Saturday, October 29, 2011

Uncle Howard's Progress

He opened his eyes today, I was just told, after they reduced his medication.

They lowered the level of meds and he opened his eyes and I guess squeezed his daughter's hand.

I woke up this morning thinking he's going to get better.

My headache that someone triggered with technology last night was gone after I took a ton of advil for inflammation and I kept thinking about his brain and edema and other systems.

I didn't take any meds today, I took spirulina, astragalus, kelp, ginko biloba, and yerba mixed up into a green drink which tastes terrible but it's really good for you. And I had bee pollen.

Last night I was sitting by my mother at the prayer meeting and there was space between us. I leaned in up against her and felt her entire body radiating from the energy that I've described, which causes ink to burst out of pens.

When I leaned away, it wasn't there. But while I was fine sitting there at first, I found out my mother was being targeted. She said nothing about it and then we were both being affected by something that caused pressure in our heads and swelling and I could tell it wasn't normal. My mom got up to take a call and I was in line for getting it worse when she didn't sit next to me and then she came back and sat down and blocked this other thing going on.

These are people who are all going back to Mt. Angel Abbey connections. The woman we gave a ride to on the way home knows Patty, the same reported I reported for transporting my mother to be tortured in Roseburg. She was talking about how she was putting together a birthday party for kids with Patty.

There is no reason why my Uncle Howard should die. He was fine until someone started harming him with technology, but was otherwise fine.

I feel he might need to be life-flighted to a better hospital.

I don't think they're doing the diagnostics they should be doing or taking the steps someone should be taking to save a life.

It's not your job to sit and watch someone die. You're supposed to save it.

And that means, it doesn't matter what the past record is, or history, or what you THINK it might be--it means you work your ___ off to save the life and get someone back to working order.

The timing of this entire thing is highly suspicious.

I just looked up information about ventilators too, and there is no reason to have someone so highly medicated that they are in a coma. Being on a ventilator doesn't mean you have to take away someone's right to be conscious.

I feel they did this on purpose. I think someone wanted to knock out my Uncle Howard and then take away his ability to communicate and weaken him in the process with heavy drugs that will affect his mind or ability to articulate as well.

There is nothing anywhere online that says being on a ventilator means you have to be in drug-induced coma.

He's NOT going to die if they do the right thing but if someone wants him to die, he will die. That's obvious.

I have not heard any medical reports other than a confirmation that yes, it was meds that put him in a coma.

But I haven't heard anything about what kinds of poisons and toxins they've screened for, if something has, is, or was seeping inside of him that needs to be fixed, and I haven't heard anything about checking his brainstem and brain for any kind of edema.

I think they're not doing it because they don't want the evidence to back up my theory.

You can give a patient all the pain medication they need and still keep them from being in a drug-induced coma. There is a vast array of medications one can use.

I'm starting to wonder about his wife too, if she doesn't know very much about medicine or what her angle is. He divorced one wife and then married this other one several years ago--I can't remember how but I think they met in a bar and she's Catholic.

My Uncle was on a lung transplant list and was up to have a lung transplant after waiting for years and years. He served this country in ways most will never imagine or will ever be able to do after him.

I kept asking why he got taken off the list because everyone was excited he was going to get his new lung and then something happened. Someone said the excuse was that they thought he wouldn't make it through surgery. Maybe that was the excuse but I also think it's possible that he got taken off after a new "law" came up in 2005, which was after I had filed my major lawsuits. 2005 was the year my entire family began being tortured in earnest, by people with religious hate, who had friends in government who abused their positions.

And in 2005 this new law pushed out those who were waiting for transplants in favor of kids 12 or younger. Which is fine but it happened right when he was about to get a new lung.

Then they fry us and torture us all and don't want to do any diagnostics.

The only diagnostics they do on us is bloodwork they send to Virginia and they never allow us to have any evidence or proof of what's going on...not very often.

Criminals in the justice system and government have been covering for hate crimes against my family.

In case law that I have already read, if someone is prosecuting a case for Hate Crimes, if you are, for example, a white man alleging hate crime committed by a black man, if you go to trial, you can't typically ask an entire jury of black guys to be recused because they're black. Even if you're the only white person and your claim is about hate crime. However, race is not something that one chooses for themself. It's something you're born with and no one decides what color they want to be born.

