650 posts shown.
bluerider63 said:Pretty brave move, but honestly just plain stupid—he basically just gambled his entire future away on this one. If he’d actually bothered to read some David Icke, he would've realized that Bush is nothing more than a bottom-feeder who isn't going to be nearly as bothered by a boot to the face as people think. 😁
I truly hope you aren't being serious.
Emily Taylor3 said:Look, just imagine if some Journalist had been taking aim at Saddam back in the day—not even mentioning Stalin or Marshall, given that your avatar is basically a walking propaganda poster. 🙂
Let’s be real here: how many pieces would that Journalist be torn into if they tried this same stunt against Stalin, Marshall, or Saddam?
It’s easy to mess around and troll Bush because Bush is actually used to dealing with "human rights" nonsense. You can protest, you can comment, you can demand a release, and you might even end up in court for a few months or just walk free. Whatever. 😳 Who knows, maybe this was actually a career move for the guy. Once he gets out, he’ll probably be the biggest celebrity in Iraq, maybe even start his own political party. 🙂
As if! A "major celebrity" with broken ribs who might end up in a wheelchair. And heaven forbid they actually beat him so severely that he suffers brain damage; you know, brain damage doesn't always manifest immediately.
Oh, please, he's a hero in my eyes. As for Bush, he is a tyrant deserving of nothing but utter contempt.
Angela Lee said:Honestly, why even bother freeing him? If you ask me, he’d probably be better off back in Abu Ghraib😠, though I suppose the Iraqi security forces likely gave him a thorough lesson after all that and might still be keeping him in line today. He’ll never forget the moment he tried to take a shot at Bush😁. I have to say, I was genuinely surprised by how quickly Bush reacted; the guy has nothing to lose, I guess, so his reflexes were actually pretty impressive. You have this disheveled Iraqi guy trying to attack him with a shoe, and then there's Georgie just smirking right in his face🤣 before adding: "It was a size 10 shoe"😂🤣. What an absolute legend, that Georgie.
How can you possibly have the audacity to make such a statement? Have you no shame at all?
driftingangler6 said:For those of you who haven't caught the footage yet, it's absolutely everywhere online right now—you can find it on just about any major news site or social media feed if you're looking.
Honestly, I have to wonder what kind of mental lapse leads someone to lose their cool, shout something ridiculous, and then actually swing a shoe at one of the most powerful and highly protected leaders on the planet...
The big question remains: will they let him go, or is he headed straight for... 🙂
... meeting an untimely end due to a tragic accident.
silentsailor5 said:You aren't performing this test near Los Angeles, are you? If the warning only applies to me, 😍
Actually, I'm not doing it anywhere.
It doesn't even necessarily have to be a full-scale nuclear power plant. Perhaps it could "just" be some sort of nuclear research facility.
placidjackal36 said:To begin our discussion, we must address the most fundamental principles at hand. What truly defines the sheer, terrifying magnitude of an atomic explosion? Is it merely the blinding flash of light, or is it the profound, soul-crushing realization of our own fragility in the face of such unleashed power? Is it even possible to comprehend such an absurdity? Could one ever truly grasp the profound gravity of what occurs within the confines of a nuclear power plant?.
Achieving such a feat is an incredibly daunting task—is it any wonder that the most brilliant physicists in history spent countless sleepless nights agonizing over the Manhattan Project? It isn't enough to simply pile up a heap of fissile material and hope for the best. That is precisely why these weapons are so prohibitively expensive to produce.
Was it a chemical explosion, or perhaps a catastrophic failure of an overheated steam pressure system? It is entirely possible, and that is precisely what transpired back in 1986. Had there been a protective containment dome in place, we wouldn't be discussing this disaster today. But because no such dome existed, the radioisotopes were released directly into the atmosphere, while the fires continued to pump even more hazardous material into the sky for days on end.
Aside from the fact that I personally would never dream of involving myself in such an illegal experiment—and indeed, I would strive with every fiber of my being to prevent it from ever occurring—from... What exactly was offered? If I were faced with such a choice, I would opt to share the information with my wife and family first, along with as many trusted confidants as possible who could disseminate the news with maximum efficiency. Would it not be a grave mistake to rush to a radio station or a television network and trigger an immediate, widespread panic among the public?
But I truly must point out the inherent contradiction here. Could someone who genuinely seeks to save as many lives as possible really be expected to consent to an experiment where they know the odds of an extremely catastrophic outcome are so staggeringly high? Wouldn't such a decision require a complete departure from sanity?
Back in 1986, nobody at the power plant could have possibly envisioned the sheer scale of the catastrophe that was about to unfold. While they were certainly aware of the inherent risks involved, did they truly grasp that the reactor would be completely obliterated? This specific topic doesn't really apply to them.
I am already well aware of all the facts mentioned above, but I only brought up Chernobyl to help set the mood. One could just as easily be discussing an experiment involving a fusion reactor or perhaps a study on entirely unknown subatomic particles; essentially, we could be talking about any conceivable experiment within the realm of nuclear energy.
