28/06/08 07:09 [Saturday]
Thursday and yesterday we went to London by Virgin trains on the route from Birmingham New Street I would without exception have used in my younger days (before I was ever drugged, or in the later 1970s when for perhaps two years, when I was living on my own in my own house, I avoided being drugged) instead of the Chiltern route promoted recently by the Authorities (this latter being cheaper but much slower). By ‘the Authorities’ in this case I mean those who determine what is said to me in nighttime hypnosis (or ‘advisory’ voicing related to hypnosis), and the reason we chose the better route (better given our circumstances, as it was better for me on my own in the 1970s and indeed as it must be better for almost any traveller, the Chiltern route being suitable really only for people travelling only part of the distance and not all the way from Birmingham to London) was that living in our own bungalow in Kingswinford it is extremely difficult for them to offer us this unwanted ‘nighttime advice’. The reasons things have not gone so well for us recently (for example causing us to waste money travelling twice to London when if we needed to go at all we needed to go only once; but because I was drugged quite severely during Thursday’s run I lost my focus this necessitating Friday’s repeat, and except that the drugging I suffered yesterday - Friday - was so little we might have needed to go again today) stem from the ‘nighttime advice’ I suffered when we slept away from home on recent occasions, at the Innkeepers Lodge Bessacarr and in a caravan in Skegness.
Things have been done in the past by ‘the Experiment’ which ordinarily would be illegal, and may have been illegal, although possibly legitimised retrospectively. To supply me fake websites which I have trusted as though they were genuine Microsoft websites I would expect to be illegal; and certainly Microsoft would have grounds for a civil action in that their name has been besmirched. Microsoft take a lot of trouble to ensure their software works with minimum flaws, and in doing this they are investing in Goodwill, that is people will trust Microsoft software (including extras supplied through genuine Microsoft websites) above other software on the basis of statistics which become widely known, that is the low statistics of failure of Microsoft software. In going to London to an address listed in a directory in Stourbridge library as an address for Microsoft (and also listed thus on 192.com via our Virgin Media internet connection) I was trying to ensure Microsoft are aware that false copies of their websites are supplied (as well as false copies of Microsoft discs - eg XP install CDs I have bought) in the hope this would stem the activities of ‘the Authorities’ and even bring The Experiment to an end. While what I suffer mainly from The Experiment is the drugging, nonetheless to have a true and proper internet connection, supplying true and proper and therefore trustworthy Microsoft sites, would be a boon.
Sometimes I fear that the object in drugging me - there is no indication those drugging me understand that it is what I would call criminal to do so, and certainly immoral (but that the dosages are now much lower - this however may be due more to my better practised techniques of evasion than from any new understanding of ethics the druggists may have come to) - is to still me, that is to deter me from publicising the abuses - as I say, on the face of it illegal and certainly criminal to use a word I think very appropriate - imposed in the past. A few weeks back I was thinking along these lines but putting the blame for the presumed intention to silence me regarding past abuse on ‘friends of Armond’. Now I think Armond was only a cog in a machine, and it is more or less the British Government - certainly the current Socialist Government kin to that of the 1970s who authorised ‘the Experiment’ in the first place - who are looking for such a way out. Apparently it is felt unacceptable to compel me in the way I was compelled in the past, and my fear is that recent scenarios engineered by The Experiment are hoped to produce behaviour from me - drugged but only mildly drugged. so that I can be said to be responsible for my choices - which will lead me one way or another into mental treatment possibly including hospitalisation and certainly including drugging which stills me.
With a mind this morning clear of the distortion of ‘nighttime advice’ I can see that it would be well to use this busy shopping day of Saturday to shop for a quantity of undrugged food. I can do this by selecting a store to shop at, randomly from a list, even without using a computer (now I have printed out the lists used by my computer prog to randomly choose a store).
