You may have response from Liberty members about protecting against torture. These are from those who believe torture is never ever an acceptable consequence in war.

You do believe in the methods of war. You do believe that the consequences of war are acceptable consequences. You also believe in the value of nuclear weapons. A submarine with nuclear weapons is capable of killing hundreds of thousands if not millions.

War can have a few definitions but I want to use one: sanctioned mass murder without consent.

There is so much suffering caused in wars as well as deaths without consent. It is pitiful little to fight against torture. Imagine if a ballistic nuclear submarine launches its full payload – easily ten times more power than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki. You have in the past voted for these things as acceptable consequences of both mass murder without consent and immense amounts of suffering.

I assume you justify this in the name of national security. It’s the same with torture. It’s justified as acceptable consequences in the name of national security. Because the human race is so evil you believe in the consequences of war and of nuclear war and of torture as acceptable consequences. If the monsters who call themselves the human race were not so evil then you would never fear the methods of war being used ever again so you would not need a military force or nuclear weapons or to give torturers jobs.

Throughout history there’s never been such a prejudice against war makers and those who use the methods of war like there’s prejudice against the suicidal mind and prejudice against those who serve death by consent. Whereas as the methods of war are sanctioned mass murder (and other methods) you can find no reason good enough to sanction assisted suicide and death by consent.

I have no doubt that the members of Liberty are as wholly against the methods of war as they are against torture. Whereas some believe the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few so torture and the methods of war are acceptable consequences to them there are others who believe there is no good in believing such consequences are ever acceptable consequences to force on someone else against one’s consent.

I doubt they and you recognise the substantial prejudice against the suicidal mind and the act of suicide. I am not just witness to the prevail of such prejudice. I am victim too.

Throughout the history of the monsters who call themselves the human race and throughout the history of the human rights movement they have done nothing to protect suicidal individuals by achieving any that resembles a humane protection such as the protection against torture for enemy combatants is.

I have written to you before about how this suicidal individual considers torture to be. It’s the will to make someone want to die to keep on making them want to die. Tortures use unlimited suffering to force their victims to do what they are not willing to do. I assume this involves creating a suicidal mind as part of the process of torture. It’s to force the victim to suffer and endure against their will until they want to die but then death is denied to keep on making the victim want to die until they give their torturers what they want. It’s to use unlimited suffering to make the victim so desperate to do anything to stop the unlimited suffering from happening – so I assume creating a suicidal mind then depriving death to force a suicidal individual to live to keep on making them want to die that’s a common part of how torturers succeed in their jobs.

Those who see the unlimited suffering inflicted by the intentional act of torture see a level of suffering that is wholly unacceptable and never justifiable. This is the sort of empathy and compassion that changes laws and creates new legal protections such as what’s led to the creation of legislation against the use of torture in wars.

You obviously understand the way the law works better than I do. I see the law as simply an explicit moral code influenced by the chaotic forces of what little good there is in human nature versus the masses of cruelty and evil in human nature. The law is like the rules in science but without the concept of absolutes such as exist in scientific rules.

At the same time I see across millennia of progress there’s a trend towards protections against suffering and suffering against consent. Inch by inch there’s this influence of growing empathy that leads to something so pitiful as the protection against the use of torture in wars. I say pitiful because of what are the consequences of war that are known consequences and there’s so much acceptable unlimited suffering that are the acceptable consequences of war so a little compassion to prevent against torture than seek to end the methods of war is pitiful little.

But these pitiful attempts against unlimited suffering are orders of magnitude greater than the attempts to protect suicidal individuals. Suicidal individuals are deprived of liberty and rights by psychiatrists and the medico-legal framework instead of given humane protections such as the protection against torture is.

I assert this is because of the prejudices against the suicidal mind and the act of suicide. It’s the prejudices furthered by the medical profession but the epistemology shifted to brain defects and mental illness instead of the truth of the gods.

Without the prevail of such prejudices I truly believe it would be the laws that protect suicidal individuals that protect against torture – because it’s unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty that’s so common in the things you should recognise are worse than death.

Unfortunately the monsters who call themselves the human race are always unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel. So there is the compassion and empathy for the unlimited suffering of enemy combatants but no such empathy or understanding for the suicidal mind so there exist no humane protections – even the human rights movement won’t protect me – such as the protection against torture is.

While the laws in civilian life and the purpose of these laws somehow disappears when it comes to wars there is the bit of civilian good to legalise against the methods of torture used in wars. Why do you think there’s no such good to protect suicidal individuals against unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelties and in fact the laws and the human rights movement seem to be happy with suicidal individuals facing unlimited cruelties and unlimited suffering?

The laws in civilian life are higher laws than the laws of war. The obvious example is how mass murder without consent is wholly unacceptable in the minds of the law makers but wholly acceptable in wars. Yet the will of civilians tries to make war more humane by the protection against torture. But no such will exists to protect suicidal individuals.

