Terrorism

Aug

2019

The War On Terror

When there is a terrorist attack, why would you, or anyone, talk about or forward their message?

With domestic terrorism or global terrorism, who are the real casualties?

I believe that one of the best ways of combating terrorism is to not talk about it. Lately, it seems, though, social media and terrorism go hand in hand. If terrorists had no way of creating fear in the hearts of many, I’m quite certain they would not be so active.

This from Encyclopedia Britannica:

“The goal of terrorism generally is to destroy the public’s sense of security in the places most familiar to them. … and that terrorist acts are intended to create an overwhelming sense of fear.”

Every time you talk about an incident that occurred, every time you forward some news article, you let the terrorists win.

The Media and Terrorism ... or Suicides ‘R Us

There are a couple of places where suicides are known to occur in volume. One is on subway lines around the world and another is a place like Niagara Falls. People jump in front of trains and people jump into the Falls. These suicides used to be sensationalized in the press. This was stopped in most places as this type of media coverage normally resulted in an increase of suicide attempts. Usually a spike after any media attention. With less media attention, they still occur but to a much lesser extent.

If you knew that as a result of your promoting that someone jumped over Niagara Falls and committed suicide resulting in three other people doing the same thing, hopefully, you would feel somewhat guilty and not promote this thing any more. The media did stop, or at least put this type of news on page 23 and the number of suicides went down.

The same could be predicted for the war on terror. A terrorist attack that no one hears about is just some idiot killing people. If they are not creating a climate of fear and worry, if they are not alarming populations as a whole, then the terrorists are not winning.

Domestic Terrorism in the US of A

There are many examples of domestic terrorism in the US, but by far the most prevalent and obvious is the recent school shootings. And not so recent. There have been a lot over the years.

You may realize where I’m going with this…

If you insist on telling everyone on Facebook, Twitter or other social media how sorry and concerned you are about the shooting in whatever school then you are feeding the frenzy. You are doing exactly what they want. You are forwarding the fear and feeding the terror.

If you say on Facebook that your heart goes out to all those in Texas for some tragedy, I honestly believe that is a useless bit of sympathy. No one in Texas is going to read your post.

For every Tweet and Facebook post about some terrorist attack, whether it be a bombing in Paris or the Columbine Massacre one is just forwarding the terrorists message and creating fear and upset.

The media’s mantra ‘the people need to know’ is simply put just bullshit. That is just an excuse to spread and create a feeling that the world is a horrible place. Years ago someone coined the phrase ‘merchants of chaos’ as a moniker for the media. I think this is quite appropriate.

Big Pharma - The Real Terrorists

The media is pretty much controlled by the advertising companies. If you disagree, just try and get an article attacking Big Pharma in a woman’s magazine. Any pharmaceutical company is going to love these terrorist attacks in schools. The upset that occurs I’m sure drives their drug sales out the roof. They are going to milk this for all it’s worth.

If you really want to calm things down and fight terrorism, then don’t give in to it. Don’t forward the fear. 90% of the people in the USA would not even consider not talking about this. They will believe the media. They will feel that it needs to be talked about. They will feel that posting on Facebook, Twitter and other social media is going to help.

I ask you how? How is this going to help. You are upset about it and now you are going to upset all your friends? How does that make a safer environment? Please tell me how that is good and beneficial.

So, I would propose that the real cause of the increase in school shootings is social media. Twitter, Facebook and the like. The media in general has been feeding terrorism for years and years. Guns are a factor. Psychiatric mood altering drugs and street drugs are also undoubtedly a factor. But for the surge over the last few years of these domestic terrorists (school shootings), I can only thank (or blame) social media. Or the people using social media to stir up fear and alarm in others.

So, just stop! If you are fearful and alarmed and need to talk to someone, then talk to one person, don’t create fear and alarm in 10 or 20. As far as I’m concerned as soon as you do that you are partnered with the school shooter or the Paris bomber.

So, just stop!

Jun

2019

Should you take SSRIs?

Depression and SSRIs

There are millions of dollars spent on ads on TV and thousands of doctors and psychiatrists that will promote and tell you how wonderful Prozac and Ritalin and similar drugs are for you. Zoloft is also an SSRI. SSRI definition: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

Read the articles below if you want to do proper research to find out how these drugs can affect you. Are they really effective is solving what they are prescribed for?

