Martin F. Abernathy
Charles Schlund's LATEST Lawsuit Against George W. Bush --
Wed Aug 27 19:28:32 2003

To Contact Charles A. Schlund

Charles A. Schlund
8520 N. 54th Drive
Glendale, AZ 85302

(623) 931-5963
(623) 931-6420
(602) 670-2017







GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, a sovereign

nation; GEORGE W. BUSH, an individual; DOES 1-10, individuals; DOES

11-20, entities,


No. CV03-1590 PHX VAM





Charles August Schlund, III, (“Plaintiff Schlund”) respectfully moves

the Court for an Order for Injunctive Relief to terminate the continuous

irreparable harm caused by the Defendants, the Government, including

Does 1-10, individuals and Does 1-20, entities, (collectively referred

to as “Government”) use of electronic torture activities of using

various electronic methods to egregiously cause irreparable torture to

Plaintiff and cause injuries and damages to Plaintiff. The electronic

based torture methods and activities result in the use of sound,

vibration, heat, electric and other kinds of or energies and radiations

which effect and interfere with Plaintiff’s normal life activities and

cause extreme pain and suffering (TORTURE) of Plaintiff Schlund.

If the court needs evidence that torture is possible and factual,

Plaintiff is prepared under the court’s rulings in Siderman DeBlake v.

Republic of Argentina, 865 F. 2d 699 (9th Cir. 1992) and Doran v.

McGuinness 158 F.R.D. 383 (1994) to demonstrate such methods and

torture. Plaintiff requests the court to order an evidentiary hearing

under Doran v. McGuinness, 158 F.R.D. 383 (1994) to demonstrate

precisely how various methods and techniques of remote electronic based

torture and other methods of it are used on Plaintiff Schlund, as a

political witness, his witnesses, family and associates, in violation of

their constitutional rights and international law.

DATED this _____ day of August, 2003

By: ______________________________

Charles August Schlund, III

Plaintiff in Pro persona


Plaintiff Schlund has properly filed his Complaint on August 15, 2003

and served it on all Defendants on August 18, 2003.


Prefatory Statement.

Plaintiff Schlund incorporates by this reference his Verified Complaint

filed August 15, 2003. No legitimate American Court would refuse to

hear a Motion to Terminate the Torture of an American citizen. Siderman

DeBlake v. Republic of Argentina, 865 F. 2d 699 (9th Cir. 1992) at p.

20, infra.

Plaintiff’s case and related issues of electronic invasion of privacy

and electronic and other forms of torture are NOT of first impression

before the Court, infra. There are similar types of torture, illegal

surveillance and invasion of privacy decisions which are consistent in

the various circuits of the United States, especially the 9th Circuit

Court of Appeal rendering both relief and damages. Plaintiff’s case is

unique, raising the collective issues of torture by electronic force,

and improper installation of electronic devices in Plaintiff’s body,

resulting in life threatening, civil rights violations, personal

injuries, invasion of privacy, sleep deprivation and deprivation of

freedom of speech, right to vote, freedom of religion and other human

and civil rights and international law violations. This includes

violations of the Protection Against Torture Act.

The Government has taken the position that any victim of government

electronic torture who complains of such torture is accused of trying to

evade the Government’s investigation of them by asserting they are being

tortured. Plaintiff Schlund asserts he has not attempted in any manner

whatsoever to avoid any investigation by the government. In fact,

Plaintiff Schlund requests the court to order the following in an effort

to terminate the ongoing fabricated investigation and order a real

investigation subject to the following conditions:

1. Order the amount of $50 million a year to start a new investigation

by the U.S. Government to insure a successful conclusion of the

investigation of Plaintiff Schlund.

2. Order not less than 50 new agents be assigned to the new court

ordered investigation as set forth in No. 1 above.

3. Order Plaintiff Schlund to fully cooperate with the 50 newly

assigned agents and the newly ordered legitimate investigation ordered

by the court. And, Plaintiff agrees to waive any rights that the court

requests of him that the court feels is necessary to successfully find

the truth.

4. The court is to ensure that the agents involved in this investigation

are not politically motivated to frame Plaintiff Schlund. The agents should be

picked by a lottery or computer program to ensure that they are not picked as

political thugs to frame Plaintiff Schlund.

