Medical Mafia Tactics Explained - Delusional Ideas

[simmo34]

It could be said that there's a fine line between a conspiracist and a delusional person.
I'm not personally commenting on this particular element, but I have come across scorn from certain commenters (even on these forums)- who disbelieve others' views that some people in society are reptilians and hence act in suspicious ways.
That could be described therefore as either 'delusional' (bad), or as a 'conspiracist' fantasy (laughed off).
Let's put it in this context: If the person who believes there are reptilian operatives plotting bad things in society said that to a psychiatrist, in all probability that psychiatrist would form the opinion that the person in front of him is unwell and deluded. He would then in all probability feel he is required and has the power to lock this person up and subject him to chemical treatments in order to make this person 'well' and ensure this person before him changes his beliefs, views and opinions.
Having conducted quite a bit of research into the whole subject I have arrived at the following.
Please feel free to comment on these findings in the thread - I like a good argument - I mean debate!

Psychiatrists lock people up in mental institutions if they believe the person brought before them has delusional thoughts, and they go on to diagnose them with schizophrenic or related diagnosis'. However, there comes a time when the person (patient) becomes well and is returned to society to live as normal. 'But' the doctors (psychiatrists) keep these people on tablets. My question is - Why do the doctors keep a perfectly well person on tablets?

Having looked into this issue it is clear that doctors per se say there is no scale from 1 to 10 (say 10 being the worst), of how ill a person is or isn't, and that it's not a science and subject to logical laws and not measureable. They admit that measurement and conclusion of a person's beliefs is highly subjective.
It therefore goes to say that 'Subjectivity' could be based on factors of whether a person likes how a person sounds when they speak; or likes what another person looks like or what they are wearing; or even if they are the same religion, race or sex. That demonstrates the dangers of the system.

It could be said you are either ill or simply you are not ill- just like you either have a migrane or you don't; or if you have a stomach ulcer or it clears up and goes away and you are better. How can there be an inbetween with mental health? What makes the mental health system want it both (or all) ways to suit them? Does it come down to money?

Doctors are trained to not commit to saying whether what they 'perceive' as mental illness
is either treatable or untreatable when they put a patient on medication.

It is a belief with empowered patients (ie. patients that stand up to these doctors' beliefs) that if a patient is on tablets, and an illness is specified as treatable, then there should be an estimated but inevitable time when a patient comes off tablet treatments and is 'treated'. Conversely, if a patients' condition is regarded as untreatable, then there is nothing a doctor can do to treat that patient with medication and should therefore not be on tablets.

What happens is, doctors keep this a grey and unanswered area and leave the patients with uncertainty over whether they will come off medication once they have been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder- and as stated do not tell the patient if they believe their perceived illness is treatable or untreatable.

I personally feel this finding is shocking and shows the tyrannical rule these doctors have over people's lives. What it means is that the doctors keep control of these people and can recall the patients back to hospitals if the doctors do not agree with any issues that their patients might do or say- disrupting those people's lives and making them fight to get out by tribunals and mental health hearings.

The reason why doctors keep well people on tablets defies logic but can be explained perhaps by more sinister motives. Also from what I have been able to deduce from the research is that the answer to the question of why doctors keep people on tablets is that the doctors themselves have delusional ideas that a person will relapse, unless they keep taking the tablet treatments.
If that isn't paranoid brainwashing and scaremongering then I don't know what is!
To add to this, it has been found that if a patient does not go along with the medical plan of remaining on tablet treatments when well, then they are not released and are kept locked up longer and told that they lack insight.

Psychiatrists also believe (or have conveniently made up) -to back up their arguments and justify their controversial actions- that the brain does not conform to every other law of recovery as per all other organs and components of the human body. Remember also that 'a belief' for example- which has been proven enough to lock a person away in a mental institution- does not amount to a physical injury.
So how do psychiatrists manage to deceive and lie over that issue?

