Tag Archive: Terrorism


Advertisements

Proverbs 1:10-16

10 My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.

11 If they say, Come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause:

12 Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit:

13 We shall find all precious substance, we shall fill our houses with spoil:

14 Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse:

15 My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path:

16 For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood.

I was thinking of verses 14 and 15 particularly before I looked this up.  I woke up this morning thinking my neighbours were absolutely right and justified in everything they were doing, that I was in the wrong and needed to let this community embrace me on its own terms, which it seemed obvious to me it wanted to do.  Including the screaming into my home every time I move and the computer hacking, which I saw as a good way of bringing a sinner to repentance and for supporting each other and knitting the community together in love and security, that the people who are doing this to me should be regarded as elders and I should love, respect and obey them.  And if I did, that would all stop, it was just a corrective measure.

Then I thought, ‘but they are doing this to someone they know to have a mental health diagnosis’.  Then I thought, ‘they are healing me, this intense stalking, harassment, computer hacking, it is a method of healing of mental illness that I ought to respect’.  Then I thought, ‘But every time I say it’s happening to the authorities they say the fact I think it is is evidence of a mental health issue.  Not the fact that it is and I have a problem with it, object to it.  My objection to it isn’t the problem.  The evidence of a mental health issue, they say, is that I think it is happening at all.  Am I required to exercise something like a willing suspension of disbelief as you would in a theatre to be fully involved with it and let it be real and do what it is supposed to do, without questioning whether it is right or wrong?  Is questioning and doubting and strongly opposing its supposed rightness evidence of bad faith and bad character?’

I read these verses in the context of the whole chapter and found myself more confused.  A question that has just occurred to me is, ‘what is an innocent person?’.  You hear all these news reports about bad things happening to ‘innocent’ people.  I’ve questioned for years that there is any such thing as an innocent person, unless we are all innocent.  People used to say, ‘no one’s perfect’, but they divide people into innocents and perpetrators of evil for their news shows, whether that is the truth about them or not.  Surely it isn’t the truth about ANYONE.  We are being brainwashed and taught to polarise, as if we needed that teaching.  I’ve just thought of something Hegel posited, that in this instance might mean that there isn’t just evildoing and victim making.  Hegel said there is thesis, antithesis and synthesis.  As I understand it, synthesis brings the other two together.

The reason I eventually found myself confused by these verses is that they are in the chapter that talks about the dark sayings of the wise and teaching subtlety to the simple.  (I’ve never heard it said by Christians that any of the wisdom in Proverbs is bad.  Some of them don’t like Ecclesiastes, they say it is the disillusionment and negativity of a backslidden person, or they used to).  I wondered if computer hacking was the new wisdom and that I am unsubtle not only not to accept it, but not to value it.  I wondered if the (new?) wisdom and subtlety of the authorities is to hack people’s computers and let other agencies hack their computers and stalk them, yet judge the hearts and character of the hacked and stalked by whether or not they are prepared to accept the edict that it isn’t actually happening to them.  They talk about God preparing you for something big.  Oh my Jesus, I find this a big problem, if this is what is involved for people.

Either the Church has knowingly collaborated in this mental health scam or it has been brainwashed.  It is corruption, in my would-be free and independent eyes.  If it has been brainwashed I, and I am sure plenty of others like me, have said plenty over the years to challenge that brainwashing, and I know they read my blog and Facebook page because they are making constant references to it.  The only Church I ever watch these days is Kensington Temple, and then not every week.  I listen to Premier Christian Radio as well.  Both of those are constantly making references to what I write, but also to things that go between my neighbours and me, and things I write in private messages, and comments I make in closed groups and on other people’s timelines and pages, sometimes within seconds or minutes of my doing so.  Not that it is only Christians.  But these are the people who say they have the Word of God and if we don’t obey them we might end up in hell or that what is happening to us is God’s discipline to bring us back to obedience to the truth.  To me this is evil doing and as someone who is being personally betrayed by this I’m a little reticent about sharing a purse, or my life, with them and subjecting my body and mind to them in one of their buildings.  John Pantry, Rick Easter, Colin Dye, the three that readily come to mind, all aggressively and bitterly push the mental health thing knowing exactly the position with me and what they are subjecting me to.  I still believe that in any authority and power relationship this will eventually happen, so guys, come on, can you understand my consternation?  That is why I think you should come to me in repentance and confession, uncoded, without referential stand-ins and all that, either in person or in a letter.  An open and genuinely vulnerable giving up of abusive power.  I think that might have something to do with the revival you always say you are wanting.  You use a lot of methods to try and substitute for that.  How can we do this better and what methods do we need to reach these people?  Sorry, but that is missing the point.  I was taught in Church that it isn’t about methods.  Maybe I heard an incomplete message, though.  The way things are I have to believe that they have either changed their position or that I heard an incomplete message in the first place.  If I heard an incomplete message then I have obviously misunderstood.

