Most recent letter to Ian Pearson MP

28 July 2008

Ian Pearson MP
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

Dear [Constituency Office Manager]

Thank you for your reply of 23 July 2008 to my letter to Mr Pearson of 19 July. Today (Monday 28 July 2008) I received your letter and one also dated 23 July 2008 (last Wednesday) signed by [an Office Administrator] promising a reply from Mr Pearson to my letter of 19 July.

When I wrote my letter of 19 July I was in a state of confusion and no doubt this explains why I do not myself have paper copies of the letter (another possibility is that my copies have been stolen since our home has been entered without permission recently, a matter I have complained about to West Midlands police). The reason for my state of confusion was that I had again suffered ingestion of drugs supplied by trickery: that is I was spiked. I think it most important that I be helped with this difficulty in my life, certainly by the police (and I urge Mr Pearson to use his influence with West Midlands Police) and by Mr Pearson directly.

You mention two separate issues I have raised but in fact there are several outstanding issues Mr Pearson is looking into on my behalf.

My confusion of 19 July led me to conflate two complaints I have raised about the British postal service. I thank Mr Pearson for the advice in his letter of 24 June 2008 but point out that writing to Royal Mail to find out if a letter sent First Class Recorded (or Special Guaranteed Next Day) has been delivered would entail foolish delay; besides which the statistics lead me to suppose any such letter to Royal Mail might well be lost in the post.

The more significant complaint I had hoped Mr Pearson would help me with was that the British postal service (that is, Royal Mail: whom it is not possible to sue in law, I believe) has been treating mail sent to me and from me in a special way, since the 1970s. There is good evidence one result of this in the 1970s was that cash sent to me by relatives went missing: that is, it was stolen. I have not heard from Mr Pearson’s office yet whether he can help with this difficulty I face.

I must say I find it unsurprising that Nottinghamshire Healthcare have not yet troubled to reply to Mr Pearson’s letter to them. You promise the matter will be chased.

Thinking more clearly now than when I suffer ingestion of unwanted drugs (as I had on 19 July) I see my letter to Mr Pearson of 10 May 2008 was received - despite no acknowledgment from his office (unless, as I enquired, the acknowledgment had been lost in the post) - as its result was that Mr Pearson wrote to Nottinghamshire Healthcare. My letter of Friday 9 May 2008 (sent Special Guaranteed Next Day delivery) has still not been acknowledged, although the Royal Mail website said it was delivered Tuesday 13 May (being posted on a Friday the guaranteed date shown on the receipt was Monday 12 May for delivery). This letter was the first in which I pointed out to Mr Pearson that counterfeits of Microsoft websites had been supplied via our Virgin Media internet connection.


I have gone to great lengths to inform Microsoft of this misuse (in the shape of Microsoft Business Solutions of Microsoft Campus - Thames Valley Park - Reading - Berks RG6 1WG: since I discovered, having to go to the trouble and expense of a personal visit to London to find out, that an address given for ‘Microsoft Limited’ in Kelly’s Industrial Directory is a mistake). If I do manage to get the information to Microsoft I think they will be most concerned at such a threat to the accountancy value of Goodwill in their business, apart from ordinary moral considerations of fair play. The enclosures with my letter of 19 July to Mr Pearson gave details of both the counterfeit websites and my endeavours to write to Microsoft. My most recent letter to Microsoft Business Solutions was posted 19 July 2008 alongside my letter to Mr Pearson (and on this occasion the post office clerk was able to validate the Microsoft postcode, a thing previous post office workers have never managed to do): I show a screenshot from the Royal Mail website purporting to show the delivery which I would call a joke were the question not so grave.

In my letter to Mr Pearson of 30 April 2008 I mentioned a matter I drew to the attention of the police, that is the diversion of phonecalls made in June 2007 using our then Virgin Media landline to the West Midlands police non-emergency number so that when I thought I was speaking to police I was not in fact. A reply dated 2 May promised matters raised in my letter would be taken up and a reply from Mr Pearson follow. I conclude the mention in your recent letter of a ‘response from the police’ (or rather, the absence of a response) is a reference to Mr Pearson’s pursuit of culprits interfering in 2007 with our Virgin Media phone connection. I do find it confusing though that you mention two separate issues I raise, when the difficulties intruded into my life cover many more issues than two.