As said, I would be interested to know what others think in relation to this subject of what appears to be over powerful Nazi-like doctor rule.

[winegums]

Originally Posted by simmo34

Let's put it in this context: If the person who believes there are reptilian operatives plotting bad things in society said that to a psychiatrist, in all probability that psychiatrist would form the opinion that the person in front of him is unwell and deluded. He would then in all probability feel he is required and has the power to lock this person up and subject him to chemical treatments in order to make this person 'well' and ensure this person before him changes his beliefs, views and opinions.Ouch, dropped at the first hurdle. No good psychiatrist would lock someone up for holding such views. Sectioning is only done in very well-defined scenarios, which do not include the above. The fact that david icke walks free surely shows that this isn't the case.Psychiatrists lock people up in mental institutions if they believe the person brought before them has delusional thoughts, and they go on to diagnose them with schizophrenic or related diagnosis'. As I said, no. Delusion is delusion. A person is only diagnosed as schizophrenic if they display the symptoms of this. Furthermore, people are only admitted to mental institutions in severe enough cases. However, there comes a time when the person (patient) becomes well and is returned to society to live as normal. 'But' the doctors (psychiatrists) keep these people on tablets. My question is - Why do the doctors keep a perfectly well person on tablets?
You're effectively asking "why are sick people kept on medication?", which is an incredibly broad question with no fixed answer. It's like saying "why are people sad?"
Having looked into this issue it is clear that doctors per se say there is no scale from 1 to 10 (say 10 being the worst), of how ill a person is or isn't, and that it's not a science and subject to logical laws and not measureable. They admit that measurement and conclusion of a person's beliefs is highly subjective.
There are various scales in medicine to measure different things. Pain, muscle control, etc. Why would you want to define 'illness' in a 1-10 scale?
It therefore goes to say that 'Subjectivity' could be based on factors of whether a person likes how a person sounds when they speak; or likes what another person looks like or what they are wearing; or even if they are the same religion, race or sex. That demonstrates the dangers of the system.
Absolutely ridiculous. Factors like aperance do give clues to a patient's state - level of nourishment may suggest certain diagnoses, and if the person is well kept/groomed it implies they're able to look after themselves, but to suggest doctors are going to diagnose a condition based on religion, race or sex is quite far-fetched.
It could be said you are either ill or simply you are not ill- just like you either have a migrane or you don't; or if you have a stomach ulcer or it clears up and goes away and you are better. How can there be an inbetween with mental health? What makes the mental health system want it both (or all) ways to suit them? Does it come down to money?
Well, it's not binary in a lot of cases. I'm sure you know ourself when you've had a cold you don't just go from fine, to having a cold, then back to fine. It eases on, and eases off. The same is true for many illnesses.
Doctors are trained to not commit to saying whether what they 'perceive' as mental illness is either treatable or untreatable when they put a patient on medication.Not too sure where you heard this. It wouldn't surprise me if doctors were hesitant to make claims about a mental illness' progression or treatability, since people respond variably to treatments anyway.

It is a belief with empowered patients (ie. patients that stand up to these doctors' beliefs) that if a patient is on tablets, and an illness is specified as treatable, then there should be an estimated but inevitable time when a patient comes off tablet treatments and is 'treated'. Conversely, if a patients' condition is regarded as untreatable, then there is nothing a doctor can do to treat that patient with medication and should therefore not be on tablets.

What happens is, doctors keep this a grey and unanswered area and leave the patients with uncertainty over whether they will come off medication once they have been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder- and as stated do not tell the patient if they believe their perceived illness is treatable or untreatable.
Again, this seems like a stark generalisation of a complex issue. Depending on condition, severity, and patient it may be more or less appropriate to have a patient stay on medication.

