Archive for August, 2011


Link here.  Why is this not showing, WordPress?  Censorship, harassment, terribly cynical of someone, inhumanly so.  Frightening.  What is the agenda here?

Edit note:  It’s been taken off the Christianity page as well, and it was definitely relevant.

Look, this is embarrassing for me and it should also be embarrassing for you.

It should be embarrassing for you because you say you stand for free speech, freedom, openness and open society – don’t you?  Those of us who are regularly censored know that is not the whole truth, if the truth at all.

It is embarrassing for me because I believe in open authority and politics.  Anything less says the populace is somehow inferior or not well enough informed and doesn’t have the same right to information.  It casts secrecy over things which should not be secret.  The ‘wrongdoer’ sometimes doesn’t know that is what they have been identified as, rightly or wrongly.  It allows one group to identify itself as right against another they identify as wrong, including in international politics.

It says that the person or people the various authorities identify as wrong are the whole cause of the problem and the authorities, and those who establish, employ and use them, are good and right-minded people, and also pure in word and action, or at least justifiable and ‘not guilty’.  People are criminalised just by the approach of the authorities to them, whether they know it or not, and whether or not they are actually criminal.

I believe in openness.  We are all as good and all as bad, we are all to blame and we all have the same rights and responsibilities.  Mistreated people are angry, and some angry people do harmful things.  Unequal relationships are a form of mistreatment.  Unequal vulnerability, unequal disclosure, people in authority or positions of influence who see themselves as being authority rather than serving in administration of what is appropriate to their job.

This is all old hat and I believe all right-minded people agree with me.  With me.  (I said it twice because I couldn’t decide which would communicate most effectively, bold or not bold).  Every day WordPress and other media still use language and material packaged together in a way that is relevant to me in constantly updated ways.  This creates a feeling of obligation and relationship which, I believe, is inappropriate to my actual situation, especially where nothing explicit, by way of committed communication, is ever entered into.  My neighbours know this too.  Hence the violence and harassment, even if it is inexcusable.  To have this kind of fluffy, feel-good, earnest or even comedic communication in the middle of a violent and undefined reality is not appropriate and not helpful.  It makes the problem worse.  Sometimes it isn’t comedic, sometimes I believe I know it is downright sinister.

So you are playing with my mind and reality.  Me, one individual who writes my blog.  The problem is, you do this in domestic and international politics as well, and your designated baddies know that, some of them are vulnerable and some of them are not, some of them have power and in their rage or confusion with this kind of communication can do catastrophic things.  I’ve written about Gadaffi before.  He is in the news at the moment.  I watched a film recommended by a friend, called Zeitgeist, which talked about the language used by the media and politicians around 9/11, and watching the news I’ve been observing the same thing here, at least with CNN, the channel I can get on my TV here.  It is an agreed, asserted view for presentation which is short of whole and little short of legitimised playground bullying and retaliation.  A club for fighting cats and dogs and gossip circles and sending to Coventry.  Ooh, nasty.  I have news broadcasts in mind.  We are all influenced against the love that we are by watching and listening to this.  Some of us are targeted to be influenced, as individuals and groups, and not just what we believe.

People say he is detached from reality.  I felt sorry for him, he looked confused.  Is he detached from reality?  He’s been made the baddy for years and years, and the media says he is detached from reality when he says all his people love him.  But I don’t believe that.  I believe all his people do love him, even if many of them oppose him.  I believe that love is the basis of all emotion and behaviour in every human being.  Most of us don’t understand that, we are not taught to.  The Bible says God is love and that we are made in His image.  Therefore love is also the foundation of our personalities, if not the whole of who we are (as it is for God, in whose image we are made), whether we realise it or not.  When that knowledge is undermined, not recognised about each other, or otherwise becomes emotionally and behaviourally perverted, that is the problem.  Yes, Gadaffi’s people all loved him.  Yes, they fought him (it is a psychological truism to say if you fight with someone you love them.  They have power with you somehow.  Somehow they matter to you.  All emotion, at root, is a manifestation of love, even if it manifests as guilty political manoeuvring and fear of loss of power and position or anything else, or of exposure.  Even if it manifests as anger or hatred or violence.  It is all a sign of our basic feeling and knowledge of connection).

