Barbara Hartwell Vs. (CIA) Don Stacey

From the Hartwell Archives, May, 2004

Barbara Hartwell Vs. Don Stacey

My latest report, EXPOSED: CIA MK ULTRA CONTAINMENT OP, in which I exposed CIA operative and spin doctor, Donald W.Stacey, got this response from a reader, also posted on the site. The reader's comments, given in their entirety, are followed by my comments in brackets, inside the main body of text, under the heading: IS THIS THE BEST Y'ALL CAN DO? Please read and discern for yourself: Who is telling the truth? The "reader", a dear friend of Mr. Stacey? Or Barbara Hartwell?

Message from Marilyn Guinnane:

Some time ago, maybe two years or better, I read Barbara Hartwell's plea for spare change at Rumormillnews, so I sent her a check. She claimed she was hunkering down, in a manner of speaking, while fighter planes buzzed her house, and called herself a 'dead woman walking'. At the time I was naive enough to believe her, but began to have doubts as to her veracity when I visited her website and saw how she depicted herself, bathed in a holy light, posing with this beatific expression, and I started to think, 'Whoa Nelly, we've got a live one here.' Now I read her character assassination of Don Stacey, a dear friend of mine, and easily one of the most decent human beings on the planet, and I'd like to take the time to refute all that she said, except for the intro bio. I'd like to but unless pressed, I will not, for in re-reading that which she wrote, I think it's obvious that this is all conjecture on her part, mixed with paranoia and disinformation, especially the so-called 'confession' made by Don and his friend that they were in fact 'CIA good guys', which is so ridiculous it is finally, I hope, her Waterloo. The beleagured Barbara Hartwell forced them admit it, uh-huh, sure. And I'm Joan of Arc.

I do not know if Hartwell is sick or CIA herself; I only know that her comments do not deserve the time of day. Nor does she.

Don Stacey and Sue Ford are great friends, and she stands by him 100%, as do I. There's something in the way of a personal vendetta that comes crawling out of the words of Hartwell, and I think it high time that she is exposed for the phoney that she OBVIOUSLY is.

Editors everywhere: DISCERN. For the love of God. The character who calls herself Barbara Hartwell couldn't shine Don Stacey's shoes...

Some time ago, maybe two years or better, I read Barbara Hartwell's plea for spare change at Rumormillnews, so I sent her a check.

[BH: Any "plea for spare change" you may have read on Rumor Mill News, would have been posted by Rayelan Allan, the editor, not by myself. But if you are indeed a "dear friend" of Don Stacey and hang out in his marvy circle of humanitarian and charitable do-gooders, I'm sure you could afford whatever you sent. A belated personal thank you, it probably allowed me to buy a few days worth of cat food. I've given up panhandling though, doesn't seem to be much future in it.]

She claimed she was hunkering down, in a manner of speaking, while fighter planes buzzed her house, and called herself a 'dead woman walking'.

[BH: Perhaps you need to put on your reading glasses and take another look, before you jump to conclusions, use wild hyperbole, and try to twist what I said, in your apparent desperation to discredit me.

What I "claimed" was that ONE Military Fighter Jet, an F-15, to be precise, had flown over a temporary 'safe house' where I was living, so close to the roof as to appear that it would crash into the house, VIOLATING FAA regs. This was on September 15, 1997, one month after I had made my first public appearance since leaving CIA, at a conference in Denver Colorado, where I exposed some information about the persecution being directed at me by the U.S. government.

I have all the facts of the case documented, along with reports I made to the FAA, as well as reports that the jet was spotted over West Point, flying too low for radar. In fact, a man from the FAA by the name of Wayne Laner, who tried to help me get to the bottom of this outrageous act, was suddenly and mysteriously "transferred" out of the Albany office, just two days after beginning an investigation of my report. I also have two (2) witnesses, one of them my son, Keith Maximilian Hartwell. I did not move to my home in Woodstock, until October 1997 and at no time did I report ANY such an event, especially not multiple incidents, taking place at my own house.

As for the "dead woman walking". Yes, correct, I did use that phrase. You see, a "beyond salvage directive" had been issued against me. I don't expect someone of your limited intelligence or ignorance on how CIA operates to comprehend this, but I'll explain for the benefit of others reading this, who may find the information useful. I had been told by several CIA operatives that such an order had been issued. In fact, I overheard the agents who had abducted me from my home in 1994, after drugging me and throwing a cloth bag over my head, say this very thing, and arguing among themselves as to what to "do about it". They thought I was unconsious.

In plain terms "beyond salvage" means you have become a liability to your handlers and cannot be "redeemed" for further use by the Agency. If they can get away with it, they arrange an "accident" or maybe a "suicide". They are experts at eliminating people who have become a problem for them.]

At the time I was naive enough to believe her, but began to have doubts as to her veracity when I visited her website and saw how she depicted herself, bathed in a holy light, posing with this beatific expression, and I started to think, 'Whoa Nelly, we've got a live one here.'