The most significant difficulties I face, as I have striven to convey to Mr Pearson, derive as a result of the improper treatment - and in particular the drug treatment - I was made to have over a period of decades following a diagnosis erroneously made by a psychiatrist formerly working for the NHS in Dudley, called Anthony Dew Armond. The diagnosis he placed on me was of schizophrenia, and much of the ‘spiking’ I have had to suffer has involved auxiliary workers - presumably not knowing the harm they do - trying to get antischizophrenic drugs into me, a variant of the abhorrent but widespread practice of families of schizophrenic patients tricking the patients into taking food with drugs hidden in it. This practice is encouraged by some psychiatric workers. Myself I cannot understand how professionally trained carers can imagine that deceiving an already suspicious patient will have any good outcome. I daresay some would argue that underfunding of mental health provision results in staff making use of shortcut practices to get things done more easily. I read that in the United States difficult children are kept subdued with these same drugs, that is antipsychotics which block the neurotransmitter dopamine. Whether it is so in the case of children in Britain I do not know, but certainly from what I have seen myself staff in NHS psychiatric facilities are over-enthusiastic to use such drugs on adult patients. In cases of mistaken diagnosis such as my own the result of compulsory administration of dopamine-blocking drugs, unremittingly year after year, is complete waste of the patient’s time and even of his life. Some more thoughtful psychiatrists - again, from what I read it is mainly in the States - recommend drugs holidays for psychiatric patients every so often so that it can be seen if continuing administration of drugs is absolutely necessary.

But from my own point of view the help I would like from Mr Pearson is to instigate an investigation of the circumstances of my mis-diagnosis, involving Armond and any others who had complicity.

I thank you for your help and look forward to hearing from Mr Pearson soon.

Yours sincerely

Colin Barrass-Brough

Enc
barrass-brough.blogspot.com
anthonydewarmondlivesat36abittellroad.org.uk

17/07/08 04:46 [Thursday]

A condition I might describe as over-excitement now as I get going regarding my business for the day is almost certainly due to stimulant drugs still in my metabolism from yesterday, rather than due to any substances in the cup of coffee I drank getting on for an hour ago.

17/07/08 05:13

It strikes me that in the note I have inserted into yesterday’s diary as Thursday 17/07/08 03:18 I was too extravagant in my suppositions (made so by stimulant drugs which in the past hour or two have worn off more). All there is pretty firm evidence of is the capability to interfere by wireless with USB-connected peripherals, and possibly only through the USB ports at the rear of the DIXONSXP tower unit. I still find this hypothesis slightly more convincing than that Dawn and I were taken advantage of by hypnosis on returning home yesterday evening and the preceding evening.

Because I feel fairly certain the drugs affecting me now were not introduced by such advantage-taking on our return home yesterday evening but were in the milk earlier, and possibly at the time it was bought from Morrisons Wellington (Shropshire), it may be that the drugs I was objecting to yesterday (Wednesday) early morning were also not introduced on our return home Tuesday night but rather were in drinks or food we bought that day. The most sensible choice of villain to point the finger at, given what has happened in the past and the fact that the railways are more or less once again under State control, is the enterprising Pumpkin railway station buffet chain.

Although Morrisons is far and away superior to the likes of Tesco, if we only shop at Morrisons then when we are on our way to some perhaps remote destination it can be presumed well in advance that we are going to do our shopping at the Morrisons there. Hence some randomisation giving favour to Sainsbury’s or Asda (or Waitrose, Iceland or Spar, or even Lidl or Heron, but not under any circumstances Tesco) will be desirable.

