Probable Cause with Sibel Edmonds- Psychopathic Rulers & Docile-Gullible Subjects: A Symbiotic Relationship?

Welcome to our eighteenth episode of Probable Cause. In this episode we’ll be discussing psychopathy- specifically psychopathic players within the Deep State, political and bureaucratic arenas, including a few significant variables that seem to be completely disregarded or kept at bay by many publications and discussion forums.

We begin with a brief definition and description of psychopathy, and how the premise’s application to power-politics has been distorted and spun by the media. From there we move to the macro application: the psychopathic system designed to breed psychopaths, reward psychopathic behavior and punish those outside the psychopathically acceptable parameters, and how it seeps downward from the top into the bureaucratic structure and public education sphere.

We finalize our discussion with the most important element of political psychopathy that has been completely absent from mainstream discussions and analyses of this issue: The symbiotic relationship and coexistence between psychopathic rulers and their docile and gullible subjects (Parasites and hosts), and as we do that we pose our customary discussion-worthy questions. As always, our next episode will be based on your reaction, critique, responses and questions posed in the comments section below.

*To listen to our previous episodes on this topic click here

Listen to the full episode here:


Show Notes

The Startling Accuracy of Referring to Politicians as 'Psychopaths'

The secret of their success? How U.S. leaders from JFK to Roosevelt and George W Bush share character traits with psychopaths

Masters of Manipulation: Psychopaths Rule the World

Corbett Report– Our Leaders Are Psychopaths (Podcast)

Corbett Report- Defense Against the Psychopath (Video)

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. CuChulainn says:

    JFK was one who was not a psychopath, but recognized that in the Joint Chiefs etc. he was surrounded by them–he continues to be the object of slander for just this reason. the fact that Lilienfeld does not mention LBJ–as documented a psycho as we have ever seen in high office–shows the value of this Atlanta-based research.

    • CuChu,

      As always, right. The mainstream-ization of even this topic!

      • kariflack says:

        definitely this mainstreaming of this topic has the goal of painting all leaders with the same brush. it’s a kind of defeatism present in a reactive sort of politics that acknowledges the psychopathy and corruption involved that makes it run (and i think we are in a different era considering the arsenal that the US empire has — unprecedented to have the technology & apparatuses at their disposal to such a vast degree), but some are not like the others. so throw your hands up because what can you do!

        certainly there may be shared traits, but the mainstream propagandists that use JFK as example, like “all the rest”, do so because it is yet more of a push to obscure the very powerful people who wanted him out of the way — the psychopaths at the very top of the pyramid who really do control the puppets. and on down his family line. it’s still such a hot topic decades later because his death really signaled the ascendency of the far right fascists. so it’s like hey, would you like a Bush or a Kennedy to lead you? all the same!

        they will never quit pushing that conspiratorial line, that a lone nut took out the president of the most powerful empire on the planet, not to mention all of the other exploits abroad Oswald supposedly carried out on his own. they’re paranoid psychopaths, and so this is still a constant theme they throw in to remind people never to question. like you Sibel, i don’t watch any kind of cable. when i was around it, oh maybe a couple of years ago now, at a relative’s house, i couldn’t believe the commercial i saw: some regular internet product/search engine or something where a rep — always just some regular person in love with the features of this great product, ha! — telling the would-be customer that it would answer all his questions. he asked if it was really Oswald, and the regular-person-rep replied, “sorry [forgot this guy’s name in the commercial], it really was a lone shooter.”

        • kariflack,

          ‘but the mainstream propagandists that use JFK as example, like “all the rest” …’- exactly. That serves several purpose. Another one being: mixing other example(s) (while there is no fit) to get view people psychopathy under a different/illusionary positive light. First they separated ‘their bunch'(more normal according to them) from Stalin/Hitler (way too extreme according to them). Same tactic with Guardian: bringing in, attaching false examples, positively viewed personalities (in this case ‘Presidents’) and let those names/personalities dilute/takeaway from the actual psychopaths. A real list would be something like this: ‘Stalin, Hitler, George W. Bush, Saddam Hussein, Robert Mugabe, Barack Obama, Kim Sung, Napoleon …’ The point I’m trying to make: By separating them into ‘categories- normal psychopath vs extremely bad psychopath, and even further, with the order by which they list them, they alter people’s perception.

          • 344thBrother says:

            I would add here George Herbert (THE PERVERT) Walker Bush to your list above.

            It seems to me that children of psychopathic fathers either become psychopaths themselves. Jeb, Marvin. Georgie W. Either psychopaths themselves, or trained to act like psychopaths themselves.

            Even Barbara (Babs) perhaps. I wonder if psychopaths tend to marry psychopaths…

            Just thinking out loud here

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Brother,
            “..children of psychopathic fathers either become psychopaths themselves..” — So true. That’s the reason for my missive on James Prescott’s work. Intergenerational psychopathy sorely needs addressing. I’ll be back with a little more on this.

          • Ronald Orovitz says:

            Because he was “martyred,” there is a tendency to worship at the alter of Saint JFK. However, it has to be admitted that to a certain degree, his assassination was indeed a case of “chickens coming home to roost” as Malcolm X put it. Members of the very assassination team that had been formed against Castro with JFK’s and RFK’s implicit approval eventually were turned against them. Had they shut it down the moment they caught wind of it, they could perhaps have saved their own lives.

            JFK, at least early in his administration, was a full-throated advocate of covert action. He was, however, making changes as time went on – many changes that were pissing off some very powerful people. If you read Peter Janney’s book, Mary’s Mosaic, the argument is made that the influence of Mary Pinchot Meyer was instrumental towards these changes, particularly towards the nuclear test ban treaty, but also towards deescalating our involvement in Vietnam. That influence included experimentation with psychedelic drugs like marijuana and even LSD (in small doses it is alleged). JFK was turning into a hippy! So he had to go.

            Those who to this day defend the assassination of JFK cite these concerns, as well as his reckless affairs with mobster girlfriends and other suspected honey-pots. He was becoming a serious national security threat, they allege. If that was the case, then why not go after him with the press, like they eventually did with Nixon? The CIA had a handle on several news organizations – in fact Cord Meyer (Mary’s ex) was running Operation Mockingbird at the time if I’m not mistaken. The fact that they went with a mortal assassination and not just character assassination suggests that the real target was not JFK but the American people. To get the American people to accept (if not whole-heartedly believe) the lone gunman story and allow the true perpetrators to escape justice was the ultimate form of subjection. Thus the most powerful nation on Earth was conquered.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Ron,
            “To get the American people to accept (if not whole-heartedly believe) the lone gunman story and allow the true perpetrators to escape justice was the ultimate form of subjection. Thus the most powerful nation on Earth was conquered.” — Sadly, so true. And, 911 sealed the deal, or so it seems now.

    • I wonder about JFK sometimes. There was recently an article about him on Jones’s site about him backing world disarmament. With so many leaders the hype is all that’s seen.

  2. Arnar Steinsson says:

    One difference about modern high level political leaders and the likes of Stalin and Hitler in my opinion is the level of control they are willing to surrender. I think the consideration for future leaders became a lot more sophisticated after JFK. I think the CIA was assured that he would go along with the bay of pigs. Roll right over with little or no trouble with an operation already in place before he became president. Either they completely misread him or were way to arrogant in their assessment of his character. And have probably taken a lot more care since then.

    I might be wrong about Hitler and Stalin purely out of historical ignorence but I think so many U.S. presidents have been much more eager to serve and appear to have much more power then the actual need to be in almost complete control.
    A different breed of psychopaths but one nontheless. A very elitist host of a parasite might be an apt description.

    • Arnar,


      You brought up a few good points here. You are absolutely right about ‘power’ vs. ‘appearance of power.’ I have long emphasized the importance of NOT viewing US presidents as anything more than ‘serving butlers’ or ‘the front puppets’ for the deep state. And I always warn people to not view them as the top/tip of the power pyramid. With that said: they have to be psychopathic to even be considered a ‘viable’ candidate by the deep state. And this goes back to the club: the top-tied psychopaths determine which candidates are allowed entry/membership. I’ll throw another analogy: the memberships come in different levels-just like AMEX Platinum, Gold, etc.

      • 344thBrother says:

        RE: Butlers and rising to presidential/senatorial power

        Those who are not psychopaths have to be blacmailable < Made up a word there. Video of them abusing/molesting children seems to be a favorite among the elite. That may have been tried with JFK by introducing Marilyn Monroe (Connected with Luciano if memory serves) to both JFK and Robert. Apparently that wasn't good enough.

        Anyway, control by psychopaths or psychopaths in control. All subject to exposure of their crimes if they step out of line and if they persist. A bullet to the brain pan or mysterious plane crash is in the cards.


  3. Arnar Steinsson says:

    Thanks Sibel.
    Very happy to be here. I have been living under a rock for a few years so to speak when it comes to serious issues so I´m playing catch up going through all the content here. I had heard your name many times in the past but I had no idea that you had written books and had a website and I really didn´t expect it because of what you had gone through. And I would like to thank you for sharing your story and continue sharing your views along with the people here.

    Back to the topic.Yes I completely agree with that.

    • 344thBrother says:

      I have read Sibel’s book “The Lone Gladio” HIGHLY recommended as a thriller as well as a means for exposing the way Gladio actually works.

      Well worth the money.
      Welcome to the forum friend


  4. I think Hitler might not have become the infamous villain he did had he been willing to go along with the general agenda of western capitalism. Seems he was just a bit too ambitious. I’m not saying this because I don’t think he’s worthy of the reputation that’s stuck. I just feel like he’s more like an over achiever in the realm of what’s been deemed as acceptable brutality by the figures western empire has supported over the years through to the present. I just can’t take any United Sates president seriously when they wag their finger at anybody as the face of evil, Hitler, Stalin, or anybody else (Putin’s trending ATM 😉

    The big difference tends to be just that the United States in particular outsources its barbarism to whatever sick players are currently on its roster; always under the guise of “stability”: Newspeak for whatever combination of military dictatorship and austerity measures (oops, I meant economic reforms).

    A quote which fits well into this discussion from Winston Churchill (I believe from 1937) regarding Hitler:

    “Those who have me Herr Hitler face to face in public business or on social terms have found a highly competent, cool, well informed functionary with an agreeable manner, a disarming smile, and few have been unaffected by a subtle personal magnetism.”

    I’m not a writer, but for a long time I’ve had it in the back of my head to write up some sort of political satire where Dick Cheney is grilling one of the black ops interrogators, asking why he hasn’t been able to extract any “actionable intelligence” from one of the unlucky detainees. Running down a list of officially sanctioned vile “enhanced interrogation techniques”, asking whether they’ve been tried, urgently stressing the point that these guys are “the worst of the worst.”

    Across the board, in keeping literally and figuratively with current events: the people who run the show aren’t going to pass the gun to anybody unless they’re confident they won’t have to think twice when you tell them to pull the trigger.

    On a more positive note! :-D, Sibel, I’ll contact you about the current action item =]

    • Arnar Steinsson says:

      Churchill also fits well into this group of psychopaths, white supremacist, facist. Atrocities he committed in the colonies. Some samples here.

      The young Churchill charged through imperial atrocities, defending each in turn. When concentration camps were built in South Africa, for white Boers, he said they produced “the minimum of suffering”. The death toll was almost 28,000, and when at least 115,000 black Africans were likewise swept into British camps, where 14,000 died, he wrote only of his “irritation that Kaffirs should be allowed to fire on white men”. Later, he boasted of his experiences there: “That was before war degenerated. It was great fun galloping about.”

      But when they defied this script, Churchill demanded they be crushed with extreme force. As Colonial Secretary in the 1920s, he unleashed the notorious Black and Tan thugs on Ireland’s Catholic civilians, and when the Kurds rebelled against British rule, he said: “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes…[It] would spread a lively terror.”

      Many of his colleagues thought Churchill was driven by a deep loathing of democracy for anyone other than the British and a tiny clique of supposedly superior races. This was clearest in his attitude to India. When Mahatma Gandhi launched his campaign of peaceful resistance, Churchill raged that he “ought to be lain bound hand and foot at the gates of Delhi, and then trampled on by an enormous elephant with the new Viceroy seated on its back.” As the resistance swelled, he announced: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” This hatred killed. To give just one, major, example, in 1943 a famine broke out in Bengal, caused – as the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen has proved – by the imperial policies of the British. Up to 3 million people starved to death while British officials begged Churchill to direct food supplies to the region. He bluntly refused. He raged that it was their own fault for “breeding like rabbits”. At other times, he said the plague was “merrily” culling the population

      Many of the wounds Churchill inflicted have still not healed: you can find them on the front pages any day of the week. He is the man who invented Iraq, locking together three conflicting peoples behind arbitrary borders that have been bleeding ever since. He is the Colonial Secretary who offered the Over-Promised Land to both the Jews and the Arabs – although he seems to have privately felt racist contempt for both. He jeered at the Palestinians as “barbaric hoards who ate little but camel dung,” while he was appalled that the Israelis “take it for granted that the local population will be cleared out to suit their convenience”.

      • Arnar,

        “Churchill also fits well into this group of psychopaths, white supremacist, facist. Atrocities he committed in the colonies.”- Most definitely. You have no idea how much he is hated in the Middle East. In fact, in Iran, many public bathroom signs used to be: ‘WC—- Winston Churchill’

        • Arnar Steinsson says:

          I think that is a very fitting place to put up his initials 🙂

          • BennyB says:

            Haha! Nice one =] How bout a royal flush?

          • 344thBrother says:

            I knew Churchill was bad and knew that he purposely prolonged the war and antagonized Hitler when Hitler wanted to side with Britain against Russia, but this quote was new to me
            When Mahatma Gandhi launched his campaign of peaceful resistance, Churchill raged that he “ought to be lain bound hand and foot at the gates of Delhi, and then trampled on by an enormous elephant with the new Viceroy seated on its back.” Nice guy!

            @Sibel great minds think alike. I’ve long wished that when the real 911 criminals are finally caught and die in prison or are executed, that their pictures should be put up in communal toilets in DC and NYC with REAL Bio’s and messages to take one’s time and read well and flush happily.

            I went farther saying that a proper burying place would be the outflow for those toilets.

            I meant it too. So the WC thing was funny as hell to me.

          • Arnar Steinsson says:

            All of the info about Churchill I just posted is from a history proffessor called Richard Toye. I don´t know much about him but I am interested in his research to a certain degree. Might be worth checking out if you are interested.

    • BennyB,

      “I think Hitler might not have become the infamous villain he did had he been willing to go along with the general agenda of western capitalism”- I join this observation. Don’t forget: we have Us media and Hollywood to thank for that. Think about it: how many movies have been made on Hitler and Hitler related theme (Holocaust)? 5000-10000 or more? After ~70 years, this year alone, hoe many based on that theme? Now, tell me how many movies/films Hollywood has made on khmer rouge? The 2,000,000+ death/genocide? So yah, I’d say it’s been milked so much that I get nauseous every time I see Hitler being mentioned, a box office film review of the theme … I’m sick of it too.

      P.S.- I received your kibd/generous note. I responded-so it is waiting for you in your mailbox:-)

      • BennyB says:

        Yeah, it’s such BS… I’m sorry, but you don’t get to criticize Hitler when you support the Pol Pots and Paul Kagames of the world.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi Benny,
      “satire where Dick Cheney is grilling one of the black ops interrogators, asking why he hasn’t been able to extract any “actionable intelligence” — Do it! Great meme.