[BH: The photograph on my website was taken in 1998 by a professional photographer from Hudson Valley Magazine. The photo was taken in the dark of a moonless night, out in a field. There was no natural light source, so the photographer used a light on a tripod to catch the image. It's kind of interesting about that "holy light". There were two others in the original picture which appeared in the magazine, before it was cropped for use on my website. But the light only appeared around me. Who knows, maybe I have friends in high places. Anything is possible....]

Now I read her character assassination of Don Stacey, a dear friend of mine, and easily one of the most decent human beings on the planet, and I'd like to take the time to refute all that she said, except for the intro bio. I'd like to but unless pressed, I will not, for in re-reading that which she wrote, I think it's obvious that this is all conjecture on her part, mixed with paranoia and disinformation, especially the so-called 'confession' made by Don and his friend that they were in fact 'CIA good guys', which is so ridiculous it is finally, I hope, her Waterloo. The beleagured Barbara Hartwell forced them admit it, uh-huh, sure. And I'm Joan of Arc.

[BH: Well, if you want to call stating facts and documenting my own eyewitness testimony "character assassination" be my guest. But in my book, "decent human beings" do not engage in such activities as lying; manhandling a woman to stop their cover from being blown; attempting to manipulate and interfere with legitimate whistleblowers like myself who are exercising their freedom of speech to expose heinous crimes committed by operatives of the U.S. government.

I also don't think that a criteria for decency would involve sending out veiled death threats for a person's refusal to cooperate with a containment operation. Perhaps your standards for "decency" need to be reevaluated. Perhaps you yourself have been hoodwinked by Mr. Stacey. Or perhaps you, like Susan Ford, are another mind control victim who falsely believes herself to be free of such control. I don't claim to know, and frankly I don't give a damn. My statements are based on facts, evidence and the testimony of reliable witnesses and trustworthy sources, nothing less. But if Mr. Don Stacey is in fact "one of the most decent human beings on the planet", it is a sad day indeed for humanity and we may as well all just thrown in the towel, for surely all hope for the redemption of humanity is gone.

You mention "conjecture" and "paranoia"? For certain others who have read my report no such things are "obvious". What is "obvious" to me is that rather than attempt to refute the statements in my report with facts and hard evidence, you prefer to throw out a vague, catch-all denial which serves no purpose except to reveal your own lack of factual information and/or your dearth of accurate perception. Maybe you've also heard of "plausible deniability", CIA's solution for all times and all seasons, all cases where culpability is hard to prove.

Maybe you need to pull out those reading glasses and read the report again. What I ACTUALLY said was that Vince Lodato was persistent and kept at his questions. I said that "Hank" made a "qualified admission" to Vince. I said that in the last phone call I was privy to, that Hank tried to make Vince believe that I, Barbara Hartwell am BAD CIA. Since he knew his own cover was blown, he had little choice, so he and Don Stacey become GOOD CIA, and all is (hopefully) forgiven. Not very logical, but then, they were clearly operating without the benefit of an accurate psychological profile of moi.

To anyone who actually knows me, this is an absurd allegation. At no time did I say that I MYSELF "forced" them to admit to anything. If this is the best you can do, you'll never make the grade as even a "useful idiot" or the least credible apologist for for this "dear friend" of yours. And if this is the best THEY can do, sending out a mindless twerp like you as the cavalry, they are in deep shit. And no, you're no Joan of Arc. Joan of Arc had guts, brains and class; all of which it appears you have had to make your own sorry way through life without.]

I do not know if Hartwell is sick or CIA herself; I only know that her comments do not deserve the time of day. Nor does she.

[BH: Bingo! You don't know. You know absolutely nothing about me. I dare say you would be very surprised to learn the truth. But that will never happen while you're buying in to the horseshit being spread around by the trowelful by Don Stacey and his CIA cronies. And if my comments do "not deserve the time of day" why bother addressing them at all? You contradict yourself, ma'am.]

Don Stacey and Sue Ford are great friends, and she stands by him 100%, as do I. There's something in the way of a personal vendetta that comes crawling out of the words of Hartwell, and I think it high time that she is exposed for the phoney that she OBVIOUSLY is.

[BH: Congratulations. With friends like these, I guess you've established yourself as one who treads the moral high ground with no compromise. I'd rather offer you my condolences, but they would fall on deaf ears. I wonder if Sue would tell you the truth if you asked her about that conversation back in 1999. The one where she told me she knew Stacey was a "Fed". Probably not, oh well......

As for being "exposed" as a "phoney"? Been there, done that. Many people have "exposed" Hartwell as such, especially those with something very major to lose if enough people were to believe my reports to be true. But about that vendetta....Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord. I think He's got it covered. Anything I can do to help, I'm there as a humble servant, just a soldier, nothing more.]

Editors everywhere: DISCERN. For the love of God. The character who calls herself Barbara Hartwell couldn't shine Don Stacey's shoes...

[BH: Great line, how original. No, but even if I were so inclined, I could not shine his shoes. That would truly be a Herculean Labor. I'd have to first scrape off the layers of horseshit in which he's standing. Hell, I'd need to wear hip-waders just to make an approach.

