NYT: ‘He Needs His Pretty Little Face Bashed In,’ a Therapist Tells an Undercover F.B.I. Agent

From the New York Times:

The New Jersey psychotherapist wanted revenge, and, as luck would have it, one of her patients had revealed in his therapy sessions that he was a former member of an organized criminal gang, according to a criminal complaint unsealed on Monday.

And that’s how the therapist, Diane Sylvia, ended up giving orders to an F.B.I. agent posing as a hit man to beat up someone who was blackmailing her, according to the complaint.

“He needs his pretty little face bashed in, that’s what I really want.”

“A broken arm would help, too.”

“Something so he can’t do push-ups, so he can’t work out.”

A licensed social worker who counsels individuals, couples and children in her office in Linwood, N.J., Ms. Sylvia, 58, was charged on Monday in federal court in Camden with one count of solicitation to commit a crime of violence. She was released on $50,000 bail. If convicted, she faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

From her page on Psychology Today:

Diane Sylvia, MSW,LCSW

As seen on a Sussex Directories Inc site

A little about my practice: I work with Individuals, Couples,Families and the Children involved in these relationships. My approach is that of the Family Systems Model. All relationships and states of mental health are affected by factors both present and past, including the environment in which we were raised. By strengthening our sense of self, we can restore functioning and create a life of positive satisfaction. Our words and thoughts are powerful and help create the life we desire. The most important component of therapy is the relationship between the client and therapist and the client’s willingness to make the decision to change.
I help people cope with every day stress, and most mental health conditions.Creating safe, supportive relationships is often the key to health. I also treat those with addictions (including Gambling) and their family members. Change is achieved by using a positive approach focused on setting and achieving personal goals.
PLEASE NOTE: I value your time. I request that you value mine. I have a limited number of appts per week. When booking your appt, you will be asked to provide your Credit Card Number. If the appointment is not held for any reason, the $125.00 fee will be charged to your card.
Call or Email Diane Sylvia, MSW,LCSW for a free phone consultation now – (609) 949-5127
Qualifications
Years in Practice: 23 Years
School: Rutgers Graduate School of Social Work
Year Graduated: 1993
License No. and State: 44SC04609500 New Jersey
Finances
Avg Cost (per session): $120 – $150
Accepts Insurance: Yes
Accepted Payment Methods: Cash, Check
Accepted Insurance Plans
Medicare
Out of Network
Verify your health insurance coverage when you arrange your first visit.
Additional Credentials
Certificate: National Association of Forensic Counselors / CDVC
Certificate Date: 2005
Membership: ICISF / Critical Incident Stress Mgt
Member Since: 2002

Posted in Psychology | Comments Off on NYT: ‘He Needs His Pretty Little Face Bashed In,’ a Therapist Tells an Undercover F.B.I. Agent

Live Election Results

Panel: https://twitter.com/Brundlefly14
https://en.rightpedia.info/w/Rodney_Martin



http://auis.academia.edu/OttoPohl

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Live Election Results

How Stifling Debate Around Race, Genes and IQ Can Do Harm

Noah Carl writes in Evolutionary Psychological Science: “It is often asserted that, when it comes to taboo topics like race, genes and IQ, scholars should be held to higher evidentiary standards or even censored entirely because of the harm that might result if their findings became widely known. There is held to be an asymmetry whereby the societal costs of discussing certain topics inevitably outweigh any benefits from doing so. This paper argues that no such asymmetry has been empirically demonstrated, and that stifling debate around taboo topics can itself do active harm. To the extent that the paper’s argument has force, it cannot simply be taken for granted that, when in doubt, stifling debate around taboo topics is the ethical thing to do.”

Posted in IQ | Comments Off on How Stifling Debate Around Race, Genes and IQ Can Do Harm

Scientific Racism

James Thompson writes:

“Scientific Racism” is an oxymoron. The truth cannot be racist, and lies cannot be science. If you say something truthful about a racial difference then that is true, not a lie, and not racism. If you say something about racial groups which is untrue, then that is not science, it is false, and science has to correct mistakes as soon as possible.