  5. The image used for this pod is brilliant. it expresses as much as possible the strange biology of psychopath in modern landscape., a kind of ‘releasing’ from the egg, snakes, somehow coordinated. The ‘club’.to join with each other. Biblical, really. A kind of rapture of the demons.
    Since first becoming aware of fascism in the human condition, and expression of it in history, I reason, we enter the latest manifestation of epochal fascism. The ‘new world’ fascism . Determined to be perceived as ‘good'(the noble lie etc) to be ‘clean’. Righteous (evangelical ), Neat and tidy. R2P or reactive and duty bound rather than active and covert-which it is., provocative in the darkest sense of psychological control mechanism, Trojan horsing all the virtues of civilisation – over centuries, really, to achieve mastery of illusion or ‘magic spin’ as you say. No more pits in the ground, although, tell that to the people of GAZA. And in Guantanamo, human experimentation. Psychopathic.

    But, to the host population, fascism, which must be by definition, psychopathic; is hidden behind confusion and clever marketing – hidden in plain view behind slick presentation. Hollywood. Cartoon, flag. Snuff eroticism. When does the parasite become the host? Pushing out the moral, until an integral tipping point is reached? I agree Kennedy was a major tipping point. The Kennedy deception relies on the control of the psychopathic network realising the Moment and seizing it. OKC and 911 the next major tipping points. With Boston close behind.

    I think of John YOO changing the definition of torture by the word ‘intent’. That is; if the torturers ‘do not ‘intend harm’ means the same behaviour is not torture explains some profound neurological shift in a population programmed to accept ‘government’ responses as law.
    To allow plainly deviant behaviour ‘because its practitioners no longer intended harm’ while exerting extreme harm, is indicative of the ‘new fascism’ at work globally.
    Also the NIST WTC reports signify this same trajectory. How was such an engineering fraud perpetrated upon a serious and intellectual workforce? Engineers supposed to epitomise frank and honest humanity based in sound science – sold the snake oil of ‘thermal expansion’ by the liar Sunder ? A manufactured ‘new phenomenon'(their words) spun thru the revolving door networks of information control. CartooNISTs…. considered a ‘ Disneyfication’ of science in poetic sense until reading advisors To USDept. Of Commerce (of which NIST is part) also sit on the board of Disney. (Rasulo).
    The club
    within which each event staged, people of integrity
    are purged,
    I imagine,
    many more enter.

    • remo,

      Thank you! I went through at least several hundred images before finding what I considered to be the ‘perfect one that fits!’ And here he was, my husband, saying, ‘It’s just okay- most people won’t get it.’

      ‘…although, tell that to the people of GAZA’- Great point

      ‘…is hidden behind confusion and clever marketing – hidden in plain view behind slick presentation. Hollywood. Cartoon, flag. Snuff eroticism.’- Absolutely. And don’t forget the language/lingo- How many of our commonly used (everyday) phrases/expressions are based on War and aggression and militaristic lingo/jargon? We have ‘war’ on everything: War on Drugs, War on Poverty, War on Flue, War on illiteracy, War on … Remember how TV news channels showed the live coverage of bombing Iraq, and the caption: Shock & Awe! Bombs, murder, homes turning into dust … so very ‘awe-inspiring.’…

    • 344thBrother says:

      remo you said: When does the parasite become the host?

      Wow! Thought provoking as hell. That one really tweaked my mind.

    • About NIST, I think their conclusion about why they can’t give out the math used for their WTC7 demolition to be even more dissonant than all of the Bushisms combined. Saying the parameters for the simulation cannot be divulged “because it would endanger public safety”.


      I imagine that they mean the mobs forming mostly in New York if that ever got out that the NIST WTC7 study is a fraud-by-design where the math, physics and chemistry used do not even make sense.

  6. Sibel:
    As you probably know, I commented on psychopathy before(cf. 4-22, 12:57am, Episode 17). I have learned more since then. Based mostly on the work of Paul Babiak and Robert Hare, “Snakes in Suits”2007(btw, Hare created a test for psychopaths and comes very highly ranked by his peers in this field) and “Political Ponerology” by Andrew Lobaczewski, 2007; I will at this state in my studies attempt to cover The “psychopath” in a somewhat broad way(The quotation marks indicate that this investigation of psychopathy is developing along– probably too slowly for most– the study is entering a neuroscience stage. Hard science can be slow. For example, a U. of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health 11/22/2012 study “found a reduced connectivity between an area of the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala.” Before you nod off, I will not elaborate on the study, other than to say if you are reading this, your prefrontal cortex is “on”.
    I have railed more than once about the raging neocon psychopaths infecting our system–But, I hate to admit this, I was over-generalizing a tad. lol.
    As a struggling student(@74), I found something I was looking for. Namely, what kind of gestalt or multilayered “field” supports the psychopath as they move about in large organizations/corporations? My hypothesis/question was not so much “What is a psychopath, per se?”, but, rather How Does an “essential” psychopath use certain persons within the organization to gain what he needs(male psychopaths out- number females 10 to 1)?? An “essential” psychopath was coined by Lobaczewski and his colleagues. These essential ones represent about .5% of humans and are the nastiest. I found out that there is a gradation among them–in all, about 4-5% of humans have little or no conscience. No conscience! Zero!
    So these are some of the organizational types which the psychopath needs to maintain his “mask/false personality” The authors, at times, use the word “fraudster” instead of psychopath.
    Charm, secrecy, and Machiavellian maneuvers are his tools.
    A. Pawns–He will need certain pawns–low level employees who will swear what a nice guy he is.
    B Patrons-He will target certain high ranking executives(Harry, I love your choice of ties? How is your son doing at Harvard?). Amazingly these high ranking executives will defend the fraudster once the connection is made.
    C “Informal Leaders’–these are persons who do not possess a high rank, but persons trust them instinctively and ask them questions. The psychopath will get to know this person–very valuable; and like the types mentioned, will furiously defend the psychopath.
    D.Narcissists and assertive abusive types are a challenge for the fraudster; but given enough time he cons them! Narcissistic, assertive types are usually high up the food chain.
    The Detractors–these are persons that know the psychopath and that he deceives, lies—a “bad pony”.
    However, they seldom tell a given “victim” and if they even bother to tell upper management, the psychopath has that covered with his patron(s).
    A striking phenomenon which Babiak and Hare found was that there were 2 definite groups when the psychopath was brought up. One group detested him and the other group supported him.
    I did not go into Deep Sate psychopathy. The psychopath is a universal type and most us have met dozens. Hell, with me, probably 100s. I feel, in time and if we survive the coming RESET, the recent discovery and deeper understanding of this semi-human(my words) animal; we will see with AWE the role the psychopath has played in the rise and fall of civilizations. This IMHO, is a crucial phenomenon and now the word is used so much and incorrectly by MSM, its power is diminishing. I suspect psychopaths are behind this.
    So, back to more study .BTW, Sibel the psychopath is a parasite straight up and in the host!! A symbiotic relationship however, is mutually beneficial. And I really hope someone steps up for the web page thingy!!
    excuse the usual typos.

    • fraudster/psychopath . It fits. Fraud is by deceit. Anyone who defrauds is obviously ‘without’ conscience in that the result of the fraud is always to the negative . Hurtful. x .

    • ron,

      Good morning.
      “Before you nod off, I will not elaborate on the study, other than to say if you are reading this, your prefrontal cortex is “on”.”- I love starting my day with a smile (almost a giggle).

      “The authors, at times, use the word “fraudster” instead of psychopath.”- I think that is a good fit/choice of word to describe.

      Here is a question for you, Ron: How does someone like ‘Henry Kissinger’ fits? While certain macro characteristics fits (Ex: Manipulative, lack of conscious), others don’t (ex: charming, charismatic, leaves a good first impression). Where would you put him?

      • Sibel:
        I have a background in Quantum field physics and A. Einstein’s Special and General Theory(relates to gravity). I think I was possessed by unknown forces and was submersed. I am not saying this to impress–It drove me a little nuts at times. But, it made me appreciate precision.
        This my “problem” regarding psychopathy, in 2 parts:
        A. My emotional state of anger says Kissinger, Nixon and all those lying SOBs are all f******g psychopaths and should be extradited to The Hague, tried. and placed in dungeons with rats, fleas, stale bread and water– forever. All neocons: Perle, Wolfowitz, Pipes, Krystol, et. al. and their pathological brothers; Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, W, et. al. are sick and need to be removed from society at once, forever! Yeah!! they are all a bunch of psychopaths infecting everything!!
        But then I am faced with B.I must research and be as precise as possible when I study the term “psychopath”. I have learned that psychopaths are cold-blooded users of people and use a series of key persons based upon a “MASK” which they create as per my comments above.
        All of the above characters are PATHOLOGICAL and the neocons have a real twisted pathology regarding a seeming blood lust and lust for power–as they remain physical cowards.
        My guess regarding Kissinger, in particular, is that he is very close to the “Psychopathic Scale”. That is, he seems to be a certain degree of psychopath. Upon reading Babiak and especially Hare, There would have to be an actual real time study of the suspect in his environment and maybe an MRI would be used in order to find out his degree of psychopathy–and it should be done by pros. Man! Do you think you or Peter B. could interview Hare?–just a thought.
        But whatever shape of beast the above cast of usual suspects are; they need to be indicted for war crimes(I almost forgot Obama) like, yesterday!! But we both know what will happen. Zero!

        I think for me, I’ll accept the typical version as in” Hitler was a psychopath!!” While seeing that the term may or may not be used in a precise way. I am not interested in correcting people when they use the term to define human monsters. You dig?

        • Ron can you answer a question for me? Does emotion arise from chemistry? Does it arise from the quantum unseen side of things? Or does it arise from a dialogue between the two? Or does it arise from one or the other and is then altered by the opposing?

          This is one of the reasons Penrose interested me.

          • A Name:
            It seems to me we need to distinguish “emotion” from “feeling.” They are 2 different brain dynamics.
            One could say, for example “I feel anger.” In this case anger is the emotion caused by the releasing of neurotransmitters and inside the brain triggering releases in the autonomic system outside the brain– adrenalin jump, heart rate, blood to the face ,etc your question “Does emotion arise from chemistry?” is close. It(emotion is a neurochemical reaction too complicated to explain here and I am not an expert)
            I’m going to switch right now, if I may, to rather brief answers. I have read Penrose–The Emperor’s New Mind. There is a micro-world quantum field which underlies this universe. We are made of it, but it cannot be directly perceived due to Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty. So I would say that emotion is of this very physical blood and guts Newtonian Universe and when neuroscientists begin to study it, it gets incredibly complicated because the actual emotion cannot be reduced to the sum of its parts. It therefore becomes what is now called an “Emergence.”
            Geez! this is the most technical I’ve been on this site, so I’ll slide out by making a general statement which lies at the center of why people balk at change: IMHO, Emotion easily trumps reasoning/thinking. Not even close. At heart(metaphor), we are Irrational creatures trying to force reason over emotion. Can’t happen
            ‘.excuse typos

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Ron,
            ” it gets incredibly complicated because the actual emotion cannot be reduced to the sum of its parts. It therefore becomes what is now called an “Emergence.” — Yep. Nor, will the parts equal the whole when vivisected for examination, removing emotions from unfolding. It’s not to say details of psycho-neurological-electrical-etc. considerations are not important, they are. Just to say, remember to breathe. Return to center and sense as a way of knowing. It’s natural. On a personal note, I had an excellent time today at Sensory Awareness Foundation’s meeting; I do recommend.

        • 344thBrother says:

          Just chiming in briefly on “Is Kissinger a psychopath?”

          I don’t know. I could say he ACTS like a psychopath. There’s a story from a Nixon White House insider (I’ve forgotten who now) who said that when Henry was given carte blanch to direct the Christmas Bombing of North Vietnam that he would run the halls giggling and clapping his hands together in glee (“Like a little boy”) over who gets bombed today. I think it was also Kissinger who came up with the idea to “Necklace” North Korea with nukes across the DMZ creating a dead zone between North and South.

          To me the above argues for true psychopathy but, it’s possible that ANY person who chooses to go along with psychopathic rulers, bosses, etc. . over the objections of their own feelings could play the part convincingly. In Orwell’s 1984, people really got into the 3 minutes hate. You can see the same thing when people mindlessly chant USA USA USA or scream NUKE AFGHANISTAN!!! NUKE EM TILL THEY GLOW!!! etc. . Otherwise normal people who are fooled by the propaganda or who understand the issues and CHOOSE to go with it.

          It begs the question, who is worse? It also addresses the question, “when does a parasite become a host?”


          • BennyB says:

            No doubt Kissinger is a psychopath. He deserves a spot on the all star team as far as I’m concerned.

          • A Name says:

            Trying to force reason over emotion is a funny way to look at it. Isn’t the psychopath an all reason based being? Without the valuation provided by emotion what value could reason alone have? It is a tool to produce with, whether it be social structures or machines or anything else. It’s when emotion takes over reason to the point that no longer serves itself that problems arise. And when reason overtakes emotion to serve…..
            Maybe ignore the last two sentences, maybe not.

      • candideschmyles says:

        Kissinger in his 1958 book “Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy” coined the term “limited nuclear war” and became one of the most inhumane people to ever publish. Of course it has to be remembered that he wrote this while very much under the wing of his mentor David Rockefeller. Kissinger is indeed, and I rarely use this word, evil.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi Ron,
      Thanks for the post . You provide needed context and nuance to this subject. I’ve not yet had a chance to read those books, but they’re on my list. Some have rightly said that identifying psychopathy is challenging due to it’s having multiple (and sometimes shifting) characteristics. From a philosophical point of view their are multiple problems with the concept of “psychopathy” and “psychopath.” Not the least of which is that it’s not exactingly falsifiable, additionally internal and external validity of this squirly concept remains undemonstrated. Still, it seems, a useful term to indicate somethings even if we are working toward a definitive and testable definition of it’s meaning. Nearly the whole of the DSM V has the same problem.

      Many readers may already know of the involvement professional psychology (The Psychological Complex) in activities rightly described as psychopathic. The recent past president of APA Martin Selegman, was a promoter of professional involvement by psychologists in the torture regime at Guantanamo. Interesting, for a “positive psychologist.” His positive methods are being used now in training US armed services. The present faddish movement of “positive psychology” elides our civic and existential crisis and continues the meme of rugged individualism.

    • 344thBrother says:

      ron you mentioned that psychopaths are 10/1 male. I wonder if that’s because female physiology is hard wired for child rearing and thus empathy. Are their amygdala’s bigger? Or better connected to the prefrontal cortex? Bigger hearts? (metaphor).

      Men more hardwired to protect, hunt, kill, it would make sense that they would be more likely to have no input circuits at all or atrophied pathways.

      good info

      • Dave;
        Based upon evolutionary human biology you seem tending in the right direction. There is a % of solid strong males who are not warriors. And, conversely there is a certain% of women who are hunters. Generally, however it is always the males who go to war. I have never heard of a serious battle between 2 women armies!

      • steven hobbs says:

        Hi Brother,
        Yes, the ratio may be as high as 20:1; but the difference may be due not to the existence of traits but their expression with females the expression being histrionic & borderline.

        As mentioned by others, these traits and disorders are on scales and simultaneous tendencies of personality disorders may be present in addition to other things like organic injury, PTSD, disassociative disorder (previously known as multiple personality). So you may have profound complexity in a criminal mind.