As stated herein, the highest federal courts have acknowledged that

torture by Government officials or agents is not new but a very well

known fact. Also, a well known fact is that its known sources and the

torture is never admitted by governments. Siderman v. DeBlake, infra.

This is the case here.

The Government’s motive is discrimination and retaliation on grounds

Plaintiff is branded as a “political witness”/”whistle blower” against

powerful and political people in the Government. Plaintiff Schlund is a

“political witness” whose whistle blowing activities of Government

corruption based on Plaintiff Schlund’s personal knowledge involving

persons in the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the Drug Enforcement

Administration (“DEA”), Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

(“ATF”), the State of Arizona and other federal, state and local law

enforcement agencies, also collectively referred to as “Government”, is

a factual reality of said known sources as more fully expressed below.

Plaintiff Schlund was working with the FBI when he was physically

gassed in his sleep and physically attacked and restrained forcibly

against his will, injected with CIA designed electronic “subcutaneous

implants” used by both the CIA and DEA and others. These multipurpose

implants are used to severely physiologically inflict punishment and

psychologically torture and disable Plaintiff Schlund with cruel and

unusual punishment (TORTURE) in blatant violation of his constitutional


Plaintiff is an ex-Vietnam veteran who, upon discharge from the United

States Marine Corp., was solicited by Drug Cartel members for the

Central Intelligence Agency (1968) (later, the Drug Enforcement

Administration – “DEA”) (1977) to carry out their agenda. Due to the

corruption activities of the CIA and DEA agenda, Plaintiff, after

acquiring personal knowledge of the reality of such agenda, rejected and

refused to work for them. Plaintiff was offered money and power

including the ability to gas and torture and/or rape any girl that

turned Plaintiff down for sex. All of this was offered under the color

of law using warrants in drug investigations issued by the Surveillance

Court and other courts.

Upon Plaintiff Schlund’s refusal, Plaintiff was targeted and placed

under constant surveillance and repeatedly set-up by the corrupt

Government person(s) to torture Plaintiff and to control the information

substantiating the serious Government corruption which he knew about and

possessed information on.

Plaintiff was then forced by the Government to become a whistle blower

due to the Government’s attacks against him (“whistle blower

activities”). As he began his whistle-blower efforts pertaining to the

corrupt governmental activities of the CIA, and DEA, law enforcement and

others, he found himself suddenly framed as being an alleged drug

dealer, murderer, gun runner, smuggler and thief and placed under

intense investigations (as the Government made it obvious he was being

selectively targeted).

The Government then fabricated evidence, and then arrested and charged

Plaintiff for alleged conspiracy to manufacture illegal drugs. The

federal prosecution of Plaintiff Schlund was extraordinarily aggressive.

Its key witness was the DEA’s own agent/informant/drug chemist and

manufacturer, Carl Altz a.k.a. John Green.

The Honorable Judge Lacey, who was a visiting judge to the United

States District Court of the District of Arizona was assigned to the

trial of Plaintiff. The Honorable Judge Lacey found that the DEA had

committed perjury and obstructed justice and framed Plaintiff Schlund

and demanded their arrest after acquitting Defendant Schlund. Judge

Lacey called the DEA’s conduct “outrageous conduct” of the United States

– Plaintiff was “acquitted” on all counts. The acquittal judgment was

upheld on appeal.

The Government’s surveillance, torture and other violations of

Plaintiff Schlund’s constitutional rights is in retaliation for

Plaintiff Schlund’s refusal to join the Government’s corruption, has

continued for twenty-five (25) years resulting in electronic monitoring

and torture of Plaintiff Schlund. It has been continuous and ongoing by

electronic force and other electronic systems and methods to monitor

Plaintiff Schlund’s daily activities, invading his and those he

communicates with privately, especially where there exists normal and

legally expected zones and orbits of privacy, and to harass, retaliate,

torture, deprive of sleep and attempt to discredit Plaintiff as a

political witness for his whistle-blowing activity of exposing the

Government’s corruption based on his personal knowledge and from what

Plaintiff read in the CIA, DEA and other files he has always called the

“Don Bolles Papers.”

Statements from Charles A. Schlund to the Federal Courts.