Of course, such assumptions are somewhat far-fetched, given that fusion power plants of this nature would likely never be constructed in the immediate vicinity of a small town of 50,000 people. However, isn't the core issue actually something much more profound than whether or not they will be built? If we persist in this endless cycle of paving over the earth, will there eventually be any untouched land left, forcing us to place even these advanced facilities near our major metropolitan hubs? Or shall we simply allow ourselves to be annihilated by some catastrophic nuclear war instead?
It seems that the officials at Chernobyl were tragically uninformed, and wouldn't you agree that the true villain behind this entire catastrophe was merely some bureaucratic functionary from Moscow by the name of Anatoly Dyatlov?
Brandon Cox23 said:Everyone needs to know.
I wouldn't tell a soul.
Now, that is where we find common ground. My friend, you have articulated my thoughts perfectly; it is as if you were reading my own mind! While there is a profound necessity to inform the public, I find myself equally inclined to remain silent, lest we trigger an even more uncontrollable chaos. Would I even confide this in my own wife? And as for those who would sit in judgment of us, should they not consider the sheer, unadulterated panic that would have gripped Pripyat when Chernobyl exploded? The fact that the evacuation didn't occur until a full day later is a tragedy unto itself—they certainly had the capability to evacuate everyone on Saturday.
I have a question that might fall more under the realms of psychology or sociology than our usual topics, yet it fundamentally touches upon profound moral dilemmas.
Imagine you are an engineer at a nuclear power plant where a critical experiment is being prepared on the reactor. The stakes are astronomical; if this experiment succeeds, it represents a monumental leap forward for science. If it fails, we could be looking at a disaster on the scale of Chernobyl. For the sake of the argument, let's set aside whether you would even obey orders and participate. Let us assume you are an engineer who is fully committed to the project and is intimately aware of every single risk involved.
You have a wife and children. The central question we must grapple with now is: what would you do with them?
1. You tell only your wife to leave town.
2. You tell your wife and a few others.
3. You tell absolutely no one, even while facing the terrifying possibility that your wife and children could be exposed to radiation—or perhaps even instantly obliterated in an atomic explosion alongside the plant and the entire city. You have only an hour or two to tell them to get out.
4. You warn her indirectly.
5. You warn her and a select few indirectly to evacuate.
However, from your perspective as an engineer, the chances of successfully warning anyone indirectly are incredibly slim, because even if you try to drop subtle hints, people will likely doubt your intentions, leading to total chaos.
Furthermore, if you were to speak up to anyone—even your spouse—there is a real danger that the news could spread uncontrollably, triggering massive panic throughout the city.
Conversely, if you say nothing to anyone, and an accident occurs—not one that levels the city instantly, but something similar to Chernobyl—is there not a much higher probability that citizens could evacuate the area calmly and steadily without unnecessary frenzy or widespread panic?
Personally, I wouldn't utter a word to anyone, not even to my wife, out of fear that she might spread the news through the neighborhood. Please do not mistake this for viewing her as a bad person or someone untrustworthy; in fact, I would consider her actions praiseworthy, but because you, as an engineer, understand the immense scientific gains if the experiment succeeds, you inevitably possess a completely different perspective on the situation.
So, please, express your views.
coastalskipper92 said:Could someone please explain their vision of the "great nothingness" after death to me? And please, leave all the Buddhist teachings and whatnot out of it
As much as I find the idea of rolling meadows and fountains a bit surreal, it feels just as strange to think that someone could be absolutely certain there’s nothing waiting on the other side
For me, the only certainty is that the mind itself doesn't simply vanish... though who's to say if the entire psyche dies? If we consider the part of the mind serving consciousness—that pure, raw WILL—then to me, that seems entirely eternal
?
A person does not seek liberation just to dissolve into a vast void, but rather to live a life of service to God.
As a Harekrišnjevac, I hold the conviction that our material world is merely an inverted reflection of a tree standing by a river. If one were to observe a true tree from its summit downward, they would see the canopy and delicate twigs first, followed by the heavy branches, then the trunk, and finally the roots—yet in the water, the image appears in exact reverse. It is my belief that everything present in the spiritual realm finds a counterpart in this physical one, though here, everything feels fundamentally distorted. I believe that just as we experience movement and interaction between various beings in the physical world, so too does the spiritual realm possess its own activity; however, while our earthly interactions are often defined by ignorance and suffering, those in the spiritual realm are overflowing with eternal knowledge and bliss.
We are all eternal servants of God, and the ultimate purpose of our existence is to find our way back home to God, where we truly belong. Our goal is to once again enjoy eternal service to Him, just as we served Him before we fell into this material world.
Steven Ruiz13 said:I can't wait for another war just so I can run off to a bunker.
Just stay woke. Another conflict is inevitable; they’re already calling it World War III. You know, that scenario where everyone is firing at everyone else using CIA weapons.
And in that situation, there won't be any Mickey Mouse to save you.