Lots of slander and gossip put about enabled, partly, by cyber stalking and computer hacking.  People ‘intuiting’ based on what they’ve already heard on the grapevine.  I know my neighbours hack my computer.  I said to them last night, ‘you’re not loving awareness, you are criminal awareness’.  Elmer Darnall said if someone told him to watch out with someone but he himself had experienced no problems with them he would tell his informant so and assume it must have been a problem in the relationship rather than a problem with their character.  My experience of the Church is that it does not follow his advice and example.  I found myself wondering if the rumour mill actually followed me to London in 1980 when I went there to be a student.  I know it was already active in Nottingham before I left, but it was only over the last week that I thought this church rumour mill might have been activated many, many years ago and been handed over to London when I left Nottingham.  That there was never any discontinuity allowed.  No one ever told me, until my excommunicated years, but it does make sense now I think of it.  I went to Talbot Street and one of the elders reeled off all the churches in London I had been to over the preceding few years.  I told the mental health authorities this and they refused point blank to acknowledge that there could be any connection or organisation.  They also asked me who was involved and I gave them some people to contact, including David Shearman.  I don’t think they ever contacted anyone, they just added it to their evidence base for my paranoia.

The Bible says do not receive an accusation against an elder from one person alone.  I wonder how that actually worked out?  I wonder, if the person was alone with no witnesses, they had to confide in someone thought responsible and convince them to take their side and that person, based on their judgment of the complainant’s character, would then be acceptable as a witness, even though they were not at the scene of the crime.  If not, how many people would be required to be victims of rape or sexual misconduct, for instance, before it was decided they had enough witnesses to act against the elder?  Or embezzlement, or cruelty, or corruption of any kind?  On the face of it it seems unfairly loaded to me.  People lie, too.  Romans 1, I think, throats are open sepulchres and all that.  For the record, I think the mental health professionals know they are lying and being evasive as well.  And I think they still read my blog.  I’d like to call them out on it.

I love my neighbours.  They seem adorable to me.  I feel like a let down sometimes.  I am not predisposed to hate anyone.  The question is, as it is with those further away from me, are they right to stalk and harass my every move and hack my computer, knowing I have a mental health diagnosis and am being told that the fact I think any of this is happening is evidence of mental illness?  Are they right to do all these things aside from that consideration?  There is no question in my mind that this is happening.  And to me that is terrorism, whatever the reasons behind it.  Maybe I need a bit more behaviour modification and brainwashing before I see and surrender my heart and mind to the light.  And that is not simply bitter humour, it’s a very hurt and confused statement which really thinks, as I am often inclined to, that I really am the one who needs to change and come into line and accept the overtures already being made.  Here endeth. . . .

https://www.gotquestions.org/Proverbs-26-4-5.html

I found the article above on these verses and I suppose it is fairly typical of the answers that would be given.  When I was at Bible college Elmer Darnall said the best way to approach answering a problem or question is to preface your answer with ‘it seems to me’, I suppose so as not to be dogmatic and unreasonable.  I try to follow that.  When I say ‘it seems to me’ I am doing the exact opposite of assuming a position of authority.

I’ve had an awful day today, though, and I was lying upset and terrified in bed.  Terrified of the prospect of possible further torture, as the UN calls forced psychiatry, at the hands of the mental health services, terrified of the way people in my community, including professionals, are treating me, many of them knowing I have a mental health diagnosis they can call on at any time, knowing that I fear that.  That is torture in itself.  I feel as if people are trying to brainwash me and I find my thinking in crisis.

I think people apply these verses as and when they see fit, for the most part, and that there is no fixed agreement on when to use one or the other.  Play it by ear and intuition, I really think must be the way it is done.  But tonight I thought the ‘it seems to me’ approach really needs to be backed up by a good body of wisdom and understanding – but again, whose wisdom?  I was wondering about the wisdom at the time and in the tradition it was written, that might be the first port of call.  But it seems to me that the original wisdom is not automatically the best wisdom for all time, though it must be interesting at least.

I was thinking about terrorism and suicide bombing and stuff and I thought of these verses and thought I had been a fool thinking I was being wise.  That answering a fool according to his folly in a situation like that might mean opposing and frustrating and arresting and even, in some people’s opinion, imposing the death penalty.  And if someone in the street has a gun then the police should shoot to kill, it must mean.  That’s what I was thinking.

Then I thought about things I have heard about Gandhi and his policy of passive resistance and I thought it couldn’t be that simple.  But how do you use passive resistance when dealing with suicide bombings and all that?  Maybe I have an incomplete understanding of Gandhi’s position.  And OK, back to me, do people like me need to have our computers hacked and lives stalked and harassed so we learn to think right, responsibly and wisely?  I’ve been thinking all this hacking, it’s like the wild west with computers instead of guns.  I believe at least one of my neighbours is hacking my computer because I believe I have heard many instances of reaction to what I have been writing or reading.  This stuff that I and the UN call torture, is it necessary to bring people to their right minds?  Am I being alternately answered and not answered according to my folly?  Not answered by being ignored, answered by being subjected to all the stuff I’ve just talked about?  If I am as wrong as some people seem to want to make out, have I lost my right to be taken seriously and treated equitably?