    • If psychopathy could be genetic, would you agree with forcing pregnant women who had their psychopathic baby taken DNA samples from to be aborted so as to remove them from the gene pool? It’s a strictly scientific-for-the-good-of-all cold method, but it might as well be done for the sake of humanity. As for any kind of “Reset”, I’ll keep repeating that they can’t nuke their way out of a “too large population” (which is a lie), a few modern nukes going off in the atmosphere and it would wipe out the ozone layer.

      The Atlanticist Empire will go not with a bang but with a whimper. Especially as the countries they despise all align themselves together since a decade, overlooking their own issues (Russia vs China for example). The future these countries are proposing are a lot more interesting than the Brave New World 1984 Remix they have us going through. Read Pepe Escobar’s Empire of Chaos to see how Eurasia might be the ones saving Europe and well north america because it is run by idiots, incompetents, corrupted officials, psychopaths etc. And psychopaths look over their own before anyone else, nukes flying is not good for any human being, so they must know that themselves, same as for large scale biological/chemical attacks. We’ll see if the deal with Iran finally works out, the world will have a huge sigh, except for the few neocons left and Israel. I doubt Israel would go Samson over this. Iran to them is just a political point when they’re not screaming about rockets falling into the sand 10km outside gaza. Even if Gazans had the equipment to shoot these bottle rockets in a semi-precise manner, they can’t reach anywhere important, israel loves to say they want to target Jerusalem. Wow. Now that is mongoloid thinking, there’s Mosques, Churches and Synagogues of huge importance in Jerusalem, they would never risk hitting these almost 1000 year old Mosques of theirs. Israel is built on a lie and the most psychopathic state in the world right now, yes more so than the US and even if the US wanted to stop it, they could not, the US does not attack countries with nukes…

  7. steven hobbs says:

    Thank you, for the critical commentary.

    Science is epistemologically anarchistic, or so it seems. You never know what more elegant explanations of our complexities may emerge.

    Yes, “psychology” is a science (or at least, some psychologists are worthy of quoting). It’s a young science philosophy birthed. Some new siblings, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. Your postulate depends on your meaning of “science.” The critical thinking door to psychology, sociology, ethnology, or economics, and criminology may be through philosophy of science. (side bar on epistemology)

    Unfortunately, when people think of psychology they tend to confuse knowledge base, procedures, and experience and think Freud, James (if, they are continental), or Skinner, Horney, Erickson, don’t forget Milton E. All this confusion may be used for mystification by the psychology complex aggrandizing their power. Knowing these things is somewhat of an inoculation as you suggest.

    Let’s not confuse a map for our territory. When speaking about self-understanding and insight, remember “Id” is a reification, maybe not more than “E=mc2”. Just one’s more falsifiable. So much of what’s described as psychology is “elephant shit,” as Fritz says.

    One psychologist deserving introduction: James W. Prescott. [Damn Google, these new algorithms — suck time.]

    This fellow was given a couple of years and a significant staff stipend when selected to report to NIH on causes of domestic abuse. He did a scientific meta analysis assessment in mid 70’s. He was asked by NIH to provide reasons for the explosion in of child and spousal abuse then. [Don’t think Vietnam] He gathered as many quality world reports and analyzed them on numerous criteria, finding several specifics profoundly significant. [Aside, remember animated psychopaths in “Secret of NIMH”? ]

    Prescott’s work is apropos to this psychopathy subject. After his report showing warlike and pleasure repressive cultures’ high correlation with violence and abuse, NIH didn’t want to hear. He was canned, blackballed, and his report suppressed.

    Prescott discovered high correlation (85%) between cultures who were anti infant pleasuring, anti teen sex, and anti extra marital affairs. The other thing about those cultures = war cultures.
    Hope to continue this conversation.

    • Steven,

      I’m going to check out Prescott. I can think of one example that doesn’t fit into the correlation he offers: Vietnam. It is known as one of the top cultures/nations when it comes to valuing/loving children. I lived there, and I know (and zero correlation in economic class vs. the highly positive treatment of children- I worked in orphanages and got to know many people from poorest class to the wealthiest). Vietnam is extremely conservative when it comes to: teen sex, extra marital affair, etc.

      I’ll definitely check him out though- thank you.

    • 344thBrother says:

      @steven I youtubed “Secrets of NIMH” thinking it was something dark about the National Institute of Mental Health hahahah!

      Never mind

      • It was a fun atypical kid movie when I was coming up though, as I usually hated anything Disney instinctively, found their “art” incredibly boring or for girls hehe.

  8. matthew_d says:

    What do we make of the person who is calculating, charming, and not a psychopath? I feel that some of the most successful artists, and leaders we have seen, are psychopaths, but also, strangely, exactly what we needed at the time.

    Sibel, when you describe a psychopath, couldn’t you also describe yourself? I could describe myself as a psychopath. But at the same time, when I display psychopathic behavior, I stop myself. I understand that is not a good thing.

    But is that what separates me from a psychopath? People have called me a psycho for wanting to be successful. But I see it as me being practical.

    So what I’m saying is, What separates a pure psychopath from someone who wants to be successful?

    Thanks Sibel.

    • that you’d kill somebody to do it. That you’d physically or mentally harm another for the success. Plan for it.
      Then, not GAF.

    • Matthew:
      One thing seems key. Psychopaths have no conscience. None. As I stated a narcissist egomaniac can care/ have empathy for his mother–he is not a true psychopath.
      If you feel empathy, love–and have 37 strange eccentricities including making tons of money and king of new york, you are Not a psychopath, by definition.

      • @Matthew:
        And I forgot to mention something very important: I recently learned that psychopaths are usually very hard to recognize. They need secrecy and create a “mask.” It cannot be therefore stated so easily that a given despotic killer is a true psychopath. I need to stress the word “psychopath” needs research to understand. Otherwise, it is guesswork and “what if”? This subject actually cannot be truly understood through this format of chunks of printed information. I could never explain it via typing; plus I am still researching the term.
        The word is thrown around so much it has become almost useless. To wonder if extraverts, movie stars, mad men, kings, magicians, artists, and fools are psychopaths would require the use of very knowledgeable people who have been studying this strange animal who creates different masks. Chameleon-like humans.

      • matthew_d says:

        Read both your comments,

        You seem to be in the same place as I am when it comes to just understanding who is and who is not a psychopath. Part of the difficulty, for me, is that we have created, or allowed to be created, a society where psychopathy goes hand in hand with being successful. All the traits required of a psychopath are what is required to be top dog in a dog eat dog, capitalistic society.

        But here’s the hard part, if some dude breaking his back in a factory everyday decides to start his own business, he’d be *understandably* psychotic about that. In my case, I’m making $9.50 an hour and trying to make my own short film. The classic starving artist….So I wouldn’t blame others for calling me a psychopath about it. But I draw the line at the point where I’m hurting others. My success would be easier if I didn’t give a damn about hurting others.

        So I guess, for me, when we try to define who is and isn’t a psychopath, I differentiate between those who don’t care about harming others, and those who come close, but stop themselves…Does that make sense?

        • Matthew:
          ‘Makes total sense… and BTW when I started researching this subject I was asking myself all kinds of questions about my neighbor down the street, my daughter on a “bad hair day” or what about that thing I did when I was 11? But enough research makes it clearer that your uncle Harry is not a psychopath, but the guy down the street? lol

    • matthew,

      My husband and I (another Matthew;-) has been discussing this very topic you brought up for … the last four days- nonstop! You are absolutely right: it is way too general. Maybe that’s why they are emphasizing ‘the degree/levels.’ As you say, based on the definition, most Type A personality people (driven, fearless, extravert, etc.) who are highly intelligent (and or ambitious) will end up being thrown into this bucket. Does that mean they possess certain degree of psychopathy (higher level than average people, but lower than the criminal/political psychopath)?

      “Sibel, when you describe a psychopath, couldn’t you also describe yourself?”- Okay, now I am smiling again:-)))) ‘They’ can definitely make a case for it. They can do it for my father as well: Driven, fearless, assertive. But here is one lacking major qualification: lack of conscience/empathy (or very little of it): This is the area where I think both of us would score high (too much conscience & way too much empathy) , thus, taken out of ‘their’ bucket? The other one is ‘conning’: A good quality in Diplomats, but I would qualify both of us (my father and me) as the opposite of conning/diplomatic: painfully and boldly honest which makes us horrible candidates for politicians: ‘Say it as it is, and as you see it … no matter who or how many people you are going to piss off ‘ has always been used to describe us both (My mother uses another phrase for me: ‘ridiculously Tactless … almost dumb.’ Let’s see, what else … Manipulative: hmmmm, I guess others who know me well should answer this one (I can’t be subjective), however, I have been characterized as a controlling personality: that I am always in control, and try to control situations. That’s how I have been perceived, and they may be right (even though, for some reason, no matter what the situation, people/including my family members give me a push whenever some situation arise requiring some control- and then hide behind me and let me take it on …;-). Charming: subjective. Some people describe me as highly charismatic/charming, and equal number disagree: ‘she is too serious/intense and somewhat rigid.’ I guess I am one of those polarized people who have only two camps: People either love me intensely or hate me passionately, with no ambivalent feelings in between.

      Okay, to summarize, and I think most likely this would apply to you as well (since you are here with us;-), what separates you/I: Having strong conscience; having empathy; being principled (not compromising).

      • matthew_d says:

        Wow, thanks for the very candid glimpse into Sibel Edmonds. Yeah, I guess the way you describe yourself in this context could go for me too. It’s a little strange to listen to people talk about this topic and find yourself asking, “Wait…Am I a psychopath?”

        What, in your opinion, is the next step in this area? Do we start defining it as a mental illness? Can we treat it? Is it a medical issue? I mean, none of the personality traits defining someone as psychopathic are illegal in and of themselves as far as I can tell. Sure, many of the things psychopaths are willing to do are illegal, so do we just wait for them to do that, and hope they get caught?

        At times, at work and other places, I have encountered people who I would say fit the bill in terms of being psychopathic. I started to realize those people always seemed to hate me more than others. I mean that they were malicious towards me. I can remember at least two times where they tried to say things so nasty and evil to me that I have every reason to believe they did it to get me to hit them and get fired. I didn’t…BUT

        I eventually realized the best way to deal with them was just to smile and act fully as if what they had just done had absolutely no affect on me. But I don’t really see that as a long term solution to a more broad problem.

        P.S. One other thing, do you think there are fundamental differences between men and women, and, if so, do you think there are differences between male and female psychopathy?

        • Mental illness is just a social contract generated to excuse those in the right position to make money off of “treating” it. This isn’t to say that people don’t have issues, but there is no mental illness. Although there can be neurological illnesses cause by things like malnutrition and toxicity. Those can effect perception. But once the effect of that neurolical problem is remedied the emotional issue can still remain. And the emotional issue can come into being without the neurological issue. Is a stress, and its usually some form of stress that induces it, induced emotional problem an illness if it can be solved by lifestyle changes and therapy aka talking? Emotional responses aren’t illnesses. And as the chemistry of the brain does change to represent an emotional response, just as it does with any other perceptual process, saying that the chemistry causes it, in the absence of toxicity or malnutrition, is wrong. The chemistry doesn’t cause the emotion. It is the physical reflection of the emotion. You can change the chemistry by force all you want but it won’t get rid of the problem although it may numb a person to it. The problem will still remain once the effects of the so called treatment are removed. Therefore it is a problem a bit different and deeper than chemistry can explain.

          Read brain disabling treatments in psychiatry by Breggin to get and idea of why I put quotation marks around treatment.

          The real question is can it be caused by genes or physical environment. The closest thing I’ve seen to a test for it involves finding a black spot on an xray of the brain but I really don’t trust that.

          It cannot be treated with therapy. That just makes the psychopath a better psychopath.

          It seems that people really are quite plastic. Perhaps the best method of getting rid of.this behavior, even if not the psychopaths themselves is to invert society on its head to no longer value the garbage nonsense and show it currently loves so much.

      • Plus I see no Masks when I see you. Only a small % have that mask thing going.
        I do not watch TV, Sibel, but I bet you and your Matthew can see some “masks” watching politicians and celebrities getting interviewed on CNN.

        • matthew_d says:

          I can’t speak for Sibel, but, like her, I’m responding while working on my first cup of coffee, so here’s my very humble opinion on what you just said:

          Short answer? Yes, I see them all the time.

          Long answer? I also don’t watch CNN all that much, for much the same reasons as you. When I do, yes, I see those masks. But here’s the thing for me. Anyone who goes on a live TV broadcast is wearing a mask. Imagine if you had to speak live, off the top of you head, in front of millions of people. It’s understandable that the person in front of the camera isn’t the same person they privately are.

          It only makes sense, that anyone would be a different person than they really are. There is a saying, “Those who are best at their job, make it look easy.” So, applying that idea to our topic of this conversation, I’d have to say the psychopath is the one who goes on TV and looks the most like they aren’t hiding anything.

          In other words, when you see someone who is squirming their way through a news interview, they just aren’t good at wearing a mask. When you see someone who nonchalantly breezes through a live interview, that means this isn’t their first rodeo, and that’s the flag for me to start looking for other indicators that they are a “psychopath”.

          But hold on…I’ve seen James Corbett live on TV and he breezes through and interview. Is he a psychopath? And that’s where I’ve been thinking about this topic a lot lately. No, I don’t think James Corbett is a psychopath, I just think he’s good at his job.

          Is Sibel, for instance, the same person on her videos here that she would be if you were sitting down to have coffee with her? I’d imagine not. I wouldn’t be.

          For this reason, I think this is why it can be so difficult to detect the psychopathy of those individuals. It’s very situational, and, frustratingly, subjective. I think the challenge in this arena is going to be developing an objective litmus test. How the hell does one do that?

          • CuChulainn says:

            Richard Rorty was a great philosopher, in person he was mild, almost painfully shy, a gentle birdwatcher; in lectures he was magisterial, commanding, sometimes condescending, often scathing, a performer.
            it is the ego that wears a mask; the word person itself means mask in Latin and Greek. the psychopathic mask is just an extreme version of the ordinary craziness by which most of us play roles and even serve, as the narcissistic idiom has it, as role models. the society of the spectacle is the valorization of masks, of the egoic delusion.
            my sense of Sibel is that she is much the same person over coffee and in the videos. any grown-up would be.

          • matthew_d says:

            Hmmm…very interesting stuff there. I love etymology, and yet I didn’t know where the word “person” hailed from. That makes the word “persona” make more sense now, so thank you.

            Perhaps Sibel is the same person in her videos as she is over coffee, but I still highly doubt it. I’m not trying to say she isn’t genuine in her videos (and I could have used anyone else besides her, but she was the most sensible person to use here in my mind), but, I have some experience myself talking to very large audiences publicly. I’ve spoken to a crowd of 2,500+ people. I can PROMISE you that, at the very least, you are on your best behavior in those situations, meaning, that you necessarily are not the same person speaking publicly that you are over coffee.

            Those who have made their life and constant stream of speaking publicly, are so familiar with that state of mind that it’s second nature to them, and they are very good at coming across as “themselves”, in fact, they make it look effortless…So I have to say again, I don’t think “any grown up would be” their very true selves in a public format such as the videos on this sight. Everyone I’ve ever filmed takes a few minutes to make sure their hair is just right before we “go live”.

