A696-04: P9: 16 July 2002: Anton Marx: Mens Rea: Case for Mental Health

IIf! I

TO:

rE: 16JULY2002

LEGAL AID OFFICE: (1 hand delivered copy)

MR ANTON:MARX ,-

GEORGE :MAGISTR.~~TE'SOFFICE: l\1AGISTRATE lVIR.GOVUSA

!--L.

:MAGISTRATE lVlR.ESSEL /", V/l l\:IAGISTRATE:MR. FORTUIN STRYDOM~~!

MAGISTRATE:MR. L.D. (2 hand delivered copies to Magistrates Office) GEORGE HOSPITAL (1 hand delivered copy)

MS. B.E. BOON ~~cM..--'

SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES: (1 hand delivered copy)

INSPECTOR POLLOCK

lA(j~It(

~v

FROM: LARA JOHNSTONE (JOHNSON)

RE:

AIDS DISCLOSURE BOlVIBTHREAT CASE TO GEORGE AIRPORT ON 18 JUNE 2002

The foHowing twenty-four (24) page letter to Mr. Anton Mm-x,regarding the above case is requested to be added as evidenciary infonnation in the above trial.

The letter is CC'd to among others the following: (i) South A:fi-icanMinistry of Justice & Constitutional Development, (ii) South Aftican Department of Health, (iii) Mental Health Infonnation Center of South Africa at the University ofStellenbosch, (iu) Mental Health Information Clem'ing House, (\ / The \Vorld Mental Health 2000 (WMH200) Initiative Collaborators, (vi) Freedom Magazine: Investigative Reporting in the Interest of Public Health, (vii) j\fr. Sean Z KaIiski FCPsych (SA), Dept of Psychiatry, University of Cape Town Forensic Unit, Valkenburg Hospital, (vii) Psychology Society of South Mica, (viii) Rhodes University Law Faculty, (ix) McMasters University, Canada: Law & Political Science Faculty, (x) G~orge Magistrates

[Full list of individuals CC'd in above institutions is shared at end ofletter.]

I~

11&-0

Survival, Truth, Accountability using Radical Honesty 16 Taaibos Ave, George Tel: (044) 870 7239 15 July 2002 Att: Mr. Anton Marx (044) 884 0008 (Email: amarx@Xsinet.co.za) Legal Aid Attorney for Lara Johnstone in 'bomb threat' case against George Airport of 18 June 2002 Dear Mr. Marx, CC: (i) South African Ministry of Justice & Constitutional Development, (ii) South African Department of Health, (iii) Mental Health Information Center of South Africa at the University ofStellenbosch, (iv) Mental Health Information Clearing House, (v) The World Mental Health 2000 (WMH200) Initiative Collaborators, (vi) Freedom Magazine: Investigative Reporting in the Interest of Public Health, (vi) Mr. Sean Z Kaliski FCPsych (SA), Dept of Psychiatry, University of Cape Town Forensic Unit, Valkenburg Hospital, (vii) Psychology Society of South Africa, (viii) Rhodes University Law Faculty, (ix) McMasters University, Canada: Law & Political Science Faculty, (x) George Magistrates [Full list of individuals CC'd in above institutions is shared at end of letter.)

RE: Psychiatric Evaluation 'Report' issued to court by Ms. B Boon in the AIDS Disclosure bomb threat political protest criminal case ofLara Johnstone MENS REA

& ACTUS REUS: THE CASE FOR MENTAL HEALTH

The alleged psychiatric evaluation 'report' issued by Ms. Boon to the court on 12 July 2002, has absolutely no quantitative nor qualitative evidenciary psychiatric information or evidence relating to an alleged mental illness or disorder. Irrespective of this lack of any evidenciary psychiatric information, Ms. Boon states in her 'report' that "I find indications that justifY relegation for psychiatric observation. I want to strongly recommend that the court refer the above named lady to ValkenburglLentegeur Hospital for an observation period. Additionally, Ms. Boon suggests that the document which I wrote and all other posible collateral information be made available to the observation psychiatrist.

Interestingly enough: neither you, nor the Prosecutor, nor the Magistrate seemed in the very least perturbed about this matter! An alleged psychiatrist writes a 'note' with NO EVIDENCE in that 'note' and you are willing to send an individual to a psychiatric observation unit for 30 days! NO QUESTIONS ASKED! Mr. Marx, the 'document' which I wrote, clearly states my knowledge and understanding of my culpable intent (mens rea) of my politically motivated 'protest' criminal act (actus reus). Additionally information in the document clearly identifies my full concurrence ofthe mens rea, the actus reus and the causation of harm; as well as cognisance ofthe fact that my act was indeed a criminal act. And, additionally, the 'document' is written with INTENTIONAL SARCASM and SATIRE (it seems in 'George' there are not many people who seem to 'understand' those 'concepts', or such 'writing' -- is there?) I choose to include humour, sarcasm. satire, and other forms of CREATIVE THINKING in my writing, because I WANT TO, because I prefer to write letters that make me think, and hopefully make other people think. I HATE getting boring letters, I choose NOT to write boring letters, even if they are to my attorney, the court, police, presidents, and if! choose to write a letter to God, one day, I will do the same! Since when is ~, humour against the law? Since when is THINKING against the law? And ifmy thinking confuses some poor ignorant psychiatrist and makes her confused -- as you ADMITTED THE PSYCHIATRIST TOLD YOU SHE WAS -- then YOU AND HER need to DEAL WITH YOUR CONFUSION, not respond to YOUR OWN CONFUSION. Ms. Boon would be advised not to write notes WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE that she WANTS TO STRONGLY RECOMMEND the institutionalization of the individual that CONFUSED HER! The document also states my opinions, ideas and thoughts on many issues, which relate to my politically motivated motive for my criminal act, and also contains extensive documentation and evidence relating to my substantiation for my opinions and thoughts on these issues. If anything, the document in question, emphasises my ability and awareness of my culpable intent in my criminal act.

While the document contains ideas, thoughts and beliefs on possibly many issues that others (including you. the prosecutor, judges, or psychiatrists) may disagree upon or even find far-fetched, the Constitution of South Africa clearly states that all citizens of South Africa enjoy equality before the law, the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedorns, and that EVERYONE is protected against any unfair discrimination, directly or indirectly, by the State or any person on the basis of one or more grounds, including: religion, conscience and belief. It also says that I have the following rights: - The right to make free political choices; - The right to have access to courts that are fair, independent and impartial; - The right to an independent judiciary that is competent, representative and human rights driven; - The right to administrative action that is: Lawful, Reasonable and Procedurally fair; - The right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom of the press and media, FREEDOM TO RECEIVE OR IMPART INFORMATION OR IDEAS, FREEDOM OF ARTISTIC CREATIVITY, and LISTEN UP!! - Anyone whose rights have been badly affected by administrative action has the right to be given written reasons as to why the decision was made or the action was taken. THERE WERE NO 'REASONS' in that 'psychiatric' NOTE! NONE WHATSOEVER! And neither have you -- MY

) 1

<61

ATTORNEY __given me ONE REASON, for why you think I need to be tested for mental insanity, except for stating that you though I was VERY INTELLIGENT! What kind of reason is that?

I am on trial for my criminal act (making a bomb threat), and ifmy attorney wishes to ascertain my ability or awareness towards whether I understand or comprehend my culpable intent, my criminal act, concurrence of the mens rea, the actus reus and the causation of harm; then any psychiatric evaluation demanded by you needs to focus on those issues (i.e. mens rea and actus reus).

The fact or possibility that you (Mr. Marx), or any psychiatrist may disagree with my opinio~s, thoughts or idea~ are NOT the i~sue.

Freedom of speech and thought are the hallmarks and fundamentals of a ftee society. There IS no law or statute ID the South AftlCan Constitution that allows for an individual to be sentenced to observation periods in mental institutions based on their beliefs, thoughts or ideas. (Maybe Ms. Boon would like to read the South Aftican Constitution one day, before she writes any more 'reports' that contain no quantitative or qualitative psychiatric evidenciary information WHATSOEVER!) And another thing, just because I was born on a farm in a one horse red neck town in Mpumalanga, does NOT mean that I have to follow the prescribed notion for many women in South Mica and become some man's breeding factory for children, waiting on him hand and foot, bare foot and pregnant, like a good little white trash slave! And neither does it imply that if! tell you about someone I met, or someone who wrote me a letter, and that includes a President in the White House, that I am 'making it up' or 'imagining it'! If you don't believe me, then write a letter of subpoena and I will request a copy of the letter for you! You can ftame it and hang it up on your toilet wall, for all I care, but don't think that I am going to sit around and let you send me to a mental institution for a month for observation BECAUSE YOU ARE CONFUSED, and do NOTHING ABOUT IT! Additionally, psychiatrists and attorneys have certain guidelines to follow, when they wish to determine the culpable intent ("mens rea") of a defendant who committed a voluntary criminal act ("actus reus"). Simply assuming that the defendant may be lying or imagining individuals or events to be 'non existant', and based upon this assumption making recommendations that a defendant be sentenced to a mental institution for a period of observation is the beginnings of a slippery slope of recklessness and negligence.

It is precisely for these reasons that there exists in the psychiatric field, a division of psychiatry known as Forensic Psychiatry (which by the way I informed the Prosecutor oftoday, and she did NOT KNOW WHAT A FORENSIC PSYCHIATRIST WAS! Can you imagine?). Forensic Psychiatry, as you mayor may not be aware, are psychiatrists who bridge the gap between psychiatry and the law. Forensic psychiatrists, unlike your average small town psychiatrist know that any psychiatric evaluation of an individual brought before them ftom the court, is presumed NOT to suffer ftom a mental illness or mental defect so as not to be criminally responsible in terms of section 78 (1), until the contrary is proved on a balance of probabilities.

78 (lA) Every accused person is presumed not to suffer :&oma mental illness or mental defect so as not to be criminally responsible in terms of section 78 (1), until the contrary is proved on a balance of probabilities.

78 (lB) Whenever the criminal responsibility of an accused with reference to the commission of an act or an ommission which constitutes an offense is an issue, the burden of proof with reference to the criminal responsibility of the accused shall be on the party who raises the issue.

2.30 Professor J.R. Millen [54] has made the following observations regarding these amendments: "The position in South Aftican law is now as follows: the presumption of insanity is codified in section 78 (lA) ofthe Criminal Procedure Act 1977; the burden of proving insanity rests on the party raising the issue; the burden may be discharged on the balance of probabilities .... [T]he accused who raises the defence of insanity is now in more or less the same position as before the passing ofthe Criminal Matters Amendment Act 1998: he or she must adduce evidence that establishes, on the balance of probabilities, a state of insanity AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENCE (own emphasis).

"What is puzzling about all this is why Parliament declined the constitutionally correct opportunity to assert the presumption of innocence and prefer the more dubious option of perpetuating the anamolous reverse onus arising :&omthe presumption of sanity? It might be that Parliament (in the form of the Portfolio Committee) was persuaded by the reasoning of the Canadian Supreme Court in R. v. Chaulk (supra) which found that 'the nearly impossible task of disproving insanity' placed an unsupportable burden of proof on the prosecution. The Court thus found the reverse onus justifiable.

"If this was indeed the motivation ofthe Portfolio Committee it is, with respect, neither persuasive nor principled. Whatever may be the position in Canada, the task of disproving insanity in South Aftican law is not so arduous as may appear. Section 79 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1977 requires that an accused person thought to be mentally ill must be referred to a psychiatric institution for examination BY A PANEL OF PSYCHIATRIC PRACTIONERS (own emphasis). The panel is REQUIRED TO PREP ARE A REPORT which must among other things, INCLUDE A FINDING AS TO WHETHER, AT THE RELEVANT TIME, THE ACCUSED'S CAPACITY TO DISTINGUISH RIGHT FROM WRONG WAS AFFECTED BY MENTAL ILLNESS. Should the panel report that the accused was not insane AT THE TIME, it is surely disingenous to suggest that it is 'virtually impossible' for the state, in these circumstances, to disprove sanity? (own emphasis) 2.31 Professor Milton's argument is persuasive and it was submitted that it is highly probable that these subsections will be found to be unconstitutional. [55] [54] "Law Reform: The Criminal Matters Amendment Act 1998" 1999 (l2) SACJ 41 at 47-81 [55] See also the dissenting judgement ofWilson J in R. v Chaulk 19903 SCR 1303 (SCC): D Stuart Charter Justice in Canadian Criminal Law 2 ed (1996) 15: 'Will section 1 now save any Charter violation? The Chaulk Effectiveness Test is improper' (1991) 2 ~" CRR (4th) 107; P Healy Rv Chaulk: 'Some answers and some questions on insanity' (1991) 2 CR (4th) 95.

