US soldier arrested at VA while seeking mental help

[PopHistorian]

_http://www6.comcast.net/news/articles/national/2007/11/20/Soldier.Arrest/?cvqh=itn_awol

LEXINGTON, Ky. —

A soldier facing his second tour of duty in Iraq said in a jailhouse interview he was at a hospital seeking mental help when he was arrested in the middle of the night for allegedly being absent without leave. Spc. Justin Faulkner insists his superior officers at Fort Campbell knew about his mental problems but refused to provide adequate treatment.

On Thursday, Faulkner checked into a Lexington VA hospital, where doctors told him they wanted to keep him until Monday for observation. Police showed up at the hospital shortly after 2 a.m. Saturday to take him to jail.

"It's humiliating, degrading," Faulkner, 22, of Stanton, said in an interview Monday with The Associated Press minutes before his release from the Fayette County Detention Center. "It's made me lose respect for the military. To come and arrest me at the VA, it wasn't like I was trying to hide, trying to run. I was getting help. I am being punished for getting help."

Faulkner, who concluded a one-year tour of duty in Iraq in February 2006, was due to head back there Monday to join the rest of his unit. He was released from jail on the condition he report back to Fort Campbell on Tuesday.

Faulkner said he would but insisted the Army would be "foolish" to send him to Iraq. He said he has been experiencing post-traumatic symptoms since realizing a few weeks ago that a return trip to Iraq was likely.

"I kept getting these flashbacks, these recurring scenes from when I was over there the first time," Faulkner said. "I get these anxiety attacks at night, and sometimes during the day, I daze off. I can't get it out of my head. It wasn't until I was told I had to go back to Iraq, something just clicked in my head _ it was like reliving your worst nightmare."

Faulkner's superior officer at Fort Campbell, Sgt. Donnie Burnett, said he wasn't authorized to comment on the case.
[...]

Quite a message they're sending. CNN's latest installment of their Broken Government series covered, among others, the story of a soldier, Garrett Anderson (his story here: _http://www.vawatchdog.org/07/nf07/nfAPR07/nf041307-10.htm), who was hit by an IED, had his arm blown off and his body covered in shrapnel wounds. The military ruled that his shrapnel wounds were not related to his service in Iraq, so they were able to limit their liability for his treatment. They also denied his PTSD claim, asking, "what circumstances led to this?" How about being blown up by a bomb! Even with the news media on the case, nothing changed until Senator Dick Durbin personally intervened. That's what it took to correct an obvious lie. The VA chief, Gordon Mansfield, would not comment directly, saying he knew nothing about the case, but that it sounded like a mistake, and "makes you angry, doesn't it?"

Entering search keywords VA+"service connected"+iraq will turn up loads of hits, including the military's page where they try to explain the "service connection" ratings system.

 

[Ryan]

CNN on Sunday covered the story of a soldier who was hit by an IED, had his arm blown off and his body covered in shrapnel wounds. The military ruled that his shrapnel wounds were not related to his service in Iraq, so they were able to limit their liability for his treatment. Even with the news media on the case, nothing changed until a senator personally intervened. That's what it took to correct an obvious lie.

I wonder if people are starting to get the picture yet? That the US government is pathological and will continually grind normal people up without a second thought unless they are told "NO", en masse. How bad does it have to get?

 

[QueenVee]

I wonder if people are starting to get the picture yet? That the US government is pathological and will continually grind normal people up without a second thought unless they are told "NO", en masse. How bad does it have to get?

Unless it's happening to them personally, or someone close to them, the majority of people just don't care. That's why the government will never reactivate the draft. It's easier to take advantage of the kind of poor, uneducated individuals whose circumstances force them into joining the military "voluntarily", people who are at the bottom rung of society. The majority of people in America obviously AGREE with the government that such people are "expendable", and of little value to society. "Hey," they reationalize, "nobody FORCED them to join the army, it was their CHOICE. What did they expect? A picnic?"

As long as they have need for cannon fodder, the PTB have a vested interest in limiting the economic options of the lower classes. The only reason the Vietnam-era anti-war protests gained so much momentum and effectiveness is because the draft (rather than economic circumstances) forced the middle classes into military service (the upper classes are never forced into "serving their country", as they always have the means and/or connections to avoid doing so).

In the current circumstances, it is highly unrealistic to expect American society to protest "en masse" the fact that "the US government will continually grind normal people up without a second thought". Because it is not "normal people" who are being "ground up". The vast majority of people are STS and they only care about themselves and theirs. That's why some anti-war activists are actually in favour of reactivating the draft -- because they know that's the ONLY way the middle classes will "start to get the picture"....