28/06/08 09:18
Looking at the letters I have sent recently (looking at the Royal Mail website in fact - as presented via our untrustworthy Virgin Media internet connection - to see what it purports has happened to the deliveries), I can classify them into categories. Several of the letters have been sent as a consequence of drugging I suffered, to try to deter future drugging either by direct entreaty (eg to Whitbread as responsible for the PremierInn Wakefield City North) or by hoping to cause trouble and expense (eg to BT and to Royal Mail Customer Services the latter in respect of the jar of Robertson’s marmalade I returned for refund but which was lost - even though Premier Brands Foods Limited sent me £3.50 as though in recompense). Letters to Nominet and to 123-reg were motivated by distortions I have suffered in my internet connection (blameable almost certainly on Virgin Media in fact). Evidence that the letters to 123-reg do not reach their proper destination leads me to suppose that someone (‘the Authorities’) without the consent (or collusion) of 123-reg have been trying to get me to sign up with a hosting service more to their preference (such as Heart Internet, corrupted through and through to the ends of The Experiment, and owing me money which they show no morals in respect of at all). I can perhaps expect support therefore from 123-reg as someone (‘the Authorities’) has been trying to do them out of business (and similarly Microsoft, as explained above).
I don’t think Robertson’s gave their consent either, to the contamination of their products with drugs. Again, this assessment is based on failure to deliver my several attempted letters to them to the proper destination. I therefore anticipate support from Ranks Hovis McDougall (ultimate holding company for James Robertson & Sons Limited).
Rowse Honey I feel must be a small company easily leant on by the Government-backed ‘Authorities’, and going along with the consequences of the contamination of their products although probably initially not consulted.
28/06/08 09:38
Looking up a quotation I thought I half-remembered about a big lie being more easily perpetrated than a small lie, I find it comes not from an ordinary sort of Socialist but from Adolf Hitler: The broad mass of a nation ... will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one. In other words if the State can get all sorts of falsifications put out by the Royal Mail, and through big companies like Virgin Media, and especially organisations conveying or purveying information, the man in the street may easily fall for it. A relic of the Wilson and Callaghan days of the 1970s indeed.
Saturday, 28 June 2008
Wednesday, 11 June 2008
See Wordpress for reprints
I am spreading the word also on Wordpress: http://barrassbrough.wordpress.com/.
See here for some reprints.
See here for some reprints.
Delayed posting from Friday 30-May-08
It seems to me then that the treatment I have been given, although unusual in being surreptitious and by virtue of that unevadable until recently, has been based on standard treatment in Britain for people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. It must be that in recent years psychiatrists have genuinely taken me to be schizophrenic, although I find it difficult to believe Armond and his co-perpetrators in earlier years would arrive at the conclusion that I inevitably was schizophrenic merely on the basis of the schizoid personality which led me into all this when I went up to Cambridge in my student days. Presumably the conclusion was drawn that I was genuinely mentally ill, and the diagnosis of schizophrenia accepted, when I reported my suicide attempt at the start of 1986 (reported it then, that is). The extent to which Armond genuinely believed the diagnosis in 1986 I cannot tell.
The standard treatment for schizophrenia I find is left in the hands of people who think that what is important in life is to have money to spend on material things, and to a degree that it is a responsibility to work for money if one is capable. Such carers are not at all in tune with the things their patients would want and do if free (of debilitation from what I can agree is an illness given the context they find themselves in, but also from debilitation which in many cases I suspect is worse, from the treatment).
In my own case the law has been broken on more than one occasion, and, because I was regarded as mental, no one has taken much trouble to assist me in rectifying this (either in complaining effectively so as to deter a repeat, or in obtaining compensation). Advice I would certainly urge on those with ultimate responsibility would be to put in place procedures whereby the law must be strictly adhered to. (For example Dawn was detained beyond the time I as nearest relative ordered her release, and the procedure which Armond followed of insisting I sleep one night every few months in hospital was found to be illegal when tested in another case.)
