Prev-IndexNL-Next

Nederlog

January 30, 2014

Crisis: "Accomplices" * 2, Snowden, Merkel, TPP, BDD, personal


   "They who can give up essential 
   liberty to obtain a little temporary
   safety, deserve neither liberty
   nor safety."
   -- Benjamin Franklin [1]
   "All governments lie and nothing
   they say should be believed.
"
   -- I.F. Stone.
   "Power tends to corrupt, and   
   absolute power corrupts
   absolutely. Great men are        
   almost always bad men."
   -- Lord Acton
















Prev- crisis -Next  
Sections     
Introduction   

1.
Does Obama Administration View Journalists as
     Snowden's "Accomplices"? It Seems So.

2.
James Clapper calls for Snowden and 'accomplices' to
     return NSA documents

3. Edward Snowden nominated for Nobel peace prize 
4. Angela Merkel warns US over surveillance in first speech
     of third term

5.
The Democratic Leadership Yesterday Effectively Killed
     Obama’s International Trade Deals

6.
Between a Rock and a Hard Place: ICD-11 Beta draft:
     Definition added for “Bodily distress disorder”

7. Personal

About ME/CFS


Introduction:

This is another crisis file, and earlier today there was a Dutch autobiographical file, that is probably the last but one of the first volume (which will be rewritten from what there is now).

1. Does Obama Administration View Journalists as Snowden's "Accomplices"? It Seems So.

To start with, an article by Glenn Greenwald on Common Dreams:
This is a brief article, and starts as follows:
James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, appeared today before the Senate Intelligence Committee, his first appearance since outright lying to that Committee last March about NSA bulk collection. In his prepared opening remarks, Clapper said this:
Snowden claims that he's won and that his mission is accomplished. If that is so, I call on him and his accomplices to facilitate the return of the remaining stolen documents that have not yet been exposed to prevent even more damage to U.S. security.
Who, in the view of the Obama administration, are Snowden's "accomplices"[? - MM] The FBI and other official investigators have been very clear with the media that there is no evidence whatsoever that Snowden had any help in copying and removing documents from the NSA.
Greenwald also asks whether it is the view of the Obama administation that the journalists and meda outlets that published the documents are "accomplices".

Well... James Clapper must be - like I am, since 26 years now, according to 16 Amsterdam philosophers and the Board of Directors of the University of Amsterdam - a "fascist terrorist" [2] who may lay the foundations of fascist terrorism in the U.S., who may steal everybody's private doings of any kind on the internet or on a phone, which is illegal, who may lie to Congress, and who may say whatever he pleases, regardless of facts, of moral norms, or of decency.

So yes: If you are a journalist who dares to publish anything the NSA does not like to see published, because it shows how extremely dishonest they are, and because it shows they steal any and all private details of anyone, that are to be used for their secret ends, then you must be "a terrorist" and an accomplice of "terrorists" like Edward Snowden.

This stands to reason, at least if the reason is that of James Clapper.

2. James Clapper calls for Snowden and 'accomplices' to return NSA documents 

Next, an article by Spencer Ackerman in the Guardian on the same theme as the previous item:

This starts as follows:

James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, has issued a blistering condemnation of Edward Snowden, calling the surveillance disclosures published by the Guardian and other news outlets a “perfect storm” that would endanger American lives.

Testifying before a rare and unusually raucous public session of the Senate intelligence committee that saw yet another evolution in the Obama administration’s defense of bulk domestic phone records collection, Clapper called on “Snowden and his accomplices” to return the documents the former National Security Agency contractor took, in order to minimize what he called the “profound damage that his disclosures have caused and continued to cause”.

Clearly, the lying Clapper is lying more, now that he may do so, supported by Obama: "profound damage"? "continued"? Then again, Spencer Ackerman also has something to worry about:

Asked if the journalists who possess leaked surveillance information counted in Clapper's definition of an "accomplice", Clapper spokesman Shawn Turner clarified: "Director Clapper was referring to anyone who is assisting Edward Snowden to further threaten our national security through the unauthorized disclosure of stolen documents related to lawful foreign intelligence collection programs."

Turner declined to be more specific.

This makes "anyone" "an accomplice" who published (or helped to publish) anything Snowden revealed, and this includes Ackerman and quite a few other journalists of the Guardian, and its editor, and indeed maybe also its owner.

Also note these lies: "
threaten our national security", "unauthorized", and "lawful".

There is a lot more in the article.

3. Edward Snowden nominated for Nobel peace prize 

Next, an article by the Associated Press (in Stavanger) in the Guardian:

This starts as follows:

Two Norwegian politicians say they have jointly nominated the former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden for the 2014 Nobel peace prize.