Instead it’s acceptable for suicidal individuals to face unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty. Surely the protection against torture in war should be based on a higher protection against unlimited suffering in civilian life – but it’s not because of the dehumanisation of suicidal individuals.

I’m trying to lead to a point: there’s so much more than assisted suicide that’s meant to be there to protect suicidal individuals but there’s no protections without assisted suicide.

I’ve used the term “unlimited suffering” to describe the methods of torturers. It does boil down to this concept if I have to reduce masses of thought into a free words. Torture is the use of unlimited suffering and the objective to make suffering unlimited to break the victim’s will. Irrespective of the reasons to cause unlimited suffering it is by recognising what unlimited suffering is and why it’s never ever an acceptable consequence that’s what drives those who want to protect enemy combatants against torture.

I believe this sense of duty to protect against such unlimited suffering as torturers want to use it should have come from the civilian laws that protect suicidal individuals. It would exist had doctors not succeeded so much in dehumanising suicidal individuals by the lie of mental illness and the specious paradigm of mental illness – they have always asserted that suicidal thoughts and feelings are the product of a brain defect thus caused by a defective mind. This is fundamentally dehumanising and that’s completely obvious when you look at how much the human rights movement want to protect enemy combatants but never cared about protecting suicidal individuals. Simply put: we’re not human so the human rights movement won’t protect us from unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty. You can also recognise this from the jurisprudence of the criminal justice system that has to protect innocents from punishment whereas when the methods of punishment are used on suicidal individuals there’s no such jurisprudence or objective to protect the innocent from punishment in the medico-legal framework. Because we have a defective brain thus a defective mind this we’re sub human. And because the monsters who call themselves the human race believe when it’s done out of a sense of care the cruelty is irrelevant.

So there are no humane legal protections for suicidal individuals. Not even assisted suicide. I am so much victim to this will to achieve the unlimited suffering of suicidal individuals and the unlimited cruelties the monsters who call themselves the human race care about doing to suicidal individuals.

What else can you do when you’re utterly unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel and the medical profession simply perpetuates the prejudices against the suicidal mind and the act of suicide?

It is this truth I see so clearly because it’s what I am victim of: you are utterly unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel.

I can’t make you understand that unlimited suffering is what becoming suicidal is about. It about being forced beyond one’s limit to what can be suffered and endured that makes being alive worse than death. I can’t make you recognise that that’s meant to be what you recognise as unlimited suffering when it’s what’s worse than death – with this sort of empathy the suicide laws would protect against torture in wars.

It’s this that’s the empathy to recognise a level of pain – and the wide diversity of the pain of living that makes life worth dying to escape from – that’s the evolving definition of unlimited suffering. It’s what should drive you to create a wide range of humane protections other than assisted suicide but there’s nothing without assisted suicide. Just like torture in war is unlimited suffering it is a higher duty of protection in civilian life there to protect suicidal individuals. And the protection against unlimited cruelty of course.

Instead of this empathy there’s just what exists when the monsters who call themselves the human race are still as always unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel. The freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die exists and so does this freedom by made unlimited by the criminalisation of assisted suicide. You can’t call this care when you are affected by how suicidal individuals feel. But the combination of the criminalisation of assisted suicide and the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die leads to unlimited suffering being made more unlimited. What exists is the will to force a suicidal individual to suffer and endure against one’s will indefinitely – that’s the purpose of assisted suicide that serves you who really want to hurt someone.

To make all this orders of magnitude greater more cruel and evil your medical suicide experts have no hesitation and no qualms when risking making a suicidal individual want to die even more. That’s what psychiatrists have done throughout their existences. They have the will to achieve unlimited suffering as well as unlimited cruelty and all based on what’s an acceptable consequence to the law makers and that’s that it’s okay for the monsters who call themselves the human race to force a suicidal individual to live to keep on making them want to die.

You might have the competency to recognise that being tortured is worse than death. But the criminalisation of assisted suicide plus the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die plus how the medical suicide experts so easily risk making a suicidal individual want to die without hesitation or qualms. How the medical suicide experts support the unlimited suffering of suicidal individuals and do so well when they’re protecting the unlimited cruelties that can be done to a suicidal individual. You think this is all acceptable to you and these are acceptable consequences to you – how much more worse than death is my existence?

I am forced to live for the monsters who call themselves the human race to make certain my suffering and suicidality is as unlimited as the evils and cruelties the monsters who call themselves the human race have always cared so much about doing to suicidal individuals.

To recognise you would protect enemy combatants against torture and against the will to achieve unlimited suffering. But you are still and always unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel.

But it’s simply down to you and your concept of what’s unlimited suffering and what’s worse than death to recognise why assisted suicide is never a crime.

