Example Number One and Two:

It is difficult for me to select the first example.   Yvonne, Marlene, my sister Susan, (who denied to our parents that she knew what I was talking about, when I tried to explain all of what was being done, (They went to their graves thinking their son a lunatic.)), all have their claims to first place.   KQED, KSFO, KGO, ABC News, Don Imus, Michael Weiner, Ron Owens, Michael Krasney, the former Mrs. Dr. Dean Edel, Scott Bobro at Farmers, Doug Darry at AAA and CENCAL, all could claim precedence. 

But to summarize this category with a typical example, what sticks out in my mind is not the large treacheries, not the break in at the Colonial Motel and the theft of my notebook, for example, not the betrayals of those I allowed to become closest to me, nor those of the most powerful, the leaders of our society in government, like Senator Dodd, who appeared on the Don Imus making a reference to the stolen notebook, (See Fragment Number One of the Stolen Notebook at the Moynihan), nor Don Imus, nor all those like him, (rich bastards),  no, what most characterizes the category Psy Ops, are all the small acts by all the nonentities. 

For example, when I wrote a letter to Yvonne that said in part how utterly shameless my oppressors had become, a woman at KQED got on the microphone at KQED a day or two after  and vociferously shouted out “shameless, shameless, shameless.”  I do not know who she was, nor do I care.  It is just the thought that there is this malignant maliciousness “out there” laying in wait for the opportunity to release its venom ---- that is Psy Ops.

There is no attempt to reason or even explain.  Just this uniform unthinking hatred.  Chiseled on the lintel of the Naval Academy is the line by Goethe, “There is nothing so frightening as ignorance in action.”

They do not want to debate they simply want to hurt me.  And so for over 12 years they have set about it.  Each one saying,  ‘I only did this much.’

Example Number Two:

The second example that stays with me was provided by a colleague, Greg Irwin, at State Farm in 1998.   For weeks, Don Imus, appeared to be making references to me.  I would say something to someone at work,  and then the next day Don Imus would repeat it.  I quit the job.  (I was only being paid a fraction of what the others were being paid. (Why?))    Then later Greg Irwin confessed that his brother works in radio in Southern California, using the on air name Shotgun Tom Kelly.  Apparently Don Imus used this connection to get information on what I had said. 

But what stays with me is that Greg Irwin knew what was going on.  He knew and enjoyed what was going on.  Greg is a white apolitical gentile male in his 60s.  He has no political differences with me.  No animosity of any kind for me.   Why then this petty betrayal?   It was simply fun.  Something to do.

A year after I left the State Farm job with Greg Irwin, see Number 2 above, my father died.   I had tried to get Yvonne and my sister to meet with me but they declined.  A month after they declined  my father was dead.  Then a week after he died, the break in at the Colonial Motel, and Weiner was on the air reading my notebook. A week after that Mrs. Jack Swanson and Brian Wilson joined in the reading of the stolen notebook.   

However, the terrible times are not behind me.  For example on the 26^th of last month, February, I was, again, harassed by the San Rafael police. 

I was drinking my coffee, reading the papers, and of course, listening to the radio, when a San Rafael policeman comes up to my door. 

What are you doing here? , asked Officer Agustus. I explained.  (Every day for several years I wait, parked in the same parking place, at this same place before the front gate opens and a small group of us go in, gardeners, technicians, others, and me.)

He is “investigating a burglar alarm,” he claimed.  Then  there are three police cars around me.  I am skeptical.  (There was no audible alarm.  The three car loads  of officers do not canvas the area or inspect the buildings.  I waited an hour after they left and no alarm technician showed up.  (These facts make me even more suspicious that they are lying. (These facts and the fact that they followed me for months referring to me as the “Colonial Motel Suspect,” on their police radios.  (see Intel. Ops.)  That and the fact that a year ago in a similar harassment they detained me for an hour and searched my car, (without permission, or reason), and gave me a ticket.  The City Attorney of San Rafael withdrew the ticket because it was issued without reason.  Later when my attorney requested a copy of all files under the Freedom of Information Act the City denied any record existed about me or the Colonial Motel Suspect.)))

As did   Officer Agustus this morning.  He said he did not know anything about the Colonial Motel Suspect and insisted that they were responding to an alarm.  (Perhaps he was told this by his superiors.)  I expressed my strong suspicion that this was yet another example of harassment.  Officer Agustus walked back to the small group of officers who have gathered to watch the spectacle.  They confer and then the officer comes back to me.  He insists that he is responding to an alarm, and I again express my doubt. 

Officer Agustus  starts shouting, “Not everything is about you.  Not everything is about you.”  I roll up my window.  Then his partner whispers something to him.  He starts circling the car checking out the passenger seat.  “It is illegal to tape me.  It is illegal to tape me.”  I roll my window down again.  “Did you say tape you?”  Agustus says, “No I didn’t, you are hallucinating.”  Apparently now putting on a show for his fellow officers, he starts shouting,  “We can get you help. We can get you help,  if you are hallucinating.”

So this is how my life is.  This is the view from here.  You can not fight city hall.  Nor can you write to the Senate about the importance of technology in education or for the redress of grievance. For the last 12 years Imus, Swanson, Weiner, Owens, Krasney, others have harassed me.  Is the San Rafael police officers a separate source or are they agents?  You think this is about me.  You are wrong this is about you. The Senate. The Nation.   

