Tag Archive: crisis management


Yes, there has been a major disaster in Japan, a place, for some reason, which is close to my heart, but I am too much of an ignoramus and too alone to have much to say or contribute.

But apart from that,  I know, even with what I am experiencing in my own locality, that most of what I am being exposed to is spiritual impersonation, much of it rapacious and debilitating and violent and viscerally accusing and manipulative and dishonest.  Just about everything you feel while exposed to it is a demonic imposition.  Even though I might not be able personally to possess that, I know it is true.  I’m failing to live in the knowledge, which is a bit new in it’s present formulation anyway, I don’t feel at all empowered by it, my neighbours keep yelling and banging, seeming to think somehow that might help them, or opposing me, or something (I feel differently at different times, and probably they do as well), but I still know it is true.

It is easy to know that when dealing with non-Christian sources.  When it involves Christian sources or sources which appear to believe they are Christian sources, it’s a bit more complicated.

I’ve been watching BBC World News.  That was when I realised in a way I never have before.  It is a spiritual impersonation and a form of spiritualistic, psychic phishing.  It is also a source of the most scathing and cynical accusation, based on stalking and psychological profiling dressed up as a news report.  The story is the vehicle for the persecution.  I know that is a grievous thing to say, but from what I have seen and heard I have no reason to think anything different.  I’m not saying ‘all hail the church and its organs’, even though I feel it to some degree when I write something like this.  I know that what I am saying is the truth and I don’t know what to do with it.  I know this sounds awful for a Christian to say, but my neighbours are spiritually leeching on me to such an extent communication isn’t something I can cope with very well.  When I am trying to write something like this, that I need to have believed and accepted and not separated from the essence of who I am, the interjections I get from my neighbours leave me feeling terrified and hysterically desperate, it is like spiritual theft and murder.

I know this sounds horrible, but the way the woman keeps yelling – .  OK, for one thing, God knows it is spiritual impersonation.  But she is like a begging leech, combining it at periods, like just now, right just now, with violent banging on my ceiling, and when I am not doing my best not to cry hysterically, begging them because I am taken in by the impersonation, she reminds me of the little core creatures that chased the people at the end of the sequel to Stepford Wives, desperately grasping and grabbing on to the people who were fleeing for freedom.

I think she impersonates a child as well.  I think it is a form of demonic accusation.  The Lord knows I know this, whatever they make me feel.

I think she is really insane.  I feel like I’m being clung to by a really unclean thing.  I don’t think I have ever felt anything quite like it.

Advertisements

BBC World News again.

I’ve had a really rough day today.  Every day is rough, my neighbours never let up, but today was worse.

I said a lot of things through Google Translate, which I think is sometimes not that accurate anyway.  I also started to draft a post which I didn’t finish because my poor broken open, fragile mind and psyche had another shotgun hallelujah screeched into it by mad motormouth neighbour-mother. I even told her today that in my opinion she needed either to go to the police or get psychiatric treatment, and that I didn’t believe in psychiatry, just to emphasise how extreme her behaviour is and how much I felt she needed to take some action.  She often acts as if she is out of her mind.  And I don’t say that kind of thing, so something has broken down in me somewhere.

After saying that if they pray and also harass their prayers are also illegal, I switched BBC World News on and it was a special news report on prisoners of an uprising.  I don’t know if it was Libya or not, to show how little I was able to concentrate.  I remember one of the reporters said people were screaming and that it was one of the worst things he had ever seen, and that he had seen some pretty bad things.  I thought how often I react to reporters as if they are freshers with no relationship with people they interview and no understanding between themselves and the interviewee, even if they fight on screen like cat and dog.  I noticed the ears of one of the guys, they seemed to be translucent and letting through a red light from behind.  I’ve never seen ears like that.

But I was fagged out and tired.  I had just fought a battle with my neighbours for my legal right to not be harassed and felt I had made a positive step forward in asserting my right to live here in peace.  But I was tired and questioning myself and, while the television was on, I was working through the questions and how much of what I had said (ranted, thrown across the line) I had meant and was right and needed to be said, and I wasn’t really listening, it was just there, a relaxing, comforting hum in the background while I sorted my mind and feelings out.  I was calming down and feeling more settled and relaxed and happy with things (some people would say I shouldn’t have been, but that isn’t the point of this post) when Jamie’s tone started to take on significance and he emphasised ‘slow down’ or ‘slowing down’, and I looked up into his eyes feeling my attention had been forced onto him and away from my own thoughts and he had lifted up one of his fingers and was doing a hypnosis type movement with it, in front of the eyes, and because I was watching and because of everything else that has already gone, I thought he was doing it at me.  He was doing it at the camera anyway, obviously deliberately, I believe, with me watching, and I felt affected by it.  Whether it was real in intention or just a humorous or mocking caricature, it made me angry because it was deliberate, and I hadn’t wanted my attention forced onto him in that way, I needed the space I had to resolve my own thoughts in the situation I am in, 2000 miles away sitting on my sofa in a pain-filled violent harassment situation.  He was deliberately calling attention and short-circuited the process.

He said some other stuff, about someone not being welcome in the situation anymore, and because of the violent call on my attention I felt confused because I was still with my situation here and had been forcibly removed in my mind from it against my will and criminally, I believe, so I thought he was talking about here.  He put his hands up and opened them out like a book, which is another part of the gesture cluster, and I was just getting angrier, then he smiled as if he recognised a presence (whether it was an act or not I don’t know, it seemed real), held the camera with his eye then jerked away and hit the desk with his papers, which I always find really crude and violent as a form of command or territory marking, and called on his interviewee.  What is that about?  I thought it was a psychic thing.  He was using material from my Google Translate session and from my unpublished post.  I don’t understand the gesturing now, I thought it was a psychic thing, but maybe it is just bad handling of a transition into an interview, saying my stuff which he shouldn’t be accessing and defiantly holding the camera in a face off.  It’s still criminal.  It’s still a crime, using what I haven’t even published yet or never would have.  I’m not sure where he was getting the Google Translate stuff from, but the draft post must have been through WordPress or straight off of my computer.

I was so angry and outraged and afraid and offended and disturbed, I started to hear voices.  Ghosting voices, behind me, like the woman shouting hallelujah, but they seemed to be more in my ears.  I don’t know, it was just frightening and disturbing and horrible.  After a few minutes I shouted at her to shut up because it was 12.30 am here and there shouldn’t be any noise after 10 pm.  Then I thought, ‘is it her, it might not be’.  I thought about what was happening, how it seemed to be whispers insistent and crowding around my ear, and decided it was an occult manifestation brought on by the psychologically and spiritually violent and illegal thing which had just been done to me.  It just occurs to me now, as well, that it was my sister’s birthday yesterday, 9th March, and just like Jools Holland held a concert in my birth city on my birthday, Derek Acorah did a show on my sister’s birthday, so there might have been an occult connection there as well, as well as all the straight forward illegal stalking ones.  My sister has been harassed by satanists, who have told her so, if I remember it right.

But he just stayed there, Jamie, staring down the camera, just going on and on, and I was thinking ‘no, this isn’t OK, this is illegal and spiritualist stalking and you have just broken into my mind and life and home by your use of my material’, he laughingly talked about a ‘grievous and irreparable breakdown’, which was relevant to my post subject which is still in draft form, and went out on another laughed ‘grievously’, and apart from anything else I felt mocked and teased about something which, to me, is really serious.

The sports report came on and at one point there was a picture of a group of sportsmen screaming a psychologically disarming warrior type screech, and the presenter came straight backed insistently facing off into the camera instructing someone, on the wave of that yell, to ‘remember when’.  That isn’t good.  That is bad.  I can’t find the terminology for it at the moment, I don’t think I’m imagining it this time, I’ve just been assaulted by another yell from my neighbour as soon as I started to write this, at 2.30 in the morning.  But it isn’t good, what happened in the sports report, and as part of the psychological stalking pattern which is part of and enabled by access to facts and people, I know it’s criminal, whether people will acknowledge that to me or not.  Or do anything about it or not.  And they should.  They are commanding me as if they have a right, more or less saying, ‘you did this and you did that and we have a right to resist you’, but it appears to release something in the studio which is what I think they are after.  It is obviously something they like.  But they savage me to get it.  And all the banging and tapping, obviously and surreptitiously, is grossly offensive and distracting and psychologically violent, for those targeted and whose attention is held as it is visited on them, territory marking.

They were using Tiger Woods as well.  I feel really sorry for him, we all saw how they treated him and I recognise in him the same signs of having been deliberately broken down and crushed, as a person with an open faith/religious position involving a strong moral stance, and left wanting to beg and plead with those who have crushed him as if he needs their permission, as if they glory in making him feel his salvation and redemption, as well as their ‘well, we sympathise but it serves you right’ attitude, are in their hands, that I do in myself.  When I see that it upsets me and makes me really angry.  I want to cry for him and pull them off.  There is something in me, I want to physically attack them and force them away from him when I see them letting him express that extremity of pain and and brokenness and apparently be offering no sympathy or support.  They have no right to humiliate people like that.  Who are these fans that he owed the contents of his entrails to?  If he doesn’t know them, they don’t exist, they were made up for him to make him grovel.  If he does know them and they think it was any of their business, they are probably wrong, in my opinion.  I don’t think it should have been public fare at all, it should have been contained and I can’t see why there had to be a public apology.  The only people he owed anything to were his wife and their relatives.  But then maybe I’m just misjudging the media again.  As a if not the top golfer at the time, if it hadn’t been formalised publicly it would have leaked, which might have been worse).

I’ve thought several times about the sentence from ‘Field of Dreams’, about a baseball player called Babe Ruth, I think, where it says, ‘if we build it, he will come’.  I think he was dead and they wanted his spirit in the place they built for him.  That is what they are doing with – me?  Someone said just because you are in it it doesn’t mean it is about you.  There are lots of people I know ‘in it’.  Is it about us all or is it just general harassment?  Why are we all in it? But more to the point for me, why am I and my family in it, who have no public platform or role?  Many of the lookalikes and namesakes I see – have a working role in a place I have been associated with.  But some are just ordinary people I have met, very quickly after I have met them, placed in a cluster which makes it obvious to me, if to no one else.

I’m wondering if they’re holding a prayer vigil or something, in the apartment upstairs.  I just heard a tapping as I was working with the last paragraph, at ‘that’ point in my engagement and concentration, and I stopped and listened and inwardly examined and challenged it, and the woman coughed in a way which is obviously not my imagination.  I don’t want it, if that is what it is (I swear someone just cried out hallelujah).  They won’t go to the police.  It’s harassment (another cough).  I don’t even get my own head space and work space in the middle of the night, if they have decided to hold some sort of vigil.  (Pause to think and challenge and reject my feeling of responsibility to go and knock on their door and see what is wrong and if and how I can help, countered by another cough).  It makes me feel as if I am being horrible and unmerciful, but they have set this in motion themselves, I don’t think we understand each other, as far as I am concerned everything they are doing is illegal (I type in response to her nasty chav noise) and if they won’t go to the police instead of harassing and invigilating I can’t see what can be done even if – no forget it, I am not responsible. They only want to make me feel that way.  If they wanted help they would initiate finding it themselves.  It appears they obviously have not and therefore probably do not.  So on that horrible derisive sound which makes me feel my whole night is going to be punctuated by these outbursts, I’m going to see what I can achieve by way of sleep in bed.  At least these days I have decided I’m not just going to stay hysterically glued to my sofa and fall asleep on that, I do actually go to bed in my bedroom, which I think is better.  They are making me feel like a really bad person for standing up for myself and not doing their work for them.  Yeah, whatever.  I should show some concern.  It feels like the most appropriate thing to do.  It also feels like the most inappropriate thing to do, at this time of night.  I should shout ‘I’m sorry’ or something.

I’m sorry, I’m not going to, I’m going to bed.  If the news people’s (again) suggestion that the situation is too broken down and I’m not welcome anymore and they are going to get me out is true (they do this all the time) so be it.  I’m really upset by it and feel very insecure but/and I’m going to bed.  Schnor-di-schnor.  Goodnight 🙂  (Woah, very resistant sounding bang, followed up by a muffled ‘hallelujah’ when I started writing this comment.  Their hallelujahs are an illegal and criminal, at this time of nght, expression of witchcraft – not to mention communist-style torture – or have I done that already?

What An Idiot!

Written Saturday, 26th February.

“You idiot, what a stupid thing to do!”

Isn’t that much more human and kind and accessible and friendly than finding something offensive and constructing an argument about it to demonstrate that it is offensive and being dogmatic about its motivation?  At least in normal circumstances.  Even then, maybe we need to broaden our understanding of all the things that should carry the label, “normal”.

I just looked at someone I was offended with earlier, and while I believe I understand what they are doing and that it is offensive and I can make all the arguments as to why and how, I just thought, “honestly, what an idiot, what a stupid thing to do”, and the lack of a thesis or essay about it made it far less charged.

I thought about it for a few minutes afterwards.  I decided that, sometimes, being a Christian and therefore not free to call someone stupid or an idiot, in good conscience, can make you far less human and sympathetic in the way you approach people when they are idiots and do stupid things.

Then I thought again.  Where did this restriction come from, the idea that you can’t call someone an idiot?  Is it Christian?  While it is true that Jesus said if you call your brother a fool you will be in danger of hell fire, the Old Testament talks a lot about fools, especially in the Book of Proverbs, and there is a parable about the man who built bigger barns to store his grain and congratulated himself about having plenty stored up, that God said to him, “you fool, this night your soul will be required of you”.  Whatever we might think of that concept of God, even though the Bible says it was Jesus who told the story, perhaps the fact that it is in the Bible should indicate that Bible believing, evangelical Christians, if we don’t already do so, should hold a more liberal view about just calling people stupid when it might be more appropriate and productive than having to construct an argument.  Because some behaviour obviously is stupid, and sometimes the best way to deal with it, in the right kind of relationship where the person can accept and respond to it, is just to say so.

So I’m not sure how I got the idea that you can’t just tell someone they are being an idiot and their behaviour is stupid, in an affectionate, good natured way, and they could just exhale in relief and maybe slightly embarrassed recognition and change it.  maybe someone was censorious with me at some point for doing that, or maybe someone whose opinion I value would be against it.  If so, me, what an idiot, what a stupid thing to do, to take that on board, maybe, and the person who influenced me could well be an idiot, at least over that, also.  Having to construct arguments and theses all the time doesn’t half kill the flow of fondness in relationships, and all the positive change that comes out of that.

It’s just a thought, for normal circumstances.

I think this is a stupid post written by an idiot.

I wrote this on Saturday.  I was going to change the title, but I’ve forgotten what to.  The link I am inserting relates to the end of my post where I mention Newsnight and Simon Schama, who was the historian in the first post on this blog in May last year.

I’m not sure why I’m putting it out.  I feel a bit dissociative at the moment.  Apologies to Peter Dobby if I have got him completely wrong.  I know I’m not the only person who thinks that everyone else is evil when they are in a crisis they haven’t made themselves.  A bad thing isn’t made good because it is done with good motives – she says moralistically.  I don’t even know if that is right in this case, where I feel protectively stalked by the media.  If I say I feel protectively stalked, why am I not protecting them?  Maybe because I am a vengeful, selfish and cynical cow.  I don’t know why I’m not protecting them, and I feel wrong for not doing.  I should be so grateful, I feel, in some ways.  As for Peter, I saw his own distress, and I feel really bad about what I said in other posts and what I have include here.  I’m interpreting everything selfishly and cruelly.  If anyone is exposed by what I’ve said about him it is me and not him. I hope so.  I’m sorry, Peter.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zfmwq/Newsnight_Revolution_2011/

My computer keeps being crashed.  Last night I lost the biggest chunk of text I have ever lost on WordPress.  It normally saves automatically.

As I was saying, Peter Dobby is a complete bastard, a cruel and unkind person who delights in the devastation he causes another to feel.  he can barely hide it.

I was also saying that, although these people might seem soft and casual, don’t be deceived.  They have a rapacious agenda they know about but do not acknowledge to us, they carry it out ruthlessly.  They seem soft and casual, but they are highly driven, hardsell people, and are inquisitors and torturers.  Deliberately.  It isn’t that some of them are hard and some of them are nice.  They have the same agenda.  It’s called the iron fist/velvet glove approach.

Jesus said don’t cast your pearls before swine, or they will turn again and rend you to pieces.  They act like velvet, don’t they?  Like a glass of Baileys.

