Suicide

Report: Half of All Americans to be Diagnosed with Mental Health Problems

December 15, 2011 By T Kelly 1 Comment

According to a new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report, half of all Americans will be diagnosed with a mental illness during their lifetime. Published on Sept. 2 in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, the report highlights the diagnosis crisis that is currently ongoing in the United States and elsewhere.

The monetary empire of antispsychotics became obnoxiously apparently in 2008, becoming the top-selling therapeutic class prescription drug in the United States and grossing over $14 billion in sales. Surpassing even pharmaceuticals used to treat high cholesterol and acid reflux, antipsychotics quickly became the most profitable pill to push on patients. Even more disturbing, is the health-damaging effects of the pharmaceuticals given to mental health patients, often leading to side effects that are far worse than the original symptoms.

In 2005, it was found that link between Prozac and suicidal behavior was kept a secret. The BBC even reported in as early as the year 2000 that Prozac ‘led to suicide’. Oftentimes killers will end their own lives after shootings, or attempt to force the cops to kill them. This is essentially a form of suicide with a mixture of murderous tendencies. If Prozac can drive someone to suicide, could it also drive someone to end someone else’s life? Paxil, an anti-depressant drug, was found to be linked to violent behavior in 2006. The link incited multiple lawsuits, and brings up questions as to whether or not similar drugs have the same effects. Anti-depressants have horrible side effects, but about the even more hardcore drugs, such as the drugs that many of the other killers were taking?

Nearly every shooter in recent times has been loaded up on harmful pharmaceuticals, arguably driving them to commit the horrendous acts that they have become known for. Loughner is most likely no exception. With children worldwide, particularly in foster homes, being dosed up with insane amounts of psychotropic drugs, it is a large concern. Prozac has even been found in the drinking water. Taking pharmaceuticals that lead to extreme thoughts of suicide and violent behavior is a recipe for disaster.

Source: https://naturalsociety.com/report-half-of-all-americans-to-be-diagnosed-with-mental-health-problems/

Filed Under: Big Pharma, Drugs, Health, Mental Health, Suicide

‘Death And After In Iraq’

December 13, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

Jess Goodell enlisted in the Marines immediately after she graduated from high school in 2001. She volunteered three years later to serve in the Marine Corps’ first officially declared Mortuary Affairs unit, at Camp Al Taqaddum in Iraq. Her job, for eight months, was to collect and catalog the bodies and personal effects of dead Marines. She put the remains of young Marines in body bags and placed the bags in metal boxes. Before being shipped to Dover Air Force Base, the boxes were stored, often for days, in a refrigerated unit known as a “reefer.” The work she did was called “processing.”

“We went through everything,” she said when I reached her by phone in Buffalo, N.Y., where she is about to become a student in a Ph.D. program in counseling at the University of Buffalo. “We would get everything that the body had on it when the Marine died. Everyone had a copy of The Rules of Engagement in their left breast pocket. You found notes that people had written to each other. You found lists. Lists were common, the things they wanted to do when they got home or food they wanted to eat. The most difficult was pictures. Everyone had a picture of their wife or their kids or their family. And then you had the younger kids who might be 18 years old and they had prom pictures or pictures next to what I imagine were their first cars. Everyone had a spoon in their flak jacket. There were pens and trash and wrappers and MRE food. All of it would get sent back [to the Marines’ homes].

“We all had the idea that at any point this could be us on the table,” she said. “I think Marines thought that we went over there to die. And so people wrote letters saying ‘If I die I want you to know I love you.’ ‘I want my car to go to my younger brother.’ Things like that. They carried those letters on their bodies. We had a Marine that we processed and going through his wallet he had a picture of a sonogram of a fetus his wife had sent him. And a lot of Marines had tattooed their vital information under an armpit. It was called a meat tag.”

The unit processed about half a dozen suicides. The suicide notes, she said, almost always cited hazing. Women, she said, were constantly harassed, especially sexually, but it often did not match the systematic punishment and humiliation meted out to men who were deemed to be inadequate Marines.

She said that Marines who were overweight or unable to do the physical training were subjected to withering verbal and physical abuse. They were called “fat nasties” and “shit bags.”

The harassed Marines would be assigned to other individual Marines and become their slaves. They would be sent on punishing runs in which many of them vomited. They would be forced to bear-crawl—walk on all fours—the length of a football field and back. This would be followed by sets of monkey fuckers—bending down, grabbing the ankles, crouching down like a baseball catcher and then standing up again—followed by a series of other exercises that went on until the Marines collapsed.

“They make these Marines do what they call ‘bitch’ work,” Goodell said. “They are assigned to be someone else’s ‘bitch’ for the day. We had a guy in our platoon, not in Iraq but in California, and he was overweight. He was on remedial PT, which meant he went to extra physical training. When he came to work he was rotated. One day he was with this corporal or this sergeant. One day he was sent to me. I had him for an hour. I remember sending him outside and making him carry things. It was very common for them to dig a hole and fill it back up with sand or carry sandbags up to the top of a hill and then carry them down again.”

The unit was sent to collect the bodies of the Marines who killed themselves, usually by putting rifles under their chins and pulling the trigger.

“We had a Marine who was in a port-a-john when he blew his face off,” she said. “We had another Marine who shot himself through the neck. Often they would do it in the corner of a bunker or an abandoned building. We had a couple that did it in port-a-johns. We had to go in and peel and pull off chunks of flesh and brain tissue that had sprayed the walls. Those were the most frustrating bodies to get. On those bodies we were also on cleanup crew. It was gross. We sent the suicide notes home with the bodies.