          • matthew:
            A mask is ONE of the psychopath’s tools. In Sibel’s case I’ve seen many hours of how she presents herself–so I mentioned no mask with her. And she does have other qualities which an”‘essential psychopath” would consider worthless-like empathy, for example. You make a good point regarding practically everyone needing to prepare consciously or sub-consciously regarding the psychological situation. We play many roles, no? But the mask-making is only ONE of the psychopath’s techniques We will “mask” all the time–but 95% of us ain’t psychopaths.
            I tend to think you might want to read “Snakes in Suits”. Otherwise, you may be shootin’ from the hip, bro. You do try to get to the heart of things, but don’t seem satisfied. Hell, I just plow along…but I’m an old school guy and probably know too much for my own damn good.

          • 344thBrother says:

            One way to recognize a psychopath is if they’re incredibly
            BAD at their job.

            The person who can breeze through a TV interview may just know a lot about the topic. By definition psychopaths are able to assume identities of other people in order to slip into their confidence and to gain something the psychopath covets. Usually they’re described as a mile wide and an inch deep.

            George W. Bush comes to mind. But any time you see some politician who’s stuck on some phrase or thought and who can’t seem to get past it to talk intelligently on any related subjects, coupled to a “Their a terrorist” mentality, then they’re just either the mindless sheep or they may be a psychopath pushing an agenda.

            This comment was a mile wide and an inch deep. : P

      • mike33 says:

        I think a distinction should be made between being just controlling and being manipulative.

        A lot of us like to be control of our destiny and often take responsibility for others when its required. (Usually short term. ie people like me are great in a crisis, but are worn down by responsibility long term due to too much empathy for, in the case of business, subordinates… trying to balance needs of bosses above.)

        Being manipulative is very much a trait of psychopathy in my opinion, but not being simply controlling, as the latter can be quite transparent.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi Mathew,
      “But is that what separates me from a psychopath?” — What separates you is that you have the thought. A full on psychopath wouldn’t have the thought about, selfishness being possibly wrong. They would have the thought that it might look wrong to others so the action needs a disguise or excuse.

    • Adding the word calculating to the definition of psychopathy is unwise. Many good efforts require a great deal of calculation and even manipulation. How else would a legitimate charity get money for example?

    • It’s that voice inside your head that gives you this sinking feeling in the pit of your stomach as you’re about to do something “wrong” (usually something your parents forbid you to do, but without explaining why, my parents were far from perfect, but they didn’t divorce even if from 10 to 17 and my brother 13 when they finally did, they didn’t want us to live without their parents even if i think they didn’t have sex for 7 years…my dad’s a trucker so I know he had “girlfriends” all over the province. My dad was exhibiting psychopathic traits but it was just his high stress job that made him go nuts (and his crazy dad who was in the army in ww2 and for a decade+ later, fighter jet mechanic) who destroyed his brains with alcohol and then started to treat my dad and my uncles and aunts on that side of the family like a very bad person.

      I guess what you’re saying is that normal people will do fucked up things when fucked up things become ordinary…we shouldn’t see psychopaths everywhere, they’re about 3-4% of the population, as defined by the psychiatric definition of Anti-Social Disorder (which is the same as psychopathy if you look it up in the DSM).

  9. This article helps to dispel certain myths about psychopaths. They are not necessarily violent, for example. This phenomenon is a work in progress.

  10. steven hobbs says:

    Hi All,
    My time is very limited this weekend, but feeling a need to add regarding the intergenerational nature of what we are calling psychopathy. Ala Prescott’s’ work I suggest that this disorder starts very early in infancy due to childrearing practices most often found in warlike and abusive cultures. These practices are handed down through, family, education, church, and other state institutions of control. The dynamics of a punitive, neglectful, threatening culture’s socialization practices will make these things more or less likely. Additionally, physical and emotional abuse is often an ingredient in both emotional and brain trauma that provokes the “self – protection” of the profoundly defensive emergence of psychopathy, sociopathy, & narcissism. In some instances the production of psychopathic children is an intentional intergenerational project of family “training.” Other times such family training is conducted with the perp’s not even fully knowing what they are doing because they are amnestic or numb for what happened to them as children that they don’t even know what they are doing. They just do it.

    • candideschmyles says:

      Perhaps a look at this from a point of perspective neutral of pejorative classification, like evolutionary anthropology, would actually reveal that spycopathy is an environmentaly activated genetic trait that infers high reproduction and survivability in offspring. Or in other words “evolution favours the psychopathic traits”. High function psychopathy is pretty obvious in leadership throughout the world and across written history. Is it even possible to eliminate what appears to be a fundamental part of our evolution and our working reality?
      History shows us an endless repetition of tyrants replacing tyrants virtually uniformly wherever natural resources are bountiful. And the rise and fall of dynasties and the systematic exploitation of natural resources have gone hand in hand to building this entity we call civilisation. So has this psychopathy driven our evolution to some extent? And if so to what extent? And is this game of real life ” risk”, on our global village going to produce a winner?

      • Candide,

        This is exactly what I mean by: the meat in each episode is in our discussion threads. Thank you for introducing this new angle: valid, thought provoking, and worthy of exploration.


        • candideschmyles says:

          Thanks. Its not exactly comfortable to admit high function psycho’s (HFS) are in at least one sense superior to ordinary people but of course that superiority is highly subjective. Perhaps one of the reasons I am hopeful the principles of the Zeitgeist movement are eventually realised in the management of our needs in harmony with the availability of resources. Removing the pyramidal power structure needs a workable alternative and only science and technology can free us from the need of pyramidal power cohesiveness. Every flag waver is after all really just applying social glue. Removing individuals and groups of individuals from the decision making in terms of resource allocation and replacing them with algorithmically derived distribution scaled on need and equality is the only sensible and workable model to come through and offer an alternative to pyramidal capitalism. Then what do the HFS’s do for kicks? Well no need to worry about that in our generation, that much is certain.

          By chance I have been watching a Stanford lecture series on mathematics and today watched number 5. How Did Human Beings Acquire the Ability to do Math? (available on YouTube). The conclusions are irrelevant here however this study of cognitive ability does reveal it to be our social brain that makes all of our other achievements possible. By social brain I mean the individuals ability to gather information and act on it in the context of their social environment. And it seems to me that this fact of human behaviour inevitably leads to a percentage of HFS type individuals by deductive logic to employ the lack of empathy required to, for example, order a drone strike, while not being clinically HFS in their default psyche. Rather that they adopt consciously what is requisite or expedient to further a predetermined objective. Attempting to tell the psycho from the ruthless is difficult to say the least.

          And what about culpability? If we do not find a way to move beyond the structural mechanics of society evolved to erect pyramids then we will only ever end up replacing the very tip to which only psychopaths are perhaps suited.

      • steven hobbs says:

        Hi Candide, [Great nom de plume, BTW]
        “evolution favours the psychopathic traits” — Actually, as much as it seems so – no, it doesn’t. However, you’re addressing warring “civilizations’” birthing psychopathic leaders for utilitarian aggrandizement of hegemonic power is spot on.

        Evolution, favors empathy. And, is innately demonstrated by “mirror neurons.” One problem of an A. Rand genre (one for one, others go to hell & giv’em a kick, self-interest school) of thought is that it doesn’t explain heroism. It doesn’t explain why the strongest stay, fight, & possibly die to allow others’ escape — she saves her herd.

        You say, “seems to me that this fact of human behaviour inevitably leads to a percentage of HFS type individuals” — Human behavior is best understood in environment. May be one conundrum A. Name is wrestling. For example, Bonobos are as genetically related to humans (maybe more) as Chimpanzees, but they are hardly mentioned in our dumbing warring media. What’s the reason? Bonobos solve conflicts with sex. Chimps are more likely to use violence, but their violence has been distorted by apologists (promoters) of war. The only evidence for anything like group aggression (to my knowledge*) was a result of human “observers” bringing in a load of bananas to ONE group of Chimps. When neighbors learned of the unavailable (to them) abundance in the others’ crib – it was on. Much to the pleasure, and scribbled notes of those who brought a full crate of bananas. They shouted – WAR IS INNATE.* Note: chimps are not that violent if left alone.

        “Removing the pyramidal power structure” sounds anarchistic. Yes, let’s replace with horizontal power & participatory democracy.

        I’ve several problems with the Zeitgeist movement. I will not say that they cannot be allies.
        1) Science and technology seems elevated to a pyramidal peak. Where’s space for indigenous wisdom, and inventive candid contribution?
        2) There’s a particular habitus, assuming hierarchy of “knowledge,” which belies their egalitarian proclamations. Their presentation reminds of Scientology (extended –Moonies). A good policy: rule out DS management.
        3) I was on first name basis with an originator of Zeitgeist, but years ago. He, a handsome, accomplished, versatile (elite from a moneyed family), powerful, and a graceful individual who seemed, IMHO, to have something missing. Now many years later, I called him out twice on Zeitgeist site. To no Avail. This remembrance is now reminding, of calling out Michel Albert (of I kept that one up for a while, making a nuisance of myself until I was exhasted.

        Sibel, these “Far-Left” groups deserve lumping into “The-Left” for their shallowness, if not mendacity. One genuine Far-Left thinker, Michael Parenti, seems still cautious (possibly due to his paycheck). He does go far, and seems one of the good guys. Wish there were more inside academia, alas.
        * “Sex at Dawn,” C. Ryan

        • candideschmyles says:

          Thank you for your response to my thoughts.

          I would still maintain the HFP (to correct myself) is highly successful both individually and dynastically at getting to the top of the pyramid and staying there. Altruism, egalitarianism, empathy and the kind of selfless heroics you refer to do indeed form a crucial role in human interrelationships. They may even be employed by HFPs when it suits their purpose and how often have we seen the US spin an invasion as a humanitarian act, with fairly broad public support? The presence of positive and socially cohesive traits in the general population is the only way our communities can survive without self destruction. But this is a gossamer thin veneer of civility almost uniformly dependent on direct contact between parties. You remove the direct contact then you find group (a) holds innacurate and pejorative views about their neighbours group (b). Yet group (c), a mutual neighbour may dispell and unite (a) & (b) should mutual interest turn the tide that way.Thus altruism and cooperative behaviour is virtually uniformly actually a flavour of self interest.

          While your examples of Bonobos resolving conflict in their communities with sex makes an interesting thought experiment, I would be one bolshy Bonobo!, Bonobos have small discrete communities and not extensive societies with billions of individuals. As for chimps I disagree they are all by any means peaceable. Indeed there is some quite stark variation of behaviour from one troupe to the next. And some can be very violent with infanticide and the killing of its weakest members commonplace. It is tempting to search for analogous behaviours in our closest relatives but useless if you put on your rose tinted lenses first. And given the docility of and mindless conformity of humanity as a whole, to the service of the queens of globalist hegemony or respective leadership, then surely we are as near mindless and as ever busy as the ants?

          Yet another way to look at this is biochemically. Some individuals have a disorder that stops them ever experiencing all the emotions we call love. In depressed individuals again the suppression of oxytocin severely inhibits standard emotional responsiveness. What is the correlation between environmental stimuli and neurochemical health? And do the HFPs have normal, reduced or elevated love chemical oxytocin? I have been in the family home of an ex cabinet minister of defence in the Thatcher government. I have watched the social cohesion of a normal family in their holiday home where they tried to relax in spite of the dragon spirited tyrant of not him but his enormous wife. He himself almost a disregardable non player. Anyone would never think this anything but an average family. Yet as a minister for defence, amongst his other roles, he directly gave the order for mass killing. He was a key player in the Reagent era game in which the same players still run the show to this day. But he was also just a normal dad and husband. Something that more often than not is something less than a fairy story for any of us. And could take us into tyrants within family units. Personally, and there is no scientific proof that I can quote but is based on a reasonable assessment of current scientific thinking then I would guess there is huge psychopathic latency throughout and it just takes the right environmental conditions to trigger them. I think that most at the top we deem HFPs can and do switch it on and off at will.

          • candideschmyles says:

            Reagan not reagent! Curse autocorrect!

          • Katie Stewart says:

            So well said! “HFP’s can and do switch it on and off at will.” Exactly what makes them so effective and dangerous. When it’s switched off, they are in charm mode, likeable, etc, making it all too easy for those they’ve “charmed” to look the other way when its switched on. I have seen this first hand with sexual abusers and their victims/family members, along with the confusion that keeps the victims quiet. They question how they are supposed to feel about their abuser, ‘do I love this person or hate this person? Is this person truly evil or really a good person with their own problems?…’ and so on. Same could be said for patriotism to our “charming” leaders, American exceptionalism and all that.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Candide,
            “..socially cohesive traits in the general population is the only way our communities can survive without self destruction. But this is a gossamer thin veneer of civility..” — I suggest that mirror neurons are evidence that the capacity for social cohesion cannot adequately be described as “traits.” The same way that oxytocin demonstrates something more “hardwired” into our being demonstrating empathy, and the natural biological emergence of social cohesion.

            Additionally, studies of preverbal toddlers shown two toys, one mean and violent the other gentle and sharing, showed clear preference for the kind stuffed toy when put in a room and given the two toys to crawl toward. For these reasons, it seems that “then veneer” is not apt.

            A couple of references (out of many) for our “nature” after these tendencies are distorted may be found in Herbert Marcuse, “One Dimensional Man,” and Welhelm Reich “Listen Little Man.” A video produced for TV and I think never shown regarding child and spousal abuse, “Tough Guise” (40+ minutes) is available on the net. It addresses how males are indoctrinated into denial of tenderness and preference for aggression. It’s painful to watch but well a well done exposition.

      • 344thBrother says:

        “Will psychopathy produce an evolutionary winner” (paraphrase from memory here).

        I think not. On the short term sure. As you say, psychopaths tend to rise and replace former ones throughout history.

        On the long term, this constant replay of conquer, use, abuse, throw away, (to me) looks to be what’s causing so many environmental problems. So on a long term evolutionary scale, I think psychopathy is likely to be the downfall of human life on the planet unless we find some way to undo all the damage we’ve already done, and carry on in a less predatory/pirate like fashion.

        This is just me, but I sense some lack of big picture/historical/evolutionary empathy as well. “Use it up before you die” mentality. “The earth is our oyster.” Grab it, shuck it, suck it, toss it, screw it.

        Please forgive my inability to use clearer more precise language, too many years in the back country I guess. I hope you readers get the points I’m trying to make here.


      • A small civilization like the nation of Bhutan would counter all of this though, otherwise, pretty interesting points you got there.

        I’ll always remember that one time when my mom went back to work when I was in year 6 (around 10 year old) because my dad had actually lost that highly stressful job he had, he worked in a big canadian waste management company (not WM itself, although now that company was bought by the american corp WM…of course). My dad had issues with the boss and just deleted their whole network, an easy thing on a Windows 3.11 LAN encompassing a very large territory. So he spent 6 months without a job on unemployment “benefits” (55% of your original salary in Canada). and that was the worst time and coincided with that 7 year of home hell, it was the beginning.

        I remember preparing dinner because the idiot can’t cook and would force his 10 year old to prepare food for his dad and his brother. It gave me some independence skills I’ll admit. but what I was getting to is, I was mixing pasta and sauce in a way my dad didn’t like and an expression in the french part of Canada is “fais ca comme tout le monde” (do it like everyone!) and I said “I don’t want to be like everyone else” and my dad snapped at this, picked a knife and said “NEVER SAY THAT AGAIN, GOT IT? I NEVER WANT YOU TO SAY THAT AGAIN, EVER”. Comformity-meister in action which is to me not natural but nurtured, like how most men view women as meat to put your weiner in, it’s not natural, it’s nurturing. Psychopathic traits being nurtured and I rebelled against what I perceived to be a fucked up world at around 13 years old, thank “god” for punk music showing me that there was many other ways that didn’t revolve around control, violence and slavery.