Remember what President Kennedy used to warn?   “Those who make peaceful change impossible, make violent change inevitable.” 

If you think of yourselves as “basically good people,”  “80% good people;” if you think you are just, and that you have a well ordered society;  then you will be surprised when the inevitable wave comes.  This is how it always is.  Every corrupt, unjust, despicable society, or at least its elite, is surprised when it comes.  You might think that if they read history, read it with some understanding, they could see it coming. But they never do.

I want you to know this: I want you to know that there will be justice in your passing.  There will be justice in your destruction. 

And your gut reaction is ‘No, you are just one person, and an unimportant one at that.’  Precisely!  So very unimportant.  You and the police officer both are shouting, “Not everything is about you.”  But I am not the point.

You and officer are the point.  You know what has been happening, has been happening for these 12 years:  the burglary, the cover up, the years of harassment.  No, it is not about me.  It is about you.  You and your corrupt society.  The rich and powerful can use the police, employers, all the resources of this country. 

For example consider Don Imus.  Don Imus didn’t want to debate me.  He wanted to hurt me.  There was no question of competing  ideas he simply wanted to cause injury.  Here you have this multi-millionaire, famous radio personality, who is simply a low life degenerate.  He has his second wife and child, possessions aplenty, what else?  But none of that satisfies him.  He “amuses” himself by injuring me.   Knowing this should cause us not only to question his judgment, not even just his “character” but everything about him.  For example does he even really love his young wife?  If you thought yes, now you have to question this and everything else.  His son?  What would it mean for such a degenerate to love? 

He has said on air that he likes “tormenting” people.  He says he finds it “amusing.”   Most listeners  assume he is talking about tormenting the rich and powerful, as in the phrase, ‘afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted.’  But Don Imus is no Christian.  No, it is not about me.  It is about you and Don Imus. 

What next?  May be you will be next.

During the year Mrs. Jack Swanson initiated her harassment,  letting me know that I was under constant watch, ( see Intel. Operations, see CENCAL Letters), she began to quote Don Imus.  Now Don Imus is on the Viacom system and KSFO is with ABC Disney. 

In addition Don Imus has the morning drive show opposite Mrs. Jack Swanson.   They are not just competitors, but they are direct competitors in the same time slot. 

Yet for a year Mrs. Jack Swanson would say Don Imus said this, or Don Imus said that, referring to the show from the prior day.  Or, for example, if Don Imus interviewed someone she would give an account of the interview, often quoting from the show.

These quotes of Don Imus started around the time she started making her references to me and increased over the course of time.  Then when the CENCAL letters were stolen and she and Lee Rodgers started making references to the letters, I set up this website. 

Almost immediately she stopped making references.  Or anyway tried to.  (See How Don and Mike Removed the Evil One.) 

Then one day she began to say, “Don Imus said . . .” and right in mid sentence she stopped herself.  The other two sat silently waiting for her to see what she was going to do.  There was this pause,  and then she said,  “. . . well he doesn’t have a very big presence in this market.”  And she just stopped.

Lee Rodgers, immediately agreed,  “No, he doesn’t have a very big share of the market.”

And then they started talking about something else. 

Now, you probably know how much I hate this woman.  For no apparent reason, years after I had stopped writing my letters to the Senate about technology in education, in fact over a decade on, she starts harassing me, for no apparent reason.

She is rich and powerful, and I am poor, driven into poverty.  Harassed from one place to another.  Remorselessly.  She is a hateful, horrible person.  She completely undermines the very idea of conservatism, with her foolish, hate filled, obnoxious, empty headed . . . well you can see how much I hate her. I can not even finish the sentence.

And yet, at that moment, when she stopped her self and did not quote Don Imus, and changed the subject, even saying, “he doesn’t have a very big presence in this market,” well, I felt “good for her.”  You know?  We had been through this together.  After all these years, and all her past attempts.  And finally she seemed to get the horse under control.  She made an effort and she did it!  She stopped herself. 

I mean I almost felt proud of her myself.  Obviously she had been told to stop it.  And here she was, stopping herself!

I don’t know what it is.  It must be like the way prisoners come to identify with their jailers or something.  But I was glad for her.

What the connection is between her and Don Imus I do not know.  I suspect Don Imus influenced her to harasse me.  Some how he made contact and steered her along.  And now here she was after struggling to free herself, and finally she had gotten free of him.  They are a pair of degenerates.  She a degenerate gambler, and he  a, well, he is just a degenerate.  Some how he was involved and she got free of him.  Good for her!

In 2003 I was working at GAB Robbins and since Greg Irwin wasn’t there I did not know how Don Imus was able to make comments about my corporate email to the Manager Frank Blaha.  (Don Imus:  “Well I think you can’t just go with ‘I’m not making this up’ . . . I think you got to use ‘it’s too stupid’ don’t you?  ‘This is too stupid, I can not make this up’ . . . I think you have got to go with that.  You can not just go with ‘I’m not making this up . . .”) 

I have learned that GAB Robbins is a privately held company and I believe the investor group, (which paid about twice its current value), is based in the New York area.  After I referenced  Don Imus  and my email to Frank Blaha on this web site (see McGurk Tutorial) there was some kidding with Bo Dietl.  Boe Dietl complained about how Don Imus would disclose Boe Dietl’s sources.  He said he told Don something in private and then Don would blab about it compromising the source. 