Peter Dobby just said ‘plenty more to come in the programme’.  As he was saying it, or something just before it, he was looking down on the desk, looking at the desk like a kind human being looks at a friend, but when he lifted his face up to the camera, he put a blank, hardly there for anyone look on his face, completely untouchable and contemptuous and as if he had a bad smell under his nose.  We were meant to see both.  The ones of us that get attacked by them were meant to want to fly at him in retaliation, or beg him to stop or something, at which point he would get our story, and suddenly our minds would be wiped clean and we would be back in favour and no longer under threat and none of the tactics they had used would matter to us anymore, because breaking and giving them what they wanted would seem like the right and reasonable thing to do.  There is so much of the ending of 1984 in this.  The couple are separated from each other, passing each other in the street and hardly seeing each other, the torture and betrayal have been that deep and awful, and the final scene is something involving an imposed consciousness of ‘Big Brother’, a voice or a picture or something like that, and the man sits there in tears, realising, as I think it is the last sentence of the book that says this, that he loved Big Brother.  They had been caught by surreptitious and deceptive state surveillance and their relationship broken by torture.

The face Peter Dobby lifted to the camera, that is the programme. Or part of the programme, the psychologically violent one.  When they talk about the programme, they are using so many therapy type things and terms, and guided fantasy methods and word pictures (bodies and buildings, for instance) that I hear ‘programme’ as psychological programme, and I think that is what they mean.  I was going to say they all do it, but now I am confused.  I’m pretty sure they do.  I’m emotionally breaking at the moment, what they are doing is making me feel  disorientated and dislocated and really bad, especially the delight they appear to be taking in my humiliation.  It’s so bad, I even feel guilty about reworking a post, the blank, Frankenstein’s monster look he puts out with the provocation very few people are meant to see and understand makes me feel hysterical and incapable of communication.  So does my neighbours’ silence when I react to their invasiveness and provocation.  It seems to me their silence is as deliberate as everything else.

I’ve said before that they go for my throat.  I just watched, for the second time, this time just because it was on the television when I switched it on, Thursday night’s Newsnight, talking about the Libyan uprising.  One of the guests said it was as if something had been taken off of their throats and their voices now sounded clear to him.  The historian Simon Schama, who I have written about before, was there, and he picked up the significance of that and looked very guilty and shocked.  I believe he was thinking about me, perhaps, at least among others.  But the look of guilt was there.  They put the stalking into the community, play on your controlling feelings, for instance, guilt and shame, and using your neighbours as the people who hold you up against the wall as they beat you up, they lay into you. It’s occultism and salacious insolence.  It is so outrageous you want to hit back, if they’ve already worked you over and you understand what they have done and are still having to live with it, and at the same time they put their faces into yours, through the camera, and say ‘what are you going to do about it?’.  The way they eyeball the camera, eyeballing the person their speech is tailored to, and hold your eye while they shout the name of their colleague, which might or might not be your name, is abusive.  It IS deliberate and it IS abusive.  It’s intimidation, and it’s like staring down a dog.

I watched some videos online the other day, by a legal expert in the US, saying it would be OK, in law, to lie to Mr Assange to lure him to a place where they could kidnap him.  I understand the feeling of what he is living with, in terms of the threat and uncertainty (even though I do not know that my life is in danger) living with threat from authorities (and non-authorities) in different ways. 

I don’t think there is anything I can do, but I wish it wasn’t happening to him.  I feel like pleading with him, ‘please don’t die’.

It shouldn’t be legally OK to lie to anyone.  Certainly not for government bodies.  But they do it all the time.  For our protection, they say. 

I don’t want a society riddled with and ‘protected’ by lies.  Some Christians quote Rahab who hid the spies and lied about where they had gone, as being an example of when lying is right.  But the Bible says ‘God is not a man, that He should lie’.  It also says ‘Walk before me and be thou perfect’.  In the New Testament it also says ‘put off lying one to another’ and ‘let no corrupt communication come out of your mouth’.

For me these are heart and covenant verses, and the only ones I can remember out of my own head.  But no one has the right to argue, based on what they see from my limited memory, that the whole issue is a covenant thing and that there are some circumstances, therefore, when lying is right to, or about, certain people.

The reason I say this is that the New Testament isn’t big on self-protection, not for Christians.  We are told to honour all men, and to do good to all (even though it does say especially to those wo are of the household of faith, that doesn’t mean it is OK to do evil to someone else, even if the law demands that they be punished for a crime). 

If the law allows lying, the law is a mess.  Why should the only sanctified place of honour be in court, where it becomes illegal to lie?  Think how much time and money and distress would be saved to so many, if only lying itself, in whatever circumstances, was a crime.  Why isn’t lying, such an abusive and dishonorable thing, a crime?  So that lawyers can continue getting fat?

The New Testament isn’t big on self-protection or for terrestrial country being on a par with God.  Christians were encouraged to accept death for refusing to say, ‘Caesar is Lord’.  I think that encouragement was right.  People are not perfect.  Even if the only acceptable point being made here for some people is that the individual’s conscience comes before any allegiance to king and country (or continent, or one world government, since that is obviously what people are trying to practice, it doesn’t have to be treated with sensationalism for it obviously to be true), I believe that is the point that has to win the day, over and above loyalty to earthly government and authorities.

The spies might have been covenant people, but they were also ordinary men. Who wouldn’t be grateful for having their lives saved?  If in rewarding the woman for that they affirmed lying, they were wrong.  The Bible says she was also a harlot, whatever that means, maybe it isn’t it’s modern meaning.  They weren’t, surely, rewarding and affirming that, if it was what is understood by the word today.  They were showing human gratitude and mercy.  Who knows, maybe they should never have involved the name of God in the transaction at all.  It was a normal, human response to someone who has saved your life.

The fact that someone uses an exalted tone doesn’t make them right.  Maybe they didn’t use an exalted tone, maybe it is just the way I have heard it read and carressed in Church.  I think a verbal carress expresses joy and gratitude and strong feeling.  it is not necessarily an indicator of truth, even though you might feel that people capable of expressing such strong and positive feelings can’t possibly be wrong.  People and their feelings should never be idolised.  Feelings rely on information.  Information might be wrong, or wrongly understood.  No one should ever say to another, ‘I am so and so, do as I say’, unless it is in a clear matter of law.  That is why, I believe, we need to be dispassionate and not inflammatory, if a safe world is what we want.

BBC World News. 2.23 am UK time. Indian woman, Sharma or something.  She’s been hitting me for about 15 minutes.  She just went into an interview with Phil Mercer, who was part of Premier Radio at the beginning, saying ‘weelly’ for ‘really’, or something like that. More like ‘weech’ for ‘reach’. 

It isn’t appropriate for me to care how anyone feels about the way I communicate about this. They shouldn’t be doing it. It is abusive and an assault.  I believe it is also a crime.  She came on talking like a Bulgarian (is that just coincidence as well?)  I will care, and be hurt, they press all the right buttons.  But it isn’t appropriate that I should care, though it is inevitable that I will be hurt.  My neighbours are getting it in the neck, while I’m trying to go softly, softly with the people who are really hurting me and exploiting things.

There was a message in Bulgarian on my screen as well.  I’ve never had that before.  I’m wondering if it is from the cable company reminding me that payment is due, or something.  Maybe I’ll be without tv and internet tomorrow.

I just changed my title to include superimposed.  The Indian lady was suddenly close to tears.  Is it appropriate that I should care????  She looks pleased.  It’s the tears, it isn’t personal.  I don’t know her, I only know what she is doing.  And she does too.  As she started to talk to Phil Mercer, and went into it with ‘weech’ for ‘reach’, her eyebrows twitched with recognised significance.

She’s fluffing her lines like Bulgarians fluff their speech sometimes.  Sometimes it’s for power and sometimes it’s out of bewilderment.  All the presenters are fluffing their lines in the same, uniform way at the moment.

Sometimes your speech gets scrambled.  It doesn’t mean there is anything wrong, or does it?  Is it just that your speech has been challenged at a deep level?  I can’t remember when this started happening for me, I think it was here in Bulgaria.  It might be a fear thing.  I hear the anger, but I don’t understand its content, so I don’t know how to feel.  So I suppose it is partly confusion.

Loose paraphrase:  Which would you rather receive, a comment saying ‘great post!  check out my blog at (www.suebarnett.wordpress.com, in my case)’ or one saying ‘well said!  I know what you’re talking about because . . . and I think . . .’?

While the forum, if properly, fairly and legally run, is useful and sometimes feels helpful, I for one would rather not be nagged and patronised and treated like some sort of a great-niece or child or student in a classroom in this way.   As far as I am concerned, we comment the way we can at the time, and those of us who are sincere in our comments and appreciation might well be using that shorthand to say, ‘I am so impressed with what you have to say here, there is nothing I feel able to add, but I would appreciate you looking at my blog because I think yours is an opinion I would value’.

Some people, like me, sometimes read and blog in distress, or very focussed on their own thing and they are desperate to have someone else aware of and concerned about the things they are concerned about.  I don’t think we need to sanitise and make anodyne the way everyone should leave their comments, or that anyone should see it as an insult or somehow inadequate if a person says, ‘great post, please check out my blog’.  It might be all they are capable of at the time, and it might show more appreciation than launching into an opinion.

While I understand exactly what is being said and on the whole agree with it, there are times of desperation or recognition, for me, when I can’t say what I want without it being as short as possible and straight to the point.  I’m thinking, maybe pretentiously, of the difference between a diver, say, at their most polite and articulate, saying something like, ‘honey, would you mind getting the air cylinder out of the car?’ and a woman in intense labour pains screaming and swearing and snarling like a savage at her helper who insists on going by the book to shut up and give her the mask.  Something like that.  There are other situations of pain where the same would apply.  Or the difference between someone swimming yelling ‘hey, great to see you, come on in, let’s play ball’, and someone else in the water drowning doing their best while trying to snatch air to attract the attention of someone to help them.

Etiquette is for the adequate and sometimes even for the indifferent and self-absorbed, to get what they want with as little friction as possible.  Many people are inadequates who accept that about each other, and don’t want to be told they should emulate the adequate, bright, happy, switched on people in order for their contribution to be acceptable.

And while I’m thinking about it, someone said that most people live lives of quiet desperation.  But we have been taught in the past, if not now, to be completely hypocritical about that fact when applying for a job, for instance.  I can’t theorise on why that is at the moment, but if a person is desperate for a job, and also capable of doing it or of learning to, why should they be advised to rely on such self-negating and relationship-sabotaging dishonesty and subterfuge right from the beginning, and why should anyone be taught that it is not acceptable to show desperation if it exists?  I’ve never employed anyone, so I don’t know if employers are advised to despise desperation, or if the advice is based on the belief that, if someone sees you are desperate, they might take advantage of you, but it seems to me that no honest and honorable relationship can be based on an initial dishonesty of that kind.

It also occurs to me that the kind of comment WordPress is presenting as less desirable might be nothing more than the expression of an internalisation of that advice which allows for nothing more.  Keep it light, keep it casual, can easily translate to, ‘hey, that’s great, come and see mine!’  We need permission to become honest again, not instructions on how to become presentable and acceptable to other people in order to compensate for and not address the fact that experts in communication have told us to steer clear of some kinds of honesty.

So thank you for your advice, WordPress, and I hope this post might be in line with the kind of comments and responses you would like to see.  And please check out my blog at www.suebarnett.wordpress.com. Thank you for reading and for letting this pass the moderation procedure (which I personally find also inhibits and tampers with my ability to communicate as I would wish, sometimes.  If I’m not even sure I am going to get through the door or have my existence acknowledged or welcomed, why should I and how can I lay myself bare, as it were, in my response?  Often closed doors and rejection make desperate and battered people who can hardly hear you anyway, even with the impecceable (and expensive) etiquette of having a butler to hold the door wide open).

Oops, here we go!  Back to me.  If you go through a butler, you have probably had to go through other levelsof protocol as well, and how you handle them might determine whether or not you get as far as the butler.  In church I was taught that this procedure is a way of reveaing a person’s heart and whether or not ‘they are ready’ for access.  They never, to my memory, said anything or much about any inadequacies or unreadiness expressed by the person requiring such protocol.  Is it right that the person expected to go through it should be the only one expected to fit? In reality does it even work that way?  Some people want the challenge of the protocol because they want a process of validation or change.  I happen to believe that in some situations I am one of those people.  But if the people imposing or handling the protocol don’t respect that about me or even respect the protocol itself . . . .  protocol is a mutual thing, isn’t it, not just from the top down.  I’m sure it should be and that really that is how it should work.

Yesterday in Parliament

https://suebarnett.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/i-followed-a-search/

This is a link to a post I wrote a while ago, about something called Monarch Mind Control.  I refer you to it to help you understand the rest of this post.  Included in that post is a link to an interview on Youtube between two very high profile people in America, one of whom was a special agent in charge of a police department.

The issue of Monarch Mind Control has come up for me again after watching the House of Commons broadcast yesterday. 

I have said before that I have been accused of paedophilia, although I am not a paedophile.  Yesterday Theresa May was talking about changes and appeals processes, and even before she got up to speak I was thinking that what had gone before seemed to be adopting a popularist stance.  I noticed that Nick Clegg was close to tears, and I noticed that, as in so many times in the past, David Cameron came in focusing and shutting everything out and down as much as he was able, and when I see that I find it frightening.  That the Prime Minister needs to focus in that way, in Parliament, before his electorate.  I feel that saying this could be to my harm and embarrassment, because it occurs to me in writing that he might have my safety and welfare in mind, at least in part.

Speaking of popularism, listening to Theresa May I believed she was doing the same thing, going for a projected popularist view.  The reason I say ‘projected’ is that I believe most of us are far more human and compassionate in our approach to this issue, especially those of us who have the slightest hint of understanding of the psychology of abuse, which should be most of us.  She presented herself as speaking for all right minded people, but as far as I am concerned she was appealing to the vigilante element of society, and her approach to the subject was in line with that.  She said that the judges who insisted that the human rights and privacy of people tagged and hated in this way were paramount were out of touch with the rest of us.  I, obviously, disagree.  She also said that the final decision in the appeals process on this issue was not for the courts, but for the police who, she said, were best placed to make this decision as being in touch.  That frightened me and I started thinking in terms of a police state.  Clearly I am speaking with heavy sarcasm and irony when I say that of course the police have always been squeaky clean and whiter than white and perfect models of humanity who have never harmed anyone and never acted with prejudice and never perverted the course of justice and never set anyone up or bullied anyone or consented to their bullying.  These are obviously the best people to handle such a sensitive issue (sarcasm and irony maintained).  I believe I have an idea of how long they were holding this accusation against me before I even knew about it, and how long they stood by, in spite of my complaints of harassment, and let people get on with it. That also goes for my housing association and the mental health authorities.

The issue of Monarch Mind Control came up for me again because there was something I didn’t understand about the presentation.  Then I remembered the interview in the post I have provided the link for, where the woman being interviewed said that, as far as she knew, it went back as far as her father.

I know, I am painfully aware, that this could be complete coincidence, but the dress she was wearing was identical in style and colours to a coat my father bought me when I was little. I can’t remember how old I actually was, but he died when I was 11.  He overdosed on sleeping tablets.  I don’t know if it was his intention to die, he didn’t say in his note, and he had done the same thing before and survived.

But Theresa May’s dress was almost identical.  And she was standing there adopting an almost vigilante attitude towards sex offenders, dripping with hate, contempt and loathing, it seemed to me, and saying how devious they are (they say the same about people they call mentally ill, it is or was part of the training for mental health professionals to view mental health patients as devious), downplaying if not completely invalidating the role of the courts over this issue, saying that parliament makes the laws, not the courts (but I say the courts uphold the law and no one is exempt from the law, including parliamentarians, as we have seen, thankfully, but if they are able to invalidate the courts, and cut us off, as Europeans, from the European Court of Human Rights, which they are saying they want to do [whether or not that is just a decoy talking point without teeth to distract from more important issues we are not talking about I don’t know, it’s one of the things they’ve always managed to talk about for years], how are they going to be held accountable?).  These lovely parliamentarians, calling groups devious and inciting hatred against them, you would think they had never done a devious thing in their lives, except me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

If the coat and the dress are not a coincidence but deliberate, why? I’ve already contacted people and asked to talk and not been acknowledged, so why would they want to do something like that?  They teamed it all up, as well, with talk about mental health.  It doesn’t matter what they are trying to say, when someone has already asked for assistance they shouldn’t be using those methods.  And if it was deliberate and they have known all along, then presumably it has been handed down to them over the years, and the government or whoever it was that had this knowledge that has been used in this way stood by and watched my father, with all his personal pain and inadequacy and lack of access to this kind of mass communication tool, insist that this was happening to him and being treated as mentally ill and in the end killing himself.  My dad.  My daddy, as I called him at the time and still think of him.  11 years old.  A younger brother and sister as well.  Whatever kind of person he was, it was wrong for something like this to be done to him and to me and to our family.  It is just as wrong for it to continue.  That is what I believe.  The one question I am afraid of is, ‘am I right?’  Am I right to believe this is wrong?  It might be good, kind governmental wisdom, and it might be better for me to go with it.  That is how I feel.

