Depression Medications - What is Scientology?

Author

What is Scientology? - From Operation Clambake

bobwhelan

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

The Church of Scientology is a vicious and dangerous cult that
masquerades as a religion. Its purpose is to make money. It practices
a variety of mind-control techniques on people lured into its midst to
gain control over their money and their lives. Its aim is to take from
them every penny that they have and can ever borrow and to also
enslave them to further its wicked ends.

It was started in the 1950s by a science fiction writer named L. Ron
Hubbard in fulfilment to his declared aim to start a religion to make
money. It is an offshoot to a method of psychotherapy he concocted
from various sources which he named "Dianetics". Dianetics is a form
of regression therapy. It was then further expanded to appear more
like a religion in order to enjoy tax benefits. He called it
"Scientology".

Scientology is a confused concoction of crackpot, dangerously applied
psychotherapy, oversimplified, idiotic and inapplicable rules and
ideas and science-fiction drivel that is presented to its members (at
the "advanced" levels) as profound spiritual truth.

The Harm it Does to a Person

The results of applying their crackpot psychotherapy (called
"auditing") is to weaken the mind. The mind goes from a rational state
to an irrational one as the delusional contents of the subconscious
mind are brought to the surface and are assumed to be valid. It also
makes a person more susceptible to suggestion since it submerges the
critical thinking faculties of the mind into a partial subconscious
state. It results in a permanent light hypnotic trance and so from
thenceforth that person can be more easily controlled. The person
will, to a much greater extent, believe and do whatever they are told.
And of course this is used to the full in persuading them to hand over
further money and dedicating themselves further to the cult.
The results of applying their oversimplified and inapplicable rules in
life is to lose the ability to think rationally and logically. A
person loses the ability to think for themselves and so they lose the
ability to challenge incorrect ideas. This makes them easier to
control. It also isolates and alienates the person from society so
that they withdraw from normal society and into their "Scientology"
society. This further increases their susceptibility to the influence
of their group. They end up being afraid of society, believing all
society to be controlled by a group of drug companies, psychiatrists
and financiers all of whom report to more remote masters. In other
words they are in a state of mass paranoia. They therefore avoid
reading newspapers and the like since they fear it will disturb their
safe Scientology world. It is a downward spiral into madness.

The science fiction content of Scientology is revealed to them after
they have reached the state they call "Clear", meaning freed from the
aberrations of the mind. However, perhaps "brainwashed" would be a
more applicable word to describe the mental state of someone who has
survived the near entire delusional contents of their subconscious
mind brought to the surface and presented to them as "truth". On the
"advanced" levels (called OT levels) above the state of "Clear" they
encounter the story of Xenu. Xenu was supposed to have gathered up all
the overpopulation in this sector of the galaxy, brought them to Earth
and then exterminated them using hydrogen bombs. The souls of these
murdered people are then supposed to infest the body of everyone. They
are called "body thetans". On the advanced levels of Scientology a
person "audits out" these body thetans telepathically by getting them
to re-experience their being exterminated by hydrogen bombs. So people
on these levels assume all their bad thoughts and faulty memories are
due to these body thetans infesting every part of their body and
influencing them mentally. Many Scientologists go raving mad at this
point if they have not done so already.

The "Ethics" Trap

On the surface the Church of Scientology seems reasonable. The insane
content of it is only revealed to a person when the early stuff has
done its work and made them more susceptible. After a short while a
person "believes" that Scientology is doing them good. They are then
persuaded to help their new-found group further by donating money
and/or working for the organisation for almost no money. Many people
do exactly that.

"Ethics" is used to good effect to trap a person. A person’s natural
tendency to do good is worked upon. Yes - they want to be more
ethical, but what is ethical? This is where a clever trick is pulled!
"Ethics" is redefined by Scientology in such a way that to be ethical
is to be a better Scientologist and obey the "church". Young people,
not yet made cynical through the machinations of life and politics,
are very keen to contribute to the world and to be ethical. So the
"ethics" trick works easily into persuading them to join the "church".
Many of them join an elite group called the "Sea Org" where they
become brainwashed slaves. There they work a hundred hour week for
almost no pay. There they are subject to every cruel whim of their
masters. It is a living hell that they endure because of the
conditioning they have received and this now perverted sense of ethics
that they have accepted. The "Sea Org" is the ultimate in brainwashed
slavery. They are expected to work harder and harder to achieve ever
higher targets of production. If they fail to meet their targets there
are various penalties. One of them is to be put onto a diet of beans
and rice and to miss sleep. Another is to be sentenced to a period on
the RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force). This is the equivalent to
"hard labour". Such is the extent of their brainwashing that they
actually write "success stories" when they complete their sentences.