You justify mass murder without consent as an acceptable consequence to protect national security. What security do you give suicidal individuals from unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty – when you don’t recognise the real purpose of denying the hope of the mercy and protection of assisted suicide is exactly as evil as torture is.

What sort of crushing blow that would make you want to die do you think it is to recognise the government and the human rights movement won’t give suicidal individuals any humane protections such as the protection against torture is but they do want to protect enemy combatants against unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty?

The combination of the criminalisation of assisted suicide and the protection of the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die by the criminalisation of assisted suicide and so much else. Who do you think you care about?

When you care so much about forcing me to suffer and endure against my will that I don’t have the right to use my death to stop you the monsters who call themselves the human race. When you believe in sanctioned mass murder without consent to such an extent that you have nuclear weapons – why do you think you cannot bear the legalisation of assisted suicide? You justify the methods of war by the needs of national security but when it comes to the safety of a suicidal individual you want nothing to give us safety.

There should be so many more humane protections than assisted suicide but there’s nothing without assisted suicide.

It’s meant to be the humane protections you want to exist to protect suicidal individuals and against unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty that are the duty in civilian life and civilian laws that leads to the protection against torture in war. But still and always you’re unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel.

And when it’s death by consent you have find it an unacceptable consequence. Why do you think this is? You want to take the cruelty in forcing someone to suffer and endure against one’s will and when you want to make this cruelty unlimited – this is the purpose of denying the hope of the mercy and protection of assisted suicide. That’s not torture that’s care?

It’s sadistic cruelty – but you don’t recognise it’s sadistic cruelty when the medical suicide experts have taught you to believe there’s nothing too cruel to do to a suicidal individual.

You can’t legalise assisted suicide when you are always unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel and you clearly cannot want to protect suicidal individuals when you’re still so utterly unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel. If for the safety of a suicidal individual if for no other reason you should want to legalise assisted suicide – can’t you recognise so little empathy exists for suicidal individuals to protect us?

Care cannot exist without fearing suicidal individuals. The human heart doesn’t exist.

I don’t know how to achieve this but it’s clearly necessary from the vast amounts of personal experience the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot stop giving me that any quality of life I have is served by them fearing me.

How can I make a species of monsters born and bred evil fear suicidal individuals – it’s clearly an objective that’s going to force them to care.

The lie of mental illness is what it takes to force a species of monsters born and bred evil to care about suicidal individuals. But it’s failed.

Fear on the other hand. I’m just beginning to recognise just how much better my life would be if the monsters who call themselves the human race feared me. Whatever feelings I engender in the minds of monsters has completely and utterly failed to protect me.

But fear. I’m beginning to think about what I should have done. I should have made them fear me.

I’m reminded of my MP saying she respects my views. But respect doesn’t make the difference.

Fear however. I should have recognised the truth sooner. If they fear me then they might achieve care. Instead of treating me like I’m a slave to the truth about human nature my life would clearly be so much better if they feared me.

I don’t have any comphrension of how to achieve this but it’s absolutely clear my life would be so much better if I could make them fear me – in fact for the monsters who call themselves the human race to fear suicidal individuals it’s clearly more likely to achieve care.

What else is there other than my death?

I have been forced so far beyond my limit by the prevail of sadistic cruelty. Only sadists are protected when the right to use one’s death doesn’t exist.

You can’t care without assisted suicide. You can’t protect the weak without assisted suicide. You can’t protect against unlimited cruelty and unlimited suffering without assisted suicide. You can’t protect against the cruelty in forcing someone to suffer and endure against one’s will without assisted suicide. It is the guarantee every individual has to guarantee safety and draw a line the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot cross.

You can’t care if you don’t have the competency to recognise your death is not the worst thing that can happen to you. What doctors do to suicidal individuals and other victims of psychiatry in the history of the existence of psychiatry you will find so many things done that are worse than death…if you can’t recognise that a decade of forcing me to suffer and endure against my will even more suicidal thoughts and feelings is only the pursuit of sadistic cruelty.

I don’t think you are affected by how suicidal individuals feel. You do not have the protection of the weak. You have two things too evil to exist

• The freedom to inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely
• The freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die

When you face the worst that can be achieved by these horrific things to live to face you will recognise like I do that death isn’t the worst thing that can happen to you…if you can’t recognise what it’s like to be forced so beyond the limit to what I can be forced to suffer and endure against my will for a decade.

You have only made me a slave to the cruelty of the human race by denying me my right to use my death to stop you the monsters who call themselves the human race. But you’re all so cruel and evil that such power an individual has to draw a line the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot cross it doesn’t exist.

Every day for a decade I want to die and that’s not the totality of my life worse than death. It’s because of the prevail of sadistic cruelty that so much suicidality you can bear.