Five Reasons

If you are taking any of these 'depression' or mood altering SSRIs, for heaven's sake DO NOT go cold turkey. Don't quit without proper medical supervision. Almost always, the effects/reactions one has when trying to withdraw or quit can be be much worse than whatever you were experiencing beforehand. There is some data in this article from

Crossfit.com

There is also a great book by renowned psychiatrist Peter Breggin on coming off drugs and how to go about withdrawal.

<br />

Please know what you are getting into before you start doing something like this. Don't do these drugs casually or even with a doctor's prescription without doing your own proper research.

Mar

2018

The History of Electroconvulsive (HA!) Therapy (ECT)

Article by Charlotte Roberts:

The History of Shock Therapy in Psychiatry

ECT was first developed by Ugo Cerletti born in 1877, the son of an agricultural engineer. After attending medical schools at Rome and Turin (he must have been out sick the day they covered the “first do no harm” bit), he went on to tour European “sanctuaries” including those run by the infamous Emil Kraepelin and Franz Nissl.

Cerletti applied the skills he learned in medical school to design a white winter camouflage suit (you think I’m kidding, but, I swear to God, not), after which he was naturally made Head of the Neurobiological Institute in Milan. What better place for a fashionista?

Cerletti turned his attention to the matter of epilepsy because, according to him: “I have always given prime importance to the study of epilepsy, since it is linked to many areas of neurology and psychiatry”. In the course of his study of this disease, he tried to replicate an epileptic state in dogs by passing a 125-volt current through their bodies. He killed a lot of the dogs, of course.

After he’d finished stacking up the dog corpses, he decided to move on to humans. In his words: “The daily confrontation with the dogs who had been made epileptic by electroshock treatment naturally gave me the idea of a possible similar application on man”. Naturally.

Then, “One day I heard that at the Rome slaughterhouse they were killing pigs with the electric current used for lighting” so he went to the slaughterhouse to check it out. Sure enough, “I saw some butchers moving about among the pigs, holding in both hands a large pair of pincers, which had at both ends two discs, spiked with small, blunted, metallic tips. When they got near to the animals, they opened the jaws of the pincers and quickly grasped the front part of the pig’s head between the tips of the discs. 70-80 volts were then sent through the electric cable. As soon as the animals had been got hold of, they fell rigid to the ground without even uttering a sound and shortly after, began to present general clonic shocks.” (Clonic shocks are seizures). Well, you could see how that would appeal to a psychiatrist. Cerletti walked off from the slaughterhouse with a set of those electric pincers in hand, a happy man, off to kill more dogs.

Cerletti’s first human victim was a man that the police had apprehended who was “behaving in a very odd way, answering questions put to him in a very strange language which was completely incomprehensible”. The poor guy was probably speaking a different European language that nobody at the psychiatric institute could speak. And, from that, they diagnosed him as schizophrenic. (Note – schizophrenia is defined as “a mental disorder of a type involving a breakdown in the relation between thought, emotion, and behavior, leading to faulty perception, inappropriate actions and feelings, withdrawal from reality and personal relationships into fantasy and delusion, and a sense of mental fragmentation”. Hmmm … sounds a lot like most psychiatrists, doesn’t it?)

This poor sod was Cerletti’s “first experiment” [Cerletti’s words] in electroshock. He secured two electrodes soaked in a saline solution to this man’s head with an elastic band and send 80 volts through his head. After this “treatment”, the patient begged “Not another one! You will kill me.”

Cerletti’s response to this? He immediately administered another shock to the patient, at a higher voltage, and damned near killed him. Cerletti noted that after the second shock “treatment”, “there was an interruption in breathing and a deathlike cyanosis of the face which, if upsetting in a spontaneous epileptic fit, seemed to us in this case distressingly unending”.

Cerletti then went on to administer 19 more shocks to this poor soul until he was in “complete remission” which, in psych-speak, means that he was quiet and compliant.