Brainwashing Bites Back

There is no doubt at all that L. Ron Hubbard incorporated brainwashing
techniques into Scientology to put people under his control. He even
wrote a "brainwashing manual" which is still in existence today.
However there was a cruel twist in his scheme. He fell victim of it
himself. In creating his devoted slaves, the Sea Org, he created an
audience that believed every word he said. Now L. Ron Hubbard had an
over-active imagination plus delusions of grandeur. The negative
feedback he would obtain by being part of normal society was replaced
by the positive feedback from his devoted followers. Through this his
imagination got the better of him and combined with his delusions of
grandeur, his thinking became increasingly bizarre which, on
acceptance, led on to more bizarre thinking and the idea that he and
Scientology had the job of saving the entire universe He wanted to
take over the world in order to further Scientology’s aims to save the
universe and so branches of Scientology were set up to try to
influence governments and gain positions where they could influence to
world to a high degree. So what started out as a mass confidence trick
backed up with brainwashing became a monstrous and insane organisation
with fantastic, fanatical ideals. Because of this change, the Church
of Scientology survived the death of their founder. It is like a
runaway monster machine that tramples on society and peoples lives
that is very difficult to stop.

Stop the Monster

The whole machinery called the "Church of Scientology" needs to be
jammed somehow so that more people do not get sucked in and the people
already in it have a chance to get out. We must not forget the people
already in this "church". Although they are the ones perpetrating this
crime they are also the victims. They need our help as well.
And here we come to the "War on the Internet".

The War on the Internet

The "War on the Internet" is the war between the Church of Scientology
and Internet users who copy their documents and post them on the
Internet.

The people who are copying their material and webbing it are using the
huge accessibility of the world-wide web to get information out to
people to warn them of the insanity and danger of this cult. They are
doing it for the public good. The hope is that if they can get this
information out to the public and make it broadly known then people
will be forewarned and will not join the cult. If they can starve the
cult of new members in this way then the whole organisation may
collapse and then the existing members can be helped to return to
society. But of course the people within the cult believe only their
own founders interpretation of things so they use every means they can
to stop this. Usually the method they use is harassment through
lengthy and expensive legal processes. Sometimes it is physical
harassment. Sometimes worse!

The people who post and host the copyrighted and confidential works of
Scientology are risking themselves to help warn the public about the
dangers of Scientology. They have a strong sense of public duty and
care for their fellow men. They are breaking copyright laws it is true
but they are acting out of conscience and out of high human ideals. As
they get broken down by legal or physical harassment more rise to take
their place.

I hope this short piece of mine is a befitting and deserving
introduction to these people, the "Warriors of the Internet".

bobwhelan

"Studies have found that after 3 months of antidepressant
treatment between 50% and 65% of the people who take them
will be much improved. This compares
with 25 - 30% of people given an inactive "dummy" pill,
or placebo."

- The British Journal of Psychiatry

Tim

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

Bob,

What is your opinion of the drug companies who've been lying to you
for decades about the safety and efficacy of their products ?

How many children do the Scientologists kill each day ?

The drug companies kill 6 kids every day in North America just with
SSRI antidepressants.

Tim

jake

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

--

"Tim" <prozackills2002@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:49eaf026.0409131726.354e2d64@posting.google.com...
> Bob,
>
> What is your opinion of the drug companies who've been lying to you
> for decades about the safety and efficacy of their products ?
>
> How many children do the Scientologists kill each day ?
>
> The drug companies kill 6 kids every day in North America just with
> SSRI antidepressants.

these are simply a series of crude forgeries some drug company shill is
churning out...
largely unattributed outdated propaganda...could even be a bot..

>
>
> Tim

Major Zoloft

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

I know you didn't ask me, but I like the drug companies. I have a Boston
Scientific medicated stent that is state-of-the-art. I take Plavix for
the stent and Atenolol to reduce the work of the heart. When I had a
heart attack, I was given a drug (methylaze?) to disolve the clot and
prevent heart damage. A true miracle drug.