 

[anart]

I wonder if people are starting to get the picture yet? That the US government is pathological and will continually grind normal people up without a second thought unless they are told "NO", en masse. How bad does it have to get?

Unless it's happening to them personally, or someone close to them, the majority of people just don't care.

Actually, the crux of the matter seems to be that the majority of people are woefully uninformed of exactly what goes on - thus they aren't in a position to 'care'. If they were informed, they likely would care and be outraged. But, as long as they are locked in their media-created boxes of ignorance, there is no way they can care.

That's why the government will never reactivate the draft. It's easier to take advantage of the kind of poor, uneducated individuals whose circumstances force them into joining the military "voluntarily", people who are at the bottom rung of society.

This is true, and it is how it always and forever has been, and something we've been pointing out on the SOTT page for years now.

The majority of people in America obviously AGREE with the government that such people are "expendable", and of little value to society. "Hey," they reationalize, "nobody FORCED them to join the army, it was their CHOICE. What did they expect? A picnic?"

I'm not so sure that is accurate either. There is quite a bit of programmed, blind trust and loyalty involved - both for people who join the armed forces and for their families/friends and neighbors - especially in the uneducated segments of society. I think it is the elite who consider military personnel as expendable - the general masses are too programmed to value them and honor them to also consider them expendable - there would be too much cognitive dissonance. They can't think of them as 'heroes' and 'expendable' at the same time.

It, again, goes back to the media keeping the facts hidden from the general masses - if people were informed about what really goes on, a shift would occur.

As long as they have need for cannon fodder, the PTB have a vested interest in limiting the economic options of the lower classes.

As it has always been.

The only reason the Vietnam-era anti-war protests gained so much momentum and effectiveness is because the draft (rather than economic circumstances) forced the middle classes into military service (the upper classes are never forced into "serving their country", as they always have the means and/or connections to avoid doing so).

Actually, while the large numbers of people affected by the draft did play a role - again - the media had an active hand in propelling the protest movement. If it weren't for the pictures coming back from Vietnam showing the horrors - if it weren't for the public being even marginally informed (which is miles away from where they are today) - then the protest movement arguably would not have had anywhere near as much energy. Normal people, when faced with atrocities, will recoil - the problem is that the media now serves as an almost impregnable wall to prevent even a subtle, wafting hint of atrocity from getting through - though the atrocities themselves, at home and abroad, are rampant. It's not so much 'do not care' as it is 'do not know'.

In the current circumstances, it is highly unrealistic to expect American society to protest "en masse" the fact that "the US government will continually grind normal people up without a second thought". Because it is not "normal people" who are being "ground up". The vast majority of people are STS and they only care about themselves and theirs. That's why some anti-war activists are actually in favour of reactivating the draft -- because they know that's the ONLY way the middle classes will "start to get the picture"....

I think it has less to do with the fact that it's not 'normal people who are being ground up' than it has to do with the fact that the American public is so drugged, hypnotized, dumbed down and distracted with keeping food on the table that they can't lift their heads up long enough to get a good look around. No, the American public most probably will never rise up 'en masse' - they are sound asleep, drugged, unhealthy and zombified - a draft might stir their slumber, it might not, depending on the further economic destruction, a draft might not even wake them.

 

[QueenVee]

Actually, the crux of the matter seems to be that the majority of people are woefully uninformed of exactly what goes on - thus they aren't in a position to 'care'. If they were informed, they likely would care and be outraged.

I don't agree. I think that's wishful thinking. People have to want to know, they have to choose to know. "Knowing" requires action, once you "know" you can no longer in good conscience continue to hide your head in the sand. Therefore, most people prefer to not know. For someone who doesn't wish to "know", you could shove the "facts" down their throats, and they would still find some way to deny or avoid them.

The majority of people are STS, and primarily concerned with the welfare of themselves and theirs. Until the "problem" comes home to roost -- i.e. directly affects them personally -- they may cluck their tongues and say "how awful", but they are not going to care enough to DO SOMETHING or upset the status quo of their lives. Those who do not wish to know require deep PERSONAL TRAUMA to SHOCK them out of their complacency, the framework of their beliefs, their STS tunnel vision -- and even then many continue to rationalize away what can't be denied.

 

[anart]

I don't agree. I think that's wishful thinking. People have to want to know, they have to choose to know. "Knowing" requires action, once you "know" you can no longer in good conscience continue to hide your head in the sand. Therefore, most people prefer to not know. For someone who doesn't wish to "know", you could shove the "facts" down their throats, and they would still find some way to deny or avoid them.

You've missed my point. My point is that the conditions on this planet are set up currently to keep the average person - the masses of humanity - uninformed. That is why control of the media is one of the top, if not the top, issue at hand.

