What’s happening in Washington, D.C. these days? Are they aggressively celebrating NAMI’s “Mental Illness Awareness Week” which recently took place this month from October the 6th through the 12th? It’s just crazy what’s happening in Washington these days. Pun intended. No, I’m not referring to Obama’s crazy shutdown of the government or he and the Congress’ psychotic, brazen act of shoving socialism down a country’s throat when the country is begging the leaders to stop.
I’m not even talking about the behavior of our last couple of Presidents or their Congressional counterparts as they shredded the rights of Americans, pushed the Patriot Act and NDAA upon us, and obliterated our economy, although that is indeed disturbing (and perhaps connected to some of the other events I’m about to address).
In America, the media establishment seem obsessed these days with the term “mentally ill”. Every time someone does something evil, they are considered “mentally ill”. The Aurora shooter, James Holmes, committed an act of evil, but instead of calling him “wicked”, they called him “mentally ill” as seen in the article at this link.
Adam Lanza, the Newtown shooter, committed an act of evil, but instead of calling him “wicked”, they called him “mentally ill” as seen in the article at this link.
In some cases, you wonder what proof the media have for their label such as in the case of a man in Washington, D.C. who set himself on fire as seen in the article at this link. In that case, numerous members of the media claimed that the man was “mentally ill”. In truth, the man could have been simply committing suicide as an act of self-pity which would be a case of human depravity.
On the other hand, the man could have been hallucinating after taking too much medication which would be a physical issue. However, the media provided no proof for which of the two it could have been, but instead just stated that the family members of the man thought it was “mental illness”. Is that what doctors had determined? Based upon what evidence? What has happened to true investigative journalism today? Are tabloid journalists all that remain in this present culture where “he said, she said” is acceptable to a public that never questions the media? Are they news columnists or are they “fifth columnists” preparing the masses for “thought policing” and the labeling of political or religious dissidents as “insane” just because they disagree with the government?
Another incident in Washington, D.C. involved a lady named Miriam Carey who allegedly was trying to ram the barricades at the White House. We’ll probably never really know why this unarmed lady was gunned down by a stream of bullets in firing squad fashion after her baby was first removed from the vehicle as heard from the mouth of an eyewitness on the video recording at this link, but a great deal of questions still remain around that event, although the media would have everyone just accept that the woman must have been “mentally ill”. Her neighbors and her family say she was not delusional. Isn’t it lazy for a journalist to just throw out a label without any investigation whatsoever? Why don’t they wade into the incredible mysterious anomalies and inconsistencies that haunted that case including a report that purports that Miriam Carey worked for Dr. Brian Evans as a dental hygienist on Barack Obama’s teeth a couple of years previously and had an affair with Obama? Is this true? Obama and those for whom he works are so clandestine that I don’t think we’ll ever know.
What about the incident recently in which a normally mild-mannered Congressional stenographer in Washington, D.C. made an outburst in the Congressional chamber in which she said the Constitution was framed by Freemasons and that “you can’t serve two masters”. Modern Freemasons admit that their predecessors helped frame the Constitution, so that was no revelation. Jesus stated that we can’t serve two masters, so that’s no new revelation either. I believe the stenographer was a bit disjointed in what she said, but probably sincere. In the video, however, the stenographer’s less-than-professional demeanor in how she presented herself and her violation of Congressional protocol were both reasons to make people discount a message that was true and already well-known. Furthermore, there’s some very good evidence that we don’t even know what Diane Reidy, the Congressional stenographer, truly said since it appears that Fox News and other news organizations replaced what she said in the Congressional chamber with a dub-over as seen in the article at this link.
In other words, the stenographer stated true things, but how she did it actually seemed to bring more confusion and disrepute to the message she delivered. She claims her message was from GOD according to her email shown at this link. I personally believe that GOD prefers order instead of chaos, since the apostle Paul says that very thing in I Corinthians chapter 14 (i.e. “decently and in order”). Also, claiming that GOD told you to do something is a belief of the charismatic movement. To learn more about the charismatic movement (which the powers in Rome have had a helpful part in building), be sure to visit the article at this link. However, there are times when GOD can move upon our hearts to do something, so perhaps she wasn’t saying that GOD told her what to say, but rather that she felt urged by Him to speak up about all the violations of our freedom that are taking place. Perhaps, she had a hard time saying what she was thinking and it all came out rather scatter-brained.
