Steve Reed#####|###`7##N7##Path:
nsw.nnrp.telstra.net!intgwpad.nntp.telstra.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed.icl.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!borve.demon.co.uk!banana
From: banana <banana@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.princess-diana
Subject: Re: Jordan Sage Investigation Update
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 19:03:43 +0100
Message-ID: <qLozrLA$Nyq3Eww3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <bv1q3.972$Yu4.42423@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<7T63NDA1eKq3EwTq@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<Zg3q3.1048$Yu4.45371@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<933907516.338268@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<oGDq3.1534$Yu4.59195@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
NNTP-Posting-Host: borve.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: borve.demon.co.uk:158.152.12.77
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 933962760 nnrp-10:22265 NO-IDENT
borve.demon.co.uk:158.152.12.77
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S
<c4bSwVNDaSacVfJQP+W8t7TvL0>
Lines: 230
Xref: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net alt.conspiracy.princess-diana:7844
In article <oGDq3.1534$Yu4.59195@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, posted to
alt.conspiracy.princess-diana and stamped at '17:00:34' on 'Fri, 6 Aug
1999', Gary Stone <gary.stone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
<snip>
>Well, let me tell you Aleeta, I had a very strange e mail yesterday, and
I
>was not a happy women. It said in large capitals YOU BLOODY DORK !!!!!.
now
>Dork I may be but that is not the point, the word bloody is used by
British
>people, could one of my own countryman be so cruel, and why is he calling
>me
>a Dork, to what post, reason, have I insulted anyone in the group? if I
>have
>I hope that person would tell me, I am at a loss. I emailed back and
asked
>him who the bloody hell he was and if he continued I would find him and
>re****t him. he didnt have an e mail address as such, just a name,
>Golden9797and the e came from AOL. Is it possible to find this person
from
>such little information? can anyone help. I dont mind insults but its
nice
>to know where they come from, and why so at least you have a chance to
>answer the ctiticism, or am I being too grown up. I suppose if I did find
>this Neanderthal, I'd be better off going down the park and talking to
that
>nice Poplar tree down there,
>Heres Hoping Geths
Geths,
Hi. This is private email because I think if we discuss how to deal with
this abusive emailer on the newsgroup, we may provoke him or maybe tempt
him into abusing people in more 'secure' fa****on than he has done
already.
It looks as though he wasn't being anonymous, if he was using an email
address at AOL. You could write to <abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> to complain - they
have a reputation to protect and would probably send him a warning at
least. Sending this kind of abuse will probably be against their
Accepted Usage Policy.
I have checked with DejaNews and there is a record of posts to
newsgroups from <golden9797@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>.
DejaNews says:
**********
There are 209 unique messages by
golden9797@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Golden9797)
(numbers may be slightly skewed by cross-postings) Get all 209 messages
Number of Messages Forum
197 alt.fan.howard-stern
2 rec.pets.cats.misc
1 alt.fan.jerky-boys
1 alt.food.low-fat
1 alt.tasteless
1 rec.pets.cats.health+behav
**********
The above list can be got by entering the URL:
<http://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/profile.xp?author=golden9797@[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
(
Golden9797)&ST=PS>
The word 'dork' has appeared in five of his articles since June. The
list of these five can be got by entering the URL:
<http://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/qs.xp?ST=PS&QRY=dork&defaultOp=AND&DBS=1
&OP=dnquery.xp&LNG=ALL&subjects=&groups=&authors=Golden9797@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
HTH!
It doesn't seem then that he is forging somebody else's email address.
If you complain, AOL will ask you to provide 'full headers', from which
they will be able to know whether he is or isn't.
