The Messiah Gene by Janet Phelan

Janet Phelan The Messiah Gene

By Janet Phelan

Human history is littered with examples of people following a political or religious leader into the depths of horrific depravity. Certainly, the twentieth century saw the results of the tendency to obey authority, no matter how cruel or morally reprehensible. Stalin and Hitler’s effects on their countrymen have been cited ad nauseum. As have Pol Pot, the implications of the Milgram experiments and Jonestown. Let’s throw Waco into the pot, as well.

Do the disastrous results of January 6 also apply? Do the exhortations to “Mask up,” “Lockdown” and “Follow the Science,” — which turned out to be not science at all but propaganda — also qualify? Remember, if you would that such commands came from both sides of the aisle and from both President Trump and President Biden.

It has been said that the country has never been more divided. Abortion rights, immigration policy and financial solvency all take a close second to the post-pandemic arguments as to who was actually responsible for the death toll of the last three years. And these conflicts may just boil down to which leader, which “Messiah” you endorse.

Social psychology is replete with studies showing the aspect of obedience as a determinant of human behavior. Some of these studies have challenged the original assumptions of the Milgram experiments. If you recall, the Milgram experiments definitively revealed that humans tend to obey authority even if the dictates of that authority are morally reprehensible.

Recent studies have attempted to hone in on biological factors, as seen in this study of obedience and conformity, in which people’s decisions as to whether or not to engage in acts of obedience and conformity were then followed up by electroencephalogram studies. Quoting from the abstract of another ambitious review of imaging techniques,

Normative social influences shape nearly every aspect of our lives, yet the biological processes mediating the impact of these social influences on behavior remain incompletely understood. In this Hypothesis, we outline a theoretical framework and an integrative research approach to the study of social influences on the brain and genetic moderators of such effects.

And this study looks into the role of serotonin in obedience and conformity.

It is a reality that humans tend to obey. And when they do pitch a tent into one or another camp, they may fiercely defend the Controller, both in words and in armed conflict. The history of the world is replete with armies of “God,” intent on spreading their faith even if it kills them. Or kills others. A sort of widespread “Stockholm Syndrome” could be hypothesized, with entire countries held hostage and identifying with their captors.

The advent of the “pandemic” appears to have solidified populations into such camps. In a word,” pro-vax” or “anti-vax.” However, this may be simply a perpetuation of the human tendency to glom together and declare those with other perceptions to be “the enemy.” In fact, pandemic propaganda encouraged this sort of group identification. Masking up, while generally now discredited as a form of real protection from an airborne virus, may serve as a marker for group identification—i.e. “I care about others and support the official narrative.”

One might almost say that we are being herded into groups and then pitted against each other.

And could it be that such a paradigm serves another agenda? Could it be that our essential humanity is being reduced down to this factor and that we are again “obeying” a hidden hand by identifying with a group and against those in that “other” group? Certainly we have seen that dynamic at work before.

Recently, a friend from Texas moved with her family — husband and a couple of kids — to the jungle of Guatemala. I receive regular updates from her — pictures of the kidlets swimming in a local lake, sunsets over the mountains and enviable pictures of exotic looking Guatemalan dishes. Not one peep about politics or group meetings to discuss this or that agenda, though I am aware that she had at one point voiced political concerns.

Just maybe that friend got it right. She is living on the edge of the world, raising her family and thoroughly immersed in what the jungle holds — secret pleasures and amazing beauty. At a time where ideas are weaponized and people are killing each other over which “God” they worship, she has removed herself from that battle and is living fully and joyously in an almost primeval Garden.

To paraphrase George Orwell, this may be the ultimate revolutionary act.

Art: Pawel Kuczynski

Janet Phelan has been on the trail of the biological weapons agenda since the new millennium. Her book on the pandemic, At the Breaking Point of History: How Decades of US Duplicity Enabled the Pandemic, has been published in 2021 by Trine Day and is available on Amazon and elsewhere. Her articles on this issue have appeared in Activist Post, New Eastern Outlook, Infowars and elsewhere. Educated at Grinnell College, UC Berkeley and the University of Missouri Graduate School of Journalism, Janet “jumped ship” and since 2004 has been writing exclusively for independent media. Her articles previously appeared in the Los Angeles Times, Oui Magazine, Orange Coast Magazine, the Long Beach Press Telegram, the Santa Monica Daily Press and other publications. She is the author of the groundbreaking expose, EXILE and two books of poetry. She resides abroad. You may follow Janet on Parler here @JanetPhelan and Twitter @JanetPhelan14. To support her work, please go to JanetPhelan.

