The writer wishes to thank the following individuals and organizations for contributing their expertise to this report: Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Rick Ross of the Cult Awareness Network (CAN), the United States Justice Department (USJD), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF). This study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
"The lifetime prevalence of Credulous Personality Disorder has been reported to be between 0.1% and 99.9% in the general population, but it is not known whether such reports can be trusted since there is evidence to suggest that a large number of these studies were performed by researchers suffering from the disorder. At present, it seems safe to say that the disorder is very common in the general population (perhaps approaching 100%). The severity of the symptoms, however, differ dramatically across individuals. It seems that the disorder is very common in both in-patient psychiatric settings and out-patient mental-health clinics, but it rarely represents the presenting disorder. Many clinicians also suffer from Credulous Personality Disorder, which makes diagnosis and treatment of the disorder very difficult. These clinicians not only tend to believe the overly credulous pronouncements of their clients, they also are much more likely to believe that untested or falsified treatment modalities actually work.... In almost all cases, Credulous Personality Disorder has a chronic course. Few remissions of symptoms have been observed in people who are fully or partially conscious. In the few cases of recovery that have been reported, there is reason to suspect that the reporting clinicians were suffering from the disorder and, thus, the accuracy of their reports can be questioned."
Presumably this diagnosis would apply to partisans who believe their preferred politicians' promises that another government program will solve everything.
Jones might be a nutjob, but his facts are still better than your buddy Piers Morgan or Rush Limbaugh. Still haven't seen you address where he has been factually incorrect.
That's the beauty of bullshit. You can use obscure facts to support idiot speculation and because it's an opinion, no one can prove you wrong.
Bush being responsible for 9/11 for example. Yes it was weird Building 7 collapsed. Yes when compared to controlled demolitions they look similar. Yes there were conflicting reports that some people might have heard explosion. Conclusion? 9/11 was an inside job!!!!!! There's no other possibility!!!
If you wrap yourself in a bubble of stupidity and only allow the facts you personally like to penetrate your shield, you can believe all sorts of bullshit.
Yes it was weird Building 7 collapsed. Yes when compared to controlled demolitions they look similar. Yes there were conflicting reports that some people might have heard explosion. Conclusion? 9/11 was an inside job!!!!!!
I'm surprised that you would allow for even that much speculation into the matter. The Building 7 conspiracy is pure jive, bubba. FWIW I was Blaster Assistant for Raytheon in the early eighties, so I might should know a little something something about demolition. I've been all up and down that footage like a monkey on 50 foot of grapevine, and there was nothing that fell under the Eye of Chunder™ to arouse an iota of suspicion.
That's as far as I can get in any article that talks about a "Study".
A study has become to mean a Liberal assertion.
I don't even hold them in the same esteem, I held the "Mayan Apocalypse" fear mongering, that the Liberal media got people who play Scientist on TV to tell the world was going to rip apart back in December.
Notice Liberal propaganda ministry always says "Study" so nobody challenges them on their bullshit. If they called it "Research", then people would want to see the facts, instead of listening to opinions.
Reminds of an Asshole talking to me last year, he told me he compiled a "Database". I was impressed, because this guy didn't seem technical. So I asked him, "what Database did you use?"
He said, "Oh no, uh I mean I've been saving emails, that support my research."
I just didn't have the heart to ask him what he called "Research".
decide for yourselves wether or not this guy is sane.
The only thing that is sane or curious about video is how many people ONLY see a crazy person screaming, instead of recognizing the many valid points given in his monologue.
This is a sad observation of most people's listening skills today?
Lack of facts and valid points combined with his behavior is why he is a nut job.
We live in a modern democracy where the people can change the government every 2 years. Yet there are people who think the tyrannical government is coming with swat teams to take away their property. This is bizarre and irrational thinking that can only be attributed to paranoia and mental illness.
Use your vote to overthrow the government, not assault weapons that stand no chance against tanks.
Why would you even suggest that citizens would face off against tanks? Like that is a possibility???
Wait, oh yeah.... There was Waco.
Not exactly the kind of thing any of us wants to see ever again.
What will the next crisis be and why would our government ever need to behave that way?
The government already behaves like this on a daily basis. Ever seen a raid on a raw dairy farmer who was "not in compliance" with the crony FDA laws? Did you see the military style raid on kim.com (founder of megaupload) on his family's house in NZ?
I think too much trust in the government is a mental illness and a sign of lazyness.
A phobia is a fear of something, so anti-government phobia, would be the irrational fear of all these "well educated" statists smuggards that blame tea party people for everything that's wrong all the time.
How sad is your life if you can claim to be a victim of the actions of the dumb motherfuckers that watch fox news?
Reading the title of this thread, I initially thought it was about people who either had a fear of people who had a fear of government or about people who had a fear of being anti government. Shouldn't it just be called government phobia?