A forensic psychiatrist knows that any psychiatric evaluation of any accused person rests on whether the individual in question was in a mentally incapacitated state AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE. Whether the accused person thinks the earth is flat, Jesus is a homosexual, that JFK was killed by a magic bullet, that AIDS is manmade, that AIDS was made by GOD, or that she has thousands of pages of documented information and evidence that AIDS IS MANMADE, is immaterial to the 'psychiatric evaluation' before them! An accused 'beliefs, ideas, thoughts or opinions' are NOT ON TRIAL, NOT FOR THE CRIMINAL ACT, AND NEITHER FOR THE SMALL TOWN PSYCHIATRIST! In my case, the political motivations for my crime do in fact include my OPINION that AIDS IS MANMADE, and for my opinion, there exist THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF EVIDENCE to support that fact, including over 2,000 United States Government documents, and testimony rrom numerous Doctors who have investigated biological and chemical warfare issues! That information however is to be brought in during my mitigating circumstances of my trial, it has absolutely nothing to do with my plea, and neither with my 'sanity'!

Your and Ms. Boon's legal (Constitutional) and psychiatric (Mental Health) decisions set a precedent whereby any future attorney or psychiatrist can simply refuse to substantiate verifiable evidence and information, but for whatever personal or political reasons have a defendant committed to a mental institution for a period of never-ending observation. Additionally, if we go ahead with this ludicrous attempt to plead me not guilty based on 'insanity' -- when I am clearly sane, and guilty, although I may at times be very 'different' -- then any attorney can come before any court in South Africa and knowing that his client may simply have a few 'different' opinions on certain matters, help him get offrrom taking responsibility for his crime, by pleading insanity! It's LUDICROUS, UNETHICAL, RECKLESS, NEGLIGENT, and demonstrates a contempt for justice, truth and equality.

r,

~

Mr. Marx, I, Lara Johnstone am acutely aware of not only the concepts of mens rea and actus reus, but specifically considered these concepts in the determination and planning of my criminal act, a planned form of political protest, similar to a sit-in, march, hunger strike, etc. Additionally, I have repeatedly informed you that I am more than willing to make available resources and contact information for you, the court or any interested individuals to peruse, who may wish to corroborate information about individuals whom YOU SEEM TO THINK 'LIVE IN MY HEAD'!

I am more than aware of the concepts of mens rea and actus reus, because I spent many months doing research on my former husbands case on these issues, writing the legal briefs, filing them and more. Additionally, I worked with former Los Angeles Police Department Narcotics investigator, and current editor and investigative reporter, Mr. Michael Ruppert (www.rromthewilderness.com) and Attornies Katya Komisaruk and Bill Simpich in organising and filing a class action lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for their complicity in allowing the importation of drugs into America, especially inner cities. Katya Komisaruk is an 'activist attorney' -- years ago she broke into an Air Force Base whereupon she used a hammer to smash over $1 MILLION worth of computers used in the missile defence system. When she had completed her protest at the Air Force's WAR PRACTICES, she left them a bunch of flowers, hitch-hiked a ride back to San Francisco, and called a press conference where she was arrested. She was sentenced to two years imprisonment, where she did so much legal work and support for her fellow prisoners, that upon her release she was offered a scholarship to Harvard Law School. She is not a 'fantasy' in my 'imagination' -- she is a LIVE HUMAN BEING, and she even speaks! Indeed, I have heard her 'voice'! Can you imagine? The words came out of her mouth, actual noises! The vibrations reached the hammer, anvil and drum in my ear, a chemical reaction occured causing an electrical transmission to my brain, and I HEARD A SOUND! My body can integrate sight and sound and other sensory data in my corpus collosum, and I can also make meaning out of the words being spoken or read probably using my rrontal lobes. This is all completely effortless! It requires no strain or effort or trying on my part! It happens automatically simply because I exist as the perceptual organizing human being that I am! And heaven of mercies, can you believe it, but Ms. Komisaruk, Ms. Ruppert, and Mr. Simpich actually HEARD MY VOICE? Are they 'hearing voices'? Should we commit them to a psychiatric hospital for observation too? What about that sarcastic satirist, Pieter Dirk Uys? Maybe he hears 'voices' which tell himjokes! I mean REALLY! You, or anyone else (for that matter) are more than welcome to contact them, and ask them if they know me, and veritY how they know me. And can you imagine, they agree with me on many of my ideas and opinions, and on others, they totally disagree! But simply because they disagree, does not mean they are ready to have me committed, and just because I disagree, doesn't mean I am ready to have them committed! Ifwe all agreed on our opinions, thoughts and ideas, we would be nothing more than robots!

Automatons! Now you are more than entitled to want a world where everyone agrees with you, but I happen to have a mind that I wish to use, as I SEE FIT, to think MY OWN THOUGHTS, to MAKE UP MY OWN MIND, to draw my own conclusions, and if that is a crime, then you better add it to my criminal rap sheet!

Mr. Marx, the South African Constitution says that I have the right to Just Administrative Action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair, and that where ANYONE whose rights have been adversely affected by administrative action has the RIGHT TO BE GIVEN REASON. Now, I am most definitely not the only person who thinks that a psychiatrist who writes a 'report' with no psychiatric evidenciary information, and who thinks that such a 'report' is sufficient to have someone committed to a period of psychiatric observation is NUTS! Everyone I have shown that pathetic excuse called a 'psychiatric evaluation report', and who knows me, thinks this is LUDICROUS, they are wondering if the people in the George Magistrate's Office have TAKEN LEAVE OF THEIR SENSES, or GONE TOT ALLY INSANE!

Ms. Boon's 'report' (ifthat is a 'report', I am Bugs Bunny!) doesn't give any REASON whatsoever. Additionally, Ms. Boon's statements and questions during her 'psychiatric evaluation' indicate that she seems to think that I MAKE THINGS UP. She seems to think that I 'imagine' things. For example:

1.

When we arrived for the psychiatric evaluation, I made ajoke about maybe we would find that I was not the only crazy person, and she immediately said, that we were not there to verify if anyone was crazy.

2.

Then later during the 'psychiatric evaluation' she asks me why some people think I am crazy? No-one I personally know thinks I am 'crazy' in a manner that is 'negative' or that requires psychiatric observation in a Hospital. At times they think I am hilariously funny, or passionate about life, justice, truth, and such things, but they ADMIRE me for it! However, it seems that there may be other 'individuals' who don't seem to think so. Do you know any Mr. Marx? I sure don't!

3.

After I had shared with Ms. Boon the story of my argument with Billy and having slapped him. She asks me if Billy exists!

Indeed, the woman seems to think I am some freak and that I 'imagine' quite allot, doesn't she? One wonders what SHE IMAGINES? For your information, here are the names of people whom you can contact to verify that Billy Wimsatt actually exists, and is a live human being, with a face, hair, two legs, two arms, a mouth, a tongue, two eyes. ~ As you may recall this is paraphrased what occurred: ÂťMs. Boon then asked me if Billy really existed. I said what do you mean? She asked me did I imagine him, does he really exist, did the event I had just described really happen, or only in my imagination. I laughed and said Of Course it happened [Did she think I made it up? Christ, she must really think I'm crazy!]. I sarcastically responded that if it didn't happen, and if Billy did not exist, then the twenty odd other people there, also had to have 'imagined' that it happened. Or maybe they didn't exist either.

~

Âť[Comment: The above event occurred during a Radical Honesty Thought Leader Workshop held by Dr. Brad Blanton (www.radicalhonesty.com). The following individuals were there who can corroborate the story, if anyone else also imagines that I made it up, or that Billy does not 'exist'. Here are the names of a few of the participants at the workshop: (i) Dr. Brad Blanton, former Baptist Minister, anti-Vietnam War activist, psychotherapist, Founder of Radical Honesty Enterprises, and author of "Radical Honesty", "Practicing Radical Honesty" and "Honest to God"(co-authored with Neale Donald Walsch, the author ofthe New York Times bestselling series of books titled 'Friendship with God'), Website: www.radicalhonesty.com (ii) Billy Wimsatt, author of "No More Prisons" as well as other books, (iii) Grace L1ewellyn, the author of "The Teenage Liberation Handbook: How to Quit School and Get A a Real Life and Education", a former middle school English teacher, the director of 'Not Back to School Camp', the founder ofthe Genius Tribe resource center and mailorder catalogue, and the editor of two other books on unschooling, (iv) Taber Shadburne, psychotherapist and Radical Honesty Trainer, <heytaber@aol.com> (v) Bill GaIt, Native American, Former US Army veteran, Business Leader, Friend of Fidel Castro, (vi) Steven Keese <Keese@ix.netcom.com>, worked for ADOBE in San Jose, (vii) Dr. Susan Campbell <drscampbell@igc.org>, psychologist, author of numerous best selling books, lives in Napa, CA, (viii) Tom Richards <tgrichards@aol.com>, Republican, CEO of Radical Honesty Enterprises, and also used to work for some military industrial corporation requiring 'military security clearance'. (ix) Teri Fredericks <terif@flash.net>, she works with people who have eating disorders and is a mend of Bill Gait, (x) Michael Dowd <mbdowd@bigplanet.com>, former Minister, current author ofEcocrises/Spiritual Growth related books (including article in Practicing Radical Honesty, titled 'The Big Picture'), with his wife and partner Connie (author of other books, I don't currently recall), (xi) Eve D'Angremond <evedaa@aol.com>, Dutch lady and supporter of Radical Honesty, (xii) Charlie Rose, a 'spiritual growth' workshop leader who previously used to work for LIFESPRING, (xiii) Dr. Deborah Anapol (Taj): Founder Sacred Space Institute (www.lovewithoutlimits.com).Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, author ofPolyamory: The New Love Without Limits; and Compersion: Using Jealousy as a Path to Unconditional Love, (x) Pila Hall, <pilahall@hotmail.com>]

Mr. Marx, on the day when you were appointed my attorney, you arrived in court, and without even speaking to me for two minutes, or asking me ANY QUESTIONS, you seemed to 'get it in your head' or someone else indicated to you that you need to question my sanity, or suggested that I 'make things up'! You immediately asked my mother to pay for a psychiatrist, she wisely refused. When I told you there was absolutely nothing wrong with me (except possibly that I'm not a 'normal brain-dead person' with normal boring ambitions, have a sense of humour, and choose to live my life to the fullest), and that if you would not let me plead guilty to the crime (the REASON I COMMITTED THE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED CRIME, WAS TO PLEAD GUILTY!), you stated that YOU WOULD NOT ALLOW me to plead guilty! When I said that if you would not let me plead guilty ,--- that I would fire you, you said that I could not fire my attorney, ifmy attorney thought I was not mentally sane! The prosecutor

today informed me that I can indeed fire you, if you do not represent me AS I WANT YOU TO! She seems to think that this 'fishing mental health/insanity' expedition that you are on, is at my request! I DEMAND THAT YOU INFORM THE COURT IT IS NOT! Mr. Marx, you have been appointed to defend me, and to do it AS I WISH AND ACCORDING TO MY WISHES. You have not been appointed to defend me, to do as you see fit, and to make up your mind as to whether I can plead guilty or not.

I do NOT WANT TO PLEAD NOT GUlL TY, and I especially do NOT want to attempt to indicate to the court that I would like to plead to 'insanity' as a way of diminished capacity in understanding my culpability to my voluntary criminal act. If you do not believe me, why don't you ask the following individuals: 1.

Inspector Pollock and the SAP Colonel who came to interview me before my arrest: I informed both of them that I WANTED TO PLEAD GUILTY. It was the REASON for committing my crime!

2.

Magistrate Mr. L.D. Strydom: I informed him at the time that I was going to be making my statement of guilt to the Magistrate that I did NOT WANT AN ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT ME FOR MY PLEA PHASE. I specifically informed him of my REASONS for saying so: Le. that attorneys consistently attempt to encourage defendants to not take responsibility for their crimes, or to plead to lesser crimes.

3.

Magistrate Mr. Govuza: I informed him that I did NOT want an attorney for my plea phase, and that I wanted to make a statement ofGUlLTY for my criminal act.

4.

Magistrate Mr. Essel: I informed him in court -- before you were appointed as my counsel -- that I did NOT WANT OR NEED AN ATTORNEY FOR MY PLEA, however if an attorney could advise me or assist me during the mitigating circumstances part of my trial, then I would not object to such advise.