You have the privilege of living in safety but I have no such privilege. I am a slave to human cruelty and evil. I am a victim to the protection of the pursuit of sadistic cruelty and you can’t make a difference to this truth but one way.

Legalise assisted suicide and establish the right to use one’s death. These are protections without equal against the cruelty of sadists and even more invaluable when you can’t recognise what happens to me is sadistic cruelty.

It’s abundantly clear you don’t recognise the cruelty I and other suicidal individuals face. When the government and the medical profession and the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race don’t recognise what is the difference between cruelty and care, when you can’t recognise just how much cruelty I face and it’s not care I face, do you recognise why the protection of assisted suicide is without equal?

The right to use one’s death it gives the individual the power to draw a line you the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot cross. It’s even more invaluable when you can’t recognise the cruelty you do to me. It’s even more invaluable when the government have absolutely no concept of what’s too cruel to do to a suicidal individual.

You have the health and safety laws that protect against the risk of a broken hand because of the slow progress of empathy for physical suffering and injury. You have no such empathy for suicidal individuals and no humane protections and instead you have absolutely no concept of what’s too cruel to do to a suicidal individual. It doesn’t matter how a suicidal individual feels so there’s nothing in you that protects suicidal individuals against further and worsening of suicidality. Instead of having the competency to make suicidality avoidable you want to make it unlimited – that’s the purpose of denying access to assisted suicide.

The criminalisation of assisted suicide it only protects the cruelty in wanting to take the acts of forcing someone to suffer and endure against one’s will and want to make such cruelty unlimited. It serves the will to achieve unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty and unlimited suicidality. You don’t recognise the cruelty in this and that’s why the protection of assisted suicide and the right to use one’s death is even more invaluable.

Do you understand? When the individual recognises the cruelty I face is too cruel but no one else can recognise their cruelty to make a difference to the cruelty the protection is not the law or the human heart. There’s only the protection of assisted suicide for the individual to draw a line you the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot cross. It’s the power of the individual to be safe that’s why you must want the right to use one’s death to exist.

It’s the protection when you’re the slave who refuses to be a slave when no one has the competency to recognise slavery is only cruelty. It’s the protection you want when you are the wife routinely beaten senseless by her husband but it’s acceptable to others but it’s divorce that is considered to be the wrong thing. It’s what you want when they force you to live to keep on making you want to die and such sadistic cruelty in forcing someone to live to keep on making them want to die is protected by the law makers and the medical profession.

You live with the privilege of not having the personal experience that your death is not the worst thing that can happen to you. I have no such privilege. You don’t have the competency to recognise your death is not the worst thing that can happen to you so you want no protections against this happening to you and no humane protections for any suicidal individual.

We live in a time that it’s acceptable to you that a suicidal individual should be expected to face whatever evil and cruelty monsters want to do to a suicidal individual and that’s only furthered by the sense of cruelty in the criminalisation of assisted suicide you believe is a sense of care. I have all the proof I cannot live in safety amongst monsters like you because of what you are part of.

You can’t make a difference to the cruelty and evil and suffering and suicidality I face. But you do have the power to legalise assisted suicide and establish the right to use one’s death to make the difference. Else I’m a slave to the evil and cruelty of a species of monsters born and bred and evil never satiated.

The tragedies and the crimes are because monsters bear the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal like sadists do. This is the only way assisted suicide can ever be a crime.

But when such profound heartlessness prevails the rational thoughts and feelings that are why it’s impossible for assisted suicide to ever be a crime they cannot prevail and instead what prevails is the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die.

The fight for liberty and independence has been won by those who recognise what’s worse than death. The fight for liberty and independence of countries and of specific groups has been won by those who use their deaths and kill to win.

What’s the difference between a suicidal mind and the minds of those considered to be heroes who died and killed for the freedoms you enjoy today? Nothing but we only use our deaths to be free from being forced to suffer and being victims of unlimited evil.

You don’t face the pain of being owned like I do but it is no different than the minds of heroes who have fought and won against oppression and tyranny and being owned by using their deaths and killing others. But my choice is the choice of the individual to use one’s death to be free from a life lived amongst monsters like you.

You live with the privilege of not having the personal experience of what is worse than death. I have no such privilege. That’s why I deserve to die.

There’s no difference between war cry “give me liberty or give me death” and what I’m fighting for “give me liberty and give me death” in the competency of a mind to know what’s worse than death. But the oppression of suicidal individuals is everything tyranny is. The criminalisation of assisted suicide is ever bit evil as slavery is. We are owned and that’s what the criminalisation of assisted suicide is. It really makes it all the worse when it’s done by the medical profession because of the privilege of the medical profession who are trusted to be good.

What am I that you can do this to me? I am property. I am a slave to the evil and cruelty of the monsters who call themselves the human race.