Whatever her intentions, the occult leaders and atheists in Washington, D.C. quite enjoyed the debacle, I’m sure. The media and radical left couldn’t wait to quickly and illegally apply the label of “mental illness” to her in hopes that all Christians would be seen as rule-breaking, confused, chaotic and charismatic as that stenographer. Also, isn’t a U.S. Citizen “innocent until proven guilty”? So why has the media pronounced her “mental” without any such ruling? Is the media allowed to tell the public whatever they think without any verified evidence? Shouldn’t such journalists who speak out allegations without evidence be banned from the media corps? Or are we living in Orwell’s nightmare?
On the other hand, one could argue that the Biblical Esther violated protocol in order to save the Jewish people’s lives when she appeared in her husband’s royal court without having been officially summoned. Of course, others could say that such behavior by Esther was warranted, but that this lady’s behavior and claim to a message from GOD is completely unwarranted. I tend to agree with the latter, but I am not out to condemn this person.
Sometimes what is in our heart doesn’t always come out of our mouth the right way. I’ll let GOD be her judge. After all, the stenographer’s breech of protocol is nothing compared to the President’s and Congress’ violation of American’s basic freedoms. Where are the media when American freedoms and the laws that protect them are violated? Where are the media when the leaders in Washington mimic Hitler in calling for the disarming of Americans? Where are the media when the NSA is shown to be committing voyeuristic acts upon the populace illegally without license, which is psychotic behavior by textbook definition? Are they calling these people “mentally ill”? Despite our disagreement with how the stenographer conducted herself, does Fox News and the rest of the media really think that blurting out an opinion against protocol constitutes “mental illness”?
Okay, so the media and government disagree with the lady’s viewpoint. I get that. They disagree with how she violated protocol. I get that. They disagree with how she presented her beliefs. I get that, but a “mental illness”? What type of freewheeling journalists and politicians do we have today? Someone acts out of protocol and everyone as one body scream “mental” as though they fear being identified as a “kook” themselves if they don’t use scathing words on the person. This type of environment was present in Germany just before Hitler took power.
It makes you wonder who is really behind all of this bizarre media behavior in Washington, D.C. as the media continues to report every bizarre story they can these days while constantly labeling everyone “mental”. What precedents are being set and what conditioning is resulting from all of the media’s recent fascination with reporting things that resemble a tabloid, while running around saying “mental, mental”? It reminds you of junior high school where fear was used by peers through bullying and name-calling in order to ensure control and power over other students in order to become the “king of the hill”. Remember those days where most people played the clone for fear of the “elite” in the school?
Is that what is really taking place? Bullying by use of words in order to control people? Leaders who have ruled with such tactics have shown themselves to be the scum of the earth throughout history, without dignity and without the respect or admiration of those they rule. True leaders rule with benevolence, love, and as servants to the people.
Could all of this media focus have a point in transitioning people to think of those outside of cloned “mainstream” thinking as “mental”? Could it become a political weapon as documentation shows has occurred in other countries and in past history? If the actions or beliefs of a person are simply different than “mainstream”, are such non-conforming people or critical thinkers to be considered “mentally ill” as well by this brave new world of Orwellian-styled journalists?