“We had the paperwork to do fingerprinting, but we started getting bodies in which there weren’t any hands or we would get bodies that were just meat,” said Goodell, who in May will publish a memoir called “Shade It Black: Death and After in Iraq.” The book title refers to the form that required those in the mortuary unit to shade in black the body parts that were missing from a corpse. “Very quickly it became irrelevant to have a fingerprinting page to fill out. By the time we would get a body it might have been a while and rigor mortis had already set in. Their hands were usually clenched as if they were still holding their rifle. We could not unbend the fingers easily.”

The unit was also sent to collect Marines killed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The members would arrive on the scene and don white plastic suits, gloves and face masks.

“One of the first convoys we went to was one where the Army had been traveling over a bridge and an IED had exploded,” she said. “It had literally shot a seven-ton truck over the side and down into a ravine. Marines were already going down into the ravine. We were just getting out of our vehicles. We were putting on our gloves and putting coverings over our boots. I was with a Marine named Pineda. I was coming around the Humvee and there was a spot on the ground that was a circle. I looked at it and thought something must have exploded here or near here. I went over to look at it. I looked in and saw a boot. Then I noticed the boot had a foot in it. I almost lost my lunch.

“In the seven-ton truck the [body of the] assistant driver, who was in the passenger seat, was trapped in the vehicle,” she said. “All of his body was in the vehicle. We had to crawl in there to get it out. It was charred. Pineda and I pulled the burnt upper torso from the truck. Then we removed a leg. Some of the remains had to be scooped up by putting out hands together as though we were cupping water. That was very common. A lot of the deaths were from IEDs or explosions. You might have an upper torso but you need to scoop the rest of the remains into a body bag. It was very common to have body bags that when you picked them up they would sink in the middle because they were filled with flesh. The contents did not resemble a human body.”

The members of the mortuary unit were shunned by the other Marines. The stench of dead flesh clung to their uniforms, hair, skin and fingers. Two members of the mortuary unit began to disintegrate psychologically. One began to take a box of Nyquil tablets every day and drink large quantities of cold medicine. He was eventually medevaced out of Iraq.

“Our cammies would be stained with blood or with brains,” she said. “When you scoop up the meat it often would get on the cuffs of our shirts. You could smell it, even after you took off your gloves. We weren’t washing our cammies everyday. Your cuff comes to your face when you eat. Physically we were stained with remains. We had a constant smell like rotten meat, which I guess is what it was since often the bodies had been in the sun and the heat for a long time. The flesh had gone bad. The skin on a body in the hot sun slides off. The skin detaches itself from the layer beneath and slides around on itself.

“Our platoon was to the Marines what the Marines are to much of America: We did things that had to be done but that no one wanted to know about,” she said. “The other Marines knew what we did, but they did not want to think it could happen to them. I had one female Marine in my tent who would talk to me. The rest would not give me the time of day. The Marines in Mortuary Affairs knew that any day could be our day. Other Marines, who have to go out on the convoys, who have to get up the next day, have to get on with life.”

Her unit once had to recover two Marines who had drowned in a lake. It appeared one had leapt in to save the other. The bodies, which were recovered after a couple of days by Navy divers, were grotesquely swollen. One of the Marines was so bloated and misshapened that the body was difficult to carry on a litter.

“His neck was as wide as his bloated head, and his stomach jutted out like a barrel,” she writes in the book. “His testicles were the size of cantaloupes. His face was white and puffy and thick. Not fat, but thick. It was unreal. He looked like a movie prop, with thick, gray, waxy skin and the thick purple lips. We couldn’t stop looking at these bodies because they were so out of proportion and so disfigured and because, still, they looked like us.”

It was hardest to look into the faces of the dead. She and the other members of the mortuary unit swiftly covered the faces when they worked on the bodies. They avoided looking at the eyes of the corpses.

Once, the unit had to process seven Marines killed in an explosion. Seven or eight body bags were delivered to the bunker.

“We had clean body bags set up so we could sort the flesh,” she said. “Sometimes things come in with nametags. Or sometimes one is Hispanic and you could tell who was Hispanic and who was the white guy. We tried separating flesh. It was ridiculous. We would open a body bag and there was nothing but vaporized flesh. There were not four hands or a whole leg in a bag. We tried to distribute the mush evenly throughout the bags. We were trying to do the best we could sorting it out. We had the last body bag come in. We opened up the body bag and it was filled with the heads. I looked at four before looking away. Not only did we have to look at them, we had to pick them up and figure out who it belonged to. The eyes were looking back at us. We got used to a lot of it. But the heads worked the other way. They affected us more strongly as time passed. We saw on the heads the expressions of fright and horror. It made us wonder what we were doing here.”

She processed one Marine whose face was twisted at the moment of death by rage. The face of this Marine began to haunt her.

“I had this feeling that something awful had occurred,” she said. “The way he had come in and stiffened he had this look to his face that made my stomach curl. It looked angry. Often expressions on bodies would look fearful and hurt. The faces looked as though they had received death. But this face looked like he had given death.”

She and the other members of the unit became convinced they could feel and hear the souls of the dead Marines they had processed and housed in their reefers.

And then there was a body that was brought in one day that was not stiff.

“He was fully dressed in his cammies and his whole body was intact,” she said. “His hands were lying folded across his stomach.”

She and the others noticed that the Marine on the table was breathing lightly. The chest was going up and down. They frantically called their superiors to find out what to do. They were told to wait.

“Just wait? Wait for what?” she cried.

She remembers the doc saying: “There’s nothing we can do. Just wait.”

“People don’t wait for this sort of thing,” she protested. “What are we waiting for? What if this Marine was your brother, would we wait?”