BTW may I take this op****tunity to say how much I admire you for your
battle against medical oppression. I hope you write the book. These
bastards isolate people so much, their whole system is based on
isolating people. A book would be great. I often think things might
begin to get a little bit better if there were 'patients' unions' on the
model of 'claimants' unions'. One only has to raise this possibility to
realise that *autonomous* organisation by patients would be seen as
*scandalous* by the powers that be, by the rich guys with their 4x4 cars
in the hospital car parks - the corrupt medical priesthood and their
money-grabbing administrative pals. I think once such groups existed,
they could grow quite quickly. People could take people along with them
to consultations, they could set up information banks, they could
publish blacklists of the worst offenders (maybe along with details of
their incomes). We could build up a bit of a culture. That said, the
medical 'establishment' has already begun to 'recuperate' patients'
initiatives on the internet - e.g. providing 'information sources',
indeed sometimes directing people to them, that are run by the
establishment quacks themselves, e.g. sponsored by drug cor****ations.
It's like taking on McDonalds or the tobacco companies or the
electricity companies - they have large funds available to try to crush
their enemies. They can set up pseudo-groups; they can use spies; if
necessary they can blow up people's cars if they have to. *They* know
the s*** they are. At the moment we only have victims' groups, often
formed by relatives of people who have been killed by incompetence or
brain-damaged by 'immunisation', or whatever. We need to spread a
culture of opposition and knowledge, so that more and more of us can put
our foot down as early as possible.
BTW my wife has been fighting for years now to get an embedded IUD
removed, that was left in on two occasions (one of them 18 years ago,
one 4 years afo) because of medical incompetence. It has been disgusting
to watch these medical pigs try to cover their arses and try to justify
the unjustifiable and help each other out. All we want is to get the
thing removed, but it is requiring a big fight. One gynaecologist wrote
down in the notes a few years ago that it should be removed, didn't
bother telling my wife, but wrote down that she would 'think about it'
and let her GP know. He obviously didn't think she was high enough up in
society to warrant the expenditure of getting it removed, but he sure as
hell knew how to cover his arse. Another gynaecologist, who identified
the thing in the first place, is covering up for the mistake made in his
own hospital of not getting it removed 4 years ago. He also realised a
year ago that he was dealing with a highly intelligent patient who knew
damn well what was happening, but he realised this after he unwittingly
said that laparotomy/laparoscopy wasn't appropriate in such
cir***stances. He didn't have the sense to realise that this was a
patient who would check out whether that was so. He thought if he used a
long word, straight-faced, she'd **** off and think he was cleverer than
her. When he realised that she had found out that of course a
laparoscopy/la****otomy was necessary, he had to backtrack and say that
he had 'reviewed' her case and that maybe it wasn't there after all. Of
course it is there, it has been positively identified, I won't go into
details. He'd rather leave it in than get it taken out now and face a
minor chance of being embarrassed over his earlier behaviour. Screw the
patient. This is how venal these people are.
My sister-in-law was recently told by some smarmy **** of a doctor, re.
my mother-in-law who is ill, that he was very much in favour of giving
patients more information (oh yeah?), but oh it was all so complicated,
and required daily reviews. 'Review' is another word they use to cover
their arses with. My mother-in-law is old, she is being shunted from one
ward to another, one month it's haematology, the next it's neurology,
they are doing 'tests' on her, but they can't ****ing well answer
questions like 'what are you looking for?' and 'if you find one of the
things you're looking for, what are you going to do about it?' Like I
said, nobody would accept this sort of treatment from a car mechanic or
a plumber (two groups BTW who know their trade much better than doctors
do, because it's easy to see whether or not a car still goes or a pipe
is still leaking). I believe they *are* doing tests on her, but for
their own benefit, not hers. All sorts of covert testing goes on. My
mother used to work for Distillers (which made Thalidomide) - she said
they were always testing drugs in prisons and old people's homes. The
newspapers are covering testing of radioactive and biological weapons on
unsuspecting victims in the 1950s and 1960s (sometimes in the 1970s), as
though, as allegedly with children's homes, 'all that' only went on in
the 'dark old days'. But of course it goes on now, not just here and
there, it is institutional.