I wrote to the police on 18th August, following the Barcelona bombing.  I’m still waiting for a reply.  I put in a complaint to the IPCC a day or two ago about the fact they haven’t contacted me yet.  People who have read some of my recent posts will understand why I might have done this and I’m not going into all that again, I couldn’t cope.

People approach me surreptitiously and skirt around stuff.  Last Saturday I was in town and a community officer was walking towards me with what felt to me like an assumed nonchalance and I thought, ‘Oh yes?  Let’s see where this is going’.  I felt his attention towards me, even though he seemed to be trying not to appear to be addressing himself to me.  As he got near where I was standing at the bus stop he drew up close and touched his radio then touched his ear, like a coded action.  I just stood there, I didn’t react, just took it in, and when he got past me he cleared his throat, it seemed to me in annoyance or frustration.  So I, without doing it in his face, went, ‘ahem to you, too’.  He didn’t look round.  The bus came almost immediately and as it turned the corner I saw him standing making notes.

Is this normal procedure in a case like mine?  No direct approach, just signals you’re expected to follow or be broken by the ‘consequences’ of not doing?

Later I was in Tesco’s.  A couple of men were behind me on the escalator and I felt they were after my attention.  When I started trying to disengage myself from hearing them one of them said something about a ‘big fashion thing’ in a way that sounded to me like a ‘big fat thing’, and he quickly followed it up by making a strong reference to his wife Sue.  At the bottom of the escalator I said, ‘oh yes, very interesting, who are you, then?’, and they looked sheepish and embarrassed and sidled off.  This sort of thing has happened to me before.  I said a while ago that when I was staying in a hotel I was out in the street one day and decided to stop walking, feeling driven, and just stand still, and after a couple of seconds a man I didn’t know drew up to me and without looking at me or stopping said, ‘hi, Sue’, then carried on walking without looking back.  I think I recognise it when it is happening.  If these people were police, was I wrong not to try and co-operate?

Something else, too.  This thing some people seem to have about telling stories instead of making reasoned and reasonable approaches.  It seems to me that if you think you need to tell a story to reach a person or know them, you are setting yourself up as some sort of authority whose terms are more important than the person you are using the story on.  The story says, ‘it’s like this’, or the story teller tries to say that with the story, whereas the hearer might not agree, and it seems to me it is quite patronising to ‘try to get through’ to a person that way instead of dealing with actualities and entering into a communication based on equality and clarity.  What happens of the person you want to see the point of your story interprets it completely differently and wishes you would just be up front because you are confusing them and making them feel guilty for ‘not getting it’ or not being prepared to get it?  Does that mean the person has a bad heart?  Maybe the story teller has a bad heart, if they won’t communicate accountably.  A story teller examines the hearer, as much as anything else.  That seems to me to be an arrogant and/or fear based position to take.  Not quite ready to deal with things, not willing to be challenged and questioned.

Man, I need to sleep.  Shouldn’t they make a formal and explicit approach?  Or is it different when dealing with something like I’ve been talking about?  It makes ME feel foolish and that I am making myself vulnerable to mental health interventions by being explicit when no one is making a response to anything I have said in a way that I have been prepared to recognise and validate.

Psalm 121 – Safety and Security

Psalm 121 King James Version (KJV)

I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help.

My help cometh from the Lord, which made heaven and earth.

He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: he that keepeth thee will not slumber.

Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.

The Lord is thy keeper: the Lord is thy shade upon thy right hand.

The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night.

The Lord shall preserve thee from all evil: he shall preserve thy soul.

The Lord shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in from this time forth, and even for evermore.

 

I had been thinking today about verse 8 of this Psalm when I saw a post by Ram Dass on Facebook which finished with a mantra that expresses the same sort of idea, I thought, so I decided I would post the whole Psalm.

Although I was thinking of verse 8, when I read the whole Psalm I felt I had to consider it in light of recent events especially, but many more before now, and decided that the key must be the last half of verse 7: ‘he shall preserve thy soul.’

have heard it said that when the Bible talks about the soul it means the whole person.  Unless the writer was indulging a flight of fancy I think it has to be assumed that in this case it is talking about the soul only, the Breath of God within the body (according to Genesis God breathed uniquely into man at creation and he thus became a living soul – Genesis 2:7, what I have been taught is the ‘fleshed out’ account and not a different story as some people assert.  I’m not sure where the story of Lilith comes from either, it isn’t in the Bible.).  God, Who Is Love, protects the soul that loves both Him and others and, as I assume must be part of that equation, is loved by others.  It certainly seems to be my experience that as long as I believe someone loves me I find refuge in that.  As my English lecturer, who was a Buddhist and also a psychotherapist, said to me once, ‘Love is your protection’.