The Socialist Left party politicians Baard Vegar Solhjell, a former environment minister, and Snorre Valen said the public debate and policy changes in the wake of Snowden's whistleblowing had "contributed to a more stable and peaceful world order".

I say. It is only a nomination, and it is quite possible he will not get it, but it seems a good idea to me - and if Obama could get the same price, I do not see why the much more worthy Snowden wouldn't deserve it as well.

4. 
Angela Merkel warns US over surveillance in first speech of third term 

Next, an article by Philip Oltermann in the Guardian:

This starts as follows:

Angela Merkel has used the first, agenda-setting speech of her third term in office to criticise America's uncompromising defence of its surveillance activities.

In a speech otherwise typically short of strong emotion or rhetorical flourishes, the German chancellor found relatively strong words on NSA surveillance, two days before the US secretary of state, John Kerry, is due to visit Berlin.

"A programme in which the end justifies all means, in which everything that is technically possible is then acted out, violates trust and spreads mistrust," she said. "In the end, it produces not more but less security."

She is right, and this is what is happening.

5. The Democratic Leadership Yesterday Effectively Killed Obama’s International Trade Deals

Next an article by Eric Zuesse on Washington's Blog:

This starts as follows:

One of President Barack Obama’s top priorities ever since he entered the White House has been to achieve two international trade deals, one with Europe, and the other with Asia, that will enable international corporations to override the laws in participating nations and thus to provide ultimate corporate control over regulations concerning pesticide-use, food-safety, global-warming abatement, collective bargaining, and other such matters.

Yesterday, Wednesday 29 January 2014, the leader of congressional Democrats, Harry Reid — the U.S. Senate Majority Leader — came out publicly saying, “I’m against fast track.” This means that unlike the international-trade treaties that were rammed through Congress under George W. Bush, Obama’s trade deals won’t be — and that they are thus now practically dead.

I think this is very good news. Then again, I am not so certain as Zuesse is: What if Harry Reid dies tomorrow, for example? But apart from that, and some hidden deals, it seems quite probable there will be no TPP unitl, at least, the next president, which is a very good thing.

There is considerably more in the article.

6.  Between a Rock and a Hard Place: ICD-11 Beta draft: Definition added for “Bodily distress disorder”

Next and last, apart from my personal bit, an article by Suzy Chapman on dxrevisionwatch, that is about health and illness rather than the crisis:

At long last, the shrinks have given "a definition" of what they choose to call "Bodily distress disorder". Here it is:

BDDJan_28_14

I submit, as a psychologist and a philosopher, that this is a totally insane "definition", that is intended to undo the difference between diseases and "disorders", and that would totally stop all research in any disease that is not already in the medical handbooks, and thus kill the progress of medical science.

For consider:

First, about "bodily distress": This covers every experience that is unpleasant, of whatever kind, however caused. This also means that in nearly all cases of illness, you will feel it through some form of "distress".

Second, about "high levels of preoccupation": This is a totally vague permission for your doctor or psychiatrists to say that you complain too much. Note the sick occurrence of "preoccupation": If you are in pain, and the doctor does not know what you have, you are not "occupied" or "concerned" or "interested" anymore: No, no: you are preoccupied. That is, your complaints are trivialized as a matter of course, and you pay to much attention to them, as a matter of course.

Third, about "unusually or persistent medical help-seeking": Precisely the same applies as I just said: it is completely vague - and I do not deny that there are irrational demands on doctors, but you cannot judge these rationally by
"unusually or persistent" help-seeking or totally unspecified "high levels", if you do not have objective criterions to use these terms - and any objective criterions are totally absent. Indeed:

Fourth, "avoidance of normal activities": The psychiatrists want to declare everybody who does not have a well-known admitted disease as a neurotic or a liar (or both), but they have learned meanwhile that these terms are impopular, so now they call it "bodily distress disorder". Also, they have "a cure": Graduated Exercise Therapuy (GET) plus Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), which both are excellent means to give shrinks even higher incomes than they already have, and hardly without doing anything, except by denying (while showing their medical diploma or stethoscope) that you cannot be ill, except if you have the luck of having a recognized familiar  known illness (if you are not faking that).

Fifth, note the "features" (not: pains, aches, vomits, misery) and the "impairment": What they mean is again that if you feel ill but your illness is not in an existing medical handbook, then "therefore" you are not ill, but you are a neurotic or a liar (or both) - except that they now call it "bodily distress disorder", because they are thoroughly dishonest, and they much rather serve the very well-paying health-insurances than their patients, who have much less money.