From what we understand, less than 15% of Americans are able to really think at ALL - so how do you expect them to 'want to know' - how do you expect them to even grasp that there is something to know as long as the world created by the media - their only sources of information/influence - makes certain to never, ever reveal the truth of any situation?

The majority of people are STS,

No, here are you mistaken again - all people are STS - if they exist in human form on this 3D planet earth, they are STS. They may be working toward something else (or they may be dreaming that they are working) - but as long as they're here, 'now', they're STS.

and primarily concerned with the welfare of themselves and theirs. Until the "problem" comes home to roost -- i.e. directly affects them personally -- they may cluck their tongues and say "how awful", but they are not going to care enough to DO SOMETHING or upset the status quo of their lives. Those who do not wish to know require deep PERSONAL TRAUMA to SHOCK them out of their complacency, the framework of their beliefs, their STS tunnel vision -- and even then many continue to rationalize away what can't be denied.

I don't think there's any question that it takes a shock to awaken someone - I never said differently. We've consistently pointed this out - and that most people won't get it until it knocks on their door. My point - which you missed - is not that 'people don't care' - it's that people are so controlled, dumbed down and hypnotized that they can't see at all - and the media's main role has become to make sure that people stay that way.

I hope that's a little more clear.

 

[j0da]

People have to want to know, they have to choose to know.

QV, people want to know. Just think how many newspapers, magazines are bought every day, how many political, economic TV programs are watched every day. Why all these people do all this reading/watching?? Is it fun? Not really. They want to know what goes on around them and in the world at large. The problem as Anart said is with the corrupt media.

Recently, I learned that even my coleagues "want to know". People whom I swept away from my life for a while, since my absolutist mindset wouldn't allow any "middle ground", any place for patience, humble listening to their point of view and calm, rational discussion. Where there were only knee jerk emotional reactions on my part, there was no place for communication. But I have changed and suddenly found out that my friends WANT TO KNOW and want to discuss what they learn. Of all people I talked to only few of them explicitly stated that "they don't want to hear any of that, they prefer to not know".

"Knowing" requires action, once you "know" you can no longer in good conscience continue to hide your head in the sand.

Not necessarily. Yesterday I've met one friend of mine who told me all of the sudden "You know, this morning while laying in bed I was discussing this 9/11 with my boyfriend. And..it's so strange - I mean I know it was a setup, lots of people think this way, but before we REALLY acknowledge this fact we have to decide if we are ready to turn our whole life upside-down."

So, between "knowing" and "action" there's a gap. IMHO knowing evokes conscience, but it takes time.

 

[Al Today]

Forgive me, but the more as look at my comments below, they probably should belong in another thread. Sorry for being lazy.

This is in regards to people wanting to know. I think many people DO want to know, but sacred cow shocks need to subside. I think a person needs to let wounds heal. I only know that for myself, how & what I think of things now, did not occur overnight. My views are an accumulation of digested information, contemplation, review, observation, and of course listening to other people (try to).

knowing evokes conscience, but it takes time.

I can speak from my experience only. For example, my wife does not read nor access the material I do. After 29 years, I think I am learning how to converse with my wife. When talking about the world in general, I would (used to) usually blurt out what I have read and/or are contemplating. I would speak matter of factly (like I know the story, yeah, right). This is a no-no. This is TMI (too much information) at one time. Now I just try to give tiny snippets (seeds) and let her digest, think, contemplate, and let her choose to talk, spark her imagination so we can discuss issues without hearing about all that crazy alternate web ‘krap’ I read. I gotta say though, when I keep my statements short & sweet (digestible) and yes, she usually agrees that this world is krap loaded. For example, we now talk about the "soulless" ones (possibilities), the ones that just don’t give a damn about anything else but STS, people asleep behing the wheel (sheeple), evil magician concepts, with a little mass public hypnosis and a smattering concept of historical ponerology. We both agree that the situation here pretty much bites a big one. And yes, we have discussed principles like STS vs. STO as how people may be. If she reads the subject matter presented, I'm not sure. But we talk, and try to laugh. Learning takes time, work, patience, and an open mind to exploration. Learning takes time and boy-o-boy, I need more time for there is so very much needed to learn.

edited because of poor typing skills...

 

[Cyre2067]

FWIW I see a lot of willful ignorance, straight up denial of the facts on the ground, and no desire whatsoever to work for truth from a lot of people. However, that doesn't mean that if they were presented with the reality, uncorrupted, that they wouldn't care. Its a goofy dynamic, people are so hypnotized, drugged, and stressed out that they really want to believe the imagery presented through the MSM as 'reality'. Unfortunately, things are not 'real' to a lot of people until it's already a consensus elsewhere, and the most common 'consensus reality' we have is television, print and radio.

