Tag Archives: New York Times

New York Times openly admits mainstream media stories are scripted by the White House This means then all news is Lying Propaganda put out by the CRIMINALS in the White House to further the NWO Agenda and not the TRUTH

 

media

New York Times openly admits mainstream media stories are scripted by the White House

Friday, July 27, 2012 by: J. D. Heyes

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/036609_mainstream_media_White_House_influence.html#ixzz228VMT1ga

(NaturalNews) Millions of Americans have long suspected that the so-called “mainstream media” is big-time controlled, whether selectively or institutionally. A recent New York Times story not only substantiates that belief, it proves just how controlled the messages are that are coming from those who mean to rule over us. What’s more, the story demonstrates that most major media sources are complicit in the packaging of information the public is “allowed” to hear.
The revelations may not necessarily be groundbreaking news to many Americans who already suspected they weren’t getting unfiltered and unbiased reporting, though the extent of control over the information reaching the public from the major campaigns may surprise many.
But the revelations should certainly be disturbing to voters who are trying to make choices based on altered or incomplete information.
Of course, that’s the point. Full disclosure would mean giving a rival something to campaign for (or against), so it’s understandable for a candidate to want to carefully control his or her message.
Where it becomes shameful is when the media willingly goes along.
Sorry – You can’t print that

mainstream_media

Consider the re-election campaign of President Obama. According to the Times, quotes from the candidates often come back to them from the campaign headquarters in Chicago “redacted, stripped of colorful metaphors, colloquial language and anything even mildly provocative.” They are emailed to reporters who have been allowed, essentially, to interview campaign officials, but only under the caveat that “the press office has veto power over what statements can be quoted and attributed by name.”
In a different age, perhaps, such a restrictive requirement might have drawn the ire of a respectable journalist. But no more; today, most “grudgingly” agree to such preconditions. Those who do not agree, it appears, are not given the opportunity to interview.
Once the interview is complete, the scrubbing process begins. The reporters check their interview notes and review tape recorders for the juiciest of sound bites. At that point, the quotes they select are submitted to the campaign for approval.
“The verdict from the campaign – an operation that prides itself on staying consistently on script – is often no, Barack Obama does not approve this message,” said the paper, whose own reporters, presumably, must subject themselves to the same treatment.
So much for the Old Gray Lady‘s long-time mantra: All the news that’s fit to print.
Control from both sides of the aisle
Then again, maybe the phenomenon of pre-packaged quotes and releases is at least partially our fault. Americans, after all, seem to be obsessed with the “Gotcha!” mentality of sound-bite reporting.
But then again, did the mainstream media hook us? After all, they are the ones who have accustomed us to this kind of sensationalism – aren’t they?

tv-network-logos-update

“The push and pull over what is on the record is one of journalism’s perennial battles,” the Times said. “But those negotiations typically took place case by case, free from the red pens of press minders. Now, with a millisecond Twitter news cycle and an unforgiving, gaffe-obsessed media culture, politicians and their advisers are routinely demanding that reporters allow them final editing power over any published quotations.”
Yes, the “media culture” is “gaffe-obsessed,” but only because we’re still reading.
While this kind of quote pre-approval process is standard operating procedure for the Obama campaign, the campaign of Republican Mitt Romney has a quote quality control apparatus in place as well.
The paper said the Romney machine also likes to air-brush quotes, especially when it comes to interviewing his five sons. “Romney advisers almost always require that reporters ask them for the green light on anything from a conversation that they would like to include in an article,” said the Times.
In a classic understatement, the Times calls this unacceptable practice a “double-edged sword,” because reporters “are getting the on-the-record quotes they have long asked for, but losing much of the spontaneity and authenticity in their interviews.”