I personally feel this finding is shocking and shows the tyrannical rule these doctors have over people's lives. What it means is that the doctors keep control of these people and can recall the patients back to hospitals if the doctors do not agree with any issues that their patients might do or say- disrupting those people's lives and making them fight to get out by tribunals and mental health hearings.You say 'tyranical rule' but we're talking about a group of people who frequently aren't in control of their own lives. If someone's severely depressive and stops taking their medication, should the doctor shrug his shoulders and say 'not my problem'? I appreciate that there's a bit of difficulty in consolidating patient freedom with patient (and public) protection, in the area of mental health, but I think you're way off the mark here.

The reason why doctors keep well people on tablets defies logic but can be explained perhaps by more sinister motives. Also from what I have been able to deduce from the research is that the answer to the question of why doctors keep people on tablets is that the doctors themselves have delusional ideas that a person will relapse, unless they keep taking the tablet treatments.Delusional belief, or perhaps medical evidence, or perhaps doing it because they don't really have any other recourse. Again, very broad language for a very broad area
If that isn't paranoid brainwashing and scaremongering then I don't know what is!
To add to this, it has been found that if a patient does not go along with the medical plan of remaining on tablet treatments when well, then they are not released and are kept locked up longer and told that they lack insight.Broad language. any patient, any treatment? If someone previously believed children are all mutant aliens, and he planned on killing them all, but has been on medication and is now less...insane, but doesn't want to take treatment, should we release him?
Psychiatrists also believe (or have conveniently made up) -to back up their arguments and justify their controversial actions- that the brain does not conform to every other law of recovery as per all other organs and components of the human body. a fact that's pretty well backed up. e.g. spinal cord injuries. Remember also that 'a belief' for example- which has been proven enough to lock a person away in a mental institution- does not amount to a physical injury.
So how do psychiatrists manage to deceive and lie over that issue?

As said, I would be interested to know what others think in relation to this subject of what appears to be over powerful Nazi-like doctor rule.

.

[simmo34]

You say 'spinal cord injury' as some kind of analogy?- a 'physical' injury. Very poor!
Listen, I said 'a belief'- is not a physical injury of the brain. I said 'a migraine' as an analogy to brain recovery to conditions of the brain. Therefore, no more migraine or in the analogy 'perceived delusional belief'-then therefore no more tablets required.
You also want to call a person who is perfectly well and had a past 'perceived' deluded belief, as still sick, so you therefore say that that person should stay on tablet treatments. I suggest that that is being done for no good reason, and is a waste of time, money and resources. I previously said that my research shows that people who are deemed well and released from psychiatric units are kept on medication because of a deluded belief of the psychiatrists of some perceived and unknown relapse they think will happen if that patient does not keep being drugged up. Every individual is different and responds to conditions in different ways, you said so yourself, so where is the justification?
What shouldn't be forgotten is that this is not a joke or something to be taken lightly. All drugs have side effects and some have more nasty side effects than others. These doctors therefore are essentially (with that knowledge) deliberately adversely affecting or even in the worst case-incapacitating people they control, because they can use their excuses of perceived danger of that person to his/herself or to others (based on their scaremongering techniques), which as you seem to be implying is individual to the patient but is in fact used as an excuse for doctors to abuse, pidgeon hole and broadly and indiscriminately generalize, and then go on to have it accepted by law and in society.
What you seem to be conveniently forgetting here, is that chosen T.I's are deliberately targeted-in many cases for no apparent or justifiable reason at all (other than their face doesn't fit). The amount of T.I.'s who report that they can't work out why they have been targeted. They can't all have done something wrong, so to quote David Icke is lame. Perps would be silly to now go and try to pull stunts (they can get away with on the average person) on him- a famous person. Besides he is too knowledgeable about this subject for them to have any impact.
T.I.'s are essentially deliberately wound up and tortured for a bad end result for that person. The T.I.'s have symptoms 'induced upon them'. The gang stalking communities want T.I's to report what could be regarded as weird goings on or beliefs to their family, friends or doctors. That then creates the problems for that T.I. they are looking for. Psychiatrists wait gladly for referrals. At the end of the day everything boils down to money, budgets and patients are just units of income generation for them.
The psychiatrists go back to their lavish mansions after their day of work, and live their lives of luxury, enjoying all the benefits in society that a person in that position commands.
You have conveniently used worst case scenarios (just like a scaremongering doctor) to try to back up your flawed response, ie. the 'mutant alien' one, and you then go on to mention 'less insane' - but you are applying the mutant aliens to T.I.'s in general; that is just the worst opinion of T.I.'s that someone can have. All it takes is a T.I. to crack under the pressure induced on them by perps and their pressure techniques, and then report those weird goings on or beliefs they've had fed to them to the wrong people ie. psychiatrists, and then they are in danger of having people with your viewpoint viewing them as insane. You do a good job of generalizing T.I. situations and beliefs to worst case scenarios in order to justify these doctors' actions.
Are you even clued up at all on the types of techniques that perps use and what T.I.'s might have done to them?

