It's Official: You Now Belong to the State

Published on June 24, 2005 By Gideon MacLeish In Current Events

One of the hallmarks of a socialist society is that all property, including the people, within a country belong to the state. This is so far removed from the concepts of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" that anyone who sees any such resemblance has to have a SERIOUS vision problem.

I have long warned people about the UN convention on the rights of the child, which, if adopted in the US, will effectively ban religious instruction of your own children among other things. The article below, reprinted from a message board, but nonetheless factually correct, underscores the fact that we're fast headed in that direction.

Congratulations, America. You now belong to the state.

*** CTM US ACTION ALERT ***
US Mental Health Screening Signals
End of Parental Rights
by Nancy Levant

In the 2005-2006 school year, all parents will receive written notice of new policies from your children's schools. Many schools will ask you to sign permission slips, allowing school counselors or "advocates" to have conversations with your children. You will be told how your local schools are now involved in vision and dental screenings, learning disabilities and speech impediment screenings, and other acts of kindness, but watch for the small print or the extra little blurb, which states that your children will also be evaluated for emotional wellness. Watch for wording like "happiness indicators" or "family participation."

The fact is that our president has mandated that every American child, age 3 through 18, is federally ordered to be evaluated for mental health issues and to receive "enforced" treatment. Welcome to President Bush's New Freedom Initiative and New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Welcome to life-long profiling and drug addictions, New Freedom-style.

52 million students and six million adults working in schools, according to this commission, will be tested and should flush out at least 6 million people, or shall we say new customers, who will then be mandated to receive "treatment." What treatment does our president's commission have in mind? The newest drugs in the pharmaceutical pipelines, of course. The commission recommends "specific medications for specific conditions."

One of the state-of-the-art treatments, and most expensive, is an implanted capsule yes, that's right, implanted. The capsule delivers medication into a child's body without the child having to swallow a pill or the need for parental permission for dispensation.

The New Freedom Commission named the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) a model treatment plan. Medical algorithms are a flowchart-style treatment indicator. If you have A symptom and B symptom, take C medication. TMAP began with the University of Texas, big pharma, and the mental health and corrections system in Texas. The American Psychiatric Association concurs that TMAP is brilliant.

However, the New Freedom Initiative and Commission is a political-big pharma marriage. Many companies who supported TMAP were also major contributors to Bush's re-election funds. For example, Eli Lilly manufactures olanzapine - one of the drugs recommended in the New Freedom plan, and furthermore, George Herbert Walker Bush was once a member of Lilly's board of directors. Our current President Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, as a member of the Homeland Security Council. Eighty-two percent of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000 went to Bush and the Republican Party. Do tell...

Texas Algorithm grossed over 4 billion dollars in 2003 and olanzapine is Eli Lilly's top-selling drug. A 2003 New York Times article by Gardiner Harris claims that 70 percent of olanzapine sales are paid for by government agencies, such as Medicare and Medicaid. And lo and behold, guess who is now able to bill Medicaid for health services? Public schools, of course, as they are now under the big pharma-political profits/pay-back umbrella once they adopt screening policies. Public schools can now be paid to screen and drug your kids.

Now, if you ever wonder, ever again, if public-private partnerships care about people, then you need a brain transplant. Your children are now the legislated guinea pigs and lab rats for the pharmaceutical companies who bought and paid for our president's campaign. Favors are now returned to those companies in the form of enforced juvenile customers, their health, and their future drug addictions.

But wait, there is more. The New Freedom Commission also calls for enforced treatment. That means that parents have no rights to refuse the treatment recommenced by TMAP and other drug dispensing corporate-bureaucratic apparatuses. And as the mental health bureaucracy is also involved in this financial game of insidious cruelty, parents and families are also to be investigated via the result of their children's screenings in schools. In other words, schools are now the across-the-board, or shall I say -nation, diagnostic tool for big pharma and child control.

And there's more. The U.N. Agenda 21 has also called for total intrusion into schools and children's lives. No more religion, no more individuality, no more real education, no more real grades, no more real teaching, no more teacher respect for parents, and no more truth from teachers or principals. This sounds very familiar and very political to me. And I've said it before, and I will say it again: if you are of a religious ilk and you refuse to allow your children to be abused by our "educational" system, the stage is being set for you to lose physical custody of your children. I suggest that you read this: 'Rethinking Orphanages for the 21st Century' by Richard McKenzie.

