Tuesday, May 13, 2008

America! What About Ron Paul For President? (Part 1)

Congressman Ron Paul: Archives
Past articles by Congressman Ron Paul on LewRockwell.com


Ron Paul Library
Articles and Speeches by Ron Paul
Congressman Ron Paul is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the “one exception to the Gang of 535” on Capitol Hill.
Ron Paul 2008
Hope for America

Campaign for President of the United States


Media Caught Lying About Presidential Candidates' Popularity
In this video, Jerry Day, a TV producer in Burbank, CA exposes the stunning disconnect between the major media version of the U.S. Presidential election coverage and candidate popularity trends on the internet.
See for yourself who the real frontrunner is when you ask the American people.
Yes. Surprising as it may seem, Ron Paul is actually still in the race! Although you wouldn’t know it based on major media coverage, which has gone so far as to exclude him completely, making it appear as though McCain is the sole Republican in the running.
Aside from his dedication to principle, good old fashioned American freedom, and the American constitution, there are many other reasons why I support Ron Paul, and a major one has to do with his devotion to your health freedom. He believes in:
Expanding the ability of Americans to use alternative medicine and new treatments.
Opposing legislation that increases the FDA‘s legal powers.
The notion that the government should never have the power to require immunizations or vaccinations.
More so than any other presidential candidate, Ron Paul is trying to improve the fatally flawed health paradigm in time to benefit you and your children.
If you agree with Ron Paul's message of freedom and liberty then JOIN THE CAUSE and SPREAD the word! Search my site for previous Ron Paul videos and send them to ALL your friends and relatives, and remind them that Ron Paul is still in the running.There are 1.3 million people that receive this newsletter. We CAN make a HUGE difference. If only a small fraction of you can spread this message in YOUR networks, your communities, and at work, just imagine what we can do.
Check out the video at this site:

On the Issues
Bill Moyers Journal
There are many stories of this 2008 Presidential campaign season: the first election without an incumbent or a vice-president since 1952, the viability of the first female president or the first African-American president, just to name a few.
But perhaps the biggest surprise development of the election cycle is the grassroots potency of the Ron Paul (R-TX) campaign. Just days after raising over $4 million on the Internet in one day, the Libertarian Congressman joked during a debate:
Representative Paul has since broken his own fundraising record, collecting over $6 million in less than 24 hours in mid-December. Although official reports aren't due until January 31st, most analysts agree that Paul likely collected more money than any other Republican candidate in the 4th quarter.
"We're struggling to figure out how to spend the money. This country is in a revolution. They're sick and tired of what they're getting, and I happen to be lucky enough to be part of it."
About Ron PaulRon Paul, 72, has served Texas in the House of Representatives for 10 terms, from 1978-1984 and was later re-elected in 1996 where he currently represents the 14th Congressional district.
A former medical doctor with over 4000 baby deliveries to his credit, according to his Web site, Paul has earned the nickname Dr. No in Congress because he often votes against any bill that he deems to interfere with the free market or that overreaches Constitutional authority of the federal government.
Secret Service Confiscates Ron Paul Material
by D. H. Williams
Today at the Republican National Convention, as the Ron Paul Delegates were taking a picture in front of the model White House inside the Convention Center, they were surrounded by Secret Service which proceeded to search the bags of all the delegates. They took any and everything related to Ron Paul including signs, buttons, videos, slim jims, cards, even books.
Alternate Delegate Dennis Rothacker from Florida said “We were done taking the picture when Secret Service started walking into the room and surrounded us. There were about 30 of them. When they searched my bags they took my Ron Paul sign and turned a deaf ear to my complaints, they just walked away.”
Delegate Ron Warner from Fairbanks Alaska added that as he was walking into the convention center today with about 15 Revolution Manifesto books, 20 DVD’s for Delegates, 20 Ron Paul buttons and a handful of other things, we was stopped by security which called on an obviously important higher up, who directed all the materials to be confiscated. She told him, and I quote “You can’t bring that in here, this is Mc Cain territory”
Dennis, Ron and the other delegates report being openly followed by secret service. He says that they had been monitored from the beginning of the convention, but that now they are being shadowed constantly.
There are also reports of delegates being approached by security and told that they will be summarily thrown out if they leave their assigned chair.
Delegate Corey Sax From MN's district five was on the floor and he witnessed six oral votes for Ron Paul out of a forty something total delegation. These votes were counted, but not read aloud by the RNC in the count or shown in the screen. He and others said that they thought there was an obvious attempt to suppress the votes casted for Ron Paul.
Corey says that Ron Carey and Tim (last name missing) witnessed the RNC tell them that they had technical difficulties and that was the reason for not reading the votes for Ron Paul. He says that the same happened to the Texas delegation and the delegation from other states. He clearly stated that illegal under-counting of delegates votes was going on across many states delegations. It appears that the number of votes casted for Ron Paul were not read aloud or posted on the screen.
Adam Weigold, Delegate from MN, reported that today he has been approached at least five times by other delegates at large who ask him to borrow his pass to go the bathroom. From his conversation with other delegates, he believes that this is part of an orchestrated effort because many of them have been approached. Without their pass credentials, they would not be able to claim their seat or remain at the convention.
Other delegates who gave interviews were Jeff Austin, from NC, and Nathan Hanson, a delegate and attorney from MN.
The delegates remain at the convention center till 10:30 or 11:00PM. They were planning to approach the media and demand that this obvious disregard for the first amendment and for their votes in a national US election for president be reported by the national media.
Posted by Harold in Events
Ron Paul Supporters Mistreated During RNC Convention
By NWV News Director, Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
September 8, 2008© NewsWithViews.com
While millions of Americans watched the 2008 Republican Convention on television, the well-staged event wasn't all peaceful and enthusiastic, according to several delegates attending the St. Paul, Minnesota event.
Several delegates -- who are avowed Ron Paul supporters -- claim they were treated shabbily at best, harshly at worst.
"While almost every other GOP contender for president was permitted to speak at the convention, Ron Paul was not. The word was that Paul was invited, with the natural caveat that he (like the other speakers) endorse McCain for president, which Paul was reportedly unwilling to do," said a McCain delegate from West Virginia.
"Instead, Paul held a separate 'convention' for one day at the Target Center in Minneapolis," said the WV delegate.
The McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee were unnecessarily nervous about the presence of Ron Paul delegates at the XCel Energy Center, and sometimes that fact was reflected in unwarranted actions, such as someone yanking away a banner proclaiming the word "Liberty" being held by a handful of Paul delegates outside the building, according to several delegates.
In fact, several told NewsWithViews.com that while the Rep. Paul delegates demonstrated little, if any, support for McCain throughout the convention -- mostly sitting quietly on their hands while the rest of the crowd erupted around them -- they caused no problems and were respectful and polite, including the Paul delegates from West Virginia.
"The Ron Paul movement has brought thousands of young people into the political process -- shouldn't the GOP find ways to welcome them rather than alienate them?” said "Patrick," a delegate and Ron Paul supporter from Maine.
The Maine delegate claimed that these was probably a larger contingent of military and police than there were delegates and alternates.
"Buses, each with an armed law enforcement official [took] us from the hotel to the convention [center] each day. Upon arrival you go through two levels of electronic security like the airport. Once you arrive on the convention floor, they have security guards every ten feet facing the rows of delegates," said Patrick.
Delegates were not allowed to speak throughout the convention. Periodically the security guards, would tell the delegates to rise and cheer. Prior to the convention, delegates were told no banners or signs would be allowed, several sources told NewsWithViews.
At opening of the convention, the convention floor was flooded with McCain banners. At different times, there was a large contingent of men with McCain baseball caps at the entranceway out of sight at the entrances to the aisles.
When former Democrat Joe Lieberman or one of the other McCain celebrities were introduced, the young men with red baseball caps were released and sent down the aisles to cheers and then returned to back of the convention floor to await the next cue to fill the aisle make it appear that the convention floor was filled.
Several delegates complained that anything proposed by Rep. Ron Paul or his staff was not included in the list of Platform resolutions. In addition, no Ron Paul delegate was allowed to serve on either the Platform Committee or the Rules Committee.
"No delegate or alternate had an opportunity to read the rules because they were not made available until the start of the convention," said another Ron Paul supporter.
"Thus the opportunity to offer floor amendments was impossible. As a Ron Paul delegate, I was made to feel like a turd in a punch bowl.....may have something to do with the large Ron Paul button I was wearing and my refusal to stand amidst all the cheering for folks like Joe Lieberman," said the Maine delegate.
"When asked by the Maine delegation Whip if I would vote for John McCain, I told him I would be voting for Ron Paul. His reply was [that] the Maine delegation would not announce 20 votes for John McCain and 1 for Ron Paul. Rather they would just announce 20 votes for McCain. Apparently, he felt that uttering Ron Paul's name would be giving Ron Paul too much publicity," said the angry delegate.
"More than one delegate shared the view that control over the delegates' speech and movements, along with the ever-present police, seemed somewhat intimidating," said political strategist Mike Baker.
"Were it not for the wonderful hospitality of the legion of Minneapolis and St. Paul volunteers and staff who catered to our every whim, this would have been a pretty dismal experience."
"I guarantee you that none of John McCain supporters, if there were any were mistreated at the Ron Paul's rally at the Target Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This proves that the Republican Party has lost its way," added Baker.
Security was especially tight the final day when McCain was present, with the Transportation Security Administration - in charge.
Drew Ivers, long-time GOP activist who headed the Ron Paul delegation to the RNC convention, told NewsWithViews he had been forced to surrender a tiny penknife he carries with him - although he had been able to bring it through the security clearance the three previous days with no problems.
It has a tiny blade, but the TSA official told Ivers his knife would have been confiscated even if it had been only a quarter of an inch long.
Ivers said he found it "really ironic" that McCain "was promising to reduce the size of government - and just moments before my knife had been confiscated by federal agents."
"In my opinion that is excessive government," Ivers exclaimed. "The terrorists have won - we're being forced to give up our liberties in the name of being protected against terrorism."
He said that Ron Paul was "right on target" in his speech at Target Center. "He [Paul] said we should not be asked to give up one ounce of our civil liberties and that's what we're doing."
Related Article: Over 10,000 Ron Paul Supporters "Rally for the Republic" in Minneapolis
© 2008 NWV - All Rights Reserved
Ron Paul's Israel Problem
By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
January 15, 2008
If evangelical Christians are hesitant to support Ron Paul's candidacy for the Republican nomination for President, two reasons are usually proffered: he does not support Israel, and he wants to bring the troops home from Iraq.
Unfortunately, many (if not most) of today's evangelical Christians have bought into the whole neocon warmongering mentality. Somewhere along the way, evangelicals have forgotten the historic Christian understanding of "just war," not to mention our Savior's promise of divine blessing upon peacemakers. They have allowed President George W. Bush and his fellow warmongers to hijack the legitimate use of defensive war and turn it into a commitment to aggressive and preemptive war.
If the United States continues on its current path of aggressive, preemptive war, incessant nation-building, empire-building, and globalism, our country will collapse. If history teaches us anything, it teaches us that no super-power can long survive global warfare. The economic, moral, and spiritual strain on the nation would be more than it could long endure. In other words, Bush's war doctrine has put America on a crash course with disaster, and evangelicals are downright foolish to go along with it.
Ron Paul is anything but a pacifist. He is a U.S. Air Force veteran, for goodness' sake. He believes in Ronald Reagan's "Peace Through Strength" philosophy. He believes in a strong military. He believes in defending the United States. That is not in question.
Obviously, however, Ron Paul rejects nation-building, empire-building, preemptive war, and globalism. By the way, this is something the Republican Party also used to reject before George W. Bush came along. And please understand, this is something that the vast majority--and I mean vast majority--of the American people also reject. If the GOP nominates a pro-Iraq war, pro-attack Iran, pro-preemptive invasion, pro-aggressive war candidate, they can kiss the November elections goodbye. The American people (except for the most fanatically loyal Bush supporters) are sick to death of American soldiers and Marines dying for Mideast oil, million-dollar Halliburton contracts, and "surrender-your-liberties-because-we-are-at-war" dribble. However, it is evangelical Christians' misunderstanding of Ron Paul's position on Israel that seems to be the most problematic.
To be sure, not all believers agree on the subject of Israel. Christians are divided between pre-millennialism, post-millennialism, and even amillennialism. For the most part, pre-millennialists (such as me) believe that God will yet fulfill the Davidic Covenant with the nation of Israel. Post-millennialists, on the other hand, believe that the Church, which is the Body of Christ, is the complete fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham and David.
Regardless of one's particular view of Eschatology, believers should be united in their support for protecting the sovereignty and independence of these United States. If this were really true, the vast majority of believers would enthusiastically support the candidacy of Ron Paul, as there is no one in Washington, D.C., who more faithfully defends the integrity of America's sovereignty and independence. The problem is, some Christians seem to give more loyalty and support to the government of Israel than they do their own country's independence and freedom.
In this regard, it is incredible to me how evangelical pastors and leaders can continue to associate with--and support--radical Israel apologists such as John Hagee. His ranting about Jewish people having a special covenant with God and needing not to come to the Father through Christ--and even that Jesus never claimed to be Christ--is nothing short of blatant apostasy.
Whether one believes in a future Davidic Kingdom or not is immaterial to the preservation of America's freedom and independence. If God intends a future place and purpose for Israel, He is certainly capable of fulfilling that place and purpose. He will not need your help, my help, or Ron Paul's help. I know that is shocking to the pride and arrogance of many evangelicals, but it is true nonetheless.
Does that mean that an American President should deliberately inflict harm upon the State of Israel? As long as they do not inflict harm upon us, no. No more than he should deliberately inflict harm upon any nation that does not inflict harm upon us. A free and independent nation--not to mention a nation whose roots are grounded in Christian philosophy--should seek only that which promotes peace and prosperity. Of all people, Christians should understand this. Ron Paul does understand this.
Accordingly, Ron Paul rightly wants to return America's foreign policy to the established and historic principles of its founding documents and sentiments. That means free and fair trade with all and entangling alliances with none. Not even Israel.
My dear Christian brethren, let's get real: America's policies toward Israel have not been a blessing to her. They have been a curse. George W. Bush and most other Presidents during the last 40 years have treated Israel like the proverbial red-headed step-child.
For example, America continues to furnish Israel's enemies with three times more aid and assistance than it does Israel. Three times. Is that being a blessing to Israel? America gives unflinching and magnanimous support to militant Muslim governments such as Saudi Arabia. There is no nation in the Middle East that has harbored, trained, supplied, and supported more terrorists than Saudi Arabia. Is that being a blessing to Israel? In addition, every time an American President wants to meddle in Middle Eastern affairs, he insists that Israel give up land for peace. President Bush is doing that very thing anew and afresh at this very moment. Is that being a blessing to Israel?
Let me assure the reader (if he or she needs assurance) that Israel knows how to defend itself. In fact, Israel has over 300 nuclear weapons. Israel has enough weaponry and nuclear capability to take out any threat to its sovereignty that any Arab nation--or group of Arab nations--could mount against it.
Herein lies another problem: it is a heavy-handed, dictatorial, do-as-I-say foreign policy from Washington, D.C., that prevents Israel from defending itself. Before Tel Aviv can do anything, it must come hat-in-hand to Washington for permission.
If Iraq was a legitimate threat, Israel could have taken out Baghdad, Saddam Hussein, and his entire army with little difficulty. The same is true right now with Iran. If Iran is a legitimate threat, Israel could launch whatever attack is necessary to defend itself. It should not need Washington's permission. Israel is a sovereign nation. It should have the right to defend itself as it deems necessary. Frankly, it is none of Washington's business. The truth is, Israel's perennial precariousness is a direct result of Washington's constant interference.
Ron Paul would put an end to Washington's deleterious and insatiable appetite for nation-building and entangling alliances. The result would be a stronger Israel and a more stable Middle East. Not to mention the lack of resentment and hatred that results from the worldwide perception that America is an arrogant and bullying country.
Furthermore, Christians need to understand that Jewish interests are not always harmonious with the interests of Christianity or the interests of the United States. Israel certainly did not act in a friendly fashion when it attacked the Navy intelligence ship, the USS Liberty, in 1967. That attack was the second deadliest against a U.S. vessel since the end of World War II. The attack also marked the single greatest loss of life by the U.S. intelligence community. 34 U.S. servicemen were killed and 173 were wounded in that attack. In addition, Israel is often found to be engaged in espionage within the United States. Should America turn a blind eye to such activities? Of course not.
Beyond that, Hebrew Christians are still pretty much regarded as second-class citizens in Israel. There is no freedom of religion for Christians in Israel. I have spoken at the only two Baptist churches in Israel (at that time): the First Bible Baptist Church in Jerusalem and the Bible Baptist Church in Bethlehem. The vast majority of the churches' members were Palestinian or Arab; they were not Jewish. Most of the opposition to Christianity in Israel comes from Jews not Arabs.
Evangelical Christians in the United States also need to seriously consider the impact of America's actions upon the Christian missionaries throughout the world, but especially in the Middle Eastern world. There are numerous Christian missionaries throughout the Muslim states. Ask any of them and they will tell you that America's meddlesome foreign policy makes their job harder--not easier.
What I am saying is that Ron Paul's position on Israel is not problematic for Israel's future security or prosperity. And neither is it problematic for America's future security and prosperity. In fact, Ron Paul's foreign policy is compatible with both historic American principles--not to mention constitutional government--and with deeply regarded Christian principles. The real problem is that many evangelical Christians have themselves lost their appreciation and understanding of these principles.