Scientific racism is a contradiction in terms.

Nonetheless, the epithet “scientific racism” is often thrown at any study of racial differences as if, whatever the outcome of the research, the mere investigation transgresses some a priori truths. The argument seems to be: “we know that racial differences do not exist, so those who argue against that view are wrong, whatever their investigations may suggest”. In simple terms, if a person can be considered a racist, then the fact that they “do science” is simply another one of their fiendish tricks. The scientific part becomes an additional outrage, a vain attempt to prove true something already known to be wrong.

The blanket condemnation of evidence-seeking is not always applied to differences which have medical connotations. Race-based differences in vulnerability to illnesses is often exempt from hostile criticism. A welcome respite. However, the evolutionary processes which affect the organs of the body are not guaranteed to leave the brain above the audit, somehow exempt from selection. If one genetic group differs in one regard it is worth studying if they differ in other regards.

It may not be obvious at first, but if you want to combat racism and sexism you need the benchmark of open discussion about racial and sexual differences. Otherwise, how do we know which claims about group differences are clearly wrong and which are right? These are empirical matters and you need to establish the truth before you can demonstrate what deviates from it. The most effective way to find the truth is free and open inquiry into all group differences. We should be on the side of those who want to know more, not those who want to know less. We should oppose those who want other people to know less, while they are free to find out as much as they can, and then decide what to hold back.

I know that some researchers will want to hold back findings which they believe will halt their careers. It is a tough choice. I sympathize with their dilemma, and look forward to the day when they can all publish their findings openly.

The study of racial differences has been criticized as pseudo-science. Of course, one should be against pseudo-science, as one should be against pseudo-journalism, and pseudo-outrage and pseudo everything. But why should one branch of science be called pseudo, and another not? All branches of science depend on maintaining scientific standards whatever the topic is. Any errors need to be corrected by better methods. There is as much scope for error when comparing racial groups as when comparing social class groups. Selection criteria are rarely pure, and can be subject to confounding.

We should aim for high standards in everything we investigate. One way to achieve that is to examine the ideas we love with as much ferocity as the ideas we find repellent. That will keep us closer to the truth.

COMMENTS:

* ALL you racist pseudoscientists will get RationalWiki articles.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Noah_Carl

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Edward_Dutton

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Davide_Piffer

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jan_te_Nijenhuis

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/James_Thompson

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Emil_Kirkegaard

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anatoly_Karlin

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Aurelio_J._Figueredo

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Michael_A._Woodley_of_Menie

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/London_Conference_on_Intelligence

* I’m reliably informed Emil Kirkegaard is suing Smith over his RationalWiki article and also some comments made elsewhere. However, Kirkegaard hasn’t done himself any favours. If you’re suing someone for alleged defamation – the worst thing you can do is create an article smearing the person you claimed has defamed you. I noticed Kirkegaard created an article on his website viscously attacking Smith filled with silly insults such as “he’s ugly”, dubious claims of mental illness and unemployment, that Smith has blocked on search-engines after sending legal complaints about defamation. According to Smith, he’s not living on welfare and isn’t mentally ill – Kirkegaard made all this up and doesn’t provide any evidence.

This will surely back-fire on Kirkegaard in court.

Posted in Race, Science | Comments Off on Scientific Racism

The Shame Of The ADL

The shame of this essay in Commentary magazine is that the author repeatedly calls the Mearsheimer/Walt book The Israel Lobby “shoddy” but never presents any examples of the alleged shoddiness. Pathetic. Those who can, do, and those who can’t, yell names.

That two highly respected elite political scientist would suddenly produce “shoddy” work in a charged issue that would hurt their lives and careers is absurd.

Seth Mandel writes:

And just at the moment that one of the twin pillars of American anti-Semitism was being laundered through the Democratic Party, Jonathan Greenblatt left the administration that enabled this bigotry to take the helm of the Anti-Defamation League.