South Amcan society (and others) clearly have a propensity for wishing to avoid taking responsibility for their actions, open any newspaper on any given day and see how many individuals within our 'governmenf or 'corporate' world abuse others, steal, buy Mercedes Benz's from public funds, lose a couple or twenty million rand here, take trips to Mauritius on taxpayer money, lie to the people, withhold information ITomthe people, spend 25 BILLION RAND on fighter planes, when people are starving and the army doesn't have any money to manage to get more than one platoon into combat status, and the list goes on and on and on! I, AM SICK TO DEATH OF IT. I TAKE RESPONSmILITY FOR MY ACTIONS! Now, you may think that because you have lived in a society that likes to live in denial, in avoidance of taking responsibility, that anyone who does take responsibility for their own actions, for their ideas of what social responsibility to their fellow human beings means to them, and who actually does something to attempt to bring these issues to the public -- TO WAKE THEM UP - is 'crazy'! By all means, think whatever you want, live in denial if you wish to, avoid being a personally and socially responsible human being -- if that is what you want! I intend to plead guilty and if you don't like that -- it IS YOUR PROBLEM! If you think that I am mentally unfit to understand the concepts of mens rea and actus reus, as they apply to my criminal act, then either confront me with THE REASONS for why you THINK SO, and put it down on paper, and we can deal with them one by one. Alternatively, REMOVE yourself from my case, and I shall represent myself PRO SE.

~

~

Today I called an attorney mend of mine in Durban, whom I have known for sixteen (16) years. His name is Azim Bacus, he used to have a legal practice (Bacus & Associates), but now works for a corporate financial firm. Before Apartheid died its timely death, Mr. Bacus was involved in some well known court cases in Durban. I informed Azim of the events that have occurred in my current trial. He was disgusted, and suggested that I report you to the Cape Law Society and Ms. Boon to the Institute for Psychiatry for Unprofessional Conduct. I have to say I agree with him! His statement was something to the effect that BOTH OF YOU were crazy! Since both you and Ms. Boon seems to think that I MAKE THINGS UP, and that it's 'all in my head' -- why don't you give Mr. Bacus a call, and ask him what he thinks of how you are representing me. He stated that ifhe was currently living in George he would represent me to take this case to the Constitutional Court. His work telephone number is: (031) 366 5021.

And lastly, but by no means least, on the day in question when you originally questioned my 'sanity' or 'mental health', I informed you that you could contact two very well known individuals in the fields of psychiatry and psychology in the United States. Both individuals have known me for over five years, and I have worked for them and with them. They are: (a) Richard Korn, Ph.D., Professor of Criminology and Psychology at University ofBerkeley and John Jay College of Criminology (NY), Founder of the Pacific Institute for Criminal Justice, author of numerous books and articles, as well as having worked with the American Civil Liberties Union and Amnesty International with prisoners and patients in mental health institutions. Dr. Korn has also testified in numerous well known trials in the United States as an expert witness, on the issues of mens rea and actus reas, including the Soledad trial, and others. (b) Dr. Brad Blanton, Psychotherapist and best selling author. Dr. Blanton earned his doctorate from the University of Texas when he was 25 years old. He was founding president of the Gestalt Institute of Washington, D.C. in 1970. Dr. Blanton is a 40 year veteran of the human potential movement, has the experience and insight to be counted among the greatest thinkers of his generation. He has been featured on 20/20, Roseanne, Dateline, CNN as well as numerous other television and radio shows in the US and abroad. His first book, Radical Honesty: How To Transform Your Life By Telling The Truth, became a best seller. His

/I?~

second book, Practicing Radical Honesty: Completing the Past, Staying in the Present, and Building a Future with a Little Help From Your Friends, is about the relationship between personal transformation and social transformation. He recently released Honest to God (with Neale Donald Walsch), and will be coming out with Radical Parenting: Seven Steps to a Functional Family in a Disfunctional World and The Truthtellers: Stories Of Success By Honest People later this year.

Both of these people had no problems with me living in their homes, one ofthem had a personal physical relationship with me. The other was so impressed with my passion for justice and truth, he continually encouraged me to study law, saying that he thought I would make South Africa proud being a Supreme Court Judge! Does it sound like he thought I needed psychiatric observation?

Unfortunately, a good ftiend of mine and Dr. Korn's informed me three days ago, that he passed away. However, Dr. Blanton is still very much ALIVE, and NOT IN MY IMAGINATION, but on PLANET EARTH! He too has two legs, two arms, two eyes, a nose, and he also has a MIND, wherein resides a BRAIN, which he, unlike it seems people in George do, USES! You are more than welcome to contact him and ask him ifhe knows me, and whether he thinks that I am able to understand the concepts of culpable intent in committing a voluntary criminal act. He was arrested with me in the capital of the Rotunda in Washington, D.C. a few years ago, where we were protesting for campaign finance reform, along with a whole bunch of other people, including Ronnie Dugger. There is an eighty year old woman, called Granny D, who walked across America, and also got arrested for campaign finance reform, should she be committed for psychiatric observation? No doubt Dr. Blanton may disagree with my form of protest (Le. making a bomb threat, and that is entirely his prerogative), however, he is well aware of my political actions and my passion for political and socio-economic change to be brought to this world for EVERYONE. During the Vietnam war, he went around Washington DC putting potatoes in the exhaust pipes ofbusses -- maybe he should also be comitted? He refused to pay taxes to support the military bombing the Vietnamese, and when they wanted to arrest him and confiscate his home, he went into the IRS, with the amount he allegedly owed them in 1 cent pieces and threw it all over the office! He wrote a book about how God and the Devil are the same people! It is a very interesting book -- maybe he should be committed for having a too active imagination? I include for your perusal some of his ideas on political and socio-economic change, consciousness, and other things, below, so you may have a better idea, that not everyone in the world holds the same beliefs, ideas, concepts, thoughts, and ways of doing things, as the mentally enslaved mainstream idiots in George do! I also include some information by some other psychoanalysts who seem to have -- at least in my opinion -- a much healthier idea of what 'sanity' is, than the psychotherapists in George Hospital do! No disrespect intended, but ignorance and abuse of power make me angry!

As far as I am concerned, you, Ms. Boon and the court have so far violated the following rights I am alleged to have in the South African Constitution.

- The right to equal enjoyment of all rights and fteedoms, including the right not to be discriminated against, based on religion, conscience and belief; - The right not to be deprived of their freedom without good reasons; - The right to make free political choices; - The right to have access to courts that are fair, independent and impartial; - The right to an independent judiciary that is competent, representative and human rights driven; - The right to administrative action that is: Lawful, Reasonable and Procedurally fair; - The right to freedom of expression, which includes fteedom of the press and media, fteedom to receive or impart information or ideas, freedom of artistic creativity, and academic fteedom and freedom of scientific research; - The rights to enjoy and exercise their religious and cultural rights; - Anyone whose rights have been badly affected by administrative action has the right to be given written reasons as to why the decision was made or the action was taken.

It is probably a good thing that I am not one ofthose inclined to make civil suits for damages, because clearly I could take the two of you to the cleaners for defamation of character -- couldn't I? I request the following relief in this matter: 1. The psychiatric evaluation 'report' by Ms. Boon is removed from my file, since it is about as close to what a REAL PSYCHIATRIC EV ALUA TION REPORT SHOULD BE, as a mouse is to an elephant.

2. We begin an HONEST, OPEN and TRANSPARENT discussion about how you will assist and support me to plead GUILTY and how to submit to the court my mitigating circumstances for my criminal act. I have no problem with you discussing my case with anyone else, I do have a problem with you discussing my case with others, and NOT informing me of your statements to other individuals, and as such talking behind my back. You can say whatever you want about me, but have the decency to say it to my face. If you are not willing to do so, and wish to discuss my case with others behind my back, without my permission, then you are VIOLATING THE CONFIDENTIALITY BETWEEN A LAWYER AND THEIR CLIENT. Are you not? Or does such a thing not exist in our 'New South Afiica'?

3. If you are not willing to work WITH ME and support me in the manner that I WISH, that is fair enough. Please do the honorable thing and then withdraw yourself from my case.

I look forward to hearing ITom you.

Lara Idlinstone 1.

(i)

~

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

2.

(i)

(ii)

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE & CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Postal Address: Private Bag X8I, PRETORIA, 0001 Telephone: 012 - 315 IIII Fax: 012 - 326 0991 Minister: Mr PM Maduna Deputy Minister: Ms CE Gillwald Director-General: Mr V Pikoli E-Mail: Mediaenquiries:kkganyago@justice.gov.zaorhaugustyn@justice.gov.za (Copy: crabe@justice.gov.za, mschouwstra@justice.gov.za) Gauteng Regional Office: Mrs Beryl R Sime!ane (Regional Head): Johannesburg: Cell: 083 4509 223: Tel:(OII) 3310440: Fax:(OII) 3310452: E-mail: simelane@joreg.pwv.gov.za(Copy:monica@joreg.pwv.gov.za) KwaZulu Natal Regional Office: Mr Marthinus J Langenhoven: Regional Head: Durban: Cell: 0824602668: Tel:(031) 3015303: Fax:(031) 3015340/41 E-mail: langenhovenmj@jusnatal.kzntI.gov.za (Copy: joubertl@jusnatal.kzntI.gov.za, rnaicker@justice.gov.za) Northern Cape Regional Office: Mr RD Isaacs (Regional Head): Kimberley Tel:(053) 832 5653/4/5: (053) 839 0000: Fax:(053) 832 5621 E-mail: rodney@kimreg.ncape.gov.za Western Cape Regional Office: Adv H Mohamed (Regional Head): Cape Town Tel: (021) 462 3135: Fax: (021) 462 3141: Email: hishaam@capereg.wcape.gov.za DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: Pretoria, Tel: (012) 312 0000: Fax: (012) 326 4395: Cape Town, Tel: (021) 465-7407/8: Fax: (021) 465-1575 Minister of Health: Dr Manto Tshabalala-Msimang (C/O: Mr Sibani Mngadi, Media Liaison Officer: mngads@health.gov.za; Mr Johannes KgatIa, Parliamentary Officer: kgatIaj@health.gov.za; Ms. Zethu Khoza: Private Secretary: khozaz@health.gov.za; Mr Mduduzi Masuku: Assistant Private Secretary: masukm@heaIth.gov.za; Ms Rone! Cornelius: corner@health.gov.za; Mr Terrance Masinga: Chief Administrative Clerk: masint@health.gov.za; Adv Patricia Lambert: Special Advisor: lambep@health.gov.za; Mr Ray Mabope: Special Advisor: mabopr@health.gov.za) Dept of Health: AlDS/HIV Government Action Plan Directors, etc: (i) Dr. Nono Simelela, Chief Director: HIV/AlDS and TB: Tel: (012) 312-0121: Fax: (012) 328-5743 E-mail: sime!n@health.gov.za (ii) Mr. Collen Bonnecwe, Director: HIV/AIDS and STIs: Tel: (012) 312-0136: Fax: (012) 326-2891 E-mail: bonnec@health.gov.za (iii) Mrs. Thami Skenjana: Director: Government AIDS Action Plan: Tel: (012) 312-0133: Fax: (012) 312-0165: E-mail: moetir@health.gov.za

3.

FACULTY OF LAW, UNIV. OF CAPE TOWN The Faculty Office: Tel (021) 650-3087: Fax: (021) 650-5662: E-mail: lawnv@law.uct.ac.za

4.

MENTAL HEALTH INFORMATION CENTER OF SOUTH AFRICA AT THE UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH: Directors: Dr. Dan J. Stein (djs2@sun.ac.za), Prof. Robin A. Emsley, Charmaine Hugo (cjhugo@gerga.sun.ac.za), Charmaine Wessels (mhic@sun.ac.za), MS. Jeanine van Kradenburg, of the Department of Psychiatry, University ofStelIenbosch: Tel: (021) 938-9229

~

5.

MENTAL HEALTH INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE: Dr Dan Stein, Director: MRC Research Unit on Anxiety & Stress Disorders, (djs2@gerga.sun.ac.za) Module administrator: Charmaine Hugo,

6.

THE WORLD MENTAL HEALTH 2000 (WMH200) INITIATIVE COLLABORATORS:

MS.

IInTB Ustun, Assessment, Classification, & Epidemiology (ACE) Group, World Health Organization (WHO) Room 4122, CH-1211, Geneva 27, SWITZERLAND. Voice: 41-22-791-3609; Fax: 41-22-791-4885; E-Mail: ustunt@who.ch.

Professor Kessler can be contacted at: Ronald C Kessler, Professor of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA, USA 02115.

Voice: 617-432-3587; Fax: 617-432-3588; E-mail: Kessler@hcp.med.harvard.edu.

-

7.

PSYCHOLOGY SOCIETY OF SOUTH AFRICA: Tel: 27-12-807-1740 Fax: 27-12-807- 1776: Email: psyssa@cis.co.za

8.