They were laughing a lot yesterday, which seemed to me completely inappropriate when handling such a serious and painful issue, but which also made me feel as if the arms of love and acceptance were being opened and offered to me, and a place of refuge, safety and protection and reconciliation.

I’m vulnerable to this kind of approach, at this particular point, because I had a bad experience in hospital last week when I was taken ill with severe stress related symptoms.  I was later contacted by the British Embassy and asked to confirm that I was OK, and I recounted the experience and everything involved in the stress that brought it on and asked for a reply, but I didn’t get one.  That was on Friday.  I want to say the Consul’s name, but people talk about discretion, and say if you are indiscrete and other people involved with you know that, they will not trust you.  I don’t know if, in my situation, discretion should be demanded of me or not.  What about me and my ability to trust?  But I don’t think officials should be subjected to vigilantism any more than anyone else should.  But this has gone so far, and I can’t afford legal representation, but I’m afraid if I mention his name on this forum anyway it might disqualify me for future help, either from the embassy’s own complaints procedure or from the law.  I don’t know what to do, because they themselves are acting illegally, it seems to me, and certainly if I don’t say his name the opportunity to move in on me again might be used.  It’s not a personal thing, I like him, at least to some extent, it’s about my own security in this situation.  I don’t know how to protect myself other than by naming him, but if I do that also might go against me, maybe even more long term.  I don’t know how it works.

On Monday (St Valentine’s Day) my housing association contacted me.  My housing association has often decided not to answer my emails and to set things in motion without consulting with me to have me apprehended under the mental health act.  The people who turn up unannounced often look appalled and apprehensive about me, and also are often very aggressive and insistent in their approach, and have even been violent and scathing, without me even knowing the specifics of why they are there.  So I replied to this person, my housing officer, Andy Minett at Hexagon Housing Association in Sydenham, made my position clear, reminded him of how he had handled things in the past and had often seen fit not to answer my emails but to go behind my back and over my head and not help effectively with community bullying and harassment, and I asked him not to resort to force or coersion but to inform me of his intentions because I believe I have a legal right to be informed.  I aksed him to clarify a few things, and as yet neither he nor anyone else from the housing association has contacted me.  Also, while I think of it, I have copied my emails on to the mental health team at Speedwell in Deptford, and they also do not acknowledge my emails, and I am afraid they are standing by and trying to force a crisis.  I asked for a response to one of them, through my CPN, from my psychiatrist, and although the CPN, Susan Farmer, said she had passed the email on to him, I have never received a response.

In this situation, and with these two most recent emails unacknowledged, on Tuesday evening someone rang my doorbell from downstairs and said what sounded like an Italianisation of my name.  I immediately thought it was the police and I was frightened, and I told him I spoke English and didn’t understand him, which was over all the truth, although not the issue for me at the time.  He said ‘OK’, and went, and I haven’t heard anything since.  But I was frightened and still am.  He came unannounced and unexpected, I didn’t know who had sent him or why, and I don’t think it should have happened that way.  I think that is really wrong. I’m afraid they might come back with instructions to arrest me under the mental health act.  But whose unprofessionalism and negligence is creating my fear and stress in the first place?  I think I could and can say ‘whose secrecy?’ and not be wrong in this case.

I’m tired now.  I might add more later, but right now if there was somewhere else I intended to go with this or something else I intended to say, I can’t remember.

Intermediate edit note: I’m recording Premier, and at the beginning John Pantry played a song called ‘Everything Was Done So You Would Come’, and he back announced it with tears in his voice.  He then moved on immediately to pray a prayer which sounded to me, in this context, as if he was instructing decision makers on how to pray and how to feel and how to view what they have done.  I obviously might be wrong, but it isn’t my opinion that I am, and if I am right I still think they are wrong to be doing this.  I still maintain it is stalking.  And I still maintain it is deceiving most of their audience.

“Glory to God!”

Colin Dye (for I think it was he) was going on this morning about treasure in earthern vessels and glory going to God and not to us.

Right.  First the way He talked about glory going to God.  It was down – “the glory goes to God and not to us”, and it leaves the hearers feeling awed or maybe even guilty “oh, we are such awful people, we must give more glory to God”.  The Bible says God beautifies and glorifies His church.  It should have been a joyful statement, not a dour one making everyone afraid of taking God’s glory.  God is glorified in our joy.  The Bible says that Jesus was anointed with joy above His fellows, because He loved righteousness and hated wickedness.  How does God get glory if we go around dark and full of foreboding and fear of not getting it right?

Second, I fail to see how God is glorified in the way they harass me anyway.  They follow everything I do on the internet and criticise it.  They criticise my isolation, they criticise me waiting for someone else to make a decisive move.

Stalking is wrong.  Hacking communications is wrong and completely counter freedom.  End of.  They even know the comments I leave on other blogs.  I only have to refer you to their body language and their shifty eyes.  They keep up a torrent of language, to what end and to what purpose, and with what motive?  To make you forget that what you believe is right?  And that what they have done is wrong?  I think so.

They talk about mercy, but they want it for themselves.  I want it for their victims first.  Which are many.

The Children of God, a group considered to be a cult, operated a principle called “heavenly deception”.  At the Christian Centre in my teens (over 30 years ago) I was told this was wrong and that they could be considered a cult partly because of that, let alone the sexual activity.  Yet these churches are now doing the same thing (except it is hardly deception, in a sense, anymore, at least, not to me because I know) and it is supposed to be OK.

Roberts Liardon is on tonight.  Poor man, what an unfortunate name.  Liar-don (some people won’t get it!)

David Wellington said this morning, “can we have the words please?”, which felt like he was asking for an apology to be given in words.  Who was he asking (except he obviously wasn’t, he was talking about the words for the songs)?  It felt as if he was asking me.  I feel as if I should apologise every time I write.  So here we are, in words, “I’m sorry”.  Now what?

“I’m sorry”.  For what?  For being so unkind and rebellious in my response to the beautiful way you portray the fact that you are sorry you have ruined my life and that you want to make amends?  Is that it?

Around the time I went to the police in 2009 David Cameron’s speech at the party conference portrayed my situation perfectly, and the song the conference used was, “Then I Saw Her Face, Now I’m A Believer”.   Ive wondered since then if he . . . this is where traditionally they can say you are deluded and psychotic.  Except I feel really treacherous, because I felt almost as if he saved my life, at that point.  But he didn’t.  It was a nice illusion, maybe for both of us.  They are not saving my life now in maintaining my benefits even though they know I have been out of the country for over a year.  They are just prolonging the agony when they should be dealing with the situation openly and head on.  I’m expected to be grateful, but you shouldn’t be grateful for what is wrong.  The continuance of my benefits while they reflect my own stuff back to me to say quite what, I am not sure, is evasion of something awful, and nothing else.

My writing is awful.  The way people come on at me with a torrent of words, using everything they know about me, almost searching for me as if in a seance, leaves me emotionally raped.  Either something spiritual really is happening in what they are doing, or they are acting it.  Both options are equally evil and cynical and hateful.  I’m not just talking about the church.  Read my other rants and you’ll get an idea of the people and organisations I’m on about.

Maybe all that has happened is my crazy speeding mind has slowed down because I’ve listened to people like Michael Mish, and I now find the torrent that others think is normal crazy and disturbing.  Whether it is or not I’m not sure.

In fact, not only crazy and disturbing, but used like a deliberate hammer or pick axe, to extract whatever ore they can find.  It’s a bit like a tongue loosener.

And the backsnaps (some people will understand).  I read about someone being tortured once by being forced to stand bolt uprught without moving, for hours.  The effect of the onslaught is like that.  Somehow you have to make a conscious effort to disconnect, except when you have screamed out all your hysterical rubbish and they are still going on and progressing it further, it is so hard.  And all the time they are doing it it is as if I’m not even there, even though all their remarks seemed to be aimed at me.

OK, another name call.  That happened to Katie Melua on Saturday Kitchen yesterday.  That’s all I’m saying, that it happened.  I’m not expressing a feeling about it.  I wouldn’t dare.

I’m sorry, I know it’s about Egypt and everything, but I was OK with Hew Edwards last night until he talked about a doctor at the end of his report and stared intently into the camera, and I felt he was trying to make a point or something.

And in the one o’clock news on BBC 1, it was either Tim Wilcox or Jeremy Bowen who stood coaxing into the camera saying that Egyptians were being told to ‘go home for the sake of the country’ – I think it was Egyptians, it must have been – and giving an eager and reassuring smile behind him was a lookalike of my old psychiatrist, the one who never believed anything I said when people accused me falsely, Dr Gallo.

The blonde girl on the programme seemed to be oozing disapproval. It was a combination of both her expression and her words. Maybe those close enough to me, if they look, will be able to see what I am talking about without me needing to explain it.

So it’s made me nervous again.  Is this deliberate, just to sabotage a new move with suggestions, or is the suggestion true about what they want to do to me?

I had a biology teacher in my grammar school called Margaret Bowen.  Nice lady.  I made her a tape once, with my first tape recorder, trying to convert her.  She wrote to me saying, among other things, that I could end up becoming bigoted.  I just called her a nice lady.  I meant it, I wasn’t being sarcastic.

Question: is a traumatised person mentally ill?  They are really pushing the mental health thing again at the moment, including in Parliament where they are talking about allocating more funds.  Especially for the young.  Which is where Miss Disapproving came in.  I assumed it was because of my post last night calling the Newsround kids ‘savage puppies’.  If they are not, then their scriptwriters are.

As for Egypt:  I wonder how much of the angry backlash and the raised expectations are due to the fact that they have been able and encouraged to do all their happy stuff into the cameras, maybe acting for the cameras, and talking their talk about it not being safe to go home now.  The cameras have been an encouragement, I have thought.

It has turned violent and ugly, but some ugly expressions were being made before it was officially acknowledged to be the case, and they seemed to be condoned and encouraged.  And now they have been parading with a hung efigy.

They think they have approval for this.  Big men for the cameras.

Can something like this produce something good?  If they can do this to Mubarak, what is to say they won’t do it to someone else?  Mob mentality.  The cameras were part of it and part of building it.  And now they talk over it in poetic tones.  Tones, it feels to me, that have been got through listening to me on the phone sometimes, like when I was reading down the phone.

Has their very presence built up the atmosphere and acted as an incitement to violence?

Edit Note:  I just went to check BBC News at One for yesterday, 2nd February, and it has been taken down already.  It is 4.14 am.  It is supposed to be on the website until 1pm the next day.  This happens often.  Too often.

Yesterday’s Newsround isn’t there either.

OK, the thing is, right, I agree wiv Tony Smiff. 

If the workers aren’t going to get a fair cut of the profits reflected in their wages so they can take full responsibility for their needs themselves, then companies should be made to pay by the government.  That is just normal human common sense.  A common sense of what is right.

This is my answer to Jeremy Paxman’s question about how do you determine what is morally right when they are already obeying the law, and Tony kept saying it, that the law needs to be changed.

The law is not written in stone.  It evolves.  It evolves either by force or by common consent.  Common consent is better (we all know what is morally acceptable in this kind of situation), but if interested parties and rulers won’t give easily, pressure has to be put on them to make them give.  That is my understanding of how every change in the law has come about.  When the law is seen as not reflecting a widely accepted sense of morality, and when people suffer as a result, eventually that law must be changed.  Come on, Jerry, me old mate, you know that, what are you trying to do?  I think he was just being mischievously provocative, and great respect to Tony Smith for holding his ground in the terms he was able to do so.

I felt a real sense of exhileration when I saw the protests.  I thought they had good energy and also a very powerful cross section of society represented.  I thought I would love to be there and be involved, then I excused myself on the grounds that it might be used to put me back in hospital, then I thought excusing myself was cowardly and I should be there.  Good for these people, more power to them.  Power to their cause, at the very least.  Hopefully they won’t need to protest in this way for too long before our leaders see sense.  But I thought that what was shown on film was absolutely great.

Hey, what happened to our new freedom to protest peacefully?  That woman they dragged out, the one who said it was disgraceful, did she actually do anything wrong?  I don’t mind our leaders holding on to power, but they need to remember they are exercising that power for us, all of us, not just the people who head up the producing and finance machine.  Bugger this, I’m going to argue like a woman because I am a woman, and you can call it emotional blackmail if you like, but how are things fair when the law allows such inequality that at one end people live the jetset lifestyle from the profits they make out of people who work for them and buy from them, one of whom, a few weeks ago, lost her daughter to swine flu because her age and health category were not catered for by the government to be vaccinated against it?

I fear this Baran guy represents a group which will ignore any conscience it has as long as it is allowed to.

Here is something I didn’t act on at the time, and perhaps that is now to my shame and makes my argument and stance a little less persuasive, but I can still remember how it felt emotionally at the time.

I have never been so well off financially as I have been over the last 14 years, since I started getting Income Support plus an additional allowance built in for severe disability, Disability Living Allowance and Housing Benefit for a flat which cost me about £350 per month, plus a Freedom Pass for travel on London Transport and many local bus networks nationally.  I sat down a few years ago, when I wanted to work out my tithe, when I tithed to the Church, and worked out that the whole package was worth about £13,000.  As I said, I have never been financially so well off.  It is probably worth a little less now as my Freedom Pass has lapsed and I pay for my own travel expenses.  I always felt guilty about having it anyway, as I did about all my benefits.  Funny how they can slap a label on you and refuse to take it off which means you qualify for benefits, then make you feel like a shirker with some fancy footwork.  This label and the power everyone is society can and does wield with it is one of the most distressing things in my life.

But one year early on, on and around budget day when they were talking about the plight of pensioners and insulting increases to their pensions, I wanted to approach the government (to which I remain thankful for this financial provision) and tell them that I didn’t need everything I was getting myself to live on and that, in view of the plight of pensioners at the time, I wanted to be able to give something back to the government for it to be given to the pensioners.  I wanted to find out if there was a mechanism for those kinds of voluntary donations to be used for those not so well-provided for.  I still don’t know if such a mechanism exists, and if it does I missed the opportunity to use it.

But my point is, that was me, on £13,000 a year, believing I was stuck for the rest of my life in rented accommodation in a basement flat that I wanted to make work because I and everyone around me had a right that it whould work, and I looked at someone less well off than me and wanted to give back a portion of my own benefits to help them.  But these people who cream off millions and billions don’t even acknowledge they have that in their hearts and argue for the ‘right’ to maintain the legality of the present financial status quo.

I am sure that people make charitiable donations, but that can’t be the security of the people who need that charity.  It has to be formal and legalised, something they are entitled to, not just something they should be grateful for.  I don’t understand economics or, at least, I have never been taught.  Would doing something like that lead to eventual fiancial ruin and insecurity for everyone? Or just redress the balance in a way which is obviously needed and, to the uninitiated into the mysteries of economics, like myself, looks like such an easy and obvious thing to do?

I’ve got CNN on, it’s been on since 11 pm my time, it’s now 1.05 am.
I have said before that they are a criminal organisation, and I stand by that. I haven’t put them on for ages since I said that, but today I thought I’d give it a chance, that they couldn’t possibly be that bad or that vindictive that they would try to do me any harm or insult me so viscerally at a distance which is safe for them that it affects me psychologically.
I was wrong..
They have been doing what they always do, use a personal identifier specific to me, talk emotion and therapy type talk, then talk about communication (twitter is one of the words they use for psychic purposes, just like My Space was right back when this first started for me and other things have been since. I start to fall asleep and they talk in forceful and overloaded concerned and understanding tones about sleeplessness, they cut audio just as it is reaching a zenith and this grey man who looks like a colourless JW crossed with a mafia godfather (as do they all tonight) comes in with ‘yes’ in a deliberately flat tone.

