Slashdot Mirror
WHO Says Afghan School "Poison Attacks" Probably Mass Hysteria
New submitter smugfunt writes "A number of incidents at schools in Afghanistan, especially girls' schools, have been attributed to poisoning by the Taliban. The World Health Organization has investigated 32 of them but found no poison. "Mass Psychological Illness is the most probable cause," they conclude, the Telegraph reports. The Taliban has consistently denied poisoning schools and have even consented to allow the education of girls in a deal with the government which allows significant Taliban control over the curriculum."
and someone believed them? Shame shame shame.
Who? Oh, those guys. I don't know what happened but I'm not taking the WHO's word for anything at all.
Hey, they have some kick ass songs. Plus, Pete Townshend's powerslide.
Lack of proof is not proof of lack
Did you get that from some TV shows? Like the one where they are always hunting the "Squatch"?
. . . and the Taliban are quite successful at spreading it. If you had a bunch of "Islam Gone Wild" retro medieval fanatics romping around your neighborhood killing innocent folks for fun and excitement . . . you might tend to be a bit on the edgy side yourself. A car engine backfire will incite you to grab your assault rifle and empty the clip in all directions, to defend yourself. In essence, anyone in Afghanistan will believe that the Taliban are capable of committing horrific atrocities. That makes people fear the Taliban, and it gives the Taliban strength.
Now, take a look in your own airports, and see if the population of your country is so scared, that they tolerate crotch groping and all other types of submissive humility . . . all because the fear of terror has devoured their souls.
Yep, terror can inflict colossal mass hysteria damage.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
I'm a neurologist and I deal everyday with people that are obviously suffering a conversive disease. This does not mean that they are feigning or malingering, It's just that somehow their brains malfunction and generate bizarre symptoms. In most cases the disease has no anatomical and physiological integrity (i.e. it crosses boundaries that it should not, or a certain part that should also be affected works fine). ... or worse: a harmless congenital defect can be found, which will produce more anxiety.
It's frustrating because the patient and everyone around her (mostly happens to females) is pretty convinced of an impending illnes and they request test after test, sometimes even threatening to sue. Of course nothing is found
This sounds like the work of Scarecrow. A Dark Knight Rises ad campaign?
As best I can tell there have been no reported deaths. That doesn't completely rule out poisoning, but along with there being no actual threats or anyone claiming responsibility, it does lend credence to the idea of it just being hysteria.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
So that explains the Christians here on the streets beating women who don't have their heads covered. That explains why all the women here have been forced out of employment and education. That explains why Christians who go to another religion or become atheist are commonly executed here.
Oh wait, none of that's even close to happening.
We have a tiny, tiny minority of Christians in this country who wish they could do a Christian-style Sharia, but the most encroachment on our lives is the annoying Westboro Baptist clan. But even then, the Bible says to give to Ceasar what is Caesar's, meaning Christians can separate religion and government in accordance with the Bible. Sharia demands there be no such separation.
But even then, the Bible says to give to Ceasar what is Caesar's
I always thought that meant that you had a duty to pay your taxes, serve the army, serve your country...
But that you also had to be mindful of a duty to tithe, serve god, and serve the church..
I'd never read that as "separation of church and state", just an admonishment that you had a duty to both, and should neglect neither.
I give up! Who?
A very strong case can be made that the phrase refers to paying tax as the payment of tax is the specific issue involved in the story. The rest is interpretation.
The American reaction to 9/11, that's mass hysteria. Just wait until WHO finds out that Bin Laden didn't do it.
from those with a vested interested in keeping war profits flowing.
Isn't it interesting how the narrative changes with the global policy? Not long ago, the Talibans were the epitome of evil, but now that western countries support the islamists to overthrow Assad, the Talibans are suddenly innocent and the good guys? This change of narrative is rather puzzling, if we take news making with more than just a grain of salt.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
I dunno about living in Afghanistan, but here the population is not scared and didn't decide to be groped at airports. Population is forced to submit to screening at gates.
If a rational debate about security from terrorist attacks on flights had ever been made, it would have concluded that a determined attacker with a bit of equipment can take down whatever civilian flight and escape, without needing to pass through gates. Ergo, both Al Qaeda and the TSA's objectives are likely different from what they proclaim to us retarded masses.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Yawn. It is "the same" as would be any religious claim about anything whatsoever, right?
If you're going to link it, you should at least address your own link's statements, otherwise it is a citation refuting, not supporting, your claim/snark.
De Marchi claims that the prediction of an unspecified "miracle", the abrupt beginning and end of the alleged miracle of the sun, the varied religious backgrounds of the observers, the sheer numbers of people present, and the lack of any known scientific causative factor make a mass hallucination unlikely.[25] That the activity of the sun was reported as visible by those up to 18 kilometres (11 mi) away, also precludes the theory of a collective hallucination or mass hysteria.
In any case, these are not analogous. The presence or absence of a poison can be tested by quite-direct means, and in its absence, hysteria becomes a likely explanation.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Factually erroneous on every point, but out of curiosity, what do you mean by "evil" per -your- definition and objective justification, rather than parasiting off of Christianity's as you attack it?