This link gives information: http://gangstalkingworld.com/what-is-gang-stalking/

[winegums]

Originally Posted by simmo34

You say 'spinal cord injury' as some kind of analogy?- a 'physical' injury. Very poor! brain and spinal cord are both neural tissue. both regenerate poorly. seems reasonable to compare them.
Listen, I said 'a belief'- is not a physical injury of the brain. I said 'a migraine' as an analogy to brain recovery to conditions of the brain. Therefore, no more migraine or in the analogy 'perceived delusional belief'-then therefore no more tablets required.I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Mental illnesses have a physiological root, generally a deficiency/excess of a neurotransmitter.
You also want to call a person who is perfectly well and had a past 'perceived' deluded belief, as still sick, so you therefore say that that person should stay on tablet treatments. I suggest that that is being done for no good reason, and is a waste of time, money and resources. I previously said that my research shows that people who are deemed well and released from psychiatric units are kept on medication because of a deluded belief of the psychiatrists of some perceived and unknown relapse they think will happen if that patient does not keep being drugged up. Every individual is different and responds to conditions in different ways, you said so yourself, so where is the justification? again, very general. Of all the people released from mental care, how many (%) will relapse, and what's the personal cost of being on medication to prevent relapse?
What shouldn't be forgotten is that this is not a joke or something to be taken lightly. All drugs have side effects and some have more nasty side effects than others. These doctors therefore are essentially (with that knowledge) deliberately adversely affecting or even in the worst case-incapacitating people they control, because they can use their excuses of perceived danger of that person to his/herself or to others (based on their scaremongering techniques), which as you seem to be implying is individual to the patient but is in fact used as an excuse for doctors to abuse, pidgeon hole and broadly and indiscriminately generalize, and then go on to have it accepted by law and in society.
What you seem to be conveniently forgetting here, is that chosen T.I's are deliberately targeted-in many cases for no apparent or justifiable reason at all (other than their face doesn't fit). citation neededThe amount of T.I.'s who report that they can't work out why they have been targeted. They can't all have done something wrong, so to quote David Icke is lame. Perps would be silly to now go and try to pull stunts (they can get away with on the average person) on him- a famous person. Besides he is too knowledgeable about this subject for them to have any impact.
T.I.'s are essentially deliberately wound up and tortured for a bad end result for that person. The T.I.'s have symptoms 'induced upon them'. The gang stalking communities want T.I's to report what could be regarded as weird goings on or beliefs to their family, friends or doctors. That then creates the problems for that T.I. they are looking for. Psychiatrists wait gladly for referrals. At the end of the day everything boils down to money, budgets and patients are just units of income generation for them.so, you're now saying all psychiatrists are cynical money-whores?
The psychiatrists go back to their lavish mansions after their day of work, and live their lives of luxury, enjoying all the benefits in society that a person in that position commands.
You have conveniently used worst case scenarios (just like a scaremongering doctor) to try to back up your flawed response, ie. the 'mutant alien' one, and you then go on to mention 'less insane' - but you are applying the mutant aliens to T.I.'s in general; that is just the worst opinion of T.I.'s that someone can have.if you're going to talk in vast generalisations, I'm going to talk in extremes. the alternative would be for you to take a moment and phrase these points more carefully. All it takes is a T.I. to crack under the pressure induced on them by perps and their pressure techniques, and then report those weird goings on or beliefs they've had fed to them to the wrong people ie. psychiatrists, and then they are in danger of having people with your viewpoint viewing them as insane. You do a good job of generalizing T.I. situations and beliefs to worst case scenarios in order to justify these doctors' actions.
Are you even clued up at all on the types of techniques that perps use and what T.I.'s might have done to them?