  11. 344thBrother says:

    @steven. From what I know on the subject, pure psychopaths aren’t groomed or trained or grow up to be psychopaths, they’re more like “The bad seed”. Born that way. Thomas Sheridan makes this argument in his Labyrinth of the Psychopath series and books. “They’re not human”.

    Although I’m sure in this spectrum of psychopathy we’re discussing psychopathic tendencies, traits, habits can surely be developed from lots of environmental factors. I’d think first and foremost it would be abuse/molest etc. . from their loved ones. Sectioning their minds off to protect their inner human being. But also people driven to succeed at all costs even if you have to climb up on the bodies of your co-workers, could be instilled in a youngster by their parents.


    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi Brother,
      ” I’m sure in this spectrum of psychopathy we’re discussing psychopathic tendencies, traits, habits can surely be developed from lots of environmental factors. I’d think first and foremost it would be abuse/molest etc. . from their loved ones. Sectioning their minds off to protect their inner human being. But also people driven to succeed at all costs even if you have to climb up on the bodies of your co-workers, could be instilled in a youngster by their parents.” — Yes, agreed. This is what I’m talking about.

      I would take exception to the “born that way.” But, I’m not familiar with the fellow’s work or how he is defining/describing the disorder. From my professional study the concept (at least in it’s usual usage) includes environmental factors. A colleague of mine, a specialist in dissociative disorders, in personal communications has described families she’s worked with that were intentionally abusive to a horrific degree with the goal of creating other monsters of their ilk. Some of these were former imported Natzies, imported to the US after the war.

      • 344thBrother says:

        steven on “Born that way” I could be convinced either way. I was guessing on that one. I’ll stick by that until I learn different. : )

        • steven hobbs says:

          Hi Bro,
          Here is an interesting new development:
          “.. altruists’ blood flow to the right amygdala, as well as the right lateral prefrontal cortex, was consistently higher than controls’ when shown fearful facial expressions. Furthermore, controls showed higher blood flow to the left amygdala when angry faces were displayed than altruists… relationship between psychopaths and functional impairment of parts of the amygdala. In “Neural and Cognitive Characteristics of Extraordinary Altruists”, Marsh et al. showed the farther an individual was from altruism on the spectrum, the higher reactivity there was to anger in the amygdala; while Carre et al. in “The Neural Signatures of Distinct Psychopathic Traits” demonstrated a significant positive association between the lifestyle aspect of psychopathy and higher amygdala reactivity to angry faces..”

          • 344thBrother says:

            @steven: “relationship between psychopaths and functional impairment of parts of the amygdala.”

            I didn’t follow everything you posted on that, but if I understand this correctly, overall, a malfunctioning amygdala may predispose psychopathic behavior. Which leads me to wonder, since it’s reported that Fluoride calcifies the Amygdala, and over 70% of Americans now drink, bathe in and water their plants with fluoridated water, what effect this will have on psychopathic incidence in the future.


          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Bro,
            I don’t tend to focus much on fluoridated water or childhood inoculations, so have no comment. Here’s a little more on brain function and psychopathy:
            “Psychopaths are people who, perhaps because of physical factors to do with abnormal brain connectivity and chemistry, especially in the area of orbital/venrtolateral frontal cortex (Blair et al., 2004; Kiehl et al, 2006) have no conscience, few emotions, and inability to have any feelings of empathy for other people. The amygdala has been described as the seat of emotion and is reported to be an important in processing socially relevant information, and so it is theorized that disruption of it’s function could lead to socially inappropriate behavior (Wernke and Huss, 2009).” Clive R. Boddy, Journal of Business Ethics; Vol. 100, No. 3 (May 2011), pp. 367-379

            There seems to be reason to believe cultural, familial, and education factors have a profound influence on incidence of psychopathy, as you suggest elsewhere.

          • Steven,

            Good point. My understanding is that psychopathy is a condition which you’re either born with or you’re not. Interestingly however, it seems, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere here, that there’s a strong hereditary correlation, where there’s a strong possibility that a parent with this condition (disease?) will pass this on to their children. I think this is very important, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere as well, in explaining the role this factor has in contributing to the attributes which support the continuation of family dynasties; i.e: Bush, Kennedy, Rockefeller, Rothschild, etc. If you have no conscience, it’s easy to carry on the family traditions/legacy. I think this is quite significant. I know I’m sounding like a broken record here, but I think it’s quite important indeed.

            Another interesting point while I think of it: one of my parent’s friends, is one of three brothers from a very wealthy family. This person (I don’t think name dropping is useful), although he’s made a career as a successful actor, director, and producer, unlike his two brothers, never set out to carry on the family business in finances. He’s made a good living, but it’s because his talents have rewarded him, not because he’s made career choices based around making money alone.

            In a discussion with my Dad, I pondered on what it is about the super wealthy that drives them to continue to pursue wealth, when by all logical standards, they’ve made more money than they, their children, and their children’s children could ever spend. My Dad made a good point: his friend’s brothers, when they were considering how much money they had, were doing so in the context of their social circles. So, whereas these brothers were worth tens of millions, they were comparing themselves with friends who’s wealth was worth hundreds of millions or even billions. In a sense, these brothers are only aware of how their fortunes stack up in this context, therefore their desire to compete to earn more money is based on standards within in a financial, social sphere which is totally divorced even from the reality of the moderately wealthy, nevemind the poor.

            Psychopaths can’t change the way they view the world one way or another, so exposure towards the reality of others, even those impoverished at their own expense, won’t change their ethical world view one way or another. However, surely not all members of these family dynasties and elite circles are psychopaths. Yet the fact that they’re insulated to the extent that they are in their lack of exposure to suffering, or just being in the midst of people who have the capacity to reflect on the role their actions play directly or indirectly in the suffering of others, allows the non-psychopath to continue living in their own bubble without the kind of jarring questions of morality which they would otherwise encounter.

            Arguably, the same is true for many politicians (those who aren’t already part of the elite society by default). Those who aren’t psychopaths are surrounded by them everywhere. While their moral compass might direct them towards trying to do the right thing, aside from momentary glimpses into the lives of ordinary citizens, even their own families, they’re constantly surrounded by people who don’t give a damn about ordinary citizens, no matter how much they lie to the contrary.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Benny,
            Putting all your eggs, so to speak, in one basket, i.e. genetics — seems a mistake. We are defining psychopathy as a lack of empathy AND active cruelty and self-centered cunning. fMRI in these individuals shows low levels of neural activity in their inferior frontal gyrus. One genetic factor identified by Baron-Cohen in longitudinal studies is greater testosterone a fetus generates in the womb.

            “When people are tired or stressed they may show less empathy than when they’re calm and rested. Baron-Cohen wants to differentiate transient changes to empathy, where empathy can be restored, versus more permanent changes,” another one is sex steroid gene, one gene related to social-emotional behavior and two associated with neural growth. That said, Bowlby and others have identified some origins of violence in child rearing practices, particularly child neglect and abuse. Beliefs and environmental factors also have a role in the waxing and waning of empathy, cruelty, and self-contentedness.

          • Thanks Steven, that’s some interesting food for thought. Clearly you’ve done more research on the matter than me, which to my discredit only is limited at best. I’m not a supporter of the idea that science alone is an absolute by any means. However, I think that it provides a basis to at least validate a correlation between what we can observe through other tests, such as behavioral (outside of tests which are administered as the basis for technological recording and observation (MRIs?) ).

            What interests me in particular in examining psychopathy is the idea that it provides a window into explaining that the negative state of affairs which has been a constant throughout recorded history, where a small group of people hold a disproportionate share of power which they wield largely to the detriment of the masses (war, poverty, etc). Being able to demonstrate empirically in some shape or form that there is a strong correlation between psychopathy and the negative forces which largely dominate the trajectory we continue to travel on as human beings, a species; however you want to put it, helps to at least provide a different perspective as to how we might be able to influence positive change through a better understanding of the nature of the beast.

            As I’ve commented elsewhere however, overly simplifying psychopathy ultimately trivializes, weakens, and even runs contrary to any potential gains I just eluded to. For these very reasons in particular I appreciate your comment here.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Benny,
            Thank you, “..not a supporter of the idea that science alone is an absolute by any means.” — Science is a knowledge base, set of methods, experiences of doing science — all somewhat anarchistic — and sometimes crowd sourced. There’s also philosophy as a means of knowing.

            Context (in addition to hormonal and genetic status) is relevant to the emergence of psychopathy, loss of empathy, and ego egocentricity was my point.

            “The perception of the other’s power is equal to the perception of your own powerlessness,” Warren Farrell’s sentiments are reflected in Tom Secker’s “Disinfowars episode 1.” Check it out.

            Indeed, powerholders don’t reveal their secrets, but thrive with our perception of our powerlessness.

          • Come to think of it, I’m not sure I really addressed what I intended in the previous comment…

            I don’t think it’s either wise or reasonable to put too much influence on genetics. However, I don’t think the significance of the correlation should be overlooked. You’ve done more research on this than me. Is what I’ve suggested here, based on what you’ve examined baseless?

  12. Stumbled upon this by chance:

    It’s a Psychopathy Books Review video. This woman’s pretty out there, but her thoughts on the matter (as well as others) are quite intriguing and obviously in line with what we’re discussing here. In short, she adds a bit of a ‘warning’ about the psychological effect exploring this subject can have on you. Don’t worry it’s not on some “don’t talk to strangers” style thing though =D

    • An aside: she has a really interesting video where she discusses the role of MK Ultra and “High IQ Societies” in weeding out potentially dangerous to the establishment types of intellectuals at a young age. Standardized testing, IQ tests, MENSA etc… She’s a trip, guess it’s like they say; don’t judge a book by its cover.

  13. “imported to US after the war’ – paperclip.
    Now there’s an insert the history PNAC Zelikow won’t be including . Shipping nazi into the country in secrecy, to continue work undergone during Third Reich examples the problem at EVERY level !! Slaps “feckless disregard” up old glory BIG time.
    How does that behavior square with the ‘honest joe’ who’d just fought his way into Buchenwald?? Dachau ?
    Ingratiating Nazi high-enders into USofA examples the ‘secret history’ we are now being awoken to. that 911 and ‘false-flag’ are all part of. ‘Feckless disregard’ only begins to cover a consciousness able to seamlessly cog nazi german fascists into US/globalist apparatus. But in secrecy that establishes a cut-off between those who know and those who don’t. That cut-off swings thru to 911. Made exponentially more robust thru decades since of gladio type kill actions in the homeland disguised as anything but. ‘The devil is in the disguise’. But also swings back further to links hitherto not discussed in polite society of US/UK/monied elite bankrolling adolf’s new uniform. His tanks. And how that love of the strut comes forward to this day and the manipulation of youth to ‘duty’ and ‘uniform’ and ANY stupid flag.
    whatever the definition of psychopath, it can begin with those who in cold foresight stole the nazi war criminals into post WW2 society, and gave them new identities under legitimate Government banner.

    • 344thBrother says:

      @remo: All that yeah.

      I would add that “Feckless disregard” sounds like wiggle words to me. It was a plan, the plan went perfectly and the main Nazi treasure was smuggled out by Borrman which was then used to purchase 700 international corporations soon after the war. This from “Rise of the Fourth Reich” by Jim Marrs.

    • Right remo,

      While the American political class made no hesitation to demonize the types of sick ‘evil genius’ which took advantage of the concentration camps to conduct disgusting experiments in eugenics, they had no reservations about taking advantage of this sick research into their own secret operations after the war. Same concept of outsourcing torture before the official lifting of sanctions on its domestic application.

    • The USSR had their own paperclip too btw, just a short addition. It’s less publicized but most were POWs and not very willing, but some, I forget the names right now, some nazis who were more in the left wing of the nazi party (yes, there was such a thing, such as the Strasser brothers, one took a flight to my backyard in Montreal and lived there the rest of his life, the other one wasn’t as lucky. But yeah, it was National Socialists, originally they were a socialist party, but only for one race (kinda like the Han Chinese now, but that’s as far as I’ll go, the chinese aren’t practicing the completely psychopathic traits of the Third Reich). So some decided to go with the Russians,but that was between 45-50, not during the war like the US did. Russians left them 2 choices, come with us, or we kill you and your family right now. I’m sure the cunning millitary intelligence of the US and later the CIA was more subtle in their offers.

  14. Need to ramble.

    Gold and autism.

    Have any of you ever read about the mita workers of colonial Spain? There was thing problem they had with
    the mercury that was used to mine the silver, and maybe gold, I remember the story about the silver miners better. They would be exposed to very high amounts of mercery to the point that it would give them horrific nervous system problems and extreme spastic, hope that’s the right word, movements. It was so bad that the natives would actually maim their children to keep them out of the mita. Kinda wonder if this inspired hunger games actually. Its funny to me that people always put on a highest pedestal the things which require so much evil to obtain.

    And now autism. In my experience autists are extremely gullible, at least until they start to understand just how predatory and corrupt people can be. Then the bias swings wildly the other way. I’ve wondered of the psychological effects of fluoride, vaccines, toxins that damage gut bacteria etc… Although one can’t say with no doubt why the autism epidemic is happening, although the science does point heavily toward glyphosate and vaccination, especially this ramped up schedule they have now, and it seems that other brain damaging substances could be adding to the effect, such as food additives and fluoride, it seems likely an engineered eepidemic and I do wonder if there would be a set of people so base that they’d actually do such a thing as induce an autistic social paradigm to create the fractured and controlled society they seek.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi A Name,
      “But my point is that psychopathy is normal behavior.” — This particular comment is nonsensical. If “psychopathy” = “normality” and their is no definition of “normality” to distinguish it from anything other than nothing, then what else is it than meaningless?

      I relate to “Need to ramble.” I’ve done it too much in this thread. Please let’s try to keep our rambling to a minimum, sensible, and concise. We only have so much energy and time, and most of us want to read everyone’s’ comments. I’d like to not feel a need to elide yours. Let’s try to for concision and cogency. Most of the time I edit mine entries for brevity.

      • A Name says:

        I should have said psychopathic behavior is normal. It was pointed out that all the “gullible” people support and empower the so called real psychopaths. But how can they do that without taking on the same views as the psychopath? How does a soldier go to a place, blow it all to junk and then say that the civilian deaths are just collateral damage? How do tax payers back such a system and behavior to also accept collateral damage? The only way to do that is to embrace psychopathy. So perhaps the true distinguishing mark isn’t even that the psychopath is willing to hurt people for no good reason, because the general population is perfectly willing to do this if they can establish it as a norm as shown with war, grand schemes such as the Nazi scheme, and that story of the policeni spoke of. The “good” people were all perfectly fine with psychopathic behavior as long as they could call it good in each case. Until it is addressed in this form there will be no way to address it in those who hold positions of authority. To say that the psychopath is some foreign foul creature is to ignore ones own and society’s own responsibilities. Much as we say that Nazi Germany is all Hitler’s fault and none of the fault of the German population. Much as the tyranny empowered by the american people is the government’s fault and not that of the poor helpless and supposedly niece american public. A standard needs to be established where the masses that create these horrors are just as responsible for them as those they put in high places.

        The only real differences I can see that distiguish a true psychopath are

        1) psychopaths are not selective. They harm anyone just for the sake of it. Although they probably have an excuse for it. Just as the public does.