No, I couldn't shine his shoes, but I could no doubt kick his ass. But before he cries "terrorist" like all the rest of the government cowards, let me clarify that I mean that figuratively speaking, NOT LITERALLY. That Delta Force combat training comes in handy, IN SELF DEFENSE, I must admit, for those times when one of them dares to get physical with me. But I can also do a fine job with nothing more than an arsenal of facts, a little persistence, a little of God's grace and a good computer.]

Note from Babs: Here is a message from Vince Lodato of Kingston, New York, as a response to my article, EXPOSED: CIA MK ULTRA CONTAINMENT OP. My reply is given below.

Barbara Hartwell, Some Facts You Should Know....

This message is addressed to Barbara Hartwell. Barbara I read what you wrote about me and it is basically true. But one fact is not.

I am to the best of my knowledge not a covert or overt agent of the CIA.

It is news to me if I am. Barbara, I am just a phd theoretical physicist who walked into a can of worms and had my life nearly destroyed.

For your information the arsoning of my home and the murder of my sister Joan, I attribute to IBM and in particular Louis Vincet Gerstner and Dr. John E. Kelly III.

The main person who put false and spurious infomation into the system to protect his job and high hopes to be the CEO of IBM is Kelly, a phd from RPI, and now a senior executive at IBM.

By the way he has and continues to fail to bring a manufacturing tool for ultra high density chips into the market place.

I am just 64 and I forgive all who harmed me but I don't forget ...however I do forgive.

Barbara, you have been wronged by the CIA, and they continue to wrong you, but I am not CIA and if I was I would tell you. Remember I helped your sister out.

Barbara I see your son from time to time. I would like to send you some wine via him and I truly wish all goes well with you at present and in the future.

Best Regards Vince

Barbara Hartwell's reply to Vince Lodato:

Hey Vince!

Thanks for your comments, and for corroborating much of my testimony as being true. However, if you read my article again, you will see that I never accused YOU personally of working for CIA. No, I only said that I believed you were "sent" by Ted Gunderson, a crony of (CIA) Don Stacey. In fact, in your first e-mail to me you said you were a "friend" of Gunderson's, which is mostly why I did not agree to meet with you for about a year.

You and I had quite a few discussions about good old Ted, and never reached an agreement about him. But what I told you then is what I still know to be true: Ted Gunderson is involved in CIA containment ops, whether he works "officially" for CIA or not.

I was disturbed by the fact that you continued to write to me, after I had broken off contact with you, trying to persuade me that TG was my "friend". It also bothered me that you seemed to believe Ted when he insisted that a good friend of mine (you know whom I mean, but who shall remain anonymous) was my CIA "handler" and that I myself was still involved with them .

You see, this is Ted's M.O. One time, years ago, Ted tried to tell me that my (then) bodyguard, who came with me to stay at Ted's son's home in New Jersey, was a "CIA plant". In fact, he was retired from Dep't of Justice and never had any ties to CIA. To hear Ted tell it, EVERYONE I ever knew or associated with was a "CIA plant". But ironically, it is Ted himself who is precisely that. But I've warned you before and if you want to continue associating with him, that's your prerogative.

But all that's water under the bridge now. Yes, I know you sincerely tried to help my sister. You made a phone call to that "retired" CIA agent Ron Cerra, in North Carolina and more or less gave him hell for his criminal harassment and abuses of my sister, Irene. I sincerely appreciated that. So did my sister and she has always wanted to thank you for your backup. She may even be able to use your testimony in court. Her husband has a civil case coming up, suing Cerra for libel, criminal harassment, etc. etc. I too will be filing a lawsuit against him. And I've got evidence galore ! If I win, I'll be a rich woman. Maybe that will finally teach CIA they are messing with the wrong woman.

My only problem with you was that I saw you as naive (which you know); and as somewhat of a "loose cannon". Yes, I too could be accused of that, but despite that, my intelligence training usually prevents me from becoming a liability to myself or others.

As far as who was actually responsible for burning down your house and the murder of your sister? You say it was IBM and you name some names (good for you!)....however; the way you respresented it to me at the time, you knew CIA had to be involved, and it's been my life-long experience in dealing with them, that they usually are. Anyway, that was also what you told Ron Cerra when you spoke to him on the phone: "The CIA burned my house down and killed my sister."

But anyway, Vince, I'm glad to hear from you and will send you a private e-mail address to contact me. As long as you PROMISE me you will not relay our conversations to Ted L. Gunderson! (or Don Stacey or Hank Amsden) . I am the type of person who believes in telling the truth; and I let the chips fall where they may. I like having everything out in the open, especially when it involves crimes and corruption connected to the Criminally Insane Agency. I believe you are the same; you are not a liar, nor have I ever known you to try to cover up the truth.

And I'd love to have some of the wine from your cellars, the last you gave me was excellent. But don't mail it. You'd have to give it to my son Keith in person, he's the only one I'd trust to carry it personally to me.

God bless you....and stay away from those CIA folks. Don't sit down with them over a glass of wine and have a cozy chat. They do NOT have your best interests at heart.

Barbara Hartwell
CIA Poster Child