Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 6603

Shown: posts 36 to 60 of 80. Go back in thread:

 

Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 10:17:38

In reply to Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder, posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 9:58:34

Krazy Kat,
Below is on e of the posts from that thread of yours.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20020517/msgs/24271.html
Lou

 

Definition of Proselytizing Dr. Bob

Posted by mair on July 25, 2002, at 10:32:57

In reply to Lou's response to Lini's post, posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 9:36:17

" The overiding issue about proselytising, as it is defined on this board, is "does the poster advocate joining a particular religion such as, let's say, catholicsism or Islam?" "

Bob

Are you aware of having said anything which would support this most narrow definition of proselytizing? Is Lou off the hook the the rest of us would be on just because he doesn't associate his religious beliefs with a specific religion or denomination?

Mair

 

Re: Definition of Proselytizing Dr. Bob » mair

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 10:50:37

In reply to Definition of Proselytizing Dr. Bob, posted by mair on July 25, 2002, at 10:32:57

mair,
Yuou have aske Dr. Bob if... Lou is off the hook...
Now others here can talk of their experiances and they are not being told to stop.
The issue is trying to get people to join a particular religion, such as Zen or , let's say, the Morman Church.
I do not see anyone here "on the hook" here. Dr. Bob's rule abot wht constitutes proselytising is grossly well-defined for it is simple.
Now the experiance that I am telling here does not requierer anyone to associate themselves with a particular religion. In fact, I have stated that even athiests can travel the Road and that the Gates will open to anyone, not just members of a particular religion. When I was in the City of Peace, the Rider said to me, "He who comes to me, I will in no way cast out."
Lou

 

Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat » Lou Pilder

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 11:49:17

In reply to Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat , posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 10:17:38

> Krazy Kat,
> Below is on e of the posts from that thread of yours.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20020517/msgs/24271.html
> Lou

No, Lou, that is a link to one of YOUR posts. It says:
"Krazy Kat,
I have read your post that you say that Kid_A is "so funny' in regards to his posting of a link to an anti-Semitic web site.
Could you explain why you think that it is "so funny"? It is not funny to me that the link portrys jews as "crucifiers of christ". That phrase has been used for 2000 years to foster hatred toward the jews. "

All I said was "Man, Kid, you are so funny". There was much more to that site than anything "anti-semitic", and I did not see the anti-semitic comments when I went there, WHICH I pointed out later.

Are you calling me an anti-semite or suggesting that I laugh at things which are anti-semitic? Your comment suggests that to me... please respond quickly, for I feel much aligned and I am going to ask Dr. Bob to please step in, because to me, that is an offensive and dangerous assumption. It's like accusing someone of murder, when they have not committed a crime.

 

Re: Definition of Proselytizing Dr. Bob » » Lou Pilder

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 11:52:13

In reply to Re: Definition of Proselytizing Dr. Bob » mair, posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 10:50:37

It is not limited to "religion" as my definition above points out...

 

Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat » Lou Pilder » krazy kat

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 13:06:51

In reply to Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat » Lou Pilder, posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 11:49:17

KK,
When you clicked on the link, the opening page of the anti-Semitic web site came up. It was plainly visable, with the castagation of jews prominatly depicted with dollar signs replacing the S in words. So, a word like, let's say, pass, became pa$$. And so forth. Then, reading the message in the site depicted a clear form of anti-Semitic hatred by the sites owner.
Reading further in the site revealed even a more insidious diatribe of hate includig the phrase that the jews were the crucifirers of christ. Dr. Bob told all never to post a link to an anti-Semitic site again and that sarcasm is not excuse for posting it. For someone to say that they did not see the anti-Semitism on the opening page , then beggs the question of then how did they deciede that it was so funny?
Now I am not afraid of you asking Dr. Bob to step in, for he has already flagged the post and admonishd those for their particiption in the thread that he said that sarcasm was not an excuse and to never post that type of post again.
You are attempting to distnguish a difference between being an anti-Semite and laughing at things that are anti-Semiic. That statement of yours, then to me, indicates that you did see the anti-Semitic rhetoric on the post, for you now are saying hat laughing at it is different than being one.
Now if someone laughed at seeing the horrors of nazism depicted by piles of corpses in a death camp, then I would not see any difference between laughing at it and endorsing the act. However, you may not see it that way, but that does not mean that I have to see it your way.
Lou

 

Dr. Bob please help...