This link gives information: http://gangstalkingworld.com/what-is-gang-stalking/

That link has 'the matrix' as recommended viewing for christ sake

It seems to suggest that people are put on some 'watch list', and thus members of the community are constantly whispering about them everywhere they go. My main question is - if shop staff, libraries, etc are all watching them, don't you think this might be a bit more widely known about? That maybe...everyone would have at some point been asked to spy on a 'TI'? Why isn't this the case? IT just seems like paranoid rambling.


All in all, your point is a bit unclear. You seem to generally be saying that mental health medicine is bad. I guess I have three questions for you...

i) Do you believe that mental illnesses stem from physiological causes?
ii) Do you believe they can be cured by medical interventions?
iii) Do you believe that doctors generally act with intentions to heal their patients?

[simmo34]

To answer your 'three' questions (sure you're not a psychiatrist?),

i) I believe that mental illnesses on the whole are induced by external factors or stimuli either by the person themselves ie. drink and drugs, or by others ie. brain volume altering/neurotransmitter altering/brain systems altering/brain chemical altering medications or covert induced microwave frequencies to the head/brain and hypnosis. Purpose being doctors like to use people as guinea pigs and conduct experiments, like all medical scientists. I also feel they are inherently evil in their theories, methods and ideologies (see below), and need legal restraints in place to attempt to keep them in check. They still break the law in their treatments of patients regardless, eg, administration of IM's in psychiatric hospitals whilst disregarding patient rights to opt out and be administered oral medication - (again they use lies about patients' conditions at the time of initial drug administrations upon admission to cover that fact up) - see videos on youtube of complaints of being pinned down to the floor in units by numerous people and forcibly injected with drugs inhumanly causing more agony and trauma to the patient than their symptoms presented to the doctors in the first place (and the video I saw of that complaint was reported by a young woman!). Additionally, the doctors are all too quick to inject the patients and get them intoxicated with mind altering drugs and making the patient vulnerable, submissive and fearful as opposed to finding alternative therapies and maintaining the person's rights and dignity.

ii) Depends whether in terms of 'cure' you are referring to the person having an illness or a disease? I would be inclined (based on your other viewpoints) that you would choose the latter, particularly as you clearly view the necessity for doctors to change physical characteristics of the brain in their treatments. I would suggest that you don't believe that patients once having a mental (illness) can be cured, because you advocate continued use of tablet treatments even after the person becomes well.
This link explains what your broad terminology of 'cure' entails:

http://www.differencebetween.net/lan...s-and-disease/

Here is a relevant extract from that link in response:

"1. An illness is a vague condition that causes discomfort or pain. A disease refers to a condition that has established reasons behind it.
2. An illness is mostly curable. There are some diseases that cannot be cured, only managed".