Sunday, May 04, 2008

Eisenhower - Lesser Known History

Just a Matter of Time - Operation Keelhaul
By Albert Burns
In our last column, we discussed a bit of the history of the 20th century as it pertained to our government. I believe that it would be valuable to consider more of that history as a means of better understanding what is happening today.
NOTE: I shall be dealing strictly with FACTS, demonstrable, provable facts although I doubt that one American in a thousand has ever heard of many of them. That fact alone gives mute testimony to the effective control of the mass media which can bury unpleasant or embarrassing facts by simply not reporting them. If some of the history you read in the next few columns makes you angry, please direct your anger at those who MADE the history, NOT the person exposing it.
We just passed a significant anniversary. On October 16, 1933, Franklin Roosevelt granted diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union. The Communist government was about to collapse for lack of financing. Granting them diplomatic recognition literally saved the Soviet government which had been ostracized by virtually every other government in the world. Throughout the rest of the 1930s and the 1940s, two disparate groups infiltrated dozens of agents or members into the executive branch under Roosevelt. Those two groups were the Communist Party and the Council on Foreign Relations. While these two groups had radically different motivations, they both had the same ultimate goal, i.e., to weaken and eventually destroy American freedom and independence.
Very few people today remember that World War II started in 1939 because Germany AND RUSSIA invaded Poland at the same time. The Soviet Union was exactly as responsible for STARTING that war as Germany was. This was known and condemned at the time. However, in 1941 when Hitler attacked Russia, suddenly our mass media made a 180 degree about face and Russia became our "noble ally" in fighting the war. Of course, it was up to the United States to supply Russia with the armament to fight the war.
The world went to war to "save" Poland and the other countries of Eastern Europe. Yet, at Yalta, before the war was over, the United States State Department AGREED that the Soviet Union would be allowed to add Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, half of Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Rumania, and Bulgaria to its territory in Europe. Before the addition of those countries and peoples, at the end of the war, Russia had a population of about 160 million people and controlled a land area smaller than the Russia of the Czars. Soviet industry had been almost totally destroyed by the Nazi war machine. Communism was a third rate power, militarily, industrially and economically. There was, literally, no reason for Eastern Europe to be handed over to the Communists other than the influence of the Communist agents in OUR State Department.
We have all seen, over and over, the movies of the trains of freight cars loaded with Jews and others being hauled off to Hitler's extermination camps. To the best of my recollection, I have NEVER seen ANY still or moving pictures of similar trainloads of men, women and children which OUR government was responsible for shipping off to a similar fate.
In 1945, General Dwight Eisenhower ordered that "Operation Keelhaul" be put into effect. This involved rounding up and shipping back to "their countries of origin" ALL the refugees from communism: men, women and children, soldier or civilian, male or female — even though many of them had been fighting on OUR side during the war. Since all of Eastern Europe was then under Communist domination, sending these people back was, quite literally, a sentence of death, some by immediate execution and the rest by slow extermination from overwork and malnutrition in the Soviet slave labor camps in Siberia. These people were rounded up at bayonet point, forced into freight cars and shipped off to a terrible fate. There was no accurate count kept but the MINIMUM figure was 2,000,000 people and a maximum of 5,000,000. The elimination of all these anti-Communist people made the Communist domination of Eastern Europe MUCH easier. And the American people were kept blissfully unaware of this action which Eisenhower enforced rigidly, even though it violated international law, the laws of his own country and laws of humanity. Germans were prosecuted at Nuremberg for similar crimes but control of the news ensured that Eisenhower, and those under his command who took part in this outrage, were never even officially accused of wrong doing.
Facts like these may be unsettling but they MUST be faced if Americans are to fully understand WHY the almost universal respect and admiration which foreigners had for Americans gradually turned into hatred.

The Assassination Of General George Patton
18 March 2005
'Los Crimenes De Los Buenos' by Joaquin Bochaca
Published January 1, 2001
An excerpt...
(Note: The translation of the passage below from Joaquin Bochaca's book, "Los Crimenes De Los 'Buenos' " was prepared by a participant on Liberty Forum who writes under the name of "Mugwort." The Book by Bochaca, an Argentinian, appears to be a major writing. I hope it soon becomes available in english translation. The short passage below addresses the assassination of General Patton.)The abuses committed by the Forces of the Occupation in Germany reached such bestial extremes that various people in the Allied command structure opposed it--or tried to. ... Lindbergh mentioned how the American soldiers burned the leftovers of their meals to keep them from being scavenged by the [starving] Germans who hung around the garbage barrels.
He also wrote: "In our homeland the public press publishes articles on how we 'liberated' the oppressed peoples. Here, our soldiers use the word 'liberate' to describe how they get their hands on loot. Everything they grab from a German house, everything they take off a German is 'liberated' in the lingo of our troops. Leica cameras are liberated, food, works of art, clothes are liberated. A soldier who rapes a German girl is "liberating " her.
"There are German children who gaze at us as we eat ... our cursed regulations forbid us to give them anything to eat. I remember the soldier Barnes, who was arrested for having given a chocolate bar to a tattered little girl. It's hard to look these children in the face. I feel ashamed. Ashamed of myself, my people, as I eat and look at those children. How can we have gotten so inhumane?" So wrote Colonel Lindbergh, national hero of the United States, who was proposed as a candidate for the presidency of his country, who fought in the air force of his country, who was not a nazi. Many decent American and British citizens can see that.
General Patton, perhaps the most popular of the American generals, immediately opposed the total or partial application of the Morgenthau Plan in his sector of occupation. Soon, he had a run-in with another general of higher rank: General Eisenhower. It's well-known what extremely violent debates they had about how the civilian population of Germany was to be treated. Patton was SENTENCED TO DEATH by the directors of the scenario.
One day Patton's car was run into by a military truck in what seemed like a very strange accident. The General was taken by ambulance to a hospital, where he was observed to have serious, but not life-threatening injuries. But some days later he died of a heart attack.
Patton's death, in any event, was extremely opportune. The General had annnounced that he was thinking of moving to the United States, where he was going to denounce publicly what was taking place in Germany. But he didn't have time. He had fought with too many important people. General Eisenhower had had to pick up the telephone and order that he be halted before he reached Berlin. At Yalta the new "masters of the world" had agreed that the Soviets would be the first to enter the German capital. Patton wanted to prevent the Vandal-like entrance of the Red Army into the capital of the Reich, and made an enemy of Eisenhower. A month before, he could have entered Prague, but was also detained by Eisenhower, leaving him nailed to the ground by an order.
Patton's difficulties with the WAR POWERS over the occupation of Germany were so great that Eisenhower stripped him of his position as Commander of the Third Army, and stuck him with the command of a secondary unit. Patton knew he was in danger of death, and confided as much to his family and close friends. He was feared because of his prestige-he was the most renowned American General, while Eisenhower was nothing more than a political soldier-and his words could alert the public to the reality of what was happening in Germany.
Thus the accident was set up, which was not by any means the first. On the 21st of April 1945, his airplane on which he was being transported to General Headquarters of the Third Army in Feldfield (England) was attacked by what was assumed to be a German fighter-bomber, but it turned out to be a "Spitfire" piloted by an inexpert Polish pilot. Patton's plane was shot up, but was miraculously able to land. On the 3rd of May, some days before the end of the war, the General's jeep was charged by an ox-drawn cart, leaving Patton with light injuries.
October 13, 1945 was when the collision with the truck occurred. When Patton appeared to be getting better from the accident, the "heart attack" occurred. The fact is that after October 13 only the doctors saw Patton, forbidding any other visitors.
Until recently, it was only speculation that Patton had been assassinated. Now it is known for a fact. And it is know for a very simple reason. Because an agent of the well-known OSS (Office of Strategic Services) or American military spy, a certain Douglas Bazata, a Jew of Lebanese origin, announced it in front of 450 invited guests; high ranking, ex-members of the OSS, in the Hilton Hotel in Washington, the 25th of September, 1979. Bazata said, word-for-word:
"For divers political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him. Because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William Donovan himself, director of the O.S.S, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the accident. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with an injection."
The tragic fate of Patton convinced other colleagues and their honorable compatriots of the uselessness of fighting against the WAR POWERS. And if any doubts remained, the "Morgan case" was enough to dissipate them.
General George S. Patton was assassinated to silence his criticism of allied war leaders claims new bookGeorge S. Patton, America's greatest combat general of the Second World War, was assassinated after the conflict with the connivance of US leaders, according to a new book
By Tim Shipman in Washington
21 Dec 2008
The newly unearthed diaries of a colourful assassin for the wartime Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the CIA, reveal that American spy chiefs wanted Patton dead because he was threatening to expose allied collusion with the Russians that cost American lives.
The death of General Patton in December 1945, is one of the enduring mysteries of the war era. Although he had suffered serious injuries in a car crash in Manheim, he was thought to be recovering and was on the verge of flying home.
But after a decade-long investigation, military historian Robert Wilcox claims that OSS head General "Wild Bill" Donovan ordered a highly decorated marksman called Douglas Bazata to silence Patton, who gloried in the nickname "Old Blood and Guts".
His book, "Target Patton", contains interviews with Mr Bazata, who died in 1999, and extracts from his diaries, detailing how he staged the car crash by getting a troop truck to plough into Patton's Cadillac and then shot the general with a low-velocity projectile, which broke his neck while his fellow passengers escaped without a scratch.
Mr Bazata also suggested that when Patton began to recover from his injuries, US officials turned a blind eye as agents of the NKVD, the forerunner of the KGB, poisoned the general.
Mr Wilcox told The Sunday Telegraph that when he spoke to Mr Bazata: "He was struggling with himself, all these killings he had done. He confessed to me that he had caused the accident, that he was ordered to do so by Wild Bill Donovan.
"Donovan told him: 'We've got a terrible situation with this great patriot, he's out of control and we must save him from himself and from ruining everything the allies have done.' I believe Douglas Bazata. He's a sterling guy."
Mr Bazata led an extraordinary life. He was a member of the Jedburghs, the elite unit who parachuted into France to help organise the Resistance in the run up to D-Day in 1944. He earned four purple hearts, a Distinguished Service Cross and the French Croix de Guerre three times over for his efforts.
After the war he became a celebrated artist who enjoyed the patronage of Princess Grace of Monaco and the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.
He was friends with Salvador Dali, who painted a portrait of Bazata as Don Quixote.
He ended his career as an aide to President Ronald Reagan's Navy Secretary John Lehman, a member of the 9/11 Commission and adviser to John McCain's presidential campaign.
Mr Wilcox also tracked down and interviewed Stephen Skubik, an officer in the Counter-Intelligence Corps of the US Army, who said he learnt that Patton was on Stalin's death list. Skubik repeatedly alerted Donovan, who simply had him sent back to the US.
"You have two strong witnesses here," Mr Wilcox said. "The evidence is that the Russians finished the job."
The scenario sounds far fetched but Mr Wilcox has assembled a compelling case that US officials had something to hide. At least five documents relating to the car accident have been removed from US archives.
The driver of the truck was whisked away to London before he could be questioned and no autopsy was performed on Patton's body.
With the help of a Cadillac expert from Detroit, Mr Wilcox has proved that the car on display in the Patton museum at Fort Knox is not the one Patton was driving.
"That is a cover-up," Mr Wilcox said.
George Patton, a dynamic controversialist who wore pearl handled revolvers on each hip and was the subject of an Oscar winning film starring George C. Scott, commanded the US 3rd Army, which cut a swathe through France after D-Day.
But his ambition to get to Berlin before Soviet forces was thwarted by supreme allied commander Dwight D. Eisenhower, who gave Patton's petrol supplies to the more cautious British General Bernard Montgomery.
Patton, who distrusted the Russians, believed Eisenhower wrongly prevented him closing the so-called Falaise Gap in the autumn of 1944, allowing hundreds of thousands of German troops to escape to fight again,. This led to the deaths of thousands of Americans during their winter counter-offensive that became known as the Battle of the Bulge.
In order to placate Stalin, the 3rd Army was also ordered to a halt as it reached the German border and was prevented from seizing either Berlin or Prague, moves that could have prevented Soviet domination of Eastern Europe after the war.
Mr Wilcox told The Sunday Telegraph: "Patton was going to resign from the Army. He wanted to go to war with the Russians. The administration thought he was nuts.
"He also knew secrets of the war which would have ruined careers.
I don't think Dwight Eisenhower would ever have been elected president if Patton had lived to say the things he wanted to say." Mr Wilcox added: "I think there's enough evidence here that if I were to go to a grand jury I could probably get an indictment, but perhaps not a conviction."
Charles Province, President of the George S. Patton Historical Society, said he hopes the book will lead to definitive proof of the plot being uncovered. He said: "There were a lot of people who were pretty damn glad that Patton died. He was going to really open the door on a lot of things that they screwed up over there."

