Month: January 2013

Rambunctious Souls

~ admin ~ 6 Comments
sdsoulAre you one of the: “Freedom loving, fear fighting, pattern breaking, don’t give a shit anymore, sweet and loving rambunctious souls?”

Be proud, stand strong and keep on keeping on.

True freedom first step is: Not giving a rats ass of attention to whatever people are thinking of you.

People are breaking out in vast numbers right now of whatever prison they conceive themselves to be imprisoned in and the matrix is coming down very hard.

Either very obvious and direct or by its nasty fabrication of brainwashed unconsciously willingly self-appointed status quo drones, either in your so called friendships, fellow co-workers or family members.

Always ready to bring your freedom craving soul down if its inner tide should pull you away from the most traveled highway, endlessly road tripping the architecture of the “normal blueprint emotional infrastructure pre-designs” for you from womb to tomb.

From the minor details to the larger visions you may have for yourself. They are on it. Drones in the skies, drones by the dinner table, drones in the cantina.

In my surroundings and the people I engage with in my work I see them breaking free now. On a very profound scale.

They are getting off of the sofa so to speak, and are setting out towards new horizons. Without safety nets. Vision driven, heart driven, driven by the sweet taste of freedom, no matter what they would “lack” in matrix commodities.

Following their rambunctious hearts and dealing with their own personal pain in these processes, I salute their courage.

Ever so strong and fierce and yet ever so fragile, the most powerful cocktail your rambunctious soul will ever provide you with.

The Matrix can’t handle both strong and fragile, since the understanding of the concept would require: Empathy. It knows nothing of that emotion.

Looking back at it, we have always had that rambunctious seed, haven’t we? Just one example: The school system.

You are probably like me, old enough not to have been diagnosed with any strange letter combination that would have made you a target for big pharma. Remembering my time in that, I kinda diagnosed them; Boring, no nutritious value, so I wouldn’t eat their programmed so-called education. The only thing they could do was to beat the living shit out of me, but that fueled my rambunctious soul.

Continue reading @ Zen Haven

Zen Haven | January 30 2013

How Psychology Undermined Western Civilization

~ admin ~ 7 Comments

After the Sandy Hook murders, psychology and psychiatry have taken another leap forward in expanding their influence throughout society. “More mental-health services” is the catch-all phrase our leaders use in “solving” these massacres—along with gun control.

But just as grabbing guns won’t reduce the bulk of gun violence in America, the vague mental-health dictum won’t work, either.

This article focuses on psychology, which is branch of false knowledge different from the false knowledge of psychiatry.

A psychiatrist is a medical doctor who has received special training in diagnosing and prescribing drugs for “mental disorders,” none of which disorders can be confirmed to exist by any test.

A psychologist doesn’t need to be a medical doctor. With an advanced degree and a license, he can do therapy with patients and try to resolve “mental and emotional issues,” for which no diagnostic tests exist.

From the beginning of the history of psychology, it was really a simple trick. Establish a loose category called “mental problem,” pour money and research into solving it, and enroll patients.

This approach has become so pervasive that most people can’t conceive of an alternative. A person is acting strange, he has a problem, and a mental-health practitioner can help him solve it. What else do we need to know?

Well, for starters, we need to know why the category of “mental problem” is necessary. Why should we assume it means anything?

Instead, for example: what about people making an inventory of their own deeply held convictions, followed by a self-assessment, to see how well or badly they’re living up to those convictions?

Why did that approach go out the window?

Because it’s based on some sense of responsibility, which is now verboten in a society where “intervening” and “fulfilling needs” are paramount.

Continue reading →

The Connection Between Big Food / Big Pharma and Nutrition Policy

~ admin ~ 1 Comment

Activist Post | January 29 2013

DietitianI’ve explored and written on food politics for years, using articles and direct links back to my sources to show evidence that the Big Agra-Big-Food-Big Pharma-Big Government complex is a pernicious corporatocracy with various satellites in place to conduct its dirty work of politicking, plundering, deceptive marketing, and purposefully miseducating the masses. I long ago declared that the food corporatocracy’s nutritional-food satellites such as the two ADAs (American Dietetic Association and the American Diabetes Association), the USDA, and the FDA are criminal organizations. The American Dietetic Association recently changed its name to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND).

Michele Simon, president of Eat, Drink, Politics, a watchdog organization, has produced a useful 50-page report titled, And Now a Word from Our Sponsors: Are America’s Nutrition Professionals in the Pocket of Big Food? This is from her executive summary:

Against this backdrop, we must ask: what is the role of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND)—the nation’s largest association of nutrition professionals—in preventing or at least stemming the tide of diet-related health problems? What responsibility does this influential group of registered dietitians bear to be a leading advocate for policy changes to make eating healthfully more accessible? Does forming partnerships with the food industry compromise such a group’s credibility? And what does the food industry gain from such partnerships?

Why does it matter? As this report will show, the food industry’s deep infiltration of the nation’s top nutrition organization raises serious questions not only about that profession’s credibility, but also about its policy positions.

Continue reading →