Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

911 is a joke

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • liutangsanzang
    replied
    whoever is behind 9/11 has a kind of paranoia illness

    please inquire into the world of paranoia in psischiatri if u want to understand 9/11

    and watch urself if u have ani simptoms, it might be easi to get contaminated

    here from wikipedia

    Paranoia is a disturbed thought process characterized by excessive anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat towards yourself. In the original Greek, παράνοια (paranoia) simply means madness (para = outside; nous = mind). Historically, this characterization was used to describe any delusional state.
    Sometimes in common usage, the term paranoia is misused to describe a phobia. For example, a person may not want to fly out of fear the plane may crash. This does not in itself indicate paranoia, but rather a phobia. The lack of blame in this case usually points to the latter. An example of paranoia, however, would be fear that the pilot is an alcoholic with no evidence to suggest such, and would crash the plane as a result of this.
    Contents


    [hide]
    [edit] Use in psychiatry


    More recently[1], the clinical use of the term has been used to describe delusions where the affected person believes he is being persecuted. Specifically, they have been defined as containing two central elements:
    1. The individual thinks that harm is occurring, or is going to occur, to him or her.
    2. The individual thinks that the persecutor has the intention to cause harm.
    Paranoia is often associated with psychotic illnesses, sometimes schizophrenia, although attenuated features may be present in other primarily non-psychotic diagnoses, such as paranoid personality disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder. Paranoia can also be a side effect of medication or recreational drugs such as marijuana and particularly stimulants such as methamphetamine and crack cocaine. In the unrestricted use of the term, common paranoid delusions can include the belief that the person is being followed, poisoned or loved at a distance (often by a media figure or important person, a delusion known as erotomania or de Clerambault syndrome). Other common paranoid delusions include the belief that the person has an imaginary disease or parasitic infection (delusional parasitosis); that the person is on a special quest or has been chosen by God; that the person has had thoughts inserted or removed from conscious thought; or that the person's actions are being controlled by an external force. Therefore, in common usage, the term paranoid addresses a range of mental conditions, assumed by the use of the term to be of psychiatric origin, in which the subject is seen to generalise or project fears and anxieties onto the external world, particularly in the form of organised behaviour focused on them. The syndrome is applied equally to powerful people like executives obsessed with takeover bids or political leaders convinced of plots against them, and to common people who believe for instance that shadowy agencies are operating against them.

    [edit] History

    The term paranoia was used to describe a mental illness in which a delusional belief is the sole or most prominent feature. In his original attempt at classifying different forms of mental illness, Kraepelin used the term pure paranoia to describe a condition where a delusion was present, but without any apparent deterioration in intellectual abilities and without any of the other features of dementia praecox, the condition later renamed schizophrenia. Notably, in his definition, the belief does not have to be persecutory to be classified as paranoid, so any number of delusional beliefs can be classified as paranoia. For example, a person who has the sole delusional belief that he is an important religious figure would be classified by Kraepelin as having 'pure paranoia'. Even at the present time, a delusion need not be suspicious or fearful to be classified as paranoid. A person might be diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic without delusions of persecution, simply because his delusions refer mainly to himself, such as believing he is a CIA agent or a famous member of royalty.

    [edit] See also

    Paranoid personality disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis characterized by paranoia and a pervasive, long-standing suspiciousness and generalized mistrust of others. (DSM-IV) For a person's personality to be considered a personality disorder, an enduring pattern of characteristic maladaptive behaviors, thinking and personality traits must be present from the onset of adolescence or early adulthood. Additionally, these behaviors, traits and thinking must be present to the extent that they cause significant difficulties in relationships, employment and other facets of functioning.
    Those with paranoid personality disorder are hypersensitive, are easily slighted, and habitually relate to the world by vigilant scanning of the environment for clues or suggestions to validate their prejudicial ideas or biases. They tend to be guarded and suspicious and have quite constricted emotional lives. Their incapacity for meaningful emotional involvement and the general pattern of isolated withdrawal often lend a quality of schizoid isolation to their life experience. [1]

    Differential diagnosis:
    • Because of the surface similarities of the paranoia involved, it is important that the Paranoid Personality Disorder not be confused with paranoid schizophrenia, another totally different type of mental disorder where the patient has constant feelings of being watched, followed or persecuted.

    Contents


    [hide]
    [edit] Descriptive diagnosis per American DSM-IV-TR

    Paranoid personality disorder is listed in the DSM-IV-TR as 301.00 Paranoid Personality Disorder.