131106camp

And the American people are losing too. If quotes are sanitized, what other information is being cherry-picked, or worse, being left out completely by a mainstream media that is supposed to be the protector of liberties and freedom, not a facilitator for the powers that be?
We may never know what we never know. And that’s the real danger.
Blanket anonymity at ‘new levels’
“It’s not something I’m particularly proud of because there’s a part of me that says, ‘Don’t do it, don’t agree to their terms,'” Major Garrett, a correspondent for the Washington, D.C.-based National Journal, one of the few journalists who spoke on the record about the contextual quote editing, told the Times. “There are times when this feels like I’m dealing with some of my editors. It’s like, ‘You just changed this because you could!'”
“We don’t like the practice,” Times news editor Dean Baquet said. “We encourage our reporters to push back. Unfortunately this practice is becoming increasingly common, and maybe we have to push back harder.”
Needless to say, the Obama campaign refused to allow anyone to go on record for the Times story. The report didn’t say whether the Romney campaign was asked to go on record for it.
But the paper did single out the current administration.
“Under President Obama, the insistence on blanket anonymity has grown to new levels,” the Times reported.
Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com
http://newsbusters.org
http://www.politicususa.com/conservative-media-bias-obama.html
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/036609_mainstream_media_White_House_influence.html#ixzz228VAtFpo

 

“WIMP ALERT” The Global Elite Constructed An Army Of Agenda 21 Advocates “WIMP ALERT”

 

Trendy Alert: How The Global Elite Constructed An Army Of Agenda 21 Advocates

Posted on July 31, 2012 | Leave a comment

Jurriaan Maessen
ExplosiveReports.Com
July 31, 2012

There is a new species of man prancing around upon the world stage. Suddenly, quite unannounced, this bizarre typology appeared, comparable to… well, nothing really. It is a remarkable creature, immediately recognizable by a certain androgynous streak running along all its features: a sheep-like nothingness, combined with an ounce of fanatical malice, dominating the rest of its general outward appearance. I say androgynous, because this new species hardly conforms to anything resembling the male- nor does it do to qualify it as female: an analogy which, as Alex Jones pointed out, is an insult to women. You see them, the trendies, popping up more and more these days, leaving us with a sense of what can only be described as sheer bewilderment. Although “trendy” is the term we may use to adequately describe this species, they comfortably classify themselves under the umbrella-term “millennial”. The following clip from the Alex Jones Show adequately expresses the nastiness of the phenomenon:

If we had to index this new family in the great house of the human race, one might classify it under Homo Trendyaris- or Homo Idiotis, or whatever name for that matter that may be applied to separate this individual from the larger, human family. The trendy, we have come to understand, is a result of decade-long, unrelenting disinformation-campaigns on the very young- which has produced a very sickening example of how man may be perverted beyond recognition if bombarded long enough with thorough globalist propaganda. It is a crime, really. The trendy’s mind has clearly from a very early age on been seriously knocked out of alignment, and subsequently molded in such a form as to be practically unrecognizable from anything resembling the human as we know him. If you want to visualize the trendy, sketch yourself a picture-postcard of an ordinary human- like the one depicted in biology textbooks denoting the classic male; shrink this image in length and width to about one half of its original size- shrink the neck even more until it compares to that of no more than an averaged-sized chicken- and then add to this all the complexities and wonderful mysteries inherent to humans in general … only to then deduct these things altogether. What remains is a creature that has a distinct Gollum-like feel to it: a hollow facade, in other words, weak of mind and body.

This sickly new creation is a disturbing blueprint of the futuristic “man” as envisioned by the global elite. To learn of how the trendy has been wrought into being, we must look at the latest generations of globalist royalty. For it is they, the Rothschilds and Rockefellers, who may be held responsible for the most subtle and consistent breeding-programs ever injected into society’s bloodstream. Subtle because of the absence of a straightforward eugenic intervention, and consistent because of the incremental nature of the propaganda onslaught.