Then in a separate conversation Boe Dietl himself made an independent reference to an email.  Boe Dietl’s company has an Insurance Services division so it is possible Boe Dietl developed a source at GAB Robins through this connection, and that this was the Imus source.    Or one or all of them may have contacts with the ownership group of GAB Robbins.  It is difficult to believe that anyone in the local GAB Robins office was involved since most crooks do not want publicity. 

(Rob Robinson, and independent adjuster in the Bay Area, who worked at GAB Robins for six months prior to the time I was there,  informs me that the office is involved in organized criminal activity.  Using contractors the adjusters at GAB Robins pay the insurance company examiners kick backs for the claims assigned, taking cash from cooperating contractors.)  How much of this criminal activity is connected directly with Don Imus and serves to explain how he was able to get my email I do not know.    For years organized crime, particularly motor cycle gangs have been trying to penetrate insurance companies.  Do you remember Don Imus  helped promote a Hells Angels film?   Now that is a sight:  Don Imus standing in front of the movie theater on “premier night,” as Hells Angels arrive in limousines.  That’s rich.  Do you remember that Don?  Trying to get straight with the mob?  I don’t think Don Imus has changed much.

Some readers may be surprised to learn that an international  company like GAB Robins can be described as being involved in criminal activity.  These are exactly the readers I have been ridiculing for their blindness to corruption in our society.  Most of the corruption in our society comes in a more general form.  For example,  the failure of the FAA to secured the cockpit doors, in the 1970s because of the opposition of the airline pilot’s association and the opposition of the airlines who complained that the extra 200 pounds would reduce their profit margins.  Or take a more recent example consider the hypocrisy of  Senator Kennedy first accusing the President of lying about Iraq, of a “fraud,” and now more recently saying only that the President is guilty of “unpersuasive evidence.”  (The Senator’s intellectual dishonesty is corruption.)

 But there is still plenty of old fashioned corruption:  money in the pocket.  For example, when I informed the IRS about corporate tax fraud the IRS reported me to my employers.  (See The IRS and the Illegals from the North)  I believe Senator Dodd knew about this double cross by the IRS.  Senator Dodd is himself not a virgin when it comes to corporate crime, in as much as Senator Dodd lead the fight in the Senate to block accounting reform in the 1990s.  The criminal results of the Senator’s actions can be read daily on the front page of your newspaper. 

Yes, corruption comes in many forms.  It is often thought that insurance companies and “trial lawyers” are like cats and dogs.  This is what they want you to think.  Reflect for just one moment on who benefits as the percentage of money in the state’s economy,  that flows through insurance company books increases from 2% in 1950 to 20% in 2004?  Obviously the more insurance is involved the greater the “float.”  The companies can not raise their rates unless they can show the state regulators that their payouts have increased.  In such an environment the company examiners may well feel that adding 10% to the claim in kick backs actually helps their company.

Or consider medical insurance.  Most of you do not realize that the insurance industry already collects several times the cost of trauma care, i.e. emergency room medical services.  The lawyers among our readers know that insurance companies regularly pay out, (also collect sufficient premiums), to pay every emergency room bill twice!  However, what even most lawyers do not know is that the insurance industry already collects premiums to pay trauma care several more times over.  That is the people are already paying  the premiums sufficient to make multiple payments for emergency room bills. 

Yet you may know that emergency rooms are closing for lack of funds.  Why?  Have you ever wondered, ‘where is the money going?’  The lawyers can explain that there are normally duplicate coverages for most trauma care.  But even they are unaware of the full extent of duplicate policies with  “med pay” as well as liability  coverage that simply never pay out.  The money stays with the insurance companies.  The people are paying the premiums but the emergency rooms are closing down.  Where is the money?  This I also call corruption.  And when Senator Dodd fights accounting reforms that would disclose the extent of these corporate skims, this also I call corruption.

So how did Don Imus get my email?  It seems by comparison a trivial question.  Just one small person that got himself entangled with powerful people.  Rob Robinson and I worked together in 1991.  I told him about my letter writing campaign to the Senate.  Robinson, a former New York City high school teacher,  warned me of the story of  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.  When you become involved with powerful people you are in grave danger, he said.  It is as easy for them to rub you out as it is for them to buy a Senator.

I was heedless. 

Psy Ops Number Six:

Every item in the Intel Operations can also be included as a Psy Ops.  Indeed it is only after one has been able to notice, or discover, the Intel Operations that they can be listed as Intel Operations.  Prior to the discovery of what is going on they are pure Psy Ops.  For example for the weeks and months, before Greg Irwin confessed that his brother was radio personality Shotgun Tom Kelly, I had no idea how Don Imus might be able to get the information on me in order to make his coded references to me, back in 1998.  (see Psy Ops)

I have explained that Michael Weiner is now moving to ever more extreme harassment (see How Don and Mike Removed the Evil One from MSNBC), but that it is difficult for me to describe.  The difficulty arises from the fact that the opposition, (KQED, Michael Weiner, ABC, Don Imus, etc.),   claim that every allegation is lunacy, the product of a deranged mind, etc..  I only feel confident to list their harassment here on this web site after I have independent confirmation from at least one other source. 

