Fear of Tyranny Is Now Treated As A Psychiatric Disorder In The West

The Exavator
Saman Mohammadi 

The modern totalitarian state is the psychotherapist for the whole of society. It acts on the elitist principle that it knows everything and the people deserve to be mind controlled and brainwashed for their own good.

Defenders of the totalitarian system demonize their democratic critics as insane, and suppress political speech with the mind control techniques that have grown out of modern psychological and mental health research. If you point out their contradictions, lies, and inconsistencies in their narratives, they call you a conspiracy theorist and chew you out with psycho-babble. And if you acknowledge that you fear their despotic vision for Western society and the world, they call you paranoid and say you have a psychiatric disorder.

It does not matter what twisted and perverted ideology that the totalitarian power-seekers hide behind. It could be Communism, Nazism, Islamism, Neoconservativism, or Environmentalism. Every "ism" is a thought-control prison. Citizens are suppressed in the same manner under every totalitarian hellhole by their mental overlords.

Anti-democratic elites in all totalitarian prisons use the language of mental health to dismiss dissenters and enforce their dogmatic beliefs and totalitarian policies on an unwilling public. In 2009, Brendan O'Neill of Spiked.com wrote a powerful essay called, "The Psychologisation of Dissent: The Global Warming Skepticism Mental Disorder," about how the West is following in the footsteps of the Soviet Union. O'Neil wrote:

"The idea that 'climate change denial' is a psychological disorder - the product of a spiteful, willful or simply in-built neural inability to face up to the catastrophe of global warming - is becoming more and more popular amongst green-leaning activists and academics. And nothing better sums up the elitism and authoritarianism of the environmentalist lobby than its psychologisation of dissent. The labeling of any criticism of the politics of global warming, first as 'denial', and now as evidence of mass psychological instability, is an attempt to write off all critics and sceptics as deranged, and to lay the ground for inevitable authoritarian solutions to the problem of climate change. Historically, only the most illiberal and misanthropic regimes have treated disagreement and debate as signs of mental ill-health."

In the West, the mislabeling of dissent as "paranoia" and "crazy" has been taken to an extreme. People who believe there should be government transparency and media accountability have been exiled out of the mainstream political community.

It is a cruel joke on the public that the very same people who speak for the totalitarian system in America and accuse their democratic critics of mental illness and mental retardation are half-retarded themselves. Examples include former President George W. Bush, and Secretary of the Department of Human Slavery Janet Napolitano. To be accused of being retarded for not believing official government propaganda by these retards is so funny. I think it is better to laugh than to get mad at these half-baked clowns.

But it gets more serious when we learn that the power-mongers who are throwing around terms such as "mentally ill," "conspiracy theorist," and "retarded," to describe their political opponents are secretly devising government programs to exterminate not only their critics, but also the general population. They want to get rid of the "mentally unfit," in society like Hitler wanted to do. And who is defined as mentally unfit? People who question the pseudo-science of climate change and the official fairy tale about the 9/11 attacks that has been used to destroy civil liberties and the rule of law. 

CIA agent who publicly opposed waterboarding charged with leaking classified secrets to journalists

Daily Mail

A high profile CIA agent made famous by his public opposition to waterboarding has been indicted by a grand jury for leaking government secrets to reporters. 

John C. Kiriakou is accused of telling journalists the name of another operative and his role in the capture of al-Qaida financier Abu Zybaydah shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks. 

The indictment of Kiriakou, returned by a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, is part of an aggressive Justice Department crackdown on leakers and is one of a half-dozen such cases opened during the Obama administration.

Prison time: CIA operative John C. Kiriakou, left, faces up to 45 years in prison.
His indictment was part of a crackdown on people who leak government secrets

The five-count indictment charges Kiriakou, 47, who was arrested in January, with divulging to journalists - including a New York Times reporter - the role of an associate who participated in the capture of suspected al-Qaida financier Abu Zubaydah in the months after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The officer's participation in that mission was classified.

The indictment also accuses Kiriakou of separately disclosing a covert officer's name to an unidentified journalist. The government began investigating after information about that officer appeared in a sealed legal brief submitted by lawyers representing a detainee at Guantanamo Bay. Authorities say the journalist passed on the officer's name to a defense team investigator. The defense lawyers are not alleged to have done anything illegal.

Kiriakou, who is free on bond, is scheduled to be arraigned April 13 in US District Court in Alexandria.

Authorities say Kiriakou denied to FBI agents that he had leaked the information and answered 'Heavens, no' when asked if he had provided Zubaydah's name to a reporter. They say he lied about his actions in an effort to convince the CIA to let him publish a book, 'The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA's War on Terror.'

The indictment includes one charge of making false statements, which carries a maximum five-year prison sentence, and four counts of violating either the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act - each punishable by up to 10 years.