As for the original question, I believe the forum member who suggested that civilians would simply flee the cities, leaving the defense entirely to the soldiers, is correct.
Drew Hernandez2 said:Hey everyone! Doing a little digging here—basically researching how schizophrenia is passed down through families. I'm trying to see if the textbook theories actually line up with what people experience in real life. Specifically, I want to know if those dealing with schizophrenia or similar conditions have a family member with the same struggle, and how closely related they are. It would seriously mean a lot if you could help me out...
I personally believe there isn't a direct correlation. For instance, if your grandfather or grandmother struggled with schizophrenia, it stands to reason that the grandchild might too. Following that logic, if neither set of grandparents had the condition, then the grandchild should theoretically be perfectly healthy. My own grandparents had no such history, which implies I should be completely fine, yet here I am, having completely lost my grip on reality. While I cannot say for certain whether a professional would officially label my situation as schizophrenia, the only thing I find myself able to do is sing along to that old song by DJ Black...
"Help me, doctor, and I'll buy you an apartment
I just want to be normal one day too
help me, doctorrrttt
fix meeeeeeee
I have a house, I have a cat
but what does it all matter
when I'm not normaalllll? "
Morgan Davis11 said:Out of those three options, marijuana was the only thing that provided even a modicum of relief, offering a slight sense of calm and mental clarity; however, let’s be honest—when you are reaching that level of sheer, unadulterated tension where absolutely everything grates on your nerves and your anxiety is redlining, all those supplements and pills are nothing more than expensive garbage.
Well, there are remedies for people like that, too! If you were to receive lithium carbonate injections in some kind of solution four to six times a day, wouldn't you be perfectly, blissfully tranquil?
Morgan Davis11 said:I have personally navigated the trifecta of antidepressants, alcohol, and marijuana all at once, and frankly, I felt perfectly fine; my tolerance levels are such that neither the cannabis nor the medication ever seemed to make a significant dent in my baseline state, given my specific constitution, so I find it highly improbable that these vitamins would cause you any meaningful harm, lol
Certain antidepressants actually possess antipsychotic properties. When taking certain antipsychotics, it becomes absolutely essential to supplement with B-vitamins, as they can deplete your levels—much like what happens with Haldol.
I am certainly not suggesting this applies to your specific situation, but rather providing an example of how certain psychotropic medications can interact with vitamin levels.
However, those types of antagonistic interactions are quite rare. Therefore, you should feel perfectly comfortable taking a B-complex alongside your antidepressant.
Maria Long3 said:A vitamin b complex is definitely worth considering for nerve support. You can pick one up at any local pharmacy, and it's perfectly fine to take it while on antidepressants.
Does anyone know of a budget-friendly B-complex that doesn't have that awful smell? I am looking for something where a single pill packs several times the punch of standard vitamins, yet remains affordable. In fact, I am considering buying them in bulk—perhaps a bottle of 200 or 300 tablets—just to drive the cost down.
As for my upper limit for this kind of investment, I would say anything up to about fifty cents per pill or capsule.
I know Niagara Falls makes some inexpensive options, but the dosages just aren't potent enough. If I recall correctly, the B6 in one of those little pills is only exactly 2.0 mg, whereas I feel that anything under seven, eight, or even ten milligrams is essentially useless.
shadowtrucker18 said:Maybe you should just check with your doctor or actually read the fine print on the label? I mean, we aren't pharmacists or anything; we’re really just amateur poison testers at best.
Will you ever find even the slightest mention in a vitamin supplement label or the prescribing information for psychotropic medications suggesting that certain vitamins might negate or enhance their effects?
electrictrucker13 said:Hey everyone.
Been dealing with depression for a long time now. Currently on Lexapro and taking Xanax when needed.
I heard recently that some vitamins shouldn't be taken alongside antidepressants. I take a daily multivitamin—just one pill a day like the label says. Started doing it because I read vitamin b complex is good for people under a lot of stress. What’s your take? You guys take vitamins?
I haven't used psychotropic medications in a long time. As for vitamins, I take pure ascorbic acid, Vitamin C; I try to take 1,000 mg spread out over several hours throughout the day. Believe me, I catch far fewer colds or the flu, and I can't even remember the last time I needed an antibiotic. Even back when I was taking psychiatric medication, I took both my prescriptions and my vitamins simultaneously.
And they all worked effectively together.
Where might one find a facility in New York City that offers truly comprehensive blood work without the cost exceeding two hundred or three hundred dollars? Furthermore, is there any way to secure an appointment as soon as possible? My head is absolutely spinning with exhaustion, and based on my typical blood panels—checking iron, sedimentation, and cholesterol levels—I feel completely drained of all vitality. It is almost as if my numbers were precision-engineered just to be perfectly mediocre!
Thnx for the info.
Hello
I am currently searching for a psychologist or psychiatrist located in Denver who offers private psychotherapy sessions.
I have already reached out on Psychology Today, but since I haven't received any responses there, I thought perhaps I might find some helpful leads here instead.
I would be truly grateful for any information or recommendations you might be able to share.