David Mayor de Rothschild

In an unbelievable display of shamelessness, the youngest son of sir Evelyn de Rothschild claims that being heir to the Rothschild-fortune somehow makes it more unlikely that he should convince people to ‘go green’. Several news outlets have reported on a television series presented by David Mayor de Rothschild himself, pointing at the dangers of ‘global warming’ and its supposed effects on the earths ecosystem as he sails around the globe, promoting his cause on a boat made of plastic bottles and recycled waste. The young Rothschild may have painted the family crest green, underneath the red is still shimmering through.

On April 17 2009 the New York Times ran a story about David Mayor de Rothschild and his television debut “Eco Trip: The Real Cost of Living”. In the article the journalist cancels all professional reservations surrendering himself mindlessly over to Rothschild’s geographical zigzagging adventures and ecological photo-ops. As we have come to expect from the New York Times, even the pretext of thinking is abandoned as the global warming-myth is presented as a well-proven fact and its advocates are sprinkled with shining star- and gold dust. But let’s not forget: not long after this particular journalistic facade the Climategate scandal erupted like a carbon dioxide-laden volcano, blowing away a generation of lies and covering it with a thick layer of ash.

Starting out by marveling over David Mayor the Rothschild’s past globetrotting adventures “across Greenland’s shrinking icecaps”, the journalist wonders aloud how on earth it is possible for an offspring of the infamous banking family to protect Gaia from the evil oil-drillers.

“It’s one of those weird things”, Rothschild said in response. “(Being a Rothschild) has given me a lot of opportunities, but I think I always have to work harder too.”

A couple of days before the New York Times published their deceptive little panegyric, an article about De Rothschild’s ventures appeared in the Guardian’s environment-section, pointing out that David de Rothschild “belongs to the country’s leading ‘eco-toffs’, those young men and women who use their inherited wealth to promote environmental causes.”

By projecting an image of himself as a rich man’s kid drifting away from his predestined path to choose a life of self-inflicted hardship, De Rothschild casually leaves out the fact that his activities are actually perfectly consistent with his family’s long-time ambitions. As so often is the case, we must peel off multiple layers of deception to arrive at the rotten apple-core. De Rothschild’s crusade against “climate change” (these words cannot be crammed in between quotes thick enough to encapsulate this deception) is not despite of his upbringing- on the contrary: it fits in perfectly with his families age-old trickery, to create and promote a crisis, let it rage for a while and then generously bring out the solution in favour of the globalist agenda. And as the young Rothschild’s environmental enterprises show, the methodology is still very much alive.

Besides making television series for the young, he specializes in directing the propaganda towards the very young. In an attempt at brainwashing the very young, De Rothschild wrote a children’s book on climate change- a fairy tale really- because “a range of learning opportunities connect children with nature, inspire proactive global citizenship and make learning an adventure.” The message is clear: forget your family, forget your tribe- become good global citizens instead. Murmuring subliminally we hear the emperor from Star Wars whispering: “Give in to the dark side..”

It was not a month before the New York Times article appeared about David de Rothschild’s travels, the PR Newswire announced that “Rothschild Australia and E3 International are set to become key players in the international carbon credit trading market, an emerging commodity market that analysts estimate could be worth up to US$150 billion by 2012.” Such an additional fact would go completely over a trendy’s head, by the way.

Conveniently leaving out that the ancient family for centuries worked to consolidate control over international finance, the website Rothschild.Com brags: “Rothschild has been at the centre of the world’s financial markets for over 200 years. It ranks amongst the world’s largest privately-owned banks.” A couple of paragraphs later the website goes on to say that “Rothschild is committed to the pursuit of excellence, and for this reason concentrates on sectors and markets in which it can excel.”

Indeed. As the many carbon credit schemes by the internationalist family clearly illustrate, their members are all too eager to point at the dangers of climate change, and even more eager to make huge profits out of the generated fear. David Mayor de Rothschild is certainly not a rogue descendant of the family, sailing of into the deep blue as he denounces his family’s global ambitions; he is actually a most loyal member, actively promoting its interests with a wink and a smile as he sells his cool aid to the youngest of the young.