I agree with the above that a perceived delusion is merely a vague condition which causes discomfort. Not amounting to the heightened dramatization, scaremongering and inevitable adverse labelling of that condition by the mental health profession. Like you said yourself - many a person holds what could be perceived delusions and you don't think it's unordinary, but then you contradict yourself by arguing for doctors keeping well people on medications by using worst case scenarios to sensationalize your argument, and then using that across the board to apply to T.I.'s who's faces merely don't fit and have been singled out for harrassment - who may then go on to report incidents of that harrassment that has been engineered to discredit the T.I. and make it look to someone they may talk to about it (because they've been made unsettled), as though they are being paranoid and deluded. You should go and work for a tabloid.

iii) In response to this one, this is what I have discovered as the facts:

Unethical human experimentation in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unethical human experimentation in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Unethical human experimentation in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(and click on any of the 'see also' links at the bottom of the page)

In total disregard of this:

Hippocratic Oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hippocratic Oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hippocratic Oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is what Is also reported:

http://www.anythingresearch.com/indu...se-Centers.htm

Pay particular attention to the 'Market Forecast' projections. Looks like a typical capitalist opportunistic private sector growth industry to me. Therefore it looks like there is a need to increase customers (patients), budgets, turnovers, profits and lies!

Why, do you think I'm being too cynical and unfair?

[winegums]

Originally Posted by simmo34

To answer your 'three' questions (sure you're not a psychiatrist?),

i) I believe that mental illnesses on the whole are induced by external factors or stimuli either by the person themselves ie. drink and drugs, or by others ie. brain volume altering/neurotransmitter altering/brain systems altering/brain chemical altering medications or covert induced microwave frequencies to the head/brain and hypnosis. Purpose being doctors like to use people as guinea pigs and conduct experiments, like all medical scientists. I'm not sure what makes you think doctors use patients like guinea pigs. There's a very explicit set of treatments allowed in medicine. Although research does occur, it's under strict restrictions. Docs don't just inject patients with random cocktails of chemicals to see what happens.I also feel they are inherently evil in their theories, methods and ideologies (see below), and need legal restraints in place to attempt to keep them in check. They still break the law in their treatments of patients regardless, eg, administration of IM's in psychiatric hospitals whilst disregarding patient rights to opt out and be administered oral medication - (again they use lies about patients' conditions at the time of initial drug administrations upon admission to cover that fact up)Not all drug treatments work when administered orally. - see videos on youtube of complaints of being pinned down to the floor in units by numerous people and forcibly injected with drugs inhumanly causing more agony and trauma to the patient than their symptoms presented to the doctors in the first place (and the video I saw of that complaint was reported by a young woman!).So you saw a patient being restrained and injected with something (presumably something to relax them). This bit is all a bit confusing really, and doesn't even seem to make sense. You seem to have a really twisted view of the profession, as though doctors are all madmen intent on persecuting a small percentage of society. Do you think people who are a threat to themselves or others shouldn't be restrained? Additionally, the doctors are all too quick to inject the patients and get them intoxicated with mind altering drugs and making the patient vulnerable, submissive and fearful as opposed to finding alternative therapies and maintaining the person's rights and dignity. Maintaining patient autonomy is a core principle of modern medicine. In mental health it's a bit more complex for a number of reasons. Saying "doctors should find a better treatment" is just silly. Are you not aware of research science at all?

ii) Depends whether in terms of 'cure' you are referring to the person having an illness or a disease? I would be inclined (based on your other viewpoints) that you would choose the latter, particularly as you clearly view the necessity for doctors to change physical characteristics of the brain in their treatments. I would suggest that you don't believe that patients once having a mental (illness) can be cured, because you advocate continued use of tablet treatments even after the person becomes well.Like I said, you're talking in gross generalities. Do you think you have the expertise to know if all patients on anti-depressants should be taken off them? Or all patients with Parkinson's?
This link explains what your broad terminology of 'cure' entails:

http://www.differencebetween.net/lan...s-and-disease/

Here is a relevant extract from that link in response:

"1. An illness is a vague condition that causes discomfort or pain. A disease refers to a condition that has established reasons behind it.
2. An illness is mostly curable. There are some diseases that cannot be cured, only managed".