RHODES UNIVERSITY LAW FACULTY: Professor & Dean: JR Midgley (RMidgley@ru.ac.za), Deputy Dean: MJ Oelschig (M.Oelschig@ru.ac.za), Professors: RB Mqeke (R.Mqeke@ru.ac.za), PJ Schwikkard (p.Schwikkard@ru.ac.za); Associate Professor: CM Plasket (C.Plasket@ru.ac.za); Senior Lecturers: GW Barker (G.Barker@ru.ac.za), BJ Clark (B.Clark@ru.ac.za), GE Davies (E.Davies@ru.ac.za), JD Haydock (J.Haydock@ru.ac.za), L Meintjes (L.Meintjes@ru.ac.za), Professor Emeritus and Senior Research Fellow AJ Kerr (A.Kerr@ru.ac.za), Professor Emeritus and Part-Time Lecturer ID Schiifer (LSchafer@ru.ac.za), Legal Aid Clinic, Director J Campbell (J.Campbell@ru.ac.za), Principal: I Sogoni (I.Sogoni@ru.ac.za), Senior Lecturer: DA Maree (D.Maree@ru.ac.za), Lecturer: IN Cocks (J.Cocks@ru.ac.za).

9.

MCMASTERS UNIVERSITY, CANADA: LAW & POLITICAL SCIENCE FACUL TY: yatesch@mcmaster.ca, wellsd@mcmaster.ca, stubbsr@mcmaster.ca, steinm@mcmaster.ca, sproulem@mcmaster.ca, seamanjw@mcmaster.ca, tporter@mcmaster.ca, nossalk@mcmaster.ca, nossalk@mcmaster.ca, millers@mcmaster.ca, lewistj@mcmaster.ca, jacekh@mcmaster.ca, gallegui@mcmaster.ca, colemanw@mcmaster.ca, carrollb@mcmaster.ca, breckeng@mcmaster.ca, kbird@mcmaster.ca, ajzens@mcmaster.ca,

10.

FREEDOM MAGAZINE: INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC HEALTH http://www.humanrightsfTeedom.orglmental.htm editor@fTeedommag.org

11.

George Magistrates: Mr. L.D. Strydom, Mr. Govusa, Mr. Essel, Mr. Fortuin.(copies by hand)

and others ....

Laboratory Birth of AIDS http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/41 The Secret Origin of AIDS & HIV, by Alan Cantwell, Jr., MD http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/336 Death of Dr. Wiley I RSA Aids, biowarfare, CIA, Operation Northwoods http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/216 Hepatitis B Vaccine & Origin ofHIV/AIDS, by Dr. Leonard Horowitz http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessagel333 Vaccines Linked to Origin of AIDS, by Elaine Zacky http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/334 CIA Confirms Nazis Worked for US, by UPI http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/338 Aids Biowar: Quirk of Nature or Mass Murder? http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/3

39

Aids Biowar (11): Did Science Create a Genetic Genocide Machine? http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/340 Aids Biowar (Ill): Aids Genocide: The crime that dare not speak its NAME http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/34l HIV Horror - At least 28 Million Afiicans Infected, Dying - Mail & Guardian http://groups.yahoo.comlgroup/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/399 Dept. of De fen se reveals: US servicemen used as biological warfare guineapigs

http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/411 Bombing the Mind, The Pentagon's Program for Psychopharmalogical http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/567

War

Poll - Most Americans Believe 911 Was Homegrown-NWO Operation http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/621 AITicans 'faced with (AIDS) extinction' - National Post http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/657 U.S. 'Government' created AIDS - Idaho Observer http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/659 Gulf War Illness (includes info on DNA links to manmade AIDS) http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/680 Brad Blanton speaks out against War .... http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/686 911: What the CIA doesn't want you to know, Q&A with US Navy Intel- Mike Freeland http://groups.yahoo路.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/l00 Enemy is Inside the Gates, by Col. Donn De Grand Pre, US Army (911 =INSIDE JOB) http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciIiation/message/88 'Evidence (for 911) is a FARCE' by U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant Stan Goff http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 45 CIA'S 'Operation Cyclone': "A few stirred up Muslims" - Le. the Taliban http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/273 Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics! -- Public Action.com http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/276 This War of Lies goes on - John PiIger, Mirror, UK http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/306 Russian Air Force Chief Says Official 9- 11 Story IMPOSSIBLE http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciIiation/message/383 CIA: America's Premier International Terrorist Org! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/

468

Deadly Deceipts: My 25 years in the CIA - Ralph McGehee http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/

469

Talk by former CIA agent - Ralph McGehee http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyre~onciliation/message/

471

New CIA Univ. Reveals Agency Priorities - FTW http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/53 Ecocrisis: Earth will expire by 2050 - report http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/5 Operation Mockingbird - CIA subversion of US media ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/652 Cheer up, could be worse, what if the gov lied to us? Idaho Observer http://groUps.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/658 Wake Up! -- Idaho Observer http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/664 The CIA and the Media -- Rolling Stone http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/665 British Media Exposes CIA-Cocaine Links .. http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/666

5 82

Media Censor CIA Ties With Medellin Drug Cartel - FAIR http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/668 The Media, the CIA and the Coup - Counterpunch http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/669 Pipe Dreams: CIA, Drugs, and the Media - PIR http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/670 CIA: 50 Years of Hidden History - Parascope http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/671 Spooky News: CIA infiltration & manipulation of Mass Media .. http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliationlmessage/673 Public Relations firm Hill & Knowlton, Iraq War & CIA - Covert Action Quarterly http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/6 76

ARE WE SANE? Excerpt ITom: The Sane Society, by Erich Fromm Erich From, German-born psychoanalyst, social philosopher, and author, was born in Frankfurt in 1900. He studied sociology and psychology at the universities ofHeidelberg, Frankfurt and Munich, and was trained in psychoanalysis at the Psychoanalytic Institute in Berlin. He has lectured at Columbia University, Bennington College, the William Alanson White Institute of Psychiatry, the New School for Social Research, the National University of New Mexico, and has been a Terry Lecturer at Yale University. His books include: 'Man for Himself, 'Psychoanalysis and Religion', 'The Forgotten Language', 'The Sane Society', 'The Art of Loving', 'Zen Buddhism and Psychoanalysis', Sigmund Freud's Mission', 'Marx's Concept of Man', 'May Man Prevail?', 'Beyond the Chains of Illusions', 'The Dogma of Christ and other Essays', 'The Heart of Man', and 'Escape ITom Freedom'.

Can A Society be Sick? -- The Pathology of Normalcy To speak of a whole society as lacking in mental health implies a controversial assumption contrary to the position of sociological relativism held by most social scientists today. They postulate that each society is normal inasmuch as it functions, and that pathology can be defined only in terms of the individual's lack of adjustment to the ways oflife in his society.

To speak of a "sane society" implies a premise different ITom sociological relativism. It makes sense only if we assume that there can be a society which is NOT sane, and this assumption, in turn, implies that there are universal criteria for mental health which are valid for the human race as such, and according to which the state of health of each society can be judged. This position of normative humanism is based on a few fundamental premises.

The species "man," can be defined not only in anatomical and physiological terms; its members share basic PSYCHIC qualities, the laws which govern their mental and emotional functioning, and the aims for a satisfactory solution ofthe problem of human existence. It is true that our knowledge of man is still so incomplete that we cannot yet give a satisfactory definition of man in psychological sense. It is the task of the "science of man" to arrive eventually at a correct description of what deserves to be called human nature. What has often been called "human nature" is but one of its many manifestations -- and often a pathological one -and the function of such mistaken definition usually has been to defend a particular type of society as being the necessary outcome of man's mental condition.

Against such reactionary use of the concept of human nature, the Liberals, since the eighteenth century, have stressed the malleability of human nature and the decisive influences of environmental factors. True and important as such emphasis is, it has led many social scientists to an assumption that man's mental constitution is a blank piece of paper, on which society and culture write their text, and which has no intrinsic quality of its own. This assumption is just as untenable and just as destructive of social progress as the opposite view was. The real problem is to infer the CORE common to the whole human race ITomthe innumerable MANIFESTATIONS of human nature, the normal as well as the pathological ones, as we can observe them in different individuals and cultures. The task is furthermore to recognize the laws inherent in human nature and the inherent goals for its development and unfolding.

This concept of human nature is different ITom the way the term "human nature" is used conventionally. Just as man transforms the world aroundhim, so he transforms in the process of history. He is his own creation, as it were. But just as he can only transform and modifY the natural materials around him according to their nature, so he can only transform and modifY himself according to his

own nature. What man DOES in the process of history is to develop this potential, and to transform it according to its own possibilities. The point of view taken here is neither a "biological" nor a "sociological" one if that would mean seperating these two aspects from each other. It is rather one transcending such dichotomy by the assumption that the main passions and drives in man result from the TOTAL EXISTENCE of man, that they are definite and ascertainable, some ofthem conducive to health and happiness, others to sickenss and unhappiness. Any given social order does not CREATE these fundamental strivings but it determines whic of the limited number of potential passions are to become manifest or dominant. Man as he appears in any given culture is always a manifestation of human nature, a manifestation, however, which in its specific outcome is determined by the social arrangements under which he lives. Just as the infant is born with all human potentialities which are to develop under favorable social and cultural conditions, so the human race, in the process of history, develops into what it potentially is.

The approach to NORMATIVE HUMANISM is based on the assumption that, as in any other problem, ther are right, wrong, satisfactory and unsatisfactory solutions to the problem of human existence. Mental health is achieved if man develops into full maturity according to the characteristics and laws of human nature. Mental illness consists in the failure of such development. From this premise the criterion of mental health is not one of individual adjustment to a given social order, but a universal one, valid for all men. of giving a satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence.

What is so deceptive about the state of mind of the members of a society is the "consensual validation" oftheir concepts. It is naively assumed tha the fact that the majority of people share certain ideas or feelings proves the validity of these ideas and feelings. Nothing is further from the truth. Consensual validation as such has no bearing whatsoever on reason or mental health. Just as there is a "folie 'a deux" there is a "folie 'a millions." The fact that millions of people share the same vices virtues, the fact that they share so many errors does not make the errors to be truths, and the fact that millions of people share the same forms of mental pathology does not make these people sane.

There is, however, an important difference between individual and social mental illness, which suggests a differentiation between two concepts: that of DEFECT, and that of NEUROSIS. If a person fails to attain freedom, spontanaeity, a genuine expression of self, he may be considered to have a severe defect, provided we assume that freedom and spontanaeity are the objective goals to be attained by every human being. If such a goal is not attained by the majority of members of any given society, we deal with the phenomena of SOCIALLY PATTERNED defect. The individual shares it with many others; he is not aware of it as a defect, and his security is not threatened by the experience of being different, of being an outcast, as it were. What he may have lost in richness and in genuine feeling of happiness, is made up by the security offitting in with the rest of mankind -- AS HE KNOWS THEM. As a matter of fact, his very defect may have been raised to a virtue by his culture, and thus may give him an enhanced feeling of achievement.

An illustration is the feeling of guilt and anxiety which Calvin's doctrines aroused in men. It may be said that the person who is overwhelmed by a feeling of his own powerlessness and unworthiness, by unceasing doubt as to whether he is saved or condemned to eternal punishment, who is hardly capable of genuine joy, suffers from a severe defect. Yet this very defect was culturally patterned; it was looked upon as particularly valuable, and the individual was thus protected from the neurosis which he would have acquired in a culture where the same defect gave him a feeling of profound inadequacy and isolation.

Spinoza formulated the problem ofthe socially patterned defect very clearly. He says: "Many people are seized by one and the same affect with great consistency. All his senses are so strongly affected by one object that he believes this object to be present even if it is not. If this happens while the person is awake, the person is believed to be insane ... But ifthe GREEDY person thinks only of money and possessions, the AMBITIOUS one only of fame, one does not think of them as being insane, but only as annoying; generally one has contempt for them. But FACTUALLY greediness, ambition, and so forth are forms of insanity, although usually one does not think ofthem as 'illness.'"

These words were written a few hundred years ago; they still hold true, although the defects have been culturally patterned to SUCH an extent now that they are not even generally thought anymore to be annoying or contemptible. Today we come across a person who acts and feels like an automaton; who never experiences anything which is really his; who experiences himself entirely as the person he thinks he is supposed to be; whose artificial smile has replaced genuine laughter; whose meaningless chatter has replaced communicative speech; whose dulled despair has taken the place of genuine pain. Two statements can be made about this person. One is that he suffers from a defect of spontanaeity and individuality which may seem incurable. At the same time, it may be said that he does not differ essentially from millions of others who are in the same position. For most of them, the culture provides patterns which enable them TO LIVE WITH A DEFECT WITHOUT BECOMING ILL. It is as if each culture provided the remedy against the outbreak of manifest neurotic symptoms which would result from the defect produced by it.

Suppose that in our Western culture movies, radios, television, sports events and newspapers ceased to function for only four weeks. With these main avenues of escape closed, what would be the consequences for people thrown back upon their own resources? I have no doubt that even in this short time thousands of nervous breakdowns would occur, and many more thousands of

people would be thrown into a state of acute anxiety, not different fTomthe picture which is diagnosed clinically as "neurosis." If the opiate against the socially patterned defect were withdrawn, the manifest illness would make its appearance.