So if television, print, and radio were broadcasting the truth about the genocide in israel, the treason committed by BushCo, the reality of our collective history and likelyhood of another comet impact things would be very different, osit.

 

[QueenVee]

You've missed my point. My point is that the conditions on this planet are set up currently to keep the average person - the masses of humanity - uninformed. That is why control of the media is one of the top, if not the top, issue at hand.

No, I understood your point. I agree that the PTB and the media works hard to keep the "masses of humanity" uniformed, and that it is a major problem. I just don't agree that the lack of being informed by the mainstream media is the primary reason for the average person ultimately not caring about what does not directly affect them. I believe the primary cause is their STS focus.

The mainstream media merely reflects the society -- the individuals -- it panders to. The desire to know, the impetus to know, does not arise from being spoon-fed INFORMATION and FACTS, it stems from a willingness to step outside of one's self-absorbed perspective and experiences to consider the perspectives and experiences of others. For those who have the desire, the willingness to know, the information is available. No, it's not as easy as turning on your TV and there it is, it takes EFFORT to find out what is really going on.

The excuse of "We didn't know, no one told us" is a very old one. We've seen it over and over and over again. I do not believe that the "blanket of ignorance" is so much imposed upon the masses, as it is collectively weaved together by ALL elements of society, each for their own purpose and end.

 

[anart]

No, I understood your point.

Interesting, because that certainly didn't come across in what you wrote.

I agree that the PTB and the media works hard to keep the "masses of humanity" uniformed, and that it is a major problem. I just don't agree that the lack of being informed by the mainstream media is the primary reason for the average person ultimately not caring about what does not directly affect them. I believe the primary cause is their STS focus.

It's a complex subject that doesn't break down well into black and white thinking - and I never said it was wholly one thing or another - you are twisting. Of course human beings, especially those dumbed down/drugged up and hypnotized by their televisions are often hard pressed to be motivated by things that are not currently knocking on their door - but make no mistake that if the media were 'free' - and presented content that even approached the full reality of the global situation that things would be very different - especially in this day and age where it could be argued that what people 'watch' on their television comprises a large part of their reality.

The mainstream media merely reflects the society -- the individuals -- it panders to.

Really? Have you read the Controversy of Zion as Laura suggested in this thread? http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=7617.msg54165#msg54165 If you have, I find it astonishing that you would suggest such a thing.

 

[QueenVee]

QV, people want to know. Just think how many newspapers, magazines are bought every day, how many political, economic TV programs are watched every day. Why all these people do all this reading/watching??

Most people seek out the newspapers, magazines, news programs, etc. that reliably REFLECT AND CONFIRM THEIR OWN BELIEFS AND AGENDAS, not out of a genuine desire to KNOW. Why do some people watch only Fox News and read only staunch right-wing publications? Is someone HIDING other sources of information from them? No, they are simply not interested in other perspectives.

"Knowing" requires action, once you "know" you can no longer in good conscience continue to hide your head in the sand.

Not necessarily. Yesterday I've met one friend of mine who told me all of the sudden "You know, this morning while laying in bed I was discussing this 9/11 with my boyfriend. And..it's so strange - I mean I know it was a setup, lots of people think this way, but before we REALLY acknowledge this fact we have to decide if we are ready to turn our whole life upside-down."

In order to KNOW, you must ACKNOWLEDGE. Your friends quote openly indicated that they were not willing to do that yet, that for the sake of their own sense of security, they still keep that information within the realm of PROBABILITY, rather than FACT. If they genuinely were to ACKNOWLEDGE the 9/11 conspiracy as FACT, then they would genuinely KNOW (vs "suspect", "consider", "entertain", etc), and then their whole lives WOULD be turned "upside-down". Your friends are sitting on the fence at this point, hedging their bets.

 

[anart]

Most people seek out the newspapers, magazines, news programs, etc. that reliably REFLECT AND CONFIRM THEIR OWN BELIEFS AND AGENDAS, not out of a genuine desire to KNOW.

I'd have to say that this certainly is often the case - we've noticed time and again how people do exactly this with the C's material.

 

[QueenVee]

Really? Have you read the Controversy of Zion as Laura suggested in this thread? http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=7617.msg54165#msg54165 If you have, I find it astonishing that you would suggest such a thing.

Yes, I have now read it. It is very a very valuable and useful read, but I do not agree 100% with all of its premises. Obviously.

 

[QueenVee]

It's a complex subject that doesn't break down well into black and white thinking...

On that we can certainly agree.