IndexNL-Next

Nederlog

March 23, 2019

Crisis: On Medicine, Mueller Concluded, DCCC For Corruption, Big Oil´s Real Agenda, Mueller Report


“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous, than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
  -- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.







Sections

Introduction

1. Summary
2.
Crisis Files
     A. Selections from March 23, 2019
Introduction:

This is a Nederlog of Saturday, March 23, 2019.

1. Summary

This is a crisis log but it is a bit different from how it was until 2013:

I have been writing about the crisis since September 1, 2008 (in Dutch, but since 2010 in English) and about the enormous dangers of surveillance (by secret services and by many rich commercial entities) since June 10, 2013, and I will continue with it.

On the moment and since more than three years (!!!!) I have problems with the company that is supposed to take care that my site is visible [1] and with my health, but I am still writing a Nederlog every day and I shall continue.

2. Crisis Files

These are five crisis files that are mostly well worth reading:

A. Selections from March 23, 2019:
1. All the Better for the Fishes
2. Mueller Concludes Russia Probe With No New Indictments

3. DCCC Moves to Kneecap Primary Challengers

4. New Report Exposes Big Oil's Real Agenda

5. Mueller-Dämmerung
The items 1 - 5 are today's selections from the 35 sites that I look at everyorning. The indented text under each link is quoted from the link that starts the item. Unindented text is by me:

1. All the Better for the Fishes

This article is by David Healy MD on his site. This is from near its beginning:

Over 150 years ago, describing most of the medicines then available as junk, Oliver Wendell Holmes came up with one of the most famous phrases about medical practice, when he said that:

If all the materia medica (drugs) could be sunk to the bottom of the sea it would be all the better for mankind, and all the worse for the fishes

Holmes clearly was quite right....
Yes indeed: I quite agree with Holmes. But then that is over 150 years ago, and these days medicine is a science ... is what almost all of the 30 medical doctors thought who my ex and I saw because we have ME/CFS since over 40 years.

That ME/CFS is ¨a serious chronic disease¨ I am only allowed to say by the Dutch medical community since March of 2018. Until then, my ex and I were either insane (hallucinating for 40 years (!!)) or else lying for 40 years, although the last opinion doesn´t make any sense for my ex and myself, because we fell both ill in the first year of our university studies on study loans.

But no: According to 27 out of 30 doctors we saw, we must be insane or lying (which is what they meant when they said it was ¨psychosomatic¨, which is definitely not a medical judgement) and also 27 out of 30 doctors were quite unwilling to help us in any way whatsoever. Not by listening to us. Not by helping us in any way with medicines or research. Not with anything: 27 out of 30 Dutch medical doctors treated us as if we were not fully human, because we had no rights whatsoever on anything: We were both insane or lying, for forty extremely long and painful years.

It is this background that made me interested in medicine and in medical doctors, where you should also realize that both my ex and myself were quite to very intelligent, and both of us succeeded - in spite of our claimed insanity, in spite of the fact that we rarely or never could attend any lectures - in getting very to extremely good M.A. degrees in psychology.

But no matter: According to the vast majority of Dutch medical doctors (none of whom studied psychology, and all of those we saw studied at most three months of psychiatry) my ex and I were insane (if we were not lying for 40 years), and therefore we deserved not to get any help, assistance or hearing by them in any way.

And meanwhile, in the last 40 years medicine and all other university courses in anything whatsoever have been halved, but nobody in Holland discusses this.

I should also add that I did find 3 doctors (out of 30) who were rational and reasonable. They also could not find any evidence of a disease (after at most 150 years of real medical science), but they did not assume that what a Dutch medical doctor does not know about medicine cannot exist, as the vast majority of all Dutch medical doctors apparently do believe.

These 3 helped me a lot by believing me, by doing some research that the other medical doctors had neglected to do, and I am pretty sure that one of them saved my life, basically by helping me to get another house while I was quite ill.

The other 27 medical doctors my ex and I saw made our lives very much more difficult, especially because - as each of them knew very well - the Dutch bureaucrats and the Dutch politicians all followed their - supposedly - medical judgements that my ex and I were insane, that is, if we were not lying for 40 years.

Two of the results of this intentional and sick discrimination we received from 90% of the Dutch medical doctors we saw are that (1) I think that 90% of all Dutch medical doctors are scientifically and medically incompetent, except when they are dealing with established well-known diseases, and that (2) I think that all Dutch doctors have gotten an education which was as bad as the educations I got studying philosophy (whence I was removed very briefly before doing my M.A. in it because I dared to criticize the incompetents who taught me) and psychology - and incidentally, in both subjects I scored an A - the highest mark - as an average for all the courses om which I was examined.