Comments

Rightwinger

on Jun 24, 2005

Hmmm...maybe I'll start voting Libertarian?

just john

on Jun 24, 2005

Is it possible that this could have a positive effect? I think so. If they ARE qualified to make these sorts of evaluations and the parents ARE aware that they will be doing these evaluations, I don't see anything wrong.

If a child is mentally disturbed, this might be an opportunity to help the child in a case where the parent can't or won't. Social pressures are far different from what they were 10 or 20 years ago. Kids are dealing with issues at home and that can translate to poor performance in school, acting out in school, or violence at school. Kids don't really understand the concept of misplaced anger (a lot of adults don't either). They take their problems to school and out on other kids.

Gideon MacLeish

on Jun 24, 2005

John,

This MAY have a positive effect on a small percentage of the population. Do you really feel that removing the rights of the majority is worth the end result of "helping" the minority?

Just as with CPS cases, where only 3% of the cases will ever result in criminal charges being filed, infringing on the rights of the other 97% is not, in my estimation, an acceptable way to ferret out the 3%, especially in light of the fact that many true abuse cases fall through the cracks due to the fact you just can't come up with enough caseworkers to evaluate every case. In fact, in areas where CPS funding is increased, child abuse deaths INCREASE.

Short answer, john, no, I do not feel this is a "good" thing by ANY stretch of the imagination. The fact that we spend so much time telling our kids "don't do drugs", while pumping them full of FDA approved drugs underscores yet another hypocritical aspect of our society.

just john

on Jun 24, 2005

I understand where you are coming from. CPS is a real joke. They tend to listen only to authority figures when it comes to true cases of abuse. I have my brother-in-law admitting on tape that he punched his son in the face on more than one occasion. CPS will do nothing about it. I guess my hope is that this child will be recognized at school and be offered help. He has several offers of good homes, with family, to live. His father, however, would rather beat him than see him happy.

I hope someday soon we can get to a world where the truly needy get the help they deserve. This poor kid is a straight A student and a brilliant athlete. Sadly, while living with his dad, none of this potential is harnessed. It's a shame.

bakerstreet

on Jun 24, 2005

Site for the commission: Link

Gid, not to be overly critical, but where's the reference material for this information? The fact is, the President really doesn't have the authority to do many of the things listed up there, even through the Congress, even if they agreed.

If we were to all fall back on this kind of thing, this place would be awash with zionist conspiracies and black UN helicopter sightings. How about, say, reference to a particular peice of legislation? How about some proof that this has been imposed on the rights of the states to decide what their schools do?

No offense, but there is waaaaay more there than is on the website for this commission, and if the author really knows this to be true, it seems they could reference something that would prove it to us?

bakerstreet

on Jun 24, 2005

Also, Here's a link to their final recommendation to the President. I haven't had time to look at it yet, maybe some of that stuff is in there.

Regardless, this commission doesn't have the power to do the things this woman is saying has been done. They can't impose legislation or force our school systems to analyze our kids. If they aren't the ones doing it, who is? Where is the executive order? Where is the law?

ParaTed2k

on Jun 25, 2005

The schools have become the chapels of the predominate religion in the U.S.... The worship of "Comfort, Convenience and Sex". If you disagree, reread your own words and think to yourself... Which of the Trilogy does this policy pay homage to?

If you look at most of our society's issues, you'll find that those that cause the most contraversy are those that put worship to this Trilogy at risk. Even above and beyond what the person would identify as their own religion.

Gideon MacLeish

on Jun 27, 2005

Baker,

Actually, Head Start in our area is already doing mental health screenings. At least, that is what their own advertisements state. They have also been pushing a "birth to three" Head Start program. And I know of MANY parents who pulled their children from public schools because there was a very strong push to force their children onto Ritalin or other such drugs.

You may think this to be the stuff of conspiracy theory, Baker, but 20 years ago, No Child Left Behind and the US Patriot Act were considered the stuff of conspiracy theory (not specifically by name, of course). I have often said (as I said when we had our own encounter with the baby stealers) that the worst thing about being paranoid is when you're RIGHT.

bakerstreet

on Jun 27, 2005

"Which of the Trilogy does this policy pay homage to?"