Friday, May 02, 2008

Jimmy Carter

Jimmy Carter Reality Check
By Geoff Metcalf
April 28, 2008

“Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true.” --Demosthenes

When I accused former President Jimmy Carter of a synthesis of “stupidity and vanity,” I understated his mendacity.
Carter has a history of revising facts in evidence to accommodate his own self interest that rivals Bill Clinton’s definition of the word ‘is’.
Once upon a time, despite Carter’s unbridled praise for his CIA chief Stansfield Turner, it was Turner who eviscerated the CIA, cutting some 820 human intelligence positions. It was that lousy decision that forced Langley to rely on the intelligence agencies of foreign governments. THAT was the cause of all the post 9/11 angst over our lack of human Intel assets and overall crummy intelligence gathering.
As a result of the inevitable ‘garbage in/garbage out’ decision, on New Year’s Eve 1977, Carter toasted the Shah’s Iran as “an island of stability in one of the more troubled areas of the world…[due] to the respect, admiration and love which your people give to you.”
However, a mere eight months later, the CIA issued a fatally flawed report in which Carter’s CIA surmised, “Iran is not in a revolutionary or even a ‘pre-Revolutionary’ situation.” Whoops!
When things went rapidly from bad to worse, Carter withdrew U.S. support from the Shah, turning Iran into a refuge and nexus of hope for jihadists around the world. THEN, before accepting the exiled Shah to America, Carter accepted Iranian guarantees they could secure our embassy. THAT, in and of itself, was one of the costliest miscalculations in the history of American foreign policy. Whoops again!
Please note this is the same myopic self promoter who now says Hamas is prepared to make nice with Israel, notwithstanding overwhelming historical and empirical evidence to the contrary.
Please see ‘The Scorpion and the Frog’.
The 14-month hostage crisis was Christmas, Easter, Purim and the Fourth of July for jihad central. American reversals in Beirut and Somalia may have jazzed and emboldened al Qaida, but it was the Iranian hostage crisis that poured gasoline on their fire.
Carter ultimately agreed to pay a ransom of $8 billion (of which, Iran netted $3 billion), although it was ultimately Ronald Reagan’s toughness and resolve that was the decisive cure to Carter’s incompetence that ended the crisis.
Despite Carter’s selective memory losses and revisionist rewrite of historical fact, without Carter’s policies:• The Iran-Iraq war would not have raged for nearly a decade.• The United States would not have had to form an unsavory alliance of convenience with Saddam Hussein, in order to mitigate the mullahs• Hezbollah would not receive $100-$200 million a year from Tehran’s coffers• al-Qaeda would not have received training in Iran in 1992• Iran’s nuclear ambitions, if they existed, would be of no consequence to the West whatsoever.Thanks Jimmy…
The lowest point of American international prestige in modern history occurred under the squire ship of Jimmy Carter’s presidency. The bonehead mistakes he made during those crucial, precarious years watered the seeds of jihadist dream quests and continue to threaten the United States and the West.
Contrary to convention of providing past presidents the courtesy and gravitas they assume for having resided in the oval office (notwithstanding performance) Carter has routinely and chronically abused his elder statesman status, and has earned the contempt and condemnation of his myriad critics.
It is an international embarrassment that anyone anywhere gives any credence to the ill informed, ego motivated ramblings of a sad old man still trying to polish his tarnished record into a glittering fiction. Then again, those same ‘anyones’ seem intent on listening to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson despite Tawana Bawley and the Duke Lacrosse embarrassments.

[Read entire article at http://www.newswithviews.com/metcalf/metcalf251.htm]

Clueless Jimmy Carter
By Geoff Metcalf
April 14, 2008

“Stupidity talks, vanity acts.” --Victor Hugo

Former President Jimmy Carter’s latest brain flatulence synthesizes stupidity and vanity.
With age is supposed to come wisdom and gravitas…unless apparently you are a myopic arrogant peanut farmer from Georgia who carries the distinction of being the worst U.S. president in modern history.
Forget the 22% interest rates, 13% inflation, the Iranian hostage debacles, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, his creation of the Departments of Energy and Education as Cabinet positions, or his refusal to allow the officer with the nuclear football to be near him, and general ‘cluelessness’ of the 39th President of the United States…
Former President Carter’s reported plans to meet the exiled leader of the militant terrorist group Hamas in Syria is WAY over the top. Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations committed to routinely pouring gasoline on any and all smoldering embers in the Mideast.
Without naming him, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized Carter.
"I find it hard to understand what is going to be gained by having discussions with Hamas about peace when Hamas is, in fact, the impediment to peace," Rice said at a press event with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
And Rice is not the ‘Lone Ranger.’ This is not just a proclamation of neo-con policy dogma. It is an empirical fact: Hamas IS the problem…not even remotely near or interested in a solution.
"Hamas is a terrorist organization," Rice said, repeating the Bush administration's explanation for why it will not meet with members of the group. Duh!?!?
The State Department has already (twice…not once, but TWICE) advised (counseled, recommended, cajoled) Carter against meeting any representative of Hamas. Such a meeting would be a big gift to all terrorists and the first public contact in two years between any prominent American figure and Hamas officials. It would, according to a letter from DEMOCRATS, “confer legitimacy” on a group that embraces and endorses violence.
However, notwithstanding admonitions from the State Department AND a letter from Congressional democrats, Carter apparently intends to flip them all off and drape himself in his 2002 Nobel Peace Prize mantle despite his own party’s aggravated angst.
As if Democrats didn’t have enough problems between the warring presidential wannabes and serial gaffes of their other posturing former U.S. president, Carter has refused to accept overwhelming facts, advice and counsel that would impede him from another foray into international photo opportunism.
Here is another unsolicited gift from the democrats to their septuagenarian rival in November.
Several Democratic members of the House apparently plan to forward a letter to Carter Monday urging him to reconsider his scheduled meeting with leaders of Hamas during his next visit to the Middle East. Reps. Artur Davis of Alabama, Shelley Berkley of Nevada, Adam Schiff of California and Adam Smith of Washington state asked Carter to drop the planned meeting.
The letter said "we believe that your efforts to forge peace in the region will be overshadowed by this meeting." It said Carter's meeting could "confer legitimacy" on a group that embraces violence.
Barack Obama’s pledge to meet with Iran’s president, Ahmadidijad is strategically a bad idea. However, at least the neophyte Obama seeks to meet with the President of another country. Carter ought to know better. The fact that he either doesn’t comprehend the import of meeting with terrorist leaders suggests either his reasoning is impaired or he flat out doesn’t care about gifting terrorists with a humongous public relations gift.
Carter is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis and yet he seems intent on not only insulting the core values of his classmates and country, but jazzed with a misplaced hubris that he, and he alone, can mitigate the fundamental terrorist dogma of an organization committed to destroying the very essence of Duty, Honor, Country that remains integral to our military.
Former House Speaker New Gingrich accuses Carter of “strategic stupidity,” but Carter’s sins are worse that stupidity.
Notwithstanding the personal foibles of individual men, all former Presidents carry the life long burden and responsibility of representing ‘the office of the president.’ It is more than the perception of courtesy that traditionally former presidents defer (or remain silent) on their successor’s policies which may contradict their own deep felt opinions.

Jimmy Carter rewrites historyposted at 11:25 am on April 28, 2008
by Ed Morrissey

Former president and current loose cannon Jimmy Carter continues to rewrite history. He appeared on the Today show to give a strange rendition of the elections that produced Hamas as the winner of the Palestinian elections, somehow alleging that the US government’s identification of Hamas as a terrorist organization and the policy of non-engagement with terrorists came after the election. [not true]
In fact, the policy of non-engagement with terrorists that so surprised Carter in 2005 dates back to before his own presidency in 1976. Perhaps Carter spent too much time kissing the cheek of Leonid Brezhnev to notice, but the US has always insisted that it would not negotiate with terrorist groups, which has included Hamas since the group’s inception. The election gave Hamas an opportunity to repudiate terrorism and to recognize the right of Israel to exist within borders later to be determined. It has done neither. Hamas conducted a coup d’etat in overthrowing the Palestinian Authority in Gaza and uses Gaza as a launching pad for rocket attacks on civilians in Ashkelon and Sderot, which they continued while Carter was in Israel and Syria.
Carter can play he-said, she-said with Condoleezza Rice all day long on whether he was “warned” not to meet with Hamas, but he knows perfectly well that negotiations with unrepentant terrorists is forbidden. The smug satisfaction he beams on Today comes from knowing that it wouldn’t have made any difference, anyway, as he himself admits. Nothing was going to keep Carter from hugging Khaled Mashaal.


[under construction]

Thursday, May 01, 2008

Psychology and Psychiatry - What's in Your Head? (Part 1)