They talk about going beyond borders.

When it first started for me tonight they did some of this then put some children on saying ‘I learn’, one of them saying ‘I learn respect’, and it seemed to me the whole sack of rubbish and psychological and criminal violence was aimed at me.

They did this thing with the sleep bit several times. I fell asleep for a little while, then I woke up to a bit more of it, which they immediately followed up with something about a nutcracker (honest, I swear!)

Looking at them I’d say they all carry guns and have maybe even used them.

It is criminal, sinister, satanism and witchcraft.. It is completely evil and demeaning. It is Satanism and witchcraft, whatever they try to pass it off as. And it is criminal.

Satanism. Witchcraft. Two words I’ve come to feel embarrassed about using. That is how they work, you call it as it is and say what they are doing, then they set about making you embarrassed to use those terms. Our society needs to be exorcised of this evil Really this is how I have come to think listening toi Tommy Boyd.. This is silly, that is silly, silly language, silly words, silly attitudes, while all the time I am dismissing words which actually describe and fit what they are doing. It’s like a doctor being made to feel silly about calling cancer cancer, and treating it that way.

I’m tired, yes. I’m having a bad day, yes. These people are a big part of the reason why. Without their criminal and occult and hateful pursuit and psychological and spiritual violence my life would be much easier. I wouldn’t have first time contacts sneering at me and saying something is all over the media and calling me a prostitute. I wouldn’t have people I want to get on with taking a second or two to look down and connect with their guru or whatever it is they do before responding to me in any way when I eat in their restaurant.

I went to try and buy a watch today. I got back to my emails and found in my spam folder one email saying something about are these watches reliable and another saying something else about watches. I got an email yesterday from an estate agent I’m trying to deal with and the coding on it was all bad, and in my WordPress spam folder I got a comment formatted to look exactly like it. And CNN is linking the name of the Quest fellow with the word ‘profit’ to sound like ‘prophet’, I believe.

And there they are, all coming on black and white and blank, milking the Egypt thing as they have been for days, and people are responding to them almost in tears, and I don’t think it has much to do with the news story., but with the dark undertones of what they are doing.

I’m not sure of his name, John something, he speaks with an Australian accent.

I mean this, honestly, it’s like watching children’s tv, Playschool or something. The over dramatised concern on their faces. You can see them arranging themselves that way when they come on camera. They can’t just report what is happening, they have to act out an attitude about it, all the while using all the stuff I’ve talked about and more.

It is menacing, it is frightening, and for me it is meant to be. This is deep, dark, satanic, dehumanising stuff they are playing with. It is not just in my head. You say this kind of thing and your psychiatrist has you put away. That is my fear today. I feel that beaten up and hateful and angry myself, I feel dark myself.

I just tried to put a deposit on an apartment in Varna, and was told that the owner decided he wants to use it for a couple of weeks, but that the agency can’t help me any more anyway. This from a woman who was doing exactly the same thing when she was showing me around apartments as these people are doing, and yesterday sent me an email saying an apartment I had asked about didn’t have a washing machine and signing off ‘Bet Regards’ and never mentioning that they didn’t want to help me anyway. I phoned another woman at a different office who used my middle name without me having given it to her, as soon as I told her what my name is. I heard a note of recognition in her voice, but she didn’t say anything, other than using my middle name. And I suppose I will be the one seen as devious for not having come straight out at that point and acknowledged a problem. Why can’t people just be up front with the information and lies illegally communicated to them? Why do they have to try and winkle me out and see what my response is when no one has a right to be doing any of this anyway?

CNN has got its own Nick Robinson (or is theirs Robertson?), just like the BBC. It’s got a Fluella Benjamin lookalike and actalike (which is why I talked about Playschool). They have a Larry King (Larry the Lamb, King of the beasts is a lion, Jesus is the lion and the lamb, or is that pushing it too far?) I said ages ago that the names of the newsreaders and reporters on CNN read like characters out of a morality play. Maybe it’s OK, if the sound and implications of the name are a major part of what makes them the right peope for the job. Maybe it is seen as part of the war on terrorism. But it hits vulnerable people psychologically, as well as terrorists. And mix it with stalking and occultism, and you make people like me very desperate.

The most helpful thing I ever witnessed in regard to all this was the making of a Sainsbury’s advert in my local Sainsbury’s. I walked into it by accident in one of the aisles and hung around to watch. There was the main woman, all kind of shopping focussed in an empty headed way, enthusing about shopping at Sainsbury’s and how wonderful it was, but then I realised that the people around her who looked like normal shoppers were not, they too were part of the set. She kept nodding her head, getting into a ditsy character. I stayed and watched it break down and saw everyone go home. Mrs Ditsy turned into a very posh, maybe tired, theatrical ‘luvvy’. In other words, an actress. Of course she was an actress, but it annoyed me that Sainsbury’s shoppers were stereotyped and portrayed and communicated with on the level the advert demanded.

Now it’s bad enough it being a Sainsbury’s advert. But when the news reporters do it? What’s that about? I think it’s wrong. It’s a lie. It’s not reporting the news, it’s using the news and manipulating how it is perceived.

I’m glad I saw the Sainsbury’s thing. I know for certain I am not wrong now. So, the age old question, why doesn’t someone do something about this? If I can see it, so can they. The making of the news is an ‘in group’ thing. They are using, utilising, Egypt as they do everything else. This is an evil and manipulative practice that has to stop. I can understand why the government shut down the internet and other communications and, whether they were the right people to do that or not in this situation, there are situations where the right people will do it and it will be the right thing for the right reasons, even if this is not one of those situations.

And it’s strange, you know. I will sound like something out of the ark here, but they do still face on for the camera and make love to it. It’s just a technique. It makes it feel intimate for the audience. But it’s just showmanship. And some of it appears to be with criminal intent.

I’m Sue Barnett, I have (just) an English degree, have studied drama, am a Christian and know a bit about psychology and linguistics and music and cadences.  I should not still feel the need to say something like this to defend myself, but at the moment I’m a dog being eaten by other dogs and that normally gets me put in hospital.  They might still put me there whether I spell it out like this or not.  If they want to nothing stops them.  That is why I don’t want to come back until I know it’s not gong to happen.

End 2.31 am

4.44 am edit.  CNN, talking about morality plays, also has someone called Wolf.  He was on with the Fluella Benjamin lookalike after I posted.  I’m sure she said ‘Nile tv’ to sound like ‘Evtimi’, which is a name in Bulgaria and something I know as a street name.  That is the name of my street now, in fact.  Then she shouted ‘Wolf’ as if she was calling up a dead spirit or takng command of someone.

I also saw they have their own Ian Lee.  Iain Lee on Talksport openly says that he admires Tommy Boyd, or used to. They both worked on Talksport.  It is obviously psychological stalking of someone, at the very least.  I know, as I have often said, that details of me and my family and other connections areused extensively.  Maybe one day I’ll find out why.  For the moment it has to be enough to believe it must be criminal and illegal, whatever the reason.

I wish you well and speedy success.  Would they want to kill me if I went and lived in an isolated area?  Sorry, I know that sounds stupid, but they have already called me a prostitute and things to people I loved.  I’m just wondering how far they might go.

I’m looking at an isolated house near Sofia at the moment.  It looks gorgeous and lovely, but although I came looking for space, I’m now more than a little afraid.

So I wish you speedy success and hope you’ll keep an eye out for me.  And apologies, if you are really serious about this, for saying things I didn’t understand.

I Want To Go Home

I really think it’s the right thing to do, I think anything I do here in Bulgaria before or without doing that can’t possibly be right.  But I don’t know how to go or who to go to.

I know that through the legal system isn’t the only way of approaching things, and that some high profile people seem to have tried to make their positive position and kind feelings very clear to me.  I appreciate that and am really sorry for those people if they feel embittered or betrayed, believing I don’t care or am really cynical or despise the reality of what they feel, and because of the responsibility and integrity with which I am sure many of them try to approach their job I am ashamed if I have made them feel that way.

I don’t know what to do or who to go to.  My flat is my home, I have tried for years to insist on that, not only for my own sake but also for that of those who have no other option but to try to make such a place their home.  But I don’t even want to attempt to deal with the problems between me and my neighbours and my housing association.  I have asked the mental health services before, and my housing association, for assurances that I’m not going to be hospitalised or something, and they never answer emails like that.  I think they have viewed me very unkindly and inaccurately, if not cynically.

So where would I go?  I have a home, but I’m afraid to be there.  I need a legally committed communication on this.  I’m sorry, friends, but I really do.  Using the media isn’t good enough.  I don’t understand why you can’t or won’t commit yourselves.

I don’t have the keys to my flat.  My housing association broke in to do some work and has changed the locks and they have the keys.  I don’t know how to get hold of them without telling them my address here, and I don’t want to do that.  That feels stupid, it seems so obvious that there should be no problem for me to do that, but I know how they have acted towards me in the past.  So I might feel clear skies but discover I have delivered myself over, yet again, to a dungeon.  How melodramatic does that sound?

Am I worth anything to anyone?  Should I be?  Should I believe that I am? 

Maybe more to the point, is anyone else worth anything to me anymore?  The truth is, I don’t care.  I can’t care, not after what you have put me through.  You need to rebuild this relationship, it is not my job.  I can accept apologies and an expression of a wish to try again, even if my answer is no, or even a summons, but being put under the obligation of responding to a plea or an invitation is not something I think is fair.

Everything I do here in Bulgaria, I feel as if I am desperately trying to avoid detection.  My first reaction when people shout at me is self-defensive anger and rejection.  But that seems to be the way people here do things.  I don’t expect ever to encounter anything different.  So I feel as if I just have to get in there, if I can, if people will let me, if I can hide my predicament well enough and the predicament they might find themselves in by having anything to do with me, and do my best to hold on, if I can.  If I still have the heart.  If I don’t why would I want to, and why should I try?  And also, of course, I find myself having to cope with the closed and dishonest ways people handle the situation.  These   days when people say they can’t do something, I don’t know if they really mean it or if they are saying ‘go away’.  But you can’t prove it.  But it’s still fear and prejudice. 

I was thinking over the weekend that I need my personal power back.  That if people shout at me or whatever, if I shout back or show any kind of strength in expressing my own anger, it won’t be made an occasion for people to arrest me or use the mental health act against me.  I feel I daren’t express the full extent of my anger in these situations, or my love or my need or acceptance of my own failure in the communication, or an insistence that I am entitled not to be treated that way.  I don’t think that is something I should have to feel, since those who start it are completely unbridled in their own expression. 

I’m not talking about physical force in my reaction or any kind of physical attack.  On the other hand, is there something wrong with grabbing someone by the wrist in that kind of situation and saying, ‘hey, that’s not OK, and I don’t want to let you walk away having spoken to me/treated me like that’?  Because that is the worst thing I have ever done to any of my accusers.  The spectre of the mental health system is always over me in those situations.

The Thinker

Me.  Sorry about that.  It’s only me, not the famous statue!  More of my boring drivel, I’m afraid.

I think . . . Esther Hyam on Premier (not sure of spelling) is mimicking Christine who held me as I cried when Loxley told me I was no longer welcome at church.

I think . . . Gypsy William Lee at Kensington Temple, dropping his aitches everywhere and saying ‘rejoice in your ‘art’ was giving instructions to Christian artists and media people everywhere, including those leading worship (why don’t they mention William Lee anymore?  At a significant point all their boasting about him going on and on and on every day and the revival going on and on . . . just stopped.  I don’t remember an explanation).

I think . . . When the solicitor Rachel Gawith (who has a criminal conviction in Bulgaria on her own admission on her website and an awful attitude to Bulgarian authorities and the legal system – check out the travel bug and the rental bug websites) and her friends dealt so badly and illegally with me (they didn’t even give me a contract or offer one when I asked) and threatened me with Bulgarian police intimidation saying they were not nice and blackmailed me with the information they had been pushing me for and, in  spite of my explanation of the situation and me telling her that I had already been to the police about it who had done nothing (and still have not after much pursuit through an IPCC complaint from me) she told me she was going to report me to the British police because I was obviously in serious trouble with them – all this went through emails and Skype and I am sure everyone I believe is stalking me knows all about this . . . I think that when, at that time, someone in church or on Premier Radio prayed that God would protect Rachel, they intended that she should be at least one of the people that came to mind for me.

I think . . . that when someone submitted a prayer request to Premier breakfast this morning about someone who needed to make a move in the next day or two, John, from the way he kept coughing and clearing his throat, had me in mind about this situation because I think you have a year to start dealing with something like this before it is too late legally, and they ejected me from the house on 18th/19th Jaunary last year.

I think . . . their stalking has served to deprive me of any feeling that I could cope with trying to seek justice and that they never intended that I should feel able to without them.

When I first heard someone say on Premier this morning that someone was being subjected to a ‘savage spiritual attack’ I felt that was what they have been doing to me.

I think . . . I am now never going to be able to recover from anything that has happened to me this year, and they won’t care.  They wanted to make me dependent on them so aimed at knocking out any feeling that it might be possible to seek legal help successfully. I might be wrong.

I think . . . John Pantry is deliberately using my style when he speaks prayer words for his emailers.

I think . . . people have been deliberately purring at me in my personality then purring things like ‘if you have a roof over your head, be grateful’, making me feel I should be grateful for a place where I am subjected to such serious harassment day after day that I can’t cope with anything.

I think . . . that yesterday Colin Dye in the 11 am service after the 9 am which they chose not to stream yesterday, obviously used his little story about the lonely female amoeba to talk about me.  Check it out at http://www.KT.org/media.  It wil be up there soon if it isn’t now.

I think . . . this kind of communication is not aimed at me to try and win me, but aimed at people he wants to despise me.  I think this kind of thing and the violence they use in their communication, both obvious and not so obvious, are designed to help them keep control and keep the power flowing.  When it is happening, and they are using things about me as access points, I look back and see it was at about that time that I began to feel a need to vent myself.  I think, having experienced this, that this might be exactly the kind of thing that Susan Boyle, a composite personality of me and my next door neighbour, might have been experiencing in all the things I have seen being reported about her meltdowns.  I’ve said this kind of thing before to my mental health team and I can only assume that, if they have any kind of education about anything, the reason they refused to understand what I was saying was because they just didn’t want to know or to acknowledge everything else they have known and understood for years.

I think . . . Premier has abandoned its remit to the church in favour of courting other celebrities and personalities who are not even Christian.  In their dishonesty and criminality and pretence they have lost the plot and are betraying their listeners and also the non-Christian celebrities they promote and pursue.  (Erm . . . is this supposed to be a reflection of me, or what?)

I think . . . they get into their Dagenham style performance character and you are never supposed to see them out of character.  Esther began to slip this morning, and John helped her back into character by addressing her with a character-appropriate name.  He was ostensibly talking to someone else, but the time and the tone and Esther’s immediate recovery of her performance character led me to believe there was more to it than that.  (this is supposed to be ministry, not theatre and performance?  they are presenting as . . . I don’t know what they are presenting as, but I think the uninformed listener, viewer and participant is supposed to believe it is not a performance, and that is a lie).

I wish . . . I had never got involved with any of this.

I hope . . . I still can.

I believe and hope and think that I know . . . that is crazy thinking.  Its about arts and media.  It’s an arts and media coterie fight for them.  Authenticity and truth and personal trustworthiness and true spirituality come after that and might somehow be things they manage to affect and pull off. 

(I think . . . these churches and this radio station stopped being a spiritual ministry ages ago, going instead for theatrical representations and namedropping, as they did this morning.  I heard them agree with each other to do that a few years ago.)  How did this paragraph get here and where did it start off?

I think . . . that will do for now.

His name is Esteban.

(Copy with some tags I had to exclude.  First published 11.08 am Bulgarian time.)

I watched the recording last night of last week’s sermon by Kristian Lythe.  I had forgotten his name, I’ve not seen or heard of him for ages.  But Kristian mentioned him in his sermon, he had made a traffic lights illustration.  He was saying something about red lights, among other things.  I don’t know how much of the sermon I would need to talk about to have you understand.  It can be found at http://www.kt.org/media. (note: please don’t be distracted by the shouting and his insistence on having the word of the Lord or anything else you see and hear.  If any of it is true [how much of it can be?] it is still not the point).