They stood and watched as the man died. Goodell stormed out of the bunker.

“There was always a heaviness in the air,” she said. “It felt like I was being watched. We would feel hands on our shoulders or hands on our heads. Everyone had stories of sounds they heard or things they had felt. I was on watch at the bunker and I heard the back door open. I assumed it was one of the Marines coming in to use the Internet or the phone. I waited for them to come up. They would always come up. But no one came up. I got up and didn’t see anyone. I went back to my duty hut and I heard footsteps walk across the bunker. This kind of thing happened often.”

Her return to the United States was difficult, filled with retreats into isolation, substance abuse, deep depression and dysfunctional relationships. Slowly she pulled her life back together, finishing college and applying to graduate school so she can counsel trauma victims.

“Every single Marine I know goes to Iraq to help,” she said. “While I was there that is what I thought. That is why I volunteered. I thought I was going to help the Iraqis. I know better now. We did the dirty work. We were used by the government. The military knows that young, single men are dangerous. We breed it in Marines. We push the testosterone. We don’t want them to be educated. They are deprived of a lot and rewarded with very little. It keeps us at ground level. We cannot question anyone. We do what we are told.

“I am still in contact with most of the people I knew,” she said. “They are not coping. One lives in VA [Veterans Affairs], constantly seeing psychologists and psychiatrists. One was kicked out of the Marines for three DUIs. Another was kicked out of the Marines because he took cocaine. Those who have gotten out are living below the poverty level. And what people do to cope is re-enlist. When they re-enlist they do better. They function. I am the only one who went to school of the 18 Marines in Mortuary Affairs. But I am in counseling at the VA. I have been diagnosed with PTSD, anxiety, depression and substance abuse. What separates me from them is that I have a great support system and I found my salvation in my education.

“War is disgusting and horrific,” she said. “It never leaves the people who were involved in it. The damage is far greater than the lists of casualties or cost in dollars. It permeates lifestyles. It infects cultures and people and worldviews. The war is never over for us. The fighting stops. The troops get called back. But the war goes on for those damaged by war.”

Not long ago she received a text message from a Marine she had worked with in Mortuary Affairs after he tried to commit suicide.

“I’ve got $2,000 in the bank,” the message read. “Let’s meet in NYC and go out with a bang.”

Source: https://www.truthdig.com/report/page3/the_body_baggers_of_iraq_20110321/

Filed Under: Mental Health, Military Industrial Complex, Suicide, USA, War Tagged With: Death, Soldiers Bodies

More US Soldiers Committed Suicide Than Died in Combat

December 13, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

For the second year (2010) in a row, more US soldiers killed themselves (468) than died in combat (462). “If you… know the one thing that causes people to commit suicide, please let us know,” General Peter Chiarelli told the Army Times, “because we don’t know.”

Suicide is a tragic but predictable human reaction to being asked to kill – and watch your friends be killed – for a war based on lies. Perhaps being forced to bag the mangled flesh of fellow soldiers could be another reason why some are committing suicide.

Body Bagging… ever heard the term? Soldiers in the Marine Corps’ Mortuary Affairs unit at Camp Al Taqaddum, Iraq, are given this job… of collecting and cataloging the bodies of dead marines. They sift through the remains of the soldiers, from prom photos to suicide notes and love letters — and put their remains and effects into bags, metal boxes and refrigerators. (clarify please – are you talking about their physical remains/bodies and their effects – ie. photos, etc. or both?).

One soldier, Jess Goodell, recounts a marine brought into the unit still breathing. She frantically called to her superiors, to which they simply replied, “wait.” She watched while he died. When she returned to the US, Goodell like many others, was diagnosed with deep depression, substance abuse, PTSD and anxiety.

Source: https://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/1-more-us-soldiers-committed-suicide-than-died-in-combat/

Filed Under: Suicide, USA, Veterans, War

Morocco: Seven People Were Burned In Protests Against Oppression In 2011.

December 12, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

Friday 09/12/2011, the Moroccan authorities reported the death of Muhammed Suleiman street vendor Rushd hospital in Casablanca, having burned his own body to protest the heavy police oppression.

The Arab world has been at the limit of endurance, with respect to heavy repression that you receive from your government. Execute arbitrary laws and almost no convictions that the accused has the right to defense.

The example of Tunisia in January a street vendor had their goods taken by the security forces have seen no alternative to support her four children and wife. burned his body in front of the courthouse to protest the abuse of power and lack of government investment in economic leveling of the population.

Yesterday, the Moroccan authorities reported the death of Muhammed Suleiman street vendor Rushd hospital in Casablanca, having burned his own body to protest the heavy police oppression.

According to the “February 20 Movement“, which represents the popular revolution of Morocco, the boy was selling smuggled gasoline (a common activity in the country), and he was pressured by police who threatened to take his goods if they pay a small “rate”.

Another reference is the website ”lakome“ who said the boy found himself depressed and angry, threw gasoline on his body while arguing with police who threatened to confiscate petrol prohibited until fired. According to sources, the young man died on Friday 09 December because of injuries, despite receiving medical attention.

National crisis

According to the February 20th Movement, a grassroots movement of opposition to the current Moroccan regime, even after the last elections, which were also considered “a success”, this is already the 7th incident in the country. All these desperate people, their bodies incinerated after not finding any more support in law or in society, or to consider that, through the police force, no one would care to hear their problems.

The average suicide has been between 20 and 32 years. Among these, there is a young, 20. While the population seeks to draw the attention of authorities for their needs, only the rich life and improve more and more people are living without rights. A crisis worsens and the apparent efforts to alleviate the suffering of the Moroccan people has not been sufficiently implemented, is what describes the “February 20 Movement.” According to testimony from members of the movement, most of the suicides came as a result of heavy police repression and abuse of authority. There are cases like Kamal Amri, who was killed by the system, so that seemed to suicide by fire.