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:04:17

In reply to Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat » Lou Pilder » krazy kat , posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 13:06:51

Please read the above post by Lou. He is saying that I laughed at a site Kid_A posted because of the anti-semitic rhetoric. That site, at a glance, is about an absurd politician. Having been in politics, I found it funny because of that. I stated afterwards at admin that if I missed the anti-semitic comments on it, I was sorry.

I am greatly offended by this. Please offer me some support here. I am not anti-semitic.

I can't believe this...

Someone mentioned that those of us leaving were selfish. This exemplifies why I felt I HAD to be selfish - if the site doesn't support me at all, it ends up hurting my family, too, because of what it does to me. This sort of thing cuts me to the bone. I am a tolerant and kind person, yet I have felt as if I have to prove that somehow here as of late.

Please, please show that you are capable of noting when Lou is being uncivil, Dr. Bob, since so many of us have been called so recently. I know he's been blocked before, but there's been a lot of stuff recently, i.e. the comments re: Kiddo, that have kind of been swept under the rug.

My hands are shaking after this. I know I shouldn't let this get to me...

I just don't see how I can post here at all anymore again. I've lost my ability to be humorous here, my ability to support because my "kind" of support is suddenly frowned upon.

Please help me see it differently. And please don't say "ignore his posts" because that is not a viable option for someone with severe OCD...

- KK

 

((HUGS)) KK... keep your chin up sweety. (nm) » krazy kat

Posted by SandraDee on July 25, 2002, at 14:18:10

In reply to Dr. Bob please help..., posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:04:17

 

I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:19:02

In reply to Re: Kid_A's 'anti-semitic' post » Lou Pilder » krazy kat » Lou Pilder » krazy kat , posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 13:06:51

You have acted cruelly towards me, Lou. I honestly hope that you are a sincere person, but I must say that it seems at times as if you are not.

Please don't call people anti-semitic when you don't know them. Please don't start answering posts and then stop answering somewhere along the way, leaving a person who is potentially suffering hanging.

Please be careful with your comments about people being addicted to medications and suffering from depression because their psychiatrists have failed them. This gets into dangerous territory, as has been discussed here before. Some people might stop their medication believing that your "road" will solve their problems, will somehow cure this medical illness. You have said that you say to consult their Dr.'s first. Well, people do not read every thread, every post of your, and you do not say this everytime. Therefore, you are creating a dangerous environment for the mentally ill.

And, please, please, consider going elsewhere so this board can a sliver of a chance of getting back to its old self. I, unfortunately, don't think it will be able to recover completely, but it would have a chance if you would leave.

I realize I am overstepping the definition of Babble civility here, by asking that, but I am happy to be blocked again, just to get it out in the open. People are afraid to actually say it because they Will get blocked.

Some posters who have stayed here seem to think those of us who have questioned things on admin and (mostly :)) left, are angry and are causing a ruckus just to do so. Everyone needs to consider that we are also hurt and very, very sad that things have come to this point. Keep in mind, that this recent "war" started after we left.

Lou, you are the problem. I have been asked - is Lou the problem? Yes. Yes, you are. Again, I fear that even without you the board will not be the same, but the downfall is your doing. It is your fault.

If that does not convince you that at least one person, who initially tried to converse with you civilly, is at their wits end with you and, because of you, this board, then I don't know what will.

Please do not reply with questions - I am not going to clarify this further and probably will not have the chance to anyway.