For example, Intel Operations Example Number One, was only listed because a local journalist made an on air reference to the statement:  “ . . . so she can park her car in a red no parking zone.”  Prior to this independent confirmation, though I had suspicions that Michael Weiner had used electronic surveillance, (in addition to the burglary at the Colonial Motel and the theft of my notebook), (see Intel Operations and The Stolen Notebook at the Moynihan),  I would not risk exposure to the charge of psychotic delusions, etc. until the journalist used my phrase ( “. . . so she can park her car in a red no parking zone.”) 

Ron Owens has some relationship with the children’s clothing designer at Gymboree.  Ron Owens went on the air during his broadcasts making references to how she had had me fired from Access.  I am certain of the connection for a number of reasons independent of his own on air references.  Yet in the years since the incident no one has commented on who this woman is or what her relationship to Ron Owens might be. 

After I called on Gordon Peterson to name the young editor of the national conservative magazine that I say is a boastful liar, (see Who Killed Duane Garrett Part II: The After Action Report), Mr. Peterson declined to name the editor or even name the magazine in his next broadcast.  (Charles Krauthammer did oddly refer to himself as “the professor.” [College:Professor(?)] This hardly qualifies as even a “coded” reply.  (It does perhaps explain how Peterson heard about the editor’s boasting about what a good liar he is.  Someone who knows both that young editor and Gordon Peterson would be the messenger.  Someone who perhaps writes for that magazine and also appears on the Peterson show.  Humm, who could that be?))

The phrase,  “. . . so she can park her car in a red no parking zone,” was spoken on only one occasion by me:  the evening before the break in at the Colonial Motel.  The journalist who years later used the line could testify to the truth of the charge in Intel Operations Example Number One but to date has refused to come forward.  Many no doubt know what the relationship is between Ron Owens and the blond bitch, the children’s clothing designer, at Gymboree.  Krauthammer could name the young editor.  (And so could Peterson.)

But all are silent.  In the absence of corroboration these suspicions remain pure Psy Ops.  I am denied even the certainty that I am being tormented.  Which is an additional torment.

David Gregory appeared on Imus on 04-13-04 and made a coded reference to this web site when he asked Imus if “Charles is going to be around for a wile” because “I want to call back and run a few things by Charles.”  (A reference to Hand Bill 04-12-04 (see below) where Imus mentioned he had been contacted by a reporter from the New York Times.)  Gregory’s was a double joke:  First, a play off the idea at this web site that Imus has been “exposed” and now everyone knows how he has stalked me for years, and now possibly even the New York Times was investigating; and then, secondly, the joke is, of course, everyone knows and no one cares, not NBC, ABC, PBS, and not the old gray lady. 

I doubt Gregory gave any of this a second thought when later the same day he asked the President of the United States of America, “And do you believe there were any errors in judgment that you made related to any of those topics I brought up?”  Errors in judgment?  I kid you not.  No indication of any self awareness of his utter hypocrisy.  (Is that what it takes to succeed in broadcasting?  Must one be completely unaware?) 

David Gregory, NBC, owned by the same billion dollar media group that owns Imus, in the morning expresses knowledge of the involvement of Imus in over a decade of harassment, psychological torture, and oppression;  gives an on air wink to the degenerate Imus;  then later that very day charges the President, “you never admit a mistake.”  I am not making this up.  He is really that contemptible.  

Errors in judgment?  Gregory jokes with Imus about his oppression of this author and then questions the President’s judgment.  This is not just a mistake.  It is evidence of a corruption so deep, a lack of self-awareness so complete, that it can not be simple cynicism.  The cynic is at least aware he is cynical.  David Gregory like Imus seems to have so compartmentalized his conscience that he is irretrievable.  A lost soul.

David Gregory’s hypocrisy is not unknown at NBC.  NBC's Tim Russert closely questioned George W. Bush about his connection with Bob Jones University in South Carolina (Meet the Press, 02-13-00).  (Candidate Bush had a campaign appearance at the school.)   Tim Russert charged the candidate’s appearance  gave "affirmation to that institution."  Has Tim Russert severely questioned himself whether his weekly appearances on the Imus show are giving affirmation to that institution?  (Don Imus has repeatedly charged President Bush was involved in a distribution of a flyer that contained a racial slur while campaigning in South Carolina.  But Imus has never offered any evidence to justify this allegation.  Needless to say the Democrat operative, Tim Russert, has never objected to these charges.)

The columnist Philip Nobile, (Newsday on February 22, 2000), has said, “There is a Gentleman's Agreement among elite journalists in the Boston-Washington corridor regarding morning radio man Don Imus.”  Yet Nobile was only concerned with the likes of Gregory and Russert appearing to “affirm” the vulgarity and racism and sexism.  He was thinking of the spoken words.  For example, Imus’ repeated charges that Laura Ingraham is a lesbian, or her alleged involvement in the vandalism of a man’s home. 

However, this time what David Gregory was joking about with Imus was not ‘mere words’ but the oppression of the author of this web site, which Don Imus has carried out for over a decade.  Following me from work place to work place, harassment, psychological torture.  Don Imus has gone well beyond mere words.  Therefore, David Gregory’s coded on air wink at Imus, was an acknowledgement of not mere words but an acknowledgement of a pattern of conduct that crosses over the border well into criminality.    Does David Gregory recognize the distinction?  Would he care if he did?  Does the reader?