Janet Phelan Book At the breaking point of history
HELP SHARE AND SUPPORT THE NATIONAL COURT VICTIM DATABASE: Share with your Family, Friends and Anyone affected by Judicial Abuse

Targeted Justice Files Lawsuit Alleging Crimes Against US Citizens, Is it a Bombshell or a Fizzle? by Janet Phelan

Targeted Justice Files Lawsuit Alleging Crimes Against US Citizens Is it a Bombshell or a Fizzle by Janet Phelan
By Janet Phelan
On January 12, 2023, Targeted Justice, which holds itself out as a resource for those who claim to be targeted with covert weaponry, filed a lawsuit in US District Court claiming that FBI head Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland—among others—are responsible for these attacks on selected US citizens. The lawsuit cites the “Havana Syndrome” and at least one of the plaintiffs, a Dr. Len Ber, has been cited elsewhere as a “Havana Syndrome” victim.

The “Havana Syndrome” has been widely covered by legacy media. It refers to what has been termed as “mysterious” attacks on CIA and Embassy officials in China, Cuba and elsewhere — attacks which have been in some cases profoundly disabling.

The causes of the “Syndrome” remain in dispute, with some attributing them to covert directed energy and/or microwave attacks. As it now stands, the US government has passed a law recognizing and giving medical assistance to diplomats and officials who have been attacked in this manner. The US government continues to maintain the stance that other than the vetted officials, no US citizen is being attacked with this weaponry.

At this juncture, there are virtually thousands of US citizens who are claiming to have been so attacked, including NSA whistleblower extraordinaire William Binney. The US government continues to deny the veracity of these citizen claims, insinuating that those who make these claims are mentally ill.

As filed, the lawsuit contains fatal errors, which may result in its dismissal. For one, the lawsuit is named “First Amended Complaint,” which leads one to question where the original Complaint was lodged. In fact, it appears never to have been entered into the record.

However, the intrinsic problems with the lawsuit do not end there. While the lawsuit waxes on about covert weaponry, fusion centers and the terrorist watchlist, it falls down irrevocably in the section named “Causes of Action.” This section is pivotal to the success of any legal effort as it names (or should name) the laws that have been violated and therefore provide an underpinning for a successful legal action.

However, whoever constructed the lawsuit (and we will get to that in a moment) appeared not to understand what a “Cause of Action” is and how important this inclusion would be to a successful suit. The lawsuit lists a total of six “Causes of Action,” some of which are not causes of action and may end up rendering the lawsuit null and void. The lawsuit lists “Damages” as a cause of action (this is not a cause of action) and also lists “Mandamus” as a cause of action, which it is not — without a prior lower court government decision.

In other words, the lawsuit falls down in listing the laws broken which justify the suit.

Also of concern is the focus of the lawsuit on the alleged inclusion of what are called “targeted individuals” on the terrorist watchlist. The lawsuit seems to make an assumption that the inclusion takes place under the banner of “Non-Investigative Subjects.” However, when queried as to how this conclusion was reached, the attorney for the lawsuit, Ana Toledo, declined to respond. If one looks closely at the verbiage in the lawsuit, it appears that the lion’s share of the discussion (26 pages) relates to the alleged inclusion of individuals in the terrorist database. Very little verbiage (a total of around three pages) is given to the allegations of the use of “Havana-syndrome type” weapons against targeted individuals.

Going to the Causes of Action, which list the laws broken and thereby justifying the lawsuit, we come away with the impression that the sole basis for filing the lawsuit was 1) a failure of the government to timely reply to FOIA requests and 2) allegations of inclusion of the seventeen plaintiffs on the terrorist watchlist, for which no proof is provided.

The attorney for the lawsuit, Ana Toledo, was contacted with questions about the lawsuit, including the question as to its authorship. Given the sloppy construction of the lawsuit, this question would of necessity be asked, as it is possible that another party wrote the lawsuit and Toledo simply put her name on it.

Toledo neither confirmed nor denied this reporter’s questions, responding in the following manner—

Dear Ms. Phelan:

I have been awfully busy. Excuse my delay in responding.

I believe you have reached your own conclusions regarding the lawsuit and have nothing further to discuss about it.

Your tone is not conducive to a productive communication.

Best regards,

A. Toledo

Further queries were tendered as to her work history and her apparent hiatus from the practice of law between 2010 and 2019. No response was received.