I sincerely hope that Dr. Bob can somehow bring things back together again. I really do, so that others can have this place for support, even if I cannot.

- Krazy Kat, sad that a place that was a haven, a place to exchange information and ideas, to help each other through REALLY tough times, is no longer there for her and many others...

 

Re: Dear KK...

Posted by Greg on July 25, 2002, at 14:56:46

In reply to Dr. Bob please help..., posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:04:17

This is why I'm concerned...

Do me a favor, turn off your computer, take a really deep breath and go for a long walk. Don't hurt this bad if you don't have to.

You know I'm thinking about you. I'll write you when I get home.

Greg

 

Re: I agree with you Krazy Kat

Posted by tina on July 25, 2002, at 15:08:09

In reply to I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder, posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:19:02

but I fear that post will get you blocked. I'm sorry for that. I wish, along with you and I'm sure others, that Lou would 'go away' as well but I don't think that's going to happen. The act only works with an audience and unfortunately, Lou has one and so keeps performing.
I do wish you didn't get so hurt by his comments though. You are a good person and I hope, someday, babble will revert to a supportive site. I'm glad you spoke your mind and heart in your post to Lou. Sadly, I fear it will fall on deaf ears.
my best to you Kat
take care
tina

 

Re: Dear KK... » Greg

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 15:10:13

In reply to Re: Dear KK..., posted by Greg on July 25, 2002, at 14:56:46

And, Greg, this is why I can't be a part of this site anymore. I hope that some of my contributions are appreciated. Right now, it doesn't feel as if any are. :)

You were right... :(

 

Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder » krazy kat

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 15:10:21

In reply to I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder, posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:19:02

KK,
I am sorry that you are accusing me of calling you anti-Semitic.
If you read my posts to you, you will see that it is what you are posting that I object to. I object to posts that call the religious leaders of Israel, "hypocrites". I object to posts that offer links to anti-Semitic web sites and the posts that say that the post is funny. I object to posts that defame other religions also, such as Islam. I object to posts that you say the religious leaders of Israel, the pharisees, were attributing the works of the jesus that you are referring to , to the works of satan. I object to posts that claim that only people tha are members of christiandom can be saved.
I believe that it my duty to object to those type of posts. And I also believe that if I do not object to them, then I am endorsing them, and I do not endorse them. And Dr. Bob has already indicated that we do not need to know the person's intentions to object to them.
I am commited to giveing my support to others here by offering them an alternative to drugs to overcome their addiction and or depression. And there is an obvious attempt here to have Dr. Bob declare that what I am saying is proselytising, and thearfore , I guess, not allowed here.
Now when I was a teacher, a little boy painted a swastika on the door to my room. At the time, there was anti-Semitic harrassment directed to me by others. I turned him in to the admin. and he said that he was only being funny.
There was a hearing and the student lost and recieved the maximum discipine. He lost becaue it was rulled that reasonable people must look not a far distance ahead, but only a short distance ahead. And the student knew that I was the only jewish person in the school and should have known that his act would be construed by a reasonable person to be an act of hate.
So, KK, I consider that your posts in question , could be construed by a reasonable person to be defaming to jewish people and there are people looking at these posts that do not post here that do not and can not know you intentions. So I can not and will not let any posts here that defame any peoples go unanswered by me.
I would also like Dr. Bob to step in here on this matter. For I havn't acted cruely to anyone here, and I am astoished that anyone would raise that stone at me.
You are advocatng that I be off this board by " considering going elseware." I do not want you to go elseware, for I believe that all of us are striving for the same thing. But we all see things in a different light. But that does not mean that one has to leave that sees things differently. And I am not the cause of your afflicton and you day that my leaving, to you, would give you a chance to recover. I believe that if you continue to discuss with me , then you will have a better chance to recover.
KK, you say that I am the problem. Is this a refference to using me as a skapegoat?
Lou


 

Re: I agree with you Krazy Kat » tina

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 15:13:22

In reply to Re: I agree with you Krazy Kat, posted by tina on July 25, 2002, at 15:08:09

Thanks, Tina. Sadly, I've very often agreed with you and enjoyed your posts but we've never really gotten to know each other.

