1. What confidentiality? Here is some of the arguments for sharing confidential information between various agencies of government relating to violent people. But what happens when a viciously violent neighbour reported for that violence including child abuse then makes false allegations against the person who reported the violence and child abuse?
Herein described and contrasted are two opposite situations:
1) confidential information was not shared in the case of someone who was disturbed and committed an horrendous murder; and
2) there is no confidentiality and privacy with respect to any information which is shared all around about someone who is totally innocent who has never been violent with no reason whatsoever to anticipate any violence.
The false allegations and negative characterisations made against me have all been manufactured by those trying to cover up their own domestic violence including child abuse which has then been used to mislead the police, NHS, tenant management and others.
As far as I'm concerned, there is no confidentiality available to anyone in this society based upon my experience. Why are people concerned about information not being communicated? Is it because people have failed in doing a proper job with someone who is truly violent and are pointing the finger of blame at someone else?
It appears to me that the common thread for each of these situations is deceit and the need to hide responsibility and accountability by those who either failed to do a proper job or committed a crime. Thus, the whipping post of confidentiality of information is drug out for all to beat upon and declare that more information must be shared when in my direct experience that false information about me has been shared so widely in the blame game that everyone has lost sight of the original problem of domestic violence including child abuse.
I have had no privacy of any kind for over eight years because surveillance technology was installed with access allowed to many nearby people under the pretext of tenant management. This followed after my reporting the child abuse by a group of four adults in a neighbouring flat in 1998. When they got access to surveillance technology three months later, they were able not only to know what I was doing but were also able to stop any effective effort by me to bring the abuse to a halt. All information in the record has been fabricated by people using the surveillance technology to do so who have something to hide, and this too has been promulgated everywhere without my being able to know precisely what the record contained. It has been mob vigilante incitement of the worst kind which confidentiality is intended to prevent. As a result, I have had no recourse to setting the record straight and stopping the criminal abuse of the surveillance technology.
As can be noted in yesterday's web journal entry, the medical profession entered this process. The police were also involved along with tenant management which meant scores of people. Everbody knew all the false allegations which were bantered about publicly continuously while scores of people gathered around my flat night after night to abuse the surveillance technology which directly involved the police, the NHS and tenant management as well as other organisations.
After I met with Richard Evans, MD, on 2nd February 2000 as described in yesterday's web journal entry, those whom I had reported for the child abuse knew the content of that private meeting. Although I had obtained evidence of the medication that Richard Evans, MD, wanted me to take without a diagnosis or proper examination to establish aetiology (cause) and to say nothing about my fully informed consent, those in the neighbouring flat knew that I had been given medication.
The partner of the mother of the abused children and father of the abused child who had repeatedly choked him quite seriously came running up out front after I returned home from my meeting with Richard Evans, MD, yelling he's on medication. I believe that he gained this information from tenant management who had been contacted by Richard Evens, MD, following our meeting. However, since there was such a great deal of involvement between these NHS medical professionals and those who carried out the child abuse in the months leading up to my meeting with Richard Evans, MD, it is possible that this information could have come from the psychiatric nurse involved to them directly.
All of these people and various organisations were so intertwined with their involvement in the use and abuse of the surveillance technology used against me that they effectively participated in an ongoing conspiracy by colluding to carry out various unlawful and criminal activities against me. I have numerous examples of this involving these organisations and people. This is one of the key reasons I wanted to be able to meet with the medical professionals involved so that I could document their involvement by being able to recognise who they were.
What also occurred in this situation was that each of these organisations passed responsibility for carrying out the activity against me back and forth at one time or another. The police would say it was a tenant management problem at one point, and tenant management would defer to the police at another. From this "Buck passsing" consistent with the results of the Victoria Climbie inquiry the whole activity became more complicated, but the one consistency was the fact that the surveillance technology remained accessible to and then under the operational control of those involved with the child abuse most especially the mother of the abused children throughout the entire eight plus year period 24/7.
BBC News Saturday, 30 September 2006, 00:11 GMT 01:11 UK
Crime details 'should be shared'
 Lin and Megan Russell were killed by Michael Stone 10 years ago |
Police, social workers and doctors should be forced to share details about potentially dangerous people, a police chiefs' organisation has said.
A new report into killer Michael Stone found facts about his state of mind were not passed between agencies.
Brian Moore, from the Association of Chief Police Officers, says avoidable tragedies could continue to occur without changes to regulations.
He says too much importance can be given to patient confidentiality.
This week's report into the care and treatment of Michael Stone stopped short of saying the 1996 murders of Lin and six year-old Megan Russell in Kent could have been prevented.