I cried, a little, at what I saw on the television about Gadaffi last week.  I think presenting the news in that way, without the human angle and understanding and acknowledgment on the part of the controllers of communication of their own contribution to the awfulness, is in itself dangerous to society and inhuman.  It helps to make the poor despots what they are.  They are not playing for sympathy. They truly are worthy of our sympathy (they feel like we do, feelings which should not be put down as being out of touch with reality, and wrestle with issues as we do), and our own acknowledgment of how we have contributed to who they are, rather than helping them, through identification with them rather than setting ourselves apart or thinking ourselves better or wiser, to become something different.  Politics should be personal, right to the top and across nations and ideologies.  We need to be able to understand each other’s ideologies and converse and debate and argue with knowledge and respect.  We have to understand each other’s versions of reality so we don’t say someone has lost touch with reality when they don’t conform to our own idea of what reality is or should be.  The view that someone of a different culture and religion or ideology has lost touch with reality should never be put out through a news agency, even if only said in frustration.  It is my belief that this is often, if not always, just a manifestation of ignorance, of not knowing and not understanding, and not knowing how to set about finding out.  Or not caring, which, moralising as I sound here, must be worse.

Christian Life College, where I used to go, talked about two different sonship states.  One, we are sons of God by creation, and for some, we are sons of God by being born again.  That is how it was presented.

I would say that even if we believe in heaven and hell and that Christians go to heaven after death, we are all the children of God by creation at least, if that is what we believe, and if we believe that, we have to know that, on earth, we all have the same rights, whether we have the same religion or not, and an obligation to respect other people and make sure we recognise those rights in all our dealings with them. Including the right to intimacy and vulnerability, and openness and full disclosure, to expect it and to give it, both ways, in every relationship which involves power and authority.

The New Testament letters of the Bible, written to Christians, says honour all men (includes women and children), and that if you do not love your brother who you have seen, how can you love God who you have not seen?  We all share the creation sense of brotherhood.

So we need to be more open, when it comes to power and authority.  You choose your friends, but in your established authority and power relationships you have no choice, either party, unless the person in authority is able to lose and give up their authority and power and everything that goes with it.

That is far more than I wanted to say, but it is now said.  And that is why I for one don’t like my mind and conscience and emotions being played with by the removal of potentially sensitive posts, whether ostensibly for my protection, better criminal-catching, or any other reason, especially when the only direct communication I get from the same authorities is that which takes away from me.

Advertisements

Their behaviour is making me really anxious.  I think they are hacking my computer.

Apart from anything else, the violence, the show of being nice and good and saying dobre and hallelujah all the time, day and night, and violence worse than my last neighbours, if possible, I keep hearing a man up there nervously clearing his throat, and every time I do something a bit different – like today I did a search on how to grow citrus fruit, they react vocally, and this search got quite a delighted reaction.

As I said, I think they are hacking my computer.  So they will know the properties I have looked at and where.  I only thought, about 30 minutes ago, that it might not be just a bit of distressing stupidity, but they might be hacking (he just said dobre as if answering that and they began to react as soon as I started writing this.  Door slamming now) for someone, or even just for themselves, to establish and stalk and harass my future movements and relationships.  Now I think I have cause for concern.

I’ve told my landlord several times and he said he would talk to them and that they said they would try not to disturb me (it’s like having a stormtrooper as a carer, or a wild animal as my keeper), but yesterday I Skyped him and told him again what they were doing, the violence and everything, and didn’t ask, but demanded that I should be protected, in the property I was paying him for, from the people directly above it, who come with the property and over whom I have no choice.  That was yesterday morning.  Last night I had still not heard anything, and I don’t expect to, the way they have handled things so far.  He might even be in on it himself.