David Rockefeller Jr.

Speaking of boating trips to “promote awareness on climate change”, the youngest son of David Rockefeller, David Rockefeller Jr., has pranced around on the world’s oceans for many a year on his million dollar luxury yard- one of his million dollar luxury yards, that is. In this particular 2010 article, Rockefeller doubles back on the scientific legitimacy of the entire thing- as so many of them were forced to do since the hoax obviously imploded for all the world to see.

“Regardless of the facts of climate change, the oceans are in trouble”, Rockefeller said. “I don’t think our concerns hang just from the tree of climate change.”

Interesting to note that Rockefeller, providing his resume to the author, stressed that he is a proud member of the Bohemian Club. A very bold admission- which was then penned down by a completely unsuspecting journalist who probably didn’t give it another thought, thinking perhaps that it was some innocent semi-elitist skiing resort. This is a good example of how members of the global elite, just for the hell of it, admit to being part of a secret cabal. They cannot help themselves. Rockefeller is also saying that the science doesn’t even matter and people should conform to the UN’s “sustainability” agenda for the sake of the agenda itself. The term “sustainability” should be interpreted for the euphemism that it is: all depopulation policies, in the making for many decades, assembled under the umbrella of Agenda 21: a post-eugenic agenda created by the very same families now pleasure-cruising around the planet for PR purposes.

The Sierra Club, calling Rockefeller a “trendsetter”, did a Q&A with the billionaire and brought up the subject of population. Musing on the good old days, when his great grandfather built his empire, Rockefeller added:

“We’ve added 5 billion people to the planet in the past century, and that has been the biggest factor in environmental degradation.”

Justin Rockefeller

In the 21st century, the son of US Senator Jay Rockefeller, is also planting the seeds of trendyism into the absorbent soil of young, naïve minds. Justin Rockefeller, a young and fanatic branch from the Rockefeller tree, has pledged his love for his family’s Population Council.

“I proudly support the Population Council because it efficiently improves the lives of young people around the world.”, little Justin Rockefeller said.

“Population challenges—not just the number of people but the quality of their lives—lie at the heart of many of the world’s great challenges, such as poverty alleviation, climate change, and demand for energy.”, Rockefeller continued.

As co-founder of an organization called GenerationEngage, Justin is one of the people responsible for the emergence of the current-day trendy. And he has full establishment backing.

In his biography, young Justin brags:

“Notable GenerationEngage participants include, among others: Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Al Gore, Barack Obama, Chuck Hagel, Hillary Clinton, Colin Powell, John Edwards, Nancy Pelosi, Coretta Scott King, Stephen Breyer, Peggy Noonan, Ted Sorensen, Bill Safire, John C. Whitehead, and Spike Lee.”

“We’re targeting young people who aren’t in college.”, Rockefeller confided to New York News & Features. “We hope to hire young community leaders in every state to do things like identify local hot spots—Internet cafés, bars, pool halls—and turn them into places where people talk politics.”

In 2007 the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation stepped in with a bag of money and an agenda, creating an organization of “Climate Precinct Captains” called 1Sky. These “Climate Captains” were first given a good dose of climate change propaganda and were then let loose to spread the good message from door to door. 1Sky is only one out of many “environmental units” groping around the land with full financial backing by calculating globalists and aristocratic transnationalists.

On the “action page” of 1Sky.Org the organization tried to add the young and susceptible inside their ranks by asking them to “become a 1Sky Climate Precinct Captain.”

Playing into children’s inherent insecurities, the website reassures them: “You won’t be alone: you’ll be part of a nationwide network of 1Sky Climate Precinct Captains in each of the approximately 300,000 electoral precincts nationwide, working to make a difference. We’ll make sure you have all the materials you need: training information, how-to guides, materials such as posters, flyers and more.”