But no matter: We were still hallucinating and/or lying according to 90% of the Dutch medics...

Back to the article, that is concerned with something far more serious for medical doctors than patients they discriminate:

Recently in Belfast, at a BMA meeting, medical delegates discussed the issue of doctors committing suicide.  There was panic in the air.  Doctors it seems need support.  They should not have to take on an occupational risk like this, delegates said.

There is no evidence that anyone at the meeting was willing to look in the mirror.  Its highly likely most if not all of these medical suicides happened to doctors on pills, a high proportion of which were likely caused by the meds these doctors were on.

A post here some months ago Even Doctors also get killed by Akathisia raised this issue. There have co-incidentally been a number of penetrating comments about this post recently.

The people who are most to blame for this are doctors.  Its doctors who have been handing out these pills and ignoring if not ridiculing patients when they report back that the drug has made them dysphoric, akathisic, suicidal or even homicidal.

Or the treatment has hooked them – See Welsh petition.

Or has caused permanent sexual dysfunction – See Encountering Doctors

A huge proportion of the drugs that every doctor has prescribed during the last ten years have been prescribed on the basis of Fake News – ghostwritten articles and without access to the data from the trials of these drugs.  Doctors could have refused to prescribe without access to the data – but haven’t.

I am not a medical doctor but I am a psychologist, and my rather wide reading in the context of medicine (of which very little gets on my site, incidentally) have convinced me that the last paragraph is quite correct - and incidentally, if you want to read many of the well-written and scientifically (and mathematically) quite competent articles of a medic, you should go here:
1 boring old man (in fact the late Mickey Nardo): strongly recommended.

Also, I am afraid that the last quoted paragraph is not true of 90% of all medical doctors, but of considerably more than 90% - and yes, David Healy is quite correct that ¨
[a] huge proportion of the drugs that every doctor has prescribed during the last ten years have been prescribed on the basis of Fake News – ghostwritten articles and without access to the data from the trials of these drugs¨.

Here is one of the consequences, according to Healy:

Life expectancy is now falling in America and Britain.  This was entirely predictable given that the science behind prescribing is all Fake Science and given that doctors have been willing to put their patients on 5, 10 or more Fake Medicines every day – where in the 1980s few people were on more than 1 and we had the data behind the one that people were on and the literature was written by who it appeared to be written by.

But there are no BMA resolutions about what we are going to do about our patients’ falling life expectancies. Doctors are worried about themselves (..)

Yes indeed - and to repeat: Doctors do no care about their patients (whom the vast majority prescribe 5 or 10 medicines that are in fact completely untested or are only ¨tested¨ by fake science) but they do care about doctors´ increased suicides.

O well.... Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:

The question is how best to treat the profession’s nervous breakdown?  Counselling or mindfulness or even higher rates of pay seem to be the options doctors are lobbying for.

A better bet in terms of restoring morale might be if someone could get the profession to take on a mission – demand access to trial data, believe patients when it comes to adverse events and engage with our falling life expectancies rather than the stressful burn-out inducing handing out meds you don’t believe and wouldn’t take yourself and then ignoring the evidence of harms – because to do otherwise would be “suicide”.

Short of doing this you’d have to say it were better for mankind if doctors were sunk to the bottom of the sea and better for the fishes.

Its not as though anyone will have to push them overboard with their feet encased in concrete to ensure they sleep with the fish – they are busy slipping their own feet into the concrete mix as is.  If medicines are so effective and safe then nurses and physicians associates and pharmacists and robots soon will be a lot cheaper prescribers than doctors

Yes, I fear that is quite correct - and I do not think that David Healy will get his wish satisfied, for the simple reason that I have waited 40 years to see any medical doctor who had both scientific rational competence and a conscience, and I have seen at most 10% who were. I think this will continue, and this is a strongly recommended article.


2. Mueller Concludes Russia Probe With No New Indictments

This article is by Eric Tucker, Michael Balsamo and Chad Day on The Associated Press. It starts as follows:

Special counsel Robert Mueller on Friday turned over his long-awaited final report on the contentious Russia investigation that has cast a dark shadow over Donald Trump’s presidency, entangled Trump’s family and resulted in criminal charges against some of the president’s closest associates.