For example, voyeurism is considered to be a psychiatric disorder in which people want to view other people’s sexual life. How many millions in the United States are doing this very thing on the internet every day, including many of the journalists who label other people as “mental”? Exhibitionism is also said to be a bizarre “mental” behavior, but how many entertainers, worshiped by the media and millions, if not billions of people, are known for their exhibitionist behavior? So who’s truly “mental”? The NSA who spies on everyone without warrant, license or reason? Or the entertainers who play the exhibitionist? Or the porn addict who gets his thrills from watching other people commit lewd acts? Or the people who feel sorry for themselves and commit suicide? I’ve helped an individual avoid suicide before as part of a job in my distant past, and I learned that it has a lot to do with a person becoming so focused on their own problems that they don’t notice other people’s problems – they fail to reach out to others and show love. Showing love is some of the best therapy available on this planet. Too bad those in the media don’t seem to be showing much to those they continue to label “mental”, eh?
Furthermore, we all knew people in high school who just acted “weird”. Then again, they probably thought we were weird. Some people who were considered “weird” back then may well be in the majority now, so does majority opinion determine who is “weird”? Is “weird” subjective? Is “weird” now sufficient reason to call someone “mentally disturbed”? How about laws on “libel” and “slander”? Can’t people sue the media for calling them “mentally disturbed”? For example, couldn’t the stenographer in Washington, D.C. sue Megyn Kelly of Fox News who called the stenographer “mentally ill“ just because the stenographer violated Congressional protocol and made some comments with which Megyn didn’t agree? Couldn’t the family of Miriam Carey sue the media and government for how they assumed that Miriam Carey was a lunatic and said such in a public forum? I can already hear the windfall of money from these two lawsuits … that is, if the media and government are held by the standard of the rule of law still in this country, and if the innocent must still be proven to be guilty before accusations and slanderous names can be used.
Why is the term “mental illness” so rampant in the media today? It reminds me of the culture in Communist Soviet Russia during the so-called “Cold War”. The communist media labelled anyone who disagreed with the government or who believed in GOD as a “mentally ill” person. Their treatment of such people was horrific. The horrors of that era are well known. After Russia’s economy imploded, they suddenly began to realize who really wasn’t “right in the head”. Today, China still does the same thing, so how soon until America is the same as China?
I once heard a professor in psychology state that there is no such thing as “mental illness”. With all of these media professionals (and I use that term loosely) talking of “mental illness”, how ironic, eh? This professor stated that someone either has a physical illness which involves brain deterioration or abnormalities due to either the overuse of drugs (i.e. legal or illegal chemicals), a brain disease, or some other anomaly. OR, if it is not a physical problem, then he said it is a spiritual issue with someone’s soul. In fact, the term “psyche” is a Greek word that means “soul”. How ironic that this root word for psychology and the study of so-called “mental illness” is actually a reference to the soul. In other words, the fathers of psychology, such as Sigmund Freud (that sexually-obsessed deviant), were simply trying to find some intellectual-sounding term such as “psychology” to make the study of the soul sound more scientific and to relegate all discussion of the soul to science instead of religion. Meanwhile, the term “psyche”, from which root we get words like psychosis, psychotic, and psychiatric, still points to the clear fact that the soul is the real issue in much of the cases cast into the bucket of “mental illness”. Therefore, if physical illness and spiritual depravity are truly the essence of much of what is called “mental illness”, then we can only have two reactions.
- Help those with physical problems (after proving scientifically that drugs or brain disease were involved) with physical solutions.
- Help those with spiritual problems in cases where human depravity and evil are involved.
In an atheistic culture, it’s difficult for the leaders in government to assist people with the second problem above. After all, how are government leaders, who reject GOD from every aspect of American life, supposed to help people who are struggling with sin and evil? What can they truly say without looking like hypocrites?
Meanwhile, we must never place those with different ideologies that we think are wrong or weird into the bucket of “mental illness” or we will soon become a statistic in the timeline of history like unto Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. In such times, the truly depraved individuals who ran the government were considered “sane”, while those who spoke out were considered “crazy”. As time passed, history proved otherwise.
Wearing expensive suits and conforming to those around you is not the definition of sanity. After all, we’ve all seen depraved monsters throughout history who have done this, while outing anyone who disagreed with them as the “crazy ones”. History has a way of sorting out the true lunatics in the end. As I view history and then view our government leaders in Washington, D.C., I can only hope that the keepers of the asylum are not its patients.