Quote:
Originally posted by matthew330
""BUSH IS A TERRORIST, BUSH MUST BE STOPPED. HE AND GUILLIANI HAVE ALLOWED THIS ATTACK ON AMERICA!!" screaming this period is irrational behavior.
|
Irrational how? No one here knows anything about this woman yet everyone assumes she's crazy. Why not assume she's normal? It still doesn't prove she is "insane", or a "possible schizophrenic", or a "nut job".
Quote:
Originally posted by matthew330
Screaming this solo at the site of the world trade centers is enough to make a reasonable assumption that "she ain't all there."
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Paq
and she kept screaming and they wer passing out flyers, etc, along with a big, "HELP THE FAMILIES OF THE VICTIMS OF 9-11, STOP THE COVER-UP" sign.
|
Doesn't look like she was doing this solo. "they were passing out flyers, etc".
What is the big deal about the venue for this demonstration? Like someone else posted before
Quote:
Originally posted by smooth
for all one knows, the lady could be related to a direct victim of the incident. she could be a survivor--or anything.
we don't know. but the idea that certain people, with no direct claim to harm, have more claim to the effects of the incident than those directly invovled has always and continues to make me upset.
|
But I guess the "possible schizophrenic" title fits better, because after all free speech ends once 9\11, or the WTC, becomes the topic.
Quote:
Originally posted by matthew330
I'm pretty sure "possible schizophrenic" is not currently listed in the DSM-IIIR.
|
Is it not a big assumption to make about someone simply by reading a thread? I mean I could say anyone here is a "possible schizophrenic", because apparantley I've read enough things posted by them to make this assumption. If that doesn't count what about this:
Quote:
Originally posted by cthulu23
......the politics of the insane.
|
is calling someone "insane" after reading a post normal?