The reason the law is not adhered to is that those treating the mentally ill feel they can do better than the law allows for their patients. Similarly they feel they can do better than manufacturers of the medication allow, by giving dosages in excess of the recommended maximum. As I have said before, they are fools beyond compare. Laws get debated extensively before being enacted and even should there be such a thing as a clever psychiatrist he is not going to do better than by following the law.
The standard treatment for schizophrenia I find is left in the hands of people who think that what is important in life is to have money to spend on material things, and to a degree that it is a responsibility to work for money if one is capable. Such carers are not at all in tune with the things their patients would want and do if free (of debilitation from what I can agree is an illness given the context they find themselves in, but also from debilitation which in many cases I suspect is worse, from the treatment).
In my own case the law has been broken on more than one occasion, and, because I was regarded as mental, no one has taken much trouble to assist me in rectifying this (either in complaining effectively so as to deter a repeat, or in obtaining compensation). Advice I would certainly urge on those with ultimate responsibility would be to put in place procedures whereby the law must be strictly adhered to. (For example Dawn was detained beyond the time I as nearest relative ordered her release, and the procedure which Armond followed of insisting I sleep one night every few months in hospital was found to be illegal when tested in another case.)
The reason the law is not adhered to is that those treating the mentally ill feel they can do better than the law allows for their patients. Similarly they feel they can do better than manufacturers of the medication allow, by giving dosages in excess of the recommended maximum. As I have said before, they are fools beyond compare. Laws get debated extensively before being enacted and even should there be such a thing as a clever psychiatrist he is not going to do better than by following the law.
Thursday, 29 May 2008
Hypnosis should be outlawed
Yesterday afternoon as we set off for Birmingham I noticed that drugs had got into us, presumably from our lunch-time sandwiches. With the sandwiches I had coffee (but Dawn I think had a cup of tea, but made with the same water of course).
It strikes me (furthermore) that discontinuing my website - certainly my main website, leaving perhaps my Blogger blog to expose my complaints - might be very positive towards ending the drugging. I don't feel entirely happy with this idea, though, and I can see no reason why I should feel unhappy about it unless I have been urged through hypnotising words to continue it. The only benefit I get from it lies in the pleasure I get at the idea people are interested in what I have to say, and the people who matter in this regard are not the people who override my objections to being drugged. How many genuine readers I have I cannot tell.
Reflecting on this, it seems not at all unlikely that I suffered hypnotising words in the nighttime while away from home at the weekend (in a hotel, in fact) and those words are having a continuing effect now, days later. I have in hand portable means of detecting voicing at night for such occasions. Furthering that project seems the best way I can spend time now, therefore.
Pursuing the hypothesis of hypnotising voices last weekend: it explains very well my predisposition to go to Birmingham (twice so far this week), and explains how the almost certain preparedness for us at the main post office there on Tuesday was arranged. Dawn bought a lottery ticket in there on that occasion, and I shall be interested to see the outcome of that (the draw was last night but we do not know the result yet for her ticket).
It explains my persuading myself since the weekend of the merits of my website and that I should take trouble to continue its maintenance (eg with my present hosts 123-reg despite the fact they seem to accept payment only by plastic). It casts doubt on the coffee granules I bought at Whittards (the ones I have just chucked).
To speak hypnotising words to me in the nighttime is, as I have said before, an unusual way of communicating. I understand that it has grown out of my preceding history, but I ask myself what the basis is on which The Experiment wishes to continue it. If I were left entirely free I should no doubt continue much as I was in 1978 and 1979, and more likely than not given the availability now of personal websites put up my diary as a blog. I have been hoping to put up my diaries from past years including the 1970s, in fact. The reason for wanting to continue the hypnotising words presumably now (whatever was formerly the case) is not merely so that the perpetrators can continue in employment. It is slightly uncertain whether I would do as I say, that is publish my diaries as a weblog, and my guess has to be that the present-day Experimenters wish to guide me in certain directions (including publishing what I have to say in a form accessible to them). Unfortunately hypnotising voicing also enables them to guide me to take drugs I do not want to take, and given what has happened in the past this possibility makes me very much less trustful. The weekend bash has cost me a jar of coffee thus far, and also consternation in processing on what to do about the Water Rate demand ....