I don’t know how they get hold of information like this about people in my life, but it particularly concerns me that they have sufficient information about this man, Dr Gallo, to use a lookalike of him. Maybe my concern and the way I am handling it are stupid, selfish, treacherous and ungrateful.  I was assuming that they had the information through having had direct communication with Dr Gallo, but that might not be true.   But if it is true, although personally and emotionally I would like to come out and patch things up, I really think there is cause for concern here.  They had told me to leave the church.  I haven’t been there for over a decade.

What are they doing with something like this, it is none of their business, and neither Dr Gallo nor anyone else has ever brought this connection up with me. I’ve known for ages they do the same things with close family and past friends and acquaintances.  As I have said before, I do feel love and I do feel loyalty, but this is stalking, in a way the psychiatric team has told me doesn’t happen, or at least, isn’t happening to me, and they have partly based their diagnosis on my insistence that it does and is.

My Christian response is my biggest felt response, but also I need to keep identification with others in the psychiatric patient community (excuse terminology, maybe I should talk more in terms of mathematical sets, for which being a part of one doesn’t necessarily imply relationship)  and recognise that this is stalking, it is a step, or more like several steps, too far in ruling a church and church discipline and discipleship, I need to employ the term ‘heavy shepherding’ because people recognise it, and recognise myself that this is what is happening in this situation.

They and other churches I’ve been involved with have been challenged many, many times by me about this, in emails, through my blog, and emails are not answered and no conversation entered into through my blog.  David Shearman’s church bounces my emails back to me, whether I have mentioned his name or not in the address or body of my email (I no longer send them and have assigned any responses to ones I do send to the spam folder) saying david.shearman@christian-centre.org is not a valid email address.  If this is supposed to be heart talk for please come home, then I am sorry, and it is probably my loss.  That email address used to be valid, I don’t know if it is only me that gets that kind of response, or used to until I stopped emailing.

I’m very, very sorry, but this is awful.  I feel awful for handling it this way.  I’m not even fully convinced that they are wrong to do this anymore, and that is one of the reasons I need feedback and help from people in whom I have expressed trust who might be more convinced than I am.  I am too emotionally caught up to fight, and the way my readers distance me, on the whole, makes that worse. These people know who they are, and some of them know I love them because I believe they are the sort of people who would want to help and not cause injury.

I might be mistaken in my assessment, in fact at the moment I would like to cause injury myself and have obviously felt that way for ages.  I don’t think in a situation like this that makes me nuts or dangerous, even if under extreme provocation and in distress I even employ gestures to demonstrate how I feel when everything else is ignored.  When I was a kid ‘I’ll kill you’ meant ‘you have gone too far’, not ‘you’d better take steps to separate yourself from me and protect yourself’.  It might be crass and it might not be used in the kindest of relationships, but that is still the way it is for plenty of people who are not considered to be in need of incarceration.  I had it said to me plenty of times.  I’ve never thought of considering that anyone who said it should be locked up.  But maybe I should, on hindsight.  It is emotional thuggery if nothing else.

Ps I have heard Christian leaders involved in this say ‘prove it’.  In something like this that is neither honorable nor Christian.  Robb Thompson was one of them.  He might have been talking about something else.

Tommy, I really do believe this is something that needs to be dealt with, not only for my sake, but for that of others as well.  You have taught me well on that and I’m grateful (even if I don’t always feel I like you very much).  It is as close as a church can get to kidnap.  I know even this gesture towards you rather than coming to you directly is enough to break trust.  I feel that and it feels irrevocable. Partly I feel I’m disempowering myself in any way I could relate to you, and I believe you also need me to be empowered in any relationship we might have, as I need it myself.  So maybe this is just useless empty gesture time again.  I am implicating you, but I’m implicating you to try to empower you, if you think that is something I’m capable of.

What I was saying in my happy new year post.

About people saying ‘out’ on the news.

I was just watching BBC World News, a programme called ‘The Business Report’, or something like that.  5.30 pm UK time.

What happened?  Well, without going into the significance of it all, this man came on talking about the eurozone, and all of a sudden, for the first time since my post, although it is their policy to do this (it’s a distracting policy, and whoever it is aimed at, no one should have to deal with it, and everyone does) Tanya Beckett was saying ‘out’ in that almost vomiting, violent, aggressive and angry way they do, the man was in immeidately afterwards and he did a deliberate ‘camp’, Tanya Beckett said ‘back’ in the same way they say ‘out’ (they always do this too, and to me it is a body part reference (I’ve had exposure to therapy and to schools of psychology, and my college lecturer was particularly into Jung, I suggest you read some and then you might recognise more than you possibly do at the moment).  They make lots of body part references.  Sometimes they are only discernible because of the surreptitious tones and body language that accompany them.  I suppose you would have to be me to understand what I do.  At the end he went back into a camp queen face, and he shook his head from side to side in the same way that Bulgarians do for yes.

OK, now I feel like queen bitch and traitor to someone who might need anonymity in order to offer help.  That’s that one messed up, just like the others I’ve messed up.  I just find the outs and the backs and the psychological violence and aggression so offensive and outrageous and impossible to cope with I don’t care what they are trying to offer.  It’s almost like force.  Work you over then make you an offer and you’re supposed to have their hand off.  I think that’s called hardsell.  I was going to say ‘heavy salesmanship’, but realised I was mixing up my thinking with the term ‘heavy shepherding’.  That’s a different context.

So sorry guys if you are trying to help.  I’m not going to have your hand off, I’m going to say what you’re doing, because that’s what I do.  I think your assumption with the hardsell is that I and others need to be able to depend on you, rather than you depending on and trusting us.  The chase, the hardsell, the headhunting – whatever it is – the trickery, is that more like it?  I don’t know.  It’s all about you being the saviours in the starring roles.  So a person says please help, and your idea of helping is to media stalk them to gather information about them and about what is happening to them, and keep using it to call people who need to respond.  Or what?  Or you don’t help them.  Fucking stupid crap shit.  You don’t want to walk it through, walk with someone through the pain and hardship.  You just want it to be part of your media career.  Someone needs your love and friendship.  You make your stalking appear as if that is what you are offering.

I know about the media and its informative role.  Recently there was something in a trailer about ‘how do reporters feel about some of the things they have to photograph?’

While I see the necessity to inform, I was thinking a little before that, that to stand in front of people in distress with a camera, who look at the camera nonplussed as if they are looking to it for assistance, and then wondering what it’s all about, and then looking downright skeptical about your role and stance, and turning away in disgust, disappointment and confusion – back to their famine conditions, or similar extremity – to me it seems indecent.  I’m assuming if people were doing practical things to help and not just filming, they wouldn’t be getting those kinds of reactions.  It does seem, on the face of it, grossly indecent and insensitive to me.  Or a child whose face opens up in receptiveness to love and is met with something so hard that their face and their eyes close down.

I was reading in Ephesians yesterday.  I got to the part where it said that it is shameful even to speak of the things they do in secret.  I think I picked up the impression somewhere that it was talking about sexual practices,  probably from the fact that I thought about it in the context of the expression ‘in the privacy of your own home’.  But yesterday I saw it differently.

Things done in secret.  Subliminals.  It’s shameful even to speak of them.  For two reasons I can think of.

1.  They mix it so you will feel ashamed if you say anything.  A bit like these Bulgarian thugs, in fact.   And they go silent to leave you to deal with what they have done in the same way.  And when you start to think or relax or receive, they start to knock.  They feel it, and they start knocking.  These people are punitive.  They take the worst thing you have said in response to their own abuse, say it back at you in a tone approaching your own voice, and then say hallelujah, laughing and mocking, apparently.  Is this demonic mockery or is it supposed to be some sort of Christian discipline and correction here?  From men who have just been extremely invasive and abusive?  I think it’s more likely to be a way men break down women to make them obedient slaves for sex trafficking.

I want to cry to my friends for help, but my friends are my stalkers.  Oh my God!  And they stand by indifferent and impassive, watching it happen, letting it happen, saying ‘come’, and making the kinds of appeals which make them look pretty and attractive.  Nothing devastating for them.  Nothing harrowing and horrifying and terrifying, leaving them looking and feeling totally and irrevocably ravaged.  Just a lovely, deeply attractive and winsome, sweet and gentle grief, the sort of thing that comes from a mental understanding, if it can be called that, but nothing really experiential, and it is probably dispensed with in bed with their partners, or maybe even earlier at the dinner table, in the daily disciplines of family life or friendship, if they are observed.  They are making sport of my life and sanity.

That’s only one.  I’ve just had an outbreak of stupidity, verbal violence, banging, accusations and hallelujahs from the men in the rooms near me.  These fucking sick dogs.  God knows what they’re here for.  I wonder if they have ever physically raped a woman?  Apparently a lot of people come to this country for sex.  This is a degraded and degrading place, for all it’s natural beauty.  I asked to be moved last might to a place where I could sleep, at 1.30 in the morning, without this happening to me.  But it has got worse.  Are these mafia people?  I think they might be.  It happened to me at the Vitosha Park Hotel as well.

So here I am again, I can’t think.  Another Bulgarian stalking, computer-hacking media coup?  It happens all the time.  How many mafia people are involved in the media?  I don’t know.  The doctor’s daughter on the bus warned me they control everything.  I’m frightened now.  Now they are quiet.  What might happen in the night?  Oh God, help me!  No one is trustworthy here, and especially not police agencies.  If you want to help, get me out of here.  Now.  With proper legal commitment, and without using the mental health act.  Or they just might kill me.  I’ve been too scared today to go out and eat.  Not only of humiliation, but of possible physical violence, since they are violent in every other way, sometimes even physically as I already know.  Maybe not much different from England.  Metaphorically speaking, of course.  May God judge the politicians of my country for allowing this to happen to me, both here and at home.

Ephesians says have nothing to do with these acts of darkness, but rather expose them, and that light exposes.  And it does, if you don’t lock everyone up who shines the light.  But the Bible says that people love darkness more than light, and won’t come to it, because their deeds are evil, and they fear exposure.  Look what they did to Jeremiah.  I don’t think all the prophets got that treatment.  People did kill prophets, but I thought the culture respected their place.  Kings consulted the prophets and asked if there was any word from the LORD.  And their words were respected and things happened.  If there was a word from the LORD it happened, in judgment and healing.  Now people say ‘are you hearing voices’, and lock you up and make you take drugs, the legalised abuse, not to mention the illegal abuse.

I posted my first version of this prematurely but deliberately, because I was really afraid of what might happen to me here.  I switched on CNN when my computer crashed as I was trying to finish it, and a man in glasses fired off several obvious references to what I had said in my post, then turned a straight and rigid back and walked with it.  That’s the kind of violence I’m talking about.  And it is turned to look like caring, but they are just stealing spiritual energy, and when they get that, job done, as far as they are concerned.  No help materialises.  It’s illusory and seductive, and deliberately so on both counts.  What’s the message, ‘wait right there?’  Are they fucking joking?  Wait, and wait, and wait, for how many years now?  It’s indecent.  ‘Tis a puzzlement (The King And I).  It’s lies, it has to be lies, or why don’t they do something really constructive and life-changing for the people they are tapping?  Hmm?

Hey Cinders – answers on a postcard, please!  Oh my golly gosh lol.  Happy hearts are grateful hearts, happy hearts are grateful for everything.  We’re walking in the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind.  Everything’s sunny, we’re grateful for everything, the only thing that could possibly ever be wrong is our attitude, if we complain about things.  I think I was a target for that song, wasn’t I?  Cindy girl, Reverend Gravitas Cindy Kent?  Taunter, teaser and stalker.  Please talk about it, I’m so sure it is something people will want to know about.  Especially since you have tried to keep it hidden.  Now that IS worrying.  I think so.  Sorry, I don’t think I can get your programme here.  It’s specific to UK DAB.  At the very least, your policy was, as was many others’, ‘she has to respond to the performance or she doesn’t get it’ (the help).  Were you just stalking by reference to the things you ‘legitimately’ knew, or were you involved in the computer hacking and phone tapping as well?  Like Dave Rose (he is/was, isn’t/wasn’t he?) and others?

The violence and people’s indifference has got to me.  I wasn’t planning on any of this last stuff.  But ‘killing my darlings’ – is that responsible when your darlings have already been seen by hackers?  This guilt I feel that I don’t abandon the writing and seek the people out.  The stalkers and tormenters.  That would be validating the crime.  Validating the people who don’t want to be punished for their crime by responding to them as if their authority is legitimate.  I will be seen in a worse light for publishing than you will be because of anything I’ve written.  I’ll just be seen as a sick, raging, revengeful woman.  They think they know you and adore you.  And the timid squeak turned to something more devastating to me along the way.

Coded Communication

The reason I disagree with this, from people with power and authority towards people who have been through the mental health system, is that my experience of the mental health system is that they insist it doesn’t happen, and if you say it does it is evidence of mental illness.

My experience of the people who use this form of communication is that they do so in order to be able to insist that you respond on their terms and they get involved on their own terms, otherwise they won’t even acknowledge the communication.  They will stand by and look on silently and impassively as they order you to be taken away.

Their assumed right to do this also assumes that they know everything they need to know to make a decision about a person.  Erm . . . that would make them God, then?

I’m in a dilemma over this.  I’m sure that most of them believe that what they are doing is right.  But I would like to e able to say that the reason I feel so strongly against it is that I have fallen prey of evil people who have perverted its use, but those people would not accept that description and assessment of themselves, and neither would most ‘decent, upstanding people’ accept it of them.

I do feel love, I do feel loyalty, I believe very much in obedience to authority.  I think I do, anyway.  So when I don’t respond to this, I believe it says something bad about me, and I think that is how they see it too.

Am I a person being abused, or am I just a rebel who needs to learn to respect those in authority? If I go to the people I rebel against in tears, will they heal me?  I certainly seem to be making life very hard for myself.  That is the position they take.

The problem is, for me and other survivors of the mental health system, the government validates and upholds the system which says believing we are being communicated with in this way is evidence of mental illness.

So what is the definition of mental illness? Is it, for someone like me, that I want to do what I want to do on my own terms, not on the terms of those who use their form of communication to be able to opt out of committment to a response from the person which is other than they want?  To me, it looks that way.

I thought that living in a democracy meant you could do anything you want to, within the law, on your own terms unless, discounting assault, someone with authority stops you with good reason and in an acceptable way, which, to me in a situation like this, would be with the personal commitment of being explicit about what you are saying, about who you are saying it to, and about what you want, so that everyone watching and listening, including the person themselves, knows what you have said and who you have said it to.

I feel I could just go walking up to these people, at the moment, and find myself embraced and accepted.  That makes me feel that I should drop my insistence that people in authority should not communicate with those without power and authority in code, whatever the communication.  I think they would say it is about testing the heart.  When I started writing this I was ready to maintain that it is an attempt to control a person inappropriately rather than to control a situation and recognise the person’s rights to their own terms of action and understanding. I wonder what kind of Britain it is that would be put at risk by recognising these rights and not acting against them.

I believe that no one in authority who upholds the mental health system has a right to use this form of communication with someone who knows that if there response is considered unacceptable they could well end up back in hospital.  I also wish to maintain that they have no right to take an individual out of that group and try and make them feel secure enough to leave the others behind. if they can do it for one, they can do it for all.  I believe the way to do that for this kind of situation is to make it clear that the mental health practitioners are wrong in their assertions and actions towards people who believe they are being communicated with using any kind of code.

Coded communication I am aware of and that I know others are aware of embraces things like parable, metaphor, storytelling, drama – seeds planted that go for the heart and conscience and which bypass the process of logic.  I heard on Premier Radio that it was C S Lewis who said that was the function of his stories, and Premier Radio accepted the validity and desirability of that without question.

My own life experience, and that of many others, I have to assume,  is that that is not something we have been brought up with with any awareness or security or understanding. That being the case, it is wrong to invalidate us and superimpose it on us at will.

I think that, in most situations, employing means to move the will through the heart bypassing the mind is assuming far too much power.  It assumes too much personal purity and knowledge.

I’m Sue Barnett.  I’m trying to survive the mental health system threat, and until people insisted on knowing everything about me, I was a survivor of sexual and other forms of abuse.  I was satisfied that, as a Christian, the new had come and the old had gone, and that there were some things I didn’t need to talk about.   Because other people were not, and were not prepared to say that to me or to tell me what it was they were concerned about, I have been made a victim of the mental health system and of everyone who is happy to have that fear as a form of control over me because it makes their job easier.  I have been made a victim by people in authority who have used this extreme form of force and invalidation to compensate for their own cowardice, anger and unwillingness to be open without taking control.