Are you saying that any of this behavior reduces the likelihood of the DNA of the theism advocates propagating maximally, as a Naturalism criticism that would validly remain open to you? Because at this point, you haven't suggested anything that gives any weight, validity, or significance to your characterizations.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
"19,171 terrorist attacks since 9/11"
[[Citation Needed]]
Also, Christianity, which seems to have a history of torturing or forcefully converting people (ie: the inquisitions) is frequently referred to as the religion of love. If you're going to mock the fact that Islam is called the religion of peace, at least be unbiased enough to mock Christianity on the same basis.
Remember, Christianity is the religion that says it's better to contract AIDS and die an excruciating death than to use a condom. The religion of love strikes again.
I don't defend people claiming that this is Islam telling them to kill "heretics", but you have no right to tell me that Islam is inherently evil.
Although, I do wonder how many Muslims are convicted of murder each year, compared to the number of Christians who are....
you might tend to be a bit on the edgy side yourself. A car engine backfire will incite you to grab your assault rifle and empty the clip in all directions, to defend yourself.
Hmm, that's doubtful. Wouldn't that just lead to waves of scared people taking up arms against the stray bullets of their neighbours?
. . . all because the fear of terror has devoured their souls.
FDR said it best, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself."
So, we're afraid of the fear, as we should be?
I'd say it's impossible for fear to have "devoured their souls", those spirits have been gone a long time. That's why they couldn't tell the difference between People and Corporations.
It's almost like they didn't really mean it when they repeated the quote with zeal, "Give me Liberty or give me death!" -- I mean, they've hardly any damn liberty left, WTF do they expect?
"Land of the Brave" my ass!
Then there was the case in Dearborn last weekend of "sudden Jihad syndrome" where a muslim tried to rundown 9 Christians protesting a muslim fair thing. He's been charged with attempted murder.
That incident had nothing to do with jihadism and everything to do with Christian fundies playing party poopers. I'm not saying his course of action was legitimate, but provocating and insulting rarely results in constructive outcomes.
There's nothing like $HOME
I do believe that Islam requires putting infidels to the sword, though. Don't look at the actions of people who *say* they're followers, look at the doctrines of the religion itself.
Ok, let's see what the Good Book says...
15:13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
Oh, yeah, much better than Islam. Islam has more crazies now, but given the chance any religion will stab you in the back with no second thoughts, you dirty unbeliever.
The passage suggests that a seperation of church and state is permissible, but not required. Jesus said that paying taxes was required even if the government did not enforce religious law. If Jesus felt that Government was required to enforce religious law, he would have stated that ceaser's government was illegitimate and that paying taxes to him was forbidden.
I don't believe that there is any passage in the new testament that encourages theocratic government. Groups like the Westbroro Baptist church claim that god wants government to enforce old testament law even though the new testament focuses on spreading religion to people instead of using government to force people to follow divine law.
Wow, I have found myself groping crotches recently! Now I know that it's because of terrorism, and my subconscious is just checking for explosives. Hopefully the media will publicize this phenomenon so that young ladies are no longer surprised by my behavior.
Just because the WHO says the girls haven't been poisoned doesn't mean they are not being attacked. Girls have had acid thrown in their faces repeatedly. And when you're face is scared for life, there's no dispute that it happened:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/world/asia/14kandahar.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/world/asia/14iht-kandahar.1.17822365.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-224_162-4631708.html
Until just 3 centuries ago, the British (not some primitive tribe) used to occasionally disembowel people alive only because they happened to profess the wrong variant of Christianity, let alone a different religion.
That's why they couldn't tell the difference between People and Corporations.
A moderately insightful comment turns to shit with this sentence. Nobody, including the court systems of the world, actually makes that mistake. I see this ranting against corporate personhood as another form of theater. Doesn't make us any more free than groping crotches does in airports.
It's almost like they didn't really mean it when they repeated the quote with zeal, "Give me Liberty or give me death!" -- I mean, they've hardly any damn liberty left, WTF do they expect?
What do you think is the appropriate response to tyranny? Roll over and let them scratch your belly? Bark at shadows? At some point, you have to actually resist the actual tyranny.
Heh, whippersnapper at least you know what an Amiga is, I'll give you props for that. I'll stand by the WHO comment though no matter how they downmod me. They're a pack of liars. Like I said, I may have doubted the claims at first but now that WHO says it didn't happen I have to think it might be true. If they say it's sunny I'm taking a flashlight. By the way, if you need a hard drive for that A500 I've got a GVP A530 for sale too. ;)
That Tommy sure plays a mean pinball.
Cool! Where can I find your blog. I would like to add it to my RSS feed.
Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
"Mass hysteria" (an unfortunate term for a real phenomenon, IMO) was my guess from the outset, based on
1. The symptoms reported are typical of mass hysteria.
2. Nobody claimed responsibility (somewhat unusual for a terrorist attack).
3. Symptoms resolved fairly rapidly, with no deaths (so pretty incompetent poisoning, if that was what it was, but typical of mass hysteria)
yeah, the Taliban and their fellow cronies have given up on airplanes long ago. We have no reason not to give them first class tickets just as show we don't fear them taking down a plane for the sheer pleasure of it.