The comprehensive report, still confidential, marks the end of Mueller’s probe but sets the stage for big public fights to come. The next steps are up to Trump’s attorney general, to Congress and, in all likelihood, federal courts.

Yes indeed. Here is some more:

What happens next is “up to Attorney General Barr,” said White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders.

Barr said he could send his account to Congress quickly.

“I am reviewing the report and anticipate that I may be in a position to advise you of the special counsel’s principal conclusions as soon as this weekend,” Barr said in his letter the top Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary committees. He pledged a commitment to transparency.

I do not believe Barr, but OK. Here is some more:

With no details released at this point, it’s not known whether Mueller’s report answers the core questions of his investigation: Did Trump’s campaign collude with the Kremlin to sway the 2016 presidential election in favor of the celebrity businessman? Also, did Trump take steps later, including by firing his FBI director, to obstruct the probe?

But the delivery of the report does mean the investigation has concluded without any public charges of a criminal conspiracy between the campaign and Russia, or of obstruction by the president. Mueller is not recommending any further indictments in the Russia probe, a Justice Department official confirmed Friday.

Well... it has been my own view (and that of the VIPS and others) that while the Russians interfered some in the American elections, they did not interfere much. I still think so, but
I grant that the two main reasons are the fact that I can program quite well and that I have been reading the VIPS quite a lot (who comprise some of the best former NSA members).

Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:

The mere delivery of a confidential report set off immediate demands from Democrats for full release of Mueller’s findings.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer declared it “imperative” to make the full report public.

The top congressional Democrats said, “The American people have a right to the truth.”

I agree with the Democrats. There is considerably more in the article, that I leave to my readers´ interests. And this is a recommended article.


3. DCCC Moves to Kneecap Primary Challengers

This article is by Jake Johnson on Common Dreams. I abbreviated the title. It starts as follows:

Progressives made clear they have no intention of backing down to the party establishment after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on Friday threatened to cut off funds to firms and strategists that support primary challengers against incumbents.

"The DCCC can do anything it wants to try to prevent the next generation of Democrats from taking power. They will not succeed," Sean McElwee—co-founder of Data for Progress, which is recruiting progressives to oust conservative Democrats—said in a statement.

The new policy was included in the DCCC's list of vendor hiring standards, which state that the organization "will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting member of the House Democratic Caucus."

Yes indeed - and let me translate what the DCCC said in the last of the above quoted paragraphs: ¨We Democrats will not conduct business with nor recommend any consultant who works for someone who is not already a nominated and corrupt member of the Democrats¨. You may disagree with my translation, but I think this is what it comes down to.

Here is some more from the article:

But progressives argued that the ostensibly neutral rule will disproportionately harm grassroots organizations looking to replace right-wing Democrats with bold figures like Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), who both ousted incumbent Democrats in primaries last year.

"Make no mistake—they are sending a signal that they are more afraid of Ayanna Pressley and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez winning primary challenges than Henry Cuellar who votes with Trump nearly 70 percent of the time," Alexandra Rojas, executive director of Justice Democrats, told The Intercept.

As Common Dreams reported in January, the progressive advocacy group Justice Democrats is recruiting a 2020 primary challenger to take on Cuellar, who has backed anti-abortion legislation and raised money for the GOP.

Yes, I quite agree. Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:

As National Journal reported, the DCCC's hiring standards "could cripple would-be primary opponents' ability to entice top talent to join their staff" and deprive them of millions of dollars in funds.

But progressive organizations and strategists were quick to say they will not be deterred by the DCCC's threat to cut them off.

"We see exactly what you're doing DCCC," declared Democracy for America, an advocacy group that also bolsters progressive candidates. "Don't think for one second that it'll stop us—or the grassroots army we stand with—from backing bold, inclusive populists who will better represent their districts in Congress over neoliberal corporate Dems."

I hope so and as to the ¨hiring standards¨: I don´t think the ¨right-wing Democrats¨ care one bit for locking out talent, but I do believe they do care a lot for their own incomes as ¨representatives of the people¨, which in many cases (as with the Republicans) are in part corrupt. And this is a recommended article.

4. New Report Exposes Big Oil's Real Agenda

This article is by Jessica Corbett on Common Dreams. I abbreviated the title. It starts as follows:

In the years since the 2015 Paris agreement, the world's top five Big Oil firms collectively have spent more than a billion dollars on "misleading" branding and lobbying to "capture the public and political narrative" on the climate crisis while they continue expanding their fossil fuel operations.

