Reblogged from Psychopath Resistance:
Reblogged from Psychopath Resistance:
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. I consider that cause for worry.
“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/
“‘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)
“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.”
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.
“Since psychopaths are pathological liars and their every interaction with others is self-serving and strategic, even seasoned investigators and forensic psychologists have great difficulty dealing with them. Basically, they’re always faced with the liar’s paradox yet still need to get useful and true information from them.
Katherine Ramsland (from trutv.com) wrote an excellent article about how investigators deal with the inevitable obstacles and difficulties they encounter when attempting to retrieve true information from psychopaths about their crimes. I’m pasting part of her article below:
. . . While psychopaths appear to use the same language as normal individuals, they have their own inner logic. They calculate the world around them in terms of self-gain. They are society’s vampires. They may be intoxicated rather than repulsed by the idea of targeting humans and picking them off, because it makes them feel powerful. Their agendas have no analogues in the normal world. That means developing a careful mode of communication. In this person’s perception, almost any response could be the “wrong” one.”” https://psychopathyawareness.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/investigating-psychopaths/
From “Damaged” by Malcolm Gladwell:
[Dorothy Otnow Lewis:] “The day before [Ted Bundy] was executed, he asked me to turn off the tape recorder. He said he wanted to tell me things that he didn’t want recorded, so I didn’t record them. It was very confidential.” To this day, Lewis has never told anyone what Bundy said. There is something almost admirable about this. But there is also something strange about extending the physician-patient privilege to a killer like Bundy-about turning the murderer so completely into a patient. It is not that the premise is false, that murderers can’t also be patients. It’s just that once you make that leap-once you turn the criminal into an object of medical scrutiny-the crime itself inevitably becomes pushed aside and normalized. The difference between a crime of evil and a crime of illness is the difference between a sin and a symptom. And symptoms don’t intrude in the relationship between the murderer and the rest of us: they don’t force us to stop and observe the distinctions between right and wrong, between the speakable and the unspeakable, the way sins do. It was at the end of that final conversation that Bundy reached down and kissed Lewis on the cheek. But that was not all that happened. Lewis then reached up, put her arms around him, and kissed him back. http://gladwell.com/damaged/
Again, “To this day, Lewis has never told anyone what Bundy said.” This is just downright bizarre. She doesn’t know that she was being played? She thinks Ted Bundy was capable of a ‘soul communication”, that deep inside his psyche was a tortured soul wishing to reach out to others? “Bundy thought I was the only person who didn’t want something from him,” Lewis says. Really?
I do quote her approvingly elsewhere, on dissociation (https://pathwhisperer.info/2014/03/19/to-the-de-blasio-administration-i-hereby-volunteer-to-identify-nypd-whiteshirt-psychopaths-gratis/). I think she has a deep knowledge of the psyche of human beings. I don’t understand her blindness here, unless it’s simply the special relationship between females and the male psychopath.
She had no idea whatsoever of what was sitting across the table, in her discussions with Mr. Bundy. Namely, a biological mechanism that could read/sense her emotions, vanities and vulnerabilities, instantaneously calculate a normal human response that would cater to his readings and his manipulative ends, and then mime them. Actually, in acting terms, psychopathic reactions are a beat off, the readings do take time. This momentary pause should be noted.
Psychopaths use words as a tool, strategically. The manipulative use of language is their main lifetool, as fins are to a fish. Valuable communication is nonverbal. Borrowing Ramsland’s phrase: there is no analogue in the normal world to their use of language. However their strategies are understandable and their communications should be interpreted through that understanding. It is also important to figure out “how old” the target psychopath is. That is, how far did they get in their arrested development path (somewhere in latency – 6/7 to puberty, though there are always very, very young traits — none of them for example get the ‘sharing thing’ though many can mime the behavior). How self referential is the target? What’s the need to brag? How arrrogant? What are the individual’s triggers? What level of self control? The more one knows about the individual’s personality the better. All of this goes into the mix in teasing the truth out of a pathological liar’s communications.
Phrase source (at the bottom): http://180rule.com/psychopaths-are-opportunists/
At Psychopathresistance a commenter warned us of not getting too cocky. No one’s cocky. Psychopathresistance, Pathwhisperer could disappear. It woudn’t make any difference. The internet has already destroyed the ghetto-ization of knowledge of psychopathy purposely brought about by psychopathic “psychopathy experts”. Psychopathic arrogances at the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) who pretend psychopathy doesn’t exist (that’s like pretending red hair doesn’t exist — you couldn’t make this stuff up) have already been outflanked. The “Psychopath Whisperer”, Kent Kiehl, who always serves psychopathic interests, who writes of psychopathic truths, but then writes repeatedly that they are so rare that few will ever meet a psychopath is tilting at windmills and is already irrelevant. However, AI in the hands of psychopaths, that would worry me.