Captured: Al-Qaida financier
Abu Zubaydah was
waterboarded 86 times
after his capture

Kiriakou received public attention for his statements on waterboarding, which he called an 'unnecessary' form of interrogation during a 2007 interview with ABC. Kiriakou said the technique had been used effectively to break down Zubaydah, who was waterboarded 83 times, and had been justified in the months after September 11. But he also appeared to express misgivings about whether the harsh interrogation method was still appropriate.
'(W)e were really trying to do anything that we could to stop another major attack from happening,' Kiriakou said. 

'I don't think we're in that mindset right now. ... And, as a result, waterboarding, at least right now, is unnecessary.'

He has since acknowledged that much of what he said turned out to be wrong. An FBI interrogator, for instance, has testified to the Senate that Zubaydah's waterboarding did not yield important intelligence, contrary to claims by the CIA and the Bush administration. And he has acknowledged that he was not present for the interrogations and instead relied on what he'd heard and read.

NDAA press conference

9/11 Truth, Inner Consciousness and the "Public Mind"

Global Research
James Tracy

With few exceptions the news that will shape public discourse is subject to a de facto censorial process of powerful government and corporate elites beyond accountability to the public. It is here that Sigmund Freud’s notion of repression is especially helpful for assessing the decrepit state of media and public discourse in the United States. In Freud’s view, one’s collective life experiences are registered in the subconscious, with those particularly disturbing or socially impermissible experiences being involuntarily suppressed, only later to emerge as neuroses. Whereas suppression is conscious and voluntary, repression takes place apart from individual volition.

With opinion polls indicating at least half of the public distrusting the official account of September 11th, the foremost basis for the “war on terror”, no public event has been more repressed in public consciousness via the mass media than 9/11. The enduring usefulness of Freud’s theory is suggested in repeated manifestations of the repressed episode to haunt the public mind for which a surrogate reality has been crafted.

Peter Dale Scott describes occasions such as the assassination of President John Kennedy and September 11th as “deep events” because of their historical complexity and linkages with the many facets of “deep government”—the country’s military and intelligence communities and their undertakings. The failure to adequately explain and acknowledge deep events and pursue their appropriate preventative remedies leads to continued deceptions where unpleasant experiences are contained and a new “reality” is imposed on the public mind.  Together with the notion of repression, the term is also applicable for considering how instances of such historical import are dealt with in mass psychological terms, or, more specifically, by ostensibly independent alternative news media capable of recollecting the real.

For example, on May 1, 2011 President Obama announced the assassination of Osama bin Laden, the mythic mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, to an apparently ecstatic nation. Most conventional news outlets reported Obama’s announcement unquestioningly because it fit the scheme of their overall erroneous reportage on September 11th. When alternative news media and bloggers almost immediately pointed to various contradictions in the story—the observations of eye witnesses to the raid, doctored photos of bin Laden’s alleged corpse, and international press reports that Bin Laden died many years prior—corporate news outlets acted swiftly to repress the well-reasoned critiques as “conspiracy theories” with a barrage of swiftly-produced editorials and op-eds. Indeed, the announcement of Bin Laden’s supposed demise came just four days after the Obama administration released the president’s purportedly authentic long-form birth certificate, an event at once uncannily amplified and repressed by the proclamation of bin Laden’s fate; where the vocabulary of repression produced another term, “deather”.

Turkish Reporters Struggle Against Repression

Der Spiegel
Daniel Steinvorth

Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Turkey has sparked international criticism over its treatment of journalists who dare to criticize the government, with many jailed on terrorism charges. The recent release of prominent reporters may signal change, but more than 100 journalists are still imprisoned in the country, more than in China or Iran. 

He has done things in the last 375 days that he would never have imagined doing before. He made dumbbells out of pipe sections, watched too much television, and at some point he discovered the sunflower seeds. That was when he realized that he was losing too much weight in prison. "I chewed those damned sunflower seeds like someone possessed," says Ahmet Sik.

The journalist is sitting in his living room in Istanbul, surrounded by his wife Yonca, daughters and closest friends. There is red wine and chocolate cake, and Sik, a youthful 42-year-old with a thin beard, still can't believe he's a free man. It is the evening of Tuesday, March 13, the day after his release from the Silivri high-security prison for presumed terrorists .

He was in pretrial detention for a year and 10 days on charges of being a "member of a terrorist organization." Sik is one of the most famous investigative journalists and authors in Turkey. His colleague Nedim Sener, another investigative reporter who has won several awards, had researched the reasons behind the murder of journalist Hrant Dink in 2007. A little over a year ago, on the morning of March 3, 2011, a special unit of the Turkish police arrested both men.

The journalists were charged with belonging to an ultra-nationalist secret organization called "Ergenekon," though there was no evidence to support the allegations. The notorious network, Turkish prosecutors claim, contrived a plan to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan several years ago. Since 2007, special police units have been trying to put a stop to the activities of the Ergenekon group, although its existence has never been proven.