I'm sure folks are tired of hearing me rage and cry and claim that I'm leaving.

If you ever want to converse, please do email me - perrofeliz@ivillage.com.

Take care. I hope you continue to find support here. :)

- K.

 

I have nothing else to say (nm) » Lou Pilder

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 15:23:16

In reply to Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder » krazy kat , posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 15:10:21

 

Re: I'll do that KK, thanks and peace to you (nm) » krazy kat

Posted by tina on July 25, 2002, at 15:25:58

In reply to Re: I agree with you Krazy Kat » tina, posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 15:13:22

 

about your support and encouragement » Lou Pilder

Posted by IsoM on July 25, 2002, at 16:46:17

In reply to Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder » krazy kat , posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 15:10:21

Lou, could you clarify what you mean about your comment "that all of us are striving for the same thing"? Could you clarify for us why you wrote KK that you "do not want you to go elseware" but you offer her no support other than
your "experiences"? If you do not want her to go elsewhere & you do not support her choice of helping herself through the use of medication, how would you help her? How would you support her? Is it by KK choosing to experience what you experienced? (Notice I carefully didn't say that you had told anyone they had to choose your "road"?) Now what if she doesn't want to experience "healing" through the same experiences as you have had? Are you prepared to offer encouragement to her despite making a different choice that you don't agree with? Or do you propose to either ignore her, or instead find ways of subtly maligning her? If I wrote about my experiences I've had with medications, some bad, some excellent, & how if a person was to experience these same things, especially the good effects from the good meds, it, too, could help them overcome their depression & their need for believing that only faith & religious experiences could overcome their problems. That doesn't mean that religious experiences aren't a good thing to have. It doesn't mean that being spiritually minded can do a person harm. But by finding the right medication, they could lead a fulfilling life without using their religious experiences as a crutch, thinking that it was the only avenue of emotional & mental salvation. They could see what true spirituality is without the need to eschew all medications. It could provide an alternative to those who may think that if they can't feel better through spiritual means, that somehow they're at fault & not thoroughly confessing their sinful nature & opening themselves to spiritual healing. Could you clarify why you "object to posts that claim that only people tha are members of christiandom can be saved" but we can't object to why you claim that those who are depressed & haven't been helped by medications can only be truly helped by turning (or following or experiencing) what you've experienced? Can you clarify why you "believe that it my duty to object to those type of posts. And I also believe that if I do not object to them, then I am endorsing them, and I do not endorse them" but that if we object to similar posts of yours that claim that medications cannot completely help anyone without causing all sorts of horrible side effects & "millions of deaths" (your quote) that we're using you as a scapegoat? Are you saying that thousands of well-meaning & trained scientists & doctors who have worked for many, many years to find methods of treating & helping people have not done so out of the goodness of their heart but ONLY with profit in mind? Are you saying you question the intentions of all these people & that by experiencing what you've experienced they could've saved themselves a lot of time & money, especially if their intentions were good? Do you mean to say that any one who works in conjunction with any pharmaceutical company, or any hospital, or is a doctor, or nurse, or other health practionar who uses psychotropic medications for their patients are doing so to their harm? Why have you been so focused on undermining the sincere efforts of others that have posted on PB about the benefits of medications that have helped them AND that others have asked about? Are you questioning the improvements that others have felt with certain medications as wrong & instead discourage those who have felt better by telling them that they, too, will suffer the consequences & side effects of these drugs without cheering on & supporting the improvement they've felt. How can you possibly think that by telling them they're going to suffer harm long term & so should seek alternative methods through the similar religious experiences that you've had, & that still have not been completely explained (& few, if any, seem interested to hear it completely explained) that you are supporting & encouraging them? Could you clarify for every one reading how you possibly could think that posting your experiences, off & on, over a period of 7 months, picking up & retelling many of the same experiences, posting innumerable complaints over what has been perceived by you as slanderous posts, objecting to the choice of words, or paths others have mentioned, & quibbling about other, mostly minor, details has been supportive or encouraging to all, or for that matter, any one else? Can you clarify for us who are curious why other sites banned you & why your family & friends left you? What reasons did they give you, if you wish to share it? No pressure to answer that. Could you clarify for us know why something so wonderful as you have experienced had such an effect as being so forsaken by so many other people? Could you clarify why this experience that made you a better, more understanding person wasn’t evident to others? Could they not see your light shine & give glory to God & want these wonderful things for themselves? Could you explain why your family & friends didn't embrace your experiences & rejoice with you if they cared about you & loved you? Couldn’t they see that even if these changes weren’t that evident to them spiritually, that there was also more to it than simply a spiritual side? That they, too, would benefit physically & financially in the long term too? What possibly could’ve proved a stumbling block for ALL of them not to rejoice with you & wish to share your joy? Why has it been that your family, friends, & people from other boards you were banned from all felt the same way? Strangely, here in the PB boards, no one has taken up your experiences & joined in with you. I wonder what it is that we don’t see that you seem to see so clearly. And too, I wonder what you don’t see that we are seeing.