There have never been any guarantees for the preservation of the body, and if anyone thinks there have, they must also think they have been broken, even within covenant communities to which they were given.  I can’t remember about the Old Testament, but the New Testament, especially in Thessalonians, talks about the resurrection of the body after death.  That is the only context I can think of for the word ‘soul’ in this Psalm meaning the whole person including the body.  I think that is the theological understanding, though I know people have many arguments and reservations outside of that.  My own sometimes, is ‘if God is love and perfection, where did even the possibility of evil in His creation come from?’.  I can find that question quite disabling in talking about God.  In Isaiah it says ‘I, the Lord, create both good and evil’.  Would any of the people who answer my posts anonymously through the media, Christian and secular, like to get into relativity with me?

Manchester Suicide Bombing

I don’t say much about news items usually, because I feel so under siege in my own home I can go days without seeing any news. I saw someone post earlier about Manchester but I’ve only just listened to Premier Radio’s Inspirational Breakfast. I broke off half way through to get a cup of tea.

I had Om Shri Matre Namah playing on a loop in the lounge and I found it helped me to process some of what I was feeling. There have been many times when I have felt an appreciation of the depth and beauty of Krishna Das as a priest (he was a priest in Maharaj-ji’s temple), and of a lot of the material he draws on in his chants. This was one of those times. And this mantra, Om Shri Matre Namah, meaning ‘I bow to the divine Mother’ seemed completely appropriate as a prayer for the situation.

In my particular stream of Christianity it may be frowned upon, probably most definitely will be, that I could even be saying this. But Catholicism honours Mary.  Islam does, too.  Even in my own background I was taught that the Holy Spirit has mother-like qualities. In the creation story in Genesis it says that the Spirit brooded over the waters. I heard back in my teens that God is also called the ‘many breasted one’. The mother is the archetypal source of love and nurture.

There are many other kirtan leaders than Krishna Das, but he is the one I know best. He says that when these chants or mantras are sung they are an invocation to the love within us, who we truly are. Whatever we think of how it does or doesn’t work, it seems to me that God as Mother is a model we are badly in need of. Not God the Warrior, God the Judge. People say we become what we worship, so I think it would be good for all of us on this planet, men, women and children, to begin to discover, value, release and cultivate within ourselves and each other the Mother heart, mind and nature of God that exists in so many of the world’s religions, including both Christianity and Islam.

 

Om Shri Matre Namah
I bow to the divine Mother
Within and Without
 

After Cain killed Abel and God asked him where he was, Cain said, “am I my brother’s keeper?”

I feel as if my upstairs neighbours are my keepers.  Or that they see me as an animal in captivity for observation and experimentation, or as a subject of some form of pest control.

Until a few years ago I was never one for talking about vibes and energy, but now it is unavoidable.  Every time my mind goes into recreative and positive relaxation a sound from them is imposed on it, usually vocal, normally sounding, today, like ‘dobre’, though it could be ‘hallelujah’ or banging.  Throughout the day, all day, every day.  I feel it as ‘don’t you dare’.  Every movement I make they put a sound or comment on top.  She screams like a demon when I come and go.  They do tapping stuff.  She goes from sweet to hate in a second, unless there is another woman there.  My mind can’t cope with it.

Also I have people turning up and ringing my doorbell and when I answer there is no one there.

Every time I become animated within myself and feel I can express myself in a way I like, their voice imposes itself, and I am here like a guilty and frightened thing, desperate and constantly seeing my own expressive life being killed by what can only be called aggressive psychic interference.

I sneezed a few minutes ago.  Sneezing, when my mind feels so bound, feels cleansing, and I like the recovery period, the seconds afterwards.  But as soon as I finished sneezing one of them said ‘dobre’.  I take hold of what I am writing now and give it a mental affirmation as it presents itself, and they speak uncomfortably and as if objecting.  It frightens the life out of me.  That phrase has a whole new meaning for me these days.

I went to the toilet and as I came out one of them said ‘dobre’.  I don’t want not to get on with them but they are making it impossible.

They still bang at me when they hear me in the bathroom.  They stir and bang about uncomfortably or deliberately every time sleep becomes restorative or pleasurable or exultant for me.  If I think about it, it is as if they are dragging me around by the hair.

I went to a pizza restaurant yesterday, and there is a children’s play area right in front of it.  Three girls dressed in yellow stopped and stared at me and I thought about the paedophile rumour.  I sat down and a few minutes later one of them shouted out ‘zestoki’ (cruel), which is something I have been heard to shout at my neighbours.  I don’t know where they got that from.  I felt mentally assaulted and raped.  A bit later the children started screaming, really soul-piercing screams I felt invaded by, and a few seconds later a security guard appeared using a mobile phone, and he stared at me.  I’ve been here a long time.  I wondered if something he had done had been responsible for the screaming and the way it made me feel.  I’ve been harassed by security guards for ages now, sometimes mockingly and exultantly.

I had a couple of women come in and act strangely close to me.  One of them was eyeing me with narrow slit eyes, like an animal ready to pounce, and I was blank, I didn’t smile because my mind was preoccupied.   Then she went into a wonderful awesome sociable switched on beauty routine.  The clearest face, the most beautiful, fluttering almond eyes.  Face held up to her man.  I resented it, it seemed theatrical and aggressive.  I noticed she had a child with her, a girl of about 8 or 10 who seemed to be a bit ill-behaved, I can’t quite remember how.  I looked and thought, ‘like mother, like daughter’.   But as I kept looking I realised the girl was uncomfortable and wanted attention that she was being denied, and she kept trying to get it, then she looked bored and wandered off.  And I thought, ‘poor kid, having a mother like that’.