What I have against Tesco is that the day I had my appointment with solicitors Rose, Williams & Partners of 2 Waterloo Road Wolverhampton to try to get the facts of the abuse done to me over twenty-five years put before Solihull Magistrates, Tesco sold me food or drink containing antischizophrenic drugs to still me and reduce my acuity.

Spawn of Satan I now number three:

(1) Armond
(2) Those running drugs factories
(3) Tesco.

17/07/08 06:37

However ‘psychological theorists’ like to dress it up to increase their seeming value as experts, confidence is feeling sure what to do, that is it is absence of doubt. The best way to theorise of it is in the terms I use, of processing capacity set against the processing requirement. If you can think clearly (and quickly) enough to know what to do in a given situation - a more, or less, demanding situation, that is demanding of ‘decision-making’ and in a loose sense ‘stressful’ - you feel confident. If you are uncertain and there is delay while you hum and hah and try to make up your mind, then that is unconfidence. It has little to do with surface appearance.

In respect of the latter too, I find that if people can see you know what you’re about and understand the ins and outs of it, and particularly if you can use that knowledge and understanding to help them (which is easy if it costs you next to nothing in distraction from what you are doing anyway), then even if you look a complete buffoon they like it and give you a high approval rating.

I think there’s something in the coffee. It may be caffeine.

17/07/08 06:54

The again rather Socialist idea that ‘psychological theorists’ seem to have, that anyone can do anything, is (as I think I have said before) mistaken. Most people however much they practised and read and otherwise garnered advice could not play tennis to the standard of say John McEnroe. The reason is McEnroe had certain components in him (still does I suppose although somewhat altered by time) - that is components in the physical universe, comprising not only things like muscle fibre but more significantly neurons and synapses in the relevant parts of his CNS (and particularly, large numbers of synapses, eg serving the retina), which on average people do not have. Such is confidence: to have large numbers of synapses serving that in which one’s confidence is well-founded (rather than brash and specious, like that suggested frequently by ‘psychological theorists’).

I must say it is a good Capitalist notion, that each component has a different - a complementary - part to play in division-of-labour arrangements. Some neurons are better suited to responding to light while others do better at causing muscles to contract. Some of them though towards the front are very flexible and can do all sorts of things, switchably (not at the same time but in a multiplexing mode).

Caffeine is good stuff.

15/07/08 09:14 [Tuesday]

10/07/08 04:33 [Thursday]

The structures of thought I am speaking of were maintained over a long period in the above cases and in similar cases, that is they were capable of being set aside for the purpose of leading a day-to-day life but were always ‘in the back’ of the mind and resumable in the more detailed form as occasion allowed. This was a prerequisite to sorting out such involved structures into the coherence (that is, having entire internal consistency within themselves) which made them acceptable on public presentation and indeed gives confidence they are ‘correct’ that is that, insofar as they are supposed to, they correspond with reality.

These structures of thought were embodied in neural structures in the brains of their creators of the type I have recently been mooting as depending on neural-loop style arrangements. This type of semi-permanent memory is used to set up internal models for such purposes as (in adolescence) answering examination questions and (in more practical life) maintaining an internal plan of one’s location as one moves about even in unknown territory. The arrangements which permit their maintenance depend on transmission across synapses of dopamine as I know because they are defeated in myself when I am given dopamine-blocking drugs. For example I completely lose my ability to maintain the internal plan of my geographical location at any time I am in less familiar territory.

Needless to say these neural structures are located in the frontal brain in man and come into use only from the time of adolescence. They are present in only a rudimentary form if at all in other animals (for example it is possible apes have them in rudimentary form). It seems to me that the functions called seriatim functions must correspond with those implemented using these structures of resumable semi-permanently remembered internally envisaged models of parts of the world (or as-if of parts of the world, in that the models can be used for abstract purposes such as in mathematics and chess when they are divorced from immediate connection with any structures in the physical universe, of tangible matter or time or space).