 

Lou's response to IsoM's post » IsoM

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 17:00:38

In reply to about your support and encouragement » Lou Pilder, posted by IsoM on July 25, 2002, at 16:46:17

IsoM,
Your first qestion is what I mean by all of us strivng for the same thing.
I believe that we all want to have love, joy and peace. And I believe that we are all "striving" for those because we are here to discuss our hopes , o, and our fears, and our mistakes, and our accomplishments a to seek companionship with others that we share a common affliction with. I believe that all posts re useful for edification, reproof, and in the serch for deliverance from the effects of our afflictions.
Now as I see it, we are all one people, including me, you, Kiddo, KK, Dr. Bob, 3-beers, CamW, mair, and all others not mentioned. I believe that all should stay, and all should be tolerant to each other. I am not advocating blocking although I believe in discipline.
Lou

 

Lou's response to IsoM's post -part2

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 17:07:56

In reply to about your support and encouragement » Lou Pilder, posted by IsoM on July 25, 2002, at 16:46:17

IsoM,
Your second question is that I said that I do not want kk to go elseware, but I do not offer her anything other than my experiance.
You see, I do not want anyone to leave, for there have been relationships established here and to leave would requirere to start anew.Now insome cases that would be advisable. But i do not think that here because of the uniqueness of this site.
Lou

 

Lou's response to Iso M's post-part 3

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 17:30:03

In reply to about your support and encouragement » Lou Pilder, posted by IsoM on July 25, 2002, at 16:46:17

IsoM,
Your next question is how would I help her. I would help her by doing what I am doing now. First, I am offering an alternative to drugs. But it is not obligatory and she has aknowleged that I would only want people to stop their drug with a doctor's supervision.
Now it may be that she is not a candidate for my help. That is expected. Not evryone will respond to anything and evrything. The Road is a choice. That is why it is not proelytising.
Now "support", I believe is an incorrect term to use here. Suppose a white supremist posted here and posted links to KKK web sites. Suppose someone here cited Hitler's Mien Kamph. Suppose someone told an experiance of being a wharewolf. Now I presume that if support endorses those things, then I could not give support to them except to object to their posts. My objection would be the support.
Lou

 

Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » krazy kat

Posted by jane d on July 25, 2002, at 17:31:20

In reply to I have posted to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder, posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 14:19:02

>You have acted cruelly towards me, Lou. I not.

> And, please, please, consider going elsewhere so this board can a sliver of a chance of getting back to its old self. I, unfortunately, don't think it will be able to recover completely, but it would have a chance if you would leave.

> - Krazy Kat, sad that a place that was a haven, a place to exchange information and ideas, to help each other through REALLY tough times, is no longer there for her and many others...

