by Mary W Maxwell, LLB
On July 18, 2018, Fiona Barnett, a survivor of MK-Ultra, read an hour’s worth of stunning testimony to the laypersons’ group known as the International Tribunal for Natural Justice. It was shown to the world, on video, last week.
In my opinion, human history changed the minute she spoke.
Fiona has more to contribute than just a claim; she has insider knowledge. She was there personally to watch some of the big-name psychopaths doing their thing, as she was scheduled to become a leader in the group herself.
Australia is a small country – population 24 million. It has a prime minister, a Governor-General to represent royalty, and a premier in each of its six states: VIC, SA, WA, NSW, QLD, TAS.
Barnett’s testimony names names of politicians both high and low. She mentions Bob Carr, the premier of New South Wales, also noting that he started out as a journalist for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and later became Australia’s Foreign Minister. (That causes me to wonder if all Oz’s FMs, all NSW premiers, and all ABC personnel are required to be “in the system.”)
Fiona also pointed out that child protective services, which are state bureaucracies, are riddled with child-traffickers. And she came down hard on universities, identifying many scholars who she thinks are members of a Luciferian cult.
Most shockingly she said that in the basement of Holsworthy Army Base you may find children who were “bred” for various uses, and who have never seen the light of day. She says the late heart surgeon Dr Victor Chang was a sadist at that location and she hints at “organ harvesting.”
I bet Ms Barnett is not making this up. Once you start to look upon human beings a commodity it’s a natural progression to such things as slave auctions and cannibalism, isn’t it? Society need to reinstate its normal philosophy of the sanctity of life.
What Can We Do?
Surely we have to jump to react in a helpful way, given the extreme accusations made by Fiona. Normally, when a person is accused of a crime, “the law” steps in. Ah, but thereby hangs another tale. “The law” itself is apparently riddled with Luciferians. (I know they are not all like that, but why don’t good judges stand up and scream about bad judges? Has everyone got paralysis of the tongue?)
In this article I offer a draft of a fresh piece of legislation, one that’s within the power of any state parliament to enact. Of course the criminal law in every state already prohibits the things Fiona Barnett discusses – child sexual abuse, torture — and lying about these things, misleading the court, etc. No new law is needed to criminalize any of that.
Enacting a Statute
But new statutes are needed to make it easier to use the law in cases where there is a tradition of “protecting the powerful.” Here is my suggested new statute. Never mind that I lack legislative experience – I’ll present a rough draft and you can improve on it.
I propose a bill for government to consider. Let’s call it, informally, “the Heffernan bill,” in honor of the sole Canberra senator who spoke up for Fiona Barnett when she was both alone and in great danger. (And by the way, she is still in great danger.) Here is the draft:
An Act to Facilitate Indictments of Powerful Persons and for the Investigation of Holsworthy Army Base
*Recognizing that there is a powerful criminal contingent in Australia today,
*Acknowledging that bringing suspects to justice has been hampered by secrecy and fear,
*Realizing that the citizenry was shocked by the findings of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse,
we enact this statute to facilitate the indictment of powerful persons and to investigate Holsworthy Army Base in regard to crimes against children.
Registering and the Questionnaire
All persons employed in the traditional professions in Australia will be required to register with Parliament for the purpose of answering a questionnaire. They have until 60 days after the enactment of this bill to register.
Within 30 days of receiving the questionnaire the person must answer it under oath or affirmation, divulging the extent to which they were aware of sexual abuse of children or any unauthorized experimentation on children at any time.
Children here means: persons under the age of 18.
Traditional professions here means: doctors, lawyers, judges, parliamentarians, directors of media corporations, clergypersons, teachers, professors, dentists, pharmacists, nurses, accountants, social workers, military officers and national security agents.
Refusal to register or to answer the questionnaire is an offense. The penalty is a fine of $500,00.00 and a maximum of 5 years in prison.
No one will be charged with failure to report crime, based on their admitting on the questionnaire that they failed to report crime.
The Panel
Parliament will establish a panel (hereinafter “The Panel”) which will be accountable to the Attorney General. Panel members will be vetted to eliminate conflicts of interest.
The first job of The Panel will be to examine the replies to the questionnaire, and to choose some repliers to be called in for questioning.
After such questioning, The Panel, in consultation with Parliament, will draw up relevant indictments.
A Second Panel regarding Holsworthy Army Base, and ASIO.
Because public allegations have been made that Holsworthy Army Base has engaged in unthinkable crimes, Parliament will appoint a Second Panel to conduct a thorough inquiry into these allegations.