"I think I'll be white." "I'm gonna be yellow!" "I'm black, but I might want to be red instead..."

However, the organization you choose to associate with, is an entirely different matter. If an organization is encouraging and allowing and inciting its members to commit hate crimes, and they are all on a jury panel, the victim of the hate crimes has every right to ask them to step down on account of their chosen affiliation with their club or religious church or group or other organization. It's a choice. And the very fact that one makes a choice to associate with people in a group who are consenting to, and allowing hate crimes, gives the victim the right to say, "I am a victim of hate crime by members of ____ group and it is therefore a conflict of interest for them to have any say in my legal and personal affairs.

The argument in court was that just because someone is black or white doesn't mean they are all going to be against the person who is of the opposite race. Which is true. But when it comes to organization and the choice to affiliate and associate with an organization that is encouraging, allowing, and committing hate crimes against a specific family that is NOT member to the organization...or was and was ostrasized for some reason,...this is cause for having Judges recused and grounds for replacement on jury selection. Even if the ideas about whether a victim is member or not is WRONG, it is relevant.

The U.S. does not profile for terrorism based on race. They don't go up to those who are of middle eastern race and say to the next guy, "They're on a no-fly list because of their ethnicity or race." They look specifically at organization or specific churches and whether church members and leaders are giving their monies to support hate crimes against others.

So how does one win a case about hate crime in today's United States Supreme Court? If it's hate crime motivated primarily by religion, how does win then, when every Judge is a member of the same groups that have tortured and assaulted your own family.

They weren't born that way. They choose to affiliate.

Therefore, it's more likely than not, that the treatment is going to favor the group they pay dues to, whom they personally choose to affiliate with. Is that not true.

And unless someone can show that there was a different inside group that was opposed to the organization's actions, which tried to speak up or stand up against wrongdoing, the entire organization is liable and responsible for supporting and/or ignoring crimes committed by their paying or hired members.

That means, also now including the FBI, if there are FBI that are not affiliated with specific religious hate crimes, but who choose to allow what is going on, they can also be held liable because they continue to act and associate and take orders from others which they know are illegal.

Every single person on my son's case in Wenatchee was military and/or Catholic and every single one of my lawyers was Jewish or Catholic and there has been a distinct pattern of hate crime originating from many, many, members of these groups.

By the way, you don't get to hide under a government cover if you're already acting an operative for a church or synogogue to terrorize and harm others. That means, if you have allowed or committed hate crimes or tried to incite others to commit them, and then hoped no one could call your affiliation into question, you're wrong. It's relevant. And on a jury selection, it's relevant. And your government position is secondary to your affiliation with a group committing acts of terrorism or torture against U.S. citizens.

If we've done anything to "offend" you, pardon our right to self-defense. We're not the ones who break the law and cross the line to use military technology and assault to protect our interests. That's what our enemies have done.

Our "weapons" for self-defense have been legal ones: brains and articulation.

And this is what our enemies have tried to take from us by torture, threat, and coercion, oh yeah, and kidnapping after they first committed the crimes of torture.

Even if you're a great church, let's say, and you give your funding or some of your tithes to a group that has other members responsible for harming my family, I have a right to have you recused simply on the basis of your sponsorship of others who have members that have harmed me and my son. So you could even be a Protestant, or a great member of a certain church, and if I find out, as a victim, that you sponsored other groups who caused harm to my family, I have a right to have you step aside too. It would be a serious conflict of interest, in a hate crime lawsuit, to have anyone involved who has supported members that have been oppressing and torturing my family. Even if it appears innocent enough by outward appearance.

UPDATE: I just found out that my Uncle Howard opened up his eyes again. A lot of family and maybe a couple friends were assembled and he opened up his eyes and looked at them.

They said it's a positive sign.

I told my mom I don't think he has to die and that it's up to this hospital because I know he doesn't have to die. And I think he has an extremely strong willpower--more than most, which seems sort of counter-intuitive but he does. He doesn't want to die.

No comments: