Monstrous, evil, psychopathic — from Lovefraud: “Undercover British cops deceived women they spied on into relationships”, plus POST REDUX: Psychopathic policing — any end justifies any means

“Here’s a whole new twist on relationship fraud — police chiefs in the U.K. have admitted that undercover cops engaged in “abusive and manipulative” relationships with women involved in political organizations that they were assigned to spy on.”  http://www.lovefraud.com/2016/03/18/undercover-british-cops-deceived-women-they-spied-on-into-relationships/

POST REDUX:  Title:  psychopathic policing — any end justifies any means.  Subtitle: why do non-psychopaths officers obey psychopathic superiors?

“‘Undercover lays bare the deceit, betrayal and cold-blooded violation practised again and again by undercover police officers – troubling, timely and brilliantly executed.’ Henry Porter   . . .

The testimony of person after person who was taken in, deceived, gulled, who knew the officers for years – who thought of them as best friends, or lovers, or life partners, or the father of their children, who had no inkling that they were part of an elaborate state-sponsored spy-ring that intruded on the most intimate parts of their lives.'” (Carole Cadwalladr, Observer)

http://www.guardianbookshop.co.uk/BerteShopWeb/viewProduct.do?ISBN=9780571302178&INTCMP=mic_3052&guni=Article:content-related%20Undercover%20book:microapp%20static:Undercover%20books%20component

“What set the SDS [Special Demonstration Squad] apart was their core tactic: living the life of a protester. SDS operatives gave up their warrant cards (their police identity), changed their names, grew their hair, changed their appearances and sought to establish personal relationships with their targets. While many of us might accept that some level of subterfuge is necessary where the policing of very serious criminal activity is concerned, there is little in the Guardian journalists’ account of their activities to strike readers as even close to acceptable.

The nature and consequences of the deceptions perpetrated are truly frightening. Indeed, theSDS’s informal motto –- “By Any Means Necessary” -– seems all too close to the truth. Staggeringly, it seems to have been tacitly understood that undercover officers (usually male) should target female protesters and form close personal relationships with them. These relationships were by no means casual, in many cases becoming sufficiently serious and long-standing for the officer effectively to become the partner of the person concerned. As such, these were no ordinary betrayals; they were, as one of the women pithily put it, “about a fictional character who was created by the state and funded by taxpayers’ money”. Worse still, and at their most extreme, these relationships led to children being born.

The officers not only deceived the women they formed relationships with, but also went as far as to father children that they knew they would have to abandon when, eventually, they were required to return to other duties. In many cases there were two sets of women (and their children) being deceived at the same time: the activist and the agent’s existing wife or partner. Can anyone in the police service seriously have thought this was justifiable?  . . .

The human cost, too, was enormous, primarily falling on the women and children who found themselves caught up in these deceptions. But many officers paid a significant price too. Quite a number appear to have experienced significant mental health problems as a result of attempting to live two separate, but very different lives over many years.”

http://nsnbc.me/2014/01/27/shocking-immoral-behaviour-british-secret-police/

Where were the civilian authorities?  Where were the politician bosses?  This is rape but beyond rape, mind rape but beyond mind rape, it’s rape of a life.  The women thought they had found partners, husbands, love families — they thought they had found a life.  This kind of betrayal, deceit is acceptable in a democracy, in a country of laws?  Acceptable by normal, decent people?  Obviously not.

Of course, the non-psychopathic officers destroyed themselves psychologically.  There is no way they could handle that kind of guilt.  But why did they obey?

When it is said that full expression psychopaths are conscienceless and guiltless it isn’t hyperbole.  It is absolute – other humans are less than ants to them.  The  psychopathic commanders and officers described above should not be considered human and should be warehoused in mental hospitals for the remainder of their lives.

https://pathwhisperer.info/2014/01/30/title-psychopathic-policing-any-end-justifies-any-means-subtitle-why-do-non-psychopaths-obey-psychopathic-superiorsorders/

And so it begins — America’s psychopathic, terroristic policing

UPDATE:  Let me stop being coy, I don’t believe the following accounts at all.  It is my considered opinion that John Miller of the NYPD is a psychopath (https://pathwhisperer.info/2016/09/20/clear-and-present-danger/).  I believe he is well capable of framing (updated by ID theft) and murdering innocents (both civilians and police officers).  He states that there’s a real threat of a ‘terrorist’ attack in NYC this Thanksgiving (2016).  I consider that cause for worry.

_________________________________________

There is no such thing as a pre-crime arrest.  First they came for the “Islamo terrorists”, and I did nothing . . .