Non-governmental organizations like Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch had long criticized Turkey for its repression of journalists, but a line was crossed with Sik and Sener's arrests. With their work, the two men had helped expose connections among politicians, the judiciary and organized crime in Turkey, the so-called "Deep State" that went back decades.

International Concerns 

Was the administration of Prime Minister Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) trying to silence two men after finding them useful at first but then changing its mind when their revelations became too embarrassing? After all, the two reporters had not just poked around among members of the old government elite, but had also dared to investigate the Islamists, the new people in power and their networks.

Why Is President Obama Keeping a Journalist in Prison in Yemen?

The Nation
Jeremy Scahill

On February 2, 2011, President Obama called Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The two discussed counterterrorism cooperation and the battle against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. At the end of the call, according to a White House read-out, Obama “expressed concern” over the release of a man named Abdulelah Haider Shaye, whom Obama said “had been sentenced to five years in prison for his association with AQAP.” It turned out that Shaye had not yet been released at the time of the call, but Saleh did have a pardon for him prepared and was ready to sign it. It would not have been unusual for the White House to express concern about Yemen’s allowing AQAP suspects to go free.

Suspicious prison breaks of Islamist militants in Yemen had been a regular occurrence over the past decade, and Saleh has been known to exploit the threat of terrorism to leverage counterterrorism dollars from the United States. But this case was different. Abdulelah Haider Shaye is not an Islamist militant or an Al Qaeda operative. He is a journalist.

Unlike most journalists covering Al Qaeda, Shaye risked his life to travel to areas controlled by Al Qaeda and to interview its leaders. He also conducted several interviews with the radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. Shaye did the last known interview with Awlaki just before it was revealed that Awlaki, a US citizen, was on a CIA/JSOC hit list. “We were only exposed to Western media and Arab media funded by the West, which depicts only one image of Al Qaeda,” recalls his best friend Kamal Sharaf, a well-known dissident Yemeni political cartoonist. “But Abdulelah brought a different viewpoint.”

Shaye had no reverence for Al Qaeda, but viewed the group as an important story, according to Sharaf. Shaye was able to get access to Al Qaeda figures in part due to his relationship, through marriage, to the radical Islamic cleric Abdul Majid al Zindani, the founder of Iman University and a US Treasury Department–designated terrorist. While Sharaf acknowledged that Shaye used his connections to gain access to Al Qaeda, he adds that Shaye also “boldly” criticized Zindani and his supporters: “He said the truth with no fear.”

While Shaye, 35, had long been known as a brave, independent-minded journalist in Yemen, his collision course with the US government appears to have been set in December 2009. On December 17, the Yemeni government announced that it had conducted a series of strikes against an Al Qaeda training camp in the village of al Majala in Yemen’s southern Abyan province, killing a number of Al Qaeda militants. As the story spread across the world, Shaye traveled to al Majala. What he discovered were the remnants of Tomahawk cruise missiles and cluster bombs, neither of which are in the Yemeni military’s arsenal. He photographed the missile parts, some of them bearing the label “Made in the USA,” and distributed the photos to international media outlets. He revealed that among the victims of the strike were women, children and the elderly. To be exact, fourteen women and twenty-one children were killed. Whether anyone actually active in Al Qaeda was killed remains hotly contested. After conducting his own investigation, Shaye determined that it was a US strike. The Pentagon would not comment on the strike and the Yemeni government repeatedly denied US involvement. But Shaye was later vindicated when Wikileaks released a US diplomatic cable that featured Yemeni officials joking about how they lied to their own parliament about the US role, while President Saleh assured Gen. David Petraeus that his government would continue to lie and say “the bombs are ours, not yours.”

Seven months after the Majala bombing, in July 2010, Sharaf and Shaye were out running errands. Sharaf popped into a supermarket, while Shaye waited outside. When Sharaf came out of the store, he recalls, “I saw armed men grabbing him and taking him to a car.” The men, it turned out, were Yemeni intelligence agents. They snatched Shaye, hooded him and took him to an undisclosed location. The agents, according to Sharaf, threatened Shaye and warned him against making further statements on TV. Shaye’s reports on the Majala bombing and his criticism of the US and Yemeni governments,

Sharaf said, “pushed the regime to kidnap him. One of the interrogators told him, ‘We will destroy your life if you keep on talking about this issue.’” Eventually, in the middle of the night, Shaye was dumped back onto a street and released. “Abdulelah was threatened many times over the phone by the Political Security and then he was kidnapped for the first time, beaten and investigated over his statements and analysis on the Majala bombing and the US war against terrorism in Yemen,” says Shaye’s lawyer, Abdulrahman Barman. “I believe he was arrested upon a request from the US.”
Shaye responded to his abduction by going back on al Jazeera and describing his own arrest.