The first signs of mental health problems will differ from person to person and are not always easy to spot. In many cases of moderate depression or anxiety – the most common mental health problems – the person becoming distressed may not display symptoms, or may seek to hide them because they worry about what others will say or think about them. The signs can often be more noticeable to other people first: for instance, if your mood starts changing, it may take some time for you to become aware of it; other people may be much more conscious of the difference. Some common early signs of a mental health problem are:
Losing interest in activities and tasks that were previously enjoyed.
Poor performance at work.
Mood swings that are very extreme or fast and out of character for you.
Self-harming behaviour, such as cutting yourself.
Changes in eating habits and/or appetite: over-eating, bingeing, not eating.
Loss of, or increase in, sexual desire.
Sleep problems.
Increased anxiety, looking or feeling ‘jumpy’ or agitated, sometimes including panic attacks.
Feeling tired and lacking energy.
Isolating yourself, socialising less; spending too much time in bed.
Wanting to go out a lot more, needing very little sleep, feeling highly energetic, creative and sociable, making new friends rapidly, trusting strangers or spending excessively – this may signal that you are becoming ‘high’.
Hearing and seeing things that others don’t.
Other differences in perception; for example, mistakenly believing that someone is trying to harm you, is laughing at you, or trying to take over your body.
All of these signs can vary in severity. Often they can be relatively minor, or pass quickly. However, if they are particularly severe or distressing, or continue for more than a short while, you may want to seek support. While this experience, particularly at first, is likely to be upsetting and create fear, it is a common human experience. Mental health problems can happen to anyone, at any time. For most people this will only be for a short period. If you are in mental distress, you may begin to doubt yourself and become desperately afraid you are going mad. You may question your ability to think and reason properly, and be afraid of becoming a danger to others or of being locked up in an institution. These fears are often reinforced by the negative way that people experiencing mental health problems are portrayed on TV, in books and by the media: you may also be scared of being seen as ‘mad’, of losing friends, family and freedom. These fears may stop you from talking about your problems. This, in turn, is likely to increase your distress and sense of isolation. There is a common, but misplaced belief that there’s a link between mental health problems and violent behaviour toward others. This is reinforced by excessive and inaccurate reporting of the dangers posed by people with psychiatric diagnoses, especially schizophrenia. However, the most common forms of mental distress have no significant link to violent behaviour. In fact, there are relatively few serious acts of violence committed by people in mental distress. Someone with a mental health problem is actually more likely to harm themselves than someone else; although, the majority of people with mental health problems do not harm themselves at all. People with serious mental illness are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than to commit one; for example, those diagnosed with psychosis are 14 times more likely to be victims.You may worry that if you become highly distressed you might hurt others or yourself. If you feel like this, it is important to contact a doctor, or a crisis service if necessary. If someone starts behaving in a way that suggests they may be suffering from a mental health problem, it’s vital that you are sensitive to their situation. Many people with mental health problems find it useful to have someone to talk to openly, when they are ready to do so: being available to listen is often the best way to help. However, sometimes opening up to friends and relatives is very difficult. Some people find it easier to communicate with someone who’s had a similar experience, or to a counsellor or therapist. If this is the case, then it is important to be supportive and as understanding as possible of this.

For all those who sent in their ads for this weekend I must apologise as I totally forgot to put them up on Friday for yesterday morning. I will instead give you guys the 23/24 and 25 hoping that it will give you more customers for the upcoming holidays..I am very sorry

First pictures of the tragic children murdered in their classrooms after ‘deeply disturbed’ gunman massacred 26 at Connecticut school
Bodies of the victims have all been identified and were removed from the school during the night
Emilie Parker, 6, Ana Marquez-Greene, 6, Jesse Lewis, 6, Noah Pozner, 6, and six-year-old Grace McDonnell among the victims
Teacher Victoria Soto threw herself in front of her first grade class to protect them from the gunfire
Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school psychologist Mary Sherlach were killed execution-style after confronting shooter Adam Lanza
Mrs Hochsprung reportedly buzzed Lanza into the school and past the security system because she recognized him as the son of a teacher
By JAMES NYE IN NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT, LOUISE BOYLE, MICHAEL ZENNIE and LESLIE LARSON
PUBLISHED: 08:46 EST, 15 December 2012 | UPDATED: 19:07 EST, 15 December 2012