As I say, it is the unusual nature of the 'communication' offered which causes me concern. People who freely agree with each other to do things enter into a form of contract, and the law on contract - tried and tested over centuries - is very helpful in understanding the nature of free agreements between people. To try to persuade others using persuasion techniques which psychological theorists have dreamt up in the past century is not the same thing at all, and formerly, evidence that persuasion techniques were of interest to The Experiment has caused me to prefer the hypothesis that we were being made use of for military purposes. (To be honest, most psychological theory as it is now is worthless, just as the associated 'work' which psychiatrists do is worthless and should be left to rich movie stars and the like to pay out for as they may pay out for personal astrologers, instead of State funds being wasted. Of course I know from experience that what is perpetrated by State-employed psychiatrists is worse than worthless: it is a danger to their patients.)
The first thing I did this morning on getting up was type up a handwritten note as I said yesterday I intended. I translated this to HTML and have just inserted it into the basic file [for my [then] website barrass-brough.org.uk] for May (this month). As soon as I returned - in doing that - to the work of preparing the website update I became 'yawnative' for which now read bored. The reason, now I see clearly, is that doing this website update is not something I myself have planned out to do, but rather has been suggested (perhaps foisted is too strong) to me by the nighttime voicers. Drugged as I have been in the past I have followed their suggestions - for one thing life was empty without having at least that to do - but now I understand clearly I have more of a choice in the matter. Having this choice, and thinking out the best choice to make, itself lays down the scheme or plan following which should give rise to pleasure apart from what actually gets done as a result of the activity planned out.
The Experimenters have whatever interests they have - in recent months, politics and economics. I have my interests: that is, what I would freely choose to spend time on: that is, most significantly, computer modelling of perceptual processes. Who is to say what is the best use of my time? One man I worked with at Dudley Council - a PhD in history, actually - disagreed with my suggestion the activities of Isaac Newton were of greater significance than say the perpetrations of Prime Ministers. He disagreed presumably because of his educational background and the things that in turn depended on. What I would say here is that I ought to be free to pursue my own lines of enquiry, to the extent the economics of the time allow (in other words at other times in history I might have needed to work in the counting-house for twelve hours each day, but not so in the present context).
I see now, also, the origin of the things going on in my mind as I have written my notes - or typed them on my handheld device - in going about since the weekend. Basically the comments I have made (my own comments at one remove from the commentary 'requested' by the Experimenters) have centred on the distraction from being explicit at too low a level, that is too close to physical reality, or certainly explicit thus too early. Keeping one's ideas in mind instead of on paper allows them to have a persistence which gives rise to better higher-level abstractions from them. That is, it gives rise (ultimately) to better summarisations and theories. This is why science has a brevity and power almost unknown in the arts and certainly unknown to ‘social science’.
Thus I see that a lot of the wasteful distraction from what I should have been doing, since the weekend, has derived not so much from drugs as from the nighttime voicing. The conclusion for politicians who may take an interest is that hypnosis without the preceding consent of the one hypnotised, in a clear undrugged condition of mind, should be outlawed.
It strikes me (furthermore) that discontinuing my website - certainly my main website, leaving perhaps my Blogger blog to expose my complaints - might be very positive towards ending the drugging. I don't feel entirely happy with this idea, though, and I can see no reason why I should feel unhappy about it unless I have been urged through hypnotising words to continue it. The only benefit I get from it lies in the pleasure I get at the idea people are interested in what I have to say, and the people who matter in this regard are not the people who override my objections to being drugged. How many genuine readers I have I cannot tell.