The Rockefeller Brothers Fund’s program director for Sustainable Development Michael Northrop commented on their cash-injection into 1Sky, explaining quite truthfully that as far as the Fund is concerned, environmentalism is just a means to an end:

“It has always been much more than an environmental issue for us and explains why we have consistently supported efforts to take the global warming out of the green box in which it has found itself confined. By definition, the notion of sustainable development requires thinking outside the green box because it understands that environmental protection must be integrated with economic and social development. It proposes not only a green agenda to protect ecosystems but also a related human development agenda.”

As we know, ‘human development’ is nothing more than the adjusted and more acceptable term for that old and favorite toy of the elite, eugenics. As evidence of their transformational accomplishments, Northrop points to the reach of their annual grants to “green” movements and other organizations:

“Our grants database provides details on how the RBF has played a role in fostering this change. The Fund has supported groups that have carried the message of sustainable development to the business community, to investors, to people of faith, to the military, to athletes, to architects and builders, to governors, to mayors, and to young people (…). For further evidence of the converging climate conversation, witness what some of the largest banks in the world are doing. Three of them- Citibank, JP Morgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley- together announced standards for the financing of new coal-fired power plants in a deal struck with utilities and environmental groups.”

The example of 1Sky indicates that a new generation of Agenda 21 advocates is consciously being bred into existence with the help of prolonged and extensive propaganda efforts (man=bad, earth=good, therefore: man should die). The product of this campaign is the trendy, which may be considered to be the purest antithesis of the man as he was from the emergence of Homo Sapiens Sapiens up and to the end of the 20st century. While men and women inherently have a desire to protect themselves and their families, the trendy has learned to disregard all these things: not out of any sense of non-conformity, by the way, or otherwise reactionary impulse. It is from an absence of recognition of oneself, a lack of connection with the tribe, which makes the trendy eventually cry at the top of its longs: “slavery is sexy; constricting nation-states is cool!”. And we have the global elite to thank for this.

 

Aurora, Phase 2: Dr. Lynne Fenton, the Batman killer, the drugs and the drug money

 

Aurora, Phase 2: Dr. Lynne Fenton, the Batman killer, the drugs and the drug money

Jon Rappoport
Infowars.com
July 31, 2012

People don’t get it. The media don’t get it and they don’t want to get it. Billions of dollars are riding on the drugs Dr. Lynne Fenton may have prescribed to her patient, James Holmes, the accused Batman shooter.

And when billions of dollars in potentially lost revenue are hanging in the balance, the interested parties take action. They’re serious about their money. They don’t screw around.

You see, if James Holmes was, for example, taking Prozac, all of a sudden no one wants to take it. If doctors prescribe it to patients, the patients say, “Hey, wasn’t this the drug that nutcase took before he killed all those people in the theater?”

And that’s not all. Congress holds hearings, not because they want to, but because they want to look like they’re doing the right thing. And at those hearings, all sorts of nasty stuff comes out about Prozac. It’s big news. The studies that showed the drug was dangerous, that it could and would cause people to commit suicide and homicide. Boom. More bad press for the manufacturer. More investigations. More lost revenue.

So right now, in Aurora, there are pharmaceutical people on the scene. Not just low-level goofballs, but competent investigators. They want to know what drugs James Holmes was prescribed. They need to know. And behind the scenes, people with clout are making phone calls. These pharma types are talking to government agents and it’s crazy time and damage-control time, and nobody is laughing. This is a high-stakes game. WHAT DRUGS WAS HOLMES TAKING?

There is pressure on both attorneys in the case, too. And the cops. With an insanity plea lurking in the wings, Holmes’ medical records could very well see the light of day. That would let everybody know what the drugs were. So somebody is calling the governor of Colorado, and other state officials, and they’re trying to maneuver and manipulate the legal process, to make the medical records vanish.

Come on. This isn’t just a murder case. Now it’s about money. Big pharma lawyers are reading up on Colorado law to find loopholes, ways to get around revealing Holmes’ medical history.

Holmes is now a pawn. He’s the nowhere kid who is going to be shuttled around on the game board to save the drug money for the people who own it.