Your freedom and the freedom of this country is protected by an arsenal of nuclear weapons. These weapons mass murder without consent. I do believe nuclear weapons cannot exist and I believe assisted suicide must exist. The latter is a human right that protects the individual. It’s what makes my life my life to have the right to use my death and it’s a freedom you want and never want to be denied for long. What else is there to protect you from being forced to suffer against your will? What else is there to protect you from the will “it doesn’t matter how cruel and evil the methods we use on you are as long as we get whatever we want”? Assisted suicide is without equal in giving the individual the guarantee of safety.

It is the empathy and understanding of being affected by how suicidal individuals feel that focuses on reducing the prevalence of suicidal thoughts and feelings. That’s how humane people reduce the suicide rate not by something so cruel and barbaric as the criminalisation of assisted suicide.

I believe the criminalisation of assisted suicide exists as long as those who are meant to care are in fact unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel. It is the most obvious thing to recognise that the acts of forcing someone to live are the acts of forcing someone to suffer and end are against their will.

Because of what suicidal individuals are feeling and facing these acts are inherently more cruel when done to a suicidal individual. There is care and cruelty achieved by a limited amount of forcing someone to live to suffer and endure against one’s will. However it is wholly unacceptable to force suicidal individuals to live for years. It is simply too cruel because of the cruelty in the acts of forcing someone to suffer and endure against one’s will are cruel and more cruel when done to a suicidal individual.

You win by preventing and making avoidable and quickly and effectively ending suicidal thoughts and feelings never by the expectations of monsters “you should get used to feeling suicidal”. Such apathy for the plight of suicidal individuals as “you should get used to feeling suicidal” has absolutely no place in a humane society and care system.

The first point is what suicidal individuals face and comphrension of the enormity of what we face.

The next point is recognising the cruelty of the use of force and deprivation of liberty and what’s essentially care that imprisons both metaphorically and physically. The walls are the control and cruelty in forcing suicidal individuals to suffer against one’s will.

Then what do you do because of the cruelty in what you are doing and recognise “it’s about us getting whatever we want not about you or what you want and don’t want” that’s the cruelty in duty of care

Duty of cruelty defines what you give suicidal individuals for what you take from us and the cruelty in being forced to live.

Point 1 epistemology

Rather than focus on the pain and your emotional response to the severity of the suffering of suicidal individuals and the awfulness of feeling suicidal let me try to persuade your rational side.

Take the example of a women a millennium ago regularly beaten by her husband. The prevailing wisdom would do nothing to stop the beating or protect the victim. She cannot divorce her husband because divorce was deemed to be wrong whereas a wife routinely beaten by her husband was acceptable.

Why was divorce wrong? The source of truth in those times was that divorce is wrong because it is against god’s will. The source of truth was from a religious basis. The laws were based on a religious source of truth so divorce was wrong. Divorce was more cruel and evil than a woman being endlessly beaten by her husband.

There were also argument made and reasons deemed rational for seeing divorce as the unacceptable evil and cruelty a millennium ago. Like “think of the impact on the weak and the vulnerable if divorce is legal. Think of the impact on the children”. Or “how can a woman support a family on her own. She needs a husband”. Or perhaps “a woman can’t have the competency to make the decision to divorce. They’re women. They are incompetent to do anything else but breed”.

Remember this was a time when women were severely prejudiced against and deemed to have minds that should be subordinate to the minds of men so if a women wouldn’t accept the beating her husband was free to routinely do to her then it’s just a woman being silly. Even families wealthy enough to afford to give their children a good education then commonly the women wouldn’t get an education. It was a time when the minds of women were deemed inadequate to do anything else but breed and men were who to worked and made the decisions.

A woman couldn’t divorce for the rational reason that she couldn’t even feed her children and her herself or have a home without a husband as well as because of the religious beliefs. Women in this time accepted this as the truth and would with the same truth accept a husband beating his wife senseless was acceptable.

There was a similar religious belief at the time that suicide was wrong in the eyes of the lord as was divorce and homosexuality. Women and men didn’t have such things as the protection of human rights or the welfare system. It was a different source of truth then from which human rights flow from. It was the source of truth of the will of god.

Much has changed in the last millennium but human nature hasn’t changed when it comes to the denigration and oppression of the suicidal mind. The human rights movement for example really do not give a damn about protecting suicidal individuals.

It’s not a religious source of truth used to oppress the suicidal mind. It’s something far worse. It’s a medical source of truth and the corruption of the scientific method that’s the source of truth used to continue the oppression and dehumanisation of the suicidal mind.

It’s the same oppression and subjugation but instead of a religious source of truth it’s a medical source of truth. The epistemology has changed but it’s the same oppression and subjugation and sub human status that defines psychiatric and mental health care.