The judge in this case requested a memorandum from both plaintiffs and defendants as to whether the venue (Southern District of Texas) was the correct venue for the lawsuit. In the first response filed by the government, the lawyer for the defendants stated that it was expected that the lawsuit would be dismissed “at the earliest stage” and was essentially comprised of “baseless allegations and conspiracy theories.” The venue was then discussed and both parties seemed to agree upon its locus of filing.

For a number of years, Targeted Justice has been claiming that it intends to file a class action lawsuit and has encouraged “targeted individuals” to join the organization. The fact that a lawsuit is now on file naming only seventeen defendants has surprised some of the members, many of whom paid a donation on joining the organization.

Targeted Justice is currently being sued by its former legal director, John Christiana. His lawsuit, filed in both Arizona (the former locus of Targeted Justice) and Texas (its current locus) alleges that the organization has attempted to encourage targets in “doxxing” public officials for the alleged purposes of creating legal difficulties for the targets. The doxxing claims come from the fact that Targeted Justice publicly lists names and home addresses of public officials which the organization claims are involved in the use of weaponry and/or gangstalking of ordinary citizens. The lawsuit also alleges a coordinated effort at defaming Christiana once he objected to the doxxing.

In fact, Christiana’s mother, Charlotte, who is ninety years old, received a demand letter signed by lawyer Ana Toledo and the principal with Targeted Justice, an “Owen Calvert” who also goes by the name of “Richard Lighthouse.” The letter, which was curiously not dated, demands over $3 million dollars from Jack’s mother, who is listed as a joint “tortfeaser” along with Jack. This reporter has reviewed the tracking information attached to the letter and believes it was sent on or around December 30, 2022, after the lawsuit against Targeted Justice was filed by Christiana.

In a subsequent letter to the “Targeted Individual Community,” Robert Brown, who is Targeted Justice’s defense attorney for the Arizona lawsuit against TJ, stated that Jack’s mother was known to be his sole support and therefore liable for the demanded damages. The letter from attorney Brown states “It is our understanding Christiana does not have any meaningful employment and he covers his living expenses, and any expenses related to a lawsuit, with money received from his mother.”

In fact, Jack Christiana, who has a MA in Legal Studies works more than one job and is currently also attending law school. He has told this reporter on prior occasions that he is working long hours in order to save money for a move from California to DC, where he intends to further his activism.

Christiana has responded to the letter, which he alleges constitutes elder abuse and extortion, by filing a restraining order against lawyer Ana Toledo and Owen Calvert, barring them from further contact with his mother. The hearing on this is pending.

In a recent interview, TJ attorney Ana Toledo spoke harshly of those she claims “defamed” Targeted Justice. Toledo put forward that those who are are critical of Targeted Justice are fronted by the CIA or NSA. She disputed claims by the interviewer that “Targeted Justice has done nothing but take money,” and claimed that she has “a really important endeavor, which is stopping this, (targeting) and making this work—the case—and… putting the elements of evidence out there …in order to have that list declared illegal and unconstitutional.”

I Talk on Sunday 5th February 2023 with Ana Toledo representative – Attorney for Targeted Justice

Janet Phelan has been on the trail of the biological weapons agenda since the new millennium. Her book on the pandemic, At the Breaking Point of History: How Decades of US Duplicity Enabled the Pandemic, has been published in 2021 by Trine Day and is available on Amazon and elsewhere. Her articles on this issue have appeared in Activist Post, New Eastern Outlook, Infowars and elsewhere. Educated at Grinnell College, UC Berkeley and the University of Missouri Graduate School of Journalism, Janet “jumped ship” and since 2004 has been writing exclusively for independent media. Her articles previously appeared in the Los Angeles Times, Oui Magazine, Orange Coast Magazine, the Long Beach Press Telegram, the Santa Monica Daily Press and other publications. She is the author of the groundbreaking expose, EXILE and two books of poetry. She resides abroad. You may follow Janet on Parler here @JanetPhelan and Twitter @JanetPhelan14. To support her work, please go to JanetPhelan.