And thne there are the over-the-counter drugs that many people use daily
- aspirin and ibuphropen. Also wonder drugs in their own right.

Stop obsessing over the drug companies and direct your energy to having
patients take a greater role in understanding the efficacy of the drugs
they are prescribed.

Tim wrote:
> Bob,
>
> What is your opinion of the drug companies who've been lying to you
> for decades about the safety and efficacy of their products ?
>
> How many children do the Scientologists kill each day ?
>
> The drug companies kill 6 kids every day in North America just with
> SSRI antidepressants.
>
>
> Tim

none

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

jake wrote:

>
> these are simply a series of crude forgeries some drug company shill

So you must be a scientologist then.

>is churning out...
> largely unattributed outdated propaganda

Unattributed? I read a few of bob whelan's posts, most had a
byline/source of some sort and for those that didn't I found every one
within seconds using www.google.com.

Outdated? All of the posts I read and 'sourced' were dated within the
last five years.

A little more accuracy in your statements will lead to greater
credibility.

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:4146f703$0$28055$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
> jake wrote:
>
>
[vbcol=seagreen]
> So you must be a scientologist then.

your logical skills seem to match your pseudonym perfectly..

>
>
>
> Unattributed?
you have some difficulty with the word?

no cites references or dates of publication

> I read a few of bob whelan's posts,

you have been reading crude forgeries

>most had a
> byline/source of some sort

a new development after this liar and fraud being called on it..

>and for those that didn't I found every one
> within seconds using www.google.com.

> Outdated? All of the posts I read and 'sourced'

LOL..

convention dictates the source is cited..
the reader doest have to "SOURCE" anything..

> were dated within the
> last five years.

try switching your TV set on and watching tonights news !

or glance at the tonights headlines..after all this IS a NEWSGROUP..

http://news.google.com/?hl=en&ncl=h...ocks/biotech/10
182921.html

Prozac is linked to child suicide in US
Independent, UK - 1 hour ago
By Jeremy Laurance and David Usborne in New York. The Government came under
pressure yesterday to ban the use of the antidepressant ...

Antidepressants Need Stronger Warnings -Panel
Reuters - 1 hour ago
By Lisa Richwine. BETHESDA, Md. (Reuters) - Antidepressants such as Paxil
and Prozac should come with strong warnings that they raise ...

FDA Panels Call for Stricter Antidepressant Warnings
TheStreet.com, NY - 2 hours ago
A pair of federal advisory committees recommended Tuesday that drug
companies apply stricter warnings to a host of popular antidepressants to
alert doctors and ...

Panel Urges Strong Warning on Antidepressants for Children
New York Times, NY - 2 hours ago
By GARDINER HARRIS. ETHESDA, Md., Sept. 13 - An expert panel advising the
Food and Drug Administration recommended today that antidepressants ...

Antidepressants linked to suicidal thoughts in kids
Straits Times, Singapore - 3 hours ago
BETHESDA (Maryland) - Top Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials have
said publicly - for the first time - that scientific trials of frequently
....

FDA Weighs Stronger Warning on Antidepressants
NPR (audio) - 3 hours ago
Description: Scientific advisers to the Food and Drug Administration meeting
in Washington, DC agree that there is a link between antidepressants and an
....

Antidepressants Need Stronger Warnings -- Panel
Reuters, UK - 3 hours ago
By Lisa Richwine. BETHESDA, Md. (Reuters) - Antidepressant medications,
including such best-selling drugs as Prozac and Paxil, should ...

FDA orders stronger warning labels on child antidepressants
USA Today - 4 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) - Antidepressants should come with the nation's strongest
warning - in a black box on the label - that they can sometimes spur
suicidal ...

Antidepressants Need `Black Box' Warnings, Panel Says (Update1)
Bloomberg - 3 hours ago
Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Antidepressants should carry a ``black box'' warning
that the drugs may increase the risk of suicidal behavior ...

Child Antidepressants Must Have Warnings
ABC News, United States - 4 hours ago
WASHINGTON Sept. 14, 2004 - Antidepressants should come with the nation's
strongest warning in a black box on the label that they ...

Panel Urges Stronger Antidepressant Warnings
Reuters - 4 hours ago
BETHESDA, Md. (Reuters) - A US advisory panel urged regulators on Tuesday to
require a "black box" warning on antidepressant labels ...