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/06/02/boston-police-officer-shoots-man-in-roslindale/
http://news.yahoo.com/boston-police-officer-shoots-kills-possible-terror-suspect-175503467–abc-news-topstories.html#
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/06/18/two-weeks-after-usaamah-rahim-death-alleged-terrorist-plot-his-brother-searches-for-answers/OViGCSAXZOF2qFlOFs1MkI/story.html

The standard police procedure is to try to catch criminals in the act.  They had 24/7 surveillance on Rahim Usaama, he wasn’t going to be free to commit any crimes.  When, in plain clothes, they accosted him on the street during his standard commute to work, what was the plan?  “We’re onto you son.  Don’t do it!!”  I doubt it.  They said he attacked them with a knife.  The video is too blurry to make that out.

rahimusaamaimages

http://www.abc6.com/story/29269585/video-of-terror-suspects-final-moments-released

Claims of insane attacks on arresting/questioning law enforcement officers seems to be growing trend.    http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2015/06/report_si_man_attacks_fbi_agen.html

Friends and relatives are stunned, aghast or even laugh at the allegations.  What’s going on here?  http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/feds-halt-isis-supporter-new-york-bomb-plot-article-1.2260244

I think it’s time to take away law enforcement’s right to lie under oath (Briscoe v. Lahue).  They are licensed to commit perjury.  What would stop a framing criminal psychopathic officer from doing so?  The above allegations in the articles include visited websites and Amazon orders, but are the suspects’ responsible?  The NSA fusion centers, if they want it, can have any Amazon account name, password and a subject’s credit card number.  There needs to be a higher standard of proof.

We are all under surveillance.  These claims could be made against anyone by unethical law enforcement officers. Your corpse wouldn’t be able to argue the facts.

Let’s look at a couple of the media cheerleaders.

John Scuitto of CNN:
sciutto_index3 sciutto_index sciutto_index2

Deborah Feyerick, also of CNN:
deborah feyerickindex2  deborah feyerickimages5 deborah feyerickindex3deborah feyerickindex4

I would predict that their DNA, brain scans (both functional and structural) would be very interesting.

Title: psychopathic policing — any end justifies any means. Subtitle: why do non-psychopaths obey psychopathic superiors?

Undercover lays bare the deceit, betrayal and cold-blooded violation practised again and again by undercover police officers – troubling, timely and brilliantly executed.’ Henry Porter   . . .

The testimony of person after person who was taken in, deceived, gulled, who knew the officers for years – who thought of them as best friends, or lovers, or life partners, or the father of their children, who had no inkling that they were part of an elaborate state-sponsored spy-ring that intruded on the most intimate parts of their lives.’ (Carole Cadwalladr, Observer)

http://www.guardianbookshop.co.uk/BerteShopWeb/viewProduct.do?ISBN=9780571302178&INTCMP=mic_3052&guni=Article:content-related%20Undercover%20book:microapp%20static:Undercover%20books%20component

What set the SDS apart was their core tactic: living the life of a protester. SDS operatives gave up their warrant cards (their police identity), changed their names, grew their hair, changed their appearances and sought to establish personal relationships with their targets. While many of us might accept that some level of subterfuge is necessary where the policing of very serious criminal activity is concerned, there is little in the Guardian journalists’ account of their activities to strike readers as even close to acceptable.

The nature and consequences of the deceptions perpetrated are truly frightening. Indeed, theSDS’s informal motto –- “By Any Means Necessary” -– seems all too close to the truth. Staggeringly, it seems to have been tacitly understood that undercover officers (usually male) should target female protesters and form close personal relationships with them. These relationships were by no means casual, in many cases becoming sufficiently serious and long-standing for the officer effectively to become the partner of the person concerned. As such, these were no ordinary betrayals; they were, as one of the women pithily put it, “about a fictional character who was created by the state and funded by taxpayers’ money”. Worse still, and at their most extreme, these relationships led to children being born.

The officers not only deceived the women they formed relationships with, but also went as far as to father children that they knew they would have to abandon when, eventually, they were required to return to other duties. In many cases there were two sets of women (and their children) being deceived at the same time: the activist and the agent’s existing wife or partner. Can anyone in the police service seriously have thought this was justifiable?  . . .

The human cost, too, was enormous, primarily falling on the women and children who found themselves caught up in these deceptions. But many officers paid a significant price too. Quite a number appear to have experienced significant mental health problems as a result of attempting to live two separate, but very different lives over many years.

http://nsnbc.me/2014/01/27/shocking-immoral-behaviour-british-secret-police/

Where were the civilian authorities?  Where were the politician bosses?  This is rape but beyond rape, mind rape but beyond mind rape, it’s life rape.   The women thought they had found partners, husbands, children — they thought they had found a life.  This kind of betrayal, deceit is acceptable in a democracy, in a country of laws?

Of course, the non-psychopathic officers destroyed themselves psychologically.  There is no way they could handle that kind of guilt.  But why obey?

When it is said that psychopaths are conscienceless and guiltless I hope this isn’t taken as hyperbole.  On this level, it is absolute.  The  psychopathic officers described above should not be considered human and should be warehoused in mental hospitals for the remainder of their lives.