The list of martyrs courtesy Ratoune Mourad political activist of Moroccan popular organization “Youth Movement February 20“:

Deaths by suicide

Judge Emad, 18
Bnkaddor horse, 25
Salmi beauty, 24
Samir Albuazawa, 17
Fadwa Laroui, 20
Shayeb Karim, 21
Kamal Al-Amari, 30

Killings by security forces.

Alknona Hamid, 26
Mohammed Bodroh
Kamal al-Hassani, 28

Source: https://bloghumans.blogspot.com/2011/12/marrocos-7-pessoas-se-incendiaram-em.html?spref=fb

Filed Under: Censorship, Police, Politics, Poverty, Propaganda, Protests, Revolution, Rights, Social Unrest, Suicide, Tyranny Tagged With: Government Oppression, Martyrs, Morocco

Jeremy Clarkson: Train Suicides Are ‘Selfish’

December 4, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson is embroiled in further controversy after branding people who throw themselves under trains as “selfish“.

The 51-year-old, who was forced to apologise earlier this week after saying all striking workers should be shot , reiterated his view that those who commit suicide at railway stations cause “immense” disruption for commuters.

In his column in The Sun newspaper, Clarkson said: “I have the deepest sympathy for anyone whose life is so mangled and messed up that they believe death’s icy embrace will be better.

“However, every year around 200 people decide that the best way to go is by hurling themselves in front of a speeding train.

“In some ways they are right. This method has a 90% success rate and it’s extremely quick.

“However, it is a very selfish way to go because the disruption it causes is immense.

“And think what it’s like for the poor train driver who sees you lying on the line and can do absolutely nothing to avoid a collision.”

Later in the article the presenter refers to those who choose to jump in front of trains as “Johnny Suicide” and argues that following a death, trains should carry on their journeys as soon as possible.

He adds: “The train cannot be removed nor the line re-opened until all of the victim’s body has been recovered. And sometimes the head can be half a mile away from the feet.

“Change the driver, pick up the big bits of what’s left of the victim, get the train moving as quickly as possible and let foxy woxy and the birds nibble away at the smaller, gooey parts that are far away or hard to find.”

The Paul Farmer, chief executive of Mind, described the comments as “extraordinarily tasteless“, especially in the wake of the death of footballer Gary Speed.

He told BBC Radio 5 Live: “I think it’s extraordinarily tasteless in its tone.

I think there will be many people who have lost loved ones to suicide and people who have contemplated suicide that will think it is in extremely bad taste.

“It stands out like a sore thumb from what is increasingly a more supportive approach to suicide by the media.

“People will feel like he is trivialising the subject and dismissing people who have taken their own lives.”

Mr Farmer added: “This is a man who really doesn’t understand what he is talking about.”

The latest controversy comes in the wake of comments Clarkson made during BBC1′s The One Show in which he said striking workers “should be shot”.

Speaking about public sector workers who took industrial action he told the show’s presenters: “I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families.

“I mean, how dare they go on strike when they’ve got these gilt-edged pensions that are going to be guaranteed while the rest of us have to work for a living?”

Clarkson had first criticised train suicides during the same One Show appearance.

The presenter and the BBC were forced to apologise for the remark about strikers after it caused uproar among public sector unions and politicians, while attracting more than 21,000 complaints .

He also used his column in the Sun to justify the comment, saying that in his interview he backed the strikers “and then to make a point about the need for impartiality said they should be shot”.

Source: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/jeremy-clarkson-train-suicides-selfish-121341127.html

Filed Under: Suicide Tagged With: Satire

Making a Killing: The Untold Story of Psychotropic Drugging - Full Movie (Documentary)

November 27, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

This video provides the facts about psychotropic drugs and the huge profits they create for the pharmaceutical industry. These drugs are not safe and have not been on the market long enough to provide sufficient long term studies regarding their effects.

These drugs do cause addiction, however most “doctors” would call this dependence because you do not have to take an increasing dose over time. They are completely fine with you being addicted to the same amount of any given drug on a daily basis.

Over half of the people that commit suicide in the United States are prescribed to psychotropic drugs. (Ex: Paxil (Paroxetine), Zoloft (Sertraline), Prozac, Wellbutrin (Bupropion), Effexor, Seroquil, Ultram (Tramadol), etc.)

Filed Under: Big Pharma, Drugs, Health, Mental Health, Psychology, Suicide

Suicide Casts Long Shadow After Decade Of War

November 25, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

KILLEEN, Texas (AFP) - A soldier kills himself and his wife. Another war veteran hangs himself in despair. Yet a third puts a gun to his head and pulls the trigger outside a gas station in a confrontation with Texas lawmen.

Suicides by veterans like these once would have left people reeling in this military community. But troops and their families here these days call it the “new normal” for a US Army that’s spent a decade at war.

Melissa Dixon sees the stress in the tattoos she draws on soldiers back from combat.

“Some of them have issues with their wives or their loved ones, where they’re fighting, or one will have a friend commit suicide,” she said.

There’s no place like Fort Hood in the Army. A post that sent soldiers from two divisions to Iraq three times since the invasion, it’s logged more suicides since 2003 than any other — 107.

Soldiers at big posts like Fort Hood that have played key roles in deployments are at the greatest risk of killing themselves. The post here in Killeen, northwest of Texas’ state capital, Austin, set an Army record last year with 22 suicides.

Elsewhere, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, home of the 82nd Airborne Division, has lost 77 soldiers to suicide since 2003.