Reflecting on this, it seems not at all unlikely that I suffered hypnotising words in the nighttime while away from home at the weekend (in a hotel, in fact) and those words are having a continuing effect now, days later. I have in hand portable means of detecting voicing at night for such occasions. Furthering that project seems the best way I can spend time now, therefore.
Pursuing the hypothesis of hypnotising voices last weekend: it explains very well my predisposition to go to Birmingham (twice so far this week), and explains how the almost certain preparedness for us at the main post office there on Tuesday was arranged. Dawn bought a lottery ticket in there on that occasion, and I shall be interested to see the outcome of that (the draw was last night but we do not know the result yet for her ticket).
It explains my persuading myself since the weekend of the merits of my website and that I should take trouble to continue its maintenance (eg with my present hosts 123-reg despite the fact they seem to accept payment only by plastic). It casts doubt on the coffee granules I bought at Whittards (the ones I have just chucked).
To speak hypnotising words to me in the nighttime is, as I have said before, an unusual way of communicating. I understand that it has grown out of my preceding history, but I ask myself what the basis is on which The Experiment wishes to continue it. If I were left entirely free I should no doubt continue much as I was in 1978 and 1979, and more likely than not given the availability now of personal websites put up my diary as a blog. I have been hoping to put up my diaries from past years including the 1970s, in fact. The reason for wanting to continue the hypnotising words presumably now (whatever was formerly the case) is not merely so that the perpetrators can continue in employment. It is slightly uncertain whether I would do as I say, that is publish my diaries as a weblog, and my guess has to be that the present-day Experimenters wish to guide me in certain directions (including publishing what I have to say in a form accessible to them). Unfortunately hypnotising voicing also enables them to guide me to take drugs I do not want to take, and given what has happened in the past this possibility makes me very much less trustful. The weekend bash has cost me a jar of coffee thus far, and also consternation in processing on what to do about the Water Rate demand ....
As I say, it is the unusual nature of the 'communication' offered which causes me concern. People who freely agree with each other to do things enter into a form of contract, and the law on contract - tried and tested over centuries - is very helpful in understanding the nature of free agreements between people. To try to persuade others using persuasion techniques which psychological theorists have dreamt up in the past century is not the same thing at all, and formerly, evidence that persuasion techniques were of interest to The Experiment has caused me to prefer the hypothesis that we were being made use of for military purposes. (To be honest, most psychological theory as it is now is worthless, just as the associated 'work' which psychiatrists do is worthless and should be left to rich movie stars and the like to pay out for as they may pay out for personal astrologers, instead of State funds being wasted. Of course I know from experience that what is perpetrated by State-employed psychiatrists is worse than worthless: it is a danger to their patients.)
The first thing I did this morning on getting up was type up a handwritten note as I said yesterday I intended. I translated this to HTML and have just inserted it into the basic file [for my [then] website barrass-brough.org.uk] for May (this month). As soon as I returned - in doing that - to the work of preparing the website update I became 'yawnative' for which now read bored. The reason, now I see clearly, is that doing this website update is not something I myself have planned out to do, but rather has been suggested (perhaps foisted is too strong) to me by the nighttime voicers. Drugged as I have been in the past I have followed their suggestions - for one thing life was empty without having at least that to do - but now I understand clearly I have more of a choice in the matter. Having this choice, and thinking out the best choice to make, itself lays down the scheme or plan following which should give rise to pleasure apart from what actually gets done as a result of the activity planned out.
The Experimenters have whatever interests they have - in recent months, politics and economics. I have my interests: that is, what I would freely choose to spend time on: that is, most significantly, computer modelling of perceptual processes. Who is to say what is the best use of my time? One man I worked with at Dudley Council - a PhD in history, actually - disagreed with my suggestion the activities of Isaac Newton were of greater significance than say the perpetrations of Prime Ministers. He disagreed presumably because of his educational background and the things that in turn depended on. What I would say here is that I ought to be free to pursue my own lines of enquiry, to the extent the economics of the time allow (in other words at other times in history I might have needed to work in the counting-house for twelve hours each day, but not so in the present context).