That was when my scepticism and my ‘I don’t believe this’ response kicked in, and I decided to have a good, doubting, examining look at the whole act.  Shortly afterwards they got up and left, but as they walked away it looked almost as if she deliberately divested herself of a character.  Afterwards it seemed to me that the whole atmosphere in the restaurant was changed.  I had felt before that people seemed so happy and relaxed, but afterwards everyone was awkward and trying to recover comfortable and natural behaviour.  I would call it vamping, but she seemed to be presenting herself as one of God’s and nature’s beauties, dominant in her way and empty-headed.

I feel as if I am being malicious now, but I’m not.  I’ve had women doing this around me a lot when I go out, and I don’t know why.  Every time I get a moment of mental light and start thinking about what I am writing or examining it, the voice I find frightening from the woman upstairs when I am trying to write imposes itself and it is like an electric shock saying, ‘thou shalt not’, or ‘I don’t want you to’.

Thinking about it it reminds me that I have betrayed my own intentions and that I came here for the country and the people, not to be separate on a computer all the time.  But it feels like my refuge from their madness and invasiveness, as well as a chain in itself, and they won’t let me have that refuge.  The feeling that I can go to them and be friendly and that it will be welcome imposes itself, or is imposed on me, at the most psychologically inconvenient and resented and rebelled against times.  They have tied me up in knots, these changelings, and left me feeling guilty for not wanting to be available when I think I realise they want me to be.

They still comment when I cough, they still comment when they hear my computer and, if it is songs, at the change of every track.  They bang when I shit and comment when I fart or belch.

Jesus, does anyone understand this and how it makes me feel?  I was going to say, ‘how I feel about it’, because pop psychology in recent years has said that nothing can make you feel something, you feel it for your own reasons.  As I wrote it the man’s voice came in sharp and aggressive, like a knife into my mind, and now I can’t rework or work with anything.  When she opens her mouth it is as if she is piercing the air demanding power or recognition.  It often happens when possibilities and connections open up in my mind that I begin to feel happy and positive about.  So to me she seems to be saying, continually, ‘you owe me’.

One of Shakespeare’s characters ends a play saying, “the world is a stage and we are its actors”.  I was tagging this and thinking about the theatre aspect and watching and being watched, and that that approach to life runs counter, it seems to me, to the approach of the spirituality I have valued that emphasises unselfconsciousness.  I felt it when people started telling us to be vigilant about terrorism threats after 9/11.  Maybe that is my problem and misunderstanding.  If you are educated in the warning signals maybe you don’t go around with the terrorist attack threat constantly in your mind and even when the thought can’t be found, if the right things present themselves you become aware there might be a cause for concern.  To me, life is not for going around being consciously vigilant.

I was writing an email to a solicitor just now, in the cross over between Robert Elms and Danny Baker, and they were doing a slapstick routine, and appeared to be commenting on or anticipating what I was going to write.  I got confused and upset trying to communicate, and in my email I wrote them a little message, “you are savage, radio”.  Straight afterwards his voice became tearful and he talked about slapstick, which was what he had been doing, with my neighbour situation and with my email.  I’ve had violent harassment from them all afternoon, and while I’ve had the radio on they tap at psychologically significant points, and the stalkers on the radio are making it worse.  Danny Baker, you bloody bastard.  ‘Bloody’ literally.  17.45 pm.  He just said ‘my mind’ to sound like ‘Marmite’.  I get so distressed I want to wet myself, and sometimes I have.  They keep tapping and she keeps piping hallelujah.  They refuse to stop, tapping and hallelujah-ing at MY radio.  That is violent, occult harassment.  They are all as bad.  Listen to the violent tones on these men.  Eddie Nestor has just come on.  Banging a drum?  I don’t NEED a drum banging.  I need the criminal harassment and stalking and mental torture to stop and my hiding, cowardly, dishonest authorities to help me.  The man upstairs keeps going to the toilet and it always feels deliberate and sometimes I feel as if he is pissing into my mouth.  He just said ‘wee’ in a pointed way, on the radio.  This is gross, and I don’t believe it is just my mind.  Fiona with the travel (17.15) has just said ‘first with the rose’ instead of roads.  ‘Rose’ is a euphemism for urine.  I wrote the time wrong, Bulgarian.  Eddie Nestor just made a point of saying ‘nay’ Bulgarian for no, and talked about ‘around the world’.  I can’t appear right in this, even if I am.  I think they are trying to get me back in hospital.  I want to wet myself.  I don’t want to go to the toilet, I want to wet myself.

Chris in Crouch End is a Christian.  He just used her to say to me, ‘stop dressing inappropriately and you won’t be attacked’.  Whatever he meant to convey by it, he did use her for that.  And he just said Dr Paranisi to be heard as paranoid.  Talking about infertility.