I’m looking at properties I really like.  I’ve even won 2 on ebay.  But if stalkers and computer hackers (he cleared his throat.  Most of the time now I try not to lose it completely because they start being violent and placing quite expert psychological attacks on my voice) and mafia, are going to attack and sabotage me everywhere, especially as I’m thinking of dealing commercially in food, that would put everyone at risk, I’m not sure if I can go ahead.  But I want to and insist on my right to do so without fear.

Mockery, cruelty, deception, violence, authorities who stand back and let them, possible savage attacks on future land and property.  I’ve just had some aural interjections which felt so evil I can’t complete this, it has confused my mind.

Edit note: They parrot and ghost my own voice right into my mind.  Normally if I try to retrieve emotional and psychological control of my own voice they ignore me or get violent, but I just reversed the sound being used and a man upstairs yelled as if offended or affected, as it affects me from them. What I hear in their voices I’ve started ending up with severe pains in my chest almost every day, my fear and outrage is so great.  They threatened to come on again just now.  I said in Bulgarian ‘your violence back on yourself, all of you’, and the pain started to dissolve and left, then I heard a woman’s sharp heals stamping on the stairs and they started to come back.  I don’t know how much of this stuff actually belongs together to affect me as it does.  They bang every time I go to the toilet or shower so I’ve noticed I’ve started going all day without a visit, and I’m too scared to move or open my mouth.

They seem to be reacting to something they feel spiritually when I am silent, all the time, when I relax.  I took 2 paracetamol and lay on my bed yesterday afternoon, sweating and immobile from the pain, and as soon as it seemed it was going completely, they banged on my ceiling.  I am sure the fact that they have to put a noise onto every one of mine, even my coughing and speech, has something to do with it.  I read a few months ago that Stalin was a satanist.  People talk about these things but say (legally and with authority to put you in a mental hospital) that you are crazy if you talk and act and reason as if they are true.

Forgotten Film Name, Help Please.

Dutch, I think, commune, brainwashing, spazzing.  Opens with nude men in the shower, near the end a woman from the commune is taken to spazz in front of her parents and she does so while eating cake and they slap her face, the group members keep betraying each other, as policy, into terrifying situations.  Woman blisses out and everyone comes round and makes a fuss of her, kissing her and everything.  Man who appears to be strongest in group strips naked in the street and his friends turn it on him by treating him like a mental patient and restraining him and doing panic stations and holding him down.   Closes with group members a few years later sitting in a room saying how the commune had changed their lives.  Something about going beyond boundaries.  I saw it in the 90s in the Prince of Wales cinema in Leicester Square, the cinema that hosts this kind of film.

Please, anyone?

(Public Health Warning: more mangled blood and guts, but also an attempt to address the issue of goading and chain-yanking, failed, unfortunately, on the whole, and I’m not the sort to incubate a post and try again.  I talk about the guy who got water thrown in his face by Spurgeon, I think, when he told Spurgeon he was perfect, and he got angry, which I think might have been the perfect reaction to Spurgeon’s mischief and therefore did not disprove his statement).

That is my open mouth, made silent with hysterical fear.

I’m living in Sofia now.  The woman above me screams hallelujah in the most hateful voice every time I feel I have a good communication and I can communicate it.

I want to scream for help and I can’t, it is that psychologically, emotionally and spiritually abusive.  I can’t express anything without feeling dishonest or that I am going to disintegrate or, if I am angry, be attacked, even physically.  She makes me feel she is my friend and I should ask her to forgive me and help me, whatever I feel she voices differently.  I said that because . . . well, if you read this blog, you know.  There is a man from whom the only vocalisation I hear is an angry or frightened throat-clearing.  That feels to me like part of the illusion, if it is an illusion, of their goodness.  If he spoke it might not persist.  But his vocal silence is also part of the oppression.