The truth is, however I feel, the life I could have known will now never exist.  For them, knowing that I have been a victim of sexual abuse makes them believe they need to take another look and try to restore the relationship, maybe try to help me and so expiate their guilty feelings.  Some want to work even harder to cover what they have done, and so present as believing they need to be even more insistent on the form of communication they are using which will not cover the person who responds to it in the eyes of the mental health system, if the communicators don’t find the response acceptable.  They can invest it with whatever tone or expression of love, authority, disapproval, anger, cajoling, humour, twitting, triumph, positive disengagement they want to, the form of communication is still as compromising to its recipient.

If they want me to go home, the right way to communicate that is to tell me so openly and formally, either giving reasons or saying that they can’t, and to tell me what kind of provision will be made for me if I do what they ask me and what else they want to happen and don’t want to happen, in terms of – well, not knowing whether or not they want to arrest me is one of my greatest anxieties.  Will anyone meet me at the airport and, if so, who and for what purpose?  How will I know them, and that they are who they say they are and want what they say they want?

With good reason I am afraid of force and of violence and of being taken into any kind of detention when no one has told me to expect it.  Making people live with that has to be wrong, in most cases, if not all.  They tell us that if we treat them with respect we will be respected.  Hm. A very easy equation to make, and also one which they don’t impose that often on themselves in any kind of requirement to be the first to show respect in a relationship which has broken down.

Christmas is here.  I feel as if I have deprived myself.  But I believe that other people have been watching my actions with cynicism they have attributed to me.  They seem to think I have done some hard and necessary things just because it is Christmas and I want to have a good one, so they are treating my actions and communications with cynicism and not even acknowledging them.  To me, that makes them the problem, because I don’t work that way.  I would not seek resolution of serious issues involving other people with an eye to having it out of the way by Christmas.  I recently contacted the police complaints department for an update on a complaint they have allowed to lapse for several months without communication.  That was a week ago.  In spite of the seriousness and distressing nature of what is involved, I have still received no reply, and I really believe, given the way they have handled all other communication I have made on this matter, that they have decided I can wait until after Christmas because if I thought I should be able to get it out of the way before then they are going to teach me I can’t do things at my own convenience.  I didn’t even think of Christmas.  I did what I knew I had to do at the time.  If this is the approach they are taking towards me, it is their cynicism, not mine, and is completely contemptuous.  There might be another reason but, if there is, they are not exactly showing any human concern.  I haven’t even had an acknowledgement of the email I sent them, let alone an update.  This must be wrong, especially when I first started trying to deal with it back in March 2009 and they have failed to deliver in terms of the way they said they were going to handle it, even after many attempts to get a clarification.  I’m wondering why I am being held hostage in this way and why I, as the person who made the report and has later complained about the way it has been handled from start to finish in the way they have treated me, am being made to feel as if I don’t matter.  It appears to me that they MUST be trying to hide something.  If they are waiting for me to be prepared to deal with it in the way they think I should be, that is awfully patronising and shows incompetence rather than anything else.  I’ve made the report.  I’ve made the complaint.  I am being ignored on one hand and being put under pressure on the other while they wait for – what?  Perfection in the way I go about things and the way I express my feelings over the situation before they will allow any resolution or progress or closure?  These people, whose officers have been exposed for rape and other misdemeanours?  They think they have a right to hold me, someone who went to them voluntarily, hostage?

You daren’t say too much against these people.  They have ways of making you pay.  Violence, neglect, incarceration under the mental health act, leaving you to deal with abuse and vigilantism in the neighbourhood.  Would they take out a contract on my life?  Would they physically have me killed?  I really don’t know.

Edit note: 11.36 am Bulgarian time:

This post didn’t appear under it’s assigned categories and tags for several minutes.  I thought it wasn’t going to, so I contacted WordPress to ask why.

When I finished (perhaps this is what is commonly called ‘paranoia’, but I don’t think so, though I am in the city centre, more or less), a police car came past with its siren wailing.  It stopped and started and stopped and started, sort, long, it felt deliberately timed and mocking, angry, harassing and threatening.

Now I’m angry.  MY anger is not acceptable, so I am also afraid.  In the light of everything that has happened this year – should I just laugh at myself and stop being so precious and pretentious?  It looks as if I am being targeted for deliberate harassment.  If the action is deliberate, harassment might not be their motivation, it is just the quickest interpretation people arrive at. But whatever the motivation, if it IS deliberate, it is experienced as harassment and contempt and provocation, and knowing that might be what they want, I am angry, and sick with fear because of that possibility.  Because when that happens, it is normal, and right, to want to confront the human beings responsible.  But if I did I would come off worst.  That is how people become mentally ill.  Not being allowed to confront what is wrong with what is right, and having to pretend compliance where it is absolutely wrong, in the face of authorities and powerful organisations and individuals who pretend they are not doing what they most obviously and certainly seem to be doing.  I’m afraid, because they might be using this kind of activity towards me to get me to reveal my identity and whereabouts.  Even though my landlord, I think, has to give them that information anyway.  I’m afraid because, when I think I am wrong, I feel it deeply, and they make me feel that way all the time.  I’m afraid because my normal mode is love and respect, and they seem to enjoy invalidating that, or misappropriating it.  I feel stupid.  I think that is what they want me to feel.  Back off and watch a woman being abused and wait until she cries for help, realising how right they really are and acknowledging how wrong she really is.

Um . . .

Why don’t I check things properly?  Julian Assange is a computer hacker.  Hacking computers is a crime, and should be whoever does it.  Even the state.  It’s reduced us to the level of wrestling in mud.  FGS.

It’s complicated for me.  The writing of this post is a little distracted by the fact that I have a Napster automix playing, but I don’t want to turn it off.

I’ve been asking the people I have been looking to for support to contact me properly and legally for ages.  They don’t.  I don’t know how many of them are involved in computer hacking themselves.  I don’t know how much ‘support’ I have mistakenly believed I am receiving from the fruits of said hacking.

We need to get back to principle. Argument from principle, not pinning people to the wall with the results of our hacking (which I don’t do, and wouldn’t if I could).

Especially while we have forums like this for open communication.  If we argue from principle, and we do it openly, people will be forced to take notice.  Anything else is deeply abusive and irresponsible, even and especially from government agencies.

I think if we argue from principle things are going to come out anyway.  It is urgent and imperative that we do so, keep at it and do not give up.  If these buggers don’t listen, there is something wrong with them.  And that is something they need to hear and that we need to understand and be confident in asserting.

I still identify a lot with Julian Assange.  He looks as emotionally vulnerable as me.  what is happening on a spiritual level is weird.  Every time I get a hold on a new thought and want to run with it, one of my neighbours says something loudly.  I don’t think it is just in my head.  I think it must happen to other people as well.

For me, I know and feel I am in deep trouble, within myself, if not in any other way.  It is these phenomena which are keeping me so emotionally raw.  Just when you think you have your own head space, someone invades it.  Their right to speak is not the issue.  The repeated timing of it is, it is freaky and debilitating.

I think they are doing to Julian Assange what they are doing to me.  I hope he isn’t aware of me as some people are, and deliberately reflecting me back at myself, as some people do.  That WOULD be stupid, if I have fallen for that.  If he is in as much emotional trouble as he seems to be, I feel for him.

Some really cute songs in this mix.  Specifically generated for Christmas.  I get obsessed and deprive myself of music, and that is bad for me.  It makes me feel at odds with everybody and that I can’t do what I am being asked to do. Listening to this is making me wish I had done what people have been asking me to do and then I might have had a decent Christmas.

I want to go home.  To London.  I’m frightened and embarrassed.  I feel that leaving was dishonorable.  Please note, I said I feel. The fact that I am verbalising a feeling does not mean that I am saying it is right and appropriate.  In a climate like this, you feel to the point of believing you know, that all kinds of things are right or wrong.  ‘Knowing’ beyond a doubt that the guilt you feel is entrirely right and appropriate is no indication that it is right at all.  But it is indistinguishable from the real thing.  Even legality can’t be the measure of what is appropriate or not, when people bend and construct the law to suit themselves.

Wikileaks Stopped Me Screaming

Thank you, Wikileaks.

I suppose because I heard what the leaks were, when they were about the US spying on the United Nations, and let’s just say I wasn’t impressed.  I suppose because I assumed that UK leaders knew about that and that if we were supposed to value our membership of the United Nations, and we were party to spying on them, I thought that was really grubby and hypocritical.  I was really pleased that it came out.  I have every reason to be sympathetic towards the United Nations over this issue, and for me the war with Iraq and with Afghanistan was illegal because it went against United Nations ruling. I don’t understand any more than that.  I bought the angle that Iraq is a sovereign nation and that we have no right to interfere in how they run their affairs.  And also I don’t believe that the war on terrorism can be a literal war.  And what is shock and awe, if it isn’t an act of terrorism?  Inwardly I was screaming no since before it started and as soon as they started talking about considering it.  I saw angry, hate driven men sitting around the tables on the television talking about what to do.  I saw men driven by a really dark and life-denying spirit.  All retaliation does is perpetuate a thing.  It might quell it momentarily and take away its figureheads, but it comes back, goes underground – what’s this stuff about Jerry Adams?  We know this kind of thing happens, even if it hasn’t happened in this case, which I don’t know because I haven’t kept up with the news.

People have been anti war for centuries, even millenia.  But they put all these august men in suits on the TV saying how the war is right and that we should be behind our boys.  I wonder if these people have any space in their lives for someone like Leo Tolstoy, or if they would make out they have if asked, even if they haven’t?  Leo Tolstoy was a pacifist.  I think he was also a Christian Anarchist, but I can’t remember.  I began to read one of his books last year.  Unfortunately I left my books in London.  I bought a one way ticket.  I thought I would be back within a month, my purchase under my belt.

I was really upset when I heard they wanted to arrest Julian Assange.  It certainly looks as if it is politically motivated.  I felt I owed him, and I can’t remember why.  John Major on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday put it down to youthful folly.  They weren’t his exact words but they meant the same.  That is really demeaning.  You can’t say you are pro democracy and take up a position like that as a leader.  Why put it down to youthfulness?  I assume Wikileaks people will continue to act on the same convictions when they are the same age as John Major and beyond that.  He puts it down to youthfulness because the voice of the war machine is the dominant voice in society.  If it wasn’t someone would be putting down going to war as youthful foolishness, which I believe it is.

Julian Assange, I salute you.

OMG!!!

First published 9th December 2010, after a post on veganism.

Edit:  This is a Sticky Post – Stuck to the front page for future reference.  It didn’t appear in any of the tag categories I selected, I assume because it has too many tags, although plenty of others that HAVE appeared have more than the 10 suggested in WordPress Help.

I brainstormed on the tags.  One reason I have stuck this on the front page, so you can search the categories any time, and so can I.  And what I say in this is relevant much of the time.   If you look at my tags in this you get an idea of how I think and feel about what is happening and how I think it should be perceived, understood and treated.

Spread the word, please, if you are with me.  Maybe if I break up the tags into easier to handle chunks I can get the post into all the categories I want, if I reproduce it or something.

Just listen to the sickly sweetness on Premier right now.  You have an hour.  I wouldn’t mind if it wasn’t criminally fuelled sarcasm, teasing and stalking.  They are not sincere people, even if they sound it.

Listen, you will hear them using my blog.  Even this.

They are taunting people, maybe me, with ‘Ah, you think YOU are always right, do you?’ But whether I am or not, I’m not using criminal means to enforce my opinion.  They are.  These Christians.  If you can’t win and you want to cry, mock and laugh, they say.  These carers for souls and God’s vision for humanity as a whole.  Unfit for purpose.

What’s it like, playing God? Esther says.  You’re asking the wrong person, Esther.  I wouldn’t know.  You would though, if you think He authorises the use of criminality and everything else in my tags to destroy a person.  Croaking and squeaking, most of it is deliberate and to hurt and offend FOR NO GOOD REASON EXCEPT TO WIN FOR YOUR ORGANISATION and you have no right to my sympathy.  I am not you, I am weak, you are abusing your position.

And you keep teasing, making out you’re going to comment or pass an opinion on what I say, but talk about something else.  I can hear the mockery in your voices, past experience of you all helps.

I love it when John Pantry gets hsi knickers in a twist about something being blatant.  If he’s talking about me, he’s projecting.  he is seeing things that were not intended at the time of writing, but I am awfully glad they are there.  But they weren’t intentional, so it is all, for him, a product of his mind, guilty and sneaky as it is.

Thank you for seeming sweet, guys, even if you are not.  We all need our illusions, especially at this time in the morning.  Pity mine don’t hold.

Got it – they are taking the message to their own consciences and forcing them outwards. That’s what this kind of Christianity does, all the time.  Look at the blogs, see how often they talk about they rather than I or we.  They think it is a sign of good authority to stand out in the street complaining loudly or pointing the finger, literally, in someone else’s face, a member of their congregation.  I’ve seen and heard it all, and deliberately recoil from and distance myself from it.  Buzz, buzz.

I’m being censored.  This doesn’t appear in any of my tag categories, 50 minutes on, and the Premier news just had something said with firm sternness about needing medical help.  It’s not new.  Maybe that is why Premier felt able to mock so freely and why it was so effective.  They caught me on my blind side.  I assumed it was going out and being shown in the categories.

Rick Easter, I have no responsibility.  I’ve already tried to meet it many times over, and you continue to taunt and terrorise based on the consequences.  You are angry, degrading people.

I really hate it when I hear leaders moralising and laying down the law as though they themselves are paragons of virtue who have never done anything wrong.

Even if the violence on the student marches is purely politically motivated by a subversive minority and there is no real emotion of anger or frustration behind it, our leaders are laying blame with the protesters and denouncing it as if their own lives are and always have been pure.

Have you conveniently forgotten the violence and neglect of the state powers towards some of its people?  The lies and the smears and the cover ups and the subliminal abuses no one can get you for but that make them feel the most angry?

Also, I’m wondering if David Cameron has EVER, at ANY time in his life, acted out his own anger in a way which he believes should be condemned.

Identifying with people in their anger to the point of personal vulnerability often has a far more calming and reconciling effect than denouncing and blaming.  That’s what I think.  I might be wrong.  it’s an impression I got listening to Tommy Boyd’s Angry Hour, when he did it.  It worked for me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wlg97/Have_I_Got_News_for_You_Series_40_Episode_9/

Yesterday I made 3 blog posts, and this week, including yesterday, I have done some searches on my tags and read some interesting stuff, mainly around religion, psychology and philosophy.

This programme is interesting to me at this time.  I always feel for people who appear to be in distress, and some of these people did.  Miranda Hart is a new name to me.  I’ve just discovered she is a comedienne trained in acting and in politics whose father held a position in the Royal Navy at the time of the Falklands war.  Nice.  A bit of class.  And they ended with pandas.  I like pandas.  And I learned there is a backbencher called Alan Futhermucker (or was that a joke? It was said in the context of a newsreader making what was, for him, a distressing and embarrassing mistake over Jeremy Hunt’s name.  The poor newsreader was mortified.

So why has the BBC squawked over the whole tone of the programme at the end with metallic and empty twitter from a girl talking about the next programme?  Is this the BBC saying, ‘we give you the platform and we set the boundaries.  We control perceptions.’?

I know this happens on the television when it is television, but on the internet recordings we don’t get that throw forward, as it is called.  Not normally.  This is the first time I have seen or heard it with an iPlayer TV programme.

So why now?  I hope it isn’t something we can expect on all future programmes.

The thing is, they are smashing at people’s minds and ability to think, including mine.  The jarring is deliberate, the timings, I believe, are deliberate, never quite enough time to ‘be with’ anything.  They say it is because our attention spans are not that long and that they are accommodating that ‘fact’, but if that is really what they think and why they do it, there is a sizable and voluble section of the population that is saying, ‘hang on, this is dumb down stuff’.  I am part of that section.  I’m not one of the people who doesn’t care about that, I care very much and object strongly, just on the general level.

As someone who is actively being targeted for stalking or whatever people want me to call it (stalking isn’t a very nice word and we are all lovely people) I find it particularly chilling, infuriating and petrifying.

I find it grievous too, because having just turned 50, I’m looking back and blaming myself for having allowed them to invade and control my life, and limit it, to the extent that they have.  In the coolness of thought, with everything that was happening to me and around me with family and neighbours and other contacts and acquaintances, I had no choice but to give attention to what was happening, and it did set out to make a grab for me.