For a minority, the pattern provided by the culture does not work. They are often those whose individual defect is more severe than that ofthe average person, so that the culturally offered remedies are not sufficient to prevent the outbreak of manifest illness. (A case in point is the person whose aim in life is to attain power and fame. While this aim is, in itself, a pathological one, there is nevertheless a difference between the person who uses his powers to attain this aim realistically, and the more severely sick one who has so little emerged fTom his infantile grandiosity that he does not do anything toward the attainment of his goal but waits for a miracle to happen and, thus feeling more and more powerless, ends up in a feeling of futility and bitterness.) But there are also those whose character structure, and hence whose conflicts, differ fTom those ofthe majority, so that the remedies which are effective for most of their fellow men are of no help to them. Among this group we sometimes find people of greater integrity and sensitivity than the majority, who for this very reason are incapable of accepting the cultural opiate, while at the same time they arenot strong and healthy enough to live soundly "against the stream."

The foregoing discussion on the difference between neurosis and the socially patterned defect may give the impression thatif~' society only provides the remedies against the outbreak of manifest symptoms, all goes well, and it can continue to function . smoothly, however great the defects created by it. History shows us, however, that this is not the case.

It is true indeed, that man, in contrast to the animal shows an almost infinite malleability; just as he can eat almost anything, live under practically any kind of climate and adjust himselfto it, there is hardly any psychic condition which he cannot endure, and under which he cannot carry on. He can live rree, and as a slave. Rich and in luxury, and under conditions of half starvation. He can live as a warrior, and peaceably; as an exploiter and robber, and as a member ofa cooperating and loving fellowship. There is hardly a psychic state in which man cannot live, and hardly anything which cannot be done with him, and for which he cannot be used. All these considerations seem to justifY the assumption that there is no such thing as a nature common to all men, and that would mean in fact that there is no such thing as a species "man," except in a physiological and anatomical sense.

Yet, in spite. of all this evidence, the history of man shows that we have omitted on fact, Despots and ruling cliques can succeed in dominating and exploiting their fellow man, but they cannot prevent REACTIONS to this inhuman treatment. Their subjects become mghtened, suspicious, lonely and, if not due to external reasons, their systems collapse at some point because fears, suspicions and loneliness eventually incapacitate the majority to function effectively and intelligently. Whole nations, or social groups within them, can be subjugated and exploited for a long time, but THEY REACT. They react with apathy or such impairment of intelligence, initiative and skills that they gradually fail to perform the functions which should serve their rulers. Or they react by the accumulation of such hate and destructiveness as to bring about an end to themselves, their rulers and their system.

Again their reaction may create such independence and longing for fTeedom that a better society is built upon their creative impulses. Which reaction occurs, depends on many factors: on economic and political ones, and on the spiritual climate in which people live. But whatever the reactions are, the statement that man can live under almost any condition is only half true; it must be supplemented by the other statement, that if he lives under conditions which are contrary to his nature and to the basic requirements for human growth and sanity, he cannot help reacting; he must either deteriorate and perish, or bring about conditions which are more in accordance with his needs.

That human nature and society can have conflicting demands, and hence that a whole society can be sick, is an assumption which was made very explicitly by Freud, most extensively in his Civilization and Its Discontents.

He starts out with the premise of a human nature common to the human race, throughout all cultures and ages, and of certain ascertainable needs and strivings inherent in that nature. He believes that culture and civilization develop in an ever-increasing contrastto the needs of man, and thus he arrives at the concept of the "social neurosis." "If the evolution of civilization," he writes, "has such a far-reaching similarity with the development of an individual, and ifthe same methods are employed in both, would not the diagnosis be justified that many systems of civilization -- or epochs of it -- possibly even the whole of humanity -- have become 'neurotic' under the pressure of civilizing trends? To analytic dissection of these neuroses, therapeutic recommendations might follow which could claim a great practical interest. I would not say that such an attempt to apply psychoanalysis to civilized society would be fanciful or doomed to fTuitlessness. But it behooves us to be very careful, not to forget that after all we are dealing only with analogies, and that it is dangerous, not only with men but also with concepts, to drag them out of the region where they originated and have matured. The diagnosis of COLLECTIVE NEUROSIS, moreover, will be cowonted by a special difficulty. In the neurosis of an individual we can use as a starting point the contrast represented to us between the patient and his environment which we assume to be 'normal.' No such background as this would be available for any society similarly affected; it would have to be supplied in some other way. And with regard to any therapeutic application of our knowledge, what would be the use of the most acute analysis of social neurosis, since no one posesses the power to compel the community to adopt the therapy? In spite of all these difficulties, We may expect that one day someone will venture upon this RESEARCH INTO THE PATHOLOGY OF CIVILIZED COMMUNITIES."

" 9:J-

ARE WE SANE? Nothing is more common than the idea that we, the people living in the Western world of the twentieth century, are eminently sane.

Even the fact that a great nwnber of individuals in our midst suffer trom more or less severe forms ofmentaI illness produces little doubt with respect to the general standard of our mental health. We are sure that by introducing better methods of mental hygine we shall improve STILL FURTHER the state of our mental health. and as far as individual mental disturbances are concerned, we look at them as strictly individual incidents, perhaps with some amazement that so many ofthese incidents should occur in a culture which is supposedly so sane.

Can we be so sure that we are not deceiving ourselves? Many an inmate of an insane asylwn is convinced that everybody else is crazy, except himself. Many a severe neurotic believes that his compulsive rituals or his hysterical outbursts are normal reactions to somewhat abnormal circwnstances. What about ourselves?

Let us, in good psychiatric fashion, look at the facts. In the last one hundred years we, in the Western world, have created a greater material wealth than any other society in the history of the human race. Yet we have managed to kill of millions of our pop~lation in an arrangement which we call "war." Aside trom smaller wars, we had larger ones in 1870, 1914, 1939. During these wars; every participant firmly believed that he was fighting in his self-defence, for his honor, or that he was backed up by God. The groups with whom one is at war are, often trom one day to the next, looked upon as cruel, irrational fiends, whom one must defeat to save the world trom evil. But a few years after the mutual slaughter is over, the enemies of yesterday are our mends, the mends of yesterday our enemies, and again in full seriousness we begin to pain them with appropriate colours of black and white. At this moment, in the year 1955, we are prepared for a mass slaughter which would, ifit came to pass, surpass any slaughter the human race has arranged so far. One ofthe greatest discoveries in the field of natural science is prepared for this purpose. Everybody is looking with a mixture of confidence and apprehension to the "statesmen" of the various peoples, ready to heap all praise on them if they "succeed in avoiding a war," and ignoring the fact that it is only these very statesmen who ever cause a war, usually not even through their bad intentions, but by their unreasonable mismanagement of the affairs entrusted to them.

In these outbursts of destructiveness and paranoid suspicion, however, we are not behaving differently trom what the civilized part of mankind has done in the last three thousands years of history. According to Victor Cherbulliez, trom 1500 RC. to 1860 A.D. no less than about eight thousand peace treaties were signed, each one supposed to secure permanent peace, and each one lasting on an average two years.

Our direction of economic affairs is scarcely more encouraging. We live in an economic system in which a particularly good crop is often an economic disaster, and we restrict some of our agricultural productivity in order to "stabilize the market," although there are millions of people who do not have the very things we restrict, and who need them badly. Right now our economic system is functioning very well, because, among other reasons, we spend billions of dollars per year to produce armaments. Economists look with some apprehension to the time when we stop producing armaments, and the idea that the state should produce houses and other useful and needed things instead of weapons, easily provokes accusations of endangering treedom and individual initiative.

We have a literacy above 90 percent of the population. We have radio, television, movies, a newspaper a day for everybody. But instead of giving us the best of past and present literature and music, these media of communication, supplemented by advertising, fill the minds of men with the cheapest trash, lacking in any sense of reality, with sadistic phantasies which a halfway cultured person would be embarrased to entertain even once in a while. But while the mind of everybody, young and old, is thus poisoned, we go on blissfilly to see to it that no "immorality" occurs on the screen. Any suggestion that the government should finance the production of movies and radio programs which would enlighten and improve the minds of our people would be met again with indignation and accusation in the name of ueedom and idealism.

We have reduced the average working hours to about half what they were one hundred years ago. We today have more tree time available than our forefathers dared to dream of. But what has happened? We do not know how to use the newly gained tree time' we try to kill the time we have saved, and are glad when another day is over ..

Why should I continue with a picture which is known to everybody? Certainly, ifan individual acted in this fashion, serious doubts would be raised as to his sanity; should he, however, claim that there is nothing wrong, and that he is acting perfectly reasonably, then the diagnosis would not even be doubtful any more.

Yet many psychiatrists and psychologists refuse to entertain the idea that society as a whole may be lacking in sanity. They hold that the problem of mental health in a society is only that of a nwnber of "unadjusted" individuals, and not that of a possible unadjustment of the culture itself. This book deals with the latter problem; not with individual pathology, but with the PATHOLOGY OF NORMALCY, particularly with the pathology of contemporary Western society.

-

Man in Capitalistic Society

From the standpoint of normative humanism we must arrive at a different concept of mental health; the very person who is considered healthy in the categories of an alienated world, from the humanistic standpoint appears as the sickest one -- although not in terms of individual sickness, but ofthe socially patterned defect. Mental health, in the humanistic sense, is characterized by the ability to love and to create, by the emergence trom the incestuous ties to family and nature, by a sense of identity based on one's experience of self as the subject and agent of one's powers, by the grasp of reality inside and outside of ourselves, that is, by the development of objectivity and reason. The aim of life is to live it intensely, to be fully born, to be fully awake. To emerge trom the ideas of infantile grandiosity into the conviction of one's real though limited strength; to be able to accept the paradox that every one of us is the most important thing there is in the universe -- and at the same time not more important than a fly or a blade of grass. To be able to love life, and yet to accept death without terror; to tolerate uncertainty about the most important questions with which life cOnITontsus -- and yet to have faith in our thought and feeling, inasmuch as they are truly ours. To be able to be alone, and at the same time one with a loved person, with every brother on this earth, with all that is alive; to follow the voice of our conscience, the voice that calls us to ourselves, yet not to indulge in self hate when the voice of conscience was not loud enough to be heard and followed.

The mentally healthy person is the person who lives by love, reason and faith, who respects life, his own and that of his fellow man.

The alienated person, as we have tried to describe him ...., cannot be healthy. Since he experiences himself as a thing, an investment, to be manipulated by himself and by others, he is lacking in a sense of self. This lack of self creates deep anxiety. The anxiety engendered by contronting him with the abyss qfnothingness is more terrifying than even the tortures of hell. In the vision of hell, I am punished and tortured -- in the vision of nothingness I am driven to the borders of madness -- because I cannot say "I" any more.

If the modem age has been rightly called the age of anxiety, it is primarily because of this anxiety engendered by the lack of self.

Inasmuch as "I am as you desire me" - I am NOT; I am anxious, dependent on approval of others; constantly trying to please. The alienated person feels inferior whenever he suspects himself of not being in line. Since his sense of worth is based on approval as the reward for conformity, he feels naturally threatened in his sense of self and in his self-esteem by any feeling, thought or action which could be suspected of being a deviation. Yet, inasmuch as he IS human and not an automaton, he cannot help deviating, hence he must feel afraid of disapproval all the time. As a result he has to try all the harder to conform, to be approved of, to be successful. Not the voice of his conscience gives him strength and security but the feeling of not having lost the close touch with the herd.

THE WORK OF STANLEY MILGRAM Excerpt trom Practicing Radical Honesty, by Dr. Brad Blanton I first heard about a social psychologist named Stanley Milgram when he presented a review of his research at Yale University during a meeting ofthe American Psychological Association in Chicago in 1965. Milgram was given an award by one branch of the Association while being censured by another branch on the same day, for the same research. Here is how he got praised and in trouble.

Milgram had, several years earlier, read a book by Hannah Arendt about the trial of AdolfEichmann, Hitler's infamous - second in command who had been responsible for overseeing most of the executions of six million Jews and other people judged unacceptable by the Third Reich. Hannah Arendt, who had covered the war crimes trial for several American newspapers, pointed out that Eichmann's defense was that he should not be held personally responsible for a crime against mankind because he was doing his duty in the social system of which he was a part. His lawyers said that a court might judge that the social system was criminal, but not the person doing his duty within that social system. This argument was rejected. Eichmann's adjudicators concluded that he was individually responsible for the crimes he committed, regardless of the social system of which he was a part, and he was executed.