And that was the start of electroshock (HA!) therapy. Contemporary proponents of it will tell you that it is “safe” and “effective”. Don’t you believe it. Psychiatrists now use heavy sedation and anesthetic before shocking their victims, but that does not make the procedure one bit less harmful. Sedation and anesthetic before ECT is like slipping Rohynol to a rape victim first to leave her helpless and forgetful of the violation, and then saying that rape is “safe” and “effective”.

Sedation and anesthetic dull the agony the victim feels, but they don’t do a damned thing to lessen the damage.

ECT is not treatment. It’s terrorism. It’s time to put a stop to it.

Mar

2018

Who Decides?

Who Decides What Becomes a Mental Disease?

who decides at what point an active boy becomes ADHD?
who decides at what point a liking for neatness and order becomes OCD?
who decides when sadness becomes depression?
who decides when an ‘emotional roller coaster’ becomes Bipolar?
who decides when a cheeky kid is suffering from "oppositional defiance disorder"?

ADD or ADHD Or Just An Active Little Boy?

Before ‘ADHD’ we were just active boys. Likely too much sugar. Either way, if we were too rambunctious we would be send outside to play and burn off some extra energy. At school there was enough physical activity and breaks from academics to bleed off any extra energy. An acquaintance of mine, Sonny, at the gym, was diagnosed ADHD when 7 years old. The teachers wanted to put him on Ritalin. His grandfather stepped in and said no. Grandfather enrolled Sonny in a martial arts class. He says it helped him burn off energy and stay focused.

I can’t remember not being outside after school winter or summer. On weekends we would head to the farm and in winter we would head out into the woods for hours. Come back when time to leave stiff from the cold and wet from falling through the ice.

There are myriad solutions online for ADHD.
1. https://draxe.com/natural-remedies-adhd/
2. http://naturalsociety.com/3-powerful-natural-remedies-for-adhd/

Above are just a couple of sites. I don’t necessarily agree that there is anything wrong with a 8 or 10 year old boy that needs to be active. BUT if you do and want to ‘solve it’, then there are dozens of ways to help your child without drugs. Of course, I do understand if you need the quick fix of a drug to control and keep your child quiet. Your life is more important than your child’s. I’m not really apologetic about the sarcasm - people need to spend more time with their kids. Not just give them everything they want.

Some schools have taken away parts of education that are not academic. Big mistake.

OCD vs Neatness?

Is there a test, physical or otherwise for OCD? I don’t think so. Who makes the line in the sand? On this side you just like things orderly and clean. On the other side you have a mental problem because you like things orderly, neat and clean. Huh? The headshrinkers would have you believe that 1 in 4 or 5 are in need of psychiatric help. It is not that hard to convince someone they need some help but when that help comes in the form of a pill that is addictive and has side effects that include depression, suicide thoughts and death, well, let’s not terrify this person more than they already might be.

Oppositional Defiance Disorder(Or Just Cheeky)?

The ‘cheeky’ kid that gets into trouble because he disagrees with the teacher. He is not convinced and won’t take things at face value. He is light hearted about it and is seen as somewhat condescending when in reality he is way ahead of the curve but the teacher or parent finds this disrupting to the rest of the children largely because this ‘defiant’ child is just too smart. But because he doesn’t fit in or just believe all he is told, he gets a prescription to subdue him. There is no physical or mental test to determine at what point these kids need to be drugged. It’s all opinion. The psychiatrist listens to the parent or teacher and prescribes a drug. That simple. A caring person would have a conversation with the child, teacher and parents to see how to encourage and challenge the child. Drugs are ‘easier’.

I’m not sure that terrorist organizations should even bother terrorizing the West, particularly North America. Psychiatry with its
drugs are stripping away the life of upcoming generations and pretty much destroying any willingness to fight back. ISIS would be smart to just finance the field of psychiatry and the job of destroying America would be done for them.

Feb

2018

Torture and ECT!!

This article by my dear friend Charlotte Roberts:(thanks for letting me post)

What would you call someone who deliberately sent 180 to 460 volts of electricity searing through their brain? Idiot? Knucklehead? Imbecile?

So what would you call someone who sends that voltage through the brain of a child, deliberately? I would call them malevolent, foul, malicious (if I were keeping it clean) and I would consign them to their very own very special Hell for all of eternity.