    According to the DSM-IV-TR, this disorder is characterized by a pervasive distrust and suspicion of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by four (or more) of the following:
    • Suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are exploiting, harming, or deceiving him or her
    • Is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates
    • Is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her
    • Reads benign remarks or events as threatening or demeaning.
    • Persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights
    • Perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack
    • Has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner.
    The traits, behaviors and characteristics
    • Do not occur exclusively during the course of a mood disorder accompanied by psychotic features nor other psychotic disorders.
    • Are not due to the direct physiological effects of a general medical condition.
    [edit] European description per ICD-10

    The ICD-10 lists paranoid personality disorder as F60.0 Paranoid Personality Disorder.
    This personality disorder is characterized by at least 3 of the following:
    (a) excessive sensitiveness to setbacks and rebuffs;
    (b) tendency to bear grudges persistently, i.e. refusal to forgive insults and injuries or slights;
    (c) suspiciousness and a pervasive tendency to distort experience by misconstruing the neutral or friendly actions of others as hostile or contemptuous;
    (d) a combative and tenacious sense of personal rights out of keeping with the actual situation;
    (e) recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding sexual fidelity of spouse or sexual partner;
    (f) tendency to experience excessive self-importance, manifest in a persistent self-referential attitude;
    (g) preoccupation with unsubstantiated "conspiratorial" explanations of events both immediate to the patient and in the world at large.

    Includes:
    • expansive paranoid, fanatic, querulant and sensitive paranoid personality (disorder)
    Excludes:
    • delusional disorder
    • schizophrenia
    Personality Disorders
    A personality disorder is a severe disturbance in the characterological constitution and behavioral tendencies of the individual, usually involving several areas of the personality, and nearly always associated with considerable personal and social disruption. Personality disorder tends to appear in late childhood or adolescence and continues to be manifest into adulthood. It is therefore unlikely that the diagnosis of personality disorder will be appropriate before the age of 16 or 17 years. General diagnostic guidelines applying to all personality disorders are presented below; supplementary descriptions are provided with each of the subtypes. Diagnostic Guidelines
    Conditions not directly attributable to gross brain damage or disease, or to another psychiatric disorder, meeting the following criteria:
    (a) markedly dysharmonious attitudes and behavior, involving usually several areas of functioning, e.g. affectivity, arousal, impulse control, ways of perceiving and thinking, and style of relating to others; (b) the abnormal behavior pattern is enduring, of long standing, and not limited to episodes of mental illness; (c) the abnormal behavior pattern is pervasive and clearly maladaptive to a broad range of personal and social situations; (d) the above manifestations always appear during childhood or adolescence and continue into adulthood; (e) the disorder leads to considerable personal distress but this may only become apparent late in its course; (f) the disorder is usually, but not invariably, associated with significant problems in occupational and social performance.
    ICD-10 copyright © 1992 by World Health Organization.

    [edit] Cultural Sensitivities

    The WHO, in the ICD-10, points out for different cultures it may be necessary to develop specific sets of criteria with regard to social norms, rules and obligations.

    [edit] Epidemiology

    Paranoid personality disorder has a variously detected prevalence of 0.5-2.5% of the general population.[2]
    A large long-term Norwegian twin study found paranoid personality disorder to be modestly heritable and to share a portion of its genetic and environmental risk factors with schizoid and schizotypal personality disorder.[3]

    [edit] Treatment

    Because of reduced levels of trust, there can be challenges in treating paranoid personality disorder. However, psychotherapy, antidepressants, and anti-anxiety medications can play a role when an individual is receptive to intervention.[4]
    Last edited by liutangsanzang; 11-02-2008, 11:17 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • onesp1ng
    replied
    "always question, question, question"

    i ask anyone who is serious in their willingness to better understand the events of 9/11 to watch this video till its completion.

    'whatever you may think of this research, do not call it "disinformation."'

    [ame="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8045542387672451515"]September Clues[/ame]

    this is public record. please, examine it.

    Leave a comment:


  • liutangsanzang
    replied
    that would be interesting question to know whi there is conspiration theori about the attack in USA and not madrid and london

    i wonder whi

    secret services have less lies behind in UK and Spain?
    less freedom of thought?


    peace and love

    Leave a comment:


  • onesp1ng
    replied
    "the truth of 9/11, is that we don't know the truth of 9/11"

    here are your "conspiracy theorists:" new york city citizens who were on-scene, family members of the deceased, and the international community.

    [ame="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4701757632630708538&hl=en"]The Elephant In The Room: Full Movie[/ame]

    it isn't as simple as men on planes with box cutters flying planes into buildings anymore.

    Leave a comment:


  • dogchow108
    replied
    liu...you're suddenly back on 9/11 itself. Which is nice since ur back on topic but ironic because you are barking at the wrong squirrels.

    Leave a comment:


  • onesp1ng
    replied
    well, i've read a bit about the other but haven't yet been able to connect the dots. what is the connection you're referring to?

    the point, anyhow, is that this is not an issue that can be easily disregarded.

    Leave a comment:


  • liutangsanzang
    replied
    Another proof of the realiti of 9/11 might be the attack in Madrid and London. Nobodi realli doubts these attacks.

    Leave a comment:


  • liutangsanzang
    replied
    So u think there is no relation between the two 9/11?