I want to wet myself because I am scared and I can’t take this, and I know for certain that no one is going to acknowledge the truth about this.  I dread having to live with this for the rest of my non-suicide-terminated life.

Look at this.

Read it here in Scottish or English.

I was watching yesterday’s news coverage of Osama Bin Laden’s death, and found myself thinking, ‘A man’s a man, for all that’, and I knew it was a quotation, but I wasn’t sure where from, so I looked it up.  I was thinking it not to belittle a man and say he is dispensable, but to exalt him as a creature of intrinsic worth and nobility.  I was thinking it for Osama Bin Laden.  I was disagreeing with David Cameron and other world leaders who have expressed satisfaction over his death.  By extension I was also thinking it for the rest of us, including those of us who have found justification in holding the bitterness and unforgiveness that can allow us to say of a fellow human being, ‘good, he is dead’, rather than expressing regret that his killing was a necessary part, so we are being told, of bringing justice.

I believe that kind of expression of that kind of feeling brutalises and degrades us and makes us less than the ‘man’ that our own nature demands we should be.  The Bible says, in one of the Psalms, that we are gods, and that the big God gave His Son to die for our sins, while we were still sinners.  Jesus quoted that Psalm and said the scripture cannot be broken.

I have heard it taught that Islam was formed as a religion in direct opposition to Christianity and Judaism.  I think I heard that from Colin Dye’s platform.  I think we have to ask why.  Christians used to hold killing crusades.  Christians sided with Hitler in the killing of Jews.  Shakespeare’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’ was one of my set texts at school.  It was about a Jewish money lender who lent money to a Christian on the terms that he forfeit a pound of his own flesh if he defaulted.  All the Christian’s ships were lost at sea.  A woman called Portia argued the Christian’s case in court, and he was reprieved because the forfeit did not mention the shedding of blood, and Shylock, the money lender, was mockingly and derisively invited to take the pound of flesh, but if in so doing he shed one drop of blood he would have a forfeit of his own.  I think it was his life, but I can’t remember.

The first line of Portia’s famous speech, ‘the quality of mercy is not strained’, is often quoted and held to be a thing of great beauty.  But earlier the Jewish money lender had a great and truly painful speech of his own, basically saying ‘I am a man like you’, and the one part I can definitely remember and that registers with me deeply on an emotional level is where he talks about being in the street and having people ‘spit upon my Jewish gabardine’.  And although the quality of mercy is not strained, it seems that, from his humiliation at the end, it was meant to achieve mercy for Antonio, the Christian, but to be a lesson, yet another painful life lesson, to Shylock, the despised Jewish money lender.  I would like to draw more points from this play but I am not familiar with it any more and would need to read it again.  Points about if Shylock had gained his money legally and honourably, why was he so despised by the people who borrowed from him?  Did they need to borrow, would they have needed to borrow if they had not been so greedy themselves?  So why despise their provider?  Shylock’s requirement of Antonio was probably meant only to express his own distaste at lending to a man who spat upon his Jewish gabardine, or represented people who did.  He never expected, in all probability, that he would be in a position to call for the forfeit.  It was probably meant as a verbal expression of hate for hate.  The fact he called for it is obviously inexcusable, but would have been an expression of his own sick feelings of hate and revenge brought on by the abuse and constant humiliation.  Antonio was a rich merchant.  Shylock was a rich money lender.  What was Shylock’s sin?  Without reading again, it must have been that he was Jewish.  Shylock the Jew did not kill Jesus any more than Antonio the Christian (by affiliation and Christian country ‘birthright’ or by life changing choice and conviction?) did.  But Shylock was hated.

I’m not sure what the point of that is in this post.  Maybe it is just a way for me to say ‘this is hurting me’, because I identify emotionally with Shylock in his feelings over the abuse he received, regardless of any consideration of business ethics and morality.  I started crying when I found and read the Robert Burns poem and found it so perfect and beautiful, and that feeling hasn’t left me while considering Shylock.

My church used to say ‘hate the sin but love the sinner’.  We are justifying hating both the sin and the sinner, and that degrades both us and the sinner.  We are justifying such hatred towards a man that we rejoice in his death.  He couldn’t have achieved anything without his followers, and even though their figurehead has died, passed through death, if they choose revenge rather than deciding to change track and work themselves for brotherhood and world peace, I cannot see how the death of Osama Bin Laden can be seen as an ‘important step forward’, or the similar words used by my own beloved and respected prime minister, David Cameron.  So I would want to appeal to both sides, in the name of God and in the name of love and humanity, to please cool it and stop the revenge and attacks and the seeking of ‘justice’.  I would want to ask that, as Christians, we love our radical Islamic enemies, enough to uncover enough humility of our own to consider what it is that has so filled them with hatred and be willing to apologise and actively pursue reparation and healing of relationships with them, to stop the self-righteous demands and invective, and to approach them with the love and honour and humility we should employ, according to the Bible, towards all men.  I’m not saying that I myself am good at that, but I hope the character of our leaders is made of such stuff that they might be different, and be so openly, and not try to ‘confound the enemy’ by presenting a different face publicly than the one they present privately.   Our enemies need to know and see that we are honest and open not only about our rights, but about theirs, and about our own failings, even historical, and willingness to make reparation.  I don’t believe it is true, for any human being, that violence is all they understand.  The Bible says that the desire of a man is constant love, and I think that goes for everyone, and we need to be braver in showing that.  Vulnerable love, not tough love.  Active and proactive vulnerable love and openness to others.  ‘I’m sorry’ and ‘I understand’ and ‘yes, you’re right’ and ‘thank you, I hadn’t thought of that’, and even ‘I love you, are you OK, can I help you?’ love and pursuit of justice.

