Daily Archives: December 1, 2010
“How has a generated myth of my being mentally ill been employed by the investigators to assist in ongoing attempts to discredit my efforts? What are the types of mental illnesses applied to my person?”
Since my first, public claims of being under investigation, the FBI and others involved have worked to build a public persona of myself as being paranoid schizophrenic, bi-polar, psychotic, or god knows what else.
Those organizing the investigation have done this based solely on the fact that I for one, have claimed an investigation against me exists and two, have not digressed in my efforts to seek legitimate proof of such an investigation (FOIPA requests, etc.).
This myth of mental illness, generated for the sole purpose of continually discrediting my efforts to obtain data related to the investigation, has been the single most destructive aspect of those, oft-times harmful tactics employed by the investigation and the informant/participant networks associated with it.
Paranoid schizophrenia, a terrible thing to taste! (especially when it’s of the manufactured variety)
Early on in my awareness of the investigation and its tactics, I penned a rather frustrated newsgroup message regarding that very subject, follow the link if you care to view it, both because it is slightly humorous and as well, because it’s a good window into my mindset at the time.
At one point, also early on, around mid 2001, I was even prescribed a variety of psychotropic medications; the stated goal at the time was to allow me to see my claims of being under investigation as simple delusions.
In essence, they said, “The drugs will help you believe us when we tell you your making this whole thing up.”
The drugs in fact made my life 100% more chaotic and were even quite terrifying in their effects and I’ve since become somewhat of an anti-psychiatry, anti-medication advocate, not quite a scientologist, mind you, just a bit more informed.
No offense to the scientologists out there.
The problem with such medications and specifically in regards to my circumstances:
The professionals involved were trying to medicate a problem, which is grounded in truth; no amount of medication, short of chemical-lobotomy, can make something that is truthful, untrue.
Primarily, the myth of my suffering from a variety of mental illnesses was generated during the first year of my becoming aware of the investigation, when the surveillance and gang stalking tactics were employed to disastrous effects in an attempt to erode my emotional state to a point of complete nervous breakdown; in other words, I did indeed display signs of severe emotional duress during this period, even traits that could be called paranoid; but throughout, my emotional state was brought on by the actions of an existing investigation and it’s myriad of real, live participants, many of whom were and are very close friends with my immediate family.
This is why it is paramount that I prove the investigation exists; if the investigation can be shown to be factual and that it exists, then the claim of paranoid schizophrenia has no basis in reality. This is something that the perpetrators of the investigation do not want to happen.
As I’ve heard on certain occasions, “just because your paranoid, doesn’t mean they aren’t really out to get you!”
So, in large part, other than simply needing to prove that an investigation exists, my goal is also to correct false diagnosis’, which have been applied to my person in the past.
Another interesting note regarding the birth of this myth of schizophrenia:
Those persons in local and federal law enforcement, who are long-time personal friends of my family, were some of the most vocal proponents, when dealing with my immediate family members, of my having a mental disorder, even to the point of suggesting to my parents that I be confined to a state mental institution (simply for claiming an investigation exists!).
I discuss in detail these family connections to local and federal law enforcement in another section of this site; it is a very important part of my story insofar as demonstrating some of the more political factors involved.
Obsessive/Predatory Sexual Behavior
As well as the general application of paranoid schizophrenia, rumors and false witness testimony have been employed in an attempt to build a public profile of myself as being predatory in regards to sex and sexuality.
It is known to me that primary among the investigations objectives, and should any given incrimination attempt be successful, is the desire to have unrestricted, court ordered psycho-therapeutic discussion of my past and current sex life, including discussion of past partners.
To achieve this end, and because I traditionally am not a frequent dater or ‘serial-dater,’ the agencies behind the investigation, along with the behavioral science groups have orchestrated a somewhat constant variety of social ruses to give the impression of my exhibiting ‘classic’ signs of predatory and or sexually obsessive/compulsive behavior.
To accomplish the creation of such an illusion, the investigators have worked within several of my existing social environments to craft, at times, quite elaborate ruses which they hope will indicate my propensity towards sexual deviance or issues of predation, mostly involving false witness testimony to my character in public and especially anything related to such attention as given to minors or underage persons, this being the easiest way of generating immediate and dramatic concern (hysteria) and especially the all important willingness of others to participate in the ongoing ruse.
I discuss, in detail, many of these sorts of situations, which may or may not involve the use of false witness testimony, in the ‘Anatomy of a Setup’ section.
An interesting note on psychological profiling, in general:
Here it should be stressed that the investigators have apparently been working in the reverse of the direction most (to my knowledge, anyway) investigations take.
Regarding the practice of psychological profiling, one would assume the investigation starts from real and factual individual behaviors and then develops a profile based upon said behaviors, aligning the subjects observed behavior patterns with existing and popular psychological/forensic models with which the subject may or may not share characteristics.
What I’ve found to be the case in my circumstance is the investigators seem to be gathering classic behaviors from established profiles and have been attempting to forcefully and deceptively apply these traits to my person through set ups and false witness testimony, all towards the eventual buttressing of the agencies desired argument in a court room setting.
Sort of like reverse profiling.
One of the hallmarks of the agencies tactics has been to utilize any past blemish upon my personal and/or public record in the interest of showing support for their ongoing set up attempts.
For instance, as a 17 year old (I’m now 38) I had a very real and known problem with drug addiction; frankly, I was the classic teenage punk-surfer-dope-smoking-hoodlum that you find in so many of the middle to upper class, suburban environs of the American landscape.
It was when I began doing cocaine, however, around 17 years old, that I knew I didn’t want to remain on the same path.
I only did the drug for about 8 or 9 months, but it was enough to convince me that I hated who I was becoming and so I talked to my folks and put myself in treatment.
This was my introduction to AA, which, frankly, saved my life and taught me a new way to live, but also, frankly, I strongly believe can be a dangerous organization if one buys to heavily into the popular AA delusion that addiction is a disease that must, for life, be met with constant involvement in AA meetings. On one hand, AA does some good in person’s lives and on the other hand, it’s a cult that should be understood as such.
More on the AA connection, elsewhere in this site, but suffice it to say, I did, indeed have a drug problem as a kid.
What the agencies behind the investigation have done is to take this fact and attempt to apply it to my current life, especially considering their desire to create an illusion of my having a proclivity towards memory dysfunction.
This is why covert druggings have been used so frequently; because, should I be covertly drugged and actually apprehended for something related to a drugs effects on me, it would not matter if I denied ever personally taking the drug, because there is always my actual involvement with substance abuse, as a teenager to point back to.
The rest should be easy to deduce … once an addict, always an addict, disease theory, “he’s in denial,” or “he did the drug and blacked out,” etc.
The possibilities are endless.