My problem is that there is no link to this policy, and no proof that the policy exists. What I find on the commission's page I looked up myself seems to be different, and I can't find any legislation or executive order.

If you are having trouble in your school system Gid, by all means fight it. I don't doubt that there are abusive school systems. I'm trying to figure out where you get the idea that this is a concerted effort by the Bush administration.

The accusations in the article above go way beyond the scope or POWER of an advisory committee or even the President himself. The stuff that is happening in your state is done at the state level, right? You have something connecting that to an advisory commission for the President?

Gideon MacLeish

on Jun 27, 2005

The stuff that is happening in your state is done at the state level, right?

NCLB DESTROYED states' rights in education, Baker.

I'm not entirely sure of the specifics of this allegation, but I DO know that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which a growing number of American politicians want to see passed in America, forbids, among other things, religious instruction of children. I'll find that link for you and post it here.

bakerstreet

on Jun 27, 2005

NCLB made states accountable, sure. Maybe it created more beaurocracy. Maybe it stinks.

I'm just tired of people building all these conspiracies on it. There's a lot to be worried about in the US right now. So much that every minute we spend up-in-arms about imaginary conspiracies is a welcome diversion to people who are REALLY trying to screw us.

By all means, if you can pin this on Bush, pin it til it bleeds. BUT, the root of all this crap comes from the Left, and if it is being perverted, it is being perverted in Leftist fashion. IF such efforts exist at all.

I know you aren't into the whole "lesser of two evils" thing, but before you start indirectly promoting Democratic misinformation, maybe we ought to know exactly what happened, exactly where the signature is, and who signed it?

This is just the sort of thing that Moby and the rest of the "Lying for Truth" folks decided was cool in the last election. It sticks because people want to believe it, and it is supposedly excusable since the overall agenda behind the propaganda is supposedly "good".

If you end up being right, I'll be the first to apologize. I don't at this point see anything in the NCLB act, or anything else that gives the government this power. States may be doing it, mind you, I haven't looked into it, but I don't see how you can pin Bush's name onto it.

Gideon MacLeish

on Jun 27, 2005

Pinning Bush's name to it was really the action of the author of the article. I'll concede your point there readily, as I don't think the blame lies exclusively, or even PRIMARILY on Bush (most of these actions are essentially socialist reforms, which come from the FAR LEFT; Bush has simply "ridden the tide" on this one; understandable for a man whose busy fighting a very unpopular war and a press that's chomping at the bit to rip him to shreds). Frankly, NCLB was the end result of years of reform pushed by the DEMOCRATS (Bill Clinton was the author of "Goals 2000"; NCLB is little more than a watered down version of the Clinton initiative).

So my apologies for the Bush bashing thrust of the source article. I really wasn't looking for it, and, on closer examination, have to agree that in this case it's not entirely appropriate. I do think we should be vigilant, however.

bakerstreet

on Jun 27, 2005

Over the last half hour I've read through the New Freedom Commission stuff about school screenings and the statement:

"The fact is that our president has mandated that every American child, age 3 through 18, is federally ordered to be evaluated for mental health issues and to receive "enforced" treatment."

is grossly exaggerated. The screenings mentioned are in reference to Columbia University TeenScreen® Program, which are given with parental consent only. They mention making mental health part of the PRIVATE checkups that kids are required to have every so often from their primary care physician.

I'm not comfortable with this kind of thing, and I think it oversteps the powers of government (as usual), but I don't think perverting it into "turning our kids into guinea pigs" and implanting drugs in them does any good at evaluating the threat.

bakerstreet

on Jun 27, 2005

No worries, Gid.

I just think that this ends up laying a lot of inflammatory, easy-to-refute panic on the government. Then, once the nutty "implant you kid with drugs" stuff has been refuted, people wander away relieved, ignoring all the lesser, VALID complaints.

There is a lot to be angry about, even in this commission's recommendations. I think as the Dems learned last time, focusing on conspiracies and fearmongering only helps your opponent distract from their REAL malpheasance.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!