I see now, also, the origin of the things going on in my mind as I have written my notes - or typed them on my handheld device - in going about since the weekend. Basically the comments I have made (my own comments at one remove from the commentary 'requested' by the Experimenters) have centred on the distraction from being explicit at too low a level, that is too close to physical reality, or certainly explicit thus too early. Keeping one's ideas in mind instead of on paper allows them to have a persistence which gives rise to better higher-level abstractions from them. That is, it gives rise (ultimately) to better summarisations and theories. This is why science has a brevity and power almost unknown in the arts and certainly unknown to ‘social science’.
Thus I see that a lot of the wasteful distraction from what I should have been doing, since the weekend, has derived not so much from drugs as from the nighttime voicing. The conclusion for politicians who may take an interest is that hypnosis without the preceding consent of the one hypnotised, in a clear undrugged condition of mind, should be outlawed.
From Monday 26 May 2008
Another part of the cost to us in being drugged is the waste of my time now trying to work these things out, the motivation being as I say to hope to avoid, or better avoid, in future such drugging, because we derive entirely disbenefit from it. Furthermore my time is wasted more than it would be by virtue of the fact my thinking is less efficient because of mind-altering drugs still in my metabolism this morning.
I have in the past had varying hypotheses why I - in particular - have suffered such drugging. One frequently cropping up has been that it was to assess the hurt to me from previous such drugging. I find this hypothesis again rearing up this morning, but dismiss it on the basis that I have had it over so many years that it cannot have been right then (because I - and now we - would not continue to suffer year after year for that purpose) so most likely is not right now.
Another major hypothesis was that it was to produce a simulacrum schizophrenia for research purposes, and I cannot so readily dismiss this same hypothesis now. What I myself suffered from the drugging yesterday - particularly in the thinking I was doing trying to sort out why we were delayed unnecessarily (as far as I could see) from the alterations to train timings due to Sunday engineering works - was very close to a condition of paranoia, and has been so but much worse in the past.
The third major hypothesis has been that the drugs were supposed to be an assistance to me because I was supposed to be schizophrenic and they were based on antischizophrenic medication (but with extras, presumably to try to counter ‘side-effects’). This hypothesis is one I have only quite recently entertained, because it seemed so ridiculous. It seemed ridiculous to imagine that psychiatrists presumably regarded as especially competent and presumably concerting together (that is, not just one of them making his own diagnosis) could make the mistaken diagnosis, and ridiculous to imagine the debilitating effect of the drug mixtures given could be missed and the view continue to be taken that the drugs were an assistance to me.
Therefore to convey the truth about the effect of the drugging - that it had entirely disbeneficial effects, for Dawn and for myself - I need to transmit this exposition (and presume it will be correctly understood) to those arranging for the drugs to be supplied. I have to say this is difficult firstly because I cannot be certain where the drugs were supplied. I cannot know how the authorisation has been given for the drugging. Those authorising the drugging - that is those writing the prescription and those organising for the railway coffee (it may well have been) to have drugs put in it - are remiss in not advising themselves adequately of the effects of the drugging, and further in causing me the frustration of needing to work out how best to transmit expositions such as this diary entry.
When I put this diary entry on my various websites it will reach a certain audience (including some MPs) but they may not have time to get to the truth of what I say and may have no particular interest in the subject of mental health. They may not cotton on to the degree of waste in my life - waste and horror for me over the years - so may not take the question sufficiently seriously. (On the other hand I am now kicking up such a fuss that I hope someone with influence may intervene.) Apart from this ‘broadcasting’ in the hope someone with influence may assist me - and really it should be my own MP - I think it might be well to send this exposition to the management of the Premier Inn chain (on the basis that the tea and coffee we drank in the Wakefield hotel may well have contained drugs) and to the management at Doncaster railway station.
