It is possible with hypnosis to communicate directly to the unconscious mind. The unconscious chooses to listen for its own reasons which must be known to conduct this form of healing. This is relatively easy to understand as we all have basically the same instincts. We can understand each other.
This method has generally been in use for 120 years. The experimental treatment varies where natural transitory differences between conscious and unconscious states are exploited to correct disorders of the unconscious by accessing with logic, instinctual responses, determining patterns of living which are destructive to our society. The time needed to effect recovery will be far less than with any other existent treatment. Drug recovery and recovery from alcoholism can be facilitated as well as a permanent resolution to domestic violence by using our instincts, the best ones, as those rationally identified as enhancing our lives for the benefit of future generations.
By using narcohypnosis with nitrous oxide in very carefully controlled clinical settings, excursions into unconscious states can be conducted and major distortions of cognition can be resolved. Those major cognitive distortions which were effected on each shooter by the uses of naturally attained somnambulistic trance, can be reversed by exploitation of dominant, opposite instincts that exist in each and every one of us. Given time.
This letter is a defacto approval of the experimental treatment proposed. Consider it is logical that person in such a position would NOT come forward as an advocate for something such as this because of socio, political reason. However, a very sincere public servant with compassion and experience, in the letter below says, "we would carry your request forward to the State". Why would they agree to "carry a request forward" that they did not approve of. they cannot conduct experimental treatments without the states approval?
The answer was never received resulting in the use of a FOIA, below, as an attempt to gain the response. It was not the director nor the signing chief medical doctor that are the problem, it is those above them, which was where the FOIA was directed.
The below Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) was presented to Supervisor Susan Rose of the Santa Barbara county supervisors meeting during a public comment April 18, 2,000 and a copy was left with the clerk of the board, whose time stamp is seen below. In the spring of 2,006 a return to the clerk of the boards office found that they had no copy of the FOIA and Susan Roses office also had no copy. This violation of Federal Freedom of Information Laws is part of a Federal complaint filed in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE # CV 06-2085. The suit was dismissed. Justice is seriously compromised as our rational existence is challenged by the extreme events of our world and, ........... the truth of our unconscious existence. We all suffer from this.
It has been appealed to the STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT case # 06-56200 filed by the author and 3 women, 2 grandmothers and one mother. The intention by plaintiffs to see that family members afflicted by alcoholism and other substance problems receive a truly competent, long term treatment. The plaintiffs understand that the general environment for the public could drastically improve with the use of such a treatment to deal with the most serious problems first, then develop more sophisticated treatments for most mental problems.
.
The filed suit is not a tort claim, it is for Specific Performance and Injunctive Relief. The plaintiffs show a history of the defendant County Colluding with officers of Courts to assist in the evasion of laws, damage and impede the author. The state court officers assist by conducting specific deprival's of equal protection of law and rights preventing the author and the public from accessing public records to establish that court case files, having profound impacts on mental health are absent from the court records. Other records proving absence have been subpoenaed and the County failed to appear on the interference of the witness by the Conuty Counsel.
The state has been revising reprinting its law books and have diluted the developed meanings of laws going far back in time relating to the higher function of justice. What this means is that original laws controlling the preservation of records have been changed. An example is the "Public records act." It sounds like it makes records available to us. In reality it makes only records after 1970 "public records" and cuts us off from using general laws of access to earlier records.
Back to