But, unbelievable as it is, such people do exist. And your provincial government funds them. I’m speaking, of course, about the barbaric cruelty fraudulently enforced on patients of ALL ages, including children, in our nation’s psychiatric institutions.

This child doesn't need ECT!

“Learned” papers by leading so-called experts, such as that published by the British Columbia Ministry of Health Services(*) touts ECT as “safe and effective”. What unmitigated nonsense! ECT is not safe. Never has been. Never will be.

As to its effectiveness, that depends entirely on what it is the psychiatrist is trying to do. If what he has in mind is inducing memory loss, brain damage, inter-cranial bleeding, loss of brain tissue, headaches, nausea, confusion, and death then, yes, it works like a bomb. If it’s supposed to “cure” anything, then it’s a miserable failure. Just ask one of the many “ECT survivors” who posted this heartbreaking comment about her ECT “treatments”:

"My lifetime memories are gone. So are my abilities, home, daughter, love of my life, and friends.

I have been suicidal after ECT many times, and it’s like a slow and lingering death.

I think all psychiatrists who do this should do it to themselves.

I cry daily, weekly, always."

And this is what those heartless, soul-less psychiatrists are doing. To children.

It isn’t a new idea, either. AHRP (Alliance for Human Research Protection) chronicles the experiments of Lauretta Bender, whom they correctly style “Child Psychiatrist from Hell”:

Child psychiatrist, Dr. Lauretta Bender, began her experimental electroshock “treatments” in children in 1942 at Bellevue Hospital. She experimented extensively on helpless children whom she “diagnosed” with “autistic schizophrenia.” Some of the children were as young as 3 years of age. She used multiple electroshock (ECT) “treatments” at Bellevue Hospital (NYC) and then added LSD and other hallucinogenic drugs experimenting on children at Creedmoor Hospital with CIA funds.

By 1947, she had “conducted ECT on 98 children diagnosed with Childhood Schizophrenia under the age of 12”.

Steve Silberman, an award-winning American writer, says that:

In the ‘50’s and ‘60’s, autistic kids were often subjected to seclusion, restraint, and physical punishment by clinicians who did not understand their condition. The head of children’s psychiatry at Bellevue Hospital in New York City, Lauretta Bender, administered electroconvulsive therapy to autistic patients and also insulin-shock therapy – administering overdoses of insulin to put them into a short-term coma. She gave them antipsychotic drugs like Thorazine. She also tried giving autistic kids LSD every day for nine months or more, but decided they were becoming “more anxious”.

A researcher friend of mine says regarding Bender, “I read nasty-ass spy novels. They ain’t got nothin’ on her”. He’s right. I defy even Stephen King to come up with anything as horrifying.

Meanwhile, Renee Binder and Saul Levin of the American Psychiatric Association (commonly abbreviated to “Am Psych Ass”) have been lobbying the FDA for relaxed regulations for using ECT on children. According to these characters, "Having access to a rapid and effective treatment such as ECT is especially meaningful in children and adolescents...."

The 2013 report by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment called electroshock “torture” and calls for a ban on all “forced and non-consensual” electroshock “against persons with disabilities”.

Some legislators, apparently with more active brain cells than ours, have banned the use of ECT on children. In 2014, Western Australia joined India, California, Colorado, Tennessee and Texas in implementing rigorous restrictions on the use of ECT. In Western Australia, for instance, administering ECT on anyone younger than age 14 can get actual jail time as well as a hefty fine.

That’s a fine start, but it’s not enough. Cheryl van Daalen-Smith, RN, PhD, Associate Professor at York University, has the right idea:

“The ongoing and growing interest within psychiatry in prescribing electroshock or shock-like procedures … in children is of grave concern," and "given the volume of evidence demonstrating its substantive brain-damaging outcomes, we call for an immediate global ban on the use of electroshock on all children.”

So, by all means, parents -- continue to install baby gates, electrical outlet caps, cupboards locks. Buy the kids bicycle helmets and sports padding. Continue to impose curfews, monitor the sites they visit on the internet, and warn them of the dangers of drugs. And keep them strictly away from the maniacs with medical degrees.