We have been drugged on railway stations before (Doncaster in particular) and in hotel rooms before, and those arranging the drugging - who almost certainly read my websites if few others do - may simply be continuing established practices with only a lackadaisical notion why they are doing so. If mechanisms are in place allowing us to be drugged in these ways, ‘the Experimenters’ - to refer to them thus - having only vague ideas (almost certainly being trained in subjects related to psychiatry) may make use of the mechanisms without over-much reflection. I have to say this is wrong - in fact a disaster - that is (this is it basically) to allow antischizophrenic drugs to be prescribed so lackadaisically.
¬¬¬
There is quite an industry of people employed nowadays to ‘help out’. Such people as Social Workers (in Western countries like Britain) depend for their employment on people - some inhabitants of the country - being in a bad way. Moreover nowadays (for reasons which I would do well to think about) the work people do - when it is assessed for purposes of remuneration, or in academic circles reputation - is measured to a large degree by quantity. Scientists - and other academics, I presume - are judged according to the number of papers they publish. It is argued that the papers are scored (by assessors from the peer group) before publication so that counting them counts only worthy publishings. Readers may be aware what I think of this system as applied to psychiatric ‘scientists’, who form what I can call only a mutual admiration society comparable to the clique of theologians in mediaeval times.
Thus it is that with the motivation of wishing for continuing employment (and extending into ‘empire building’) employees of the State - and in particular, Social Workers and similar (possibly including psychiatrists although I would think they deceive themselves more and are less cynical) - feel they need to do ‘work’ in quantity. They need to have a large case-load and they need to take action in each case. Applied to my own ‘case’ this maybe is what leads to continuing use of the mechanisms for drugging me - including perhaps access to those who supply tea and coffee (or the water used) in hotel rooms.
This is an unfortunate state of affairs, as insufficient account is taken - in measuring the ‘work’ - of success or otherwise in achieving aims. Intervention by Social Workers sometimes (I myself do not know whether the statistic is around 50% of cases or is greater) makes matters worse not better. But this is not ordinarily measured. Only the quantity (the number of cases) is ordinarily measured. In extreme cases (such as death of a child) some effort may be made to gather more information on the ‘work’ done.
I have produced ideas in past months on the explanation for the irreversible growth of State intervention - ‘big government’ - and usually I would accept that nothing is to be done, and merely regret the facts. In my own ‘case’ though, because State intervention of this species has led me to suffer so badly, I have been motivated to strive to make an alteration, which comes down lately to publishing words in places they are put in the way of people with influence.
I have in the past had varying hypotheses why I - in particular - have suffered such drugging. One frequently cropping up has been that it was to assess the hurt to me from previous such drugging. I find this hypothesis again rearing up this morning, but dismiss it on the basis that I have had it over so many years that it cannot have been right then (because I - and now we - would not continue to suffer year after year for that purpose) so most likely is not right now.
Another major hypothesis was that it was to produce a simulacrum schizophrenia for research purposes, and I cannot so readily dismiss this same hypothesis now. What I myself suffered from the drugging yesterday - particularly in the thinking I was doing trying to sort out why we were delayed unnecessarily (as far as I could see) from the alterations to train timings due to Sunday engineering works - was very close to a condition of paranoia, and has been so but much worse in the past.
The third major hypothesis has been that the drugs were supposed to be an assistance to me because I was supposed to be schizophrenic and they were based on antischizophrenic medication (but with extras, presumably to try to counter ‘side-effects’). This hypothesis is one I have only quite recently entertained, because it seemed so ridiculous. It seemed ridiculous to imagine that psychiatrists presumably regarded as especially competent and presumably concerting together (that is, not just one of them making his own diagnosis) could make the mistaken diagnosis, and ridiculous to imagine the debilitating effect of the drug mixtures given could be missed and the view continue to be taken that the drugs were an assistance to me.