Christianity is (obviously) based on the teachings in the Old Testament, but it doesn't end there. Otherwise, Christians would just be Jews.
1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11“No one, sir,” she said.
Post like this makes me glad I live in a country in which the Christian fundies involved in this incident would have been arrested for breach of peace before their provocations triggered nasty reactions.
There's nothing like $HOME
I'm glad you live there too.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Citation done:
19,171. Done, it's not hard to figure it out. They're all nicely sourced for you too. Including by day, week, month, and year. Including, death tallies, injuries, and all the rest.
Well let's see, between Christianity and Islam. Which of the two had a reformation? And no that's all of Christianity, rather that's one branch of that says using condoms is *bad*. If you're going to try something, try harder. Remember the two major branches of Islam(Sunni and Shiite) believe the same thing and when they don't they just murder each other. Wahabbists happily are still expanding on their extremism though. Druze are the most peaceful of all the branches.
But hey, tell me something. When was the last time you saw a islamic government that didn't crush everyone, and make or try to make women chattel? I'll wait, because you won't find one.
Om, nomnomnom...
That incident had nothing to do with jihadism and everything to do with Christian fundies playing party poopers. I'm not saying his course of action was legitimate, but provocating and insulting rarely results in constructive outcomes.
So, if you're standing on the corner of your street and you're pissing on a flag. I should just get in my car and run you over? No free speech for you I guess. There's no difference. And there's no difference in this case either.
Just so you know, since it was actually reported in the newspapers, you can go blog hunting for it though. When they pulled him out of his car he was screaming the good old gone-by-gone "god is great". Yeah he was a sudden jihad syndrome.
Om, nomnomnom...
“If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”
Removed in edit by council of Nicaea.
A rock whizzed by Jesus's head and hit the harlot square in the temple, she dropped. Jesus slowly turned and with great annoyance said 'Mother...'
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yes, your personal duty, not the duty of the state. In the perfect Muslim state there is no differentiation between religion and state, they are one.
It's not worth trying to extract a great lesson on politics from this passage, although that hasn't stopped people from trying to do so. The Church has a consistently poor understanding of this passage, partly because they don't read history outside of the bible, which you have to do in order to understand some of it.
The Roman denarius was the USD of its day, being the most important world currency and what you needed to pay your taxes. It was stamped with an image of Cesar. Now, remembering your history, the emperors of Rome were considered to have divinely sanctioned authority, and we ain't talking Yaweh here. The Jews did not like this at all, and considered the image of Cesar stamped on the denarius to be idolatry. Jews had been known to actually re-mint denarii with different images. They might have avoided the coins altogether, and vanished from history by starvation, but we can assume they compromised--principles are great, but sometimes there's no other option but to use the currency of the day (sort of like h.264).
When the Pharisees try to entrap Jesus by asking him if it's ok to pay taxes, he jabs back at them by drawing attention to the fact that although they talk big, the coins in their pockets are Roman denarii, thus highlighting the the fact that they are just a bunch of whores whose rules and laws are as irrelevant as Ceasar's on a spiritual level. If there is an overarching political message of the gospels, it's that things of the world do no matter, including political matters.
Matthew 21, ESV
45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. 46 And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet.
15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. 16 And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances.[b] 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius.[c] 20 And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They said, “Caesar's.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” 22 When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.
The "Render unto Cesar" passage is nothing more than Jesus deflecting the Pharisees' attempts to frame him, in a somewhat clever way. It's pointless to try to derive a lesson or a teaching on separation of church and state from it. Actually, it's hard to extract any political message at all from the teachings of Jesus, which teachings are practically devoid of political content even to the point of ignoring looming contemporary political issues. It's not just modern followers who are frustrated by this. His disciples never quite got it either. They discussed what position they would have in the kingdom when Jesus made himself king. Seriously. After his resurrection, they assume he's going to take over the world, and he immediately brushes them off and starts talking about the Holy Spirit.
6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, 'Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?'
7 He said to them: 'It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.'
I also live in a country in which I can shout "I AM AN ATHEIST" on a public place without being ostracised - the worst I would get.is a "so what" look or a "why should I give a fuck" look. Or more likely a "Dude, just quit shouting already, it's annoying."
I live in a country in which the religious believes of candidates is considered a marginal matter when it comes down to elections.
I live in a country in which catholicism is the mainstream religion, and in which even conservative political figures, if they are practicing catholics, abstain from following the rites as a church follower when they are there in any official respect. Like, funerals of fallen soldiers. Devout christians tend to be even more infuriated with this than atheists.
In which country are you more free?
There's nothing like $HOME
"I see this ranting against corporate personhood as another form of theater."
I hadn't thought of that, but I think you've got a good point there... when times are bad, or going wrong, everyone wants a bogeyman to blame. For the gov't, it's OMG-terrorists. For the geek crowd, it's corporations.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
The one with the lowest tax rate. Duh.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Hahahaha oh man, that's great.
I guess you never hear about the other benefits of immaculate conception.
3 centuries ago? I guess you've never been to an Old Firm game.
Of course, now you'll never have to.
Ahahahahahaha!