FDA advisers recommend warning labels on antidepressants used for ...
Minneapolis Star Tribune (subscription), MN - 4 hours ago
WASHINGTON -- Antidepressants should come with the nation's strongest
warning - in a black box on the label - that they can sometimes spur
suicidal behavior in ...

Antidepressants Raise Suicidal Behavior Risk in Teens (Update2)
Bloomberg - 5 hours ago
Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Antidepressants may increase the risk of suicidal
behavior in children, and manufacturers including Pfizer ...

Experts Link Some Antidepressants to Suicide
Reuters, UK - 5 hours ago
By Lisa Richwine. BETHESDA, Md. (Reuters) - Use of antidepressants appears
linked to a higher risk of suicidal behavior in some children ...

FDA Panel Urges Suicidal Behavior Warnings on Antidepressants
Bloomberg - 5 hours ago
Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Makers of antidepressants including Pfizer Inc.,
Wyeth and GlaxoSmithKline Plc should be required to put ...

FDA Eyes Rules on Child Anti-Depressants
ABC News, United States - 5 hours ago
WASHINGTON Sept. 14, 2004 - Antidepressants seem to spur suicidal behavior
in some children and teenagers, government advisers ...

Antidepressants Raise Risk of Suicidal Behavior, FDA Panel Says
Bloomberg - 7 hours ago
Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Antidepressants may increase the risk in children
and teenagers of self-destructive behavior, ranging from ...

Health advisers weigh emotion, science in antidepressant inquiry
Atlanta Journal Constitution (subscription), GA - 7 hours ago
By DIEDTRA HENDERSON. WASHINGTON - Federal health advisers overwhelmingly
agreed Tuesday that there is evidence linking antidepressants ...

Antidepressants Raise Suicidal Behavior Risk in Teens (Update1)
Bloomberg - 7 hours ago
Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Antidepressants such as Effexor, Zoloft and Paxil
may increase the risk in children and teenagers of self ...

FDA could seek more warnings on 9 antidepressants
CBS MarketWatch - 7 hours ago
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- The Food and Drug Administration indicated Tuesday
that it may want new labels on some antidepressants prescribed to children
and ...

Prozac raises child suicide risk
BBC News, UK - 8 hours ago
Children who take the anti-depressant Prozac are at greater risk of
attempting suicide, say US experts. The drug is currently the ...

Feds Warn on Children and Antidepressants
ABC News, United States - 8 hours ago
WASHINGTON Sept. 14, 2004 - Federal health advisers considering more
stringent warning labels for anti-depressants linked to suicidal ...

Feds warn on children and antidepressants
MLive.com, MI - 10 hours ago
By DIEDTRA HENDERSON. WASHINGTON (AP) - Federal health advisers considering
more stringent warning labels for antidpressants linked ...

Prozac Children Greater Suicide Risk, Say US Regulators
The Scotsman, UK - 11 hours ago
By Mark Sage, PA News, in New York. Children who take Prozac are at a
greater risk of attempting suicide, regulators in the United States claim.
....

Antidepressant-teen suicide link acknowledged
International Herald Tribune, France - 11 hours ago
BETHESDA, Maryland Top officials of the Food and Drug Administration have
acknowledged for the first time that antidepressants appeared to lead some
children ...

FDA: Suicidal thoughts in some kids caused by drugs
Chicago Tribune (subscription), IL - 15 hours ago
WASHINGTON, DC -- Two to 3 percent of children treated with anti-depressants
had suicidal thoughts or behavior as a result of the drugs, officials said
Monday ...

Suicide link to meds seen in children
San Francisco Chronicle, CA - 15 hours ago
Washington -- Two to 3 percent of children treated with antidepressants had
suicidal thoughts or behavior as a result of the drugs, officials said
Monday based ...

FDA hears 2 sides of kid drug-use debate
Detroit Free Press, MI - 16 hours ago
BY DIEDTRA HENDERSON. WASHINGTON -- Tom Woodward's 17-year-old daughter
Julie committed suicide by hanging herself. He blamed the ...

Hearing on warning labels
Newsday, NY - 16 hours ago
WASHINGTON - Federal advisers considered yesterday whether strong warning
labels were needed on antidepressants because they have been linked to
suicidal ...

