This is an FCC COMPLAINT
FILING REPORT AGAINST THE MALFORMED PRACTICES EMBEDDED IN THE COUNTY
COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE WITH CLIENTS AND PATIENTS:
I have an #INeedAnGuardianAngel
that is standing onto the tweet of @ElonMusk, the person behind Tesla
Motors, the world's present role position that Steve Jobs held in
innovation.
This is found on
twitter --- I have caught the attention of some sanity out here.
Your representation of bringing forward a complaint against the system
in the manner to which is appropriate ---- may need to be applied to
these statements made on Article 12 of the CRPD.
open the 10 minute watch segment video youtube link.... this is what is said:
statements made:
It aims to enable self direction or autonomy -- yes it
works for that within a framework of support. So the last little bit in
that slide, the last contract, goes to what I would term the relational
effect of these two models.
So whereas the substitute model has the
effect of subjecting one suspicion and surveillance and ultimately
coercion --
[
this is the current model that is in place in the county system, or at
least weighted against me in discriminatory practices ]
This is a big package that I'm throwing together - the
alternative model of supportive decision-making is meant to enhance
relationships of respect and empowerment.
[ The model that I have been stressing internal of them, they refuse to enable ]
So this sums up to the point,
and it is the language used by representative of a group called the World
Network of Users and survivors of Psychiatry.
That was a key player
instrumental group among many others in assisting in the drafting of
article 12.
So what does this say? it says instead of restricting
autonomy [ which they are restricting the use of email ] of those who
need extra support to comfortably participate in all aspects life, The
CRPD [ Convention Rights For Persons With Disabilities ] in particular
article 12 - requires states [ that means the County of San Bernardino ] to provide access to those supports [ which
has been denied by verbal order and suspension of services provided ].
Article 12 : What is supportive about it? I picked out a few things
here. One, it stipulates expressively that capacity shouldn't depend on
one's way of communicating with others.
[ They are restricting my access to email protocols, because it is
threatening to their standard. That standard being dangerous to
the community ]
That seems important from what
we have seen so far. Second, it allows one to appoint someone who
assist me, right, with making decisions and to take over, in
specific areas.
I
APPOINT #Kramobone-The.Good Agent of Change #Jonathan-Arellano-Jackson
to represent the truth to assist me in the filing of a COMPLAINT with
the DISTRICT of ATTORNEY in the COUNTY of SAN BERNARDINO if NEED BE. For
the Greater Good of challenges, you better get on the phone and tell
these people do be on the mark corrective choice actions per the UN CRPD
--- it is time to give up the oppressive system of hate that you have
been running for too many years past the date of signage in this county
system. I claim it is neglect and criminal at this point of time
here in the United States of America.
It also allows me to appoint someone to take over in
certain circumstances that this model does.
I
am sick and tried of running into agents of hate. Do you
represent the truth or the haters? I think you are moved by
the deliverance of my interface. Perhaps you have been reading.
Perhaps you have been ignoring me. Perhaps I don't care to have any
other one person that does not have the truth in the care. That is
all I care about, you have been given the truth of the matter.
The act also states a test
for capacity to make those appointments that's not rooted in the sort of
cognitive capacities of understanding and so on that traditional models
are so it goes to one's ability to express preferences [ in my case
communication in email ] and trust
I TRUST NO ONE --- BUT ONE WHO HOLDS THE HONOR OF BEING THE HONORABLE RECIPIENT OF MY EMAIL PROPER!
So Think about the relevance of this
and this is why it is drafted this way.
Thank you Mr Jackson for your complete understanding of my requests
here, This email requests a reply by Friday the 30th of March 2018.
You
may visit my home, per my challenge to your level of court function in
criminal jeopardy case, We can discuss the matters of detail
that you may have missed by ignoring the emails being received. This is
a complex issue of circumstances and no one has the balls that I do to
challenge the system to force the change beyond all options, to do the
right thing. I have allow them to hold their authority until this
email over me --- to attempt compassionate understanding interface ---
RUDENESS is the ONLY METHOD THEY ARE GOING TO LISTEN TO --- THE RUDENESS
OF HAVING TO BE BROUGHT UP ON CHARGES FOR MALPRACTICE! And having
no defense for their actions, because their record of testimony is
already written to them forced into motion of real time emails to my CC:
to a defense attorney.
REAL TIME DEFENSE POSTURE --- IT
WAS PREDICTABLE TO HAVE TO RELY THE DETAILS IN THIS MANNER --- I HAVE NO
OTHER OPTION BUT TO CALL THEM
HATERS --- BULLSHITERS --- AND DANGEROUS TO COMMUNITY!
James M. Driskill
3260 Grande Vista
You
are suppose to be able to speak in relation to the truth for me with a
letter of release of confidentiality. If they don't relay that I
signed one for you already and they have not followed through, I will
sign one again with you for them to get it --- this bullshit stops ---
to the offense of the court will be their destiny toasting.
Thank you again for your representation.