        2) they feign empathy they don’t have.

        Of course this last set of arguments are erroneous. The general public harms those it shouldn’t and they feign empathy too. In fact the only real difference may lie in their so called sense or morality. But even morality can be psychopathic. “We gotsa kill grandma to hire more teachers”. This was the type of argument favored in Nazi Germany and now again in america.

        So the question I’m stuck being unable to answer is what truly is the difference between a paychpath and a normal person? Perhaps the term psychopath is just a construct designed to enable people to wag their finger at the bad guy while at the same time ignoring their own foul deeds?

        • A Name says:

          Oh, and I should point out that there are two way the logic can tilt toward.

          There is no difference between psychopathy and normality because

          1) like you said the the term normality becomes meaningless or nonsensical

          2) the term psychopath becomes meaniningless

          3) both terms are nonsense generated by people of limited perceptual capacity.

          Perhaps it would be better to describe the behavior as destructive and cruel. But then again many normal behaviors are destructive and cruel. They’re just accepted because more people hold that they are right. Drug laws are normal.but destructive and cruel.

          Regardless of how you frame this situation it bring attention back to the same area, the “good” people. A greater awareness of this behavior and its pervasiveness needs to be had. And perhaps a new frame work that takes more into account the inter-responsibility that needs to be established to deal with it as a whole.

          The term psychopath serves too much to put the blame on a scape goat. Although I’m not saying that that goat was not evil. Perhaps society itself is evil and that goat just an expression of its will.

          • A Name says:

            I should have said three ways and I should have noted the nature of the first half of that argument. Many times I put up arguments so that I can test them. This happens automatically and involuntarily when I ramble and not at all when I don’t. And that’s what happened in the above post. I started off with an idea and knocked it down to go in a new direction. A good direction I think.

            Maybe I need a sig stating that because it happens a lot… Or so I think it does.

          • A Name says:

            And when I say an expression of its will I should explain.

            Notice how society places great value in great harm? Notice the harm done to miners of gold and silver in the days of old? Notice how it values things difficult to get. Same thing with a Ferrari or one of them giant cakes. You have to sacrifice other peoples effort so that it can be spent on dumb garbage. And society looks upon this waste and misappropriation of effort as a sign of success. Notice too the context in which it happens. Poor starve while rich eat 5 foot cakes. Would it still be a sign of success were everyone to have a 5 foot cake and Ferrari? No. Is an iphone or anything else that once would have been considered a technological marvel but is now ubiquitous considered a sign of success? No. It just that slow stupid piece of crap that won’t do what you want it to but would have been horribly costly at one point in history. Even a shibboleth of success at one point. Even going with the Ferrari analogy you can probably now get a car for under 30,000 that could outdo an early Ferrari. That normal car isn’t going to be a sign of success. So my point is perhaps unassailable. Sociopathy is the norm. It is ingrained in the very fabric of what drives people. People strive to succede and success is, in most cases a sign of something quite vile. Who established this sorry norm? The people themselves.

    • 344thBrother says:

      A Name: “it seems likely an engineered eepidemic and I do wonder if there would be a set of people so base that they’d actually do such a thing as induce an autistic social paradigm to create the fractured and controlled society they seek. ”

      My opinion, yes, there are people that base. And, probably there are people at the top, (psychopathic types like Kissinger) who would rejoice in creating such a fractured and controlled society. I envision the reports of Henry running through the halls of the White House during the Christmas Bombing of North Vietnam (Which he ran) giggling and clapping his hands like a small child over the joy of deciding what targets to hit that particular day. Also the plans for the “Necklacing” of Vietnam with 50 nukes comes to mind. To me this transcends feckless disregard and achieves batshit murderous craziness. Something the Neo/Ziocons and International Banking cartel and their ilk seem to share with Henry.


  15. I gotta ask. Does it even really matter if one is trully a psychopath or not? There was that part about
    ignorant and gullible masses. I’ve noticed that pride allows the so called good people to do evil things so long as they can belittle, and not even necessarily demonize, those they can get away with doing it to.

    I recall this case in California where a cop beat a homeless man to death for waving his hand in the cops face. If I recall correctly the cop basically had NO defense in the case. But he was let off by the jury. If that cop had beat some fancy pants usurer to death probably would be in jail right now. He was shunned out of a restaurant at one point.

    But my point is that psychopathy is normal behavior. They only care about maintaining the social order that feeds them. They care little about right or wrong.

    • candideschmyles says:

      I would say we can and should use the word. Moving the stubborn apathy of ordinary Mr & Mrs Jones is notoriously difficult yet some key words, like psychopath, resonate all the way down to the amygdala. There are few such key words to stimulate the masses. Being able to accurately define and associate our beloved leaders as psychopaths is emenintly useful in swaying the swayable.

      • Good point candid.

        I believe I commented on this somewhere else here previously. One thing however, that I think is useful if it can be extracted and distilled from the argument is the fact that there’s a scientific basis for evaluating psychopathy as a neurological disorder. This, in my opinion, makes including the concept as part of a larger discussion about the phenomenon useful. However, as you pointed out, without sufficient tact, the term/condition and all its implications, run the risk of becoming trivialized and vague. Or perhaps a better way to put it would be: that these factors will remain trivial and non-descript in the manor which they typically are and have been used the vast majority of the time.

  16. chris bagg says:

    While this discussion of psychopathy in government is a tempting topic, I think we should keep in mind Hannah Arendt’s phrase “the banality of evil” which she used to describe the role of Adolf Eichmann in implementing the Nazi Holocaust. With this concept, she raises the question of whether psychopathic evil is a radical departure from the norm of human behavior, or simply the tendency of ordinary people to obey orders and conform to mass opinion without considering the consequences of their actions. Often, people we may consider “psychopathic” privately justify their behavior on the grounds that they are, when all is said and done, serving the greater good of their fellow citizens, and conforming to the bureaucratic norm of their day. Her phrase aptly describes the mind set of many nazis and ordinary German citizens when they participated in the extermination of communists, homosexuals, Jews, and gypsies. It may also describe the mind set of people like Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Philip Zelikow, Barry McDaniel, Duane Andrews, and all the rest of their 911 coconspirators.

    In fact, as remo suggests above, this American mind set may bear more than just a passing resemblance to its nazi precursor. At its very inception, the American CIA and Deep State were shaped by actual Nazis imported from the collapsing Third Reich. With the cooperation of the two Dulles brothers, a Nazi general by the name of Reinhardt Gehlen was recruited at the end of the war to set up an anticommunist network inside Russia. Later the Gehlen organization was transferred to West Germany, becoming its first intelligence arm, the BND. Eventually Gehlen’s agent, Otto von Bolschwing was tapped to work for Dulles’ OSS. Bolschwing had been a captain in Himmler’s SS and Adolf Eichman’s superior in the Nazi hierarchy. For a detailed discussion of this topic, and its connection to the Kennedy assassination, see this link, from the archives of Mae Brussell:
    This article was printed in the first issue of a magazine put out by Larry Flint called “Rebel”. As an interesting aside, it was not because of Flint’s past as a publisher of pornography (Hustler Magazine) that an attempt was made on his life, but rather because of his interest in the Kennedy assassination. Just prior to the shooting that left Flint paralyzed, he had put out a one million dollar reward for information that might once and for all solve the mystery of Kennedy’s murder.
    For more articles by Mae Brussell, see this:


    • Hi Chris,

      ” Her phrase aptly describes the mind set of many nazis and ordinary German citizens when they participated in the extermination of communists, homosexuals, Jews, and gypsies…”- I’d go further and include the US citizens who support mass murders (wars) committed by their psychopathic government (with their votes, taxes, silence …) around the world, the black sites, Guantanamo, illegal surveillance, prison system …

      “At its very inception, the American CIA and Deep State were shaped by actual Nazis imported from the collapsing Third Reich ..”- Some argue that it is actually backwards. Hitler’s model was Eugenics’ system/operations/guidelines in the US.

      • chris bagg says:

        Just as you point out, Sibel, the ideology of the Eugenics movement was indeed exported from America to Nazi Germany. Here is an article that traces that history in detail:
        One has to wonder who the real enemy was in World War Two. The Nazi party was funded from the very beginning by American financiers like Prescott Bush and John Dulles. Without their loans it is doubtful that Hitler would have gained control of Germany. Indeed, it was the Dulles brothers themselves who dictated the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, leaving a prostrate Germany open to Hitler’s demagoguery. Was America’s nascent Deep State secretly creating a proxy army to roll back the tide of Bolshevism in Europe? Why did we wait until the Nazis were losing their war against the Soviet Union before committing US forces to the western front? Was it a last ditch effort to keep the Soviets out of Western Europe? Were we in fact salvaging a failed policy goal, and interposing the Allied forces between the Soviet Union and Western Europe, leaving the world with the infamous “iron curtain” and the cold war? Perhaps, as we see from the recent developments in the Ukraine, Fascism is not so un-American after all.

        • Totally pertinent Chris .Thanks . the odious Nuland/Pyatt/McCain/Svoboda/PravySector, 5 Billion USAID dollars put into the brutal coup by Nuland, the maidan sniper provocateurs..this IS nazi..this IS collaboration. NATO/ are active and deployed in alliance with and as fascist force in Ukraine right now. The kill teams are out.

 is an extraordinary document – of great value.

        • Chris,

          Many good points here. You encapsulated more articulately a couple of comments I just made a bit higher up. While Psychopathy has a scientific basis that we can observe at this point with brain imaging technology, the temptation to refer to the social implications of psychopathy as a “phenomenon”, fails to take into account the scale and scope in which this applies to society at large on account of numerous factors. Not just the top down structural indoctrination which perpetuates a grim state of affairs, but the vulnerability at much of the core of the human condition, which allows any of us, despite our best intentions to become unwitting tools in the maintenance of and propagation of the core infrastructure of a morally bankrupt system which in numerous ways paves the way to our own demise; not just figuratively, but in many cases, such as nuclear warfare, quite literally.

      • 344thBrother says:

        ”- Some argue that it is actually backwards. Hitler’s model was Eugenics’ system/operations/guidelines in the US. – Going from memory here Watson, Cold Springs Harbor, Mengele? I think it was Martin Borhman (sp) who got away with the elite Nazi loot. I have read and seen evidence that Martin very quickly after that, opened 700 international corporations. That would explain a lot if it’s true. I think it probably is, at least. The whole Boys from Brazil thing. Mengele. Paraguay. The Bush Ranch right near Sun myung Moon’s 900,000 acres (don’t quote me on that figure). Right over one of the biggest aquifers in South America.

    • The illegal extraction of Eichmann by Israel from Paraguay(I think), a very important thing when it comes to understanding modern Israel. Eichmann was in a soundproof glass cage during his “trial”. This is obvious as to why they did so, they didn’t want him to say certain things. I’ll leave them up to your “imagination” (knowledge) because he definitely had things to say that would have embarrassed Israel, the US, and the whole world order existing then and now as to what exactly happened in 44-45 when germans themselves had problems finding something to eat, including Wehrmacht and SS and the diseases spreading like typhus in the work “concentration” camps. He would not have denied there was extermination camps, but they were for people unfit to work…which included germans, poles, estonians, people from anywhere they conquered. He would have said that 6 million jews is a lie, and he was the most well placed person to know that, being he was just a functionnary with lists of people with their personal info and the IBM punch cards containing them when the paperwork got too large. And I bet he would have said many other things I don’t know/many people don’t know at all if allowed to even speak during trial.

  17. A Heads Up:

    1- We are getting ready to record our new first episode of BFP Roundtable Series with Pearse and Guillermo. Let’s see how we overcome a bunch of technical issues/questions … our first experiment! If all goes well, it will be up by this Monday. Our first introductory episode will be open to all. After that, starting with our second show, only BFP activist members will have access.

    2- I received a question from a few of our current members re: the change in our subscription fees. The change only affects the coming/new BFP members. Our current members’ who are subscribed to recurring program will always have the same rate (the rate under which they subscribed). So, the change will not affect you in any way. This will be the case for the future as well: everyone maintains their rate indefinitely. Sounds good?

    • BennyB says:

      Sounds good =]

      • BennyB says:

        Gee Sibel, I know this really great non-profit group that can help you out so you can just focus on running the site and not worry about having to charge membership fees. Just think of how much you could do with that kind of support… 😉

    • This is something I raised with you in the contact form and never received an answer. I’m a member since several months and I now pay more and with the dwindling Canadian dollar these days (it’s getting to the point where online shopping is not worth it in a lot of cases now at 0,80 for the 1 US dollar And credit cards have their own exchange rate which is always a bit more disadvantageous. Anyway I won’t speak of this more here, not the place for it.I had to resubscribe after Sibel suspended my account for reasons that were never explained after multiple filled contact forms. But it’s okay, I won’t raise hell for a dollar and a half raise.

  18. A Name says:

    Oh, I’ve had an idea that will make these comment sections easier to navigate.

    Make it to where people can, when logged in, highlight posts in a color of their choosing, and highlight the entire post square that is. That way they can crunch things down faster and draw their attention to only the posts that need them instead of having to sift through it all each time.

  19. Mihiri Lim says:

    I came across this article from the guardian (UK) last year regarding how the English boarding school system creates the political leaders of this country.
    It describes how ‘ Boarding children invariably construct a survival personality that endures long after school and operates strategically. On rigid timetables, in rule-bound institutions, they must be ever alert to staying out of trouble. Crucially, they must not look unhappy, childish or foolish – in any way vulnerable – or they will be bullied by their peers. So they dissociate from all these qualities, project them out on to others, and develop duplicitous personalities that are on the run, which is why ex-boarders make the best spies.”
    My question is just as there is a school system that creates docile, gullible, easily charmed host subjects do you think there is another school system that creates the parasitic, emotionally detached highly motivated and driven psychopathic rulers? If so is this a well thought out, intentionally created dual system to perpetuate the concentrated power within the ruling psychopathic elite?

    • candideschmyles says:

      The mechanics of dynastic success no less. Glad you brought it up,

    • Mihiri,

      I guess, as with many topics like this, it goes back to the good-old question of ‘Nature vs. Nurture.’ Another similar example: those who get accepted into Univ secret societies and clubs such as skull & bones. You have the possess and show certain traits in order to get ‘in.’

      • The higher up the ladder you the lower your standards of morality and humanity go. Anybody with a moral compass reaches a point where, when they look down and recognize how many terrible things they’ve done to get to where they are, their desire to keep climbing diminishes. The skull and bones variety never stop to look down.

        Psychopaths have no empathy or ethical standards therefor they have no reservations about doing anything whatsoever to achieve their objectives, just so long as they don’t get caught. Furthermore, the hereditary nature of psychopathy contributes to the dynastic characteristic of the elite; the Bushes, Rockefellers, Rothschilds etc . I guess that’s why groups like skull and bones base much of their process of admission based on “who you know” and what family you come from. Same thing with the British elite schools. The “weak” get weeded out along the way. By default, those in their immediate circles are psychopaths who share the same general principles (or lack thereof), therefore they insulate themselves from the risk of having their agendas exposed. They compete with each other for power, but only within the relative parameters of the larger agenda as a whole. Nobody within these groups reports monsters like these pedophiles for example, probably because it doesn’t really matter to them; it doesn’t pertain to their immediate interests. Again, just so as long as they don’t get caught, which the level of power and influence they have ensures that they aren’t.

