Group: sci.med.psychobiology
Dialog and news in psychiatry and psychobiology.
Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
How would you define what's "wrong" with Britney Spears?
Re: How would you define what's "wrong" with all these freaks who cut and dice a diva's traumatized
Snip psychotic freaks gibberish about a diva victimized by the
stalkerazi, which now includes psychotic freaks like him/herself, to
initiate discourse about the pathologies of all the morons, frauds,
thieves, kooks, and bullies who occupy powerful positions which
enable them to have an impact on the life of every US Citizen,
such, as America's Numero Uno Kook and Torturer in Chief , US Colonel
Larry C. James.
http :// www .counterpunch.org/bond02122008.html
Camp 7 and the Torturer's Shrink
The Elephant at Gitmo
By TRUDY BOND, Phd
"Doctor, my eyes tell me what Is wrong . . .
Was I unwise to leave them open for so long?"
----Jackson Browne, "Doctor My Eyes"
"I am proud to be a member of the American Psychological Association,
proud for what APA has stood for in these troubling times, and deeply
grateful to the Association for supporting me and my colleagues in our
quest to ensure that all in our custody are treated with human decency
and respect."
Larry C. James
Colonel, United States Army
June 23, 2007
"Having custody and control over an individual is an awesome
responsibility."
Larry James
Colonel and Psychologist
June 23, 2007
"This is my second tour at Gitmo, Cuba. I was also the first
psychologist at Abu Ghraib. I'm going to repeat what I said earlier.
If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are going to
die. If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are
going to get hurt."
Larry James
APA National Convention
August 15, 2007
Sounds good Colonel James. Great sound bytes. Good enough to convince
thousands of psychologists that you're the real thing, as American as
Stealth bombers and pre-emptive war. Who would possibly think that
psychologists in the military would engage in torture after listening
to you? Good enough that you became the poster child for the American
Psychological Association as they pulled out all stops in their
attempts to defeat those few psychologists opposed to torture, inhuman
conditions and the disappearance of habeas corpus. They brought you
all the way from Guantanamo for their song and dance show. Not even
most psychologists, those who are supposed to understand human
behavior, saw through your charade, as you convinced them that their
professional association really IS on the side of truth and goodness.
The APA used you to introduce a different resolution against torture
for the second year in a row, in an attempt to deflect the dissenters
and detractors. APA's use of resolutions as a means to stop torture
have proven to be simply a sleight of hand to appease the multitudes
and the media, but actually signifies nothing.
Perhaps you'll repeat history, Colonel James. In 2006, Surgeon General
Kevin Kiley was used by APA leaders to offer the 2006 "Resolution on
Torture." Remember him? He lost his job a few months after presenting
THAT resolution, another military officer who was willing to overlook
the inhumane treatment of people that were considered to have no
value.
But you blew it this week, Colonel. One might say you fell out of
role, and the truth became evident. Though you are in charge of the
team of psychologists that assists interrogators at Guantanamo, when
the Associated Press reported last week on the just-revealed Camp 7 at
Guantanamo where detainees from CIA secret detention facilities are
kept, including the detainees who HAVE been water-boarded, including
Abu Zubaydah who endured water-boarding with two psychologists
present, you stated you just don't want to know about it.
"I learned a long, long time ago, if I'm going to be successful in the
intel community, I'm meticulously -- in a very, very dedicated way --
going to stay in my lane," he said. "So if I don't have a specific
need to know about something, I don't want to know about it. I don't
ask about it."
You, the military psychologist, who spoke so piously of how much you
cared to protect detainees at Gitmo, who so scrupulously defended your
character as patriotically humane - didn't you just sell out the fate
of those detainees for the advancement of your career?
You commanded the Guantanamo Behavioral Science Consultation Teams
from January 2003 to mid-May 2003, during a time when the
International Committee of the Red Cross stated that the treatment of
detainees at Guantanamo amounted to torture.
Under your command and supervision, psychologists from the military's
Survival, Evasion Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program were
instructed to apply their expertise in abusive interrogation
techniques to the interrogations of detainees in Guantanamo, according
to a report from the Office of the Inspector General.
According to the Standard Operating Procedure manual at the time that
you were the Chief Psychologist at Guantanamo, all incoming detainees
were to be held in isolation for the first 30 days "to enhance and
exploit the disorientation and disorganization felt by a newly arrived
detainee in the interrogation process" and were not entitled to the
protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions.
So while you and the American Psychological Association continue to
assert that military psychologists are necessary at Guantanamo, Abu
Ghraib, Bagram and other detention sites - to build rapport, to
"protect" the detainees, to stop other military personnel from harming
and killing the detainees - you're telling reporters that the secret
to your success is to look the other way. What else could it mean when
you say, "if I'm going to be successful in the intel community . . .