HELP SHARE AND SUPPORT THE NATIONAL COURT VICTIM DATABASE: Share with your Family, Friends and Anyone affected by Judicial Abuse

How to Research Your Judge Course January 2023

Phelan Janet Court Victim Community Course HOW TO RESEARCH YOUR JUDGE 2023


2023 28 January class Please contact me if interested.
Here is another case where this research had a profound effect. Justice in the Time of Corona – Activist Post (SEE BELOW) Justice in the Time of Corona – Activist Post

The first class for 2023 on HOW TO RESEARCH YOUR JUDGE will be held on January 28 at 2 pm Central Time. As we continue to reel under judicial oppression, with ostensibly no legal recourse, this research has proven, time and time again, to make an impact in cases where judges are ignoring the law and the human and civil rights of litigants.

The class remains at the very low registration fee of $30. If you are unable to pay that, please contact me directly as fee waivers are available. We need an army of people doing this research, which can show that judges are compromised and are throwing cases and being paid off, under the table, to do so.

This is not justice. This is a charade of justice. Please join us on January 14 and start to make a difference in your case, our legal system.

Now imagine if we had a whole “army” of people doing this research. Imagine the effect we could have on cases where justice appears to have gone South.

This case took place in another money-intensive court setting, which is federal tax court. Although the judge was moving to sanction the litigant and had, in fact, issued a ruling which would have financially demolished him, the entire case screeched to a halt after this article hit the press. The litigant is still happily living on his farm in the South, working at a high level in an engineering capacity, and still refusing to pay his taxes. And no longer being hauled into court on the non payment of the judge these. The judge here, Michael B. Thornton, did what other judges have done when the facts of their finances are brought to light—he just slunk off and did nothing further to assail the litigant.


Comments or questions are welcome.

* indicates required field

Justice in the Time of Corona


By Janet Phelan

“I discovered to my joy, that it is life, not death, that has no limits.” Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Love in the Time of Cholera

One of the casualties of Covid-19 has been our system of justice. The First Amendment to the Constitution, granting freedom of assembly, freedom to practice one’s chosen religion, and even freedom of speech is being trampled upon in the face of the corona crisis. The fact that this illness may possibly be no more dangerous than the seasonal flu pandemics of recent years is not apparently part of the national dialogue.

Michigan recently issued an order for all nonessential workers to stay home, citing the potential to arrest violators on misdemeanor charges. In that state, misdemeanors carry a punishment of up to a year in jail. Other states have issued similar orders, and in Washington DC and elsewhere, you can be jailed and fined for leaving your house. A recent Los Angeles Times article detailed the arrest of a paddle boarder on the coast off of Malibu, among other violators.

Well, we don’t want him infecting the fish, right?

In many states, courts are now closed. The DOJ has asked Congress for the suspension of habeas corpus and for the right to detain suspects indefinitely without trial.

Other legal rights are under attack. According to this article, an effort is afoot in California to waive transparency laws.

Noting that city resources and personnel are stretched thin responding to the pandemic, the executive director of the League of California Cities asked (Governor) Newsom last week to “take immediate action to pause certain statutory requirements.”

These “statutory requirements” include the public records act and financial disclosures of public officials.

While we are watching our legal protections swirl down the toilet, it is important to remember that they are really pretty illusory. In one recent instance, and in an apparent effort to obscure information relating to a human experimentation project being forcibly inflicted on psychiatric inmates, UCLA Hospitals and Clinics ignored their legal obligations under the California Public Records Act — long before the corona crisis hit.

All was not well in our justice system prior to corona. Fundamentally, our system of justice relies on the integrity of our judges. Long before the corona crisis hit, hard hitting questions were emerging referencing the mounting evidence that state court judges were routinely receiving bribes and pay-offs. It is now appearing that federal judges can be added to the list of those who are similarly self-enriching at the cost of justice.

The revelations that somewhere in the realm of two- thirds of state court probate judges researched had loan histories redolent of money laundering and bribe taking are now being echoed in other “high stakes” courts.

By “high stakes” here we mean courts through which money flows like a virtual waterfall. With 30 trillion dollars set to be transferred from the baby boomers to their heirs, and much of these funds now diverted through adult guardianship courts, these proceedings can certainly be thought of as “high stakes.”

(For those not yet aware of the concerns prompted by probate judges’ excessive loan activities, this brief Russia Today interview lays out the territory)

Tax court could be considered another money-rich venue. A recent investigation of a federal tax court judge, the Honorable Michael B. Thornton, has raised questions as to his loan activity, which appears to be excessive and of concern.

Thornton, who was at one time Chief Tax Court Judge, has been serving as a judge for over twenty years. During this time span, Thornton has encumbered his personal residence with approximately $2.5 million in loans, loans which he pays back very quickly.