Hearing told of link to antidepressants
Baltimore Sun (subscription), United States - 18 hours ago
WASHINGTON - A Food and Drug Administration epidemiologist who triggered a
closer look at suicidal behavior among children taking antidepressants cited
....

> A little more accuracy in your statements will lead to greater
> credibility.

I feel little need for credibility in the eyes of apologists for liars ..net
abusers and forgers

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:4146f703$0$28055$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
>
>
> your logical skills seem to match your pseudonym perfectly..

Of course the logic was faulty......it was based on yours. That was the
point you dullard. ;-))

> you have some difficulty with the word?
>
> no cites references or dates of publication
>
>
> you have been reading crude forgeries

>
> a new development after this liar and fraud being called on it..

Now this IS funny. You a believer of scientologist and anti-scientific
approaches to meds, now
expound on the need for 'attribution', BUT your attribution is
selective and limited to Reuters/AP articles rather than the mountains
of studies supporting the efficacy of ADs. Are you impaired, stupid or
a hypocrite?

See the two lines following for a refresher on finding references and
dates on usenet.

>
>
> LOL..
>
> convention dictates the source is cited..
> the reader doest have to "SOURCE" anything..

"..after all this IS a NEWSGROUP" not a peer reviewed journal. This
IS a NEWSGROUP, googling is second nature to most newsgroup readers. As
usual you're either stupid, knew that and are being slimy or you're
impaired. That you troll a depression/med group suggests all of these.

>

<snip>

In other words articles and medical research not on Rueters/AP and
printed within several weeks are invalid. Using your logic [I feel the
need to point this out since you can't follow] cancer studies not
recently on Reuters are invalid. Studies of alchoholism not done
within the last few weeks are invalid. Studies on heart ailments not
found online and within the last few months are invalid. And so on...

Imagine a 'forger' with more credibility than you, your bitterness is
understandable! ;-)
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I feel little need for credibility in the eyes of apologists for
> liars ..net abusers and forgers

That you lack credibility in general has already been noticed by most,
however your own admission is welcome nonetheless and extended to
nearly everything you post.

What really gets you is that bob whelan's posts are the most on-topic
and
helpful articles in this newsgroup! ;-))

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2qr75uF11v63iU1@uni-berlin.de...

>. You a believer of scientologist and anti-scientific
> approaches to meds,

yawn...
pathetic stale slurs without a shred of evidence to support them cut little
ice..

now
> expound on the need for 'attribution', BUT your attribution is
> selective and limited to Reuters/AP articles rather than the mountains
> of studies supporting the efficacy of ADs. Are you impaired, stupid or
> a hypocrite?

is there something about the nature of news you fail to comprehend?
never mind ..the rest of the world is watching and discussing it..

> What really gets you is that bob whelan's posts are the most on-topic
> and
> helpful articles in this newsgroup! ;-))

lol...what a clueless clown you are..

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2qr75uF11v63iU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> yawn...
> pathetic stale slurs without a shred of evidence to support them cut
> little ice..

You have difficulty understanding so I'll clarify: I didn't accuse you
of being a scientologist but of sharing scientology's approach and
rejecting scientific studies. The facts are your post's in asdm.

Of course facts don't cut ice with a old thick-skulled loon like
yourself, but they certainly assist other readers to see through you.

> now
>
> is there something about the nature of news you fail to comprehend?
> never mind ..the rest of the world is watching and discussing it..

You don't concentrate well dullard. You belched out garabage about
out-dated posts by 'bob whelan'. I explained their relevance and you
answered with Reuters/AP articles on *one* issue. You can't comprehend
they don't detract from the relevance of bobwhelan's posts.

So the NG readers can choose that you're either a sleazeball or not
very intelligent. As an added bonus, it's apparent you didn't read
those articles without selective thinking, if you even read all of
them. They boil down to the FDA labelling of SSRIs for children,
telling doctor's to do their job and not prescribing meds without
strict supervision.

You've seem to have cognitive 'difficulties' jake/bobw. Geriatric meds
influencing your mental faculties?

>
> lol...what a clueless clown you are..

Spewed from the colostomy bag of jake the slow-witted newsgroup troll
and scientology sympathizer.

At least the 'forging' bob whelan is on topic and helpful you
evil-senile-old-liver-spotted lump.

John Smith

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

none wrote:
> jake wrote:
<snippage>
>
>
> Spewed from the colostomy bag of jake the slow-witted newsgroup troll.....