The money is dirty. It always was. It’s filthy. It’s been made on the backs of people who have died at the rate of 100,000 a year in the US alone. That’s a million people per decade—pharmaceutically caused deaths. The heads of these drug companies and their allied banks are Mafiosa. They inflict more human damage in a day than all the goombahs who have ever shot up pizza joints on Mulberry Street or dealt narcotics to addicts across the world, since Sicily puts itself on the map as the center of the Cosa Nostra.

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com they could get to Holmes in his cell, they’d erase him. They’d make it look like a suicide. Today. What do you think “lone shooter” is all about? Yes, the covert op that very well may have used Holmes as the patsy, to push the government into banning guns, is a major piece here. But that work is done. Now it’s “lone shooter” because getting rid of Holmes by killing him or warehousing him for the rest of his life in a mental prison, with brain-hammer drugs making him into a vegetable, means that the names of the psychiatric drugs he was taking before the massacre will be lost to history, and no one will take the criminal investigation any further.

Update: Holmes’ psychiatrist, Lynne Fenton, was reprimanded by the Colorado Board of Medical Examiners, in 2005, for prescribing drugs to several patients, including herself, without entering the information in patient records. She could now find a target painted on her back, as the drug companies try to make her a patsy, an “irresponsible and incompetent doctor who didn’t give Mr. Holmes what he truly needed.” They would do this to take the drugs off the hook. “In the hands of a good psychiatrist, the proper medications would have worked well.” Who knows? Maybe they’ll claim she didn’t even treat Holmes directly, but supervised interns or grad students, who actually worked with Holmes.

I wrote the following as part of a 1999 white paper for The Truth Seeker Foundation, in the wake of the Columbine massacre. So the information is from that period. The white paper was titled: WHY DID THEY DO IT? THE SCHOOL SHOOTINGS ACROSS AMERICA.

It’s quite long; I’ve only printed an excerpt here. You can go to my blog and read the whole thing. It’s very relevant to the issues at hand.

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com

The bulk of American media is afraid to go after psychiatric drugs as a cause of violence. This fear stems, in part, from the sure knowledge that expert attack dogs are waiting in the wings, funded by big-time pharmaceutical companies.

There are doctors and researchers as well who have seen a dark truth about these drugs in the journals, but are afraid to stand up and speak out. After all, the medical culture punishes no one as severely as its own defectors.

And what of the federal government itself? The FDA licenses every drug released for public use and certifies that it is safe and effective. If a real tornado started at the public level, if the mothers of the young killers and young victims began to see a terrible knowledge about the psychiatric drugs swim into view, a knowledge they hadn’t imagined, and if THEY joined forces, the earth would shake.

After commenting on some of the adverse effects of the antidepressant drug Prozac, psychiatrist Peter Breggin notes, “From the initial studies, it was also apparent that a small percentage of Prozac patients became psychotic.”

Prozac, in fact, endured a rocky road in the press for a time. Stories on it rarely appear now. The major media have backed off. But on February 7th, 1991, Amy Marcus’ Wall Street Journal article on the drug carried the headline, “Murder Trials Introduce Prozac Defense.” She wrote, “A spate of murder trials in which defendants claim they became violent when they took the antidepressant Prozac are imposing new problems for the drug’s maker, Eli Lilly and Co.

Also on February 7, 1991, the New York Times ran a Prozac piece headlined, “Suicidal Behavior Tied Again to Drug: Does Antidepressant Prompt Violence?”

In his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin mentions that the Donahue show (Feb. 28, 1991) “put together a group of individuals who had become compulsively self-destructive and murderous after taking Prozac and the clamorous telephone and audience response confirmed the problem.”