Psy Ops  Eight :  08-07-04

So now the San Rafael Police have dispensed with using their junkies as intermediaries,  and have now returned to doing their own harassment.  Now when ever they drive by me,  they sound their siren,  just a little shot.  Their way of saying hello?

And if the incredulous reader is thinking, ‘Oh, no, they wouldn’t still go on with it . . . that this continuing harassment is a tacit admission that it is all true!  The burglary at the Colonial Motel,  giving the stolen notebook to Michael Weiner, (or the ADL who gave it to Weiner), the follow up harassment, the unlawful detention and search, the harassment by Officer Agustus, all of it, they are admitting, by their conduct, they are admitting that it is all true,’  ---  if the reader is thinking this then the reader is correct.  It is all true.

But what the reader still does not appreciate is that the San Rafael Police Department does not give a damn what the reader thinks.  To hell with you, and your stinking civil rights, and,  and, what?  The rule of law?  Give me a break.

Isn’t it yet clear to you?  There is no law.  Or rather, they have the guns, they are the law. 

Do you think they are ashamed to act so wrongfully?  Is Michael Krasney ashamed to have been exposed for the small minded fraud that he is?  He is proud of his harassment.  This is part of what it means to be post liberal. 

Wrongful conduct?  How bourgeois!  Law?  Bash!  The Law is for suckers.  Get with it. 

Welcome to the Bay Area, the post liberal Bay Area.     

Psy Ops Nine

11-11-04

Paranoia:  Or How to Destroy a Man

But this is what you wanted?  This is what you have spent all these years to achieve?

Do you know this place?  It is Number Seven Tudor Court, San Rafael,  California?  Neither do I.  When I got a job as a taxi driver in Marin, someone at Number seven kept calling and asking for me by name.  Why?  They told the dispatcher they were my “friend.”  

In the months with the taxi company I never got a single call to the airport.  One of my colleagues, who was missing his front teeth told me, at the end of one shift that he had gotten three calls to the airport.  Why?

But this has been the plan?  Leave the victim guessing.  Deny the truth and torment him further.  The victim  tips the dispatcher every night but still, for some reason, no airport calls.  Why?

I took a job as a courier.  Then one of the clients, a clothing designer at Gymboree had me fired for “smelling bad,” she had claimed.  Then for the next two days Ron Owens talked about bathing and body odor, etc. etc.,  (see Dear Yvonne at the Moynihan) what was the relationship between Ron Owens and the woman at Gymboree?  No one has ever said.  He has said he owns stock in the company.  (And there is the issue of the Hawaiian shirts.)

And then a few days before this insident there was the incident at the locker room of the health club and the homosexual who harassed me.  Then too, Ron Owens went on the air giving advise about how to deal with homosexuals who harasse you in the locker room.  And all of this just a day after Michael Weiner talked on his show about standing outside that same health club looking in the windows from the dark.

What?  Why?  Who?  What does it mean?  This is Psy Ops Nine.

Who are the police visiting?  Do they have an invitation?

How was it that Michael Weiner got the stolen notebook in less than 24 hours after the burglary?

How was it the following Monday, Brian Wilson and Mrs. Jack Swanson were discussing the stolen notebook?  (see The Stolen Notebook at the Moynihan)

Why was I paid $16 when the other adjusters were paid $26 at State Farm in 1998?  Did Don Imus have anything to do with that also?  (He was connected to Shotgun Tom Kelly’s brother,  Greg Irwin.)  Greg and Doug Derry worked for the same temporary firm.  I worked for another one.  Who got the missing $10?  The claims manager?

Then two years later Doug was the one at AAA who kept striking up conversations with me.  In one conversation he remarked that in college, (20 years earlier), “all three of my roommates were Jews, . . . I wonder what that makes me?”  Why?  Why start up conversations?  Why Jews?  Why? 

Why?  Could it be that I have been accused of being anti-Semitic?  Because I said that the Counselor was wrong to betray her client?  Is that it?

Then years later Don Imus had McGurk wear a sandwich sign in front of Ted Turner’s office in Atlanta to collect a charitable contribution Turner had promised. 

“Michael Krasney is holding for you on line three.”

It was also at AAA that Krasney called me just a few days before they laid me off.  Also at AAA the former Mrs. Dr. Dean Edell, Rose Guilbault , was the vice president of public affairs.  Formerly Rose and Michael worked at KGO together, before Krasney went to KQED.  And so we are back there, at KQED.

Why?

I had a belief that justice would prevail.  I was certain that if confronted, and forced to face the truth, all wrongs would be righted.  This isn’t Russia!

Even though Senators knew about PBS’s harassment nothing was done.  President Bush, 41, even U. S. Senator Moynihan,  they received the Last Letter, even acknowledged receipt of it.  Yet nothing was done.   Still, when I discovered wrongdoing in L. A. I reported it. Later when the IRS gave my name to the very criminals they had asked me to help them investigate, incredibly, I still believed in America, and the innate justice of America.

Over the years I cam to realize that public exposure of wrong doing made no difference.  The powerful were entrenched.  They had the power and no amount of public scrutiny would dislodge them.   Many knew about the PBS station, KQED, and also knew about the IRS leaking my name and did nothing.

The burglary at the Colonial Motel was aided and abetted by the San Rafael Police, (this just a few days after my father’s death).  The millionaire owners of CENCAL published my letters to Mrs. Jack Swanson.  One after another, from place to place . . . State Farm, AAA, Gab Robins,  a nightmare or harassment and oppression. 