These are the first pictures of the victims who died in a shooting rampage when a ‘deeply disturbed’ gunman went classroom to classroom at a Connecticut school.
Emilie Parker, six, was killed when the shooter opened fire on children and teachers at 9.30am on Friday at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Twenty-six people died in the mass shooting. All 20 children were aged six and seven.
The little girl’s father spoke to the press on Saturday, holding back tears as he remembered his eldest daughter and also graciously extending his remorse to the family of the gunman in a remarkable act amid the trauma and tragedy
Scroll down for video

CONTINUE READING HERE http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248574/Sandy-Hook-shooting-The-child-victims-gunned-Adam-Lanza-school-Connecticut.html

ONSTAGETV – ONSTAGE DECEMBER 15, 2012 SEGMENT 5 TOMMY LEE from ONSTAGE on Vimeo.

MONEY FREE UP BUT SAME TIME MONEY MISSING!!! REMEMBER THAT IN OCTOBER 2007 ZEEKS JA18million WENT MISSING AFTER THE GOVERNMENT DID SEIZE IT. ALL NOW NOT AH BREEZE BLOW BOUT DAT DESPITE SO CALLED INVESTIGATIONS. BUT MOUT HAVE IT DAT ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN ZEEKS MISSING MONEY HAVE EITHER RUN WEH TO DI US of A, BEEN REASSIGNED OR SIMPLY MIA.

The Supreme Court has granted an order lifting the freeze on the assets of Kingston businessman Justin O’Gilvie. The assets were frozen in 2010 when the State also seized the assets of O’Gilvie’s associate Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, who was about to be extradited to the United States on drugs and weapons charges. In the meantime, the order freezing Coke’s assets remains in effect.
The Assets Recovery Agency had gone to the Supreme Court contending that O’Gilvie was Coke’s business partner. It obtained an order seizing the assets of Coke, his relatives and his company – Presidential Click – as well as those of Justin O’Gilvie, Maxine O’Gilvie and two business places – Incomparable Enterprises Limited and Bulls Eye Security Service Limited. O’Gilvie argued that when he started the businesses, it was a requirement for him to have shareholders as part of the firm. But he said in 2004 when the Companies Act was amended, he removed Coke’s name from his company documents. O’Gilvie through his lawyers Paul Beswick and Kayode Smith went to the Supreme Court yesterday and got an order from Justice Lennox Campbell discharging the restraint order against their client and his businesses under the Proceeds of Crime Act. The judge has ordered the Assets Recovery Agency to notify in writing within seven days, all the parties on whom the restraint order was served that is has been removed. The judge says the Agency must tell the parties that there is not sufficient evidence to succeed in the claim against Ogilive. In the meantime, another case against O’Gilvie remains in the Sutton Street Resident Magistrate’s Court where the Assets Recovery Agency is seeking to forfeit $2.9 million belonging to him. The money was seized during a raid on O’Gilvie’s company Incomparable Enterprises. But O’Gilvie is claiming that the authorities actually removed $5.9 million which he legitimately earned from his business ventures. This would mean that $3 million is unaccounted for.

http://go-jamaica.com/news/read_article.php?id=41760

LA Lewis creates controversy in Nottingham
Jordane Delahaye, Sunday Gleaner Writer
A stickler for controversy, self-proclaimed “conceptional artist” LA Lewis is again inciting a maelstrom social unease with his latest “artistic” endeavour.
As part of a long list of events and activities geared towards Jamaica’s celebration of 50 years of independence, Nottingham’s New Art Exchange (NAE) is currently showcasing the second installation of its two-part ‘I is AnOther’ art exhibition.