She is attacking my soul and spirit with razors and bludgeoning me with hatred which feels like a physical mallet to the head.

Combined with the banging . . .

So is this orchestrated, because it is happening everywhere I go.  Who is behind it?

The most torturous thing about this for me is the church’s dishonesty and use of these things.  Someone on Premier was talking about chain yanking this morning, and that is what she is doing and that is what Premier and the church have been doing for years – the way they have kept saying ‘crazy’, for instance, and pushing psychiatry.  This man said so this morning, he pointed it out himself.  What they have been doing is sadistic, cruel and abusive.  That must always have been obvious to them, surely, and if it hasn’t been . . . either way they are not fit to  hold ministerial duties of any description.

I don’t know if I’m imagining that when my recording was interrupted near the end this morning, John Pantry became annoyed because his attempt to build a bridge had been interrupted.  How would he have known, without illegal access to my computer?

Sometimes it feels like protection and I feel unworthy and shameful calling it criminal.  But it isn’t really.  It isn’t really protective.  They are keeping me imprisoned by their evasion of responsibility, procrastination, holding on to power, refusal to apologise officially, if not openly.

I don’t want a bridge back to the world where leaders are not first prepared to own their wrongdoing before I cross that bridge.  Own it where everyone can see, in a committed way. . .

One of the ministers involved, I think it was R T Kendall, but I’m not sure, told this story of someone who said to Spurgeon, I think, that he, the person speaking to Spurgeon, was perfect.  That he believed he was perfect.  Spurgeon (if it was him) said ‘oh, really?’ and threw a glass of water at him, and the man became angry, and everyone laughed at him.

The same chain-yanking.  That is hardly perfect, is it?

Now, was the man expressing imperfection to express anger in that situation?  Is anger a sign of imperfection?  But the Bible says Jesus was angry.  Our teachers have had it for ages that Jesus’ anger was different, that it was perfect and righteous anger.

It doesn’t say, though, that He ever pulled anything like this self-righteous, judgmental, proud, debasing, mischievous and malicious chain-yanking.  At least, not on true seekers and people who expressed something they thought they had grasped as a truth.

An exception comes to mind, possibly, in Mark 7.

Jesus Honors a Syrophoenician Woman’s Faith

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre.  He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

I’m not supposed to criticise this man, but what was he about here?  If he wasn’t being provocative, it could be put down to insensitivity because of tiredness, or some sort of irritation.  Our leaders say He was correcting her attitude.  But if it wasn’t that, if it was a lack of perfect response, where does that leave us in terms of my Friend Jesus’ perfection?  He;s my friend, I can’t talk about Him and theorise about Him like this.  But I just have, and for the usual reasons it has to remain.

But back to the perfect man who got angry when the person he told threw a glass of water at him.

In the Bible David said that God’s enemies were his enemies, and that he hated them with a perfect hatred.  I’ve heard it said that David did not have the complete revelation that we have today.  Would they say that of this occasion?  No, not all of them.  There would be different opinions backed up with chapter and verse and personal experience they felt was surrounded with the approval of those that matter to them.  I know for sure there would be some who agonised more over the truth than to be satisfied with that low standard of agreement, potentially low, at least, but I don’t know how many.

I got to this stage with St Barnabas’ Church.  They opposed me in every way, locking down on me and preaching at me.  I had read a book recommended by a Christian counsellor, on boundaries, which said that negative emotions were a sign that something was wrong.  I was going home, time after time, feeling devastated, and one night in bed I was frightened by a feeling of hatred.  I was also angry, I thought they were opposing what God was doing in my life.  I find that a bit embarrassing now.