But it revealed a picture of agencies not communicating with each other, of records being lost and of warnings not being acted upon.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5394026.stm
2. I sent the following email to Columbia University's Eric Kandel who "is University Professor of Physiology and Psychiatry at the Center for Neurobiology and Behavior of Columbia’s College of Physicians and Surgeons. He is also senior investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Born in Vienna, Austria, he graduated from Harvard College, where he majored in twentieth century history and literature. He received his medical degree from New York University School of Medicine. He took postdoctoral training with Wade Marshall in the Laboratory of Neurophysiology at NIH; residency training in psychiatry at the Massachusetts Mental Health Center, Harvard Medical School; and a postdoctoral fellowship with Ladislav Tauc at the Institut Marey in Paris. Kandel held faculty positions at Harvard Medical School and the New York University School of Medicine before coming to Columbia, where he was the founding director of the Center for Neurobiology and Behavior. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and counts among his honors the Nobel Prize, the Wolf prize, the Lasker Award, the Gairdner Award, the Harvey Prize, and the National Medal of Science." (Source)
Dr Kandel is Director of this research effort among other responsibilities. I include the overview description here from its web site to provide a synopsis of legitimate research which has more comment following on its web site.
The Center for Neurobiology and Behavior, headed by Eric Kandel, consists of 17 independent basic research laboratories in the Kolb Research Annex. Contained within the Center is the newly formed David Mahoney Center for Mind and Brain Research. This group is headed by Michael Goldberg, and includes Drs. Das, Ferrera, Gottlieb, Qian, and Salzman. The members in the Mahoney Center work in the area of cognitive and systems neuroscience. Two of the scientists within the Center for Neurobiology and Behavior (Kandel and Siegelbaum) are Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) investigators. The center also contains several core faculty of the newly formed Kävli Institute for Brain Science, of which Eric Kandel is the Director. This group will focus on the development of novel experimental and computational strategies for analyzing and deciphering how signaling in neural circuits controls behavior. The goal is to develop more powerful tools to enable one to move from the study of individual nerve cells to that of complex neural systems that underlie higher mental function.
The guiding philosophy of the Center for Neurobiology and Behavior maintains that an integrated approach, ranging from cell and molecular biology to systems and behavioral analysis, is required to understand the basis of normal and abnormal human behavior. In line with this approach, the main focus of the research and education in the Center is primarily on basic science aspects of neural development and the functions of the nervous system that underlie normal and abnormal behavior. Approaches range from the cell and molecular level to the systems level. A wide range of experimental techniques are used, including molecular genetics, neurochemistry, cell biology, biophysics, behavior, electrophysiology, computational biology, and psychophysics. The subjects investigated in these studies range from simple invertebrates to humans. Many of the studies carried out in the Center focus on processes such as learning and memory, attention, perception, and affective behavioral traits that can be affected by mental illness. Several ongoing projects may someday contribute to our understanding of the etiology of, and new therapeutic approaches to, autism, ADHD, anxiety, addiction, benign-age-related memory loss, impulsivity, aggressivity, fragile-X syndrome, cerebral palsy, spinal cord trauma, depression, and schizophrenia. The faculty of the Center is actively involved in training medical, dental and predoctoral students and postdoctoral fellows.
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Some Comments About Your Appearance Yesterday on Campaign Columbia
Date: Saturday 30 September 2006 14:33
From: Gary D Chance
To: erk5@columbia.edu
Dear Dr Kandel
I want to bring to your attention my direct experience which relates to the state-of-the-art of neuroscience and its abuses which are connected with using neurological science for surveillance abuse, R&D, medical experimentation and indefinite torture interrogation against a nonconsenting human guinea pig.
I want to point out by reference to what I wrote yesterday the kinds of abuse which are related to psychiatry in terms of research, surreptitious medication and social control engineering which are being carried out against me. Please seehttp://garydchance.bravejournal.com/archive/09/27/2006
This entry also contains a copy of my Email to President Bollinger with my comments about a of point your's during yesterday's worldwide webcast, so I will not reinterate that here.
I have confirmed by my own direct experience during the past eight years the validity of this neurological brain wave monitoring and feed back surveillance activity. Due to the behavioural and personality problems of those using this surveillance technology, they have informed me of all that they are doing and enabled me to verify its validity. These people are well known to me and are not a mysterious "they." They are named and described in my web site and web journal whose URLs are noted bellow my signature.