Part one of the exhibition, which was launched on September 27, featured works from two Jamaicans – filmmaker Storm Saulter and acclaimed artiste Nari Ward. The exhibition also featured British painter Hurvin Anderson and, according to NAE, was meant to illustrate the ancestral and historical influence on Jamaican identity.
Part two of the exhibition was launched on the first of this month and features additional work from Jamaican artists Ebony G. Patterson and Peter Dean Rickards. Part two is said to be an exploration of contemporary influences on identity, including current politics and economics.
PART OF PORTFOLIO
LA Lewis is not a featured artist in the exhibition, but Rickards has included some of Lewis’ work among his own.
“I put him in the exhibit because I’ve done so much work on him over the years that he is indeed part of my own portfolio,” Rickards told The Sunday Gleaner.
Ironically, the piece that probably turns the most heads at the exhibition is a piece by Lewis titled ‘Head Less Tree’.
‘Head Less Tree’ is a graphic juxtaposition of three gold-painted skulls against a large almond tree stump painted black and red. The piece creates a profound imagery that Lewis describes as “spiritual art”.
Lewis claims he set out to combine past life and nature in an effort to transcend boundaries and “take art where it has never been brought before”. It is important to note that the skulls are real and, according to Lewis, they were found around the May Pen Cemetery area where skeletal remains are known to turn up after heavy rainfall.
Also included among Lewis’ work are a host of repurposed artefacts that would have otherwise been considered worthless. To contest whether or not Lewis’ work actually qualifies as visual art would, however, be a near-futile task, as some of the more “questionable” artists are always quick to point out that those who do not appreciate their work simply do not understand it.
Renowned art critic Clive Bell wrote that for any work to be considered visual art it must incite some aesthetic experience, producing what he calls “aesthetic emotion”. Bell proposes that a work’s artistic value is determined purely by its visual aspects and that the context, history or background of the work or the artist is completely unnecessary in this regard.
IS IT LEGAL?
The question, though, isn’t whether ‘Head Less Tree’ is truly a work of art, but rather if it is truly legal.
Rickards has also been stirring up his fair share of controversy within the British art society. The artist’s installation titled ‘Banksy Wall’ centres around a demolished piece of wall which was apparently branded by the pseudonymous and equally controversial British artist – Banksy.
Known for his creative and usually tongue-in-cheek vandalism, Banksy had apparently done a variation of his now-famous ‘Balloon Girl’ on a wall in Mona, St Andrew, back in 2004.
Four years later, Rickards paid roughly US$1600 to have the wall removed, to have it sold to the highest bidder, after hearing about other Banksy items that have sold for what he describes as “a ridiculous amount of money”.
Unfortunately, Banksy had set up a verification service called Pest Control to prevent people from “stealing” his creations off the street and selling them. So when no sale came, Rickards was stuck with a seemingly worthless, large piece of wall, sitting in his uncle’s garage.
Rickards’ installation at the exhibition is somewhat of a recreation of how the wall was stored and treated while it was in his possession, and features a projected video footage of the removal of the wall. The wall has been further smashed for the exhibition, and Rickards says that this was to reinforce that it was not at all about Banksy.
“The installation is about the perception of people (drunk Jamaicans, including myself), who never saw the wall as a great piece of art, but as a object that white people in the UK (and Brad Pitt) would probably pay tremendous amounts of money for,” Rickards writes on his blog ‘The Afflicted Yard’.
Rickards’ ‘Banksy Wall’ has been featured on BBC and the artist says that after the exhibition the wall is likely to be sold.
“We’ve had enquires, but anyone who buys it has to buy the entire exhibit, which includes a lot of junk that was hand-picked from the Riverton City dump and sent in the same crate that the wall was shipped,” Rickards told The Sunday Gleaner.

Self-righteousness is one of the hardest sins to avoid because it is so much easier to see other peoples faults than to see our own faults. Rather than look for faults in others, we should look for the good in others and try to correct the faults within ourselves. Jesus’ comical parable of a person with a board in his eye trying to see to remove a speck from another’s eye reminds us that we probably have bigger faults within ourselves (including self-righteousness) than the faults we would criticize in others:
“Don’t criticize, and then you won’t be criticized. For others will treat you as you treat them. And why worry about a speck in the eye of a brother when you have a board in your own? Should you say, ‘Friend, let me help you get that speck out of your eye,’ when you can’t even see because of the board in your own? Hypocrite! First get rid of the board. Then you can see to help your brother. (TLB, Matthew 7:1-5)
Don’t criticize and speak evil about each other, dear brothers. If you do, you will be fighting against God’s law of loving one another, declaring it is wrong. But your job is not to decide whether this law is right or wrong, but to obey it. Only he who made the law can rightly judge among us. He alone decides to save us or destroy. So what right do you have to judge or criticize others? (TLB, James 4:11-12)
We should not infer that criminal activity should go unrestrained or unpunished: the laws of Moses had strong sanctions for criminal acts, and the Bible strongly supports civil governments. However, we are reminded that judgment is reserved for God and we should concentrate on correcting our own faults rather than criticizing others for their faults.