At Fort Campbell, Kentucky, home to the 101st Airborne Division, 75 soldiers died by their own hand over the last eight years.

But the problem is widespread. Last year, a record 300 soldiers in the active-duty, Reserve and National Guard killed themselves.

The numbers appear to be down slightly in 2011, but 32 active-duty staff killed themselves in July, the highest since the Army began tracking the phenomenon in January 2009.

The Army’s vice chief of staff, General Peter Chiarelli, expressed disappointment but insisted that an array of suicide-prevention programs instituted in the wake of widespread publicity over the deaths was helping.

The Army has distributed booklets and cards to help spot suicidal behavior, launched a task force that tracks deaths and develops new intervention strategies, and has begun two major research projects.

“While the high number of potential suicides in July is discouraging, we are confident our efforts aimed at increasing individuals’ resiliency, while reducing incidence of at-risk and high-risk behavior across the force, are having a positive impact,” he said.

Progress is hard to see.

Suicides have risen steadily since the Iraq war began, with the number doubling from 80 in 2003 to 162 in 2009.

Most of those dying are lower-level enlistees.

Roughly two in every three victims have served at least one combat tour.

The vast majority are men.

One, Staff Sergeant Jared Hagemann, was found dead with a gunshot wound to his head earlier this summer. An Army Ranger in Washington state, he had deployed eight times.

The Army’s recently retired chief of staff, General George Casey, once insisted it wasn’t clear if combat stress was a factor.

But last year he conceded that stress as well as such problems as ruined relationships played a role as well. “As I look at it, it has to add stress,” Casey said.

Yet active-duty troops aren’t the only war-weary soldiers.

Last year’s suicide mark was driven by a sharp rise of deaths in the guard and reserve.

With more than half the year gone, the Army Reserve’s top commander, Lieutenant General Jack Stultz, sees little improvement but is still trying to reach out to his troops, who are citizen-soldiers often disconnected from military support.

“Our suicide rates in the Army Reserve are trending about where they were this time last year, which I guess the good news is it doesn’t seem to be increasing, the bad news is it doesn’t seem to be decreasing,” he said.

Many of those killing themselves have done so quietly.

Sergeant 1st Class Gregory Eugene Giger grew despondent in the wake of a divorce that began while he was in Iraq.

One of the 22 suicides at Fort Hood in 2010, he was found hanging by a necktie in his apartment off the post. His mom called Giger a “tall quiet Texan,” devastated by the breakup. “I think he probably had a lot going on that he just stuffed down inside of him,” Helen Giger said.

Killeen, an Army town since World War II, has seen its share of violence that includes a 1991 massacre where a gunman killed 23 restaurant patrons before shooting himself.

Nearly two years ago, Army psychiatrist Major Nidal Malik Hasan was shot after a rampage that left 13 dead and 32 wounded on Fort Hood.

Yet over one long weekend last year four soldiers, all combat veterans, committed suicide.

One, Sergeant Michael Timothy Franklin, was believed to have murdered his wife at their residence off the post before killing himself.

Just a month earlier, Armando Galvan Aguilar Jr., 26, was cornered by police outside a gas (petrol) station northeast of Fort Hood at the end of an early morning high-speed chase.

“Mando” as friends called him, had been home from Iraq for a year. Fort Hood doctors had treated him for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression, but he still struggled.

He had trouble sleeping and sometimes mixed alcohol with his medications.

On the last night of his life, Aguilar drank 30 beers.

Then he shot himself in the head with a .45-caliber handgun that he’d taken from a fellow soldier, ironically, to stop him from committing suicide.

Source: https://www.activistpost.com/2011/08/suicide-casts-long-shadow-after-decade.html

Filed Under: Mental Health, Military, Suicide, USA, War

Guantanamo is most expensive jail

November 18, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

This establishment, managed by the U.S., spends $800,000 for each of the 171 detainees, many of them held in custody without charges.

Data published in the Spanish daily, El País, and assigned to the Department of Defense of the United States, establishes Guantanamo prison as the world’s most expensive prison. The establishment, with 171 detainees in Cuba, are costing American taxpayers 137 million Euros (about 242 million dollars) per year, or 800,000 Euros each (1.4 million dollars). Meanwhile, the average spending per person in the prison system on American soil is 25,000 Euros (about 45,000 dollars) a year.

The Guantanamo prison, opened in 2002, months after the attacks of September 11, operates under the “logic of prevention.” Inmates sent to the site do not necessarily need formal charges. They can be kept in custody indefinitely, as long as the U.S. would consider them a risk.

The result of this controversial premise was exposed by Wikileaks in May 2011, with the leak of 759 secret records of 779 prisoners who have been through the establishment. According to the documents, at least 150 detainees were innocent people, including elderly people with dementia, psychiatric patients and teachers.

In an interview, Michael Strauss especially lays bare French violations and mistakes made by the U.S. government at Guantanamo Bay. Michael Strauss, a professor of International Relations at the Centre d’Etudes et Stratégique Diplomatique of Paris, explained to CartaCapital at the time of the leaks, that the prison was designed to shift the crime of terrorism from civilian to military and detain prisoners outside the USA.

“This scheme has created several new legal, political and moral issues. For the Americans, it became even more difficult to deal with terrorism with international partners.”

The documents showed that the most important aspects for the arrest of an individual were the amount of information known by the same and their degree of dangerousness in the future.

In prison, trying to escape the image of torture, the prisoners are checked every three minutes. The most dangerous, such as the alleged mastermind of the ideological attacks on Washington and New York in 2001, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, are monitored every 30 seconds. In addition, 1,300 local people work among soldiers, interpreters, cooks and psychiatrists.