Even my family, my sister, the painter, was some how involved with Yvonne, how is still not known.  But even my brother Thomas, seeing that I was now alienated from the family, justified his keeping the few dollars our father left me.     

Psy Ops Ten

12-09-04

After Duane Garrett died I saw Yvonne one last time.   I discussed his suicide with her and then told her I could not see her anymore.  Just three days before he jumped from the Golden Gate Bridge he had used the phrase:  “grasping at twigs . . .”  This just after I had given Yvonne a twig.  (see CENCAL letters)  It was useless to talk to her about this sense she always denied everything.  That is her way.  So I confined myself to talking about the suicide.

I guessed that his wife and young daughter probably weighed on his mind, but not as might be supposed.  Most people would feel that if he thought about them, their suffering, this thought would cause him to resist suicide.  However, I reasoned, for the suicidally depressed, there is a catch in their minds, a strange twist.  He probably did think about them, about how they would feel after his suicide, however this thought, in his mind got twisted around,  thinking of their suffering probably caused him to become even more depressed and suicidal.  Instead of thinking how hard it would be on them, and giving up the idea, thinking of their sorrow probably made him even more unhappy.  It is a kind of a counterintuitive twist his mind played on him.

I commented to her that he could have fought the claims against his business.  The buyers had as much an interest in keeping things congenial as he did.  He was an attorney and might not be disbarred, however, even if he was I said he probably could have started over, become an accountant, real estate broker, something.  But, I conjectured, he probably just didn’t want to start all over at the bottom.

Then the next time I went to listen to a talk by Reb Anderson at Green Gulch Farm he mentioned that his teacher had started teaching the young Americans meditation by suggesting that they count silently to themselves.  (His teacher was from Japan.  He had come to America as a sort of one man peace mission after WWII.  He became a deeply revered teacher here in America.)

Counting in meditation is of course foolish, yet probably it was expedient.  Young Americans have to do something, just watching, just being present, is not enough, we must be active.  So to keep them quiet for the few minutes of meditation they were told to count.

Reb Anderson continued the story by saying that over the months and years that followed they came to a better understanding of meditation.  But then one day, unexpectedly,  their teacher suddenly announced that they were going to start all over.  Start at the beginning, he said, just as they had so many years earlier, they were all going to start practicing by counting to themselves.

His students who had been sitting with him all these years, like Reb Anderson, were offended.  Here they had started that way, but now look here they thought, look at all the progress we have made.  Now we know how to sit in the presence of the moment.   We are experienced meditaters.  See how far we have come.  Now you want us to start all over like the pimply faced school children we were when we first started?  What an insult.

So, they started all over, right from the beginning:  one, two, three, four, five, six, . . . .

Not being too proud to start all over.  From the beginning.  Like a beginner.  That was the teaching.

But as I say, I think this may have been  Duane Garrett’s problem.   He did not want to sell the mansion and cars, and start all over from the beginning.

This was not the first time that Reb Anderson, and many others at Green Gulch Farm seemed to be referring to something I had just said to Yvonne.  One Sunday I counted five different references to things I had said.  And all five made by five different people.  Incredible.

Of course, I started going to Green Gulch Farm because the Red Comedian seemed to be making references to it in his radio broadcasts.  Some how they were connected with KQED.  So I went there to find out what the connection might be.  (It turned out that it was nebulous.  Yvonne had gone there, had some connection, as she seems to have with nearly every “new age” group,  but mainly they all associate with one another.)  Yvonne would go to the Chatterbox Café and tell someone something, and they would tell someone, etc. 

At first I wondered if they were all letting me know that Yvonne was chatting up everything I told her because they wanted to help me.  Clue me in.  But then why not just come out and say so?  Why all the innuendo?  All the coded messages?

Then I realized what it was.  They had decided that Yvonne’s disclosures were ok.  This was all after my Last Letter in which I had condemned Yvonne for conspiring with KQED.  I had said it was wrong, and here was Reb Anderson, and all the rest of the creatures of Green Gulch Farm telling me that they thought it was ok.

This realization came with a jolt.  What pomposity!  They had decided that they were good people, and Yvonne was a good person, (she is of course), and for all I know they had decided that the people at KQED were all of them too, good people.  And seeing as how they were all good people, well . . . they could do no wrong.

Deception.  Lying.  Breach of contract ---- well I will not bore the reader  with yet another indictment ---  they wanted me to know that they thought it was all just fine.

And I am not going to argue the point again.  Good people sometimes do bad things.  Yvonne knew it was wrong, my sister also, and the proof that they thought what they had done was wrong can be found in the simple fact that they lied about what they had done.  Yvonne lied to cover up what she had done.  She knew it was wrong.

But Psy Ops Ten is the psychological effect on one when one is dealing with a true believer, a fanatic.  Whether Moslem fanatics, or Japanese soldiers who choose to die for their Emperor, whom ever, fanatics are unsettling.

This is Psy Ops Ten.  The people I have been dealing with are convinced that what they are doing is ok.  They do not have a problem with it. 

And it really does not matter how fanatical they are.  They can be like Michael Weiner, who justifies himself with fanatical rants about fighting anti-Semitic NAZI etc. etc., or Barbara Simpson who patches herself together with the most flimsy arguments to justify herself, (“you shouldn’t keep diaries and notebooks”),  or these very calm and serine “experienced meditaters” at Green Gulch Farm.  They all think that they are right and there is no reasoning with them.