The state Attorney General will liaise with the Commonwealth Minister of Defence concerning the military. The state Attorney General will liaise with the Commonwealth Minister of Home Affairs about any involvement of ASIO.
The Prime Minister will brief any foreign government as appropriate.
This law comes into effect 14 days after it receives the royal assent.
[This is the end of my draft of “the Heffernan bill.”]
What about the DPP?
I can see one problem with this bill straightaway. Namely, indictments for prosecution are to be issued by a Panel that answers to the Attorney General. Under present state law, indictments are the prerogative of a “Director of Public Prosecutions,” a DPP.
Therefore, prior to (or concurrent with) submitting the Heffernan bill, someone in state Parliament should draft a simple bill called “The Abolition of the Office of Public Prosecutions Act.”
That abolition should take place on its own merits. There should never have been creation of an office that is accountable to no one. It is a very bad joke as I have argued elsewhere.
If the military or ASIO refuses to cooperate regarding the questionnaire, additional legislation will be required to confirm that all military and security offices are under the control of Parliament. If this means that any Official Secrets Acts need to be modified, Parliament can deal with that. Of course.
Note: Fortunately, the new legislation does not have to amend current law regarding “diminished responsibility.” Granted, a person whose brain was programmed in MK-Ultra can be made to carry out a crime and yet be unaware of what he is doing. – but even early English law coped with this. An element of every crime is the mens rea – the state of mind of the criminal.
Proceeding to Crack Down
Th time has come. We can’t just talk about it anymore. In 2015 Fiona Barnett produced a very graphic video (“Candy Girl”) on Youtube — but it never led to anyone’s arrest. I think that’s because all of us have become resigned to the ridiculous premise that the prestigious and “the powerful” are untouchable.
Two Catholic bishops were arrested in Australia in 2017, so the cloak of protection by prestige seems to have disappeared, but there is still an almost worshipful deference to the powerful. “If they’re high up, we can’t get them.”
That deference was seen in Belgium, for example, in the Dutroux case, and in California in the McMartin Pre-school trial. In both instances the public was very steamed up, and judicial wheels did appear to turn, but it all came to nought.
Mainstream media are wondrously helpful in causing any such case matter to peter out. And admittedly the public largely handles these distressing things by going into denial.
I note that politicians, having been paralyzed for a long time, seem reluctant to act. But maybe that’s inaccurate! – many pollies might gladly jump on the bandwagon if someone will start it going. I offered the above parliamentary bill, and you could hand it in to your MP.
Once there is a bill in parliament, interested members can call for a division – thus the ayes and the nays get identified. (They stand on opposite sides of the room – it’s rarely done but it’s legal.) Every MP would find himself or herself asking “Am I for or against bringing child-murderers to justice?”
Being Wary of the Powerful Today, and Their Weapons
Parliament must take into consideration that many of “the guilty” in Australia were directed by persons outside the country — and that those powerful persons have weapons — and a lack of scruple about using them. Doubtless it will be hard – but not impossible — to arrest them.
We should help Parliament consider ways to negotiate with powerful indictees. One famous way is to offer amnesty or limited immunity. I did not build that into my proposed bill, as it would seem to sweep away the importance of simply enforcing the law. Citizens today need to have it drummed into them that society is in charge of society.
Citizens need to hear specifically that all persons are accountable. Were you shocked when I said Holsworthy will be investigated? I was shocked myself! Let’s go around shocking everybody with the news that top brass in the armed forces (and police forces, and ASIO) are not above the law.
Thank you, Fiona, for showing the way. Thank you, Senator Heffernan for “acting like” justice is possible. What a thrilling idea!
— Mary W Maxwell can be reached at mary.maxwell@alumni.adelaide.edu.au
Seriously, no amount of legislation is going to resolve this issue. Holsworthy army base will be cleansed of any clandestine events within seven days of this story leaking out, if not already, squeaky clean. Judges, KNOW which side of the their bread is buttered on and will never open their mouths to mete out REAL justice against the folks they KNOW who are criminals. We had a saying in my day, “don’t rock the boat” as long as the crimes are not personally effecting these people, they simply turn their backs and pretend it’s not happening. Sadly, that’s the realities today in our society.
Aha, but Holsworthy personnel will have to weigh in on the Questionnaire, under penalty of perjury.
Ten dollars says you’re wrong, Eddy.
After reading my amateur go, you may be wondering why we don’t see more of this sort of thing in, say, Congress.
