the expense of this BBC crew revealing a latency problem himself which he was projecting onto them. This is called oral projection of anal aggression. No wonder they do not like psychiatry. They must be quite familiar with Eric Berne's Games People Play and realise that he would diffuse theirs. This is why they are so afraid of psychiatrists. I do not think that Dr Berne is one of the doctors of death that Scientology seems intent upon eliminating. In fact, Dr Berne might be called exactly the opposite or at least his students since he has gone onto new frontiers.

This interview session had an interesting result. None of the comments by the celebs could be broadcast because Scientology chickened out and had their lawyers claim that the BBC had invaded their privacy under California law which they would legally attack if the BBC aired these interviews, so not a word was heard from the celebs although Tommy was present and made a comment that did not end up on the cutting room floor.

How could it possibly be an invasion of privacy when the whole thing was arranged by Scientology with the willing presence of the celebs for an interview? Oh, yes, he was accused of asking invasive questions. This would have been some interview results, then, if Scientology can determine which questions are invasions of privacy and which are not in the courts after the fact.

Nonetheless, their pictures were shown along with John Sweeney asking questions, then he provided the answers they made. That's legitimate journalism from a reporter reporting an interview with a recorded record, on film no less, backing himself up. He is entitled to say what they said, right, under the law in merry old England and Wales? Well, he said it originally and told Tommy this quite clearly earlier.

There was clearly stalking and harassing being carried out in addition to Tommy who perhaps was being kept up-to-date by these people on foot and people in vehicles who were apparently always present. In fact, what this became was a documentary about extreme abuse, aka "noisy investigation," carried out against a legitimate documentary effort by the BBC Panorama programme.

My conclusion after seeing this programme is that Scientology is a scam which seeks the gullible wealthy preferably those who are famous so that it can maintain a lavish life style for those on top. It maintains power over people through confessions which are documented and stored for future use. It's abuse of people can be seen in store front windows. Clearwater, Florida, appears to be like an organised crime dominated town in Sicily. Have you ever lived in a neighbourhood dominated by organised criminals?

This reminds me of one Lyndon Baines Johnson aka LBJ who was famously quoted during the intro montage to the series of PBS programmes The Great American Dream Machine saying quite clearly "I never trust a man unless I have his pecker in my pocket." Well, that's just the good ole American method of political control. Scientology has just taken a leaf out of the politician's handbook along with other methods to protect itself and make certain that it is not exposed for the shill organisation it is. The BBC Panorama crew including John Sweeney went, saw and documented what they saw quite well and objectively. Now people can take or leave Scientology with a greater knowledge of the organisation. If it suits them, they cannot say they weren't informed.

I have this feeling that Tommy will soon find himself in another job within Scientology that better suits his talents and abilities. John Sweeney's career in journalism is cemented in place. I'm looking forward to the award ceremonies in the future. I'm wondering if he and Panorama are up for a short trip out their front door at Television Centre to the corner of Bramley and Whitchurch Roads nearby to them where they can do a documentary on the really important issues that involve stalking and harassing someone 24/7 carried out by the US and UK governments virtually in the BBC's backyard for almost nine years with the most sophisticated surveillance technology ever known to the humanity.

I can give him some tips on how to avoid blowing his cool when under continuous pressure from surveillance technology and a "noisy investigation" that is really a fabrication. Well, he should have had experience with Scientology trying to fabricate a "story" about him.

Cult

Cult \Cult\ (k[u^]lt) n. [F. culte, L. cultus care, culture, fr.
colere to cultivate. Cf. {Cultus}.]

1. Attentive care; homage; worship.
[1913 Webster]

Every one is convinced of the reality of a better
self, and of the cult or homage which is due to it.
--Shaftesbury.
[1913 Webster]

2. A system of religious belief and worship.
[1913 Webster]

That which was the religion of Moses is the
ceremonial or cult of the religion of Christ.
--Coleridge.
[1913 Webster]

3. A system of intense religious veneration of a particular
person, idea, or object, especially one considered
spurious or irrational by traditional religious bodies;
as, the Moonie cult.
[PJC]

4. The group of individuals who adhere to a cult (senses 2 or
3).
[PJC]

5. A strong devotion or interest in a particular person, idea
or thing without religious associations, or the people
holding such an interest; as, the cult of James Dean; the
cult of personality in totalitarian societies.
[PJC]

-- From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48

Shill

Shill \Shill\, v. t.
To shell. [Obs. or Prov. Eng.]
[1913 Webster]

-- From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48

Shill \Shill\, v. t. [Cf. {Sheal}.]
To put under cover; to sheal. [Prov.ng.] --Brockett.
[1913 Webster] Shillalah

2. "There are powers at work in this country that we have no knowledge about," said the Queen to Paul Burrell her footman and later butler to Diana, Princess of Wales. You can say that again. I read Paul Burrell's book A Royal Duty (Penquin/Michael Joseph, London, 2003) at the end of 2003 when it came out. I was quite intrigued with what he might say regarding the fact that Diana, Princess of Wales, felt she was under surveillance. After I finished the book, I wrote a letter to him dated 1st January 2004 a copy of which is below. I don't know what Mohamed Al Fayed might uncover in this inquest, but it would be extraordinary and fascinating to hear the Queen describe exactly what she meant by this phrase.

