Thanks for the response Peter and the links!! I will check them out tonight/tomorrow am. I appreciate you taking the time to respond and redo the links for me. 😉

” Hi Peter, thank you as always for your detailed response.”

TC : You are most welcome, dear Observingsandiego.

“I’m fairly well educated on both WWs (at least I like to think I am haha) and this isn’t something I’ve come across –even after reading many, many books on the subject.”

TC : I understand ; this isn’t something that you would normally find in common textbooks on WWI ans WWII, or on “World History” textbooks as they mainly emphasize the political and economic context that created the conflict in the first place. Therefore , they stress points like treaties (The Versailles Treaty, for i.e) , key political figures, specific key battles and turning points , key military figures , etc. Most textbooks on World History covers basically the same , and even though the Holocaust is obviously mentioned , the technical details of it and the existent medical practices and methods already being developed and tested , is seldom discussed unless specialized books and articles are also consulted.

But there is plenty of written information on this subject of psychiatry and medicine as it relates to the methods used by Hitler to implement his “solution”. I’ll provide a few of them at the end of this reply so you have it in one place instead of being scattered all over my previous posts.

“My response to you wasn’t a knee jerk reaction (i.e. assuming you hated the profession) it was an honest question/statement to you (not that I think you thought differently but in light of the other comments your post generated I wanted to clarify).”

TC : Got it about that ; thanks.

“I’m always interested to learn something that I don’t know or further my understanding of things I do know. I will definitely check out the links and the reading you suggested and then maybe we can have an actual discussion (I know what you are referencing and then therefore can make an intelligent and appropriate response, whether in agreement or not, then. ;”

TC : Fair enough , my friend. :-)))

Here are the links. Study them as well as the books , articles , etc , they refer to so you have a complete view on the subject. Remember , this are academic articles , books , etc, in the main written by psychiatrists themselves and medical doctors.

http://www.heti.nsw.gov.au/Global/HETI-Resources/psychiatry/An%20Overview%20of%20Psychiatric%20Ethics.pdf

https://chaoticpharmacology.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/psychiatry-and-politicale28093institutional-abuse-from-the-historical-perspective.pdf

http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/pbrcpsych/24/9/347.full.pdf

http://www.publichealthreviews.eu/upload/pdf_files/11/00_Lindert.pdf

http://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/135879/Bartov_-_The_Holokaust_-_origins,_implementation,_aftermath.pdf

Best regards ,
Peter

Hi Peter, thank you as always for your detailed response. I’m fairly well educated on both WWs (at least I like to think I am haha) and this isn’t something I’ve come across – even after reading many, many books on the subject. My response to you wasn’t a knee jerk reaction (i.e. assuming you hated the profession) it was an honest question/statement to you (not that I think you thought differently but in light of the other comments your post generated I wanted to clarify). I’m always interested to learn something that I don’t know or further my understanding of things I do know. I will definitely check out the links and the reading you suggested and then maybe we can have an actual discussion (I know what you are referencing and then therefore can make an intelligent and appropriate response, whether in agreement or not, then. 😉

?

Dear Roger, I’ll tell you a little bit about myself so that you and others here know where I stand on this “Scn/LRH v/s psychiatry” dilemma , though I feel that my viewpoint on this had already been explained at length at previous posts. But first I just wanted to comment (and my apology in advance for assuming things) that it seems to me that you are either a practicing psychiatrist ? against which I have absolutely nothing (you seems like a very nice intelligent individual) , or you have been helped by psychiatry ? in which case I am happy for you and totally support you on that.

Having gotten that out of the way to keep the communication line clean and honest, I will start by saying that I hate two-valued type of analysis : “Right v/s Wrong” , “Evil v/s Good” , “White v/s Black” , etc. They lack enough multiplicity of viewpoints to properly evaluate anything , leading to fixations, prejudgments, and possible injustices.