        • Your first sentence here is basically one of the lessons in Breaking Bad (Sibel, Dexter is/was a crappy show), Breaking Bad goes deep into the human psyche and Walt’s (the main character, chemist with a doctorate married to an emasculating woman, with a son with cerebral palsy, not to mention his very demanding wife does not bring a cent in the household, tries to be a writer, made a book of short stories and just put herself in debt to the publisher because they did not sell at all, and a lung cancer (supposedly inoperable) diagnosed on the first episode at his very 50th birthday….we see the transformation of a man who does reach the top of the ladder in the worldwide meth kingpin he’s become with extreme trauma even before his DEA bro in law finally catches up that the guy he has been chasing for a year and a half is his own brother in law…and apparently that would end your carreer in the DEA after you solve such a case. Once he sees the actual pile of cash his wife is unable to launder fast enough in a self storage unit, he loses all the joys he had being the Man (and shortly after his damn bro in law finds proof, but not solid enough proof to put him in prison). Anyway I won’t spoil it more, but watch this on your Netflix :p not Dexter. Breaking Bad is a very moral show, that ends up showing that well, in this case, just one man and his partner end up in trouble so grave time after time they kill people and rationalize it (most of the time they are much more evil people than them, actual psychopaths but some accidents where children get in the way…accidentally). Anyway I gotta stop spoiling, but this show was so popular because it attracts pretty much the whole mosaic of humanity because of how it is written, filmed, directed. It’s like a 78 hours long movie about the lack of compassion that makes what the american health system is based on unlike all other industrialized countries who have single payer (he never would have needed to become a meth manufacturer in Canada let’s say). But he has flaws, at first are just misplaced pride (refusing rich ex-university researcher friends help who are billionaires job and money to have an insurance good enough to pay for the treatment, which miraculously goes well for him.

          But by the time he’s got enough money to leave his family considering he was thinking he was a dead man who did horrible things (already had some murders under his belt) his doctor says he reacted so well to chemo his tumours shrunk 80% and he can now have a lobectomy. His reaction? Punching his reflexion in a metal towel dispenser in the washroom until his knuckles were extremely raw and the dispenser really crushed. After that well, he loses his soul more and more, committing or excusing his employees heinous crimes to his partner who is a very sensitive young man.

          There’s a book I have where 5 either psychologists, psychiatrists or psychoanalysts analyze the show in those scientific angles but also in philosophical angles. 4 out of 5 ends up saying even though he commits some kind of redemption at the end, he’s hurt too much people directly or indirectly to ever be redeemed, but then again he saves his ex partner from neo nazis torturing him and enslaving him into cooking meth, he was Walt’s assistant so he can come up with almost as good product as his ex partner turned enemy.

          There is so much to that show, where we see psychopaths, and persons who almost become psychopaths (Walt), so to me, it is either ingrained from young age until it is like if it was a naturally occurring phenomenon like many of the antagonists he encounters through the show, including his supposed good-doer DEA brother in law, who’s also pretty much enslaved by his pride and hubris but has a more friendly demeanor than Walt but he isn’t a psychopath. I highly suggest watching the show or if skeptical, read Breaking Bad and Philosophy: Badder Living through Chemistry (Popular Culture and Philosophy). It’s a masterpiece like I think we will never see again (the show) and it touches the very subject at hand here and others (drug prohibition, police abuse of the citizenry, healthcare, drug abuse, grief, friendship, human nature, good vs evil and family.

      • Sibel:
        I think Existentialism coined the term “brute reality”, any way I like the term.
        Here is some sobering brute reality concerning psychopaths –it may give a one a different perspective:
        Based strictly on my studies, psychopaths can be graded in degrees of severity. Robert Hare has devised a testing method, for example.
        Approximately 4-5% of humans are qualified as psychopaths; the most intense is called an “essential psychopath”. Lobaczewski and fellow psychiatrists claim .5% of humans are essential psychopaths.
        Brute reality: there are about 2.4 million people working in the Federal Executive Dept. of USA.
        and doing the math we get over 100, 000 psychopaths of which 12,000 are essential psychopaths.
        So what’s my point? Once you do some research, you begin to see that psychopaths are basically everywhere.
        If you rely on your “gut feeling”, literature, and sophisticated magazines, MSM, the very word “psychopath” is used to describe high powered persons, greedy bankers, serial killers, the elite, key players of the deep state, etc. “The SOB is a f******g psychopath!!” Or among the polite, “Yes, it does appear that Van Gogh was, indeed, a psychopath.”
        This tells me at least three things: 1. We tend to use the word to describe the Kissingers and Cheneys of the world and 2. don’t fully realize how many psychopaths there are in our home town.
        or county. 3. The brute reality( a reality with a certain intensity, which you ignore at your peril) is a damn hard one to fully accept–namely, psychopathy among us is always at work and does indeed destroy the host. One of the key features of a garden variety psychopath is that he has no concern about the consequences of his action. This is why earlier I mentioned that the discovery and deeper understanding of psychopathy is to understand, in great part, why civilizations, sooner or later collapse. Some(me included) sit very uneasy regarding civilization itself. It is sooo easy to bring down a structure(entropy) as opposed to painstakingly building it(negative entropy).
        excuse typos

        • 344thBrother says:

          ‘Brute reality” I like it. I’m confronted by it (or a flavor of it) all the damn time. It seems to be my mental vehicle.

          Would you please give some examples of “Essential Psychopaths” I assume that these would be the power elite who murder and molest children at will and launch wars etc. . and, why do these people act out so much? Is it because they’re trying to feel something? Anything?

          Lastly, you wrote: “Some(me included) sit very uneasy regarding civilization itself. It is sooo easy to bring down a structure(entropy) as opposed to painstakingly building it(negative entropy).”

          Boy howdy and AMEN to that brother.

          Take a brand new Ferrari see how hard it is to really make it haul ass down the road in full control.

          Take the same Ferrari and see how hard it is to drive it over a cliff. My belief is that this is essential to the way these “Leaders” operate. They start something and pump it up into a bubble. BIIIIIG bubble. They know it can’t sustain itself, so when they’re ready, they jerk their money out of it, bet heavily against it and watch it implode while gathering up their easy winnings. 911, perfect and concrete example in the real world.

          It is so much easier to destroy than create and grow.

          peace freedom truth justice

          • Brother:
            As much as I would like to–I cannot give you an example. According to Babiak and Hare(Hare designed an actual test–Psychopath Checklist or PCL) the suspect needs to be studied in real time by Psychologists, and experts. There is an actual list of key criteria that apply to all psychopaths and reflects the degree of psychopathy.
            The “essential psychopath” was coined by Lobaczewski and fellow psychiatrists who knew of or experienced Nazi horrors. Lobaczewski is Polish, studied psychothapy, and came up with another term, “Ponerology”–the study of political evil–a pathocracy!
            So, I would assume that an essential psychopath would get a maximum score(on the PCL,a low score may siginify a non-psychopath).
            Interestingly, virtually all of us have lied, kept secrets, manipulated people, etc. But this is done once and a while for most and normal people would usually feel guilty, remorse.
            With a garden variety psychopath; secrecy, lying, coldly calculating, mirroring persons to create Masks, etc., etc. is a 24/7 non stop flow–similar to another species, yet still called human.
            FYI, there are several neo cons and war lovers I WANT to call SOB psychopaths, but scientifically, I cannot say for sure.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hi Ron,
            “FYI, there are several neo cons and war lovers I WANT to call SOB psychopaths, but scientifically, I cannot say for sure.” — If it quacks and walks like a duck…

            “Psychopathy,” is multifaceted reference for something often described as “evil.” I’ve not dug deeply into materials you’ve so kindly reported. As a professional psychologist with a penchant for philosophy of science, the term is not quite testable or falsifiable, to my taste. for numerous reasons. That’s not cause to stop our epistemic investigation. Science is anarchistic, and knowledge social. We are already way deep into this, no reason to stop now.

            One thing about some who’ve been called psychopaths is brain damage. I remember studies of homicidal psychopaths who suffered brain injury in childhood who had a lower stress response decreased when they were violent. Commonly called “cold blooded killer.” Probably similar to NFL Star Jovan Belcher Had Brain Damage at Time of Murder-Suicide. And, so many other environmental factors can shape.

      • 344thBrother says:

        @Sibel re Skull and Bones you posted “the good-old question of ‘Nature vs. Nurture.’ Another similar example: those who get accepted into Univ secret societies and clubs such as skull & bones. You have the possess and show certain traits in order to get ‘in.’”

        To get in you have to be vetted and sponsored by a previous member… so there you go with nurture. It explains how GHWB and GWB both wind up in Skull and Bones and supports the theory that psychopathy runs in families (and circles I would add).

        There I go, yet again, with the shallow obviousities!
        guilty as charged

        • 344thBrother says:

          Thanks for the reply on essential psychopaths, it was enlightening even without a clear example.

          This brings me to a further “Nature vs Nurture” question (Questioning my own answers here).

          So, every “Normal” person has done things in their lives that they’re not proud of for sure, but when a “Normal” person is placed into a position of comfort and power and prestige, this must be a set up for them to do more and more of these types of things. If they stay in that employment long enough I bet they’ll be less conflicted about doing more and more heinous things to protect their “personal investment in political power”. So, over time, I’m guessing that it would be almost natural to become more of a “Developmental-psychopath”… So there you go with the “Nurture” argument. In a position of pathological power, one embraces that power or falls by the wayside. Right?

          Sometimes I wish I could use clearer language.

  20. A Name says:

    After reading chapter 3 it seems there are many types of psychopath.

    1) the in control wierdo going about grooming the situation to his advantage. Like Donald if I remember the fat mans name right. The type like Ron mentioned above.

    2) the peon type who will do what it takes to fit in like the Nazi Germany citizenry. These types are possible to reform sometimes as they mature, not in age but wisdom. But are still very dangerous. They tend to portray their psychopathy and apathy as just.

    Both seem like animals to me. Just different breeds.
    Theres probably more types.

  21. JAMES ROBBINS says:

    I would commend for reading Antony Sutton on the deep state, Hitler, Wall Street, and Bolshevism.

    Let’s think of the political spectrum in terms of zero percent (anarchy) to 100% totalitarianism, rather than fascism to communism….both fascism and communism are at the totalitarian end of the spectrum, neither espouse liberty but instead involuntary slavery, i.e. indentured servitude to the state. Nazism is National Socialism. Communism is International Socialism.

    Kissinger’s code name in the SVR nee~KGB is BOR.

    Literally psychopathology…the study of psychopaths…psyche…the soul…

    Relation of entropy to evolution. .evolution is devolution…not ascending but descending…from order to chaos.

    Ptysorkin(sp?) at Harvard pointed out the psychopaths in the US government.


    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi James,
      Welcome to the group. You write, “..both fascism and communism are at the totalitarian end of the spectrum, neither espouse liberty but instead involuntary slavery, i.e. indentured servitude to the state. Nazism is National Socialism. Communism is International Socialism.”

      I beg to differ on many counts. First, there has never been a genuine communist government, in part, because Marx’s political ideas for government were not nearly as prescient as his economic and political analysis. So, when we speak of a ‘communist’ state it must always be qualified. It appears you have not read Marx and Engels, because they espouse freedom, and liberty, further they attempt to provide some economic parameters of which would foster those qualities.

      Second, socialist theory is not the same as communist theory, although there are similarities. To conflate these the way you do loses precision, and starts to sound as as if you don’t know what you are talking about. Defining what you terms before espousing huge overlaps, and identical meanings will help; to not do so diffuses any incisive argument.

      Third, “Nazism is National Socialism,” is accurate only in that’s what they called themselves. Nazi fascists used ‘socialism’ the way Stalin & Mao used ‘communism.’ The Third Reich was fascist, and only ‘socialist’ in name. Many people use the term “socialist” or “communist” as a jingoist epithet without knowing their political history and theory.

      Fourth, seems you don’t understand the meaning of “anarchy,” which is not technically on the political spectrum at all. It is a set of ideas of about characteristics of an ideal polity.

      • Steven:
        You are flirting with an ad hominem…just kidding. lol

      • Believe it or not the Nazis, National Socialist German Worker’s Party had a left wing in the 20’s and early 30’s, but they were purged. Read up on the Strasser brothers. I’m surprised to read this kind of ignorance here. It was indeed national socialism. Socialism for only one “race” they approved of. Unemployment and being forbidden of owning a business at first, slavery later, for everyone else.

        • steven hobbs says:

          Hi Marty,

          “.. Nazis, National Socialist German Worker’s Party had a left wing in the 20’s and early 30’s, but they were purged.” — Agreed.
          To what extent those purged (or those who remained) were quintessential “socialists” may be debated. This remains as questionable as, for example, describing Democrats as “democratic”. I will tell you this, undefined labels often lead to numerous confusions, and are an easy rhetorician’s tool.

  22. well. If Marcin Mamon has it right, those different breeds are now all fighting alongside each-other under BREEDLOVE’s gush,
    in UKRAINE.
    (“Mamon is a Polish documentary filmmaker who has produced a number of documentaries about Chechnya, such as The Smell of Paradise with Mariusz Pilis in 2005, for the British Broadcasting Corporation’s Storyville program. He is also openly sympathetic to the cause of the Chechen separatists against Russia in the North Caucasus.
    Mamon’s travels to Afghanistan and his interaction with Chechen separatist fighters have resulted in the Polish filmmaker having contacts with the ISIS/ISIL/IS/DAISH/DAESH inside Syria and Turkey. This extraordinarily led him down a new path to Ukraine.”)

  23. NATO Commander Philip BREEDLOVE is reported saying : “I support the consideration of using offensive weapons to change the decision calculus on the ground (in Donbass) and to facilitate bringing our opponent to the table for a solution, a final solution”
    ISIS is reported fighting in Ukraine alongside the very same Nazi who’s grandfatherSS did Babi Yar .
    Who USAMO/BREEDLOVE is working with right now. As is NULAND and McCAIN. That is Cain, son of Mc.

    the IBM tattoo machine.
    wants us all this time.

    • Remo:
      Breedlove, Nuland, and McCain are full blown sadistic, clinically psychotic, warped, cold-blooded, lying, deceiving, secretive, power obsessed semi-humans!! Hell, today I will call them psychopaths.
      What they have done and will do is infuriating and depressing. Thanks for your truth to power.

      And to Brother Dave, I do seem to know of 3 psychopaths.

      • steven hobbs says:

        Hi Ron,
        I don’t doubt that. This trio of showcase attack dogs are possibly dangled for estimating countervailing force reediness, and domestic market consent. This hydra has so many appendages, to say nothing of the unnoticed nascent Afro-Com.

      • 344thBrother says:

        You won’t get any argument from me on those 3. @steven: Yeah all that too.

        • Lindsay Graham is the creepiest of them all, just seeing him on TV and hearing what he says makes me shiver in disgust. He should just die already if he hates the world so much, soulless fat ginger.

  24. A Name says:

    How do you recognize and call out the psychopathy in society, the psychopathy of the chattel, while at the same time not diluting the meaning of psychopath to the point of making it seem okay to be psychopathic?

    There needs to be some way to make it uncool.

    • candideschmyles says:

      Lol, I think being called a psychopath would feel pretty uncool to anybody. Except perhaps by a few actual or wannabe psycho’s.

