~ ANIMAL TERRORISM -- A CLASSIC FORM OF PSYCHOPATHY ~
By Brennan Browne
Dr. Robert Hare's analysis of a psychopath:
"THE
WORLD HAS ONLY ONE PROBLEM--PSYCHOPATH S. THERE ARE TWO BASIC TYPES OF
PSYCHOPATHS, SOCIAL AND ANTI-SOCIAL.
THE ESSENTIAL FEATURE OF PSYCHOPATHS IS
A PERVASIVE, OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIV E DESIRE TO FORCE THEIR DELUSIONS ON
OTHERS. PSYCHOPATHS COMPLETELY DISREGARD AND VIOLATE THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS.
Over and over again we come up against religion and belief systems that
have to be defended against objective evidence or the beliefs of others. We
have to ask ourselves "where did these belief systems come from that so
evidentially are catastrophic? " And then, we have to think about the fact
that now, in the present day, WHEN MANY OF THESE SYSTEMS ARE BREAKING DOWN
AND BEING REPLACED BY OTHERS THAT SIMILARLY DIVERT OUR ATTENTION AWAY FROM
WHAT IS, IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO "ENFORCE" A CERTAIN MODE OF THINKING. AND
THAT IS WHAT PSYCHOPATHS DO BEST.
PSYCHOPATHS DOMINATE AND SET THE
STANDARD FOR BEHAVIOR IN OUR SOCIETY. We live in a world based on a
psychopathic, energy stealing food chain, because that's just the way
things are. MOST PEOPLE ARE SO DAMAGED THEY NO LONGER HAVE THE CAPACITY TO
EVEN IMAGINE A DIFFERENT SYSTEM BASED ON A SYMBIOTIC NETWORK.
THEY
[psychopaths] ARE DAMAGED BY THE THOUSAND EVILS THEY HAVE DONE TO OTHERS TO
SURVIVE. FOR THEM TO SEE THE SYSTEM FOR WHAT IT IS, WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO SEE
THE PART THEY HAVE PLAYED IN PERPETUATING IT. THAT'S A LOT TO ASK OF A
FRAGILE EGO."
PZ Myers says: Think about this: you have a
baby daughter who needs precise surgeries done on the tiny, delicate muscles
of her eyes. Do you want her to be the very first practice surgery the
doctor has ever done, or would you rather, perhaps, that the doctor had done
his practice surgeries on animals first?
BB: Strabismus [crossed
eyes] does in no way necessitate the barbarity of sewing kittens eyes shut.
Since it requires nothing more than a surgical manipulation of the eye
muscles [and the afflicted person exercising those muscles], this learning
technique can easily be taught and performed on cadavers to gain expertise.
As for amblyopia [dim eyesight] there is no way whatsoever that torturing
kittens by depriving them of their vision is warranted when millions of
human subjects suffer from this condition and are more than willing to
volunteer for clinical research studies.
PZ Myers says:
Oooh, sewing kittens' eyes shut sounds so evil, doesn't it? How could that
possibly help people?
BB: It can't.
Psychopathic
checklist:
Aggressive narcissism
1. Glibness/superficial charm 2. Grandiose sense of self-worth 3. Pathological lying 4.
Cunning/manipulative 5. Lack of remorse or guilt 6. Emotionally shallow
7. Callous/lack of empathy 8. Failure to accept responsibility for own
actions
The shoe obviously fits here...time to wear it!
TERRORISTS OF THE ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENT Category: [Propaganda]
Posted on: February 24, 2010 9:22 AM, by PZ Myers
Janet Stemwedel was a
participant in a panel discussion on the ethics of animal research. She got
her reward: she is now featured on the web page of a deranged terrorist for
animal rights, complete with her home address and phone number. These thugs
are people who threaten children and carry out violence against researchers,
and deserve to be treated as terrorists, fitting the definition perfectly:
they use fear and intimidation and violence to compel people to meet their
irrational demands.
They are also ignorant, and don't even want to
understand the purpose of basic research. This particular ranting loon made a
revealing admission in the complaints about the researchers:
On the
left below, are the three individuals [Stemwedel, Blakemore, Ringach] who
will be speaking in favor of imprisoning, mutilating and then killing animals
under the "guise" of science. NONE OF THEM ARE MEDICAL DOCTORS; repeat,
NONE of the three vivisectionists have EVER treated a single patient in their
lives and their torture of animals has NEVER helped a human patient.
(Punctuating with frequent use of ALL CAPS is one of the characteristics of
this person's mode of communication, I'm afraid.)
There is so much
wrong with that comment. There is a false equation of scientific and medical
research; the only kind of research regarded as 'scientific' is therapeutic,
clinical research that directly makes a human being healthier. It's
fallacious and short-sighted thinking. We need to understand how cells and
tissues function in normal, healthy organisms, and for that we need to work
on animal models -- there are obvious ethical problems with proposing to
tinker with the nervous systems of healthy human babies, for instance. The
scientists who do fundamental work on how nervous systems work tend not to be
M.D.s because they are not trying to do clinical work; the scientists who
directly study human disease tend to be M.D.s because they must be to be
qualified to work on people. They are both necessary, the first to puzzle out
basic mechanisms of biology, the second to apply that knowledge to human
beings. Excluding the first from the domain of science because they don't
have the specialized, narrow training needed to work on one species is
nonsensical.
One of the panelists, Colin Blakemore, is a perfect example
of the importance of basic research.
Colin Blakmore's claim to fame is
experimenting on kittens for YEARS in England. Blakemore is outspoken in his
support of the use of animal testing in medical research. He came to the
attention of the animal rights movement while at Oxford University in the
1980s, when he carried out research into amblyopia and strabismus, conducting
experiments that involved sewing kittens' eyelids shut from birth in order
to study the development of their visual cortex.
Oooh, sewing kittens'
eyes shut sounds so evil, doesn't it? How could that possibly help people?
Well, it doesn't if you're an idiot who begins with the premise that the
only true science in this field would require that Blakemore be an M.D. who
sews babies' eyes shut. But let's assume you are a rational human being.
My daughter was born with mild strabismus. Our doctor was rightly
concerned, and took us aside to explain what happens to the brain in these
case, citing the research done on cats (which I was already familiar with,
since I was trained as a developmental neurobiologist) . The brain is a
plastic organ, and even for several years after birth, it is being wired
and remodeled -- the optic nerves are making connections with specialized
targets in the brain. The young brain actually tests for disparities in the
signals from the two eyes and makes adjustments to minimize noise in the
signal -- too much variance, and it automatically starts shutting down
confusing inputs. We knew from the work on cats that, while my daughter had
two perfectly functional eyes, her brain was going to respond by rewiring to
ignore one of them.
She spent her first several years with therapy
designed from the perspective of our understanding of how the plastic
brain works -- understanding directly derived from the work of people like
Blakemore. She also had a series of surgeries to adjust and strengthen the
muscles of her eyes.
Think about this: you have a baby daughter who needs
precise surgeries done on the tiny, delicate muscles of her eyes. Do you want
her to be the very first practice surgery the doctor has ever done, or would
you rather, perhaps, that the doctor had done his practice surgeries on
animals first? Early in my career, I worked as an animal care assistant in
a department of surgery, and that's what most of the animals were used for:
teaching medical students the basics of their craft, running students through
simple procedures that made them learn how to handle tissues, how to cope
with bleeding, how to repair damage, all stuff that you cannot do except
on living organisms.
The real monsters are the terrorists at the
"Negotiation is over!" website. Even from the title you can tell that they are
not open to reason.