Love and concern for each other should flow from the top down and the bottom up and spread out and come in, and maybe then the right policies will be obvious and not take up so much time in our relationships, governmental and otherwise.  I want to see the leaders of my world loving one another.  Having therapy sessions and love-ins, most of the time, instead of arguments and policy formation.  If they can pass on the benefits of that to us and across international boundaries, it might change everything about our living and thinking and being in the world and with each other.

I believe all of this is part of our intrinsic worth and nobility which we abandon at our peril and that we need to rediscover, and part of what it means to be ‘A Man, for A’ That’.

In Jesus’ Name.

Amen.

I’m Sorry But . . .

Today I feel emotionally sick and out of step with everyone, even with my own sense of decency.

Is there a time I should just shut up and let people get on with it?  Just for a day maybe, or a week, or maybe I should cut my tongue out and never be able to speak for the rest of my life!  Now there’s a thought.

As much as I truly admire the people who work so hard for our security and am very touched by the happiness and satisfaction some of them I have heard speaking today are expressing, I still find it repulsive that anyone can be happy about and rejoice over someone else’s death.  No matter how much they or others close to them have suffered.

As I said, I feel emotionally sick.  I still can’t have a thought or emotion begin to materialise without the people upstairs start their stuff.  The uncanniness of it is doing a number on me, along with some of its deliberate and markedly repetitive illegality when they bang just after the boundary line every day.  I wondered after I typed those last paragraphs and thought maybe I’m being a bit too squeaky liberal to be real.  Perhaps I should join the celebration, for reasons of my own it feels like a bit of a weight off of my shoulders as well.  Maybe all decent people are glad, and I just don’t have that level of freedom to be able to enjoy it with everyone else who is also decent.

But I remember stories of days when missionaries went among cannibal tribes, eyes wide open, taking the risks.  And dying.  No political pull outs.  Died for their peaceful, loving, non-violent beliefs, killed by the enemies, in lifestyle, that they had gone to live among and convert/evangelise/win for Jesus.

Jesus said, so the Bible tells us, if we choose to believe it (or it might have been Paul), ‘render to no man evil for evil, but overcome evil with good’.  Armies and governments and terrorist groups are made of many people who, individually, would be identified as ‘a man’.  I’ve heard it preached and taught that war is a different kind of situation to which that does not apply.  That sometimes peace has to be fought for, and that that is the justification for war.  But how can you fight for peace with weapons of war?  If you do the same you become the same.  The act of war causes and deepens wounds in the psyche, personally and nationally, which make it more likely for physical warfare to continue to be embraced as an option.  People don’t repent, they go into denial and justification, and that isn’t something which makes for a future where this is less likely to happen.

We need to be transformed by the renewing of our minds (Romans 12), and that means to establish new habits of acting and thinking. I’ve noticed that when I take a step to do what is right, I understand how wrong the former thing was and how wrong its support structures and rationalisations.  Especially if I thought before that the right thing was the wrong thing.  In my early days as a Christian I was taught that pragmatism and compromise over the truth were not acceptable approaches to living the Christian life.  That belief has not abandoned me, even though these days the church is more at ease with ideas of necessity and pragmatism.  I’m not sure why that is.  Maybe I just haven’t moved on as I should have done.

However, I believe that the spread of peace depends on abandoning war as an acceptable way of ‘maintaining’ ‘peace’.  If war is not an option, we have to go further in building international relationships.  Not ‘so far and no further’.  So far then ‘how very dare you, sir?’  Peace is not compromise.  Peace is Shalom, whole and vibrant.  Peace is love, not polite, formalised, ritualistic functionality.

If war is not an option, outraged people with hurt egos can’t issue a call to arms, pumping out buzz words ten to the dozen that make you feel ashamed and embarrassed to disagree with them.  People who do not embrace armed conflict as an option must surely be easier people to approach.

If we want to talk about the brave people who die in the pursuit of peace, and lay down their lives, I think there is more chance of healing for the world and of leading by example if those people lay down their lives in refusing to kill, rather than in trying to maintain peace and security for their own group by killing people and groups who are seen to threaten it or who strike at it.  If we lay down our lives for peace, sacrifice our lives in being actively peaceful and refusing to engage in war.  Let our own lives be taken rather than kill an aggressor.  Rather than a few being brave for many, I believe we all need to face it and trust for ourselves.  That way we relate with love for all, even for our enemies.  That is how peace is built.  We are governed by peace because we are founded on peace.  It isn’t the result, but the whole structure.  As long as we need to protect our lives, we live with fear.