But that was the verse which came to my mind, and I embraced it, because I couldn’t get rid of the feeling of hatred, so I actively justified it.  Hindsight says if I had done this or that . . . but nothing within me which is saying anything gets much chance to be heard at the moment, it is silenced by the violence around me, and as soon as I can strongly own and express anything from within, the harassment starts without and I am left too hysterical to cope.  I’m trying to argue something when I want to scream and beg and cry, since every time I feel I can and should surrender I refuse it.  I feel I should go up to them, apologise and ask what the problem is, then we could begin to sort everything out.  That is what I see and what I feel condemned by.  Her hallelujah makes me feel joy, but what about the rest?  It is chaos.  It is also illegal, and they know what I think of that.  It is the word I am reacting to, not the people or their activity.  I feel she even steals, with her occult violence, the tone of joy which would be in my own voice if I said it myself.  That must be where the confusion comes in.  I can’t validate this, it is so wrong.  I’m not the only one who hears them, and not everyone rejoices, I am sure.  I don’t want to be patronised by people saying poor Sue, come home.  I want people to focus on the issue of chain-yanking, and if I could focus on it myself it would help!  I try to be serious and have to be humorous.  Why?  I feel thumped in the head and I can’t cope with the pain.  There is no point waiting for a better time.  It never happens.  Don’t get bogged down in the circumstantial stuff that comes pouring out just because I don’t know how to edit it away. They seem to feel it when I calm down and start justifying them in my mind, and I hear them say dobre with a smile.  But I know what they are doing and it isn’t OK?  Or is it here?  Is this a valid and acceptable expression of Christianity here?  If it is, I’m out of step.  I feel as if I want to join in, like a party.  Go up and say hello and bubble along with them.

It’s a form of psychological harassment and censorship.  Who wants to read the silage that I insist on letting pour out of me, or allow by default, instead of being a normal, generous, kind, forgiving, friendly person and neighbour?

The point I was going to make was that I think there is something wrong with the theory and theology of leaders who can make a good and positive thing out of this incident of cruel chain-yanking in one of their traditions major heroes.

If that anger from the man came out of a damaged emotional place, it was incredibly cruel for him to expose it in that way.  Granted I don’t know the whole story, maybe it was just a bit of robust male joshing. I don’t know how the man took it after his anger was over.  But what if it wasn’t from a damaged emotional place?  What if it was the perfect reaction to such mischief and malice towards what he believed God had said to him?  Then who is the laughingstock?  If there should be one at all.  If our emotions are appropriate to the situation then they are perfect in that situation, aren’t they, so what he said wasn’t disproved at all.  In a sense we are perfect, and not just by imputation.  In a sense, as individuals, we are perfect, if people don’t interfere with us.  But they do, when we are too vulnerable to resist or realise.  I can’t do this, I’m tired and hurt.  I can’t think and write it through.  I’m mixing everything up all over the place when I started out believing I knew exactly what I wanted to say and where I wanted to go with it.  I’m already editing after first reading, and that isn’t doing me much good either.  I am ill and traumatised, I must be, to put this abortion out.

Another thing:  I believe this thing we call robust joshing is itself a manifestation and denial of pain.  Or is it just a healthy switching off every now and again?  It must be.  It must be me that is crazy.  So someone invite me to come and have some fun?  To live your whole life in the perfect therapy session and healing moment after healing moment, at least one participant has to be perfect.  And where have I got this idea from that therapy and healing is all about deep and querulous and earnest talk and tears and quietly and meditatively going about your business? ‘Tain’t, is it?

But what if, instead of throwing water over him and laughing at his anger, he had accepted the statement with respect and watched his friend over a period and tried to understand what he was saying and learn something instead?

It is thump in the back salvation.  I’m wondering if I am being a pathetic wimp if I object to that.  The people I have felt close enough to to love over recent years, and want to model myself on, I am thinking possibly I have only seen them awkward and afraid and desperate and making an effort, because of me and my situation.  Maybe they too are back thumpers and I have just not seen it, and I myself need to enter the real world of rough and tumble where people do not always treat each other with reverence and respect and it is OK.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

OK that is it.  That is my communication after being butchered by upstairs and everything knowing my account/computer is being hacked is doing to me, turned into a bucket of unmentionable stuff and screaming.

