SG Broadband Community

YARDofSTUF wrote:Im rushing over it rather quickly because it doesn't really seem like we're talking about drug free zones of overlap of competition from drug deals and corporations, and I expect you or TonyT to go off on a tangent shortly and then this thread to be locked or filled with more clown farm vagina motivational posters. lol

Well I don't know if I can go off on a tangent in my own thread lol but anyway, the point is this:

The most dangerous mind altering drugs come from within the confines of drug free school zones and are ordered by school officials. I don't know of any student massacres as a result of illegal drug use. Do you?

The irony of it all.

UOD wrote:I don't know of any student massacres as a result of illegal drug use. Do you?

I don't know of many at all, and can we really blame them fully on the drugs? And should we consider student age gang shootouts student massacres? And if they're drug related shouldnt they be counted too?

YARDofSTUF wrote:I don't know of many at all, and can we really blame them fully on the drugs? And should we consider student age gang shootouts student massacres? And if they're drug related shouldnt they be counted too?

Do these gang shootouts happen on school premises during school hours?

What we do know is that all school shootings perpetrated by students happened on school grounds in drug free school zones during school hours by students who were diagnosed by school officials and taking drugs in order to attend school...

How many school shootings were there before we introduced kids to ADD and prozac and ritalin......

How many shootings did we have in drug free zones before we made up that fake term.

There are no drug free zones. If there were, we wouldnt find drugs in kids lockers and stuff. Based on that you could call all of America a drug free zone and the term would be just as accurate.

YARDofSTUF wrote:How many shootings did we have in drug free zones before we made up that fake term.

There are no drug free zones. If there were, we wouldnt find drugs in kids lockers and stuff. Based on that you could call all of America a drug free zone and the term would be just as accurate.

what is your infatuation with drug free school zones?

the facts are that our school officials demand that certain students take drugs in order to attend. Since then, we've had multiple school massacres on school grounds. Our school officials push more dangerous drugs on our kids than drug dealers. I don't know of any school shootings based on the consumption of illegal drugs. Do you?

UOD wrote:what is your infatuation with drug free school zones?

I wasn't the one that started bringing them up.

YARDofSTUF wrote:I wasn't the one that started bringing them up.

Well then maybe the point of their design is being lost. Drug free school zones exist for what reason? To let drug dealers know that if they get caught selling inside the school zone, they will suffer higher penalties...so it's a deterrent.

With that in mind, the most dangerous and harmful drugs are being ordered up for our kids by the folks that we entrust to teach them inside of this "zone".

I mentioned it as a point of irony...if you get it fine, if it eludes you...I can't help you. Simple as that.

Quite frankly, if you are gonna be part of our little evil social group, then you need to be able to keep pace while running with the devil.

Just because I don't agree doesnt mean I don't get it, and no one said I had to be the same evil as you

So what should we do instead of the drugs? I agree they aren't great, but maybe its the best we can do now in some cases. Though I do think I remember hearing pot can be effective in some cases and is less dangerous obviously.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Just because I don't agree doesnt mean I don't get it, and no one said I had to be the same evil as you

So what should we do instead of the drugs? I agree they aren't great, but maybe its the best we can do now in some cases. Though I do think I remember hearing pot can be effective in some cases and is less dangerous obviously.

What should we do? First off, reject the idea that being a kid is a medical condition lol.

I stated that drug free school zones exists to "keep out the competetion". That statement is a satirical remark. However, there is some truth in it, the system is making drugged children and getting them accustomed to 'take a pill to fix the ill", no matter the ill. They want herded managable students who can be easily sold on the American Middle Class ideologies.

Drug free school zones are not drug free though. Kids use illegal drugs. Kids sell illegal drugs. Gangs are prevalent in schools too.

Drug free school zones exist to (1) ward off drug dealers by enforcing stiffer penalties & court sentences & (2) a revenue system to generate more dollars via fines. They already know that yellow signs on the street don't deter drug dealers one bit, nor do the signs prevent students from seeking out the drug dealers.

You can liken these "drug free school zone" signs to Web sites that offer free mp3 downloads but display a Google Ad Sense banner ad of RIAA warnings! Does that banner prevent mp3 downloads?

UOD wrote:What should we do? First off, reject the idea that being a kid is a medical condition lol.

Well since every single kid isn't on prozac and ritalin I guess we're at that step.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Well since every single kid isn't on prozac and ritalin I guess we're at that step.

Kids are under constant evaluation by those folks who do not have the authority or the training to determine illness. Any type of maladaption is now considered an illness. Why? And why do we allow it? It's business. The medical field could treate it's way into bankruptcy....so it has to "create" new illness. Go ask your mother or father what they did with the "bad" kids in school.


I can recall what happened to those kids...they got a foot up the ass from a concerned parent. It used to be called discipline and it comes in many forms.

But now we have pills.

Killeen, told CNN's "Larry King Live" that Suleman "has no plans on being a welfare mom and really wants to look at every opportunity that she can to make sure she can provide financially for the 14 children she's responsible for now."

Suleman's publicist did say that Suleman gets $490 every month in food stamps.

..and as the donod come in the food stamps will get reduced. Alls well that ends well.

Typical media generalization:

In recent television interviews, Suleman has rejected suggestions that she might not be able to care adequately for all 14 of her child

Care adequately? Where exactly do these suggestions come from? Psycholgists and psychiatrists. After all, they are the "experts" on mental health and have every right to tell us how to manage our children!

TonyT wrote:Care adequately? Where exactly do these suggestions come from?

How about from her mother?

YARDofSTUF wrote:How about from her mother?

And her mother got the idea from whom? What does "adequate care" mean? According to whose standards? The only relevant standard is that of the one who births and raises the kids. Who has the right to say, "you are not raising your kids right." Who has the right to offer up such evaluations?