This is what I should do, not what I do.  I am protecting too much, things and goals which wanting to achieve make me careful for my life.  Crazy things, like seeing the end of coercive medicine in the mental health system, a change in understanding and an end to labelling.  Even more, I don’t want to die on my own, maybe never to be discovered and with my life seen as worthless and full of failure, and something to be despised and not missed.  That is my craziness, wanting to hold on to my life until I feel it is worth something, not so guilt-ridden and not so isolated.  That is how I feel under the present abuse.  Too guilty to die, and guilty for hanging on.  Sorry for coming back to myself, but on the other hand, I think facing and coming to terms with yourself is a necessary part of being able to embrace this lifestyle choice anyway.  So no, I’m not sorry, really.  You have to come back to yourself to lay your life down by deliberately committing to non-violence.  I know so.  I’m only sorry I can’t express it better because of what is going on in my life at the moment.  I could possibly express it if I chose my own advocated actions, but under the abuse I can’t do it in words.  The option for me seems to be to surrender to and make myself vulnerable to my abusers (who might only be abusers in my mind anyway), or not to be able to express it in words.  But I do have a problem with my abusers if that is the point they are trying to make  by their abuse.  ‘Join us, we’ll teach you the way of peace and non-violence by making you pass through the fire of our violence’.  Jesus didn’t use violence.  The Bible says the devil can appear as an angel of light, and that means his presentation is appealing and persuasive.  But trust goes to the cross.  They present as Christians, and everything I try to say is aurally countered, either actively or with silence.  Or is it all a product of my own fear and darkness?  The Bible says in Christ there is no darkness, it also says the darkness becomes light.  To me that doesn’t just mean that a light shines removing the darkness but that, where Christ is, the darkness itself, even the darkness of violence, is light.  That is the conviction of my heart and soul.  Love, my love for those who do me violence, makes even the violence a source of light and something into which I should walk.  And these words are darlings I refuse to kill by putting them into action.  The violence and exclusion/silence, because of the ‘hallelujahs’, feel like a call, a ‘trial by fire’.  But also, post-communism, it feels somehow inappropriate.  So why am I arguing so much?  Have we talked our way out of needing to pay the price, by invalidating the price asked and demanded as torture?

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.

Question Time Teresa May

She looked sickly sheepish, didn’t she, all the time they were talking?  You have to feel a bit sorry for her, programmes like that are their own form of torture.

I thought she was looking that way about me, because they were talking about waterboarding, and I used a metaphor in a post a few days ago about having my head held under water until I tried to scream.  Everyone knows, obviously, that when you are under water you can’t scream.

But this morning I woke up and thought, ‘who set me up to think they were talking about me?  The presenter.  Teresa May really MIGHT not even know I exist, so why should I attribute anything about her to thoughts she is having about me?

But she has been looking that way ever since I started blabbing.  That is why I think there is something in it.

And following my post, ‘Note to my 16 and a half stone self’, she somehow made leaflets, which she repeated 3 times, sound like Lil-lets, which used to be my choice, and followed it up with firm stuff about going too far, crossing the line, being stopped. They do this all the time, grab hold of something really sensitive and personal and go into a strict, scolding tone to put a limitation on me.  I’m always unprepared for it, I never quite believe it when it comes, and it always leaves me feeling, ‘hey, you can’t do that’, or worse.  I can almost hear them saying, ‘if you don’t come to us we are going to keep doing this’.  Who knows that if I go to them they will find stronger ways to do that in a face to face relationship?  DA! (Bulgarian for yes).

I love Jesus, and I know I’m a bit of a stupid person, but if my life is being stalked and has been stalked in this way, I do want it stopped.  I also want the way the mental health system works challenged, because when people present saying things like this they are put on medication for paranoia.  It isn’t just the reaction of society that is injurious, it is everything, and sometimes everyone, that goes before it.

I no longer go into a situation telling people I have a mental health diagnosis.  The law doesn’t require me too, and that is right.  And yet, even though I choose not to disclose things I’m not under an obligation to and relate as positively and normally as possible, people, even here 2000 miles away, is it, start hitting me with words and snippets there is no way they could know unless someone is telling them.  And I know what I’ve heard and seen on the radio and television, here and elsewhere.  Everything is fine for a day or two, then people start going crazy around me, and at me.

I don’t know how long the stalking has been going on, but my whole life has been like this and my dad thought there was something happening.  I wonder if what I am getting is a continuation of what was going on with him.  I don’t understand why they would want to do it, though.  Not if it goes all the way back to my dad.  He had performance connections, I’m not sure how strong, I think they were in his family.  I haven’t seen them since before I was 10 years old, well before.  They disowned him at one point, he spent time in an approved school.  As far as officials are concerned, maybe they just decided we are a bad family.  My sister has had 3 children taken away from her.

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.