> ......................you
> evil-senile-old-liver-spotted lump.

ROTFLMAO!!!!

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2qu57jF13g2dqU1@uni-berlin.de...
> jake wrote:
>
[vbcol=seagreen]
> You have difficulty understanding so I'll clarify: I didn't accuse you
> of being a scientologist but of sharing scientology's approach and
> rejecting scientific studies.

yawn...
pathetic stale slurs without a shred of evidence to support them cut
little ice..

>The facts are your post's in asdm.....

if you had any concern with facts the tirades of personal abuse would be
unneccessary..
now wouldnt they?

<personal abuse clipped>

oh well...nothing left

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

>
>
> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2qu57jF13g2dqU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> yawn...
> pathetic stale slurs without a shred of evidence to support them cut
> little ice..

Are you this stupid or are you just a sleazy liar? Your history of
posts to this newsgroup share scientology's viewpoint and reject
volumes of clinical research except in those rare cases they agree with
you. Anyone can prove this by using www.google.com .

>
> if you had any concern with facts the tirades of personal abuse would
> be unneccessary..
> now wouldnt they?

Hypocrite. You started the name calling after it was pointed out that
if you stuck to your statement about 'shills' your own logic dictated
you were a scientologist. It stuck too close to home apparently.

Since you've shown yourself to be intellectually and morally bankrupt
you adopt this line of argument. What a slippery old evil snake you are.

> <personal abuse clipped>
>
> oh well...nothing left

Of your argument? No, there isn't.

Tim

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2r09orFoi4auU1@uni-berlin.de...
> jake wrote:
>
>
> Are you this stupid or are you just a sleazy liar? Your history of
> posts to this newsgroup share scientology's viewpoint and reject
> volumes of clinical research

<this space reserved for evidence>

>except in those rare cases they agree with
> you. Anyone can prove this by using www.google.com .

PPOSTFU

--
'All policymakers must be vigilant to the possibility of research data being
manipulated
by corporate bodies and of scientific colleagues being seduced by the
material charms of
industry.
Trust is no defence against an aggressively deceptive corporate sector.'

Editorial (2000). Resisting smoke and spin. Lancet 355, 1197.

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

..
"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2r3booF14ro0jU1@uni-berlin.de...
> jake wrote:
>
> "jake" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in news:cifvfl$bn8$0@pita.alt.net:
>
>
> The sickly roar of the cornered rat!

You may not LIKE the fact that SSRIs have been found to be as problematic as
critics have long suggested...
but your hysterical tirades and personal abuse does nothing to alter the
facts

thank you for reproducing them
>
> Dig through for jakes anti-med posts:
> <http://makeashorterlink.com/?S4EF21F49>
--
'All policymakers must be vigilant to the possibility of research data being
manipulated
by corporate bodies and of scientific colleagues being seduced by the
material charms of
industry.
Trust is no defence against an aggressively deceptive corporate sector.'

Editorial (2000). Resisting smoke and spin. Lancet 355, 1197

nomdeplume1000@yah00.com

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:12:13 -0700, in alt.support.depression.medication "jake"
<invalid@invalid.com> wrote:

>You may not LIKE the fact that SSRIs have been found to be as problematic as
>critics have long suggested...
> but your hysterical tirades and personal abuse does nothing to alter the
>facts
>
>thank you for reproducing them
>--
>'All policymakers must be vigilant to the possibility of research data being
>manipulated
>by corporate bodies and of scientific colleagues being seduced by the
>material charms of
>industry.
>Trust is no defence against an aggressively deceptive corporate sector.'
>
>Editorial (2000). Resisting smoke and spin. Lancet 355, 1197
>

I see you are still at it.

--
Nom dePlume, Ph.D

Why, yes, in fact, I am a rocket scientist.

Guide to Medications for Mental Illness:
http://www.geocities.com/nomdeplume1000
=====

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

"jake" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in news:cifvfl$bn8$0@pita.alt.net:

> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2r09orFoi4auU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> <this space reserved for evidence>

The sickly roar of the cornered rat!

Dig through for jakes anti-med posts:
<http://makeashorterlink.com/?S4EF21F49>

Future jake-isms:

<this space reserved for evidence that the holocaust happened>
<this space reserved for evidence the earth is round>
<this space reserved for evidence man landed on the moon>

Thank you for admitting you have no integrity and can't even stand
behind your own agenda. There's nothing worse than an elderly
hypocrite. But it is classic jake.