Unfortunately both epistemologies are wrong. But everything built in the name of care for suicidal individuals is based on a false source of truth. It’s not just the corruption of the scientific method but the corruption of the very meaning of words as well.

It all leads to so much cruelty and so much cruelty and evil protected…it really doesn’t lead to care. This is what I face to this day of my unwanted existence. It’s such a mild way to put it “my unwanted existence”.

It’s the curse of the lie of mental illness.

It goes by a few names such as the biomedical model or the biological model of mental illness that’s what the institution of psychiatry is founded on and perpetuates.

It is the idea of illness that a biological (brain) defect is the cause of mental suffering and certain types of mental diversity there to be ruled over by the medical profession. That’s the lie of mental illness and the source of truth the monsters who call themselves the human race have been working from in the centuries they’ve attempted to care about suicidal individuals (and other victims of psychiatry).

It’s quite specific in how the biomedical model of psychiatry and mental illness and mental health acts to oppress and subjugate and confer sub human status. A biological difference misrepresented as a biological defect serves as the proof that a mind is sub human and incompetent. The cause of the mental phenomena and symptoms of mental illness are the product of a defective mind because the brain is defective and it’s this brain defect that’s responsible for, for example, suicidal suffering, feelings and thoughts.

I’m sure psychiatrists don’t recognise they’re the scum of the earth for coming up with this. But it’s their profession who have created the conditions that exist today for suicidal individuals that are equivalent to the conditions that prevailed over women when divorce was too cruel and evil whereas a husband mercilessly and routinely beating his wife senseless was not so cruel. Their profession is responsible for the minds of the government who are all about oppressing and subjugating suicidal individuals not protecting us.

It’s a false source of truth that is responsible for so much evil and cruelty done to suicidal individuals and so much evil and cruelty of monsters protected than any humane protections for suicidal individuals.

It’s a false sense of truth that doesn’t even recognise there’s cruelty too cruel to do to a suicidal individual and in fact legislates for the protection of the unlimited cruelties that can be done to a suicidal individual as well as legislates for unlimited suffering. As if suicidal individuals cannot ever be abused or tortured endlessly by those who have no sense of remorse or mercy.

This corruption of the scientific method which is fundamental to psychiatry it leads to the corruption of the meaning of words such as vulnerability and “duty of care” to justify whatever evil and cruelty monsters want to do to a suicidal individual but it also defines a sense of cruelty devoid of humane protections for suicidal individuals against unlimited cruelty and unlimited evil and unfettered abuses and torture so the monsters who call themselves the human race are really free to do whatever evil and cruelty that comes into the minds of sadists to want to do to suicidal individuals.

Point 2 – no concept of cruelty is what defines the psychiatric and mental health meaning of things like duty of care

The freedom to force me to live for the monsters who call themselves the human race to keep on making me want to die is protected by a vast system of cruelty.

The false source of truth it leads to what is obviously going to happen when dehumanisation and the misuse of the scientific method to prove sub human status is a scientific truth is going to achieve. There’s absolutely no recognition of the cruelty the monsters who call themselves the human race are doing to me even when I’m suicidal already. Because it’s done out of a misguided sense of care entrenched in the sort of sub human status enforced a millennium ago by the falsehood of the truth of the gods is why divorce is wrong but a husband beating his wife senseless without remorse or mercy is not so cruel or not even cruelty at all. “You have to put her in her place by beating her as much as you do” – that’s the sense of cruelty I face. It’s done out of a sense of care so the cruelty doesn’t matter.

That’s what every single suicidal individual before me and I also face. So much cruelty because there’s no recognition of the cruelty and that’s called care. No protection from cruelty and evil because it’s done out of a sense of dehumanisation. It’s about reducing my being to sub human status so it really doesn’t matter if I recognise just how evil I face and have always faced. My needs and wants and what’s important to me as well as my suffering and suicidality are all there to be ignored because I’m not human I’m sub human – and because all this is done out of a sense of care the cruelty doesn’t matter.

It leads to something so beyond horrifically awful: there’s no cruelty in forcing someone to suffer against their will when it’s done out of a sense of psychiatric and mental health care. Like a millennium ago women were expected to face whatever suffering their husbands decided to force their victims of suffer against their will this is the same cruelty that prevails over suicidal individuals.

Obviously there is care in the acts of forcing someone to live not least because the tyranny of evil disguised as care it has always conferred sub human status to the victims of psychiatry so no such possiblity of education for empowerment of the suicidal mind – it’s worthless to educate we who are sub human. It’s what happened to women when they were deemed to sub human in comparison to men and neither women’s liberty was important nor was educating women.