Enjoy!

I left a comment on Tommy Boyd’s blog on Friday, about how the way people treat me sometimes makes me feel, emotionally, that I want to hit back.

At the time I left it, I was aware, listening back, that it seemed as if my comments were being tracked by the radio hosts I was listening to.  When it got to the time that I left that comment, the host who was on at that time said something sarcastically and derisively about unfailing love.

Apart from the obvious fact that it is God who is perfect love, and not me, I wasn’t aware he had access to my unpublished comments in the middle of me writing them anyway.  Well, I was, and have been for ages.   Unless it is a psychic thing, and I don’t think it is.  Sometimes, but probably rarely.

So it is stalking and harassment.  Hostage-taking and keeping, maybe.  And they love bomb you like a cult.

That kind of sarcasm, if it factored in something in Biology, for example, would be called an inhibitor or a limiting factor.  It is something I came across when I got interested in vegetarian food and was given a couple of books which went into detail about it.  Talking about available protein.

If I remember it right, proteins are made up of amino acids, the composition of which can be pictured as a star shape with unequal protrusions, the shorter ones limiting the availability, release and utilisation of the rest, and therefore the amount of available protein.  It was presented as a part of the idea of complementary protein, where, for instance, rice and beans complement each other and make more protein available when eaten together than is available if you add them up separately.  Wheat and milk is another one (that was vegetarianism, not veganism).  And there are others.  Some people say that is an outdated theory now, but the diet and nutrition industry being what it is, who knows?  I suppose if it was scientifically proved it must still stand.  It isn’t something which depends on individual metabolism, it is the protein available in combined foods, and that is testable in a laboratory (I think!) before the food enters the body.  Although thinking about it I am wondering how the necessary blending of the foodstuffs would take place apart from digestive breakdown, but that probably shows the limitation of my own knowledge due to inadequate study and experience.

But in relationships, I don’t want people behaving as inhibitors towards me in that way and thinking it is good or clever.  He went on to say something about ‘don’t cry, woman’, or something like that.  But by that time I wasn’t open to anything else which came from him, and I stopped listening.

PS – the WordPress system has just informed me that this is my 275th post and called me a dope.  Honestly!  “Dope!” – just like that.

I noticed yesterday that the tags I clicked on my blog only led me to related content within my blog.  I read on a forum today that this is universal at the moment within WordPress, and it is not clear whether this will be permanent or not.

I refer you to my page ‘How to Global Tag Search‘ for instructions on how to access material from other people using the same tags and categories I have used.

Actually it is really simple.  Click on the tag which will still confine you to my blog.  In the browser it will say https://suebarnett.wordpress.com/tag/(name of tag).  Delete ‘suebarnett’ in the browser so you have http://wordpress.com/tag/(name of tag), and that will take you to the global page where you can see everyone’s posts under that tag.

Apologies, I don’t know why this is happening.  Someone suggested it was permanent and someone said it is just WordPress soritng out their code.  I emailed WordPress before I realised it is a universal problem (it is a problem and severe inconvenience), but I haven’t had an email back yet and don’t expect to because they must have had countless emails on the subject.  If anyone knows or becomes aware of an official announcement please provide me with the link.  In the meantime I hope it is just a coding thing that needs to be sorted out.

I heard this term used in the news a short while ago in relation to something to do with US politics.  But you can have a satan sandwich, but it isn’t spelt that way, it is seitan.  It is also not supposed to be pronounced that way, the word is Asian in origin.  It is a vegan wheat gluten meat replacement, and I just found out it is sometimes referred to as mock duck.