Krazy Kat,
I'm shocked by your post. You accuse Lou of cruelty but then go on to ask him to leave the board? That is cruel. I understand that maybe you want to turn back time to some earlier point on the board when it had been discovered by fewer people but I don't see how asking someone to leave does that. I don't think this was ever the kind of place where one person could be kicked out because they annoyed (or even infuriated) other people. No matter how important to the board those other people seem to be. Doing something like that would change the nature of this board far more than anything that has happened yet.

I'm sorry that you feel this board can only be a haven to you if you can exclude certain people. One of the things that I value the most about this board is discovering things in common with, and receiving support from, people who are completely different from me. So different, that if I were in charge of creating a private club I might leave them out. I think it makes the support you do get here that much more special. It does not just come from people you have an instant feeling of affinity for. And, if you really need to be a part of a more restricted group there are tons of private groups and it takes only a few minutes to set up another one as was just demonstrated here.

I hope you decide to stay. I've missed you in chat and I will miss you on the board if you do decide to go.

Jane

 

Thank you very much, Jane (nm) » jane d

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 17:44:38

In reply to Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » krazy kat , posted by jane d on July 25, 2002, at 17:31:20

 

Lou's response to IsoM's post-part 4

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 18:00:05

In reply to about your support and encouragement » Lou Pilder, posted by IsoM on July 25, 2002, at 16:46:17

IsoM,
I have to tell you , now, that your post directed to me constitutes a "too great of a burden" to answer in one day. Now I will answer the rest of your requests to me , but I think that ,perhaps, this can be done in daily installments. I appreciate your request for clarification and I will answer.
You did ask me about mds and drug companys and such. I once reserched how much BZDs sold for at the users end. I found out that Benzodiazepines sell for $800,000.00 per Kilo. Not on the street. Perhaps you could verify that, for I could not believe it. I will continue, since you have opened the door to this discussion, more about psychotropic drugs.
Lou

 

Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » krazy kat » jane d

Posted by krazy kat on July 25, 2002, at 18:38:36

In reply to Re: I have posted to Dr. Bob » krazy kat , posted by jane d on July 25, 2002, at 17:31:20

O.K. jane - what if I called you an anti-semite? Don't answer... never mind... if you don't understand, I can't clarify it further. :(

 

Re: Lou's post-part 4 » Lou Pilder

Posted by IsoM on July 25, 2002, at 18:52:08

In reply to Lou's response to IsoM's post-part 4, posted by Lou Pilder on July 25, 2002, at 18:00:05

That's not what I asked you about. I, personally, have no interest in hearing about profit, loss, & incentives for marketing regarding medications despite your assuredly wide knowledge of it. I asked you about their intentions - nothing more.

That's what I want to hear about - their intentions. AND not the intentions of the pharmaceutical companies but the people who research & develop new medications, themselves, & the doctors & hospitals that use them.

Again, I will reiterate my questions regarding what your 4th post is trying to answer for yur clarification. Here it is again, broken into three separate questions. It is only this that I'm interested in you answering. If however, you feel you can't answer these three questions without bringing profit & economics into it, I would rather you didn't answer this then. My first question is discussing intentions, not profit - every company has to make some profit in order to stay afloat. And no, the comment "...saved themselves a lot of time & money..." in the second question isn't discussing profit, but intentions again. I would prefer not being side-tracked from a straightforward answer about intentions.

- Are you saying that thousands of well-meaning & trained scientists & doctors who have worked for many, many years to find methods of treating & helping people have not done so out of the goodness of their heart but ONLY with profit in mind?
- Are you saying you question the intentions of all these people & that by experiencing what you've experienced they could've saved themselves a lot of time & money, especially if their intentions were good?
- Do you mean to say that any one who works in conjunction with any pharmaceutical company, or any hospital, or is a doctor, or nurse, or other health practionar who uses psychotropic medications for their patients are doing so to their harm?


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.