But you recognise the care. You don’t recognise the cruelty. You don’t recognise the cruelty inherent in the acts of forcing someone to live just like you don’t recognise these acts that are about forcing suffering against one’s will are even more cruel when done to a suicidal individual. You denigrate our minds and you denigrate our suffering as the product of a mental illness so there’s so much cruelty done to suicidal individuals and so much cruelty that’s unlimited and unfettered that can be done to suicidal individuals.

I’m focusing on one clear and present unrecognised cruelty and evil here and that’s the inherent cruelty and evil in the acts of forcing someone to live. You’re forcing suffering against one’s will and this is even more cruel when it’s done to a suicidal individual. Like every other cruelty the law makers succeed in making certain the evils and cruelties that can be done to a suicidal individual are not legislated against so it is unlimited evils and cruelties the law makers legislate for.

It’s very much like the conditions that prevailed over women a millennium ago because of the existence of a false source of truth. So words like vulnerability are corrupted from the meaning of weakness and fragility to instead justify tyranny and oppression and subjugation. And the cruelty isn’t recognised. The meaning of “duty of care” it really does mean “I don’t give a damn about how cruel and evil my methods are I will get whatever I want from you. I don’t give a damn about what you want. I don’t care and your wants and needs and free will. I don’t care about your suffering or your quality of life as I would a free man. I don’t give a damn how cruel or evil you think what I’m doing to you is. I do it because I care about getting whatever I want from you so my cruelty doesn’t matter and you don’t matter. I matter and my decisions matter and I will get whatever I want from you by any method matter how cruel and evil my methods are or the impact on you is. It doesn’t matter how much I force you to suffer against your will because you don’t matter. I matter and my choices matter and it doesn’t matter how much I force you to suffer against your will or your recognition of the cruelty I am doing to you because I care about you. I don’t give a damn about what are wholly unacceptable consequences for you with the power I take over you because you don’t matter but I matter so my choices matter not yours. If I abuse you or if I torture you or if I inflict even more suicidal thoughts and feelings or if I worsen your suicidality it doesn’t matter to me because you don’t matter. I matter so it’s not what’s important to you that matters to me because I care about you”.

Or simply duty of care means “I protect and I gorge on the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die because I care about you”.

I digress. It’s what duty of care means it means they ignore the cruelty. That’s everything the monsters who call themselves the human race have done well throughout the existence of psychiatry. They’ve ignored the inherent cruelty in the acts of forcing someone to live. Because of a false sense of truth they ignore the inherent cruelty in forcing someone to suffer against one’s will and they don’t – you don’t – recognise such cruelty is even more cruel to do to a suicidal individual because it’s not that we face unlimited suffering already that’s one of the humanised ways to explain why suicidal individuals feel suicidal but the source of truth is the belief that a suicidal mind is defective and incompetent because it’s the product of a defective brain.

(All this makes what an even more invaluable protection without equal…?)

That’s what duty of care represents certainly in my mind. It defines what I trust psychiatrists and the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race to do and do well. To work towards unlimited suffering and unlimited cruelty then in this pursuit they do succeed in caring about. The competency not just to ignore the cruelty inherent in the act of forcing someone to suffer against their will but to also believe there really is nothing too cruel to do to a suicidal individual and call this care.

I hope this explains the final point which no doubt I’ve communicated poorly when I call it “duty of cruelty”

Point 3 – duty of cruelty

What do you do when you do recognise the cruelty in the acts of forcing someone to live? What do you do when you recognise the vast list of things too cruel to do to a suicidal individual is also part of this point.

This piece is about yet another reason to justify what’s actually care for suicidal individuals but I’m seeking to use a different truth than having the most basic empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind.

It’s the point that’s to recognise the inherent cruelty and evil you do in the name of psychiatric and mental health care and in the name of duty of care.

What do you strive to do and to provide suicidal individuals not because of your sense of care but because you recognise the cruelty you are doing by, for example, the criminalisation of assisted suicide?

This is not the emotional argument rather it’s the rational argument that when you do such cruelty then how do you compensate and counteract the cruelty inherent in the acts of forcing someone to live?

This is poorly expressed by the phrase duty of cruelty but it’s to sum up the objective of reducing and compensating and counteracting the cruelty.

It’s like “we take this from you your right to use your death and in return we give you all of these things such as…?”

It’s the rational thoughts based not on ignoring the cruelty when it’s done out of a misguided sense of care but rather the care that exists when evil eye cruelty is recognised for what it is. It might be justified as a necessary cruelty and evil because a species of monsters born and bred evil can’t do anything else but then it’s to still recognise the cruelty inherent in acts of forcing someone to live that drives the rational will to do everything in the name of reducing and compensating and counteracting the cruelty. EVERYTHING!.

“We can’t bear for you to suffer anymore beyond being forced to live” – it’s a rational thought driven not by empathy for suicidal individuals rather it’s the recognition of the cruelty in the acts of forcing someone to live are still cruel.