I’ve been meaning to do this for ages, I just made myself a steak sandwich using seitan and the usual trimmings, and it was delicious.  For all the world, having eaten it, I can’t tell it wasn’t a traditional steak sandwich that I ate.  I made it with seitan from Kring, natural style, I think.  They also do spiced and chicken style.  Kring is a restaurant (full menu here) in Sofia which sells its products on the premises and also in some shops, in Sofia, Plovdiv and Ruse.  Their products are delicious, and for me as a vegan they are one of the saving graces of Bulgaria.  If you guys at Kring read this – hi, I love you, thanks for my great steak sandwich lunch!  And thanks for who you are too.  I really love you.  And I very much appreciate the addition of your gorgeously light vegan chocolate cake to your menu.  I haven’t tried the carrot cake yet, I am sure it is as good.

I get embarrassed trying to say ‘seitan’, because the obvious way appears to be ‘satan’, but that isn’t right.  But if you are insistent on trying to say it the right way people can think ‘methinks the lady doth protest too much’.  I bought a vegan cookery book when I first became a vegan, and it had a recipe called ‘seitanic’ something or other, and I was offended.  I like seitan, but I wish it was called something else.  As I said, I was offended, but now I wonder if using it in that way was just a way of emphasising the awkwardness and embarrassment and turning it into humour.  Seitan isn’t an English word.  It wasn’t designed to invoke ideas of satan.  I just read its most likely origin is Japan, which would make it a compound of two words, sei, meaning ‘to be’, or ‘to become’, and tan, meaning ‘protein’.

Obviously in England you can use the word subversively, and maybe that is where my embarrassment comes from, because there have been times when I have felt a certain glee in being able to do so, to express my own brassed off-ness, and be aware of the ambiguity and the fact that it is the name of a vegan food stuff.  People use those kinds of ambiguities all the time, as I have said elsewhere on this blog.  That is why, in serious situations where I feel people could use their power to hurt me, I tend not to trust them unless they state their wants and intentions in a legally recognisable and accountable way.  Sometimes there is too much at stake (no pun intended but immediately recognised) not to insist on that.

OK I’ll stop there.  I seem to have come to a standstill and I don’t think there is anything else I wanted to say in this post.

Test

.

I wrote it today, about an hour ago.  It wasn’t explicitly Christian, but I am a Christian and I have posted a lot of things on the Christianity board, partly because I wanted Christians to see.  First it started being moved down the page, then it disappeared altogether.  Scroll down, it is the post before this.  I don’t understand or agree with these rules, if that is what they are.  I’ve used the ‘copy post’ facility so this has all the same tags and categories.

I’ve also updated my ‘My Stalkers, And Other Animals‘ page today.  Check it out.  It’s heavy.

PS straight after posting this I checked the board again and the original post had reappeared on page 2!  Before that I had checked about 6 pages.  But even then they position and reposition things.  Frame and reframe.  It is almost like freemasonry.  But I feel bad saying that, because I feel I should be grateful for the protection of myself and those involved.

Question:  SHOULD I feel bad?  I’d be interested to know who thinks what and why.

On the 3rd, the next day, I walked down Vitosha Boulevard in Sofia and passed a doorway with blood spattered in front of it, just like the reports of mafia shootings, though of course, it might not have been.  There were a couple of police in attendance, no panic, seemed pretty routine.  Lots of big drips of blood.  Straight after my post the day before, on the popular boulevard I was walking down, though I didn’t think it was in any way linked with me.  I hope not.  If other people are going to be hurt because of what I write . . . I hope that wouldn’t happen.  I can’t get my head around the possibility that I might be that significant.

Film Gomorrah Link.  Not downloadable via iPlayer, other recording options possible.  Available until 2.29 am Wednesday 3rd August 2011 UK time.

Documentary – Italy’s Bloodiest Mafia Link.  Downloadable via iPlayer and available until 12.19 am 3rd August 2011 UK time.  If downloaded via iPlayer or other options offered by the BBC site this is available for 28 days after download and can be re-recorded to a permanent format using other software.

The Scoop Radio Interview Link.   Not downloadable via iPlayer, available until 5.02 pm 7th August 2011.