Hannah Arendt then raised another question, which fascinated Stanley Milgram. Was AdolfEichmann some unusual social deviant, some sadistic exception to common humanity, or was he just a bureaucrat? Arendt had pointed out that only twice in his entire career had he actually witnessed any executions, which, he said, he found "repugnant." What he actually did was shuffle papers in an office and make phone calls and give orders. Outside of work, he seemed to have a normal life with family and friends and associates. Was he normal?

Milgram designed an experiment to see ifhe could somewhat simulate the conditions in which Eichmann operated. He drew a random stratified sample of males trom the community around Yale. (In later versions of the original study he included females, and found no significant differences between males and females in the results of the experiment.) He paid each subject, in advance, seven dollars for participating in an experiment that he told them was "a study ofthe effects of negative reinforcement on learning."

When Milgram met his subjects, he used a room in a building on the campus of Yale University. Milgram wore a white lab coat and introduced himself as Dr. Milgram. There were three people in the room: Milgram and two subjects, both of whom were apparently drawn ITom the sample of subjects. However, only one of them was a true subject and the second was a stooge, a student actor ITom the drama department. Milgram said to them, "I am conducting a study ofthe effects of negative reinforcement on learning. In this study, one of you will be the teacher and one will be the learner. I will flip a coin to see which is which." The coin flip was rigged, so that the true subject ITom the sample was always the "teacher."

After the coin flip, Milgram led both subjects into a room containing a very large and impressive electric chair, and proceeded to strap the learner (the stooge) into the chair and apply electrodes to his wrists and head. In later versions of the experiment (the experiment was run several times with several groups of subj ects before being written up in journals and reported to the American Psychological Association) Dr. Milgram mentioned in passing that the electrode paste was "to keep the flesh ITom being burnt," and the learner/stooge mentioned in passing that he had a "slight heart condition."

Then the "teacher" (who was the true subject) was led to a room with a one-way mirror so that he could see the person in the electric chair but the person could not see him. He was seated in ITont of a panel of thirty switches, which were labeled clearly in IS-volt increments ITom 15 volts to 450 volts. Above the switches were verbal labels in gradations of degree: "shock," "dangerous shock," "severely dangerous shock," and two steps before the last switch was an ambiguous but ominous "XXXX." Milgram said, "I am going to project a list of words on the wall in ITont of the person in the chair. He will be given several repetitions of the word list to learn it. When he sees a word appear on the wall, his task will be to name the next word ITom the list before it is projected, based on having memorized the list. Ifhe makes a mistake, I want you to administer an electric shock, and I would like you to increase the voltage ofthis shock in fifteen-volt increments. Do you understand the instructions?" When the "teacher" fully understood the instructions, the experiment began.

The stooge in the chair was only receiving a mild cue shock every time a switch was thrown, but the "teacher" didn't know that. As the "learner" made mistakes and was shocked, he reacted more and more dramatically. At first he just jumped a little. As the shocks progressed he began jumping and yelling out. Then he started screaming when he was shocked. Then he began screaming and saying he wanted to stop. Then he said. "Stop this! I want out! Whoever is doing this stop! I want to quit!" Then as the voltage got closer to the end, two steps before the end, the "learner" screamed, convulsed, and collapsed completely. When the next word appeared and there was no response, Milgram said, "We'll have to count that an error; shock him again." Then one more time, no response, "That's an error; shock him again." In order to get to the end of the row of switches the teacher had to shock the learner two more times while he was apparently completely "unconscious."

Prior to actually conducting the study, Milgram had given a questionnaire to a similar random stratified sample of people ITom the community around Yale in which he asked ifthe respondents "would ever purposely inflict pain on a fellow human being, regardless ofthe social circumstances." Over ninety-two percent said that they would not. When he actually ran the experiment, sixty-eight percent of the people went all the way to the top. The "teachers" sweated excessively; some cried; some went into hysterical laughter. Many, even though debriefed and told that it was an act, reported when interviewed two weeks later that they had nightmares about what they had done. The subjects obviously had a very hard time doing what they did, but nevertheless did it.

They resisted, they felt bad about it, they felt guilty, but they did what they were told. Milgram had written down, in advance, four statements he could make in response to objections on the part of the "teacher"-the strongest one being: "The experiment must go on."

Later, Milgram pointed out that this experiment was not really fair to AdolfEichmann because Eichmann had many colleagues who cooperated in his bureaucracy. So Milgram modified his experiment by adding one more stooge, who was a person in the room with the teacher who pulled down a master switch to "turn on the electricity" each time an error was made. When the responsibility or blame could be shared with just one other person in this way, ninety-two percent of the subjects went all the way to the top.

Milgram's presentation was called "A Study in the Legitimation of Evil" and he concluded about the people in his sample, and by generalization, the people in the culture ITom which his sample had come: "Individuals will generally go against their own moral inclinations in order to cooperate with authority."

No sub-group in the sample differed in a statistically significant way ITom the norm ofthe whole population. Women did not differ ITom men, and groupings by ethnic origin, religious orientation, age, and so on were not significantly different. One group approached statistical significance-Catholics-and that difference was in the direction of more cooperation with authority rather than less.

One of the things I like about this study is that none ofus knows how we would have fared. We would all like to think that we would have been in the eight percent who said that they would not go on. There were some few subjects who not only quit but proceeded to go talk to the provost at Yale and to Milgram demanding that he stop. We would all like to think we would have been

one of them. But obviously, all of us couldn't have been in the eight percent. Most of us would have cooperated and felt bad about it but cooperated nevertheless.

I have been fascinated with this work for thirty-two years. I used to report on Milgram's work in speeches I made against the war in Vietnam. Much of my work as a group leader and psychotherapist has been an attempt to discover and reinforce the kind of independent individuality that might allow for those statistics to change.

I think, to demonstrate independence in the circumstance of that experiment, it was necessary for individuals to be able to act according to their compassion-their identification as one being to another with the person in the electric chair. Their compassion made them "feel bad" about what they did, but it was not enough to overrule their training in obedience to authority. Their compassion would have to have been stronger than their need to obey the professor from Yale in the white lab coat. Their sense of individual responsibility and the courage to act upon it would have to be stronger than their years of training from school and church and family to acquiesce to authority. The integrity oftheir own feelings would have had to be more powerful in determining their actions than their moral obligation to not challenge the constituted authority or rock the boat of the existing power structure.

Eichmann was just an average guy. Average guys are just Eichmanns. So are average gals. Most of us would obey Hitler like most did in Nazi Germany. Most of us still are obeying some questionably constituted authority instead of acting on our own authority most ofthe time. Most of us have lined up to go to recess and lined up to come back into the classroom and lined up to go to lunch and lined up to come back from lunch and sat in rows and not talked and waited in lines and behaved and waited for the bell to ring and are still doing that. Most of us operate from models of what we should and should not do rather than what we feel, what we prefer, what we feel called forth to do based on our empathetic connections with other human beings. And for the most part, we have organized our world to keep it that way. As the Sufis say, ninety-eight per cent of humanity spends ninety-eight per cent oftheir time at the level ofbelieÂŁ THE SUFI LEVELS OF CONSCIOUSNESS Excerpt from Practicing Radical Honesty, by Brad Blanton We have just started the conversation about the developmental path from centeredness in being to the growth of the mind in a culture, to the eventual recentering in being for using the mind and the traditions ofthe culture. Now we want to review what happens when we assume that a person in a culture wants to outgrow the limitations of that culture. What can we do if our starting place is now, and we are trapped in a mind? I'm using the Sufi system called the levels of human consciousness as a model for our mutual instruction. This model was first taught to people in the West around the turn ofthe century by Gurdjieff.

Let's assume we are liars in the acculturated way we learned in whatever culture we were raised. Ifwe were stringently instructed to learn abstractions at too early an age, we live in our minds so much we hardly have any experience of anything and we can barely contact reality enough to walk through a doorway without bumping into the doorjamb. We need to get back into the world of experience and stop obsessively thinking. We would like to get to where we feel happy and in charge of our lives rather than feeling like we're running around in circles putting out fires all the time. We want to "inhibit the modifications ofthe mind" and become present to experience. How do we do that?

The Level of Belief We must start by recognizing where we are in the first place. We are at a level of consciousness that the Sufis called the "level of belief." This means we think that to escape our mind we must figure something out. We think we need to figure out what to believe and then act accordingly. The problem is that we are trying to think our way out of thinking. Our entire focus is on figuring out what we should believe and acting accordingly. This is the lowest level of human consciousness, called "the level of belieÂŁ" The Sufis say that ninety-eight percent of us spend ninety-eight percent of our time at this level. At least we know we are not alone. Lots of other people in the world share this level of consciousness with us most of the time. This level has an alternative name. It's called hell. It's the inescapable do-loop prison ofthe interminable warning buttons of the reactive mind and the useless rationalizations of the rationalizing mind. It's hell. It's being strongly attached to the cultural quagmire we got dumped into that I discussed in the beginning chapters you have just read.

Let's say we live in hell for a long time. We grow older, get ajob, get married, and so on. When we reflect on our life, we realize life isn't quite living up to its billing. We don't want much. We would just like to work when we feel like it and not work when we don't. That's all. We believe we can't do that but we wish we could. Our job, our kids, our family, our bills, and our other obligations dictate what we do and there just isn't any time left. We just never can, really, relax. It is not all intensely painful, some of it is even enjoyable, but we are basically on duty all the time, dreaming of a day when we won't have to be on duty all the time anymore.

The Level of Social Contracts In this level, we have done some work on ourselves, some therapy, some schooling, some honest conversations, some degree oftelling the truth, but we are stuck with obligations we just have to respond to. The "level of social contracts" is one notch above hell, but only one notch. It is a slightly higher hell than the level of belief because it at least recognizes that other people out there exist independently trom our own mind's pictures of them.

That isn't true at the level of belief, where other people are just categories like "converts" or "heathens." The lowest level, the "level of belief," is where insulated, isolated fundamentalists live. The next level up is where many first generation immigrants live. It is where we live when we are concerned about acceptance and living up to other people's expectations.

So let's say that now we have advanced trom the level of belief to the level of social contracts but we are still severely constrained. Plus, many times each day we drop back into the level of belief, where we are trying to figure out what to believe and then do what that belief dictates. Although the obligations to other people we have contracted for constantly "rescue" us rrom"the hell of belief, the rescue is hardly worth the work. Whereas at the level of belief we aren't even related to other people except as triggers for other beliefs on our part, now we recognize the independent existence of other people that places constant demands on us. Our marriage, kids, paying taxes, paying bills, and honoring other commitments to other people deliver us &om the fTying pan of self-torture into the fire of the torture of obligation.

The Saint Ego Level Eventually, through hard living and experience, we get to know that there must be more to life than showing up to work on time and having a split level house with a two-car garage and two-point-eight children and keeping the mortgage paid and doing our duty to others who are doing their duty to us. There has to be more to life than maintaining our obligations. At least we have learned that. Most of us are in our forties before we learn that. When we do realize that there is more to life than fulfilling obligations, we realize at the same time that knowing that makes us superior to others who haven't learned that yet. We also know that there is more to life than being an obedient, well-behaved citizen for whom living within the guidelines of convention is the highest goal of life.

The Sufis, according to Gurdjieff, who first introduced these levels of consciousness to the West, called this level of consciousness the "Saint Ego leveL" We begin to understand that we are better than most of the other fools in the world. Some of us modem day Sufis call this the "Muhammad Ali level," because Muhammad Ali in his prime was such a great example of proclaimed superiority. "1 am the greatest!" he said, "1 float like a butterfly and sting like a bee!" "1 am beautiful!" He refused to go to Vietnam and kill his dark-skinned brothers and sisters because the human bunch who claimed he belonged to them told him it was his duty. He was not obedient to the beliefs and the social contracts they claimed he should be obedient to because he was superior to that.

When we attain the level of consciousness known as the Muhammad Ali level, we still make &equent visits back to the two lower levels of consciousness known as belief and social contracts. We still have beliefs and we still have to deal with social contracts, but we tend to not be as attached to beliefs and we handle social contracts so we can spend more time at a higher and less worrisome place. We want to spend more and more time at this higher level because we have a larger perspective that subsumes more information, a perspective of superiority trom which to view beliefs and social contracts.

Since 1 have been hanging out at that level for some years now, let me give you an example of the level by excerpting &om a letter 1 wrote a few months ago to my literary agents in response to their suggestion that 1 needed a co-author, ghost writer, or editor before 1 could have a best-seller because my language is too offensive: "So here is the way it is. I'll write whatever way 1want. 1know what 1 am talking about and what 1 have to say. 1will not change what 1 have to say to suit the market or what so-called experts about the publishing field claim to know about the market, including you two. 1 will not change how 1 say what 1 say if, in my view, it changes in any way, shape, or form the point of what 1 have to say. 1will not surrender any authority over what goes out under my name. At the heart of what 1 have to say is the general attitude of disrespect for minds. The fundamental integration of Eastern and Western philosophy that 1have synthesized, which 1 both represent and live by, transcends local knowledge, and 1 am not going to change that for any mere agent or publishing company. " "1 don't want a co-author or even a heavy-handed coach about what the mind of the expert thinks the minds of the people think. 1 have been doing psychotherapy with miserable intellectuals for more than half my life. 1 don't intend to cater to the sickness 1have learned to heal in myself and others. 1will work, on a give and take basis, one paragraph at a time, with an editor whom I respect, with me having the final authority over what gets published ..."