The Court should first understand that Plaintiff has been under constant

torture and surveillance and under many different investigations since

reading the CIA and other files that Plaintiff has always called the

“Don Bolles Papers”. Plaintiff read these government files in 1977. The

Bolles Papers were all the papers that George Bush Sr. had removed from

the Government when Jimmy Carter was elected to the presidency. These

papers were removed to stop President Jimmy Carter and those he would

appoint from obtaining the contained information on Government

corruption. The director of the CIA George Bush Sr. removed these

documents from the government in 1976. Plaintiff has been under constant

surveillance, not to collect information for the prosecution of him for

some crime he purported has committed, but to authorize the use of

torture and collect information to be used to discredit Plaintiff as a

political witness due to his political witness status and activities.

The Government has no intent on ever arresting Plaintiff Schlund.

A very small portion of the information collected on Plaintiff Schlund

is real and most of the statements or recordings taken from him were

made under torture by the Government. The torture was done to force him

to make the statements to the Government that it desired after he had

been tortured close to death by the Justice Department and/or others.

Most of these conversations were taken from Plaintiff Schlund under

torture and agreed to by Plaintiff as a condition in exchange for relief

from the torture or in exchange for sleep. These conversations were then

submitted to the courts by the Government under perjury or falsely or

out of context to reality by the DOJ, DEA and others. Many of these

conversations were recorded while Plaintiff was working with the FBI

setting up corrupt agents in the DEA and other federal and state

departments and/or agencies and the courts.

Many of these conversations were taken after depriving Plaintiff of

sleep for years with the Government only allowing Plaintiff a few hours

of sleep a week. As an aside, if the Government denies any of this,

Plaintiff demands to be allowed to prove that such electronic force and

technology for the use of torture is not only possible but can be

demonstrated to the court. Plaintiff Schlund, by way of example, would

need a human subject to demonstrate these kinds of torture on and

recommends Robert C. Broomfield be one of the people used for these

demonstrations. Broomfield was one of the corrupt judges that Plaintiff

had been secretly supplying criminal information on to the FBI many

years before he refused to recuse himself from Plaintiff’s lawsuits upon

challenge by recusal motions. Broomfield then decided Plaintiff’s

lawsuit and motions knowing that Plaintiff was a witness against him and

ruled on the lawsuits using made up facts and statements that were never

pled in any of Plaintiff’s lawsuits or motions.

In violation of F.R.C.P 52, Broomfield failed and refused to make

findings of fact and conclusions of law as Plaintiff continuously

requested in [all] of his pleadings, motions and responses. He did this

to further cover-up his criminal acts as asserted by Plaintiff. These

rulings were done using a federal rules decision case out of

jurisdiction and off point; the case law of Doran v. McGuiness, 158

F.R.D. 383 (1994). Plaintiff Schlund now wishes to use the Doran case

law to prove his case. The court is requested to authorize Plaintiff to

conduct the medical procedures on Broomfield for the electronic torture

demonstrations (pursuant to the Doran decision to prove electronic

torture is an electronic engineering reality) as the Court has

authorized similar procedures on Plaintiff’s witnesses, family, friends,

associates and Plaintiff. In fact, no technology is required to torture

or murder people being placed under investigations. All that is required

is the court’s authorization to perform secret procedures on these

sleeping people after placing them in a state they can not wake from

while authorizing these crimes by the Government under real or created


The corrupt judges of the court then only need to stop any legal proceedings

from those they are torturing and pretend that they are guilty of some crime

which authorized the court to secretly commit these secret medical procedures

on them. The corrupt judges of the court and the corrupt agents can then continue

to violate a person’s Constitutional rights and cover up their illegal corruption and

crimes. In the Justice Department, Surveillance Court, DEA, CIA, FBI and other

files Plaintiff read were authorizations and legal opinions on the injections and/or

implantation with implants of many famous and important people.

Plaintiff believes that Broomfield as a judicial representative of the

court committed deceit while using the ruling of Doran v. McGuiness, 158

F.R.D. 383 (1994) in Plaintiff’s case. [Doran claimed he heard voices

through “mental telepathy” connected to claims of electronic implants.]

This ruling gives the impression Plaintiff Schlund agrees that mental

telepathy is possible, which he does not. Let this court fully

understand that Plaintiff Schlund has never asserted mental telepathy

and does

Main Page - Thursday, 08/28/03

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]


messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)