What's the matter getting old? Can't sleep? Can't remember the
anti-med articles you've posted here on asmd just in the last two
weeks? Alzheimer's taking its toll already? Can't remember if you're
pro or anti med now after posting several articles opposed to meds just
recently?

>
You deleted the following jake:

would[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
that[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
bankrupt[vbcol=seagreen]

No answer jake? You name called I returned it and then some. Your
hypocrisy is exposed, you move on and try to dodge. A metaphor for your
life?
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> PPOSTFU

The mighty whelp of the cornered rat!

Now you're trying to distance yourself from your own posts.
Schizophrenic? Early Alzheimer's? Truth challenged?

Dig through for more of jake's anti-med agenda:
<<http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26332059>>

Thank you for admitting you have no integrity and can't stand behind
your own agenda. There's nothing worse than an elderly hypocrite. But
it is classic jake.

jake, too punch drunk to figure out where he stands on anything when
exposed. So now you resort to calling in trolls to abuse the group.
You're a nutcase who preys on the mentally ill.

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

>
>
> .
> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2r3booF14ro0jU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> You may not LIKE the fact that SSRIs have been found to be as
> problematic as critics have long suggested...
> but your hysterical tirades and personal abuse does nothing to alter
> the facts
>
> thank you for reproducing them

Finally an admission to being anti-med! Bugles and drums sound off! My,
my what a duplicitous little shit you are. Before the posts were shown
you lied and now you completely ignore your previous stance!

Oh come now sleazy jake. You've trolled this group for years preying on
the mentally ill using the same tactics. Subverting supportive advice,
showing fake concern, having others do your trolling for you and
backing off in a faux you're-using-personal-abuse" when exposed. You
need new tactics.

Your implicit acknowledgement of your own lack of integrity and
hypocrisy is noted.

Now you're accusing me of being several others? Manufacturing evidence?
Thank you for confirming the already accepted fact you're a psychopath!

nomdeplume1000@yah00.com

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

On 18 Sep 2004 18:06:16 GMT, in alt.support.depression.medication "none"
<me@privacy.org> wrote:

>Path: imp.nntpserver.com!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!chi1.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!peer02.cox.net!cox.net!prodigy.com!nntp.flash.net!newspeer.monmouth.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail

>From: "none" <me@privacy.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.support.depression.medication
>Subject: Re: What is Scientology? - From Operation Clambake
>Date: 18 Sep 2004 18:06:16 GMT
>Lines: 101
>Message-ID: <2r3booF14ro0jU1@uni-berlin.de>
>References: <kogbk0hrhb726jn8jhgdsfa15tq4j0il3f@4ax.com> <49eaf026.0409131726.354e2d64@posting.google.com> <ci5id4$j77$0@pita.alt.net> <4146f703$0$28055$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com> <ci877b$r52$0@pita.alt.net> <2qr75uF11v63iU1@uni-berlin.de> <ciau3m$g4
7$0@pita.alt.net> <2qu57jF13g2dqU1@uni-berlin.de> <cidikg$771$0@pita.alt.net> <2r09orFoi4auU1@uni-berlin.de> <cifvfl$bn8$0@pita.alt.net>
>X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de Vy9oBxx48WzuGL1uOZISFwCfiYFa9QY5b08FgF7LE9/+Ei8V+X
>User-Agent: XanaNews/1.16.4.6
>Xref: newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com alt.support.depression.medication:160795

Another anon coward.

nomdeplume1000@yah00.com

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

On 19 Sep 2004 15:26:11 GMT, in alt.support.depression.medication "none"
<me@privacy.org> wrote:

>
>Now you're accusing me of being several others? Manufacturing evidence?

You've been caught with your pants down... Your desperation is showing.

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

nomdeplume1000@yah00.com wrote:

> On 19 Sep 2004 15:26:11 GMT, in alt.support.depression.medication
> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> You've been caught with your pants down... Your desperation is
> showing.

The psychopath's handmaidens speaks. You're stupid and clueless as
usual. Careful your master's paranoia's rubbing off on you.

Good monkey.

Have a peanut!

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2r60n6F15pq9nU1@uni-berlin.de...

..>You're stupid and clueless as
> usual

that would be you...