Therefore to convey the truth about the effect of the drugging - that it had entirely disbeneficial effects, for Dawn and for myself - I need to transmit this exposition (and presume it will be correctly understood) to those arranging for the drugs to be supplied. I have to say this is difficult firstly because I cannot be certain where the drugs were supplied. I cannot know how the authorisation has been given for the drugging. Those authorising the drugging - that is those writing the prescription and those organising for the railway coffee (it may well have been) to have drugs put in it - are remiss in not advising themselves adequately of the effects of the drugging, and further in causing me the frustration of needing to work out how best to transmit expositions such as this diary entry.
When I put this diary entry on my various websites it will reach a certain audience (including some MPs) but they may not have time to get to the truth of what I say and may have no particular interest in the subject of mental health. They may not cotton on to the degree of waste in my life - waste and horror for me over the years - so may not take the question sufficiently seriously. (On the other hand I am now kicking up such a fuss that I hope someone with influence may intervene.) Apart from this ‘broadcasting’ in the hope someone with influence may assist me - and really it should be my own MP - I think it might be well to send this exposition to the management of the Premier Inn chain (on the basis that the tea and coffee we drank in the Wakefield hotel may well have contained drugs) and to the management at Doncaster railway station.
We have been drugged on railway stations before (Doncaster in particular) and in hotel rooms before, and those arranging the drugging - who almost certainly read my websites if few others do - may simply be continuing established practices with only a lackadaisical notion why they are doing so. If mechanisms are in place allowing us to be drugged in these ways, ‘the Experimenters’ - to refer to them thus - having only vague ideas (almost certainly being trained in subjects related to psychiatry) may make use of the mechanisms without over-much reflection. I have to say this is wrong - in fact a disaster - that is (this is it basically) to allow antischizophrenic drugs to be prescribed so lackadaisically.
¬¬¬
There is quite an industry of people employed nowadays to ‘help out’. Such people as Social Workers (in Western countries like Britain) depend for their employment on people - some inhabitants of the country - being in a bad way. Moreover nowadays (for reasons which I would do well to think about) the work people do - when it is assessed for purposes of remuneration, or in academic circles reputation - is measured to a large degree by quantity. Scientists - and other academics, I presume - are judged according to the number of papers they publish. It is argued that the papers are scored (by assessors from the peer group) before publication so that counting them counts only worthy publishings. Readers may be aware what I think of this system as applied to psychiatric ‘scientists’, who form what I can call only a mutual admiration society comparable to the clique of theologians in mediaeval times.
Thus it is that with the motivation of wishing for continuing employment (and extending into ‘empire building’) employees of the State - and in particular, Social Workers and similar (possibly including psychiatrists although I would think they deceive themselves more and are less cynical) - feel they need to do ‘work’ in quantity. They need to have a large case-load and they need to take action in each case. Applied to my own ‘case’ this maybe is what leads to continuing use of the mechanisms for drugging me - including perhaps access to those who supply tea and coffee (or the water used) in hotel rooms.
This is an unfortunate state of affairs, as insufficient account is taken - in measuring the ‘work’ - of success or otherwise in achieving aims. Intervention by Social Workers sometimes (I myself do not know whether the statistic is around 50% of cases or is greater) makes matters worse not better. But this is not ordinarily measured. Only the quantity (the number of cases) is ordinarily measured. In extreme cases (such as death of a child) some effort may be made to gather more information on the ‘work’ done.
I have produced ideas in past months on the explanation for the irreversible growth of State intervention - ‘big government’ - and usually I would accept that nothing is to be done, and merely regret the facts. In my own ‘case’ though, because State intervention of this species has led me to suffer so badly, I have been motivated to strive to make an alteration, which comes down lately to publishing words in places they are put in the way of people with influence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)