BBC News Tuesday, 15 May 2007, 16:30 GMT 17:30 UK

Queen 'must be quizzed on Diana'

Princess Diana's sudden death shocked the nation

The Queen should be quizzed over conversations she allegedly had with ex-royal butler Paul Burrell, Mohamed Al Fayed's lawyers have said.

Mr Burrell has claimed she warned him of "powers at work in this country that we have no knowledge about".

The request came at a pre-inquest hearing into the deaths of Princess Diana and Mr Al Fayed's son, Dodi.

Coroner Lady Butler-Sloss and Michael Mansfield QC earlier argued over "late" papers and possible inquest locations.

Queen 'must be quizzed on Diana'

Thursday, 1st January 2004

Paul Burrell
c/o Penguin/Michael Joseph
80 Strand
London WC2R 0RL

Dear Mr Burrell

I’ve just finished reading your book and found it an extraordinarily enjoyable and informative read. It is a very well written book. I came to read it for reasons which I will discuss shortly but first a few comments.

Despite having lived in London for over 13 years, I have never read the books or seen the television programmes about Diana and Prince Charles’ evolving relationship. I’ve always considered that personal and something no one except those involved could really know anything about. I did pick up bits and pieces in the media about these works and other comments but largely ignored them.

I have liked and admired each of these people for their works and public comments about issues which impact society at large. I think these have said more about them than the rest of it. I also think that you have succeeded admirably in presenting what is a fascinating and what appears to be an objective account of these past decades.

You have done a justice to the Royals involved and especially the Queen and Monarchy which has been sadly lacking in the public domain. For this you are to be commended. You had a very tough journey leading to the telling of it, but the result has proven to be the proof in the pudding in my opinion.

I’ve had a great sympathy for the false allegations brought against you and the ordeal you were forced to endure. I also have great sympathy for what you have described as surveillance while you were under investigation and the sense of being under surveillance which Diana suspected. You described that as having originated from being “warned,” but I wonder just how much was from a sense of learning that others knew things which could not have been known except by surveillance.

I was led to your book because I have been subjected to intensive and extensive surveillance since about the end of August 1998 which resulted originally from having reported child abuse in a flat adjacent to mine. They turned the tables against me to try to discredit what I had reported and what I was reporting as the spillover effect from this violence against children.

This has resulted in my being used as a guinea pig for research and development experimentation which not only includes all kinds of surveillance technology but also surreptitious medication intended to incapacitate and debilitate. When you were looking for devices at KP by rolling back the carpet and prying up the floor boards, you were looking in the wrong direction which you noted when explaining further that mirrors could be used in conjunction with vehicles parked in the proximity. It is much worse than that and something you will find unbelievable at first.

I cannot put a time on when this was perfected, but I know it has been in use against me since about February 2001. Whether it was available leading up to August 1997 and in what form, I cannot say. But, I can vouch for the fact that it has been in existence for almost the past three years. It also confirms the comment which the Queen made to you which is another reason I was drawn to read your whole account. Your secrets that you consider locked in your head are no longer safe.

Surveillance can now be carried out using brain wave monitoring technology from a remote location without implants in the victim. These are capable of reading thoughts (words and images), seeing what you see with your eyes, what you hear with your ears, feel (pain) and smell. I have not verified taste as yet. See for a 1999 article with photographs of the ability to see through a cat’s eyes using the brain.

Even more important is the ability to feedback using this same brain wave electromagnetic radiation technology to induce hearing, feeling (pain) and thoughts (words and images). This means of hearing is old stuff and has been around for quite some time. It is nothing new. Generating muscle movement and pain sensations are also not very new. To impact the brain with images is, I believe, relatively recent.

The brainwave feedback process can also emulate chemical impact on the brain so that surreptitious medication can be carried out which will cause drowsiness, debilitation and/or incapacity in the victim.

This is carried out by means of mapping the unique brain wave of each individual for identification and tracking purposes with the use of satellite communications. In other words, all of this activity can be carried out no matter where the victim is located unless the electromagnetic radiation can be blocked.

I have experienced this 24/7 since February 2001 in what has amounted to an intense terror and torture interrogation programme based upon false allegations. The usage of this technology and its experimentation has not been in gaining information but in fabricating information to support the false allegations. It’s usage has fallen into the hands of sadistic people who are seeking revenge and retaliation. The mother of the children whom I reported for the child abuse is a key participant. This is why I know all about what is being done and the fact that it is highly accurate.

To satisfy their need to let me know about this torture campaign and provide an outlet for their own emotional disturbance, they (I know the names of these people. There is no mysterious “they.”) have informed me about all that is going on allowing me to document everything and test it repeatedly to confirm results and their statements. What has been a surveillance of me has actually been reversed for I have been able to maintain total surveillance of them in all that they are doing with respect to me.