I very much believe in a infinity-valued logic as Truth is a relative proposition which depends on many factors analyzed all together. There are always many angles from which to look at anything. Those who are willing to inspect every possibility and viewpoint have a very free mind which is almost impossible to enslave or “hypnotize”. To say that something or someone is absolutely evil or absolutely good is a fallacy and a misguided fixation.

I believe in teaching others to think for themselves , and to arrive at their own conclusions on anything, free from undue influence and authoritarian approaches to knowledge and data. I love free thinkers ; remind me of the Renaissance and the Alexandrian Schools.

I believe that LRH did many wrong things which wasn’t expected from a man like him. Attacking critics and dissenters for disagreeing with any part of Scn or it as a whole , is not only wrong , it is suppressive. Deceiving others for so many years as to the alleged abilities to be gained from the Bridge is inhuman , as most of us stayed in Scn in the first place to acquire those exact abilities as advertized by him. Otherwise , many would have just walked out within months of having experienced Scn. He was wrong about forcing people to believe and stay in Scn as many of his policies form the 60s clearly infers. And he was wrong about others things as well.

I also believe that he did quite a few good things. I know this when I am capable of helping my little princess with assist every time she gets sick or injured like a few weeks ago when she sprained her arm and was in a LOT of pain. It was very late at night when her mother called me to come and check her out. I am no medical doctor , but no bones seemed to be broken or damaged. As it was late at night, and the hospital was far away, I decided to give her an assist to alleviate the pain and see how it goes. I did a Touch Assist on her and ran the incident using old Bk-1 techniques. She improved a lot, but still felt a lot of pain when she moved her arm a lot. But was able to sleep.

Next day was Sunday where only emergency services open so I gave her another Assist with even better results , and put her a sprained wrist support. Next day she went to school and was able to write with the hand even if with a little pain. I gave her another Assist. Then on Tuesday her arm had completely healed enough to feel no pain whatsoever and play all day with both arms. In just 3 days! what seemed a serious injury which usually takes a lot longer to heal, was completely well.

I believe LRH did also good when due to my auditor training, I am capable of really listening to others w/out evaluating or invalidating for them, while making them feel really understood and acknowledged, and thus , doing a lot of good for them. I feel he did good when using the study Tech (regardless if he actually discovered it or just compiled it from the work of others) I have been able to help my little princess to have academic excellence (straight As ) in ALL her years as a student where she have won numerous school contests including Spelling Bee contests (in English) when her native language is another. Gee, she even correct her father every time at his horrific grammar.

I believe he did good when I have been able to help a lot of people to handle a multiplicity of life ruins through the use of honest and ethical auditing.

That LRH lied to us a lot of times is also my belief, but that he told many truths as well is something I have a solid reality on. He lied to us when he told us that he was a nuclear physicist and that had graduated from university. He lied to us about his alleged war injuries. He lied to us about the alleged abilities that the Bridge was capable of bringing about. And he lied about many other things as well.

But he told us the truth when he explained the principles of ARC. He told us the truth when he explained to us the mechanism behind overts and withholds and their manifestation in human behavior. He told us the truth when he said that past traumatic experiences are capable of being recorded and being unwittingly and unwillingly reactivated at period of stress, causing changes in attitudes and general well being. He told us the truth when he told us that function is senior and more important than structure. He told us the truth when he said that man is basically good. And so he told many other truths as well.

He suppressed either directly or indirectly, unwittingly or willingly, many individuals, but he also changed many lives for the better. He could be a self-righteous asshole, but he also was a very gentle well-mannered individual.

I believe that Hitler had a very deep hatred for Jews as a result of many historical events of a social, economic, and political nature ; but I also believe that he used the practices and beliefs of the psychiatrists of his time as the perfect justification and methods to put in practice his “solution” to the so called “Jewish Question”. Without that influence , many historical events would have turned out quite different , and many lives saved. Psychiatry is the profession with the worst and darkest past that humans have ever practiced.