I'm meticulously . . . going to stay in my lane . . . I don't want to
know?"
The fact is, for you and our professional organization, it's all about
keeping your job. You toe the military line for your paycheck. And the
APA toes the military line to curry the favor of the Department of
Defense and the current administration for contracts. All the rest is
window dressing, such as the APA's gratuitous letter to Attorney
General Mukasey this week. The letter is a lobbyist's masterpiece,
suggesting that waterboarding is legal torture in one paragraph and
then asking the AG to please hurry up and render a legal ruling in the
next.
But as you seem not to be motivated by considerations of ethics,
Colonel James, perhaps the potential for life in prison might have
more impact. At the Nuremberg Trials, it was held that merely
following orders will not absolve you from criminal liability. In that
rare moment of truthiness, you told us that your guilty knowledge may
pose inconveniences for you: "[I]f I don't have a specific need to
know about something, I don't want to know about it. I don't ask about
it."
Before denouncing the above, take time to visit this article.
Trudy Bond, Phd has been a licensed psychologist for 27 years. She
can be reached at ar mordilo@yahoo,com .
Snip psychotic freaks gibberish about a diva victimized by the
stalkerazi, which now includes psychotic freaks like him/herself, to
initiate discourse about the pathologies of all the morons, frauds,
thieves, kooks, and bullies who occupy powerful positions which
enable them to have an impact on the life of every US Citizen,
such, as America's Numero Uno Kook and Torturer in Chief , US Colonel
Larry C. James.
http :// www .counterpunch.org/bond02122008.html
Camp 7 and the Torturer's Shrink
The Elephant at Gitmo
By TRUDY BOND, Phd
"Doctor, my eyes tell me what Is wrong . . .
Was I unwise to leave them open for so long?"
----Jackson Browne, "Doctor My Eyes"
"I am proud to be a member of the American Psychological Association,
proud for what APA has stood for in these troubling times, and deeply
grateful to the Association for supporting me and my colleagues in our
quest to ensure that all in our custody are treated with human decency
and respect."
Larry C. James
Colonel, United States Army
June 23, 2007
"Having custody and control over an individual is an awesome
responsibility."
Larry James
Colonel and Psychologist
June 23, 2007
"This is my second tour at Gitmo, Cuba. I was also the first
psychologist at Abu Ghraib. I'm going to repeat what I said earlier.
If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are going to
die. If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are
going to get hurt."
Larry James
APA National Convention
August 15, 2007
Sounds good Colonel James. Great sound bytes. Good enough to convince
thousands of psychologists that you're the real thing, as American as
Stealth bombers and pre-emptive war. Who would possibly think that
psychologists in the military would engage in torture after listening
to you? Good enough that you became the poster child for the American
Psychological Association as they pulled out all stops in their
attempts to defeat those few psychologists opposed to torture, inhuman
conditions and the disappearance of habeas corpus. They brought you
all the way from Guantanamo for their song and dance show. Not even
most psychologists, those who are supposed to understand human
behavior, saw through your charade, as you convinced them that their
professional association really IS on the side of truth and goodness.
The APA used you to introduce a different resolution against torture
for the second year in a row, in an attempt to deflect the dissenters
and detractors. APA's use of resolutions as a means to stop torture
have proven to be simply a sleight of hand to appease the multitudes
and the media, but actually signifies nothing.
Perhaps you'll repeat history, Colonel James. In 2006, Surgeon General
Kevin Kiley was used by APA leaders to offer the 2006 "Resolution on
Torture." Remember him? He lost his job a few months after presenting
THAT resolution, another military officer who was willing to overlook
the inhumane treatment of people that were considered to have no
value.
But you blew it this week, Colonel. One might say you fell out of
role, and the truth became evident. Though you are in charge of the
team of psychologists that assists interrogators at Guantanamo, when
the Associated Press reported last week on the just-revealed Camp 7 at
Guantanamo where detainees from CIA secret detention facilities are
kept, including the detainees who HAVE been water-boarded, including
Abu Zubaydah who endured water-boarding with two psychologists
present, you stated you just don't want to know about it.
"I learned a long, long time ago, if I'm going to be successful in the
intel community, I'm meticulously -- in a very, very dedicated way --
going to stay in my lane," he said. "So if I don't have a specific
need to know about something, I don't want to know about it. I don't
ask about it."
You, the military psychologist, who spoke so piously of how much you
cared to protect detainees at Gitmo, who so scrupulously defended your
character as patriotically humane - didn't you just sell out the fate
of those detainees for the advancement of your career?