Greenblatt took three hallmarks of Team Obama with him when he left: a belief that liberalism and modern morality were synonymous; an obsession with Benjamin Netanyahu; and a rivalrous antagonism toward anyone to his right who called out anti-Semitism.

The liberalism part of that isn’t unique to Greenblatt—the ADL has long supported abortion rights, which is not a “Jewish issue” in any way. But there are two puzzling aspects to Greenblatt’s behavior. First, he makes it personal. Immediately after Trump announced he would nominate to the Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh, Greenblatt went on the attack, tweeting that Kavanaugh’s record “does not reflect the demonstrated independence and commitment to fair treatment for all that is necessary to merit a seat on our nation’s highest court.”

Slandering a respected judge is so far beneath the ADL that Greenblatt’s behavior should’ve been a gut check for the group’s leadership. Additionally, as Jonathan Tobin pointed out at National Review, “the group’s haste showed that it had planned to oppose anyone nominated by Trump,” thereby making a leap into blind partisanship.

The second difference is an overt hostility to religious liberty—an absolutely dangerous gamble for a Jewish-rights group. It isn’t merely that Greenblatt publicly lamented June’s Supreme Court ruling in favor of a Christian baker’s First Amendment rights. It’s also the way the organization has embraced liberalism as a form of religion in itself. Thus the ADL in 2016 called opposition to abortion a “right-wing assault on religious diversity in reproductive freedom,” an Orwellian mangling of language and faith.

Greenblatt’s antipathy toward the elected Israeli government is perhaps even more out of character. In 2016, Netanyahu confronted the Palestinian demand that no Jews remain in a future Palestinian state, calling it “ethnic cleansing.” This is quite literally the definition of the phrase. But Greenblatt—again, it bears repeating, as the director of the Anti-Defamation League—took a long swing at Netanyahu with a full column in Foreign Policy magazine. Greenblatt wrote: “Like the term ‘genocide,’ the term ‘ethnic cleansing’ should be restricted to actually describing the atrocity it suggests—rather than distorted to suit political ends.”

This is nonsensical, but it’s worth pointing out the hypocrisy here as well. In late July, Greenblatt tweeted out an ADL video of two Holocaust survivors describing the trauma of being separated from their families by the Nazis. Greenblatt’s point was to draw a parallel to the Trump administration’s policy of separating migrant children from the adults who had carried them across the border. Greenblatt tweeted: “Miriam & Astrid were separated from their parents during the Holocaust. They know the trauma this causes. 38,000+ people signed the petition we delivered to @DHSgov & @TheJusticeDept demanding an end to zero tolerance & to reunite families they tore apart.”

As the Jewish activist Noah Pollak responded to Greenblatt: “ADL spent decades successfully shaming people who appropriated the Holocaust to serve contemporary political agendas,” yet it is now a “leading perpetrator” of this trope. In this case, the analogy is not only false, it is dangerously irresponsible, tying the president of the United States explicitly to Hitler—all after kicking sand at the Israeli prime minister for correctly calling a policy of the expulsion of all Jews from a state “ethnic cleansing.”

This pathological distaste for Netanyahu has proved problematic for the supposed anti-Semitism watchdog. On May 1, Netanyahu gave a televised presentation of Iranian deception regarding its nuclear program, thanks to intel gleaned from a mind-boggling Mossad operation in which agents broke into secret vaults in Tehran, evaded detection, and fled the country with “some 50,000 pages and 163 compact discs” covering “years of work on atomic weapons, warhead designs and production plans,” according to the New York Times.

Tommy Vietor, Obama’s National Security Council spokesman, went so far as to accuse the Jewish state of fabricating intelligence to satisfy its bloodlust, tweeting that “Trump is now cooking up intel with the Israelis to push us closer to a conflict with Iran. A scandal hiding in plain sight.” These horrifying words, retweeted nearly 2,500 times, would have been met with thunder by Foxman’s ADL. Greenblatt’s ADL remained silent. And the poison spreads.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on The Shame Of The ADL