User-Agent: XanaNews/1.16.4.6

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

>
>
>
> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2r60n6F15pq9nU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> .>You're stupid and clueless as
>
> that would be you...
>
> User-Agent: XanaNews/1.16.4.6

You mean you're posts using free accounts and that (very nice) free
newsreader by "the fake jake". The ones that you answered immediately.

You XXXXed up though. You posted the supposed forgeries and immediately
began posting to refute it. Pity you're an idiot, you might have gotten
it right if you weren't so impulsively stupid waited a bit.

Classic jake.

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2r61l0F15pq9nU3@uni-berlin.de...
> jake wrote:
>
>
> You mean you're posts using free accounts and that (very nice) free
> newsreader by "the fake jake". The ones that you answered immediately.
>
> You XXXXed up though. You posted the supposed forgeries and immediately
> began posting to refute it. Pity you're an idiot, you might have gotten
> it right if you weren't so impulsively stupid waited a bit.

blah...blah...blah..

What is Occam's Razor?
Occam's (or Ockham's) razor is a principle attributed to the 14th century
logician and Franciscan friar; William of Occam. Ockham was the village in
the English county of Surrey where he was born.

The principle states that "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily."
Sometimes it is quoted in one of its original Latin forms to give it an air
of authenticity.

"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate"
"Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora"
"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem"

In fact, only the first two of these forms appear in his surviving works and
the third was written by a later scholar. William used the principle to
justify many conclusions including the statement that "God's existence
cannot be deduced by reason alone." That one didn't make him very popular
with the Pope.

Many scientists have adopted or reinvented Occam's Razor as in Leibniz'
"identity of observables" and Isaac Newton stated the rule: "We are to admit
no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient
to explain their appearances."

The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is,

"when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same
predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2r61l0F15pq9nU3@uni-berlin.de...
>
> blah...blah...blah..
>
>
>
>
> What is Occam's Razor?

William didn't factor jake into his equation. A lot of work on your
part considering I'm anon anyway and wouldn't otherwise care. It does
work well as another example of your sleazy duplicity.

nomedeplume1001@yah00.com

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

On 19 Sep 2004 18:41:46 GMT, in alt.support.depression.medication "none"
<me@privacy.org> wrote:

>jake wrote:
>
>
>William didn't factor jake into his equation. A lot of work on your
>part considering I'm anon anyway and wouldn't otherwise care. It does
>work well as another example of your sleazy duplicity.

Wow big words.

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2r627aF15pq9nU5@uni-berlin.de...
> jake wrote:
>
>
> William didn't factor jake into his equation. A lot of work on your
> part considering I'm anon anyway and wouldn't otherwise care

ah ...but you do dont you..?

the knee-jerk defence of sock puppets undoes many an anon..

nomedeplume1001@yah00.com

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:55:41 -0700, in alt.support.depression.medication "jake"
<invalid@invalid.com> wrote:

>
>ah ...but you do dont you..?
>
>the knee-jerk defence of sock puppets undoes many an anon..
>

LOL!

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2r627aF15pq9nU5@uni-berlin.de...
>
> ah ...but you do dont you..?
>

You can't grasp the obvious as usual. Your forging your own name to
make a point just proves much of what we've seen of your tactics.
Highlighting it supports my and several others view of you.

jake

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Editorial (2000). Resisting smoke and spin. Lancet 355, 1197.
"none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
news:2r63feF176cekU1@uni-berlin.de...
> jake wrote:
>
>
> You can't grasp the obvious as usual. Your forging your own name to
> make a point just proves much of what we've seen of your tactics.
> Highlighting it supports my and several others view of you.

you scientology obsessives will say anything but your prayers..

none

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

jake wrote:

> Editorial (2000). Resisting smoke and spin. Lancet 355, 1197.
> "none" <me@privacy.org> wrote in message
> news:2r63feF176cekU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> you scientology obsessives will say anything but your prayers..

Thank you for confirming you can't understand anything you read.

nomedeplume1001@yah00.com

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

On 19 Sep 2004 19:20:13 GMT, in alt.support.depression.medication "none"
<me@privacy.org> wrote:

>
>Thank you for confirming you can't understand anything you read.

Suck my big black cock!!

--
Nom dePlume, Ph.D

Why, yes, in fact, I am a rocket scientist.

Guide to Medications for Mental Illness:
http://www.geocities.com/nomdeplume1001
=====