As I’ve said before, I’ve asked over and over and over again for people to make proper contact through normal recognised channels of communication, and on the very few occasions that someone has their communication has seemed to me to be controlling and evasive of the issues.  Most of the time people don’t.

The whole thing has left me feeling that I have been too relaxed and happy and chilled for people’s comfort, so they set out first of all to destroy me emotionally and have me blame myself for it (or other members of my family or friends), then they can easily go for my underbelly, or jugular, and ruin my reputation (ha ha!) or make me do so myself.

Sometimes I look at what I’m feeling and the areas of personal development I feel I need to work on and think it is more appropriate to teenage angst than it is to a woman in her 50s.  I mean, I’m over the hill, man.  I’m Saga age!  People were talking about retiring at 55 yesterday.

I look at my attitude and realise it has become as unattractive and disrespectful as what I have constantly been fed exposed to.  For me, disrespect is not a gateway to answers.

I’m thinking about the student marches.  More later.  Except the same things that shape me shape them.  It’s obviously because I’m 50 years old.  I once had an employer who had a student or graduate customer come in all the time and tell him how to change his business.  It infuriated him.  He kept saying things like, ‘bloody kids, you can’t tell them anything.  Coming in and telling me how to run my business.  They think they know it all’.

Our young students are the same.  Who has taught them this invective and rhetoric?  Do they think they are thinking for themselves?  They are trying so hard to be the young, bright, entitled people they have been taught to believe they are in the face of a government which is now saying they are not, in effect, if not by intention.

We talk about reason and debate.  Why are these poor young kids with no idea of the world having to fight this on their own with such shoddy weapons, risking arrest?  Are the parents not voluble, or is it just that the media isn’t letting us see that bit?  Why are the marches being shown and, it could be said, glorified, but no one is saying anything about the parents and their role to fight for their children’s future?

These children are not independent.  Their futures are under threat.  And they don’t really understand what they are dealing with.  That isn’t their fault, they are young. They just haven’t been around long enough, no matter how well-informed they think they are.  I really hope there is a strong parent movement behind them.  This is not a battle they should have to fight on their own.  It needs people who know and understand and who command respect, who can’t be fobbed off because of their youth and inexperience, although some of them might be got on their posturing, just like the kids.  Where do we think the kids get it from?

But I don’t know, either.  I heard someone say that in paying back the student debt if they earn over £21,000, they will be hampered in their abilities to establish a home.  But I don’t know if that is true.  Because I don’t know how much they will be expected to pay back each time they have to make the payments, I don’t know what the general cost of living will be, I don’t know what will have happened to house prices.

Eee by gum, talk about sensationalism.  Or is it just my own ignorance of facts that are readily available?

We’ve had a lot of witchcraft imagery in the media lately.  When the Pope came, on the first day he or some high official was confronted by a reporter called LeVey, or McVey, or something.  Anton LeVey wrote the Satanist Bible, I think.  In that same first programme I think it was Hew Edwards who was talking about cauldrons.  Or maybe it was someone else.  I might be getting him mixed up with someone else because, when the woman who used to be a nun and was part of the on screen discussion group said ‘It’s a big ask’, he rapidly took control of that.  I’ve always thought it was supposed to sound like ‘a big arse’ (unacceptable in UK) ass (unacceptable to US readers)  arse/ass, both common in children’s playgrounds.  But this woman said it innocently and for some reason Hew Edwards took it away from her  I think that was where the cauldrons bit came in, straight after.

I’ve noticed this a lot, when someone says something innocent which has previously been perverted/subverted by the media, or some people in it, the innocent use is treated with embarrassment and consternation, and attention taken away from it as quickly as possible.

Anyway, that will do for now.  I don’t want to be rude, but I have to be busy this morning.  I feel as if I have just shot myself in the foot.  that if I disconnected more respectfully, acknowledging I have no right to be in my present position and therefore ‘busy’ in the first place, someone would say I am now ready to be helped and swoop down and help me, send me an email or something.  As long as they don’t arrive at my door to take me into custody, but at the moment I feel I would even be willing to face that, but that isn’t allowing for the level of intimidation people might use in that kind of situation.  Some people turn into savages when faced with a decent and reasonable person they have been told to arrest or put in hospital.  I know.  I do feel like a bad person though, taking my country for a ride, so maybe even that shouldn’t be a problem to me.  Usually though my fear is that they are going to get physical, and I can’t control my feelings, both of fear and outrage.  And I try to resort to reason as well, and find the attempt is despised.

I’m desperate.  Is anyone going to make proper contact and give me an official way out?  Even if the way out is arrest and prison.  It’s better than this uncertainty and feeling of cheating all the time.  It has to be.

THAT Was Ages Ago!

I was just thinking about something I read or heard that, after a couple of years being a vegetarian or vegan, your body loses the ability to process non-vegetarian/vegan food sources.  I felt slightly worried, just in case it really should turn out that you need animal nutrition to be healthy, and what would I do if my body couldn’t even cope with it?

Then I thought of the days when I was fascinated by the fact that Pete Murray was a vegetarian, and wondered how he could possibly do it, and thought it couldn’t be possible, and that it was very interesting, but scary territory, and very much ‘out there’.  It wasn’t something I could ever do. People like me can’t.

I went to Happy Grill the other day, for a cup of coffee.  I decided to look at the menu, and decided that, as a vegan, I was in trouble.  I wanted everything I shouldn’t want.  Not just eggs, but meat and fish.  It felt like the most normal, natural and easy thing to do, just tuck into a chicken, meat or fish meal.  I am wishing I was still a fish eater, and am trying to justify a thought that I could keep my own egg producing hen.  With me it would be free and well cared for.

I also keep deciding it can’t be right, as a vegan.  I keep coming back to the belief that, if I do that, I will be validating the system of exploitation that gives me access to the hen in the first place.

But is it different in the countryside, and in Bulgaria?  Is it OK to eat animals and their products if the animal has a free and natural life?  Is being a vegan a bit extreme?

I sometimes feel it is, and that I am being stupid and depriving myself just because I said that I would be a vegan for life, and I don’t want to be teased about giving it up.  Why not, I don’t know, really.  Vegans are no nicer than – I was going to say ‘the rest of us’, this is not a good place for a vegan to be – anyone else, and there are more of us than there are of them, that is more meat eaters than vegans, and this is my thought process which, as a vegan, I’m not entitled to, but it is where I’m at.

OK, muddle.  I have not felt embraced by vegans, any more than by anyone else.  As a human and a vegan, I have felt enraged and deeply wounded and betrayed by this, because part of my vegan expectation is that people will matter to vegans as much as any other living creature does.  As a vegan, especially in Bulgaria, I am really lonely.

I don’t know what is wrong with the vegetarian/vegan people here.  Their prejudice and misogynistic hatred and contempt seem to run just as deep, if not deeper – I mean, if you are a vegetarian or vegan out of conviction, that’s a love stance, isn’t it?  So how can you be cruel/rejecting/controlling towards a human being, especially if they share your convictions and believe in and practise the lifestyle?  And if you claim to embrace a peaceful and loving spirituality to boot?

I wonder if they read this.  I wonder if the people the media continually directs my attention back to are really wanting me to go back to them? Because if they do and if they read this, I’d like to say to them,

‘wake up and smell the coffee, guys.  I am gutted and devastated by the way you have treated me in this, the way you have turned away from me and turned in on yourselves, the way you have accepted a bad report about me from people who have no right even to have access to some of the things they say, let alone be spreading them’.

Maybe I made a mistake.  I believed in the vegan community, the kind, compassionate, caring, Christian, spiritual community.  I saw the sharing of values as a bond and covenant of friendship.  I still do.

I was going to liken it to believing in the disabled community, or a racial or ethnic community, but about those things you have no choice.  But is it still true that, even given who you say you are in the paragraph above, it is no more covenantal than being disabled or of a particular ethnic background?

There is one thing we all are, and that is human.  But even that is not a respected covenant.  So just as I am not going to find a friend in every human being just because I am human (we might be different in every other way), it probably follows that I am not going to find a friend in every vegan or spiritual person and shouldn’t believe in the idea of community anymore than I should believe in a disabled community.  The fact that we share a situation or cause or believe we share a conviction doesn’t mean we have what it takes to be friends and find friends.

This is garbage, isn’t it?  It is also a place of real pain and heartbreak for me.  And parading it on a page on the internet makes me feel less able to deal with it in a way that might heal relationships in real life.  It’s about motive.  Who am I writing for, and why?  They have as much right to feel betrayed as I do, maybe, if not more.

Non-vegans tease you all the time, pushing the boundaries of what you will or won’t embrace as acceptable and your reasons.  A question I keep coming back to is, if some animals are bred only for their usefulness or food value, if we were all vegan would they all become extinct?  These lovely, fluffy lambs we don’t want to kill and eat, the horses and the donkeys we don’t want to exploit.  If they only existed in the wild, would they soon become extinct, and our lives be perceptibly poorer for their absence?

Another question: is using an electronic sound deterrent on household pests and vermin a form of animal cruelty?  I’ve got a rat or 2, they are getting bolder.  They do my bedroom now.  I read they don’t like peppermint, so I put some peppermint teabags out all around the kitchen, and at the hole I know about.  They shifted them out of the way and carried on regardless.  I can’t afford rat catchers all the time, and I think they would be unsympathetic to a vegan approach anyway, the only other option seems to be to let dogs and cats eat them.  Or kill them and leave them for me. Lovely!  And inconsistent, to my mind.  So what do you do?

East Midlands Today 24.11.2010

Edit note 26.11.2010

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00w5djf/East_Midlands_Today_25_11_2010/

These people are vicious.  Aggressively invasive and sexual gropers and hateful in every way.  Whatever they want, they and those like them, I oppose them as a point of principle.  The woman was wearing dress a bit like a kaftan I bought off ebay.  The one on a child called Chloe in Doctors was more like it, teamed with other personal details, as all these programmes are.  ‘I am you and you are me’, Tommy Boyd said.  That’s how these programmes work.  It’s like a personality mix and match or chop suey (get it?).  I took what Tommy said at a heart level, but perhaps he meant something else.

These human beings are acting like dogs, and that is grotesque.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00w5dj5/East_Midlands_Today_24_11_2010/

For some reason my link buttons are inaccessible, so I had to copy the link from the browser rather than use the short form provided by the BBC.

Dominic Heal looks like my grandad.  I pointed this out to an MEP I accidentally left a comment for (I didn’t know she was an MEP), and on the following Monday he was not there.

I decided to be sensible about it a couple of days after he came back.  I decided he is just a man in television doing his job, and it isn’t his fault that he looks like my grandad and has a name reminiscent of a pastor at Kensington Temple, Dominic, part of a church which believes in healing.

But I watched this today (it’s supposed to be available until about 7pm tonight and isn’t downloadable unless you can record it yourself), and it seems obvious to me that he knows and is fully aware of the role he is playing.

The programme features a woman, a senior citizen (must be politically correct) who was knocked down by a hit and run driver who had stolen a yellow dumper truck.  A lot like the one the people I stayed with in Wales have.

This kind of coincidental crime happens all the time, I remember another one which was also hit and run.  It was a car which had the number of my address on the back.  I’m not sure how that happened, the woman was run over by her own car, I think it was hit and run.

Anyone would think that, if I am a decent person, I will stop there.

But I started writing this post to complain.

I told Nick Ferrari on LBC that I hated cigarettes.  Since then programmes have constantly linked cigarettes with things that I enjoy, the mention of which will open me up, and then they come on with the cigarette reference, either in word or gesture.

On the show in this post, the hit and run was described as callous.  Possibly I was not intended to link this word with anything to do with me, but because what followed next came so hard after, in my mind I have linked it all together.

So in my mind, this man who looks like the grandad I never got on with while he was alive because he shouted and hit me is associated with calling me callous if I don’t respond to this on his terms.  They then went on to talk about honing your craft, and straight after he followed it up with a hand gesture as if he was holding a cigarette.

This kind of thing always knocks me for six.  But for the rest of the programme they were wheeling it round and at the end seemed to be asking for a confirmation of the incident (is that so, or something like that), a young black guy came on with the weather forecast in the way Tommy Boyd said he thought it should be done.  In my post yesterday I wrote about hospital.  Lewisham is a mixed race area with a lot of black people.  This was reflected on the ward, and the guy was close to tears.

Can you imagine how I feel challenging this?

They already know about the yellow truck.  I don’t know how.  I want to run to co-operate, but it is still stalking.  Why won’t they make normal contact?  Why do they need to take charge in this way, assuming an identity which isn’t their own to do it?

I was often in hospital because I insisted all this was happening.  Now they want me to validate it.

I keep hearing, ‘you’ve brought it on yourself’.  That isn’t true, and should never be said to any victim of any kind of abuse.

These things are happening because someone has made their own evil decision that they should.  I did not make them make that decision.  Nothing I have said or done could ever justify a decision like that from someone else.

It might be convenient for them to think I’ve brought it on myself, though.  That way they can be my rescuers to whom I should be grateful, and I can be their pawn as long as I’m not prepared to meet them on those terms.

Premeir talked this morning about be thankful to God for saving their life.  It sounded like a directive to me that I should be grateful because they have saved my life.  But it was them that put me in such dire straits in the first place.

I don’t know how long they have seen themselves as saving my life.  I think if they had given me the security I asked for in asking them to make proper contact with me it might not have needed to be saved.

Check out the strange body language, the theatrical flourishes etc, at the end of this news report.  Or is it just me?  It leaves me wanting to respond but forgetting what I am going to have to go through, 2000 miles away, in order to do so.

But he’s saying, ‘we’re here’.  Isn’t he?  But stalking and all that stuff for years isn’t just a technicality.  It can’t be.  He looks like my grandad.  I know it and he knows it.  That’s why it carries weight.  And I was 50 on the 24th.  Wow, that’s magic.  But enjoying it is just out of reach, and my birthday was the pits.

No more for now.  I’m too confused.

Big Daddy Weave – David Shearman or his dad.

Trust and Obey – My baptismal hymn

Doreen – me old mam

Stuttering – my uncle Frank

Celebrate Your Beautiful News – Happy 50th birthday?

How was I supposed to realise that?  It feels like my failure, but they already know I see what they are doing as stalking and psychological pressure when a proper, direct approach would be more appropriate in every way.

He’s playing immovable tank, just like Fred/George Stubbs, the man who bullied his way into a pastorate over a divided diaconate, taking presidence before he was even chosen by the congregation.

They went by do as you’re told without thinking about the technicalities.  Cliff and Rachel got everyone except 4 of us who attended the meeting (a lot had already left the church) on their side.

49 Or 50?

49 or 50?

(Or, as I heard a politician say today, neither fish nor foul!)

50 IS a special age.  If they say it isn’t, they’re lying.

I just thought I’d get this in now to be awkward – here in Bulgaria I am 50 years and 1 and a 1/2 hours old.  In the UK I am still 49.  Which counts and why?

When I realised I was 50, I smiled.  It was automatic.

Then I looked at where I am and felt suicidal (I’m not exaggerating).

I don’t know why or if I’m right (I’m probably not), but I believe 50 is God’s age.  That is, a special age to God.  It’s God’s reaching of majority.  5 is, my tradition tells me, the number of grace.

Whatever anyone might pray for me or try to bless me with in the future, no one can ever give me back the attaining of my 50th birthday.  That has gone.  Reconcile that for me someone, please.

I feel embarrassed making a big thing of this, because now I’m actually writing it doesn’t seem that important.  I also feel as if it is an insult to God to be so faithless for the future.

But I still felt that way, and it still is a big thing.

Check out WordPress’s Freshly Pressed.  Awesome.

PS Premier likes playing a song which I believe they are at least in part directing at me, and it’s a big part.  I can’t remember all the words I want, but it goes something like:

“I have come . . . down the road of my own mistakes . . . wasted years” etc.

For balance, I have to recognise that I am not their only intended audience, or at least I shouldn’t be.  They also play songs rejoicing and triumphing over enemies.

They say it is always your choice, and the bottom line is, that is true.  Sometimes the choice can cost you your life, and the church won’t be on your side.

It seems to me though to be a rather polarised approach to the human condition, including our spiritual condition. Blaming yourself for everything is no less the blame game than blaming other people.

I don’t know any more of this girl’s songs, but I hope that isn’t her settled position towards herself.  The Bible doesn’t mind saying that sometimes other people are to blame.