The Prozac Calamity
By Shane Ellison, Award winning Scientist, Masters Degree in Organic Chemistry
August 12th, 2009
I love Big Pharma. After getting a masters degree in drug design, I was fortunate enough to work within their stinky labs and learn the inner workings of corporate drug making (and dealing). My most important lesson: Not all drugs are bad. Some are really bad. Take the so-called antidepressant Prozac as an example.
In 1990, Prozac appeared on the cover of the pharmaceutically compliant, Newsweek magazine with the headline “Prozac: A Breakthrough Drug for Depression.” It was designed almost twenty years prior. And during that time, some ghastly findings were made which proved the drug to be the antithesis of what popular media touted it as. Such findings were kept hidden. Patients are learning the hard way.
Thirteen days after taking the SSRI Prozac, on April 28, 2003, Jordan’s wife of 56 years, Kathy, found his lifeless body hanging from a beam in a back room of their shop. Not depressed at the time of his appointment, Jordan was given a free sample of Prozac for “chest pains!” Apparently, a pretty drug rep convinced Jordan’s doctor that Prozac could be used for these types of “off-label” purposes. By FDA standards, this is totally illegal. But those standards are never enforced by the consumer watch dog turned Big Pharma lap dog. Regardless of what they are prescribed for, Prozac is a real and present danger to SSRI users.
SSRI’s strive to increase the levels of a “coping” molecule known as serotonin in the brain. It helps us FIND happiness when it’s covered in an avalanche of nastiness. SSRI’s attempt to boost serotonin by “selectively” stopping the “reuptake” of it among brain cells. This is where the whole SSRI acronym came from – “selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.” It’s a slick name that seems to hypnotize medical doctors into prescribing submission, but it’s a really stupid idea.
Nothing is selective in the body. While trying to block the reuptake of serotonin, SSRI’s can also prevent its release. The areas of the brain responsible for release and reuptake are so damn similar (after all, they work on the same molecule) that an SSRI isn’t smart enough to understand which one it is supposed to work on. So it does what any dumb drug would do, it blocks both. The end result: no coping molecules in the brain. Deep sadness, fear or anger can set in. Early studies proved this.
The first testing of Prozac was performed on dogs and cats. Every trial showed that Prozac use caused aggression amongst these normally calm and friendly animals, as could be seen by increased hissing and growling. When the animals were taken off of the drug, they returned to their usual friendly behavior. Researchers concluded that Prozac use causes aggressive behavior.
By mid 1978, Prozac testing moved to humans in controlled clinical trials involving more than 4000 patients. In an attempt to hide its aggressive tendencies, the study allowed for voluntary dropout of those who experienced the most severe side effects. Additionally, clinical investigators were allowed to administer concurrent sedatives to patients to further mask Prozac’s side effects that would most likely lead to violence/suicide. This is a common loophole used by drug company-funded drug trials and is known as “checkbook science.” Despite the lack of scientific methodology, this study concluded that Prozac works well to a “statistically significant” degree in a population of depressed patients.
Since its approval, the potential for Prozac calamity has become frighteningly clear amongst both professionals and the public. Reports of Prozac-associated suicide, written by James D. Hagerty and distributed by the Drugs and Devices Information Line at the Harvard School of Public Health, dominated the “Letters to the Editor” section of the American Journal of Psychiatry during the fall of 1990.
Under the FDA’s own analysis, there have been more than 20,000 Prozac-related suicides since 1987.
Clinical studies performed on Prozac show 191 negative side effects per 100 people. This equates to almost two negative side effects for every user of the drug.
The FDA continues to ignore the Prozac body count (they approved Prozac’s use for children in 2003). To make matters worse, the FDA granted its manufacturer, Eli Lilly, extended patent protection. In order to procure thirty additional months of earning power, Eli Lilly changed the name of Prozac to Sarafem, while at the same time labeling common personality and biological shifts as a disease among women; this “disease” being premenstrual irritability. As a result, thousands of unsuspecting women were given Prozac for premenstrual irritability while at the same time increasing their chances of suffering from the aforementioned negative side effects such as aggression, and suicide.
Such lessons got me out of corporate drug making. Thankfully, they taught me how not to be healthy: Take prescription drugs. You can do the same, just say no to Prozac.
Disease Mongering Galore: Panel Says ALL Teens Should be Screened for "Depression"
Thursday, July 09, 2009 by: David Gutierrez
(NaturalNews) The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a new recommendation, published in the journal Pediatrics, that all children between the ages of 12 and 18 be regularly screened for the symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD).
The new recommendations surpass those of most doctors' groups -- which advise screening high-risk youths only -- and even those of the of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which recommends only that doctors ask teens about depression, rather than giving them a full screening."
Adolescent-onset MDD is associated with an increased risk of death by suicide, suicide attempts, ... recurrence of major depression by young adulthood, ... early pregnancy, decreased school performance, and impaired work, social, and family functioning during young adulthood," the report authors wrote. "Mass screening in primary care could help clinicians identify missed cases and increase the proportion of depressed children and adolescents who initiate appropriate treatment. It could also help clinicians to identify cases earlier in the course of disease."
The Preventive Services Task Force is a panel of independent experts given responsibility for setting national primary care treatment guidelines.
According to the panel, approximately 6 percent of U.S. teens, or two million, suffer from MDD, also known as clinical depression. Symptoms include sadness, anxiety, changes in eating or sleeping habits, hopelessness, irritability, isolation, moodiness, negativity, poor grades, risk taking, substance abuse and death wishes or suicidal thoughts.
Because depression is so common in teens, the researchers said, the majority of cases go undiagnosed.
"You will miss a lot if you only screen high-risk groups," said task force chair Ned Calonge of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
In order to develop the recommendation, the researchers reviewed high quality studies conducted since 2002 on the effectiveness of screening in diagnosing depression in children between the ages of 7 and 18, and also on the effectiveness of various treatments. They concluded that all children between the ages of 12 and 18 should receive yearly screening, preferably in a primary care setting such as an annual physical. Patients would merely need to fill out a simple questionnaire, which could even be completed in the waiting room, the researchers said.
The panel did not recommend screening younger children, due to absence of evidence that screening was effective in that age group.
"Limited available data suggest that primary care–feasible screening tools may accurately identify depressed adolescents and treatment can improve depression outcomes," the task force wrote. Another report, authored by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and appearing in the same issue of Pediatrics, also calls for primary care physicians to get more involved in the treatment of mental illness, including depression. Recommendations include that pediatricians consult regularly with child psychiatrists, and try to have one working in their office if possible.
Report co-author Alan Axelson said that because parents have built up trust with pediatricians over time, these doctors may be in a better position to screen for and treat mental illness without invoking the social stigma of a visit to a therapist or psychiatrist. He noted that pediatricians are authorized to prescribe antidepressant drugs, though they may not perform psychotherapy. Yet the Preventive Services Task Force report recommends that doctors screen for depression only in cases where psychotherapy is available as a treatment option. The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) drugs commonly used to treat depression have been linked to increased risks of suicidal thoughts in teenagers, Calonge noted, and the panel does not want to encourage their use in the absence of therapy.
"Treating depressed youth with [SSRIs] may be associated with a small increased risk of suicidality and should only be considered if judicious clinical monitoring is possible," the report reads.
The task force's study did not show any correlation between depression screening and improved physical or mental health outcomes.
Popular Psychiatric and Seizure Drug Depakote Found DangerousFriday, May 29, 2009 by: Valerie Gregg
(NaturalNews) The psychiatric mood stabilizer Depakote can significantly lower the average IQs of children whose mothers took the drug when they were pregnant, reported the New England Journal of Medicine on April 16, 2009.
The drug, called valproate in its generic form, is commonly used to treat bipolar disease and prevent seizures and migraine headaches. Three-year-olds whose mothers took the drug during pregnancy had average IQs six to nine points lower than children exposed to three other antiepileptic drugs, a landmark multi-center study found. The children of the women taking Depakote during pregnancy had an increased risk of anatomical birth defects as well as lower IQs.
The Food and Drug Administration approved Depakote to treat mania in bipolar disorder in 1995. It was first marketed 35 years ago in France to treat seizures and is now one of the most widely used anti-convulsant drugs worldwide.
The study's authors wrote that women of child-bearing years should avoid this widely prescribed drug. The study, called the Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs, is following more than 300 children born to women with epilepsy between 1999 and 2004. The study will continue to follow the children until they are 6 years old to further study their cognitive functioning.
Investigators at 25 epilepsy centers in the United States and the United Kingdom enrolled the women in the study during pregnancy, giving them one of four anti-seizure drugs, including Depakote. The others drugs were carbamapezpine, lamotrigine, or phytoin. The conclusions show Depakote to be the riskiest by far.
"There are clear risks associated with valproate, and physicians have an obligation to inform women about them," said lead study author Kimford Meador, professor of neurology at Emory University in Atlanta, Ga. "We are recommending that women try a different drug first."
Many studies have documented problems with Depakote, including increased levels of androgens, like testosterone, in women, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. Young girls and women taking Depakote should be closely monitored for increased testosterone levels, but in practice are usually not. This condition can lead to the growth of facial hair and polycystic ovarian syndrome, in which a young woman's eggs develop into fluid-filled cysts. The cysts then collect in the ovaries instead of being released during ovulation. The syndrome can result in ruptured ovaries and can be life-threatening without surgery.
Meador said that women with epilepsy and who are pregnant should not stop taking Depakote abruptly without seeing a doctor to avoid seizures with life-threatening consequences.
The same goes for women patients with bipolar disorder. There are less risky alternatives. As time goes by, clinical evidence is growing that the safety of Depakote should continue to be evaluated for safety and used with caution.
A study published in August 2005 in the journal Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology showed that the rate of autism among children exposed to Depakote was 8.9 %. This observational study was conducted over a 20-year period by investigators in the Department of Child Health at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland.
Chimp That Mauled Connecticut Woman had Xanax in System
May 18, 2009
A chimpanzee that mauled a Connecticut woman had the anti-anxiety drug Xanax in its system, according to toxicology tests, but investigators haven't determined whether the drug played a role in the attack, a prosecutor said Wednesday.
Authorities are still weighing whether to file criminal charges against the chimpanzee's owner, Sandra Herold, said Stamford State's Attorney David Cohen.
The 200-pound (91-kilogram) chimp named Travis attacked Stamford resident Charla Nash on Feb. 16. She lost her hands, nose, lips and eyelids in the attack. Doctors at Ohio's Cleveland Clinic say she is blind and faces two years of surgical procedures.
Nash's family has sued Herold for $50 million. The suit alleges, among other things, that she had given Travis medication that further upset the animal.
"I think it provides tremendous support for the plaintiff's case,'' said Paul Slager, a catastrophic injury attorney in Stamford. "I think it's understood by everyone that Xanax is medication intended to be used by people, not animals.''
He added: "I suspect that experts will agree it's difficult to predict how an animal like a chimpanzee would respond to taking a medication like Xanax.''
Herold has made conflicting public statements about whether she gave Travis Xanax the day of the attack.
Herold's attorney, Robert Golger, declined to comment Wednesday, saying he hadn't seen the toxicology results, which were first reported by The Hour of Norwalk.
A telephone message left for an attorney for Nash's family wasn't immediately returned.
Herold's attorneys have said there was no way to predict Travis would attack Nash.
On the day of the attack, Herold called Nash to her home to help lure the animal back into her house.
Herold has speculated that the chimp was trying to protect her and attacked Nash because she had changed her hairstyle, was driving a different car and was holding a stuffed toy in front of her face to get Travis' attention.
The attack lasted about 12 minutes, and ended when police fatally shot Travis as he attempted to open a police cruiser's door.
Herold owned the 14-year-old chimp nearly all its life, dressed the animal and fed it human foods. When he was younger, Travis starred in TV commercials for Old Navy and Coca-Cola, made an appearance on the "Maury Povich Show'' and took part in a television pilot.
Psychiatric Drug Use of German Shooter Confirmed: Kretschmer Withdrawing from Depression Treatment
Thursday, March 12, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
NaturalNews) Yesterday we reported on the recent school shooting in Germany, emphasizing the link between psychiatric medications and acts of extreme violence (http://www.naturalnews.com/025826.html). From the facts that were known yesterday, it was already apparent that the shooter, Tim Kretschmer, was either on psychiatric medications or withdrawing from them. His behavior and choice of targets (including a worker at a psychiatric medical school) pointed strongly towards his use of antidepressant drugs, which are known to cause violent thoughts and behavior. Behind the scenes, I already knew from an industry source that Kretschmer had undergone psychiatric "treatment," but I could not name that source and thus chose not to publish that fact until it could be further corroborated.
But today, the Associated Press confirms it. In a story widely published across the 'net (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090312...), police investigator Siegfried Mahler states on the record that the shooter (Kretschmer) "underwent several treatment sessions for depression at a psychiatric clinic" and was "...prescribed a session of outpatient therapy, which he never began."
Thus, the shooter was on psychiatric medications and then quit using them. This created a classic antidepressant withdrawal crisis which is exactly what leads to extreme acts of violence against self or others. As we reported in our previous story, virtually every school shooting that has taken place in the last two decades was carried out by those who either take psychiatric medications or are attempting to quit them.
Why can't the media connect the dots?The mainstream media, as usual, remains mystified about why so many teens would pick up deadly weapons and kill their classmates. They seem to willingly ignore the truth about the rather obvious links between antidepressant drug use and acts of extreme violence. It's almost as if there is a willing conspiracy by the media to apologize for the pharmaceutical industry and avoid mentioning anything that might implicate Big Pharma's drugs in these school shootings.
When will the ignorant people in our world finally realize the obvious? That when you artificially alter a teenager's brain chemistry, you also change his behavior. And interjecting synthetic chemicals into a human brain instead of relying on nutrition and natural medicine that's fundamentally compatible with human biology, you're going to get some rather nasty results.
The deaths of the people killed in these school shootings rests solely on the shoulders of psychiatry, an industry of death.
Blaming the guns, but not the chemical child abusers?Germany, much like America, is reacting to this great tragedy in precisely the wrong way, banning guns instead of banning the chemical child abuse ("psychiatric treatment") by psychiatrists who bear the real responsibility for these acts of violence in the first place.
If you take away the guns, you will not solve this problem. Violence can be carried out with knives, or arson, or explosives or any number of other tools of destruction that can be easily accessed by a teenager in virtually any country.
The problem with teens today is not, simplistically, that they merely have access to too many guns, but that their minds are being poisoned by psychiatrists who conspire with the drug companies to profit from the pain and suffering of others.
Before the age of ADHD disease mongering, Ritalin drugging and SSRI "treatment" of children and teens, high school students in places like Texas routinely brought their guns to school. They actually kept rifles and handguns in their school lockers (this is not an exaggeration, it's an historical fact).
Despite the easy access to so many guns, nobody got shot. Ever wonder why? Because they weren't all drugged up on psych meds, of course!
School shootings are, without question, a direct effect of drugging teens with psychiatric medications. And unless we stop chemically abusing our children with these dangerous prescription medications, you can bet that the school shootings will continue.
As I stated in 2006 (http://www.naturalnews.com/020394.html), there is a war being waged against the people, and the weapons are chemical weapons sold by pharmaceutical companies and distributed by psychiatrists. The innocent casualties of this war include schoolchildren, teachers, parents and even the trigger pullers. We are witnessing a massacre, and it is being pushed forward every day, in virtually every country, by psychiatrists whose own arrogance and greed erases whatever human compassion they may have once held.
There is a War for Profit underway in psychiatric medicine today, and the battleground is now littered with the bloodied bodies of the girls and boys and teachers whose lives were stolen from them by an insidious medical-sounding front group known as "psychiatry."
Watch this movie to learn the truth: http://www.cchr.org/#/videos/making...Or see this video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsfH...
These are films the psych industry hopes you never see. The last thing they want is the truth to get out about how much blood is on their hands. Those parents who lost their children in this shooting should be marching on their local psychiatric treatment centers, demanding the arrest and prosecution of the so-called doctors who prescribed these dangerous psychotropic chemicals to the shooter who pulled the trigger.
Kretschmer is a victim of chemical child abuseIt is almost certainly not mere coincidence that this German shooter specifically targeted and killed a psychiatric worker. Perhaps somewhere in the back of his subconscious mind, hidden behind the pain and mental torture of psychtropic drug withdrawal, there was a part of his mind that remembered who had harmed him, and he sought to do something about it as his last willful act before being completely destroyed.
Make no mistake: Kretschmer is a victim of chemical child abuse by psychiatry, and it is the psychiatrists who bear responsibility for this great tragedy. Pharmaceuticals made him into a monster by altering his brain chemistry. During his violent outrage, he was not in control of his own thoughts. It is sad that he will be labeled a mad killer when, in reality, he is merely the predictable product of a torturous pharmaceutical experiment still being carried out on millions of children around the world.
Nor is Kretschmer the last violent shooter we will see. As long as the industry of psychiatry exists, the world is an unsafe place for us all. Think about your own coworkers or peers and ask yourself, "How many of them are on psychotropic meds right now?"
Shootings in Germany, Alabama Underscore Violent Side Effects of Psychiatric Medications
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 by: Mike Adams
(NaturalNews) A 17-year-old former student opened fire near Stuttgart, Germany, killing at least 16 people. The teenager was a former student at a Winnenden school, where he initiated the shooting spree. Three teachers and at least 10 students were killed by his actions.The media is reporting that Tim Kretschmer, "walked calmly into three classrooms and opened fire, without saying a word." Following the shooting at his school, Tim ran to a psychiatric clinic school and killed an employee there. (Did he have a link to the psychiatric staff members there?)A day earlier, a man in his mid-30's opened fire in Alabama, killing ten people before he was shot and killed by law enforcement.
It's the medication, not the firearms
In seeing the news reports on these events, the ignorant masses quite predictably leaped to the conclusion that "guns are the problem." Apparently in their minds, these shootings were carried out solely by guns and have nothing whatsoever to do with the people pulling the triggers. But the truth is far more insidious: It is the psychiatric medications that are causing violent shooting sprees in America, Germany and elsewhere.These dangerous psychiatric medications drastically imbalance brain chemistry, causing teens (and adults) to feel distanced from reality, as if they are walking through a video game. In fact, this was exactly how the Columbine school shooters described their experience of carrying out the infamous shootings in Colorado.The report that Germany's shooter, Tim Kretschmer, "walked calmly into three classrooms and opened fire, without saying a word" is a strong indication that he was almost certainly suffering the brain-altering side effects of psychiatric medication.The pharmaceutical companies, of course, incessantly attempt to deny the reality that their drugs cause school shootings. In fact, their psychiatric drugs actually cause the very same things they often claim to treat! Antidepressants, for example, can cause depression, suicidal thoughts and violent behavior. They also directly promote weight gain, obesity and diabetes, and those health conditions can then lead to more depression, requiring more "treatment" with medication.It's all a gigantic scam. These drug companies are just selling patented chemicals for profit while destroying the lives of human beings in the process. In my view, Big Pharma is responsible for the deaths of all those killed by drug-induced shooting sprees. Read the jaw-dropping collection of quotes (below) from authors on this issue to learn even more.Not surprisingly, the mainstream media remains virtually silent on this issue, not even mentioning any link between psychiatric drugs and school shootings. The media, you see, is largely funded by drug company advertisements.
A film you must seeA truly remarkable documentary film on the history of psychiatric medication is now available through CCHR (the Citizens' Commission on Human Rights). Watch it here: http://www.cchr.org/#/videos/making... Or see the two-minute trailer here: http://www.fightforkids.org/video/m...CCHR is the same non-profit organization that produced Psychiatry - An Industry of Death, which you can watch on YouTube here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsfH...CCHR is the world's leading organization fighting against the psychiatric medication abuse of children. I recently visited CCHR in Los Angeles and toured their shocking museum called Psychiatry - An Industry of Death. This is an absolutely mind-bending museum you simply can't miss seeing. If you're visiting Los Angeles, make plans to go through this museum (admission is free).You'll find it in the Hollywood district. The street address is: 6616 Sunset Blvd., Los Angeles, CA, 90028.CCHR is the leading organization standing up against psychiatric medicine around the world. They have achieved an amazing number of important accomplishments in exposing the fraud and criminal behavior of the psychiatric industry, and they deserve your support: www.CCHR.org
Listen to the song: S.S.R.Lies
You may also know I'm the writer and singer on the song known as SSRIs - S.S.R.Lies which you can download or listen to here: http://www.naturalnews.com/SSRIs_S_...The lyrics are included on the right-hand column of that page.
Authors' Quotes on Antidepressants and School Shootings
Below, you'll find selected quotes from noted authors on the subject of antidepressants and suicide or violent behavior. Feel free to quote these in your own work provided you give proper credit to both the original author quoted here and this NaturalNews page.This first list of school shootings is from the book, Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills That Kill by Kelly Patricia O'Meara:Illegal mind-altering drugs may elicit the same or similar adverse reactions as many of the newer mind-altering antidepressants, yet this important correlation, beyond a cursory mention, is absent from serious consideration in most of the school shootings. The following list of school shootings is an example of the number of children with a known history of psychiatric counseling and psychiatric drug use: [abbreviated list, get the book to read the full list]
• Kip land "Kip" Kinkle, 15 years old, May 21, 1998, Thurston Middle School, Springfield, Ore. Killed his mother and father and two students; wounded 25 others. Psychiatric counseling and drug use: Prozac.
• Shawn Cooper, 15 years old, April 16, 1999, Notus Junior-Senior High School, Notus, Idaho. Fired two gun shots. No one injured or killed. Psychiatric drugs used: "antidepressants."
• Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, 18 and 17 years old, respectively, April 20, 1999, Columbine High School, Littleton, Colo. Twelve students and one teacher killed; 24 others wounded. Shooters commit suicide. Psychiatric drug use: Harris had been prescribed Zoloft and Luvox.
• Thomas "T.J." Solomon, 15 years old, May 20, 1999, Heritage High School, Conyers, Ga. Six wounded. Psychiatric drug use: Prior psychiatric counseling and Ritalin.
• Elizabeth Bush, 14 years old, March 7, 2001, Bishop Neumann High School, Williamsport, Pa. Wounded one student. Psychiatric drug use: "antidepressants."
• Jason Hoffman, 18 years old, March 22, 2001, Granite Hills High School, El Cajon, Ca. Killed one; wounded one. Psychiatric drug use: Celexa and Effexor.
• Cory Baadsgaard, 16 years old, April 15, 2001, Wahluke High School, Mattawa, Wash. Held 23 students and a teacher hostage with a rifle. No injuries or deaths. Psychiatric drug use: Paxil and Effexor.
• John Jason McLaughlin, 15-years old, September 14, 2001, Recori High School, Cold Spring, Minnesota. One killed and 1 wounded.
• Jeff Weise, 16 years old, March 21, 2005, Red Lake High School, Red Indian Reservation, Minn. Killed nine and wounded seven others then committed suicide. Psychiatric drug use: Prozac.
• Michael Carneal, 14 years old, Dec 1, 1997, Heath High School, West Paducah, Ky. Killed three students; wounded five others. Had psychiatric counseling prior to shooting.
• Mitchell Johnson, 13 years old, and Andrew Golden, 11 years old, March 25, 1998, Westside Middle School, Jonesboro, Ark. One teacher, four students killed; 11 wounded. Johnson received psychiatric treatment prior to the shooting.
Teen Screen
Are antidepressant drugs an accomplice in the Virginia Tech shootings?Wednesday, April 18, 2007 by: Mike Adams
The Chicago Tribune reports that Cho Seung Hui, the Virginia Tech shooter who killed 32 fellow students in a shooting rampage, was taking antidepressant drugs. This is not the first time a school shooting rampage has been linked to antidepressants. The infamous Colombine High shootings took place almost exactly eight years ago, and the shooters in that rampage were also -- you guessed it -- taking antidepressant drugs.
What is it about antidepressant drugs that provokes young men to pick up pistols, rifles and shotguns, then violently assault their classmates? Clearly, there's something wrong with the mind of anyone who engages in such violent acts. Could the drugs be "imbalancing" their minds, priming them for violence?
The answer is a very sobering, "Yes, they could be." As we reported in a previous NaturalNews article on Paxil:
Researchers from Cardiff University in Britain and the Cochrane Centre examined data on Paxil -- or its generic form, paroxetine -- from GlaxoSmithKline, legal cases and emails from nearly 1,400 patients who responded to a British TV program on antidepressants. The researchers found that 60 out of 9,219 people taking Paxil -- 0.65 percent -- experienced a "hostility event," compared to 20 out of 6,455 patients taking placebo, or 0.31 percent.
In that same article, published in September, 2006, I stated, "This finding helps explain why school shootings are almost always conducted by children who are taking antidepressants. We also know that SSRIs cause children to disconnect from reality. When you combine that with a propensity for violence, you create a dangerous recipe for school shootings and other adolescent violence."Sadly, that explanation rings true once again with the Virginia Tech shooting. Wherever we see school violence, antidepressant drugs seem to found at the scene of the crime. The correlation is not coincidence. There is a causal link between the two.
The links between antidepressants and violence are well documentedA study published in the Public Library of Science Medicine (an open source medical journal) explored these same links in detail. (See Antidepressants and Violence: Problems at the Interface of Medicine and Law, by David Healy, Andrew Herxheimer, David B. Menkes)
The authors note that "Some regulators, such as the Canadian regulators, have also referred to risks of treatment-induced activation leading to both self-harm and harm to others" and the "United States labels for all antidepressants as of August 2004 note that 'anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric'".
In other words, the link between antidepressants and violence has been known for years by the very people manufacturing, marketing or prescribing the drugs. As the author of the study mentioned above concluded, "The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used."
That was last year, well before this latest shooting. The warning signs were there, and they've been visible for a long time. Medical authorities can hardly say they are "shocked" by this violent behavior. After all, the same pattern of violence among antidepressant takers has been observed, documented and published in numerous previous cases.
How to stop the violenceFollowing this recent episode of violence, some Americans are renewing calls for gun control. But I ask, isn't it time we looked at antidepressants control? Why do we continue to drug up young people in this country with psychotropic drugs that we know are closely associated with violent outbursts?
Giving young men antidepressant drugs is, in my opinion, just like building silent timebombs and waiting around for one to suddenly go off. Chemically assaulting these young, troubled brains with powerful drugs -- while denying them real mental health solutions based on nutrition -- is the bread and butter of modern psychiatry, an industry that in my opinion has sold its soul to drug companies and now serves primarily as a glorified system of legalized drug dealers that preys upon children and teenagers.
That doesn't mean the doctor or psychiatrist who prescribed the antidepressants is directly responsible for the violence committed by Cho Seung Hui, but they may have very well played a key role in destabilizing the mind of a young man who was on the verge of insanity. You don't give another shot of whisky to a drunk driver, and you shouldn't prescribe antidepressants to troubled young men. Especially when there are weapons lying around.
How many more Americans will be killed by pharmaceuticals?FDA-approved prescription drugs kill 100,000 Americans each year. Sadly, these 32 dead students at Virginia Tech now join the list of those killed by pharmaecutical side effects. And yet nobody in the mainstream media seems to be reporting about the drugs.
Don't you find it curious that when 100,000+ Americans are killed in their homes and beds each year, dying from heart attacks and strokes caused by pharmaceuticals, there's virtually no news coverage, but when mind-altering drugs cause a student to pick up guns and blow away 32 classmates, it's suddenly front-page news everywhere? The reason is because there's violence involved, and violence gets ratings for news organizations.
Another interesting point in all this is that a Korean diplomat contacted the Bush Administration to offer his condolences. Does this seem a bit strange to anyone else? The student was an American citizen, and he had lived in America for many years. In fact, he got put on antidepressant drugs in America, following the same fraudulent system of medicine that is uniquely American in the degree of harm it causes people. If anybody should be picking up the phone and apologizing, it's the U.S. diplomats who should be apologizing to the world for exporting death, disease and western medicine. Drug companies should be apologizing to the families of those who died, as well as to the family of the shooter. And the doctor or psychiatrist who prescribed these drugs to Cho Seung should be apologizing to everybody. Where is the apology from the drug companies who manufacture these chemicals that kill?
The question I'm asking is: Who's really at fault here? Sure, it's primarily the person who pulled the trigger. But it's also the companies and FDA regulators who allowed dangerous, violence-inducing chemicals to be prescribed to the person who pulled the trigger. "Chemically-induced violence," I call it. And antidepressant drugs make it so much easier for the shooter because they make people feel dissociated from reality. One of the Colombine shooters said it was all, "like a video game."
Or, as described in shocking detail in the PLoS Medicine study mentioned above, a 12 year old boy was being drugged with antidepressants when the following took place. As reported:
The independent forensic report on the case notes CP as saying that that night: "something told me to shoot them". He had initially reported this to be hallucinations and then said he thought it was his own thoughts. When asked to specifically describe what the experience was like, he said it was "like echoes in my head saying 'kill, kill', like someone shouting in a cave". According to the forensic report, "He reported this began happening after he went to bed…He reported he had never considered harming his grandparents before and this was unlike anything he had previously experienced. He reported that the voices were coming from inside his head and they bothered him so much that he got up. He reported that the voices continued until he killed his grandparents. He reported that he couldn't control himself and reported the echoes stopped after he shot his grandparents. He set fire to the house but could not explain these actions saying the thoughts just popped up". He then took a vehicle and began driving but reported that he had no idea where he was going and that it all felt like a dream. He recalled asking the police about his grandparents after he was picked up because he was not sure if it had really happened or not. My heart goes out to those who died... ALL of themYes, I mourn the dead. Do not mistake my skeptical thinking with a lack of compassion for those individuals and families traumatized by this event. But unlike most tabloid reporters, I don't end my story with the 32 dead at Virginia Tech. I mourn the 100,000 Americans killed every year by FDA-approved prescription drugs, and the millions more killed all around the world by pharmaceuticals, regardless of whether they were killed in a headline-grabbing act of extreme violence. And unless we restrict the use of antidepressant drugs and find a way to help young men achieve genuine mental health through nutrition, sunlight, and avoidance of toxic chemicals, mark my words: We will see more antidepressant-induced violence in America.
The shootings will not stop until the pills are banned.
You can bank on it. The next attempted shooting is likely only days or weeks away.
If we want to end this violence, we must end the chemical warfare being waged against the minds of our young men and children by the drug companies.
Study summary:Here's the summary of the study, mentioned above, published in PLoS Medicine:
Recent regulatory warnings about adverse behavioural effects of antidepressants in susceptible individuals have raised the profile of these issues with clinicians, patients, and the public. We review available clinical trial data on paroxetine and sertraline and pharmacovigilance studies of paroxetine and fluoxetine, and outline a series of medico-legal cases involving antidepressants and violence.
Both clinical trial and pharmacovigilance data point to possible links between these drugs and violent behaviours. The legal cases outlined returned a variety of verdicts that may in part have stemmed from different judicial processes. Many jurisdictions appear not to have considered the possibility that a prescription drug may induce violence.
The association of antidepressant treatment with aggression and violence reported here calls for more clinical trial and epidemiological data to be made available and for good clinical descriptions of the adverse outcomes of treatment. Legal systems are likely to continue to be faced with cases of violence associated with the use of psychotropic drugs, and it may fall to the courts to demand access to currently unavailable data. The problem is international and calls for an international response.
The Unholy Alliance Between Psychiatrists and Psychotropic Drugs: 36,000 Deaths a Year?Dr. Mercola
February 05 2009
Psychotropic drugs is a story of big money. These drugs fuel a $330-billion psychiatric industry, without a single cure -- and now kill an estimated 36,000 people every year, with the death toll still rising.
This is part one of a riveting 10-part documentary containing more than 175 interviews with lawyers, mental health experts, the families of victims and the survivors themselves.
Or is this just an amazing testimony to marketing brilliance?
Psychotropic drugs have been a goldmine for drug makers. Through savvy marketing aimed at consumers and physicians, people are now convinced that what previously had been their normal emotions now fall outside of normalcy and require the use of some expensive and potentially toxic prescription pharmaceutical.
Normal Life Challenges are Now Medical Conditions
At the crux of the problem is the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), and its slew of newly created diseases that are dubbed in need of medical treatment (i.e. drugs). The central dilemma is that many of the “disorders” could apply to nearly any one of us at one time or another.
• Do you drink coffee and then have trouble sleeping? It’s “Caffeine-Induced Sleep Disorder.”
• Are you sometimes shy? You may have “Social Phobia.”
• Are you wondering about deeper things, such as the meaning of life? Then you’ve got a “Religious or Spiritual Problem.”
• Do you argue with your brother or sister? Then it’s “Sibling Relational Problem.” With your spouse? That one’s “Partner Relational Problem.” Your kids likely fall under some of the categories in this massive tome as well.
• Does your child argue with adults, lose his temper, or annoy people? He has “Oppositional Defiant Disorder.”
• If your child has trouble with math, he can be diagnosed with “Mathematics Disorder.”
• Or if you or your teenager is uncertain about what path to take in life, what your values or career goals are, you’ve likely got an “Identity Problem.”
Of course, any one of these “disorders” likely has a drug solution to “cure” it.
This practice of systematically inventing disease, or exaggerating minor ones, in order to sell more products actually has a name. It’s called diseasemongering, and it’s a well established tool used among drug companies. Of course, their pills do not eliminate the problem but instead merely relieve the symptoms as long as you continue to purchase them. That is, until the side effects begin and you run the risk of feeling even worse than you did prior to taking them. Here is just a short list of side effects from psychotropic drugs such as Prozac, Paxil, Ritalin, Zyprexa, Depakote and others:
• Anxiety, depression, impulsivity and obsession
• Anger, compulsion, temper tantrums and mood instability (this one, ironically, from a mood stabilizer drug)
• Social awkwardness, withdrawal, tics
• Sleep disturbances
• Separation anxiety
• Behavior problems
• Inattention and distractibility
What About Your Children?
This seems to be a question that far too few people are asking. It is bad enough to prescribe dangerous psychotropic drugs to adults, but some of the most targeted people are just barely out of diapers.In 2007 alone, half a million children and teenagers were given at least one prescription for an antipsychotic, including 20,500 under the age of 6.U.S. children are getting three times more prescriptions for antidepressants and stimulants, and up to double the amount of antipsychotic drugs than kids from Germany and the Netherlands.These powerful meds are being given to children not for life-threatening conditions or to treat acute emergencies … they’re being prescribed for behavioral problems such as attention deficit disorder, and often they’re not even approved for use in children at all!
How can we, as a society, continue to allow corporate profits to come before lives, and even before children’s lives? And why is it that so few people are willing to step up and really expose the corruption once and for all?
If you or your child is suffering from an emotional or mental challenge, please seek help, but do so from someone who does not regard psychotropic drugs as a first line of defense. It will be very helpful if you first optimize your or your child’s diet and lifestyle as this will significantly improve the likelihood of any successful natural intervention. A good starting point would be my comprehensive health plan that is free to view. Of course you will need specific interventions to address any emotional challenges. There are many wonderful tools out there. One of my favorite ones is Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT).
Why Psychology Does More Harm Than GoodBy Selwyn Duke
April 29, 2008
In his book The Future of an Illusion, Sigmund Freud said of religion and morality,
“It would be an undoubted advantage if we were to leave God out altogether and admit the purely human origins of all the precepts and regulations of civilization.”
In making this statement, Freud weighed in on one of life’s most important questions: What is the nature of right and wrong? Is it real, something existing apart from man, a reflection of Absolute Truth, of God’s will? Or is it, in accordance with the atheist model, merely a product of mortal minds and thus synonymous with consensus opinion? Freud made it clear he believed the latter.While many may debate Freud’s influence over modern psychology, there is no doubt that the atheism and moral relativism he espoused reign in it. This is not to say there aren’t exceptions. There is the American Association of Christian Counselors, and many people will speak glowingly of positive experiences with Christian therapists. And, while I myself would never have need of such services (although some of my critics may beg to differ), I have had the pleasure of corresponding with an individual of this stripe, author, speaker and family psychologist John Rosemond, a man traditional to the core. Yet, in just the way we refer to the Founding Fathers’ ideology as “classical liberalism” so as to distinguish it from the modern variety, there is a reason why we use a modifier and call such people “Christian Counselors”: They are not the norm. Without a doubt, psychology has in a great measure become a bastion of secularism, born of atheism and molded in its lukewarm fires. As to this, in her piece “With God as My Shrink,” Pamela Paul quotes Brigham Young University psychology professor Scott Richards as saying,
“Not only was Freud antireligion, but the behaviorists who came afterward were extremely eager to avoid religion in order to establish psychology as a respected science.”
Paul goes on to cite these statistics:
“Nearly three-fourths of Americans say their whole approach to life is based on religion. But only 32 percent of psychiatrists, 33 percent of clinical psychologists and 46 percent of clinical social workers feel the same.”
Yet even this understates the matter. Like so many nowadays, these people’s ideas about faith aren’t the traditional variety. They may pay homage to an ambiguous conception of spirituality and profess a belief in God, but just ask them about morality. More often than not they will tell you that right and wrong is a matter of perspective. This is ironic, since the word “psychology” dates from 1653 and originally meant “study of the soul.” Yet it is hardly surprising. Science deals in empiricism, in what can be observed, touched and quantified, and nothing spiritual, be it the soul, Truth or something else, qualifies. Thus, psychology prefers to view man as an organic robot, a cosmic accident, one whose actions are explainable in terms of its hardware (genetics) and software (conditioning or socialization). And it prefers to view that socialization not as inculcation with Truth, but with those expressions of collective opinion known as “values.”
The problem with this is that reality doesn’t yield to preferences, and you cannot improve something’s function if you misunderstand its nature. If psychology’s predominant school of thought is correct and there is no God, no Truth and we have no souls, then, sure, we are simply a few pounds of chemicals and water; hence, organic robots. And this would have some staggering implications.
For one, morality is then mere opinion, and we can’t expect opinion to govern the operation of the human “machine” any more than it influences the rotation of the Earth. But what if we are spirit as well as flesh? What if Truth and, therefore, morality exist, and, as Aristotle believed, living a moral life is a prerequisite for happiness? It then follows that we cannot expect to enjoy happiness unless we know what morality is and acknowledge it. It also follows that a practitioner who endeavors to help patients achieve a happier state but who is disconnected from morality will labor in vain.Yet the problem with psychology is not just that those within the field may be peddling a relativistic creed, but that it has provided a specious scientific basis for relativism’s wider embrace. We now live in the age of “If it feels good, do it,” a maxim that is eminently logical if morals are really values and values are determined by man. Because of this, it is also the age of no accountability; after all, if right and wrong are merely opinion and thus don’t truly exist, how can anything I’ve done be wrong? Haven’t you heard, you provincial thinker, that you aren’t supposed to impose your values on me? Don’t you know I have my own “truth”? And, if nothing can be truly wrong, there is nothing to be accountable for.
Homosexuals "Born That Way" - A Con Job
Devvy Kidd
May 25, 2009
© 2008 - NewsWithViews.com
PART 1 of 3
The massive push by sodomites and lesbians to sell their deviant sexual preferences based on "born that way," must be exposed because it is a lie.
For the record and this column, I do not use the word 'gay' except as used in a media source. Using the word 'gay' to describe those who engage in sodomy is nothing more than clever marketing to distract people from what a homosexual does with another man. The word 'gay' is used to present an uplifting feeling instead of picturing what sodomites and lesbians do between the sheets and openly on the streets. (Warning: graphic photos: sodomites and lesbians.) "Alternative lifestyles" is more clever word smithing to take people's attention away from the act of sodomy and lesbian sex.
This column is not about hate, it's about the truth. As a Christian my entire life, I was taught and strive to live the teaching: hate the sin, love the sinner. Hate what the person is doing to themselves and pray they will stop. This column is about exposing the propaganda that sodomites and lesbians are "born that way." I feel pity for men and women who have been brainwashed into believing such a monstrous lie, putting their immortal soul at jeopardy, not to mention their psychological and physical well being.
The lies via massive, well calculated propaganda has spread to churches where there are now sexual deviants as pastors and ministers. Deceiving and selling the souls of their faithful to justify their own perversions. The Church of Scotland has just appointed its first queer (We're queer, we're here"!) cleric: "The Equality and Human Rights Commission Scotland said it was "delighted" with the result. Alyson Thomson, head of communications, said: "The Church of Scotland General Assembly has set out a clear stall – it is a modern church for a modern Scotland.”
A "modern" church for a "modern" Scotland. What does Almighty God have to say about sodomy? Here's just a few examples:
"You shall not lie with a male as those who lie with a female; it is an abomination." -- Leviticus 18:22
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death." -- Leviticus 20:13
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions: for their women exchanged the natural use for that which is against nature. And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural use of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error." -- Romans 1:26-27
"Who, knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Leviticus 18:22
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13
God's word is perfect, but those who choose to practice sodomy and lesbian sex chant Bible scripture is misunderstood, not modern enough or taken out of context. None of us can read English or understand such simple words. After all, Jesus was "tolerant."
Falling lockstep into a Godless country
Contrary to massive doses of disinformation and outright lies, world communism is alive and well. In order for communism to flourish in a country, Christianity and the teachings of God must be eradicated. The people must be convinced the state is really their only hope "for the common good." Few really understand the art of propaganda and brainwashing. They are merely victims of it as demonstrated by those who do understand the game and tried to warn us so long ago:
Congressional Record --Appendix, pp. A34-A35. January 10, 1963. Current Communist Goals: Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy." Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch." Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
Our political and judicial institutions are now infested with sexual deviants who are shoving the filth of sodomy and lesbianism down the throats of the American people and whoa unto anyone who doesn't buy it. The stench of political correctness. A perfect example, besides flaming sodomites like Barney Frank, was the set up in Texas, which I wrote about back in November 2004:
Barney Frank's family values"Speaking of the Supreme Court, except for a small percentage of Americans, the decision in Lawrence v. Texas (decided June 26, 2003) hardly made a ripple with the tens of millions of Americans who live in their own little comfort zones, far removed from the destruction being dished out by federal courts all across this country. In Lawrence v. Texas, the question to the court was due process and equal protection under the 14th Amendment regarding a Texas statute that made it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate conduct (sodomy).
"In her opinion, Justice O'Connor did not deny that homosexuality is a voluntarily chosen "lifestyle" --a startling admission. In his highly acclaimed work, "How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary," legal scholar and constitutional attorney, Dr. Edwin Vieira sums up the Lawrence decision:
“Rather the majority opinion in Lawrence "effectively decrees the end of all legislation" based on morals of any kind. For if morality cannot be invoked as a legitimate basis for legislation in a sexual-morality case, how can it be invoked in any other? Surely the particular area of conduct to which We the People address their moral judgments cannot determine the constitutional outcome.
“Thus, perforce of Lawrence, in the future to constitute "due process of law" as a basis for limiting "liberty," all legislation must be amoral – that is, all legislation must demonstrably serve some goal other than a concededly moral one. A "wall of separation" between morality and state must be thrown up and maintained.
“Therefore, the Lawrence majority's repudiation of the history of Western civilization and Christian moral and ethical standards amounted to repudiation of the Declaration of Independence and consequently the Constitution, and consequently again, the justices' own authority – further proof that whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.”
"In the Lawrence decision, the Supreme Court not only came up with one of the most convoluted, toxic decisions of the past century, it went much deeper than that. This was an all out attack on states' rights. This decision was so putrid, it should have caused a massive uproar from every Christian, minister, pastor and priest in this country and demand for removal of half the U.S. Supreme Court. The silence has been deafening. This decision not only bodes something akin to a death knell for America's moral foundation, the injection of international law into America's judicial system has set an unbelievably dangerous precedent."
The Lawrence case was a set up to catch two males engaging in sodomy to test the courts and it worked. Even though Sandra Day O'Connor didn't deny sodomy is a chosen sexual practice, the "high court" ruled against states rights, decency and mankind. In other words, it doesn't matter if sodomy is a chosen behavior, that’s okay. Equal protection under the law and soon will come protection for pedophiles and every other sexual deviancy known on this earth.As I have said for so many years, the argument using religion will continue to be a lost cause simply because the finest marketing and brain washing has been used to sell a toxic product. "Tolerance," "equal rights" and "understanding" are the buzz words along with changing the mantra. Religion will continue to be the losing argument because America has rejected God's word and wallows like swine in a sty shouting decadence and filth is normal, natural and healthy. The way of Rome fostered and led by phony preachers like Joel Osteen who head up big, cash cow social churches spewing feel good instead of God's wrath. "Empower" the created to feel they are more powerful than the Creator. It IS the churches of this country who have encouraged the big lie and now promote it with lesbians and sodomites as pastors and preachers backed up by corporate media funding these immoral organizations.
PART 2 of 3
Financial gain
The massive push for "same sex" marriages has nothing to do with love or tolerance. It's all about money. John Smith, who is a sodomite works for the State of Massachusetts and gets full health benefits. His "lover" doesn't have the same benefits but has AIDS. Considering the high number of stranger sex sodomites have over a life time, the risk of contracting AIDS is very high. John and Joe get "married" and the taxpayers foot the bill for a preventable disease. It's not just AIDS, but men who have sex in each other's feces have massive health problems (listed below) and all preventable. Now, they want you to pay for their medical treatment under the umbrella of tolerance, understanding and the cancer known as political correctness. I receive the most vile, profane email from sodomites who all chant the same thing: heterosexuals engage in anal sex. Yes, they probably do and how foolish to put their health at risk for what? The "thrill" of having sex in someone's poop?
So called "gay marriage" is pathetic. It's revolting to see two men "joined in hands" as if their "union" has any legitimacy at all. Have you seen the massive coverage of the old biddies holding hands, crying, as they are "joined in holy matrimony?" Gee, isn't that great? Grandma is getting married to my friend's grandma! They get to have same sex! What happened to grandpa? Aren't these “gay” grandparents a fine role model for children?
’Lavender diseases’ as they are called in the medical community
(Anal) Douches, Lubricants: Allergic reactions, Rectal fatty tumors Active Fellatio: Physical abrasions, Oral gonorrhea, Herpes progenitalis I and II, Nongonococcal pharyngitis (Chlamidia and others), Oral condyloma acuminatum, Syphilis, Hepatitis B, Enteric diseases, Lymphogranuloma venereum, Granuloma inquinale, Chancroid Passive Fellatio: Herpes type 1 and 2, Nongonococcol urethritis (Chlamidia and others), Gonorrhea, Neisseria meningitidis. Anal Intercouse, Active: Nongonococcol urethritis, Escherichia coli, Gonorrhea, Hepatitis A, B, non-A/non-B, Herpes, Warts -molluscum and condyloma, Syphilis, Trichomoniasis, Epididymitis/prostatitis, Fungal infections, Lymphogranuloma venereum, Granuloma inguinale, Chancroid, Cytomegalovirus. Anal Intercourse, Passive: Physical protitis, Rectal gonorrhea, Warts -condyloma and molluscum (rare), Nonspecific proctitis (Chlamidia and others), Herpes, Syphilis, Hepatitis B, Trichomoniasis, Corynebacterium, Lymphogranuloma venereum, Granuloma inguinale, Chancroid, Cytomegalovirus, Candidiasis. Analinction (dung-eating, "rimming")
Enteric diseases: Gay bowel syndrome (explained below) PLUS Escherichia coli and Helminthic parasites, Oral warts, Oral gonorrhea, Syphilis, Lymphogranuloma venereum, Granuloma inguinale, Chancroid. Fist/Finger Insertion, Passive: Internal scrapes, Anal sphincter tears, Perforations of the colon, Acute abdomen, having to wear a diaper. Toys/Apparatus: Allergic reactions, Friction dermatitis, Physical torsions, Varicoceles, Peyronie's disease, Fungal infections, Lost rectal objects, Testicular strangulation ("cock rings"). Gay Bowel Syndrome is a collection of bowel diseases which lead to dysfunction of the lower bowel tract and is prevalent throughout the "gay" community. GBS requires one wear a colostomy bag. Shigellosis is an acute bacteria infection like salmonellosis, it can lead to a diarrhea-induced dehydration death in infants and the elderly. Infected individuals [HIV] should never handle food, yet how many "gays" work in restaurants and handle food?
Hepatitus A and B - a viral liver disease spread by fecal contamination (A), or by blood (B). The latter type is considered to be transmitted "by 'parenteral injection' of saliva or semen positive for B antigen through breaks in anal or oral mucosa during anilingual (tongue/anus) contact or proctogenital intercouse (penile/rectal sodomy)" (New England Journal of Medicine, 1980, p.302.) January 2009: Homosexual Men Account for 65 Percent of Syphilis Cases, CDC Study Finds. Of the 12,000 cases of syphilis in the United States in 2007, making them the “primary driver” of increased syphilis rates overall.
For further information, see: The Health Risks of Gay Sex and Sexually transmitted disease among homosexuals. This is normal, natural and healthy? When God created man and woman, do you really think he would have intentionally programmed humans to engage in behavior that brings such pain, misery and death?