“I can’t bear the cruelty in forcing you to live but it’s a necessary evil. But because I can’t bear the cruelty inherent in forcing a suicidal individual to suffer against their will it’s the last cruelty I expect you to face’.

“I take from you what makes your life your life and in return for this I will give you so much”.

“Because I recognise the cruelty I do everything to counteract it. Obviously that’s the protection of the weak to limit the cruelty that can be done to you big I believe there is one cruelty I have to do which is to force you to live. But I recognise just how much this act of cruelty is cruelty so I have to do everything possible to counteract it and obviously I have to protect you even more because I am part of this cruelty”.

The legalisation of assisted suicide is a logical sequitur once the cruelty inherent in the acts of forcing someone to live are recognised for the cruelty they represent thus such cruelty can never be unlimited.

But what I’m saying here is about the lengths you go to achieve what’s as essential to care as you believe the criminalisation of assisted suicide and other acts of forcing someone to live are essential care.

Not by the empathy and understanding for the suicidal mind I’ve clearly utterly failed to give you but by the recognition of the oppression and subjugation of the suicidal mind as being recognised as cruelty as well as recognising the inherent cruelty in the acts of forcing someone to live.

It’s seeing the cruelty for what it is and making duty of cruelty about counteracting and compensating and reducing and limiting cruelty.

It’s about giving things to suicidal individuals – such as the protection against further and worsening of suicidality – because you’re taking from us what makes our lives our lives by the use of force and deprivation of liberty that is how psychiatrists have only succeeded in achieving metaphorical and physical prisons for suicidal individuals.

It’s to evoke the rational response to achieve so much care to counteract the inherent cruelty in forcing someone to live than the emotional argument that I’ve clearly failed to communicate. You recognise it’s a necessary evil and you want to do everything to reduce the impact on the victims of the methods of cruelty and evil.

Point 4 – what’s the impact on me when you can’t even begin to recognise the difference between cruelty and care let alone limit and counteract your evil and cruelty?

Whatever happens to me I have to die. The proof of the truth about human nature and the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot be undone. But it’s so much worse for me when the monsters who call themselves the human race cannot recognise the cruelty they’re doing because it’s done out of a sense of care.

But you’re all blind to your cruelty and that’s the tragedy of every suicidal individual before me and me. Because you have the wrong source of truth you have the wrong methods and wrong objectives. But that aside you really don’t try to limit or counteract or in any other way provide so so much more for suicidal individuals to protect and save suicidal individuals because you recognise the cruelty inherent in the acts of forcing someone to live.

You must recognise the consequences of what’s so cruel and too cruel to do to me it’s not been recognised and that’s the proof I have of human nature. So I’m not fighting for the life I deserve. I’m fighting for the death I deserve. You don’t have the most basic empathy and understanding for my being. So you can’t recognise the difference between care and cruelty. But you don’t have the empathy to care about the impact on me of what you think you do because you care about me. You never have had before in the history of the monsters who call themselves the human race when it comes to mental suffering and mental diversity.

You do have the belief that I’m here to be hurt and harmed and abused and tortured endlessly and that’s a sense of cruelty married to not recognise the cruelty and the erroneous belief that if you do it out of a sense of care then the cruelty inherent in your acts of oppression and subjugation and dehumanisation is either there to be ignored or you don’t recognise the cruelty at all.

So what I face is the corrupted meaning of duty of care. Without recognising the cruelty and with no sense whatsoever of duty of cruelty.

Thus I fight for the death I deserve not the life I deserve. You take from me what makes my life my life but you cannot take away from me the proof of the truth about human nature.

I know too much about the truth you really don’t give a damn about how I feel or am going to feel even when I’m suicidal already. That’s what you give me in return for taking from me what makes my life my life.

Duty of cruelty serves to achieve one sense of care if no other. “Forcing you to live is the last cruelty I expect you to face’ and that’s how you save and beat the value of assisted suicide.

But your source of truth is a lie. So what’s duty of care? “I protect the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die and I will gorge on this freedom and that’s not cruelty it’s care”.

I do trust you and your kind to prove the protection of assisted suicide is even more invaluable and without equal. Do you recognise the lines that cannot be crossed when the competency of the minds of monsters is the competency to believe that divorce is what’s too cruel and evil but a wife routinely beaten by her husband that’s not too cruel?

You know I recognise the lines that cannot be crossed and that’s why I fight for the death I deserve not the life I deserve and you recognise I can’t trust you to recognise the lines I know cannot be crossed. Like the impact on a wife routinely beaten by her husband a millennium ago you have the same thing for suicidal individuals the complete and utter regard for how suicidal individuals feel. You don’t try to protect and save and beat the value of assisted suicide. You take liberty and protect unlimited cruelty and evil.