Grame McQueen of Canada has zeroed in on “physical intimidation of whole legislatures.” His article is very lengthy but the pictures of the hugs may tell you what you need to know.
“When crisis strikes, hug your fellow legislator.”
https://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-war-on-terror-or-war-on-democracy-the-physical-intimidation-of-legislatures/5653306
Mary, this idea sounds like a wonderful start. I hope others, enthusiastically jump on board, especially any politicians innocent of these crimes. Politicians really need to clean out their nest in many areas, to get the public back on-side, believing that we really do have a Constitutional Sovereignty.
If this idea was to take off, there would be other benefits apart from recognition of those wronged, but also it could get rid of the yolk of the criminal control by the international groups such as the Rothschild, Rockefeller Families, George Soros, and the Clinton Foundation types. Even the Royal Families could be felled.
If politicians caught up in these ghastly groups of Satanism were released from blackmail exposure, we would all benefit. The laws and benefits to the “financial class” that they have been passing under duress could be rescinded.
The ridiculous “anti terrorist Laws” which allow the Intelligence Agencies to ride roughshod over innocent people and allows them to enact their own terrorist activities, such as the Port Arthur Massacre, could be rescinded.
Mal, got any free time this arvo? Write up an Act to repeal the yuck-o anti-terror laws. (Pardon me.)
Just go to austlii.edu.au website and find the 2007 law and rewrite it using negative terms.
I think it should be labelled the Hughesie bill. Sounds grrrreat.
i call for a division!
If it worked, it would do a great deal to restore a mutually beneficial trust to the remaining (not indicted) politicians.
Ya mean “if there are any.”
Oh. I have just realized that my Panel workers may be too heavily burdened. We could try, as a first go-round, administering the Questionnaire to only those “professionals” who were born on the third of any month.
Thus only one thirtieth of the population would get tested.
Or only those born on, say, September 11th, and thus only one-365th of the population.
Some of the people who testified at the ITNJ begin with an oath. I’ll have to say when I heard Rachel Vaughn say “I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth…” I cried.
Anyway I am not sure why Fiona did not do it (or maybe it preceded the camera), but in regard to kids being kept in cages there is at least one victim who has sworn to it.
Claudia Mullen was allowed to testify at a 1995 presidential commission in regard to radiation experiments, mostly done on soldiers but also on MK-Utra persons. (I mean, hey, why not?).
Ah, I just found this on Gumshoe, written by your local Opinion Editor:
“In 1995, possibly owing to veterans’ complaints about their exposure to radiation for experimental purposes, President Clinton hosted hearings. One victim, Claudia Mullen revealed that she had been used both for radiation and mind control experiments. She gave details of being kept in a cage.
“It is my guess that a grand jury could use her sworn testimony to indict some of the persons who harmed her.”
I believe I heard on the grapevine, but can’t now pursue it, that Claudia was subsequently shot in the stomach (soon after the 1995 talk).
And that gives me a chance to say that a reader emailed me yesterday to say that a victim in his 30s was killed a few days ago but I am not clear if it was in Australia or UK.
I know a survivor who has hardly ventured outside her house in many years. This is serious business. Any suggestions on how we can support such persons?
Beware the ol play, re royal commission’s into 70-80s ASIS etc. The questionare results are never made public or available to parliament.
How could Parliament fail to make it available to itself? Huh? Who’s in charge here? (That’s my main point, really.)
That would be the Queen of Australia. Parliamentarians, do not get Top Secret Clearance. The Cabinet steps in to handle it. Andrew Wilkie is interesting in that he rubbished intelligence against the flow, but has the full spook credentials. Never hear a peep out of him about stuff he must know.You’d think he would be all over the Bill Heffernan speech, given he has Top Secret Clearance and mainstream credibility.. Andrew you there ?
Am I thicker than I realize?
“That would be the Queen of Australia. Parliamentarians, do not get Top Secret Clearance. The Cabinet steps in to handle it. ”
The Cabinet steps in to handle what?
What is to prevent Parliament from legislating Top Secret Clearance to itself?
Yep. I must be thick cuz I don’t get it.
Or maybe Eddy was right and I lose my ten dollars. Did anyone read my anti-monarchy article?
https://gumshoenews.com/2018/05/06/with-all-due-respect-the-queen-must-go/
Simon, which Heffernan speech are you referring to? Could you link it here?
I did read your article. The Queen is the apex of Australian Law. This is no ceremonial position, the terms of reference for royal commissions are dictated and legalised by the Monarch for example.
The Cabinet was created to shutdown any possibility of represention of the people. The party members must vote with the Cabinet regardless of being informed or not. Even the Cabinet is then broken down to smaller cells that interact with independent Government bodies like ASIS. ASIS existed for some 20 years before its existence was confirmed. What further groups have been formed by them since we moved to perpetual war.
There is no free speech in Australia, so we are left with a mob of ignorant or psychopathic narcissist’s being our saviours.
Then one sneaks in which I take as genuinely motivated but regardless gives standing to conspiracy theory’s.
http://australianpolitics.com/2002/03/11/heffernan-disgraceful-speech-under-parliamentary-privilege.html
There is lots of google type links like
https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/senator-bill-heffernan-claims-he-has-a-police-list-which-names-28-people-including-a-former-prime-minister-as-suspected-paedophiles/news-story/882beff463306991f7d5d8cedf203b0a
Fiona and others are a Australian forces munition and are covered by section D1. Sometimes munitions blow up in the faces of the creators and give a little insight into the reality of Top Secret operations our “defence forces”.
No way are your thick Mary.
Erratum.
A friend has just told me that there won’t be a need for as Act to abolish the DPP as the AG currently has the right to overrule the DPP “but is reluctant to use it.”
Excellent, and pardon my assuming anything so crazy as that Parliament could have given away its power.
I was about to ask “Where’s Pauline?” and funnily enough, The Australian published this just a few hours ago:
The senator says she would “love to” have a candidate running in every electorate for the poll, due by May, but people haven’t been putting their hands up to run.
Senator Hanson said she doesn’t intend to “just throw anyone in”. “They have to be credible, they have to be there for the right reasons. I’m not just going to fill a seat just for the sake of filling it,” she said. It would be great to get One Nation candidates into the House of Representatives but the upper house is where the party fits, she said.
“When you have people there that are not yes people, who will look at legislation…that’s where One Nation’s place is and that’s what we do.”
PEOPLE, PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT YES PEOPLE
ARE THE LUCKIEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD.
— Barbra Streisand
Simon, thank you for the Heffernan speech links.
Re your sentence here, can you explain more to us? —
“Fiona and others are a Australian forces munition and are covered by section D1.”
and I thought D1 is a “request for voluntary silence by the media” -( not that the media is exactly champing at the bit to talk…)
D Notice is a request for media silence.
D Notice 1-Capabilities of the Australian Defence Force, Including Aircraft, Ships, Weapons, and Other Equipment
Its army voluntary(everyone is a volunteer) and mainstream media knows it, and is dependant upon the Government for licence to operate. A lot of investment could disappear overnight. The editors are already onboard with the mockingbird operation, this gives them an out for their credibility.
robert mcclelland started moving to shutdown independent reporting as it is gaining traction by its more plausible inferences, whilst having the power to not prosecute those inferences no matter the evidence.So can effectively put a sword of Damocles over these blow-in reporters. As things get to Top Secret “national security” type, a secret court will be established if not already. charles porter should do well here as he thinks it is ok to bash the most vulnerable Australians with no evidence.
Fiona has unique skills enhanced by the defence force for war. The techniques would be proprietary as well(patents) a further gagging option
Fiona would also be covered by D Notice 4 which is no reporting of ASIS. ASIS is our MI6 or CIA.
This is why the the MK Ultra type programs run Australia have never been reported(to my knowledge). Just the odd occasional doctor that kill people whilst removing memories reported as depraved individuals.
It’s a start – headless corpse found against judge’s front door
http://www.thenyherald.com/2018/09/11/pedophiles-decapitated-corpse-found-on-judges-doorstep-after-bail-hearing/
I wonder if the judge thought that it could be a ‘warning’ since the decapitated pedo was put on his doorstep? – At least the judge got his judgement correct, the pedo was not a threat to the community, albeit he was a bit early in his assessment.
I’m sure these types of things have happened. We know family law court Judges have been attacked in Australia.
Link to snopes(I use to disassemble psyop direction)
-https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pedophiles-decapitated-corpse-found-on-judges-doorstep-after-bail-hearing/
Contained is story – ” Some fake news sites just can’t get over their obsessions with pederasty, likely because it makes for effective clickbait material”.
Hey snopes, our obsession is driven by proven systemic pedophilia world wide.
You obsession with denying that, makes me surmise that, either your pedo protectors, if not pedo perpetrators.
But thanks for the cross reference, that adds oxygen to the validity of this particular story.