Masters of manipulationNot long after the first cases of AIDS were diagnosed and this new killer began to claim precious lives, a subtle form of brainwashing began to creep into American homes via the stupid tube [television]. This brainwashing took many forms and we can all see the results today at how clever this tiny number of people were in getting a nation to toss its moral foundation into the sewer for "tolerance." Those who refuse to kow-tow to this kind of propaganda and cave in to pressure from well financed groups and organizations are pilloried and given labels such as "homophobe." At the same time, a slow but steady drumbeat echoed across this land that queers, as they were called back then [and still are today by their own], were spreading this killer disease through irresponsible and perverted sexual habits.
In order to counter this bad publicity, subtle new labels emerged. Sodomites and lesbians started to appear as guests on such programs as the Today Show and other talkies. These well orchestrated propaganda events brought Linda and Susie right into your kitchen over breakfast, decked out in business suits and oozing love, like former VP Dick Cheney’s daughter. I will never forget the photo of Cheney and his wife holding a little baby with huge grins on their face. That baby was born via artificial insemination and is the child of Cheney’s lesbian daughter and her “partner.” How revolting.
In the State of Colorado, courageous Americans decided to do something about all the special privileges and status being given to sexual deviants who had the gall to compare "homosexual rights" to the plight of black Americans during the civil rights era. In 1992, Colorado voters approved Amendment 2 to their state constitution. This Amendment [later overturned by the Gods who sit on the U.S. Supreme Court], was to ensure that no one received preferential treatment, that all are equal under the law. The voice of the people was once again tossed into the ocean of political correctness and the homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual, et al, community rejoiced.
An interesting thing happened while this battle was raging on in Colorado. I lived there during this time and watched first hand how words are used to deceive and manipulate. Up until the time of the vote, the homosexual, et al, community referred to their perversions as "sexual preference." It was the constant mantra that we heard on the stupid tube and read in leftist newspapers throughout the state for almost a year during the Amendment 2 battle.
Those seeking to stop this onslaught by the homosexual crowd continually reminded everyone that these people preferred their deviant sexual practices. The key word here being preferred. When the homosexual, et al, bunch suddenly realized they were losing the battle in the court of public opinion, America was introduced to a new label, "sexual orientation."
The homosexual, et al, crowd figured they could hoodwink most people into believing that all of a sudden, their sexual appetites were no longer a matter of preference, but rather "orientation." How clever and what nonsense. A few years later, "gay" suddenly was attached to sexual deviants to again divert attention away from the word sexual or the sex acts engaged in by sodomites and lesbians. Just "gay" people.
PART 3 of 3
ScienceThis is the one thing sodomites and lesbians refuse to talk about unless forced. Is there such a thing as a homosexual or lesbian gene? Decades ago, Simon LeVey, a homosexual and author of Queer Science, attempted to use science to prove sexual deviants are born that way. LeVey's science has been highly criticized over the years.
In order to sell something so toxic, you have to market the product in a way that becomes acceptable to the masses using a lot of positive images. After all, telling youngsters and pre-teens that anal sex can expose you to HIV/AIDS isn't the picture leaders of the sexual deviant movement want to portray. They want to parade "funny" people like Ellen DeGeneres into your living room to show you how normal lesbians are, just regular Americans. Add a media icon like Oprah selling the message on her show reaching millions of women and the advancement of the cause increases in a big way.
Today, if you don't accept the sexual deviant agenda, you should be put in rehab and if you think I'm kidding, recall the flap over Isaiah Washington calling a cast member from some garbage program called, Grey's Anatomy, a faggot, should bring things into focus. Fellow cast member, Katherine Heigl, publicly commented that Washington should just shut up his mouth and go to rehab so he can "learn to think the right way." Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Propaganda, would have been proud of Ms. Heigl. You either think the "right way" or off to the indoctrination camps; today it's called rehab.
This issue isn't about tolerance or discrimination. It's about science. There isn't a scintilla of scientific evidence to prove any human is born homosexual or lesbian. It's all been debunked. Science is the one thing advocates and participants of deviant sexual behavior refuse to discuss - they always bring it back to religion, which is much easier to attack. Advocates of sodomy and lesbian sex have tried to use the civil rights movement to give credibility to their argument. Pushing deviant sexual behavior as somehow part of a "civil rights movement" is just more clever marketing using powerful images. If you're born white, you can't change your skin color to black at will and visa versa. The same as if you're born Asian, you can't suddenly decide you might be Caucasian. We are all which ever race God has chosen for us. A must see DVD is "The Kinsey Syndrome."
Many lesbians have left their preferred life styles. Actress Anne Heche used to have sex with Ellen DeGeneres. Ms. Heche then went on to marry a man, have a child. Unfortunately, she divorced. Not to return to having sex with a female, but a with a man. So, which way was Ms. Heche born? Angelina Jolie used to have sex with a dyke. So, which way was Ms. Jolie born? Funny thing. Both Heche and Jolie left women to be with a man and become a mother. But, wait! This web site gives us all the politically correct answers:
"It's clear that a change in sexual orientation is imaginable to more people than ever before, and there's more opportunity -- and acceptance -- to cross over the line," says Klein, noting that a half-dozen of her married female patients in the past few years have fallen in love with women. "Most are afraid that if they don't go for it, they'll end up with regrets."
Another clear example I can give you that it's a choice and not an "accident of birth" is the candor of WNBA star Sheryl Swoopes a couple of years ago. In an interview following her "coming out." This was the exchange:
Interviewer: "You have said that you don't believe you were born gay, which, as you said, may confuse many people. How do you believe you came to be gay?"
SW: "I think there are a lot of people -- gays and lesbians -- who believe you are born that way. I think there also a lot of people who believe it's a choice. And, for me, I believe it was a choice. I was at a point in my life where I had gone through a divorce and was not in a relationship, and the choice I made happened to be that I fell in love with another woman. It might confuse some people, and some people may not understand that, but I think in life, no matter what it is that you're doing, you always have a choice and you make that choice and you have to live with that choice. And it just happened that, you know, my partner and I were really, really good friends, and the more we hung out, the more we did stuff together, my feelings grew stronger and stronger for her, and it got to a point to where I said, "I can't fight this any more."
"How do you believe you came to be gay?" I thought you were born that way. Swoopes made the choice of embracing sin because she wants to, not because she was born that way. Is she really a lesbian or a product of years of propaganda shoved down her throat in massive doses by the media and special interest groups? How about men and women in prisons who have turned queer? I watched a cable program on this and the female prisoners said they turned to other female prisoners for sex because of loneliness. The male prisoners did it with each other just for the sex, not because they were born that way.
Uh, oh.....'Gay' gene claim suddenly vanishes
Did you miss that headline?
"A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no "gay" gene, according to a doctor who has written about the issue on the web site of National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality.
"A. Dean Byrd, the past president of NARTH, confirmed that the statement from the American Psychological Association came in a brochure that updates what the APA has advocated for years. Specifically, in a brochure that first came out about 1998, the APA stated: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. "However, in the update: a brochure now called, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," the APA's position changed."
The new statement says:
"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors..."
We know why humans are born heterosexual: Because God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or June and Joan. What people like me, the authors of 'My Genes Made Me Do It,' and credible scientists throughout the world have been saying all along: There is so such thing as a gene which hard wires human to be born homosexual or lesbian. Science settles the matter, but the propaganda machines will continue trying to shame people into the PC herd and tolerance.
With more sexual deviants elected to public office and sitting on the bench at all levels, the push for "same sex marriage" is spreading like a cancer. Vote out pro-homosexual/lesbian politicians whether in Congress, the White House, the State House or the local school board. Don't put money into the hands of those in Hollywood who promote such filth. Don't buy products from companies that promote sodomy as normal, natural and healthy because it is a lie. Take a stand. Here's the list of 259 and don't forget to boycott Pepsi. PepsiCo gives $1,000,000 to help promote the gay agenda and Campbell's Soup for promoting "two mommy's."
Do people even think about the act between homosexuals and lesbians? Here it is in raw language. Not to be crude, because I've used clinical terms as a doctor would in discussing human anatomy. Maybe using such frank language will shock people into understanding what we're talking about when the word “gay” is bandied about.
Sodomy: Men insert their penis in another man's anus where it comes in contact with the other man's human waste; their feces. Sodomy is having sex in another man's rectum. Would you play in someone's feces? That's what sodomites do with their penis in another man's rectum frequently tearing the lining of the rectum and spreading disease. Many engage in what's called "fisting." For details see: Queer sex for youth 14-21
Now, someone tell me this is natural, normal and healthy? Same sex between women. Lesbians put their mouths and faces between each other's legs and suck each other's breasts like babies. Something else I found out doing this repulsive research: "Leave the toys in the drawer. There will be plenty of time to learn about and play with sex toys. Let your first time be simple flesh-on-flesh love."One of the biggest mistakes parents in this country have made is to allow this well crafted propaganda to hit public school campuses in the form of G.L.S.E.N. (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network). Innocent children being brain washed to accept that which Almighty God has called an abomination. Sodomites and lesbians don't reproduce so they need to keep recruiting and where else better to accomplish this than public schools. Indoctrinate children and by the time they're 12 or 13, it's time to "experiment" to "find their sexuality." Toxic poison pumped into the heads of the innocent while parents are glued to inane trash like Survivor, Two and a Half Men or non stop sports.
Is this what you want your six, seven year old child to learn in school? "Mommy: The teacher told me that it's normal to put my pee pee in another boy's butt. I just have to wait until I'm old enough." That is the message. "Mommy, its okay to have two mommy's who have sex with each other. What is sex between two mommy's anyway?" So says your precious, innocent child after a day at school and the books being force fed down their throats.
Is that blunt enough for you? What do parents think "gay curriculum” is? Acceptance of same sex mommy and daddy’s is a good thing. Those who oppose it, bad. Over time in well thought out propaganda time tables, next comes the explicit teaching about sodomy and lesbian sex. Is this what you want for your child?
Organizations like G.L.S.E.N. will continue to recruit YOUR child on school campuses unless the parents of this country demand they are kicked off school campuses along with getting rid of school textbooks full of this propaganda. Children are innocent. They deserve to enjoy their childhood without being bombarded with toxic messages and subtle suggestions they engage in sodomy or lesbian sex to "explore their sexuality" while still in grammar school. Schools must not be used to promote sexual deviancy.
Parents all across this country need to organize, attend school board meetings and demand the school district shut down G.L.S.E.N.'s propaganda operations on your child's school campus. If that doesn't work, you take it to the state house by the thousands. I know it's difficult in states like California with a morally bankrupt legislature and pro-sodomite/lesbian governor, His Buffoonery, Arnold Schwarzenegger. However, it can be done or pull your precious child out of the public indoctrination centers. One organization I can highly recommend is Campaign for California Families headed up by Randy Thommason.
Litigation should focus heavily on science because that's the argument. How can "equal rights" be given to individuals who willingly choose a particular sexual behavior? This isn't about discrimination, it's about choice. Homosexuals and lesbians choose their sexual preferences just like someone who chooses a red SUV over a blue one. No difference. There is no science to back up their deceptive "born that way" argument. Many of them switch from men to women and visa versa as easily as you change a shirt or skirt. Stop allowing the big lie to be sold to voters and the courts. Call your ministers, pastors and preachers on the scientific findings and ask them why they continue to promote that which God calls an abomination. How can anyone sit in a house of God with a preacher, pastor or minister who openly repudiates God's word?
Being Queer is a Sexual DisorderBy David R. Usher, March 29, 2009, NewsWithViews.com
There is no finer metaphor for “pretzel logic” than the issue of “gay rights”. The contemporary addiction to “gay” liberation is no less dangerous or mind-altering than being addicted to heroine.
Being gay is a sexual disorder the American Psychological Association does not recognize because it drove out Division leaders and members who recognized sexual addiction for what it is. Gay men have eight times more sexual partners than heterosexual men do, and are the prevalent reason why 3% of individuals living in Washington D.C. are infected with H.I.V – on par with AIDS crisis countries such as Kenya.
Speaking frankly, I know what goes on in the gay community having been invited to a few gay parties. The real party is in the bathroom. The parade goes both ways all night with any number of people in there at one time. It’s a crack house for sex addicts.
We know that crack, heroine, and other mood-altering addictive substances are dangerous to individuals and inflict great costs and health risks on larger society. We do not think twice about dealing with drug and alcohol addiction at face value. That is why “crack studies” and “smoker’s rights” are not taught in schools. Accordingly, drugs are illegal. We tax the daylights out of tobacco, and some cities have even made smoking illegal in many locations.
If “drug rights” promoters filed lawsuits asking the courts to mandate the establishment of “Friends of Drug Lovers” support groups in the public schools, they would be laughed out of town.
No matter how one cuts it, schools and universities promoting queerness as an attractive lifestyle may one day find themselves being sued by those who become ill after being conscripted into this dangerous lifestyle.
The shrill defiance of gay activists has gone too far. Same-sex marriage is now out of the question. As an “economic right” advocates now demand, same-sex marriage would not build chastity into open marriages.
Same-sex marriage is a viciously sexist proposition: the stated intent of feminist strategists is to secure the right for any two women to marry each other, turning marriage into a feminist political institution having chattel control of family, children, and the levers of political power. We are not far from this day. Upon creation of Obama’s White House Council on Women and Girls, N.O.W’s president (and Alpha-lesbian) Kim Gandy proudly proclaimed “We Got the Entire Cabinet.” Obama is set to inject gay lifestyle into the military, and sign a non-binding U.N. gay rights treaty that G.W. Bush refused to sign.
We have an aids epidemic in America caused by queer activists practicing and proselytizing their addiction. The epidemic is spreading into the heterosexual community at an alarming pace, most likely enhanced by swinging lesbians.
The sexual liberation movement now controls the White House. We can expect a downpour of mandates coming from Washington in the coming years. States must act to protect themselves.
Matters of public health and states’ interest are paramount. States should quickly enact health laws making homosexuality illegal and sending those who insist on practicing it into sexual addiction recovery programs until they get well. The alternative is to end up with yet another victim group needing ongoing federal and state bailouts this country cannot afford.
The APA decision December 1973: declassification of homosexuality as an illness
- the gay movement's most revolutionary moment
by Charles Kaiser
The best day of the 20th century for every lesbian and gay man in America was December 15, 1973: the day the board of the American Psychiatric Association voted 13-0 to remove homosexuality from its official list of psychiatric disorders.
It was the front page story in The New York Times (and almost every other major newspaper) at the time, and it remains the most important victory of the modern gay rights movement, which was then slightly more than four years old.
The triumph was a tribute to the diligence, intelligence, and furious determination of Frank Kameny, a cofounder with Jack Nichols of the Washington, D.C., branch of the Mattachine Society and one of the most important gay leaders of all time. More than a decade before the APA acted, Kameny identified homosexuality's classification as a mental illness as the major stumbling block for gay rights because "an attribution of mental illness in our culture is devastating."
When Kameny studied the psychiatric literature, he was "appalled." He told me that everything he found there was "sloppy, slovenly, slipshod, sleazy science--social and cultural and the theological value judgments, cloaked and camouflaged in the language of science, without the substance of science. There was just nothing there.... It was garbage in, garbage out."
In short, after centuries of religious persecution, gay people had suffered throughout the 20th century from outrageous medical malpractice: the psychiatric notion that the only healthy gay person was the one who wanted to be straight.
In 1970, Kameny convinced the Gay Activists Alliance to join him in his campaign to overturn the APA's policy, and only three years later they were successful.
For gay people who came of age after the 1970s, it is almost impossible to imagine what it had been like to live in an era when every official body (as well as most liberal lobbying groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union) classified your orientation as an illness or a crime. As Judd Marmor, one of the APA officers who engineered the change in the association's official doctrine, told me, the board of trustees concluded there was "no reason why ... a gay man or woman could not be just as healthy, just as effective, just as law abiding, and just as capable of functioning as any heterosexual." That was an entirely revolutionary notion in 1973, and without its formal articulation none of the progress of the next three decades would have been possible.
Kaiser is the author of the books 1968 in America and The Gay Metropolis.
COPYRIGHT 2002 Liberation Publications,
Inc.COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group