No reasoning in part because they are deceptive, (liars), who will not, can not, honestly present their arguments.  Of course their dishonesty undercuts their claim that they have considered the question and have come to the conclusion that they are in the right.

How can it be called consideration if they can not even talk about it, openly and honestly?

Yet Psy Ops Ten is just this:  They are convinced that they are in the right.

Wholly unjustified it may be; unreasonable, you bet.  But that is it.  Psy Ops Ten.  They believe that they are right.  However it is that they justify it to themselves is beside the point.  Beside the point because unknown.  This is why they can not openly say what they are doing.  There is just this bald arrogance;  insufferable certainty.    

Psy Ops Ten creates this profound alienation. 

It is said that Ted Kaczynski was duped into a psychology experiment at Harvard.  He was told that they wanted to examine the other party.  He was told to try to persuade the other party about something, to argue, to use reason, etc. and that later they would give an exam to the other party.  However this was not true.  The actual experiment was to see what happened to Ted Kaczynski.  Whatever he said to the subject, no matter how sound his arguments, no matter how persuasive his presentation, the subject was instructed to reject his arguments.

It is possible that this experiment soured him on the possibility of using reason with his fellow human beings. 

But that experiment is Psy Ops Ten.  Or rather the resulting psychological effect, the effect on one in dealing with a fanatic, someone who is beyond reason, that is Psy Ops Ten.                     

Psy Ops Twelve:

05-25-05

My heart was trembling as I awoke this morning.  Something like terror.  For weeks I have been  tormented.  Is it because my death is closer?

Perhaps.  Who can say?  Our minds have a path of their own.  In the end the one issue is can I squeeze the trigger?  Dr. Edel has assured us that there is no pain.  “Suicide is painless.”    Thank you Dr. Edel.

The thing with Al Franken I think may be part of it.  He made some references to what I have written here and I started monitoring him closely.  At first I did not know what to expect.  He had seemed sincere the few times I had heard him.

As the number of references increased I went through the whole thing all over again.

After Yvonne took us to the KQED studio, the very day in fact, I tried to talk to her about what had just happened.  She refused to acknowledge anything.   Then there were the other references on later shows.  The anxiety.  The uncertainty.  Then  . . . It brought it all back up again. 

I had stayed with Marlene longer than I should.  There is that anxiety trying to sort out that.  Then the day at KQED and not wanting to accuse Yvonne wrongly.  She refused to talk.  Just as Marlene had refused to be honest . . . Yvonne thought it would be a good idea to betray her client, who was troubled by a relationship of nineteen years, thought that it would be fun to take him to the KQED studio so her friends could make covert references.  

“They used Yvonne to get at me,”  I had said to my sister, and she had replied, unhesitatingly, “She used herself.”  And why unhesitatingly?   On general principles that we are each accountable for our acts?   Or that women should not be given any more leniency?   Some sort of feminist thing, ‘don’t be more forgiving just because a woman?’  Or did it betoken some knowledge of the situation?

And the Red Comedian on KQED, his taunting covert references on the radio, the end of my life with Marlene, Yvonne’s betrayal, I drove to the Golden Gate Bridge . . .  The day she had suggested we go to KQED, she paused, looked down, took a breath of air, then looked up and said,  “So it is agreed . . .?”  I have suffered for her.  For that pause.  She steeled herself.  Composed herself to betray her clients.  I have suffered many times for her.  For years.  Sucker! 

And here was Al Franken, about whom I knew almost nothing, I  do not watch TV, I have never seen him or heard him;  I saw his face on a book jacket.  I had heard O’Reilly talk about him.  (I thought it a conspiracy to promote their books.  Each could make out that there was some sort of controversy to sell their competing books.  It is unlikely that a consumer would be torn between the two as they appeal to different market segments.)  But I never paid much attention.

And so it all has come back up again.  The uncertainty.  Welling up in me again just as if for the first time fifteen years ago.  Now I have a gun, so the means is readily at hand. 

There was even the old hope.  Maybe these comments betoken some interest?  Perhaps someone will take notice and help?  And this even though I passed the point of no return a long time ago.  I do not have enough money to hold out for investigations, inquiries.  After living with death so long I am almost dead, I have given up. 

But there was that hope, again, as if fifteen years ago, someone will do something someone will come forward and give evidence’, why?   Have I learned nothing?

And then as I monitored it became clear that it had been a joke.  He had heard about the web site, had visited.  He made a few references, that is all.  His friends, Garrison Keillor, Imus, whomever, they had said something to him and he was just replying.  A joke nothing more.

Then he showed himself to be dishonest.  He supported the war then he found it more politically correct to be against the war.  Have it both ways.  For example, he agreed that we should not have to “bribe” the rich with Social Security in order to have an old age pension assistance program for the bottom 60%  who would fall into poverty without it.  He agreed to “progressive indexing” if it started at 40K and then the next week said the proposal was “pernicious.”

The point is not his faulty political analysis, but his dishonesty.  He stopped making references when I showed him up for the liar he is.  He “moved on.”     This is the human condition:  this dishonesty.  My situation is just one small example of dishonesty.  Franken, the employees of  KQED, of KGO, they know about it but just do not want to get involved.