And the ‘blame game’ (I got that from Anne Coles).  Is it REALLY a game?  Isn’t it a necessary part of owning responsibility.

Blame isn’t a game, it really exists and needs to be dealt with in all healthy and growing relationships.  It is, or at least can be, a heartbreaking experience.  But surely nothing is more deadening to the soul and spirit than to live in a fuzzy, wooey, vibrating mulch where no one is allowed to recognise that blame exists, and also that it might not belong to them?

You can’t just say, ‘let’s not talk about it, let’s not play that game, let’s go and watch a film/go to a restaurant/go out witnessing.

Fuck me, you bloody can’t! (trans. I feel strongly about this and want to cry).

OK first impressions of last night’s show, but drawing on stuff I’ve known for ages.

Jack Straw introduced control orders.  I didn’t know that.  I also didn’t realise until fairly recently that I had been the subject of a limited(?) control order, although actually I think mine was more pernicious than what they say a full control order is, there was a denial that it was happening, and I kept being put in a mental hospital, and the media was on my case.  So while I did not have the physical accoutrements of a full control order – tagging, curfew (I had the phone and computer monitoring and probably hidden surveillance in my flat, even though I had my own sweep done for bugging devices and they said it was clean.  I asked about conflict of interests and everything and I knew they sold their services to bigger interests than mine, and if they were told to say they hadn’t found anything, that’s obviously what they would have done.  Maybe they took a chance on the probability that I wouldn’t conduct my own.  They also said that bugging devices are obvious.  I don’t know.  I have no experience or knowledge.) I did have those things effectively imposed by psychological means.  Unless I am exalting myself beyond measure.  Maybe I really am just a woman who has fallen by the wayside in the same normal, humdrum way as many others, and at this stage of my life I want someone to blame.  All I intend to say on this is, if I was subject to a control order, I was far too distracted to understand that that was what was happening to me, and everyone else in positions of immediate power in my situation affected by the media involvement was too busy playing hide and seek and blame the psycho to even think of involving me in what was happening at an early stage, even though they knew it was and I was open about the fact that I knew it was.  I just saw it as stalking.  I knew nothing of control orders.  The authorities didn’t want to know, I saw it as obviously criminal, and I had no one to turn to.

Some other things about Jack Straw.  I used to see this as just a winsome serendipity, but there is a pub in Hampstead called Jack Straw’s Castle (unless it has closed, I heard something to that effect).  When I was at college (when the degrees were handed out I was the last one on the platform because I got the lowest degree of my section, it’s not even honours), I spent a year obsessing over an essay on Thom Gunn, an English Poet who moved to California in America.  He has a book of poetry called Jack Straw’s Castle, named after one of his poems.  Jack Straw’s Castle was his local pub.  He died a few years ago.  The part of the essay title that got me was, ‘Wherever I am, I am what is missing’.  I didn’t have to use Thom Gunn’s poetry, but it is a quotation from one of his poems, and I did use his poetry.  It felt at the time like a very deep experience for me.  It took all my time and energy that year (worrying about it and working it) and I got nothing else done.  That’s why I didn’t even get Honours.  I think most of my essays were 2.1/2.2 standard.

Here, for me, is the heavy part about Jack Straw, the politician (These guys are asking for my surrender, and I am a surrender monkey.  This goes against the grain for me, and against my conscience).  He is a consumate actor.  He is doing my uncle to a tee.  The hunched-overness, the facial expressions, the vocal patterns and expressions.  At the beginning of the programme last night, he hunched over his notebook writing whatever in a way totally reminiscent of my uncle hunched over his racing form book.  But there was guilt flashing around all over that studio last night. Watch him carefully, and you will see he sometimes loses the act and straightens up physically and poshes/intellectuals out in his bearing and air.

I believe, from the last time I was with my uncle, that he is having the same problems I am.  I do not know how Jack Straw has got hold of this impression of my uncle, but from what they were saying about control orders last night, it made me think my uncle has also been a subject of surveillance.  I may be wrong.  That’s where the ‘invading family life’ bit of my post title comes in.  My uncle’s name is Frank.

Liberty was also represented there.  I have written to them twice since I have been here.  The first time I got an answer saying that it wasn’t the kind of thing they dealt with, and the second time I got no answer.  I had asked to be put in touch with Shami Chakrabarti.  I had seen her apparently being worked over, so it looked to me at the time, by Jeremy Paxman.  To me it is obvious that she is aware of my communication.  She didn’t appear to be thinking very clearly last night on the subject of votes to prisoners, for a human rights campaigner.  perhaps i have given her more credit than she is due.  As someone who has had some teaching on how to read literature and presentations, and as someone who has been involved in performance arts, I think I can say that I know they were working the audience.

I’ve only watched the programme once so far, but she was giving the performance of her life.  When she adopted the little girl lost tone when she said, ‘what, all of them?’, over the loss of rights in prison, the audience was right there with her.  There was a definite, sympathetic attention shift.  And that is what they were looking for.  The dictat is ‘keep smiling, keep talking’, but all the time your mind is working and you know what you are looking for, at least, that is how it was last night, I am fully convinced and sure.  And what it said to me was that, if the audience is in any way representative, our politicians and rulers have broken the hearts of our nation.  So I’m not alone after all. 

That will do me for now.

DC said he ‘had to say’ it made him feel physically sick.  I’m not sure what he meant by that or, if it’s true that it makes him feel sick, why it does.

I DON’T have to say that.  I’m an obscure person that no one knows who only risks her own life if she says the wrong thing in front of the wrong people.

We all know that some people are in prison through a miscarriage of justice, even those accused of the most shocking crimes.  Depriving prisoners of the vote just because they are in prison removes the acknowledgment that there is that margin of error.  If you remove the vote from prisoners, it is the ones who would benefit from the ability to vote who would suffer.  Those wrongly deprived of their freedom do not also need to be deprived of their basic human rights, whatever we believe those are.  In prison you lose privileges, not rights.

I believe, and maybe the prison system already works this way, that what you lose you should have the chance to regain, in terms of privileges.

The right to vote, or to decide not to, could be a valuable part of someone’s rehabilitation.  To remove it is punitive, and I think there is a difference between that and a legal imposition of punishment.  It also increases the sense of not being a part of society and breaks the possibility of establishing or maintaining what could be called good and helpful allegiances.

And let’s face it, there are plenty of undeserving people outside of the prison system who still assume they have the right to vote just because it is still legally in their power.

I’m worried about a government that takes this kind of attitude to a change in the law with regard to the human rights of someone without freedom of movement.  If the law changes and has to be implemented, the Prime Minister should not be saying that it makes him sick, he should be standing behind it, or at least be disinterested enough to acknowledge that it needs to happen.  His present stance endorses, at least tacitly, any ill-treatment or bullying by prison staff of prisoners who choose to vote.

David Cameron, please think again about your position.  Anyone informed and interested enough to have the information at hand would be able to reel off case after case of people who have been acknowledged to have been wrongly imprisoned.

But you know what?  In a sense, I don’t care.  I don’t want to be a human rights activist.  I want time to enjoy my new found freedom.  I don’t really care.  I just felt I had to say something.  Even though it HAS all been said before.

As for prison, if you want me in one, put me in one, don’t make the world my prison or effectively stand by letting other people.  If I’m free, show me.  If I’m not, arrest me.  One or the other, please.  Don’t just play with words etc.  That’s not fair.

Thank you.

Question Time 28/10/10, BBC1

This is the link to the recording on BBC iPlayer.  It should be available until about 11.30 tonight, but I’m not sure, as the availability information on the site is inaccurate.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vn1d0/Question_Time_28_10_2010/

Please download it and you will have it for another 30 days, thereabouts.  Or record it, using whatever device you have.  I use Replay Media Catcher from Applian.com.  It doesn’t always catch immediately, when it does you will know because it will have ‘mp4’ in the streaming information.  Until then it isn’t capturing.  I don’t know if it is the device or my computer.  You need to refresh the page to start again.

The reason I am drawing your attention to this is that it features the historian I wrote about in my first post in May, Simon Schama.  He is now the advisor to the government on the teaching of history.  Given that he, along with his media colleagues, have been involved in a political cover up, I personally find this concerning.

I will edit this later with the original audio I managed to capture from that programme 6 months ago, if at that point my blog still exists.  I am anxious to get this posted now though, so that those of you following my blog, if you are reading before you go out to work or whatever (I’m sure there must STILL be some people who approach the day that way), you might be able to get this copied or downloaded or at least have all day to be ready to do so.  I think it is important.  I have been aware of enough involvement around myself, or involving myself, at least, to believe this is significant for reasons this particular blog has not made you aware of, though I still have the copies from my Premier blog which was closed down.

Please take this seriously and get the recording.  I will add more later.  If you are outside of the UK you will need to acquire a UK computer number, it’s called unlocking your VPN.  It is completely legal, as is everything else I have suggested in this post, according to the people who sell it.  Enter the terms in a search engine and find what suits you.  There are some which specify that they unlock iPlayer, among other things.  I suggest you make sure you know this before you purchase.  The company I use has a download cap of 2gb per day, though you don’t physically lose the ability to download at that point.  You may wish to find another.

I like what I have seen of Simon, though I did find myself outraged by the deliberate and studied childlike flutter of his eyelashes as he was introduced.  Everyone on TV does that, though.  In this programme he is constantly working at developing and maintaining a persona, which appears awfully scatty and expansive.  He is referring to and replicating the style (or lack thereof) ofmy blog, and assigning a completely false personality and motivation to the way I communicate, and saying I am not a credible witness, because I am morally disgusting and not a reliable source of information either.   I assume he is doing it to protect himself, but I don’t know, obviously, not having spoken to him.  But when I email, people don’t respond.  So here I am feeling disgusting and blogging instead.  David Dimbleby keeps referring to him as an adviser to the government, and after one of the later references he makes, Simon responds with a Shakespearean gesture which immediately put me in mind of the speech from Julius Caesar, ‘I come not to praise Caesar, but to bury him’.  It would be awfully patronising of me to think of someone as being sweet and vulnerable just because they are small in physical stature.  I’m only 5’1″ myself.  But my impression 6 months ago was that Simon only let slip by accident something they were all aware of and were involved in, at least on the Newsnight programme, and they were all angry with him and embarrassed, and are they testing me and my reaction, or are they really out to make Simon the sacrificial lamb, or scapegoat?  They ALL KNEW this.  He was just unguarded in mentioning that he knew the day that Gordon Brown was going to resign.  But their reaction said very clearly that they all knew.  The two days’ lead up to the resignation was nothing more than theatre, whatever the motive for that.  But the media already knew.  I’m repeating it to try and get my own mind to deal with it and stop the flashes of light which say ‘told you, the media is a propaganda organ, nothing more nor less’.

Unless someone wipes it from my computer, I have my own permanent copy of the programme which I will send to anyone who asks for it.  WordPress has an independent internal messaging system independent of the comments facility and you can contact me that way.  I think you need your own account, but I’m not sure.  Signing is very simple, though, it only needs your email address, and you might not even need to register a blog, but if you do, you can keep all of it, or any parts you want, in private mode.  So don’t let that put you off.

Have a nice day!  I mean it, that’s a sincere wish.

The Moon

So, what is the moon to me? 

When I went to school we had a song about the moon, or a man who lived there.  His name was (not sure how to spell this) Achin’ Drum.  And he played upon a ladle.  And something to do with cream cheese.

It has always been an object of beauty to me, and valuable for that alone.  I am assured that it is probably going to be around for at least as long as I am.  So I can look up, and there it is, awesome, beautiful, especially in the mountains on a cloudless night.

Why can’t we just look at it from a distance and love it, and love its maker?  Why can’t we let it be separate and appreciate it for its light and beauty?  Why do we have to get close up and analyse it?  To find that it has enough water per tonne for a shallow bath, but it isn’t drinkable, as said in Fiona Bruce’s News at Ten last night, ‘there are problems’.

Someone said, ‘a thing of beauty is a joy for ever’.  Someone else said, ‘familiarity breeds contempt’.  Since we can analyse anything we want to, why should we be grateful for or awed by anything?

My first intellectual reaction to the report was, in this era of austerity, isn’t it a waste of money to be ‘conquering’ space in this way?  Isn’t it only scientific man’s way of flexing his muscles, and isn’t it an intellectual luxury we can’t afford?  I think so.  I don’t think anyone is ever going to live on the moon.  I might be wrong, but we don’t need that space, it will only be novelty and ‘because we can’ if we do.  But it’s showing off and we can’t afford it.  In all kinds of ways we can’t afford it.  I believe the fabric of who we are can’t afford it, and I think it is immoral.  Just because we CAN do something, it doesn’t mean we SHOULD.

I went to a political talk in Deptford on climate change last year, hosted by Joan Ruddock, my MP.  I didn’t feel informed enough to contribute, so I sat and listened and thought, and eventually she waved a hand in my direction saying, ‘some people, of course, don’t even care’.  I defended myself, saying it wasn’t that I didn’t care, just that I didn’t feel qualified to have an opinion, and that the experts were divided, at which point someone suggested quite forcefully that I could leave if I wanted to, but I held my ground and stayed.  Later I asked about the impact of space exploration on the climate and the environment, but she said it was minimal, and all the lights left on and CFCs etc were more harmful and these little changes made all the difference.  I’m not convinced of that, and I thought her answer was very defensive and evasive.  Having watched parliament for a while as well, it appears to me the issue of climate change is often used strategically and metaphorically anyway.  It’s a handy issue to have going.  I was invited to the talk at a very strategic point in my own life last year, having never been invited to anything before or since.  I think I had emailed her or we had had a brief correspondence or something.  But I had had contact with her ages before that as well.

I think space programmes are an intellectual luxury we can’t afford, which adds only to our material knowledge and satisfies some of our curiosity but does nothing really for the quality of our lives, unlike other areas of science, and unlike the arts, and religion.  I suppose a few drugs might have their origin on the moon, but at this point I don’t know.

In this age of climate consciousness I wonder if people still find it so ridiculous to say, ‘if God had intended us to fly, he would have given us wings’.  Hasn’t the number and intensity and geographical reach of wars increased with our mobility?  Could we have had world wars without aircraft?  Most of us can’t afford the ‘benefits’ of air travel (going on holiday is up there in the list of the most stressful things to do as well – we need a holiday.  We need the stress of going on holiday to get away from the stress of everyday life and recharge our batteries, they tell us.  Maybe that is why many of us don’t bother with our neighbours ‘too much’, we can walk away, put space between us if it becomes too intense, and come back and maintain the comfortable distance), but apparently we can’t afford it environmentally either.

We look out there for everything, if we can’t easily find the solution nearby, everything comes at us from out there, and we end up out there ourselves.  There is no centring anymore, no respect for the individuality and separateness of another, whether it be person, family, community or country.  We cross the boundaries whenever we think we will.  Modern day mass media gives us the impression of immediacy and responsibility, but the reality is, we do not have it in us to take on that kind and amount of responsibility (or to be busybodies), and we are suffering for it.  We need more independence.  Our economies need more independence.  There should be no such thing as a global economic crisis, and no possibility of there being.  That’s what I think, but I might be wrong, I’m not that educated or well informed.

But back to science and stuff.  I’m not sure if we have the moral and ethical compass to keep pushing the boundaries.  Every new discovery seems to add more reasons to our lives to be afraid than it does benefits, and we always seem to be being told that we can’t afford the benefits anyway, as in drug treatments.  Please sir, why can’t we afford the benefits if we can afford to keep funding the war and fear machines?  Please sir, why not?

Who are all these despots that keep terrorising their people, who have been put in place by the western world leaders?  Is the selection process itself responsible for the havoc they can create and maintain?  All these famines and things where we can’t or won’t deliver because of the countries’ leaders.  I don’t want to just bandy words about that I don’t understand, but this really IS still colonial Britain, isn’t it?  Imposing our ways and values on every people we get involved with.

IF multiculturalism doesn’t work, why don’t we adopt the same ‘no pain, no gain’ policy towards dealing with that in the face of all the PC protests and accusations of racism, the same as we do with economic issues, where the accusation is that of classism?  Or on that is everyone saying, ‘you turn if you want to, the lady’s not for turning’?  Why is it taboo in England even to consider that?  Protests don’t stop our politicians in any other area of national and public life.  I’m not saying we should, I’m just asking why we can’t even give respect to the people who think we need to regain the separateness of our national identity.

Here endeth this little foray.

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.