For example, the initial mortgage taken out on his property at time of purchase in 1999 was for $428,000 and was paid back in full by 2003. In the meantime, he again mortgaged the property in 2002 for $540,000, a loan which he paid back by 2004. The property was mortgaged twice in 2004—once for $609,000 and again for $592,000. It appears that the loan for $609,000 was satisfied within three years.

This is only a partial rendition of Thornton’s loan activity since he ascended to the bench.

As of 2019, Thornton makes $210,900 a year as a tax court judge. Do the math. Given his income and his loan burdens, is Judge Thornton even able to buy himself a hot dog for lunch?

Thornton’s wife is also employed, although interestingly enough Judge Thornton has asked the federal Committee on Financial Disclosure to redact her employer’s name from his publicly discloseable financial statements, which he is mandated to file each year. We nevertheless located Alexandra Thornton’s employer, which is the Center for American Progress, where she is working as Director of Tax Policy.

The Center for American Progress, which publicly details itself as “non-partisan,” was founded in 2003 by former Bill Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, who came again recently to national attention surrounding an email scandal involving leaked emails during his tenure as Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager in her bid for the Presidency. Podesta was succeeded as head of CAP by Clinton loyalist Neera Tanden.

In fact, it is well known that the “non partisan” CAP was formed as a left wing think tank to counter the influence of the right wing Heritage Foundation. CAP is funded by The Carnegie Corporation, The Ford Foundation, George Soros, Bank of America, Rockefeller Family and Brothers Fund, and a plethora of other heavyweights.

Thornton’s actions on the bench have raised some concerns. In at least one case, Thornton has made decisions on the bench which directly violate due process rights. A petitioner in a case seated in Atlanta filed a motion to dismiss a Notice of Deficiency (NOD) issued by the IRS, alleging lack of jurisdiction. The original case was filed in March of 2018 and the motion to dismiss was filed on August 30, 2019. The response to the motion was filed by the respondent, the IRS Commissioner, on September 10 but never adjudicated by Judge Thornton. Instead, he went forward to trial, ignoring the problematic NOD when in fact the NOD was improperly issued.

The petitioner protested.

In an order dated August 22, 2019, Judge Thornton explicitly issued the following threat to the petitioner–

In Harriss vs. Commissioner supra, we warned petitioner that his continuing to advance frivolous or groundless arguments before this Court could result in substantial penalties in the future. Notwithstanding that warning, petitioner has continued to press the same frivolous and groundless arguments in his motion for summary judgment and in his reply to respondent’s response. We strongly warn petitioner again if he continues to press frivolous and groundless arguments before this Court he may expect a penalty pursuant to section 6673 of up to $25,000 for each of these cases.

In other words, if you keep protesting that your procedural rights are being violated you will be fined $50,000.

It has been eight months since the trial and Judge Thornton has yet to rule.

Thornton was contacted with questions about his loan history and also his failure to adjudicate a pending motion. He has not replied to either set of questions.

The head judge was contacted through the court’s media representative with questions about Thornton’s loan history and has not responded.

Thornton’s loan history, while concerning, is not unique. Using loans as a means to funnel bribes to public officials appears to be very widespread. As justice in the US has been compromised through this and other practices, our mounting concerns about the most recent attack on our justice system through the coronavirus crisis needs to be put in perspective. While it certainly appears that our rights are being taken away, it is more than likely that we did not have the rights in the first place. Not a jolly thought but possibly an important one to remember.

There is a positive side to all this, however. As increasingly people are becoming alarmed at the creeping fascism attached to the official corona virus response, we are seeing that more and more people are asking questions as to what is the motive and intent behind this draconian assault on civil liberties. To paraphrase Paul Anka, “Waking Up is Hard To Do” and we now see people doing so in droves. If we have any possibility of reinstating a free and just society, public knowledge and awareness are absolutely critical.


Janet Phelan is an investigative journalist and author of the groundbreaking exposé, EXILE. Her articles previously appeared in such mainstream venues as the Los Angeles Times, Orange Coast Magazine, Long Beach Press Telegram, etc. In 2004, Janet “jumped ship” and now exclusively writes for independent media. She is also the author of two collections of poetry—The Hitler Poems and Held Captive. She resides abroad. You are invited to support her work on Buy Me A Coffee here:

HELP SHARE AND SUPPORT THE NATIONAL COURT VICTIM DATABASE: Share with your Family, Friends and Anyone affected by Judicial Abuse