Conservatives think the market proves that people in the market are honest, or smarter, or . . . . and that people in government are, that the reason socialism failed was because, just those people are dishonest, or dumb.   This is a mistake.  It is the same people in government as in the market.  There is the same dishonesty.  The only difference is that in the market over time, day by day, everything is subjected to the test, “Now comrade, tell me, what do you really think?”  Over time the truth will out.  But in government you can go generations covering up the truth.  The savings and loan crisis was decades in the making and everyone “knew”, but the necessary changes were not made because of this fundamental dishonesty.

The congressmen did not want to face the problem in the 1970s and so they “reformed” it trying to delay having to face the problem.  They too had children they needed to put through school, or campaign funds they needed to raise, or whatever.  Just as the employees and management of KQED-PBS and KGO-ABC know the truth but do not want to risk their careers.   So the cover up.  And now the pension deficit, the Social Security deficit, the Medicare deficit, the National debt of $8 trillion, on and on . . .  Or for example, the “liberals” of San Francisco tell themselves they just want to “preserve” their neighborhoods, . . . another lie.  Thus the “housing bubble.” 

We do not live in an “evenly rotating economy” of static relationships.  The economy is dynamic.  Everything is constantly changing, the relationships, the prices.  The “preservation” alters the market and the zoning regulations stay in place the same way that the savings and loan “reform” regulations stayed in place, i.e. not responding to the changing market.  The “reforms” were not rewritten every day in response to the changing conditions the way people in the market are forced to change their actions in response to the changing market conditions.  (Only 3% of the savings and loan losses were the result of criminal misconduct.  (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/SavingsandLoanCrisis.html )   Yet an aspect of the dishonesty of “politics” as it is called, can be seen in the continuing dishonesty in the reporting.  Most people think that the S & L collapse was the result of criminal misconduct, theft, and not because the government’s “insurance” on accounts of $100,000, (per account, not per person), removed the market forces from the flow of capital into the savings and loans.)

In the market when the price goes up you must pay more.  In government the zoning regulation is not forced to change to the market.  The savings and loan “insurance” is not forced to change.  The day of reckoning can be delayed or ignored for years at a time, especially in a country as rich as America, but it can not be abolished, it will come. 

But because Peter Coyote and his “liberal” kind, people like Al Franken, are so dishonest they even  lie to themselves, they can convince themselves that they are not doing what, (as the market informs us), they are in fact doing.  If you are a rich liar you can lie for a long time.

This is the fundamental problem with government action:  This dishonesty.  In the market people are also dishonest it is just that in the market they must part with something, cash, and the results of these transactions are daily tabulated and reported in the prices.  Then the next day they can not ignore the new prices, they must pay more, unlike the way people like Peter Coyote and Al Franken, and everyone else can go on lying to themselves, and everyone . . . at least for a while.  A while longer . . .

So as I monitored Al Franken it became clear to me that his dishonesty about Social Security was simply one example.  He stopped making references to me because he is  dishonest about everything.  He made some covert references about this web site because he thought it would be fun. 

All of this, all of what has been done to me is just another small example of this dishonesty.  That I have vowed to kill myself in a few weeks, just days, did not figure into his judgment.  He did not care that someone, me, had been tormented for fifteen years, driven into poverty and despair, and is about to put the muzzle of a gun to his head and kill himself.  This just did not register with Al Franken.  He did not care about all that . . . he thought it would be fun . . . a joke that is all.   

I am a “conservative Republican” and he thought it would be fun to poke me one last time.  When I responded and showed him for the liar he is,  (one week he was in favor of “progressive indexing” then  it was “pernicious”), he simply moved on. 

For most of life, there is no market feedback.  Michael Weiner can organize the burglary of the Colonial Motel because nothing can be done about it.  His colleagues at KGO could join in because there was no connection between their conduct and the harm they were doing.  Ron Owens could . . .  well you get the idea.  Most of life is lived in the darkness of lies and ignorance, self delusion.    

So at first my spirit was lifted up from death, for a moment.  Why is Al Franken making references?  And then the realization that it was just more of the same.

So I went through the whole thing again . . . Yvonne left the studio and was looking at  a display table . . . I walked up to her . . . “So, . . . do you know any of the performers . . .?”  I tried.   She demurred,  appeared preoccupied with the display table . . .  How do you ask,  ‘have you just betrayed us’?

“You treated us as if we were animals!”  I shouted at her several months later.

We were not human.  And Al Franken did not think, fifteen years later, that it mattered  . . . just a “conservative Republican.”  Who cares?

So lie about,  lie about,  anything, everything.

And this accounts for most of humanities suffering:  This dishonesty.

The mentally ill abandoned to the street, while you tell yourselves you are so “liberal”,  the manipulation of the markets, in the savings and loans, the housing market, the use of freeways and zoning and tax laws,  . . . the children in Africa.  The Tutsis were Protestants.  Did you know?  The Hutus are Catholic.  Not reported by our free press.  Recall that many Catholic priests have been arrested for incitement of genocide.  We live in such ignorance. 

You have driven me to my death out of hatred for the poor or, straight, or  White Gentile Protestant conservative Republican male perhaps, and  but mostly out of dishonesty and ignorance. 

“Oh, I’m vicious.”  ---- Mrs. Jack Swanson

Yes and that too.

But it is really that pause that troubles.  Then she looked up, a smiling face . . .