Say No To Psychiatry: Site Index
Psychiatric treatments are harmful. All psychiatric treatments are harmful. Psychiatric drugs, ECT (electric shock) and brain surgery (lobotomy) each harm the individual and society. This sometimes goes against what we have been taught or indoctrinated into believing, and also against what we would often like to believe. Taking a pill as a "cure" obviously is easier than confronting and dealing with the actual personal reasons for one's difficulties with their own mind and life. The alternative requires personal responsibility, control and can take time, but the final results far exceed the quick fix (drugs, shock, etc.). In fact, the "psychiatric" methods "fix" nothing at all and actually make things worse.
The field of psychiatry is rooted in German experimental psychology, racist eugenics theories, and anti-human materialistic opinions parading as scientific facts. The promotional activities and tremendous profits of the major drug companies and affiliated financial interests play no small part in understanding the development and success of modern psychiatry. The result of modern psychiatric theories and methods is the denial of everything comprising man's "inner" personality of thoughts, feelings, values, hopes, dreams, intentions, goals, and ultimately, life itself.
Much of modern education and all aspects of the social sciences are rooted in flawed modern theories of psychology. This has had and continues to have disastrous effects on individual people and society.
The links to information here supply a formidable basis of knowledge leading towards an accurate and true understanding of what psychiatry really is. Sources are referenced and much additional suggested reading material is given both on the Internet and in books. Your local psychiatrists will never refer you to this information.
Do not base your opinion only on what members of the psychiatric field tell you. Liquor manufacturers will not tell you their products cause liver damage, are the source of numerous automobile related deaths every year, and encourage you to cease drinking liquor. Similarly, no psychiatrist will tell you psychiatry harms people and that you should avoid it at all cost. Even if he or she knew or suspected this, he or she couldn't endure the loss of income, status and authority this would entail.
Psychiatry and the affiliated major drug companies form a huge money making enterprise (business) which can tolerate no criticism. Each psychiatrist has gone to school for many years, spent much money on their "education" (which I consider to largely be indoctrination into nonsense), and invested a good part of their life towards their "profession". It isn't easy for anyone, regardless of one's field, to flush years of education, expense, time spent in their field and one's source of a very good income down the toilet, much less also to confront that what one does for a living is fundamentally harmful to other people and society. Don't argue or even discuss the facts with them. Most of them won't listen, and instead will defend their opinions to the end while sarcastically and "authoritatively" criticizing the proponents of the truth
Psychiatry and modern psychology are primarily ideologies comprised of opinions, theories and beliefs with little basis in actual "science". For more on this see:
Extended introduction to the site.
General Comments on Psychiatry and Modern Psychology
The Definition of the Psychology
Materialism & Psychiatry Function as Ideology and Orthodoxy
Psycho-Mythology: Believed Completely by Psychiatrists
G. Brock Chisholm: A "Respected" Psychiatrist
The Errors of Applying Modern Science to the Human Mind
Keywords for Psychiatrists (having a little fun)
Reality, Belief and The Mind
Comprehensive overview of psychiatry by Gary Null, Ph.D.
Do the research yourself, and base your decisions on what you discover and what you find to be true. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Don’t drug it, shock it or cut it up. Don't allow anyone else's to be drugged, shocked or cut up either.
Key Web Site Descriptions & Links
Reporting Psychiatric Abuse - Psychiatric abuse includes actions by psychiatrists
such as sexual abuse (including sexual "therapies"), incorrect diagnoisis,
patient brokering, overdrugging, incorrect and harmful treatments resulting
in damage or death, and forced commitment. This link tells you where to
report abuse. The consultants can work with you to sue the psychiatrists
and/or hospital to stop their armful practices and obtain compensation
for harm done.-->
The History of Psychiatry - This link covers the "evolution" of psychiatry from early insane asylums, with shackles and straight jackets, to electric shock "treatments", brain butchery (lobotomy) to modern psychotropic drugs. The ideological forerunner of modern psychiatry is experimental psychology developed by Wilhelm Wundt. See link directly below.
The History of Modern Psychology - Psychiatry officially began with its encroachment into the area of medicine, but it's ideological beginnings are found with 19th century German experimental psychology and Wilhelm Wundt. The word "psychology" originally dealt with the "spirit", "soul" or "mind". German psychological theories gradually erased the "mind" until nothing was left except the biological animal part of man. The "being" (mental, spiritual) part of a human being was discarded leaving only the "human" or animal part. This distorted, one-sided and incorrect view of Man has had disastrous consequences for us all.
Psychiatric Drugs - There is no "safe" psychiatric drug. Each has numerous harmful short term and largely unknown long-term effects. Each psychiatric drug which was once heralded as the new "safe" wonder drug, was always eventually found to have severe harmful side effects, including addiction, and withdrawal symptoms, among others.
Psychiatric drugs obtain their result by causing brain dysfunction. Thorazine, a strong tranquilizer, creates a very similar effect to a lobotomy (brain surgery) by disrupting frontal lobe nerve activity. Psychiatrists grossly neglect to point out the potential harm of psychiatric drugs to their patients, such as tardive dyskinesia, tardive dementia, general dulling of awareness, emotional numbing, and cognitive dysfunction. Side effects can occur in as high as 50% or more of patients, depending on the drug and dosages, and often the effects are permanent with no known cure.
This link supplies much information on the various types of psychiatric drugs and their dangers. Do not take or allow others to take any psychiatric drugs without first reading the information contained here!
ECT (Electroconvulsive shock "therapy") - The story of electric shock began in 1938, when Italian psychiatrist Ugo Cerletti visited a Rome slaughterhouse to see what could be learned from the method that was employed to butcher hogs. In Cerletti's own words, "As soon as the hogs were clamped by the [electric] tongs, they fell unconscious, stiffened, then after a few seconds they were shaken by convulsions. During this period of unconsciousness (epileptic coma), the butcher stabbed and bled the animals without difficulty." ECT causes memory loss and brain damage. Do not allow yourself or others to submit to such barbaric "treatments".
Brain Surgery (lobotomy) - Psychosurgery is a psychiatric practice that creates permanent and irreversible brain damage. It is a brain operation in which healthy brain tissue is intentionally mutilated or removed for the purpose of behavior control. Making docile patients and controllable people is the true goal of this psychiatric method. There is no attempt or intention to bring about sanity, happiness, increased awareness, causativeness or responsibility for the patient.
Destroying Education - Modern education, especially as exists in the government controlled public schools, has deteriorated continually over the past 100 years. There are no "education specialists" who aren't actually behavioral psychologists or psychiatrists. The field of psychology has very much taken over the public school system, and is doing its best to take over private schools. Instead of stressing basics such as reading, writing and arithmetic, modern educational techniques push a curriculum of belief manipulation, attitude adjustment, and politically correct indoctrination, while also concentrating on the student's feelings, personal experiences and values. Find out why touchy-feely notions have replaced basic learning, appeals to students' emotions have replaced expanding the intellect, and wacky faddish psychological theories parade as "scientific" fact.
Who's Normal? (Psychiatric Labeling) - The psychiatric labels assigned by medical doctors and psychiatrists are largely based upon shoddy science. The list of "mental health disorders" is constantly expanding. Why? Because labels figure prominently in deciding whose psychotherapy will be paid by insurance companies, who will be hospitalized against their will, who may be declared by a court of law to be incompetent or too disturbed to have custody of their children, who will be allowed to grant or withhold permission to perform surgery on their bodies, and on and on. How are decisions made about who is normal? To a large extent scientific methods and evidence are disregarded as psychiatrists determine (i.e. invent) the categories of "mental illness" in the handbook of psychiatric disorders, The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). A committee of psychiatrists VOTE on what are and are not "mental disorders".
Children, Ritalin, & Attention Deficit Disorder - Ritalin is given to millions of children every year, with the amount growing. Psychiatry has convinced a majority of the public that up to 20% of our children are "mentally ill" and need these drugs to correct their "brain imbalances". Strangely, the behaviors the psychiatrists cite as evidence of the disease have been around as long as children have been getting into cookie jars and running out in front of cars. Ritalin is a Class II narcotic, with severe withdrawal symptoms and many undesirable side effects. Find out the truth about this "invented" disorder and the harms of drugging our children.
The CIA & Mind Control Experiments
Brain Damage - The brain-disabling principle applies to all of the most potent psychiatric interventions including neuroleptics, antidepressants, lithium, electroshock, and psychosurgery. The major psychiatric treatments exert their primary or intended effect by disabling normal brain function. None of the major psychiatric interventions correct or improve existing brain dysfunction, such as any presumed biochemical imbalance. If the patient happens to suffer from brain dysfunction, then the psychiatric drug, electroshock, or psychosurgery will worsen or compound it. Find out the whole story, especially before allowing yourself or a loved one to undergo any psychiatric "treatment".
Prozac - Various links to information about the dangers and harmful side effects of Prozac. Read how Prozac was slipped through the FDA and granted status as a legitimate and safe drug.
Anti-Depressants - Although it is often possible to help depressed people through caring, enthusiastic psychotherapy, religious counseling, and family support, biopsychiatrists typically reject psychological approaches and instead make extraordinary claims for the efficacy of drugs. The antidepressants represent a varied group of agents, and their effects on the brain and mind are little understood. They can cause severe withdrawal symptoms and can therefore become very difficult to stop taking. Side effects are numerous, including extreme anxiety and even suicide.
Tranquilizers - Among psychiatric medications for the treatment of anxiety, the most commonly used are the minor tranquilizers. In the 1970s the minor tranquilizer Valium (diazepam) topped the charts as the most widely prescribed drug in America, to be replaced by Xanax in 1986. Most of the minor tranquilizers belong to the group called benzodiazepines and are closely related chemically to Librium, Valium, and Xanax. They have nearly identical clinical effects. To divest the minor tranquilizers of their medical mystique we need only recall that alcohol was prescribed for generations by doctors as a sedative for anxious patients. All hypnotic-sedatives, including the minor tranquilizers, are habit-forming and addictive and can produce withdrawal symptoms when they are stopped. Memory and cognitive dysfunction are potential side effects. They are not the safe fix they are promoted to be.
Psychiatrists/psychologists who admit psychiatric disorders are not diseases
“Psychiatry makes unproven claims that depression, bipolar illness, anxiety, alcoholism and a host of other disorders are in fact primarily biologic and probably genetic in origin…This kind of faith in science and progress is staggering, not to mention naïve and perhaps delusional.”
— Dr. David Kaiser, psychiatrist
“In short, the whole business of creating psychiatric categories of ‘disease,’ formalizing them with consensus, and subsequently ascribing diagnostic codes to them, which in turn leads to their use for insurance billing, is nothing but an extended racket furnishing psychiatry a pseudo-scientific aura. The perpetrators are, of course, feeding at the public trough.”
— Dr. Thomas Dorman, internist and member of theRoyal College of Physicians of the UK
“I believe, until the public and psychiatry itself see that DSM labels are not only useless as medical ‘diagnoses’ but also have the potential to do great harm—particularly when they are used as means to deny individual freedoms, or as weapons by psychiatrists acting as hired guns for the legal system.”
— Dr. Sydney Walker III, psychiatrist
“The way things get into the DSM is not based on blood test or brain scan or physical findings. It’s based on descriptions of behavior. And that’s what the whole psychiatry system is.”
— Dr. Colin Ross, Psychiatrist
“There’s no biological imbalance. When people come to me and they say, ‘I have a biochemical imbalance,’ I say, ‘Show me your lab tests.’ There are no lab tests. So what’s the biochemical imbalance?”
— Dr. Ron Leifer, psychiatrist
“Unlike medical diagnoses that convey a probable cause, appropriate treatment and likely prognosis, the disorders listed in DSM-IV [and ICD-10] are terms arrived at through peer consensus.”
— Tana Dineen Ph.D., Canadian psychologist
“No biochemical, neurological, or genetic markers have been found for Attention Deficit Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, compulsive alcohol and drug abuse, overeating, gambling or any other so-called mental illness, disease, or disorder.”
— Bruce Levine, Ph.D., psychologist and author of Common sense Rebellion