Here are the worst implications for this surveillance technology. First, it is being used in a capacity which destroys the sovereignty of this country and is knowingly allowed to be used by agents of Her Majesty’s Government to undermine the Sovereign and what the Crown represents in this country. Second, this is being used to undermine the democratically established institutions including law enforcement and the judicial system along with the laws enacted by Parliament and approved by the Crown. The result has been the abolishment of justice, fairness, the assumption of innocence and due process in the legal justice system. Torture and interrogation can be carried out without detection or proof that it is being accomplished for an indefinite period. This has been going on for almost three years in my personal experience against me.

The Queen was right when she told you that “There are powers at work in this country about which we have no knowledge.” I believe that the Queen does not know about this and would most likely be disposed to disbelieve it if she were told. However, it is quite real and constitutes a threat to the Sovereign of this country because this activity is being carried out by agents of the US Government with complete disregard for Her Majesty’s Government and the democratic civilisation for which this country stands. It represents the end of democracy as we know it unless steps are taken to address it properly.

Your whole ordeal was described by yourself in this context as being driven by the secrets which you held of historic significance with which you were entrusted by Diana. I will say now that those secrets are no longer safe and could very well be known to those who carried out the surveillance against you. You were only aware of the 20 odd phone taps. You do not know what else might have been done.

While Diana’s earlier suspicions before her death are out of my realm of knowing what was available at that time, your recent experience falls into the time frame of when I know that this technology was available and being used successfully against me. It is worth noting that this began shortly after the inauguration of Bush as president with the arrival of two ex-US Marines (a Lt Harry X and a (Lt?) Colonel Vine) [Lt Harry Bird and Colonel Vine] under my windows in about February 2001 who started immediately with the hearing feedback activity hoping to terrorise and torture me.

Since that time I have very carefully documented all that has occurred verifying what was being use and its efficacy. I was especially concerned with Bush’s state visit recently when he stayed in Buckingham Palace including the vast number of people with him. It is highly likely that they could easily have set up such a monitoring system against the Queen and members of Her Majesty’s Government. In other words infiltration and surveillance will be carried out by the very people themselves who will become the eyes and ears of the surveillance technology itself.

Imagine if all that you did with respect to your legal defence was monitored through your eyes, ears and thoughts. All that you read was read by someone else. Every person you dealt with could be seen and heard as you see and hear them. Whoever had you under surveillance would know all that you were doing, saying, hearing, seeing and thinking.

Since I have been under surveillance originally since the end of August 1998, I was used to this by having been able to establish all that was going on. It was used as a weapon against me to harass me, but I was able to adequately defend myself by documenting it all and communicating what was going on. Some of that can be found in my web site noted at the beginning of this letter. By March 2001 shortly after the arrival of the US Government agents, I commenced legal proceedings in the High Court to seek the protection of the court as provided by law. This was destroyed by the surveillance activity carried out against me.

This is why I have a great deal of empathy for what you have gone through and know exactly what it means to be suspicious of surveillance while having a very difficult time communicating that experience so that it is taken seriously. There is a general tendency to disbelieve those things we do not want to accept because we do not want to admit that they exist. As you well know, people operate on their belief systems and not their objective observations and do not listen.

I believe that there is far more to what you experienced before with Diana in the year before her death which led you to believe in the surveillance which was “monitoring” her than you can or are willing to say. Take that experience into consideration when you read what I have described. Someday all of this will be well known to all, but at present it is not in general consciousness. Take it seriously and listen as you wanted to be listened to when you were dealing with the false allegations against yourself.

There is nothing that can be done about this except to communicate it to those who can wake up Parliament (if that is possible) so that this matter can be carefully considered by the Crown, Her Majesty’s Government and everyone else so that it can be recognised for what is and used very, very carefully with full protective measures including detection available to prevent its misuse and abuse as I have experienced it for these past almost three years.

The press must be informed so that it can obtain all information available about this surveillance technology for it is the press who will become one of its earliest victims if misused and abused on a large scale. I have done a great deal to communicate this during these years including correspondence to the media, the Prime Minister, cabinet members and MPs, but I have not written to the Queen as yet. Your book has certainly changed my perspective of the Monarch for the better. I believe that she is also patron of the NSPCC which, as it turns out, has been a key concern of mine since this all started with my reporting child abuse in May 1998. The ramifications of my experience are extensive indeed.

I am communicating this to you to supplement your experience and offer these comments as something that might very well be of use to yourself to unravel some unexplained and perplexing experiences which you might have had. Feel free to communicate this correspondence to anyone you choose. I have essentially made my experience public on my web site (such as it is) in order to save my life which is being constantly threatened. The mere use of this technology can be lethal.

I was not really surprised when you published the comment from Diana about her fear of a staged accident to kill her for something similar is constantly being done to me in order to terrorise and torture me. I am nothing. This is just a training programme for R&D and medical experimentation purposes using me as a guinea pig without my consent obviously. I believe we are all in danger until this surveillance technology can be properly dealt with.

Thanks for writing an extraordinary book. All the best to you and your family for the New Year

Yours sincerely

Gary D Chance