I agree with the above that a perceived delusion is merely a vague condition which causes discomfort. Not amounting to the heightened dramatization, scaremongering and inevitable adverse labelling of that condition by the mental health profession. Like you said yourself - many a person holds what could be perceived delusions and you don't think it's unordinary, but then you contradict yourself by arguing for doctors keeping well people on medications by using worst case scenarios to sensationalize your argument, some conditions are never fully cured. should epileptics not take medication, since they're not "ill" unless they're fitting? and then using that across the board to apply to T.I.'s who's faces merely don't fit and have been singled out for harrassment you need proof that they've been "singled out for harassment" That's quite a strange claim tomake.

.

[muzungu100]

Originally Posted by simmo34

The amount of T.I.'s who report that they can't work out why they have been targeted.

The reason they can't work that out is because they are deluded. If you are deluded you are (by definition) unable to know that you are deluded.

[simmo34]

I suggest the opposite, but we are all entitled to our opinions. Good luck if you are not a member of the Zionist Jew movement! You are gonna need it!
Perhaps you should take a trip to central London today and ask yourself if what's going on is 'normal'??

[muzungu100]

"The reason they can't work that out is because they are deluded. If you are deluded you are (by definition) unable to know that you are deluded."

Originally Posted by simmo34

I suggest the opposite, but we are all entitled to our opinions. Good luck if you are not a member of the Zionist Jew movement! You are gonna need it!
Perhaps you should take a trip to central London today and ask yourself if what's going on is 'normal'??

So lets go through my post step by step and apply the opposite.

"The reason they can't work that out is because they are not deluded."

If you are deluded you are (by definition) able to know that you are deluded."

Neither of the statements above make any sense whatsoever after your logic is applied.

"Zionist Jew", it's that paranoia creeping in again....and what on earth does a bunch of criminals looting shops have to do with anything?

Have you ever had a medical diagnosis of paranoid delusions? I am not trying to be "funny" but your posts do seem to contain a bizarre mixture of beliefs.

[simmo34]

Originally Posted by muzungu100

The reason they can't work that out is because they are deluded. If you are deluded you are (by definition) unable to know that you are deluded.

That sounds like a bit of a cop out catch 22 brainwashing statement. I guess the answer to your statement is for the T.I. to be able to argue with backed up facts and resources that what they are saying is actually not a delusion, and then offer the person with the statement you came out with to prove that to be incorrect. The onus is on the disprover. If they can't provide an educated argument backed with facts and proof to disprove an 'alleged delusion'- other than saying 'if you are deluded then you are unable to know that you are deluded'- then they cannot make an empty unsubstantiated statement like that because how do they know what is correct or incorrect about the 'alleged delusion'?

[simmo34]

Originally Posted by muzungu100

"The reason they can't work that out is because they are deluded. If you are deluded you are (by definition) unable to know that you are deluded."



So lets go through my post step by step and apply the opposite.

"The reason they can't work that out is because they are not deluded."

If you are deluded you are (by definition) able to know that you are deluded."

Neither of the statements above make any sense whatsoever after your logic is applied.

"Zionist Jew", it's that paranoia creeping in again....and what on earth does a bunch of criminals looting shops have to do with anything?

Have you ever had a medical diagnosis of paranoid delusions? I am not trying to be "funny" but your posts do seem to contain a bizarre mixture of beliefs.

See post above about this, and no never had medical diagnosis. Thanks for asking though! I am able to work many things out and I am certainly not deluded. You must be one of these sarcastic and winding up non-truthers I keep hearing about??
In all seriousness I see this forum as a way to bounce ideas so if you disagree that is your decision. I am sure plenty of people will agree with my views as you may have many agree with you. Me and you will have to agree to disagree.

[ozpixie]

I sincerely believe that some people who are labelled as delusional are able to decode frequencies from at least one or even more parallel realities. Big pharma ruled by profits is unlikely to ever admit to this.

[simmo34]

http://www.thevideoanalyst.com/wp-co...-sign-eyes.jpg