Breggin also cites a troubling study from the February 1990 American Journal of Psychiatry (Teicher et al, v.147:207-210) which reports on “six depressed patients, previously free of recent suicidal ideation, who developed intense, violent suicidal preoccupations after 2-7 weeks of fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment.’ The suicidal preoccupations lasted from three days to three months after termination of the treatment. The report estimates that 3.5 percent of Prozac users were at risk. While denying the validity of the study, Dista Products, a division of Eli Lilly, put out a brochure for doctors dated August 31, 1990, stating that it was adding ‘suicidal ideation’ to the adverse events section of its Prozac product information.”

An earlier study, from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that, in five examined cases, people on Prozac developed what is called akathisia. Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the “jerking of extremities,” and “bicycling in bed or just turning around and around.” Breggin comments that akathisia “may also contribute to the drug’s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies … Akathisia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior … The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, ‘Akathisia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.’”

The well-known publication, California Lawyer, in a December 1998 article called “Protecting Prozac,” mentions other highly qualified critics of the drug: “David Healy, MD, an internationally renowned psychopharmacologist, has stated in sworn deposition that ‘contrary to Lilly’s view, there is a plausible cause-and-effect relationship between Prozac’ and suicidal-homicidal events. An epidemiological study published in 1995 by the British Medical Journal also links Prozac to increased suicide risk.”

When pressed, proponents of these SSRI drugs sometimes say, “Well, the benefits for the general population far outweigh the risk,” or, “Maybe in one or two tragic cases the dosage prescribed was too high.” But the problem will not go away on that basis. A shocking review-study published in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases (1996, v.184, no.2), written by Rhoda L. Fisher and Seymour Fisher, called “Antidepressants for Children,” concludes: “Despite unanimous literature of double-blind studies indicating that antidepressants are no more effective than placebos in treating depression in children and adolescents, such medications continue to be in wide use.”

In wide use. This despite such contrary information and the negative, dangerous effects of these drugs.

There are other studies: “Emergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine treatment,” published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al. It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.

July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: “full of energy,” “hyperactive,” “clown-like.” All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were “totally unlike him.” [Sound like James Holmes?]

September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor. The boy is then “hyperactive, agitated … irritable.” He makes a “somewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.” Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.

[What is true about Prozac is true about Paxil or Zoloft or any of the other SSRI antidepressants. And be warned: suddenly withdrawing from any psychiatric drug can be extremely dangerous to the patient. See www.breggin.com on this subject and how to handle it.]

Ritalin, manufactured by Novartis, is the close cousin to speed which is given to millions of American schoolchildren for a condition called Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), or ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). ADD and ADHD, for which no organic causes have ever been found, are touted as disease-conditions that afflict the young, causing hyperactivity, unmanageability, and learning problems. Of course, when you name a disorder or a syndrome and yet can find no single provable organic cause for it, you have nothing more than a loose collection of behaviors with an arbitrary title.

Correction: you also have a pharmaceutical bonanza.

Dr. Breggin, referring to an official directory of psychiatric disorders, the DSM-III-R, writes that withdrawal from amphetamine-type drugs, including Ritalin, can cause “depression, anxiety, and irritability as well as sleep problems, fatigue, and agitation.” Breggin then remarks, “The individual may become suicidal in response to the depression.”

The well-known Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a vital fact. It states that Ritalin is “structurally related to amphetamines … Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.” In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman’s terms, are obvious. You take speed and, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.

In Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: “Combining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.” Children are frequently medicated with this combination, and when we highlight such effects as aggression, psychosis, and emotional instability, it is obvious that the result is pointing toward the very real possibility of violence.

To read the rest of this white paper, go to:

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com

What does this all add up to? The fantasy evil portrayed in The Dark Knight Rises, and the real evil enacted by the shooters in the Aurora Century theater, has now given way to a more pervasive evil, as the mega-drug companies come to town to protect their money and their bankers and their fabricated reputation.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.
www.nomorefakenews.com
qjrconsulting@gmail.com

About the author:
The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon
was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of
California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an
investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics,
medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine,
Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon
has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic,
and creative power to audiences around the world.
www.nomorefakenews.com