I bring this to your attention because it reflects upon and does a great deal of harm to people like yourself who are sincerely engaged in honest research for the beneficial use of this science. As I've experienced this directly for the past year, the other side of the coin where such science is based upon secret research and carried out for malevolent objectives reflects the dark side of this scientific research and its application which will contaminate people like yourself no matter what you do when it becomes general public knowledge. Therefore, it becomes imperative for people like yourself to engage in an "interdisciplinary" world to address the problems I report to ensure that trust is maintained in scientific research.It is my belief that this current surveillance technology devolved from what has been called TEMPEST developed by NSA many decades ago. This is the process of intercepting very slight electromagnetic radiation signals such as those surrounding electronic equipment, wiring and most well known computer monitors and other computer devices including internal components. The giant step forward with this "spying" technology occurred when it became known that such signals could be intercepted from a distance. As an example, this is how the communications were monitored by satellite from telephone lines on the ground during Yuri Gagarin's space flight in April 1961. (James Bamford, "Body of Secrets," Arrow Books, London, 2002, pps 154-5.)
Once this monitoring ability is understood, the rest is a mechanical effort to "decode" the signal to read it properly. This has now advanced to the point where the brain wave halo of electromagnetic radiation can be monitored surrounding the human head from a remote location and, I believe, by satellite communication. The decoding of this electromagnetic radiation has resulted in the ability to read (without implants of any kind) hearing, seeing, thinking (thoughts and images), feeling (pain and muscle movement) and smell. While I have validated this capability with hundreds of "tests" and response from those using the surveillance technology, I have not verified whether tasted is being so monitored as yet.
The monitoring and decoding process has evolved to the point where there is a significant feedback activity which can induce hearing in the target by electromagnetic radiation which was the first thing I was able to verify from the inception of the use of this technology in February 2001. It took me longer to verify the fact that my eyesight was being monitored although right from the beginning I was searching for an explanation which related to visual surveillance which could not be easily explained.
Determining the fact that both thoughts (words and images) were being accurately monitored was made possible by the verbal activity of those using this technology which led to the fact that I was able to determine that a feedback of this activity was used during sleep to induce dreams and probe memory. I have extensive experience and notes on this activity too including the blood/brain barrier breach which results as a side effect from such usage of this technology in this manner.
In addition there is an ability to induce surreptitious medication by this feedback mechanism which emulates the chemical impact on the brain from electromagnetic radiation stimulation for a specific result to incapacitate and debilitate as I have experienced it as a fully informed target.
All of this above is used for the purpose of imprisonment unless one can escape electromagnetic radiation underground, etc. It is impossible to get away from it, and I have never bothered to try. I have never bothered to evade or try to locate more conventional methods of surveillance. I have nothing to hide and am fully informed by those using this technology. It is being used to carry out surreptitious medication wherever I am located. And, there is continuous 24/7 torture interrogation using the hearing feedback for continuous abuse to stimulate a thought reaction which is then monitored. All of the torture techniques which have been carried out physically can now be carried out remotely with the us of this surveillance technology. I have documented a significant amount of it.
I have described the malevolent abuse of what is quite a remarkable and marvellous surveillance technology above. I do not need to tell you that it could be used for a such a wide range of benevolent applications and legitimate research that it does "boggle the mind" if you will forgive the bad pun and cliche. Its malevolence with respect to development and application results from all its abusive aspects which require secrecy. Thus, this is not shared with the scientific community in the world which means that the benefits of it and its existence are restricted in the extreme.
There is a far worse aspect of this surveillance technology. It means that those who are at the frontier of neurological and any other kind of scientific research or any human activity for that matter can be monitored completely so that whatever a human being is doing can be monitored and stolen. Damage to the human being can be done to keep researchers and anyone from functioning and progressing. This is the same kind of damage being carried out against me to restrict my activity with its meticulously continuous documentation and reporting. The difference is that I am made aware of what is happening by those carrying out this surveillance activity. It can be used without the target having any idea of what is happening. Fortunately, in my experience the abuse is such as to fully inform me.I do not think that I have to say anything further since this should be more than enough food for thought. I suspect you will want to deny the validity of what I report because I have found that no matter how enlightened, knowledgeable or open minded a person is, unless they have experienced this directly for themselves, they will not accept this as part of reality. I learned many decades ago when I was sixteen that I would never be able to change people's belief systems and have never tried to do so. The same applies here, and all I can do is to urge you to keep your mind open and seek to independently verify what I have explained here for yourself.
Every effort is being made to discredit what I am reporting, and that fits right into your expertise in psychiatry and human behaviour. You will have to think beyond conventional wisdom and knowledge to another level of each in order to evaluate the validity of this technology. That's why you need a philosopher (among others) to join with you who will make people aware of of what Edmund Husserl means by "Noesis:" the ability to be aware of the process of perception itself while perceiving an object. It will revolutionise your field of expertise because you will have to develop technology to understand and directly monitor the human brain in order to get objective evidence to determine the validity of what I am describing. However, that technology exists already, and I am describing it here. You will have to solve this dilemma with respect the knowledge, information.
*****End of the Email*****