Rights

The Guantanamo detainees captured in 2008 alone have the right to habeas corpus under the U.S. Constitution. “This decision came only after several inmates spent six years detained without being charged with crimes, and after torture,” said Strauss. “The Court ruled that prisoners enjoy these rights, because the United States has a sort of de facto sovereignty in Guantanamo. Even if, officially, in fact, Cuba has sovereignty.”

The teacher pointed out the ambiguity of sovereignty as the main reason for the choice of prison, because it allows the special peculiar treatment of prisoners. “Where the Americans are, their sovereign legal system applies completely. And where they have jurisdiction, but are not sovereign, its legal system applies only partially. Thus, constitutional protections such as habeas corpus did not apply there,” he explains.

According to El País, about 20% of the detainees were arrested arbitrarily even according to military law. Moreover, the U.S. did not believe in the guilt of 60% of the prisoners.

President Barack Obama said he was making closing Guantanamo one of his main goals during the elections. In January 2009, the White House stipulated that in a period of one year the prison would be closed, but failed to stick to it.

“The recession would have a direct impact on a much larger number of people in the United States than anything that Washington did with respect to Guantanamo,” said Strauss. He says the economic crisis was one of the reasons Obama disregarded the promise.

Source: https://english.pravda.ru/business/finance/17-11-2011/119660-Guantanamo_is_most_expensive_jail-0/

Filed Under: Censorship, Corruption, Education, Guantanamo, Imperialism, Islam, Justice, Law, Martial Law, Media, Military Industrial Complex, Money, Politicians, Politics, Prison, Privacy, Propaganda, Protests, Religion, Revolution, Rights, Suicide, Surveillance, Terrorism, Torture, USA, War, Weapons

The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World

November 18, 2011 By T Kelly 1 Comment

The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World was launched simultaneously on 11 November 2011 at several locations around the world.

Please sign and share widely. Thank you for your compassion and support.

The aim of this Charter is to create a worldwide movement to end violence in all its forms. The People’s Charter will give voice to the millions of ordinary people around the world who want an end to war, oppression, environmental destruction and violence of all kinds. We hope that this Charter will support and unite the courageous nonviolent struggles of ordinary people all over the world.

As you will see, The People’s Charter describes very thoroughly the major forms of violence in the world. It also presents a strategy to end this violence.

We can each play a part in stopping violence and in creating a peaceful and just world. Some of us will focus on reducing our consumption, some of us will parent our children in a way that fosters children’s safety and empowerment, some of us will use nonviolent resistance in the face of military violence. Everyone’s contribution is important and needed. We hope this Charter will be a springboard for us all to take steps to create a peaceful and just world, however small and humble these steps may be. By listening to the deep truth of ourselves, each other and the Earth, each one of us can find our own unique way to help create this nonviolent world.

Why did we choose 11 November as the date to launch The People’s Charter?

‘When I was a boy … all the people of all the nations which fought in the First World War were silent during the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of Armistice Day, which was the eleventh day of the eleventh month. It was at that minute in nineteen-hundred and eighteen, that millions upon millions of human beings stopped butchering one another. I have talked to old men who were on battlefields at that minute. They have told me in one way or another that the sudden silence was the Voice of God. So we still have among us some men who can remember when God spoke clearly to mankind.’
(Kurt Vonnegut Jr., an atheist humanist, in his novel Breakfast of Champions.

Organisation

So far, the organising groups in various locations have organised launch events in their localities around the world. Some groups are organising follow-up events so that other people have the chance to become involved in local, personal networks.

See ‘Future Events’ for information about the next public event nearest you.

Signing the Charter

The People’s Charter can be read and signed online: click on ‘Read Charter’ or ‘Sign Charter’ in the sidebar.

‘A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.’ Mohandas K. Gandhi

Source: https://thepeoplesnonviolencecharter.wordpress.com/

Filed Under: Animal Rights, Banks, Campaigning, Censorship, Corporations, Corruption, Drugs, Economy, Education, Health, Human Rights, Imperialism, Income Inequality, Justice, Law, Martial Law, Media, Mental Health, Military Industrial Complex, Money, Nuclear, Occupy, Politics, Population, Poverty, Prison, Privacy, Propaganda, Protests, Radiation, Religion, Revolution, Rights, Science, Self-Sustainability, Spirituality, Suicide, Surveillance, Symbolism, Torture, War, Weapons

Tibet: What can other countries do?

November 18, 2011 By T Kelly Leave a Comment

At least 11 monks and nuns have set themselves on fire this year such is their desperation and condemnation of China’s repressive policies in their homeland.

Is it an effective form of protest? Will China change its policies?

Not likely, without clear and consistent pressure on the international stage, argues Professor Robert Barnett, director of Modern Tibetan Studies at Columbia University.

“We are not seeing strong signals coming from the major Western powers. We need to find a way to articulate these issues without seeming to impose on China,” Barnett said.

GlobalPost talked with Barnett about which countries are better at dealing with China, why changes China does make don’t necessarily get noticed, and whether focusing on what’s going on inside Tibet could actually be doing some harm.

What can, or should, other countries do about Tibet?

Basically, China assumes that it should push its objectives until it meets resistance. Because it sees itself as growing and recovering a lost historic role in a hostile environment, its underlying strategy is to pursue its strategic objectives up to the point where its competitors prevent it from going further — a mode that is typical of a nation at this point in its arc of growth.