Sixth, note the symptoms with which you can not be ill, unless these are symptoms of a well-known medical disease: pains, aches, tiredness, belly aches, lack of breath, and indeed "any bodily symptoms" (with which you also are automatically preoccupied, all because your doctor doesn't know, but doesn't want to admit it honestly).

Seventh, you are, in case you have a disease that is not yet fully known and present in prominent medical handbooks, f*cked whatever your complaints are, if the psychiatrists have any say in it: whether you complain of many, several or one thing(s), even if that is very painful (restyled as "bothersome"), you are a neurotic or a liar (or both) except that they now call it "bodilly distress disorder", and frown upon the earlier terms, not because these are inept, in their opinion, but because a term like
"bodilly distress disorder" deceives many more people, and is so completely vague as to apply to anything and anyone: if you complain about something, and the doctor doesn't know it, you'll have BDD. (No research is necessary, and no help - and if by chance you die of whatever you have, that's too bad: the doctor is never to blame - he or she merely thought you had BDD.)

In case you doubt the medical sadists who compiled the above "definition" did know what they were doing, I quote Suzy Chapman:

In mid 2012, the Goldberg led PCCG primary care group was proposing a new term called “Bodily stress [sic] syndrome (BSS),” to replace ICD’s primary care category, “F45 Unexplained somatic symptoms.” This single BSS category would also absorb F48 Neurasthenia, which is proposed to be eliminated for ICD-11-PHC.

In late 2012, the S3DWG group was proposing to subsume the six ICD-10 categories F45.0 – F45.9, plus F48.0 Neurasthenia, under a single disorder category, but under the disorder name, “Bodily distress disorder” (BDD).
(...)

That is: These folks now claim to be able to "explain" what was hitherto correctly called "Unexplained somatic symptoms" - though they explain it by "Neurasthenia", except that they do not want to use the term, because it doesn't sound well. So they invented "BDD".

Not only that: Those with ME/CFS or FM (Fibromyalgia) or Irritable Bowel Syndrome now also are declared to be mere neurasthenics - sorry: - BDD'ers:

What wasn’t explicitly set out in the PCCG’s 2012 paper was whether the group intended to mirror the Fink et al BDS construct to the extent of extending the diagnosis to be inclusive of the so-called “functional somatic syndromes,” FM, CFS and IBS (which are currently discretely coded or indexed within ICD-10 in chapters outside the mental and behavioural disorders chapter).

This 2013 paper, below, interprets that it is indeed the intention of the Primary Care Consultation Group to capture FM, CFS and IBS (...)

Do these "evidence based" medical sadists have any evidence? Of course not: They work for the insurance companies anyway, for that is where the big money comes from, and they don't care how many lives they destroy, as long as they are paid well. (Indeed, if I had been a sadist, I would have studied medicine.)

7. Personal

There was today no further updating of my sites, so far at least, but there was earlier today the latest part of my autobiography (in Dutch).

---------------

Note

[1] Here it is necessary to insist, with Aristotle, thay the governors do not rule, or at least, should not rule: The laws rule, and the government, if good, is part of its executive power. Here I quote Aristotle from my More on stupidity, the rule of law, and Glenn Greenwald:
It is more proper that law should govern than any of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servant of laws.
(And I note the whole file I quote from is quite pertinent.)

[2] I am a "fascist terrorist" since May 1988, when I was invited to read 39 Questions about the declines of education and government in the Netherlands.
in the faculty of philosophy of the University of Amsterdam. Many of the fascist terrorists who called me a fascist terrorist, including the fascist terrorists who then were the Board of Directors, knew that my father had spend 3 years 9 months and 15 days as a political prisoner in German concentration camps, that my grandfather was murdered as a political prisoner
in a German concentration camp, and that my mother had been in the Dutch Resistance.

But 16 Amsterdam fascist terrorists insisted, screamingly, that I am "a fascist terrorist", because of my questions, and because they lost discussions. I have asked many times to withdraw this. I was never even answered. I now repay the compliment that was made me - after having waited more than 25 years, and never having received any reply.


About ME/CFS (that I prefer to call M.E.: The "/CFS" is added to facilitate search machines) which is a disease I have since 1.1.1979:
1. Anthony Komarof

Ten discoveries about the biology of CFS(pdf)

2. Malcolm Hooper THE MENTAL HEALTH MOVEMENT:  
PERSECUTION OF PATIENTS?
3. Hillary Johnson

The Why  (currently not available)[2]

4. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf - version 2003)
5. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf - version 2011)
6. Eleanor Stein

Clinical Guidelines for Psychiatrists (pdf)

7. William Clifford The Ethics of Belief
8. Malcolm
Magical Medicine (pdf)
9.
Maarten Maartensz
Resources about ME/CFS
(more resources, by many)


       home - index - summaries - mail