"The very essence of what 1 have to say is radical. 1 am talking about the overthrow of the government of the mind. That includes all minds. Your own mind is not your mend; it is Big Brother inside of you. It considers itself to be who you are. 1 don't consider your mind or mine to be who we are. I consider the being who grew the mind, the one who notices first and learns second, the observer-in-the-moment-alive-right-now-only being to be

who I am and who you are. I do not cater to the minds of what your mind calls 'the market.' I serve their beings instead. " "A fully alive, healthy person raises hell all the time, is not polite, offends people, hurts people's feelings, and also stays with people while they work through the feelings~ommitted to their being and at war with their minds. He or she doesn't submit to the minds of others or even to his or her own mind. He or she rules his or her own life and creates a life from being, which is to say, out oflove, using his or her mind; not being used by it. I do not cater to expert opinion even if it is my own. This is what I am expert in. For the love of being I am a destroyer of minds; incessantly, endlessly, and perhaps fruitlessly, but it is my own sweet damned choice."

"I am in love with hundreds of people and they are in love with me. This is not romantic love or nostalgic love but simply the love of one being for another. The way we did it is through the way of being I have just described. A lot ofthe people I love and who love me were offended by me in the first place because I threatened the illusion of control provided by their minds. That is what I am about."

As you can see, living at this level is more fun than the previous levels. I continued my rant at my poor agents.

"Once, when Frank Lloyd Wright was being sued by a client, the lawyer for the client began his cross ",," examination of Mr. Wright, who was in the witness stand, by saying, 'Mr. Wright, it's been said that you are the world's greatest living architect.' Frank Lloyd Wright responded, 'That's a bit conservative.'''

"I admire that arrogance. I think Wright showed an honorable disrespectfulness of all human assessments and comparisons and evaluations other than his own. I am proud to be arrogant in that same way, and I think in an important way it is prerequisite to being the creative genius that I am. I don't have much faith in minds at all, but if! am going to place my faith in anyone's mind at all, it will be mine.

"I would like to title my next book A Mind is a Terrible Thing! Waste It!" but after reflection and good coaching from some people who love me I am willing to change it to Radical Honesty II: Haw to Live the Good Life by Completing the Past, Staying In the Present, and Creating a Future with a Little Help from Your Friends.

"I intend to teach by modeling, both in how I live and how I write, the life of an individual who is not controllable by moralism. I wish 'mere anarchy' to be 'loosed upon the world' and I will do everything I can to make it so. What do we need moralism for if we have the integrity of being? When we break loose from the stupid illusion of control we have trapped ourselves into with the help of the entire culture and educational system and the crippled humans we were raised by, we don't go 'out of control,' but we do go beyond control. We are beyond control by political force, whether it be government or office politics. We then discover a new use for the mind-namely, as a creative instrument in service to our true identity, the being within which the mind resides.

"I am a leader in the revolution of consciousness. You don't do that by catering to lame-brained experts.

You don't do that by catering to minds' attachments."

That tirade is a fine example, ifI do say so myself, of a person at the third level of consciousness, the Muhammed Ali or Saint Ego level. Luckily my agents are used to it, and being superioristic egotists themselves they understood me and didn't quit, but figured out a way to continue to support me without controlling me too much. Unfortunately, we didn't find a publisher who wanted to give me a whole lot of money for being the superioristic jerk that I was there. I have had to grow a little more to get published now.

Another example of someone who spent time in the Saint Ego level is General George Patton. The movie Patton has a scene where, after successfully invading Sicily, Patton is giving a press conference as he's walking through a field. He uses some profanity, and a lower-ranking reporter, trailing along in a carefully pressed uniform, comments on the general's language. George C. Scott, as Patton, delivers this line: "If! want it to stick, I give it to 'em loud and dirty, and then they remember it."

The Level o/Philosopher/Charlatan After a while at the Muhammad Ali level of consciousness, a being may have a dawning revelation that leads to the next level of consciousness. We recognize that bragging about being superior by virtue of the inferiority of others is not very superior, and even if it is, so what? We are equal as a being to other beings. When we brag about being better than, smarter than, or superior to other people, it is not our being we are referring to, it is our beliefs. We come to understand that the beliefs we have generated from our own life experience are just more beliefs. This includes our belief in our own superiority. We start losing faith in our own ego. We begin to see through our own mind. So what that we are superior to fundamentalists? What does that mean? We know that their attachment to their beliefs doesn't work, but we are still attached to a few we call our own, one of which is about our so-called superiority.

At this point, partly out of desperation, we begin to enroll other people in our hard-earned beliefs (that is, we start selling our beliefs to others). Hopefully, a whole bunch of others will pay to read these beliefs at about fifteen bucks a book. (Ha!) Yep, this is my main level these days. It's called the "level of Philosopher/Charlatan." The beliefs I have generated from my hard-earned experience are, I know, just more beliefs, but I'm selling them to you nevertheless. Most of us have had a taste of all these levels, though we still remain generally entangled at the levels of belief and social contracts.

11'17

You know what I am talking about here. You may not spend a lot of time at this level, but you experienced it when you were trying to sell other people on the virtues of your beliefs. Ifnot, you wouldn't be reading these so-called self-help books. At this level, you acknowledge that you know more than most, you know that doesn't mean much, and you try to sell what you can to make the most of it even though your general opinion of yourself as superior doesn't do much for you anymore, given your knowledge that a superior person and a regular person aren't recognizably different The Level of Despair Here we are, unfortunately, becoming superior to being superior. We are on the cusp of a very high level of consciousness, the next rung on the ladder, known as the "level of Despair." Despair comes trom root words in both Latin and Greek that mean "down trom hope." We no longer hope. We have no hope. We have nothing to hope for. We are hopeless. We have nothing left to believe in, including our own hard-earned beliefs.

We have come to understand that all beliefs, even our beliefs based on our own experience and our beliefs about who we are, are wortWess. We get that we are compulsive meaning-making machines who endlessly make meaning out of everything, and it is all a waste. We realize that life its own self is meaningless. This is a very high level of human consciousness. Werner Erhard said, "Until you know that your life is utterly meaningless you don't know anything at all." At this level, you get that the preacher Koeloth in the book ofEcclesiastes in the Old Testament is right when he says, "All is vanity, and a striving after the wind, and there is no profit in it." We are worth exactly nothing. We are not of significant negative value (a popular ego trip), or of significant positive value (all the hype about self-esteem and positive thinking, and all the previous levels of consciousness, and so on). We are of no value. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Nothing.

Now, at this level, we're really getting somewhere. Then it dawns on us that becoming more conscious is not necessarily correlated with becoming happier. There are no guarantees about nothing, and that's not bad grammar and it's not just a pun. Now what?

Well, if we don't run away to lower levels of consciousness as quick as we can (which, of course we do, the first thirty or forty times we reach this level) we get born into the next, very high level of consciousness, known as the "level of Suicidal Panic."

The Level of Suicidal Panic At this level, we either kill ourselves or we don't. We are desperate for something to believe in. Ifwe don't kill ourselves, we eventually run out of panic. We are at a very high level of consciousness, known as "Suicidal Panic," and then we don't kill ourselves and we are no longer in a panic. That, then, is the next level. But before we name and describe that level, let's focus a bit on what the panic at this level is about. The panic is trom not having a single thing to believe in at all, not even despair. We get that not only is our life utterly meaningless, but the fact that our life is utterly meaningless is also utterly meaningless. We can't even get off on being an existentialist philosopher any more! We can't get meaning out of preaching meaninglessness any more! We are left with nothing.

All we have is what the Buddhists call "suchness," the present experience of being, right now, whatever it is, and nothing -----more. All that is left is just what is in tront of us and within us to experience right now. We face the hard Buddhist saying, which is written on the wall of my office: "If you understand, things are as they are. If you do not understand, things are as they are."

The Level of Here and Now When the panic is gone, we arrive at the next level, which is called the "level of Here and Now." At this level we are present to being present. We are grounded in noticing. We have "lost our minds and come to our senses." If someone else is there, we are present to being present to them The being we are notices the being in them-the being they are. Our presence to their being salutes their being's presence to us. This is what Kierkegaard was talking about when he said, "When a person relates to another, and relates also to that relationship, they relate thereby to God." Here, at this level, is where love becomes possible. Not a beliefin love, but love its own self.

This level is the focus, certainly, of Buddhism and of most spiritual practice and psychotherapy and group process work when the leaders actually know what they are doing.

The level called "Here and Now" has three aspects.

Here and Now but Still Wishingfor Something to Believe In When we first enter the here and now, it has a negative quality. We still wish we had something to believe in and are sorry we don't. We yearn for the former phony security of our belief in meaning beyond the moment. We are present to what is going on in the moment but we wish there was more to expect than just more moments.

Neutral Feeling Here and Now After a while, we become completely neutral about not having anything to believe in. We are present. We don't feel bad that all we have is this. It's not great. We don't feel good about it; we don't feel bad about it; we are completely neutral.

Positive Feeling Here and Now Then after a while, we still have no hope and nothing to believe in-nothing but "suchness,"-and that is just fine with us.

We begin to feel good about it. There is nothing to believe in, only the present experience of being alive in the moment, which includes everything (all of the past and all we can imagine ofthe future, including our own death), and that is just fine.

There are actually six levels above this one, but I am only going to describe one more, the next one. If you want to learn about the other levels of consciousness, do our Course in Honesty or find out trom Oscar Ichazo or the Arica training or Gurdjieff or someone else who knows more about the traditional way ofteaching this model than I do anyway. My version has been modified based on real-life experiences of my mends and me for the past twenty-five years.

The Level of Pure Reason The next level after the "level of Here and Now" is called the "level of Pure Reason." Isn't that something!? We've gone to all this trouble to escape trom the jail of alienation our minds create, and the first thing that happens after we get grounded in our experience is we get our minds back! What a difference, though. We now have a mind that is not bound to the defense of our ego.

We have this wonderful instrument we worked so hard to grow, and now we can use it! It turns out to be a fantastic instrument for creating! Daydreams become amenable for action! Fantasies become visions! Escapist hopefulness and desperate attempts at reassurance about our self-worth and the entanglement of self-image promotion and maintenance become just possible scenarios to play with. We don't need that mind for our identity anymore! Our identity is the being we are, in the here and now! Our identity precedes our mind! We take ownership of our mind and take it out for a test drive! Hoohah!

This is the part where you start to consider the life of the creator. At "Pure Reason" we can think like we have never thought before. We become truly a tree thinker. We see the possibility of a lifetime of play and service. As Kris Kristofferson says, "Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose."

The experience ofIiving for a while, grounded in your experience ofthe here and now, leads to thinking about that experience. Sitting in that place, we come to understand things we never understood before. We get that the source of our historical being and the source of our present being is like a generator that has been constant since it started. Getting back to our source is the first step to transcendence. When we pay attention to the being we are, we withdraw attention trom the dilemmas of the mind.

This is at the heart of Buddhism, Yoga, Vedantic philosophy, Christian salvation, and other forms and practices of enlightenment. When a Zen Buddhist sits and looks at a wall fourteen hours a day, seven days in a row, he does it to be able to sit and look at a wall. To be able to sit and look at a wall andjust sit and look at a wall is enlightenment. To sit and look at the story of your life like you would sit and look at a wall means you have recontacted your source in the same way as the Buddhist in tront of the wall.

Some controversial views trom Psychiatrists and others: THOMAS SZASZ (Author of 'The Myth of Mental Illness, The American Psychologist): "mental illness is a myth which obscures difficulties located in social relations" FREEDOM MAGAZINE: INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: In 1973, FREEDOM began an investigation into abuses of patients' rights in Missouri state mental hospitals and particularly into the Missouri Institute of Psychiatry in St. Louis. After uncovering instances of overdrugging and physical abuse, FREEDOM's probe continued and led to the discovery of something more sinister.

What FREEDOM uncovered can only be described as one ofthe darkest entries in the long catalog of psychiatric crimes: psychiatrically inspired CIA and military funding of behavior-modification and mind-control drug experiments, where mental patients and prison inmates in institutions around the country were secretly used as disposable psychiatric "guinea pigs."

These psychiatric-government programs -later discovered by Congress to have such code names as Project Bluebird, Project Artichoke and MK-UL TRA - were first discovered by FREEDOM in 1974. Congress, in 1975, launched a full-scale investigation.