This means that other countries need to maintain exceptionally clear definitions of what they will accommodate in terms of their interests, and that includes issues of rights and responsibilities. That’s easy when it comes to external affairs, where the Chinese recognize that we all have a role and interest, but we all have to find skillful and effective ways to explain why there should be limitations to Chinese action too, when it comes to affairs that they are convinced are internal, like Tibet, Taiwan, Xinjiang, even sometimes the South China Seas. But it’s difficult, because these issues are very sensitive and complex when international players are involved.

We also have to think how diplomatic language is understood by China. For example, symbolic and ceremonial aspects of diplomacy are seen in Beijing as much more important than they are in the West. China knows that whether a US president meets the Dalai Lama, and whether he does so in a public or a private room, could conceal a larger strategic shift.

More importantly, Chinese diplomats carefully read the signs of diplomatic attention. Silence is very vocal — if you raise an issue and then don’t mention it again, it is taken as a concession. If you even slightly moderate the language you use to refer to it, it’s seen as a major concession. Backing off is a major signal, so Westerners have to learn that on some issues they have to learn to maintain a practice of repeated, consistent restatements of a principled position. Dull but important.

China is a major world power, but it still seems very sensitive to world perceptions of its policies. This doesn’t mean that other countries should be insulting or aggressive toward China. It does mean that Western governments need to be much clearer and more consistent in stating what their concerns are, and explaining why they have any right or interests to speak on internal issues.

Are you seeing Western governments that are doing this?

There has been more or less a complete collapse on policy consistency across the Western block in terms of knowing how to respond to assertive modern Chinese diplomatic skill. In western Europe, it’s a total write-off. They are easily divided, since they are numerous, and so are terrified of upsetting China. They’ve had years of China saying “If you criticize me, I won’t buy your next Airbus” and have failed to work out a way to deal with that strategy. It’s like watching someone throw dollar bills — or, rather, euro notes — into a crowd.

America has been more consistent, actually. They do try to maintain a clearer line and a more skillful sense of how to respond to various maneuvers. And America has said consistently on Tibet that China should change its policies there because they’re counterproductive, which is useful language since it appeals to their interests, not just ours.

But the most interesting gestures have come from countries in Scandinavia and eastern Europe, the latter presumably because they understand Leninist traditions of diplomacy.

We are not seeing strong signals coming from the major Western powers. We need to find a way to articulate these issues without seeming to impose on China.

Can you see anything shifting in the near future?

Actually the Chinese have made some micro-changes to their policies in Tibet as a result of pressure from both outside and inside, but they are so small that most specialists don’t even mention them.

For example, the new party secretary in Lhasa arranged last month for almost all Tibetan university graduates to have jobs. This week he said that all monks — of course he only means the few recognized officially — will have pensions and minimum allowances. They are certainly pouring more money into the area now, especially the villages, and though the effects of this are very much disputed, it shows a certain urgency of response.

We can be skeptical, and we should be to some extent — the methods of Chinese modernization in Tibet and elsewhere are rushed, manipulative, top-down and so on. That’s our responsibility in a situation where a people is not allowed to speak out.

But these moves are proofs of principle: they indicate that pressure works. That does not mean that all kinds of pressure work of course, and inside pressure is much more important than outside pressure. But it suggests that a skillful balance of the two does sometimes get noticed.

Could there be significant changes?

Perhaps the way Tibet is run by the Chinese could be changed, at least to some extent. The question is whether the changes that will come will be enough. It’s very doubtful, given the extreme conservatism of the current leadership. Still, when you live under an autocracy, sometimes small changes can make a much bigger difference than expected to the people living there. And you never know what they might lead to — which is also why the Chinese are so scared of making them. I don’t mean independence, but a broader civil society.

But there are shifts taking place of a more troubling variety. While people are focused on terrible tragedies in Tibet, a lot is being done in Nepal to the exiled Tibetan community there. It is now apparently illegal for them even to have certain private prayer ceremonies. Police raided a Tibetan cultural show in Kathmandu, a classical opera performance, recently. Thousands of Tibetans have been refused exit permits to come to the US, even though the US has prepared to issue visas. It’s incredible, inconceivable within what is supposedly a democratic society.

There’s no real dispute that this is all done directly at the demand of China. So Nepal, on this issue, is being run internally by its neighbor. I experienced this when I was last there a few years ago. I was surrounded and escorted at one point for a few hours by un-uniformed Chinese police when I was in a border area. They didn’t realize I could understand what they were saying.

And last week, there were news reports from India of a major Bollywood film being ordered by a government agency there to cut a scene that featured a “Free Tibet” flag. These are clearly challenges to democractic principles in those countries. They are fundamental shifts, but they are not discussed — and they are always done without public debate. In those neighboring areas, Chinese policy is happening all around us.

So, the focus inside Tibet is a distraction?

It is making us look in one direction while a lot is going on in other directions. Things are changing, just not in the direction we might like to see. We shouldn’t be alarmist about it, it’s all part of the normal chess game that the big political players are involved in, adjustments to regional balance and spheres of influence, but it requires attention and alertness.

Self-immolations are in the news. Besides reports today of a Chinese man who set himself on fire in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, China is also facing a wave of self-immolations in eastern Tibet.

At least 11 monks and nuns have set themselves on fire this year in protest of China’s grip on their homeland. Last week, the Dalai came forward and blamed China for the spate of tragic acts, saying its approach in Tibet amounts to “cultural genocide.”

For some, it was a welcome message from a figure who, inevitably, is at the center of any news out of Tibet. For others, it began the well-worn cycle that starts with the Dalai Lama condemning China, moves to China condemning the Dalai Lama, and ends without much changed.

“It’s hard to see new ways to describe the situation. But we have to keep on trying to describe it,” said Robbie Barnett, director of the Modern Tibetan Studies program at Columbia University.