Experiments with rats trained in conventional mazes which were then converted to mazes of canals having to be swum convinced theoreticians who had previously hypothesised that learning a maze involved merely learning a sequence of muscular operations which got the animal from start to finish, that it was not so and that the rats in fact must have an internal model of spatial arrangements. Needless to say rats achieve this without a seriatim process.

An adult human being could learn a maze - walked or swum - much faster, the reason being he could set up an internal model ‘by an effort of will’, a model which (consisting of the type of neural structure spoken of above) could be discarded afterwards if no longer needed. Giving dopamine-blocking drugs would interfere with this ability, reducing the human to needing like the rat to practise sufficiently often over a sufficient period, to embody the knowledge of the maze in synapses which had permanently adapted to form a model of that specific maze.

Needless to say I strive my best to evade being given dopamine-blocking drugs because I dislike in the extreme having the ability taken from me to form such semi-permanent models of the world and its parts. I find it a matter for bitter regret that developers of these drugs, as well as those prescribing them in practice, have not taken sufficient care to determine adequately this effect they have. I find it very difficult to believe that anyone treated with these drugs will not suffer the debilitation I am speaking of. In practical terms the debilitation I have suffered of this nature over the years, given the unusual circumstances of the foisting on me of the drugs, has led to my not being employed in any capacity I would otherwise have been fit for and might have benefited from (as well as benefiting the economy). I regret the legal framework which permits such drugs to be compelled on people in disregard of their attempts to complain when they cannot understand (I myself have not until now) what the nature is of the debilitation they have to complain about. I regret any legal framework allowing people’s freedom to be taken from them without absolute need.

09/07/08 05:53 [Wednesday]

On Tuesday 20 May 2008 I was delving quite deeply into the origin of the Experiment towards the end of my first term as a student at Cambridge University, that is around the month November 1974. It has been my belief occasionally in the past two or three months that some sort of official enquiry is going on into the way - the criminal way, if the truth be found out - I have been treated in the course of the Experiment. Something I overheard on a bus or train from a fellow traveller supported this view: she suggested (by my way of interpreting what she said) that I should go along with being spoken to hypnotically so that I could say things in evidence more to the point (because about then - perhaps two months back - I was rambling rather in my outspoken remarks on buses, under the influence of the drugs then successfully thrust on me). It might be, of course - presuming firstly that what I overheard was anything to do with my situation at all, and not merely an ‘idea of reference’ blown up by the effect then of drugs on my brain - that she was an agent of the Authorities intent simply on tricking me one way or another into allowing hypnotising voices to reach my ears at night without combating it at all. That would be for the purposes of the present-day Experimenters and not for my benefit in the least. (I must say my constant fear when I make remarks such as these which sensible people might read and take - as one would, at face value - to be delusional, is that the sensible people will have the truth withheld from them - even MPs, who many of them will take little particular interest in the unpopular question of mental health - and therefore I shall not be protecting myself, as is my intention in spreading the truth about what has gone on, from future mis-treatment on the pretend basis that I am mentally ill.)

So I might be led to imagine that the ideas in my mind on Tuesday 20 May 2008 were a result of nighttime voicing inviting me to remember and present (on my website) evidence from the past of the way I was mis-treated. On the whole - re-reading what I said that day and preceding days - my conclusion is that the reason the origin of the Experiment in the 1970s was in my mind was that I was just recovering from another bout of being drugged, that is drugged in a way reminding me of the past and drawing forth reflections on the past as the ability to think returned as the drugs wore off.

Presumably the reason is similar this morning, why I am trying to tidy up loose ends as regards evidence I have been putting together from the 1970s. In recent days I have suffered drugging with the antidopamine drugs which bring back the past, bring it back more forcefully as the effect of the drugs recedes in their aftermath. The upshot of this is that I have added images showing letters from my parents, for example one from February 1975 which I have added after the diary entry at 20/05/08 11:40.

You are also invited to read excerpts from my recent diary [now at colinbrough.co.uk]. Astute readers will observe the effect on my thinking and way of expressing myself as drugs affecting me up to the weekend have worn off.