That's according to Big Oil's Real Agenda on Climate Change, a new report
published late Thursday by InfluenceMap, a London-based nonprofit that tracks and analyzes how corporations influence climate policy.

I say, for I did not know this. But I do believe it, and here is some more:

In December of 2015, world leaders came together in Paris and agreed to pursue policies to drive down planet-warming emissions in hopes of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2100.

Today, every country on Earth except the United States under the Trump administration supports the climate accord.

But major fossil fuel companies are actively working against systemic reforms—such as urgently phasing out fossil fuels on a global scale—that scientists say are necessary to meet the Paris target and avert climate catastrophe.

Yes, I agree. Here is some more:

"The most important part of this campaign activity is the nearly $200 million per year spent on lobbying designed to control, delay, or block binding climate-motivated policy," the report states. "This lobbying has hindered governments globally in their efforts to implement such policies post-Paris."

And while the companies certainly engage in such campaigning directly, InfluenceMap researchers found they also outsource "the most direct, negative, and egregious climate lobbying to trade groups such as the American Petroleum Institute which in 2018 successfully campaigned to deregulate oil and gas development, including a rollback of methane standards."

Big Oil's narrative capture effort, the report highlights, "accompanies the expansion of the companies' operations with combined annual sales of over $1 trillion and profits of $55 billion 2018, the vast majority of which is oil and gas related."

I also mostly believe the above. Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:

"These companies have mastered the art of corporate doublespeak—by boasting about their climate credentials while quietly using their lobbying firepower to sabotage the implementation of sensible climate policy and pouring millions into groups that engage in dirty lobbying on their behalf," ShareAction chief executive Catherine Howarth said in a statement.

I fear this is correct as well, and this is a strongly recommended article.

5. Mueller-Dämmerung

This article is by C.J. Hopkins on the Off-Guardian. It starts as follows:

If Nietzsche was right, and what doesn’t kill us only makes us stronger, we can thank the global capitalist ruling classes, the Democratic Party, and the corporate media for four more years of Donald Trump. The long-awaited Mueller report is due any day now, or so they keep telling us. Once it is delivered, and does not prove that Trump is a Russian intelligence asset, or that he personally conspired with Vladimir Putin to steal the presidency from Hillary Clinton, well, things are liable to get a bit awkward. Given the amount of goalpost-moving and focus-shifting that has been going on, clearly, this is what everyone’s expecting.

I think I definitely know - see above - that Nietzsche was quite mistaken, but otherwise the above seems correct to me (and Mueller´s report was handed in yesterday).

Here is some more:

When the Mueller report fails to present any evidence that he “colluded” with Russia to steal the election, Trump is going to reach over, grab that report, roll it up tightly into a makeshift cudgel, and then beat the snot out of his opponents with it. He is going to explain to the American people that the Democrats, the corporate media, Hollywood, the liberal intelligentsia, and elements of the intelligence agencies conspired to try to force him out of office with an unprecedented propaganda campaign and a groundless special investigation. He is going to explain to the American people that Russiagate, from start to finish, was, in his words, a ridiculous “witch hunt,” a childish story based on nothing.

Quite possibly so. Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:

It will not be the End of Everything.

What might, however, be the End of Everything, or might lead us down the road to the End of Everything, is if otherwise intelligent human beings continue to allow themselves to be whipped into fits of mass hysteria and run around behaving like a mindless herd of propaganda-regurgitating zombies whenever the global capitalist ruling classes tell them that “the Russians are coming!” or that “the Nazis are coming!” or that “the Terrorists are coming!”

Well... I have seen (quite consciously) over 50 years of politics, and I am afraid that I think most who are interested in politics are partial, prejudiced, ignorant and not intelligent, which means that I disagree with Hopkins, on factual grounds. This is a recommended article.

Note
[1] I have now been saying since the end of 2015 that xs4all.nl is systematically ruining my site by NOT updating it within a few seconds, as it did between 1996 and 2015, but by updating it between two to seven days later, that is, if I am lucky.

They have claimed that my site was wrongly named in html: A lie. They have claimed that my operating system was out of date: A lie.

And they just don't care for my site, my interests, my values or my ideas. They have behaved now for 3 years as if they are the eagerly willing instruments of the US's secret services, which I will from now on suppose they are (for truth is dead in Holland).

The only two reasons I remain with xs4all is that my site has been there since 1996, and I have no reasons whatsoever to suppose that any other Dutch provider is any better (!!).
       home - index - summaries - mail