What should the Dalai Lama do?

GlobalPost spoke with Barnett about the likelihood that China will make some changes, what the Dalai Lama can really do, and why no one is an idle commentator on this issue.

The majority of Tibetans who have self-immolated this year have died. It’s clear these deaths are the result of more than a decade of repressive policies in Tibet. What is a helpful frame to make sense of this in the West?

Professor Robbie Barnett: We would have to imagine a government here treating universities as, let’s say, mafia centers or criminal cults that have to be repeatedly invaded by police. That’s roughly how the major Tibetan monasteries are being viewed now in China.

Local officials in the areas where these self-immolations have occurred, mostly around Kirti monastery in Ngaba, seem to have decided to go further with security policies than other areas. They are using techniques that had been used before only after major incidents, such as blockading a monastery, and cutting off food and water, sometimes for weeks, in response to a single-person protest.

So it looks like the area around Kirti has been used as laboratory for ways to manage the Tibetan population. It is an understatement to say that the experiment has not been successful.

What are the chances China will change its harsh policies?

In one sense the chances are higher than we think: The policies that are most provocative are not that difficult to reverse. Some Chinese officials also think them excessive — most Tibetans do — and it’s in China’s interest to reverse them. But there is no sign of the political will to do so.

In China, there is in general a cynical view of protests by Tibetans and other nationalities. Because there are some positive discrimination policies in place in China for Tibetans, many Chinese think that any protests by them are just attempts to get more funding and more privileges from Beijing.

They view Tibetan complaints as being all about the economy and about getting access to more economic goods. In that view, culture and religion are seen as secondary to economics, and a community that gets richer because of the state is expected to be satisfied with that.

There is also the fear of the internal domino effect. China is afraid that if it shows any flexibility to Tibetans, that will lead to more demands, which will ultimately lead to a heightened sense of Tibetan nationalism and demands for independence, which in turn will trigger demands for independence from other nationalities in China — and the areas inhabited by those nationalities cover some 60 percent of China’s landmass.

It’s not that China does not want Tibetans or others to have distinctive identities — people there enjoy superficial cultural exoticism and variety as much as Westerners do. But they want these to be ethnic identities, not national ones. They want them to see themselves as “ethnic groups” or “cultures” and not as “nationalities.” This seems to be why Chinese officials ordered in about 1995 that only the English word “ethnic” should be used to describe them, not the former official term, “nationality.”

So, the problems that stop them changing their policies in Tibet are political rather than practical; this is a very conservative leadership. There are many things they could do, practically speaking. They could limit the migration of non-Tibetans to these areas. They could appoint culturally-literate Tibetans as local leaders and create social partnerships with monasteries in terms of education and other issues. They could have true bilingual education policies, and they could stop the demonization of the monks and the practice of insulting the Dalai Lama.

If the Dalai Lama took a strong stand against the self-immolations, would they stop?

That’s a reasonable question that’s being asked by a lot of people. But it’s more complex than it seems if one considers the history and the context. The Dalai Lama has asked protesters to stop on many similar occasions in the past — when Tibetans have staged hunger strikes in India, for example. He has said that suicides for political reasons shouldn’t be encouraged. His government has said repeatedly that it does not encourage self-immolations.

But in the past when the Chinese have asked him to say something to calm the situation inside Tibet, and when he has done it, the Chinese officials have then demanded that he say something else that they want, as opposed to making a concession in return. This hugely damages trust, I think. That’s what happened in 2008: A major crisis was used as a bargaining opportunity to get the Dalai Lama to help. He tried to do that, and they then made more demands and more outrageous ones, while doing nothing on their side to calm the situation.

When we ask this question, we are imagining a diplomatic situation in which the Chinese side and the Tibetan side are working together to solve a problem. But that is not the situation, unfortunately.

Each opportunity is being used to try to humiliate the other side, at least by the Chinese officials in charge of talks. It’s not quite the same on the Tibetan side. In academic terms, the Tibetan negotiating moves are “communicative,” basically trying to persuade the other side or to appeal to emotion, while the Chinese manuevers are “strategic,” trying to cripple or weaken the other party. This is typical of asymmetrical negotiations.

What is needed is a new approach from both sides. The Tibetan side has been asking for talks for over a year, and they are waiting for the Chinese side to set up a mechanism for talks. So, it’s not that the Dalai Lama should be saying something, but it’s the two sides that should be coming together for talks, or have a mechanism for dealing with crises.

One thing that is obvious here, is that there needs to be a hotline for emergencies. A point of contact between the two sides for when the situation gets really dire.

But what can, or should, the Dalai Lama do?

His government has said it does not encourage these acts but understands the reasons for them. I think that’s a useful articulation of the issues.

The Dalai Lama is now saying strong things, like his most recent comments on China committing “cultural genocide” in Tibet. He seems to feel it is his role to criticize China in strong terms. It’s hardly surprising that he would feel frustrated, but is it the right thing for him to use such terms?

We have to remember that we’re all pawns in a larger situation, where each side is trying to get each of us to criticize the other. That’s very strong objective in China’s policies, and for Tibetans too. So I’m not sure it’s for me to tell the Dalai Lama what to do. We are not just idle commentators.

Everything is electric on this issue.

Source: https://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/the-rice-bowl/tibet-self-immolations-dalai-lama-china-foreign-policy-diplomacy

Filed Under: Censorship, China, Corporations, Corruption, Genocide, Health, Imperialism, Justice, Media, Military Industrial Complex, Money, Politicians, Politics, Poverty, Propaganda, Protests, Religion, Rights, Spirituality, Suicide, Surveillance, Symbolism, Tibet, Torture, USA