Much of the 'managerial' culture (social work, psychiatry, information
provision, etc.) within the 'health sector' is itself based on what can
only be called mental illness. This is also true of nursing now. I have
had lots of friends who were nurses - every single one of them got out
because they couldn't stand all this 'managerialist' rubbish, the
systematic conditioning to see patients as objects. Most midwives and
health visitors are crazy like this too (as are teachers). I used to
know somebody who was a midwife, she said there was a little bit of
resistance a long time ago, maybe 20 years ago, the 'Radical Midwives'
Collective', but that was all in the past. They had the weakness of
remaining cocooned within their profession too, their specialism, too.
Why not just radical *people*, who happened to know a lot about the
fight between humanity and inhumanity in this particular sector, but
understood that fight as being omnipresent, and understood that
divisions into this fight and that fight were a Bad Thing?)
(My wife BTW, when she was actually in labour, had a form thrust in
front of her which she was asked to sign, giving permission for some
other doctor conducting 'research' to cut away some tissue and use it in
her research. I had to step in and tell them they should have asked her
three months before, and that the answer was no. Imagine the mentality
of people who think it's OK to treat a patient in that way. Whether they
took the tissue anyway, I don't know. They certainly take tissue from
aborted foetuses and cadavers without asking permission. There are all
sorts of little tricks too, that are usual for those who are a little
bit higher up the ladder, managers etc. E.g. when someone has died in
hospital they ask you whether they're going to be cremated. What's it to
them - it's irrelevant, one might think? But no, it isn't, because if
you say yes, the doctor pockets some money - I think it's around 25
quid. So you can bet your bottom dollar, they'll always make damn sure
they ask. See what I mean about how good it would be if there were
doctor jokes like there are lawyer jokes? I'm not very good at making up
jokes. Maybe I should look for a list of lawyer jokes and see how many
can be translated into doctor jokes. One of my fave lawyer jokes is
Q: Why don't sharks bite lawyers? A: Professional courtesy).
My mother was given a botched hysterectomy, she should have had her
ovaries removed at the same time but they left them in, she got ovarian
cancer and was dead little over a year later. She was 55. She was a
long-term disabled single parent whose child had grown up - hardly any
worth to the ruling class at all. I have reflected on this, and reached
the conclusion that most working class people die because they are given
inadequate medical care. In Britain it is common for a 'DNR' to be
slapped on people, without patient or family being told. This means 'Do
Not Resuscitate'. If the person has a heart attack, they are not
revived, they are left to die. Many people who are weak in hospital and
not considered socially 'useful' are put in this position by a simple
means: namely, by not being encouraged or helped to eat their food. If
they were encouraged and given this basic care, many people would live a
few years longer. But it's obvious that the consultants don't want
working class people living for too long on their pensions. Meanwhile
the authorities are doing things like licencing McDonalds restaurants on
hospital premises, so that grandchildren visiting their grandparents can
be taken by one parent or other to eat unhealthy crap while their other
parent visits their granny or granddad. Of course the budget for 'public
health' must be hundreds of millions, maybe billions, of pounds, and you
get crap like this. Plus the Coca-Cola machines in all the schools.
Don't tell me money doesn't change hands, that the cor****ation doesn't
pay state officials to get these rights. Of course they do.
I have realised that medical oppression is especially strong, obscenely
strong, against women. Not that men aren't oppressed as well, they are,
it's just that maybe the majority of the female population is
practically institutionalised within gynaecology. There is no good
reason for women to be iller than men - think about it, the species
wouldn't function properly if that was the case, the species would get
weaker and weaker over time, because it is women who carry children. As
always, ***ism only helps the oppressors, in that most women get little
sup****t from their male relatives in regard to any of this. Going to see
a gynaecologist is often seen as 'something a woman does', men are
encouraged to be embarrassed about it all. It's not seen as in the same
category as 'going to see a mugger'.
Sorry for this rant, Geths, I have got to go and have my tea now, I just
got the idea that we may see much of this in pretty much the same way.
Best wishes,
--
|