You commanded the Guantanamo Behavioral Science Consultation Teams
from January 2003 to mid-May 2003, during a time when the
International Committee of the Red Cross stated that the treatment of
detainees at Guantanamo amounted to torture.
Under your command and supervision, psychologists from the military's
Survival, Evasion Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program were
instructed to apply their expertise in abusive interrogation
techniques to the interrogations of detainees in Guantanamo, according
to a report from the Office of the Inspector General.
According to the Standard Operating Procedure manual at the time that
you were the Chief Psychologist at Guantanamo, all incoming detainees
were to be held in isolation for the first 30 days "to enhance and
exploit the disorientation and disorganization felt by a newly arrived
detainee in the interrogation process" and were not entitled to the
protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions.
So while you and the American Psychological Association continue to
assert that military psychologists are necessary at Guantanamo, Abu
Ghraib, Bagram and other detention sites - to build rapport, to
"protect" the detainees, to stop other military personnel from harming
and killing the detainees - you're telling reporters that the secret
to your success is to look the other way. What else could it mean when
you say, "if I'm going to be successful in the intel community . . .
I'm meticulously . . . going to stay in my lane . . . I don't want to
know?"
The fact is, for you and our professional organization, it's all about
keeping your job. You toe the military line for your paycheck. And the
APA toes the military line to curry the favor of the Department of
Defense and the current administration for contracts. All the rest is
window dressing, such as the APA's gratuitous letter to Attorney
General Mukasey this week. The letter is a lobbyist's masterpiece,
suggesting that waterboarding is legal torture in one paragraph and
then asking the AG to please hurry up and render a legal ruling in the
next.
But as you seem not to be motivated by considerations of ethics,
Colonel James, perhaps the potential for life in prison might have
more impact. At the Nuremberg Trials, it was held that merely
following orders will not absolve you from criminal liability. In that
rare moment of truthiness, you told us that your guilty knowledge may
pose inconveniences for you: "[I]f I don't have a specific need to
know about something, I don't want to know about it. I don't ask about
it."
Before denouncing the above, take time to visit this article.
Trudy Bond, Phd has been a licensed psychologist for 27 years. She
can be reached at ar mordilo@yahoo,com .
Re: How would you define what's "wrong" with Britney Spears?
On Feb 12, 12:36 pm, thedarkoneli...@hotmail,com wrote:
> We keep hearing that Britney Spears is turning into a mental
> basketcase. Assuming there's something to it and not just a perverse,
> protracted publicity stunt, what clinical name would be applicable to
> what ails her?
Nobody here knows...youd just be speculating. Do you have access to
her psychiatic records? NO.
Id speculate that what might be wrong with her is either some sort of
post-partum depression, possibly post-partum depression with
psychosis. Id also speculate she might be bipolar. Id also speculate
she might have a significant substance abuse history, of which some of
the drugs could have messed her brain up causing serious psychiatric
symptoms.
But again, nobody on the net knows and anybody who claims they really
know is full of shit. They are just speculating or taking calculated
guesses based on what they read and see in the news about her.
On Feb 12, 12:36 pm, thedarkoneli...@hotmail,com wrote:
> We keep hearing that Britney Spears is turning into a mental
> basketcase. Assuming there's something to it and not just a perverse,
> protracted publicity stunt, what clinical name would be applicable to
> what ails her?
Nobody here knows...youd just be speculating. Do you have access to
her psychiatic records? NO.
Id speculate that what might be wrong with her is either some sort of
post-partum depression, possibly post-partum depression with
psychosis. Id also speculate she might be bipolar. Id also speculate
she might have a significant substance abuse history, of which some of
the drugs could have messed her brain up causing serious psychiatric
symptoms.
But again, nobody on the net knows and anybody who claims they really
know is full of shit. They are just speculating or taking calculated
guesses based on what they read and see in the news about her.
Re: How would you define what's "wrong" with Britney Spears?
On Feb 12, 12:36 pm, thedarkoneli...@hotmail,com wrote:
> We keep hearing that Britney Spears is turning into a mental
> basketcase. Assuming there's something to it and not just a perverse,
> protracted publicity stunt, what clinical name would be applicable to
> what ails her?
My prediction is unless Britney has ECT soon, she will turn into a
chronic mental patient
On Feb 12, 12:36 pm, thedarkoneli...@hotmail,com wrote:
> We keep hearing that Britney Spears is turning into a mental
> basketcase. Assuming there's something to it and not just a perverse,
> protracted publicity stunt, what clinical name would be applicable to
> what ails her?
My prediction is unless Britney has ECT soon, she will turn into a
chronic mental patient