I believe that it took quite a lot of time for psychiatrists to finally confront and publicly accept the many atrocities that their colleagues committed in the past, and their role in helping the Holocaust happen. That many of them have accepted this as a fact , is evidenced by the many academic articles written by psychiatrists themselves at psychiatry journals and publications. Even the own “German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) publicly accepted in 2010 psychiatry’s role at the Holocaust in a speech given by its president Dr. Frank Scneider.

I believe that a lot of psychiatrists have been putting ethics in at their profession, and have showed the courage to face their past , and their willingness to change it for the better. A lot of them have honorable desires to help others and ARE actually doing it.

I believe that anybody deserve his chance at redemption, and that anyone is worth salvaging. Punishment is a tool of the beasts ; compassion and forgiveness are the tools of a civilized society. We all can be better than we are ; we all can change. I believe in alliances not in war and conflicts.

SCn, LRH, and psychiatry have ALL harmed others in different ways. They have also helped others in many different ways. This is not a “white or black” proposition, dear Roger ; this has many , many shades of gray.

I have absolutely nothing against psychiatry ; I only have a beef against violation of human rights and two-valued “ethics” or “moral” analysis , as those last ones are always misguided and full of misconceptions , half-truths, and general injustice.

My duty is the dissemination of Truth ; convenient or inconvenient ones. Truth has no color, no gender, no race , no preferences, and chooses no sides. Truth is also serene and not misemotional.

My duty is NOT to defend LRH, or Scn, or psychiatry, or Pro-Scn blogs, or Anti-Scn blog , or anything like that. My duty is the dissemination of truth, the fostering of Human Rights, and the rehabilitation of Free Will, Self-determinism and self-esteem. I am never one-sided, dear Roger ; I am always multiple-sided, and thus I can easily change my mind about anything as I never fixedly hold to any single viewpoint.

I hope that this time I had made myself clear enough for you and others here. I won’t be posting any more comments on this thread. I don’t pretend to bore anyone to death. :-)))

Take care, my friend.

Best regards,
Peter

Roger, I’ll save you the trouble. I read through everything. There was not a SINGLE piece of primary documentation showing that Hitler was primarily motivated or driven by anything written by psychs vis-a-vis how he formed or executed his “Nazi” program.

It was ALL supposition.

Okay Peter. Psychiatry was a driving force behind the Nazi’s. Psychiatry is evil because it influences people who study it to become evil.

Dear Roger , this isn’t about what “Peter wants to prove” ; this is about what dozens if not hundreds of psychiatrists themselves (responsible ones) believe psychiatry’s role in the Holocaust was.

so you are basically saying that :

Jutta Lindert, PhD, MA, Protestant University of Applied Sciences Ludwigsburg, Ludwigsburg, Germany.

Yael Stein, MD, Hebrew University – Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel

Hans Guggenheim, PhD, Founder, Foundation Guggenheim, Boston, United States.

Jouni J. K. Jaakkola, MD, DSC, PhD, Center for Environmental and Respiratory Health Research, University of Oulu, Oulu,Finland.

Rael D. Strous, MD, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

are ALL Scientologists forwarding their own agendas in an academic journal ?

Do you have any evidence to support that allegation , dear Roger ?

I would like your answer first before making any additional comments on this article.

Peter

TC, I just now had a chance to catch up on this thread and I wanted to validate you for your various comments. While others don’t seem to be able to hang in there with true reason and resort to various logical fallacies, you’ve been holding your position with equanimity, facts and insight. Well done!

Peter, that document you have linked us to is a very academic-looking agenda-advancing dissertation written by a scientologist. It’s a long and tedious bit of reading and I hope you’re not actually suggesting anybody take it as fact. That sort of writing is meant to be submitted to professional academicians who will analyze it critically on the strength of their specialized education. We “regular” people can’t critique it unless we research every line. I’ll pass on that.

I have a better idea. Why don’t you just come out and say what it is you want to prove? What point are you trying to make? Arguments that rely on what’s written here and what’s printed there and by whom are endless arguments. ENDLESS. So please just say what your point is.