I just noticed these today and two of them have almost expired.  So far I have only watched the documentary and by the look of it the film is about the same group.  The documentary made the same comments as my own observations and thinking have pieced together with regard to the relationship between the mafia and the state.  I appeal to the sources I learned to think from to forgive me for forgetting that this is not a product of my own brilliant mind, because in my situation I feel as if my observations and thinking are unique to me and my own direct observations.

I’m in a hotel.  I’m still getting a woman’s ghost voice.  This has happened many times.  People always say there is nothing happening and no one there that I have described.  Fortunately I now book through Expedia and can write a review of the hotel.  People seem to be angry around me, slamming doors after the documentary finished, and slamming again just now, so I’m wondering again if my internet connection is being hacked.

Two facts made an impression on me from the documentary about a group in Italy.  One was the mafia equivalent of the three wise monkeys, hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.  Maybe that is where it came from in the first place.  People who speak out against the mafia become isolated by friends and family, and it cost one man in this documentary his marriage.

The second was that one of the people interviewed said they entered into a blood pact, swearing on the Bible.  I didn’t know the Bible was involved.  I’ve always felt the confusion of a religious pull with it and now maybe I know why.  It would make sense to me anyway.

I’m quite isolated myself, and one of the men in the documentary talked about having the sign of the cross made at him, and said it was the same as saying they wanted you dead. I’ve had that done to me, and that is how I felt as well.  That and that maybe they were trying to protect themselves against sexual temptation or something.

I need to do some research on the Bulgarian mafia.  That is obviously the thing in my own mind.

The Italian documentary said that if a person stayed in that city for a month it would be impossible not to buy something that would fund the mafia, that they were involved in drugs and business and prostitution, and extortion was mentioned a few times.  They said 15 year old boys were involved so they could have all the right clothes etc, because otherwise they are nothing.  To me another reason for radically lessening the hold of the fashion industry on the media and advertising.  The media creates ‘the valley of the dolls’ surely, among people of that age, all the pressure, media and peer, classification of what is good and bad, in and out.  Good image and bad. Fashion is pushed and dictated beforehand.  It is decided that something is going to be the look, before it is even on the streets, then people are persuaded and pressured to go get it.

They also showed a football recreation ground that was a gift from a mafia boss.

It looks as if the film and the documentary are about the same mafia group in Italy.  The names are almost identical.

I haven’t heard the radio interview yet either, which is available until the 7th.  That is about a journalist called Jake Adelstein who chose to write a story about Japanese organised crime in spite of risks to himself and his family.

This is the ‘more programme information’ paragraph on this series and on this particular interview (underlined emphasis my own):

“Startling stories from behind the headlines. Neil Mackay – the Sunday Herald’s multi-award winning Home Affairs and Investigations Editor – hears from fellow investigative journalists about the biggest stories of their careers. What on earth drives them to pursue a scoop well beyond the point of their own safety and possibly their own sanity? After uncovering a scandal including a top Japanese Mafia boss and the FBI, Jake Adelstein was told “Erase the story. or we’ll erase you. And maybe your family too” Neil Mackay hears why Jake did decide to write the story despite the risks to him and his family.”

I have highlighted the ‘possibly their own sanity’ phrase because I am wondering how those threats are posed and if I would just be being egotistical to identify myself with this.

WAGblog: Dum Spiro Spero

"While I breathe, I hope"

Emerging From The Dark Night

Working through the Dark Night of the Soul to emerge as me.

The Elephant in the Room

Writing about my experiences with: depression, anxiety, OCD and Aspergers

The Sir Letters

A Tale of Love

The Seeker's Dungeon

Troubling the Surf with the Ocean

Seroquel Nation

Onward and upward...

We are all in this together

it's gonna be okay.

my last nerve

psychology | psychiatry | neuroscience | n stuff

A Philosopher's Blog

A Philosopher's View of the World...assuming it exists.