In these United States, so long as one is not violating any laws, even the police cannot tell you how to raise a family.

But we now have "the child police". AKA Social Services or Childrens Services. Composed of psychologists, managed by psychiatrists who also run the pharmaceutical companies. (look at any pharma board of directors to find these psychiatrists)

And the subject of this thread is all about how the "child police" may soon have a new "zone of influence" if and when new laws are created around the likely to occur made up diseases "obsessive childbearing syndrome" or "compulsive progeny disorder". The point being that such diseases listed in the DSM are not based on scientific fact but are in fact voted into existence annually at the APA conventions.

Octuplet mom Nadya Suleman has launched a website asking for donations for her family of 14 children.

She is accepting monetary donations payable by credit card (MasterCard, Visa, AmEx and Discover taken) and she also given an address to which one can send goods.

Suleman no doubt needs help. She has no income, is $50,000 in debt. She also receives $490 a month in food stamps and receives about $600 in disability payments a month for each of the three of her older six children with disabilities.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/1 ... 66030.html

TonyT wrote:And her mother got the idea from whom?

Maybe common sense?

YARDofSTUF wrote:Maybe common sense?

so now you argue that she has common sense although a few posts ago you said that she was r r rr retardeded. How does a retard learn common sense?

Did your mother teach you how to post on the internet Al?

I look forward to the day that I can look to my government to decide how many children I need/want/desire.

UOD wrote:so now you argue that she has common sense although a few posts ago you said that she was r r rr retardeded. How does a retard learn common sense?

Did your mother teach you how to post on the internet Al?

No I'm saying her mother has common sense.

YARDofSTUF wrote:No I'm saying her mother has common sense.

I understood you the first time dude. My reply, how does a retard learn from her mother?


Look dude, the mother is an idiot, we can all agree on that. But being an idiot doesn't make her less worthy of her civil rights. And being poor doesn't mean that she can't afford her civil rights....everyone can afford their rights.

You are free to exercise your rights and make your voice known to the rest of America regarding this woman's ill advised actions.

UOD wrote:Look dude, the mother is an idiot, we can all agree on that. But being an idiot doesn't make her less worthy of her civil rights. And being poor doesn't mean that she can't afford her civil rights....everyone can afford their rights.

Her civil rights don't entitle her to under nourish her children, or other mistreatment of them.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Her civil rights don't entitle her to under nourish her children, or other mistreatment of them.

Where is the honest to goodness evidence that occurred? Just because her mother stated it? Just because the media spun & twisted it? Are there police reports? Hospital records that verify mistreatment/abuse?

I've not seen any evidence that there was mistreatment or abuse. I've not directly observed the family.

TonyT wrote:Where is the honest to goodness evidence that occurred? Just because her mother stated it? Just because the media spun & twisted it? Are there police reports? Hospital records that verify mistreatment/abuse?

I've not seen any evidence that there was mistreatment or abuse. I've not directly observed the family.

They showed the room the kids live in and the clothes spread out on the floor and that there is no more room, and now 8 more kids are going to go into that home?

Proof enough to take them away from her? No. But proof enough child services should look into it.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Her civil rights don't entitle her to under nourish her children, or other mistreatment of them.

How could they be undernourished...aren't we all paying for them to be taken care of with our hard earned money?

UOD wrote:How could they be undernourished...aren't we all paying for them to be taken care of with our hard earned money?

Oh I doubt you find our system so good and perfect.

YARDofSTUF wrote:They showed the room the kids live in and the clothes spread out on the floor and that there is no more room, and now 8 more kids are going to go into that home?

Proof enough to take them away from her? No. But proof enough child services should look into it.

Give me a break...she's a prime candidate for Extreme Home Makeovers!!!!!!!



Man, you are quick to take on the role of judge, jury, and executioner on this one. what's got you all wound up man? This story should rank about a millionth from the top...the top being this economy.


This thread was never meant to be a focus on that ******* woman....it was supposed to show how the psychiatric community is gonna jump on this one in order to classify it so they can start pushing pills for it...all in the name of MONEY!!!!!

Well I must be a very tame executioner if my execution of her is to say that child services should watch her. lol


But ok, the psychiatric community, yes they're gonna all jump on this to push new pills for something.

I'd say no. First off they dont all agree, I mean all the groups we make up don't agree with each other, but these guys really show it. Some dont even like to resort to drugs unless nothing else works.

Now would a drug company try and market soemthing for this if they could? Of course.

JawZ wrote:How could they be undernourished...aren't we all paying for them to be taken care of with our hard earned money?

Yep... soon to be

Octuplets mom Nadya Suleman says she is caught up on her Southern California home mortgage payments and is no longer delinquent.

Suleman, who lives in the La Habra home with her 14 children, told KROQ radio on Thursday that she is no longer in imminent danger of losing her house.

Suleman lawyer's said last month that she was considering going on welfare to make ends meet.

Amer Haddadin, the man who has been threatening to foreclose, told the Orange County Register that he decided to accept (Canadian) $6,500 for September and October house payments because he knows Suleman is strapped for money.

A (Canadian) $450,000 balloon payment still looms.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504744_162- ... ?tag=stack

JawZ & others have made some good points. What you are seeing is a classic event the media has chosen to really emphasize. Why?

Problem
Reaction
Solution


Will this event and others like it have a ending where a third party decides who can have children & how many, based on income, etc.?

I’d forgotten all about this women untill I seen this thread.
I wonder how she’s doing? She’s not in the news anymore.

It made the news a couple of days ago out here (she's up the freeway about 15 miles from me). Something about her house being forclosed on. I really don't know the details but she's outlived her celebrity. Other than that you don't hear anything.