    And that 1973 is a joke?

    Knowing a little the world of international terrorism from mi basque and french perspective, u should be aware that resentment against USA is strong and the chosen date could be a proof that the attack was real.

    Personalli i m against it but for instance among basque radicals some applauded it. there was a drawing:' we dreamt of it, Bin Laden made it'

    Peace and love

    Leave a comment:


  • onesp1ng
    replied
    thanks, dog... :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • dogchow108
    replied
    Onesp1ng, easy there bro. You're making a good point, don't let people's simple-minded interpretations of your words get the best of you

    Leave a comment:


  • onesp1ng
    replied
    One of the biggest crime in histori?
    liu, are you serious? this thread is dedicated to 9/11, not the chilean coup d'état. as oppossed to responding to any of the content mentioned, let me get this straight...you're questioning if my syntax was correct?

    don't you think that's being a bit petty?
    Last edited by onesp1ng; 10-31-2008, 10:11 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • dogchow108
    replied
    I don't know but this thread suddenly made me think of this comic (best if you scroll down slowly)



    oh and for those of you who dont feel like waiting, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_coup_of_1973

    Leave a comment:


  • doc
    replied
    What happened in 1973?

    I'm almost afraid to ask.

    Leave a comment:


  • liutangsanzang
    replied
    One of the biggest crime in histori?

    It is big ies, but we have seen bigger...

    And arent u falling into double standards?

    What about comparing 9/11/2oo1 and 9/11/1973?

    Leave a comment:


  • onesp1ng
    replied
    If there was reason to doubt what actually happened. Then a discussion could shed new light on it and open ones mind. However, in this instance that is not the case. The truth of the matter is plainly obvious.
    unfortunately this just goes to show how naive people are about the subject.

    "a waste of time?" i'm sorry you seem to feel this is beneath you, cross. but how informed are you really? weren't you the one who suggested that the twin towers were actually designed to implode on themselves?

    really, i wish it was obvious, but on-scene reports contradict the official account time and time again. many experts also agree: the towers just couldn't have been brought down in the manner that's been recorded. i mean, eventually you have to ask yourself whether it's the "pancake theory" or
    "physics" that you accept.

    furthermore, a great number of people believe, at bear minimum, that the us government had prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and/or feel the government was in some way complicit. this includes high level american government officials (ie. senior military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel) prominent media types, professionals in the fields of architecture and engineering, and many others (in favor of a new investigation).

    even...

    'commissioners believed that key agencies of the U.S. government, including The Pentagon, the FAA and NORAD were deliberately deceiving them, and that the CIA was deliberately impeding the work of the commission.On the whole, the chairmen of the commission believed the commission was set up to fail.

    The commission was criticized for significant alleged conflicts of interest on the part of commissioners and staff. Further, the commission's report has been the subject of much criticism by both the commissioners themselves and by others.

    The commission stated in its report that "[their] aim has not been to assign individual blame," a judgment which some critics believed would obscure the facts of the matter in a nod to consensus politics.'
    in addition, with this being one of the biggest crimes in history, the 9/11 commission had still only been given 3mill dollars (startup appropriation) in contrast to the 40mill allocated to investigate bill clinton during the monika lewinsky scandal! so yes, many have spoken out and continue to question the validity of the events that unfolded that day. though the government has clearly stonewalled attempts at getting at the truth, the situation is not clear-cut, as you believe, and is far from obvious.

    whether people wear blinders to the facts that are presented, that is their choice. i personally don't give concessions to government officials, just as i don't distribute candy to lying, spoiled children. but this is not just localized stuff, a large portion of the american and world public view it differently than you.

    why do they challenge the official account? and how can you be so sure in your claims when many others aren't? is it that you're smarter than all the other credible witnesses and professionals?

    and, as for your example,"the conspirators" are not the so-called "creationists" in this situation, as you may think. they are actually far from it. you're forgetting an important component that differentiates the two situations entirely (namely the fact that testing into whether or not demolitions were used was not performed), and so the comparison is completely unfair and biased. what you're basically saying is, "the creationists are wrong - even without testing for how old the earth is or testing for proof of evolution first - it's just obvious." just as evolution can be tested for and proved... emolitions can be tested for and proved (or determined invalid) too.

    there is plenty of evidence out there, much of which is part of the public record, that shows there are people who made (huge) profits off 9/11, that people in the government were told, warned, and/or knew about it beforehand, and that government officials lied to conceal the truth.

    Here is the transcript of what you were not allowed to hear from Osama binLaden's own mouth

    FBI: Bin Laden Not Wanted for 9/11

    CIA closes down unit that was hunting Bin Laden

    FBI PROTECTS OSAMA BIN LADEN’S “RIGHT TO PRIVACY” IN DOCUMENT RELEASE

    Bin Laden Family Evacuated

    [ame="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939"]9/11 Revisited[/ame]

    is it possible that you're being somewhat narrow-minded yourself?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X