AND

In the mid-1970s, the South Afiican edition of FREEDOM conducted an extensive investigation of psychiatric slave labor camps run undercover by a profit-making corporation. It was found that thousands of black mental patients in South Afiica were in the "care" ofthis private business. Not only was it holding them prisoner and forcing them to provide slave labor for other private companies, but the barbaric treatment ofthese people included, to enforce "cooperation," the savage administration of electric shocks to the brain without the use of anesthetics.

FREEDOM's charges were investigated by the United Nations' World Health Organization, which concluded, "The limited evidence available on the conditions within the private mental institutions suggests that the 'sanitaria' are in fact custodial institutions with very few discharges per year, and with poor standards of patient care .... [I]n a country which is among the richest in the world, the type and quality of mental health care are determined by the color of the patient's skin."

The American Psychiatric Association dispatched an investigative team to South Africa which reported that the "most shocking finding" was the "high number of needless deaths among black patients" in the camps. Charles Pinderhughes, one member of the investigative team, commended the Church of Scientology and FREEDOM for exposing the camps and stated that discrimination against blacks there was "massive and general."

AND In numerous in-depth investigative features over the years, the pages of FREEDOM have documented the havoc created by the cult - of psychiatry and by such psychiatric drugs as Prozac. The responses have been overwhelmingly one of tremendous gratitude for providing important and insightful information.

A state judge wrote a letter with a description of a disturbing case over which he had presided involving the drug Prozac. The judge had mitigated the penalty against the defendant in the case due to the fact that the man had been forced to defend himself from a Prozac-crazed attacker. "Judges are never absolutely sure that they have made the right decision," the judge concluded in his letter, "so I was happy to read your article as it supports my judgment. I hope that you will continue to provide a public service by warning people of the dangerousness of certain drugs."

A housewife sent a long letter describing a heart-rending personal travail she suffered while on Prozac and stated, "Needless to say, as soon as I read your article I poured what was left over down the drain .... I thank your magazine so much for bringing this horrible drug to my attention. I owe my life, as well as my husband's and children's, to you. I will never take another Prozac as long as I live and that, thanks to you, will be a long, long time!"

AND Unstabilized by eradication of standards of right and wrong and personal responsibility, the American jurisprudence system is tilting dangerously toward collapse. The villain? Psychiatrists who have infiltrated the courts, motivated by profit and control.

In this issue of Freedom, we examine our justice system in America.

Many recognize that improvement is critical to the entire survival of the justice system in the eyes of those it is meant to serve. And, in this spirit, some possible reforms are outlined in this issue.

These include more effective oversight procedures to ensure high ethical standards among judges, the elimination of psychiatric "expert" testimony and utilization of provenly workable rehabilitation methods instead of merely locking offenders up, which demonstrably does not work.

The part played by psychiatry in our overloaded and disappointing justice system is key. It is the driving force in destroying the concept of individual responsibility.

Psychiatry has pushed society toward a chaos where no one is responsible for anything. A wife can mutilate a husband, sons can kill their parents, a man can shoot the president - but because psychiatrists claim the perpetrators are themselves "victims," they are "not guilty".

From: Dr. Brian Boettcher, Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist (Sydney, Australia), in an article published in Psychiatry Online, March 8th 1997, titled 'Criminalisation in Forensic Psychiatry' had this to say: Foucault (Discipline and Punishment) had considerable reservations about the use of psychiatry to assist the court and wrote; "ever since the new penal system - that defined by the great codes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries- has been in operation, a general process has led judges tojudge something other than crimes; They have been lead in their sentences to

IJol do something other than judge; and the power of judging has been transfen'ed, in part, to other authorities than the judges of the offince. The whole judicial process has talren on extrajudicial elements and personnel. Beneath the increasing leniency of punishment, then, one may map out a displacement of it's point of application; and through this displacement, a whole new system of truth and a mass of roles hitherto unknown in the exercise of criminal justice, a corpus of knowledge, techniques, scientific discourses informed and becomes entangled with the practice of the power to punish. " Further on he writes: " Today, criminal justice functions and justifies itself only by this perpetual reference to something other than itself, by this unceasing reinscription in nonjudicial systems. Its fate is to be redefined by knowledge. "1 He goes on to make reference to the shadows behind the judges and clearly he has misgivings about this dilution of judicial power. He specifically sees psychiatry as a threat to juridical power; "Psychiatric expertise, but also in a more general way criminal anthropology and the repetitive discourse of criminology, find one of there precise functions here; by solemnly inscribing offences in the field of objects susceptible of scientific knowledge, they provide the mechanisms of legal punishment with ajustifiable hold not only on offences, but on individuals; not on what they do, but also on what they are, will be, may be. The additional factor of the offender's soul, which the legal system has laid hold of, is only apparently explanatory and limitive, and is infact expansionist. During the 150 or 200 years that Europe has been setting up its new penal systems, the Judges have gradually, by means of a process that goes back very far indeed, talren to judging something other than crimes, namely the 'soul' of the criminal. " 2 He seems to see psychiatrists as generally having little basic good and an exchange between Dr David Cooper (an antipsychiatry psychiatrist) and Foucault is a good example of the evident distaste that Foucault has for psychiatry; "Foucau!t; We seem to be seeing two difJerentfunctions - The medical function of psychiatry, on the one hand, and the strictly repressive function of the police, on the other- coming together at a given moment, in the system we're talking about. But in fact the two functions were only one from the outset. You must have read Castel's book on the birth of the psychiatric order; he shows very well how psychiatry, as it developed in the early nineteenth century was not at all localised in the asylum, with a medical function, and then became generalised and extended to the entire social body. right up to the confusion that we see today- somewhat discreet in France, but much more evident in the Soviet Union. But from the outset, psychiatry has had as its project to be afunction of the social order. " Further on the exchange was; "D. c.: During the press conference given by Fainberg and Pliuch, I was very struck by Claude Bourdet's question to Victor Fainberg; why do they use psychiatry in the Soviet Union? When they have the whole police and penitentiary apparatus , which is peifect in itself, and which could take charge of anybody, why use psychiatry ?

"Foucault: There's no answer, except perhaps, "J-P. F.: It was always there ...

that the question is inappropriate. Because it always functioned like that.

"Foucault: It was already there,. Once again it is not a question of distortion of the use of psychiatry; that was its fundamental project.

"D C: The movement in the 1930's toward depsychiatrization in the Soviet Union was reversed by Stalin. The legal prohibition of psychological tests - and lobotomy, around 1936- was thenfallowed by resumption of it , though not as widespread as in the West. " 3 The conversation goes on to discuss the use of psychiatry in Nazi Germany in "scientific euthanasia" , of psychoanalysts who were torture advisors in Argentina, the ideology of pain translating the language of psychiatry to the language of pain, and the fundamental project of psychiatry being "social hygiene" at any cost to the individual fteedom and rights.

Many other anti-psychiatrists such as Thomas Szasz saw psychiatry as fundamentally flawed and in the Myth of Mental Illness he wrote; " The introduction of psychiatric considerations into the administration of the criminal law -for example, the insanity plea and verdict, diagnosis of mental incompetence to stand trial and so forth- corrupt the law and victimise the subject on whose behalf they are ostensibly employed."

So during the development of psychiatry voices have been raised expressing concern at its coercive nature and perhaps today it is even more so. A modern definition of the law displays this recognition when it defines law as;

''Analytically it can be pointed out that law is simply one stage in a continuum of disciplinary and normalising discourses, rules of grammar, etiquette and the social, political and moral aspects of collective existence, through to the more explicitly coercive language of psychiatry, therapy, law and religion" 4 Some psychiatrists do not see themselves as punitive and do not recognise the subtle and insidious effects that they are having perhaps not till long after they have seen the patient. An example ofthis was a woman who was diagnosed as "mildly schizophrenic" by a very eminent psychiatrist. In fact the woman at the time was 22 years old and passing through a troubled late adolescent crisis which appeared to be eased with Anatensoll mg per day for several months. Twenty years later the letter surfaced after she again had problems during the completion of her Degree which had been delayed to have several children.

This had the effects of throwing doubt on her whole self and ability to do anything and generally labelled her. Her latter day psychiatrist managed to correct these effects. Had she been involved in a court case a Barrister would have had a meal with this labelling and it would have been quite Criminalising .

AND Much of the problem that led to these situations was a certain apathy within psychiatry and perhaps ignorance of the Criminalising effects psychiatrists have. Similar apathy and a numbing effect that the South AITican Regime had on the doctors there who allowed Steve Biko to be tortured to death with the collusion ofthe three doctors involved who said after examining him that he was malingering. In South Afiica a commission of enquiry said in relation to this matter; " Failures in the doctors judgement were the result of complex influences including the effects of their own social conditioning, the risk of habituation of the state doctors to degrading conditions, the inroads that apartheid has made to medical practice, the possibility of reprisals ifstate doctors oppose the wishes of the police ft. There was also criticism of the medical organisations for not giving better leadership to doctors to help them to combat hierarchical pressures .

"The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious, of being out of one's mind, is the condition of the normal man.

Society highly values its normal man. It educates children to lose themselves and to become absurd, and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years." -- R.D. Laing, Scottish Psychiatrist [English Translation of Dr. RE. Boon's psychiatric evalution 'report' ofLara Johnstone regarding Bomb Threat AIDS Disclosure trial] Dr. B.E. Boon Psychiatric Department George Hospital Davidsonway George 2002-07-10 "~ Legal Aid: Mr. Anton Marx RE: LARA JOHNSTONE (D.O.R 66/12/04) I examined the named lady today, as well as the document which she wrote on 27 June 2002.

In light of the above named information I find indications that justifY relegation for psychiatric observation. I want to strongly recommend that the court refer the above named lady to ValkenburglLentegeur Hospital for an observation period. The document that she wrote and all other possible collateral information must please also be made available to the observation psychiatrist.

I trust that this information will be of value to you.

Dr. R E. Boon Specialist: Psychiatrist Mmed (Psig)(Pret) Secret Team: CIA & Allies in Control of US & World - US Air Force Colonel AF Prouty http://groups.yahoo.com!group/trutharnnestyreconciliationlmessage/43l Preface: "The Secret Team IT" 1997 - USAF Col. Prouty http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/trutharnnestyreconciliationlmessage/ 461 /~. Secret Team: ChI: The Real Power Structure

1;)03

http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/432 Secret Team: Ch2: Nature of Secret Team Activity, Cuban Case Study http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/433 Secret Team: Ch3, Secl: CIA: lntel vs Secret Operations http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/434 Secret Team: Ch3, Sec2: CIA: Origins of Agency & Seed of Secret Operations http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 435 Secret Team: Ch3, Sec3: CIA: Simple Coup d'Etat to Global Mechanism http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/4 36 Secret Team: Ch4: Word of Law to Interpretation: Kennedy & CIA http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 437 Secret Team: Ch5: "Defense" as National Mil Philosophy ... http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/438 Secret Team: Ch6: "Duty of Agency: to Advise, Coordinate, Correlate, http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/4 39 Secret Team: Ch7: Nature of Clandestine Operations .. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/440 Secret Team: Ch8: CIA "Cover Story" Intel Agency & Real Life Clandestine Operations http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 441 ~ Secret Team: Ch9: Coincidence of Crises ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/442 Secret Team: ChlO: Dulles-Jackson-Correa Report in Action http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 443 Secret Team: ChI I : How it is Organized: Dulles Era Begins http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/444 Secret Team: Ch12: Personnel: The Chameleon Game http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 445 Secret Team: Ch13: Communications: Web of World http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 446 Secret Team: Ch14: Transportation: Anywhere in World - Now http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 447 Secret Team: Ch15: Logistics by Miracle http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/448 Secret Team: Ch16: Cold War: Pyrrhic Gambit http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 449 Secret Team: Ch17: Mission Astray, Soviet Gamesmanship http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/450 Secret Team: Ch18: Defense, Containment, & Anti-Communism http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 451 ~ Secret Team: Ch19: Special Forces & Mutual Security Program http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/452 Secret Team: Ch20: Kruschev's Challenge: U-2 Dilemma http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/453 Secret Team: Ch2I: Covert Action: U-2 to Kennedy Inaugural http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 454 Secret Team: Ch22: Bay of Pigs to Dallas, Texas http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 455 Secret Team: Ch23: Five Presidents: "Nightmares We Inherited" http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 456 Secret Team: Appl: 'Special Operations' Definition http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/457 Secret Team: App2: Powers & Duties of CIA .. http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/458 Secret Team: App3: Training under Mutual Security Program http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/459 Secret Team: Bibliography http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 460 Colonel. Fletcher Prouty: Fearless Truth Teller, or Crackpot? http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/truthamnestyreconciliation/message/ 464