      • The point was to make it uncool as psychopath while distinguishing it from psychopath and still drawing attention to psychopathic qualities.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi A Name,
      You raise several important points that indicate how important it is to distinguish between the host and the parasite, so to speak, and the relationship between them. I’m beginning to think we are in need of a new language to describe features of the dynamic between psychopathy in action, a relational response in society, and the situated existential circumstances of this evolving dynamic. It also seems that such a project — generative of a new knowledge base — would benefit from horizontal attention to critical epistemic ideas from other groups such as feminism, and indigenous studies. For example, it would be great if we could come up with a more informative term than “sheeple.”

      • Steven:
        I will second that.

      • 344thBrother says:

        RE Sheeple:
        I had to look here for “Sheeplike”

        I found these particular synonyms instructive “law-abiding loyal respectful subservient”

        It still doesn’t give us a good replacement for sheeple though.

        A little more from that page that looks interesting:
        “The more usual I.E. word for the animal is represented by ewe. As a type of timidity, from O.E.; the meaning “stupid, timid person” is attested from 1542. The image of the wolf in sheep’s clothing was in O.E. (from Matt. vii.15); that of separating the sheep from the goats is from Matt. xxv.33. To count sheep in a bid to induce sleep is recorded from 1854. Sheep’s …”

        “To count sheep in a bid to induce sleep” Maybe it’s a stretch, but we know Hitler purposely had his big rally and speeches timed to come after a hard day’s work and dinner because the sleepy are much more susceptible to suggestion. And, In these gigantic numbers, the impetus to conform must have been immense.

        Anyway, there’s that

        • 344thBrother says:

          I KNOW I KNOW!
          (Flock of sheep-people) = Fleeple!
          Think it’ll catch on?
          Kind of like the Farkle family
          Meep and Sleeple Fleeple .
          and… Freeple Fleeple HI!

          Hey it was free!
          You get what you pays for.

  25. A Name says:

    I don’t know what horizontal attentions is and yet again I forget what epistemic means.

    But for a term how about psychopathic sub?

    Makes sense since for example, the subservient population of Nazi Germany held the same psychopathic.views and feelings of Hitler’s or at least what he espoused. They hear it and follow. Enjoying their subservience in return for the fulfillment of their psychopathic dreams.

    Although I kind of hate calling them subservient. They did have a choice. They could have just not followed him. They chose to be subservient even in light of the wickedness of nazi-ism.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Hi A Name,
      “I don’t know what horizontal attentions is and yet again I forget what epistemic means…But for a term how about psychopathic sub?” — By “horizon attentions,” I was referring to other groups (not DS) which may have similar sensibilities, but a different way of (“epistemic”) knowing unique to their situations, for example indigenous peoples oppressed by an overlord who not only doesn’t understand them but actively seeks to dumb them down, and remove their language, culture, and historical linage.

      • steven hobbs says:

        “psychopathic sub” is an interesting suggestion, “sub” is usually used in BDSM context. And, in that context a “sub” enters into a power exchange contract (hopefully) fully conscious of it’s gravity. So, not quite apt for our purposes.

        • A Name says:

          But perhaps it would impress upon people that they should be more aware in a twisted sort of way?

          Maybe more than one term is needed to popularize the concept?

    • candideschmyles says:

      Why do people get behinds tyrants… Its a complex question and no doubt has complex answers I could not hope to elucidate concisely here. Hitlers rise was however born of extreme austerity imposed to make war reparations for the previous war. Perhaps this combined with a bruised national ego is too simplistic but sometimes the law of averages alone means answers will be simple and obvious.
      Perhaps we can see why by looking at Putin who despite his tactical genius and the strange respect people like us tend to give him for standing up to NATO, is nothing other than a thug in a sharp suit. And Russia will be able to count itself lucky if his time is not marked down in history as a time of darkness.

  26. A Name says:

    You know, a psychology term would work best. Psychopathic…. What would be a technical term that describes the psychopathy of the masses, not letting them off the hook for their role in the evil, while at the same time noting their follower status and not diminishing the psychopathy of the round men of the world?

  27. A Name says:

    I don’t know if this can safely be answered, but is round man now seriously a high school teacher?!

  28. BennyB says:

    @A Name in particular, but more generally, those partaking in the discussion on the subject of psychopathy:
    I left a link somewhere here earlier pointing to a video someone created which discusses books on psychopathy that they’ve read and are reviewing. I didn’t push the video that much, in some ways because I feel that the woman who created it might be off putting for some of you, particularly in relation to some of the subject matter she covers in other videos. However, listening to this conversation and having spent a decent amount of time considering the issue of psychopathy, including other videos which this woman, Doreen Dotan, has made on the subject matter, which is of particular interest to her given the existence of psychopathy in her family, including one of her children, very informative and I’d say worthwhile.

    At any rate, I found the following video which I’ll post the link for, pretty accessible and insightful as part of an examination of the topic. There are certain effects that just committing time to thinking about psychopathy which I think are worth keeping in mind as you research and contemplate the topic.

    Again, @A Name: I’m not trying to single you out in any way, I just see from your comments that this is something that’s captured your attention and, as such, I think you may find the video some good food for thought. Beyond that though, I do recommend it in general. I’m not going to ‘rope it off’. Check it out if you feel so inclined and I’d be interested to see what any of your responses are should you choose to do so:

    • A Name says:

      Her idea of rehabilitation was a bit clumsy and grandiose.

      A societal shibboleth needs to be established that not only draws the line but forces people to stand on one side or the other, even if many will do so only to fit in. That’s what I was hoping this new naming convention would help draw

      You know. Sometimes I wonder if people mistake their desire to fit in and the subsequent discomfort of not fitting in if they don’t go along to get allong as actual sorrow. This broadens my view on the pervasiveness of psychopathy. I may have a social position that allows me to see more of this than most.

      • BennyB says:

        @A Name: I totally agree on the rehabilitation comment. It seems to me that it was in a way an attempt to step back a bit from some of her more harsh comments in other videos which express a significantly more pessimistic outlook about the prospect of psychopaths to interface with society at large in a way which is ultimately not destructive. Particularly based on her own personal experience.

        One of the points she made that really seemed to strike a chord with me was the sense that just engaging in critical thought regarding psychopathy potentially has a particularly disorienting effect on you. I experienced this, so I think it’s good that you feel that you have a certain level of immunity to that sense of disorientation.

        What I’ve observed in your comments on the topic is a recognition of the significance of psychopathy as far as explaining some of the worst social ills that colour the human condition and the relationship of control that the few are able to wield destructively over the many. I can’t remember whether it was in the video I recommend or another one, but Dotan references a quote by David Thoreau: “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root”, to express her sentiment that trying to deconstruct and counteract some of the social ills that we can see in the forms of conspiracies, covert operations, war, poverty etc, without really striking at the root factor that these are conditions stem from; the fact that the most powerful people in the highest places who dictate the policies over the masses are with few exceptions are psychopaths, limits the capacity for successful countermeasures to come to light.

        I agree with what I interpret as your effort to deconstruct psychopathy based on the importance of its implications. Of course, I may be wrong in my assessment though. I found the concept presented in the video of maintaining a certain amount of self-awareness while taking on this thought process important. With that in mind, hopefully I was able to express the bulk of what I intended to.

        • A Name says:

          I don’t know. I’m kinda dense and unreceptive.

          Anger and disgust will give the appearance of immunity.

          It was definitely a different vid. Haven’t watched the others yet.

          You know. The crux of the problem is that people with authority are put in high places. If these positions were stripped of all their clout, their holders forced to endure constant survellience via a live stream to the public, and forced to endure poverty for the rest of their lives and forced to relinquish all but subsistence levels of wealth, perhaps being unable to own anything for the rest of their lives and forced to be completely dependent on charity, I think it would weed the psychopathy out. Although you might end up with a um… how do I put it… I can’t think of the word. A zealot problem. Zealot isn’t the word I was looking for but it should work well enough. But hopefully that would be easier to deal with.

          A social rearrangement is needed. The formation of a word to demotivate people from going along with it is one part of a possible plan. But society needs a drastic restructuring. Propaganda is needed? Honest propaganda.

          Also, psychopathic institutions should be brought low. Bankers should be called usurers for example. Salesmen con artists. Politicians garbage. Go along to get alongers… Well I don’t want to cuss. Butt lickers would

        • A Name says:

          I don’t know. I’m kinda dense and unreceptive.

          Anger and disgust will give the appearance of immunity.

          It was definitely a different vid. Haven’t watched the others yet.

          You know. The crux of the problem is that people with authority are put in high places. If these positions were stripped of all their clout, their holders forced to endure constant survellience via a live stream to the public, and forced to endure poverty for the rest of their lives and forced to relinquish all but subsistence levels of wealth, perhaps being unable to own anything for the rest of their lives and forced to be completely dependent on charity, I think it would weed the psychopathy out. Although you might end up with a um… how do I put it… I can’t think of the word. A zealot problem. Zealot isn’t the word I was looking for but it should work well enough. But hopefully that would be easier to deal with.

          A social rearrangement is needed. The formation of a word to demotivate people from going along with it is one part of a possible plan. But society needs a drastic restructuring. Propaganda is needed? Honest propaganda.

          Also, psychopathic institutions should be brought low. Bankers should be called usurers for example. Salesmen con artists. Politicians garbage. Go along to get alongers… Well I don’t want to cuss… How can it be made unpopular to go along to get along and to support parasitic institutions? I wish we had a marketing person here.

          • BennyB says:

            I don’t think psychopathy can ever be weeded out, to use your phrasing. I think it’s a neurological condition, which I have no doubt has existed in some shape or form for as long as humans have existed. It seems to me that probably one of the most significant steps that could be taken to minimize the destructive capacity of this group is just to begin to recognize this condition for what it is and try to take measures not to be allured into the scheme which have been devised to keep this ruling class in power.

            I’m wary of focusing on psychopathy in a way, or to an extent where it becomes trivialized, but if there’s a way to leverage a better understanding of its existence to help people recognize, including ourselves for that matter, that in part we enable these individuals to do great harm simply by allowing ourselves to be tricked into playing their game, that’s something we ought to be wrestling with in some shape or form.

          • A Name says:

            I wasn’t suggesting weeding out as in breeding out. I wanted to flip society on its head, with the authorities brought low to to make the the servants they should be. And what proper psychopath would want to be a servant?

            Decentralization of power and disrespect for so called authority seem to be necessary key elements to keep them out of power.

            Oh! And idolization/idolatry of people. This is a big problem as they love to be treated lime that. Time to sleep. To tired to make sense.

          • A Name says:

            I want to continue where I left off. Idolatrybis a big part of this problem. Why do we put these people up on pedestals? We have these movie stars and politicians and music stars and so forth. Why even create the pedestal in the first place? It just allows those with more media control, wealth and better con artistry skills to ascend while keeping the people who would do good down.

            One example. Would you rather have some crack smoking mayor that’s actually trying to weed out waste and corruption or some smiling pretty boy like rick perry? People pay too much attention to the surface. A nice suit and tie, some success, some nice talking skills… right now the social system is set to favor these things over any real character. Why? What can be done to change this?

            That also brings me to another issue. People talk about experience as being something they want their leaders to have. But what about intent? Should we have people that know what they can do or people who know what they should do?

            And why does our sociopathic society value such thin and worthless facades? You can see this all the time with pop culture. Its almost like people like things such as being irresponsibly rich. Tak that show about celeb houses to example. Why would anyone really want to watch that, beyond curiosity anyway? This Kim kardashian stuff is another good example.

            Why do people have such shallow values and how can they be torn from those shallow values? Answering this question will be key to depowering the psychopath.

          • A Name wrote:
            And why does our sociopathic society value such thin and worthless facades? You can see this all the time with pop culture. Its almost like people like things such as being irresponsibly rich.

            Society values the facades because that’s what we’re being subliminally and overtly programmed to do. In my opinion, part of what occurs is that we have the elites shaping a culturally flat, superficial, and materialistic society, because this represents what they see as an ideal state of affairs. Due to the fact that these individuals view the world at large through a lens which omits a reflection of humanistic, spiritual, or moral values, the fact that the underlying mechanics and components which this society is built on are inhumane and ultimately even suicidal is essentially of little to no value to this class.

            In a TED talk with Bill Gates (, he discusses the idea of “innovating to zero”. He proposes a formula where C02(carbon dioxide) = P x S x E x C, where ‘P’ = People, ’S’ = Services Per Person, ‘E’ = Energy Per Service, and ‘C’ = C02 Per Unit.

            I despise Bill Gates in general, but I still found the following quote from the talk pretty stunning:

            First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3.

            I won’t go into a more detailed commentary on that statement or the talk at large. However, it goes to show that these are the sorts of people who are exhibiting the most control over every aspect of our societies and our very existence as a species for that matter. Gate’s model of an ideal “innovation” is one which revolves around ideals with no real humanistic values.

            I hear someone like Bill Gates talking at TED and I feel a sense of both revulsion and disbelief that he’s standing up in front of an audience of what you might refer to as a “typical”, perhaps ‘western’ audience, who are unquestioningly clapping and admiring his ‘brilliance’. Why? Because he’s very skillfully outlining a set of so called “solutions” in a compelling and sophisticated manner, based on an equation which is based on a core set of values (or lack thereof, which I addressed earlier) that reflects the ideas of the psychopathic/sociopathic elite class which society at large has internalized as representing their own core interests, whereas presented with a set of alternatives outside of this paradigm, most people would recognize that the elements that form equations like Bill Gates’, don’t reflect what’s really important to them. One starting point to counteract this construct is just to start asking ourselves and each other, whether this kind of social engineering truly represents our best interests. When you strip back the facade and expose it for what it is and what it represents the answer clearly would be no.

  29. Update:

    If you haven’t already, check out Tom Secker’s show- episode 1. A great show- I am looking forward to his coming shows!!

  30. Heads Up:

    Our introductory New Season BFP Roundtable video is up:

    And here is YouTube Post (After this episode we’ll only post show preview clips @ YouTube. Full videos will be only available to you BFP activist members:

    We recorded our episode 2 with Tom Secker & Pearse on Putin’s latest revelations, FSB vs nationalist, Gladio & much more!!!!

  31. mike33 says:

    We’re supposed to believe the pilot of the German Wings plane was suicidal/depressed AND a psychopath. This doesn’t add up (among numerous other things about that incident). Sorry if slightly off topic.
    Obvious cover story, but for what is the question. Governments seem to be complicit in this cover up as no one in official capacity is questioning this.

    • Ah, with him it was likely psychiatric drugs if I recall correctly. Try reading brain disabling treatments in psychiatry by peter breggin sometime. You’ll find that these drugs actually disable the higher centers of thought and awareness. They can cause people to become ridiculously apathetic, loopy might be the best word, to the point where they don’t even realize what they are doing. This would explain why his breathing and heart beat didn’t change while diving the plane into the mountain.

      That book even lists an example of challenge dechallenge rechallenge in which these SSRI’s actually caused the kind to want to shoot up a school and commit suicide when he first went on them. They took him off them and this desire went away. They put him back on and and he wanted to commit suicide again.

      And this brings me to another point to get back on topic. Society has this belief now that any negative emotional effects are wrong and should be drugged away. We have about 23%, probably more by now, of the population on psych drugs. The psychiatrists don’t care if they “work” by causing brain damage. They don’t care if they enduce violent or dangerously apathetic behavior. They don’t even care that they will actually make it harder for the patient to recover from their traumas with a damaged brain in the long run (that same book has an account of a woman who lost something like half her IQ from taking these meds. Also a story of a girl who became apathetic to the point that she lost her soccer scholarship. But her parents preferred this new version because she was easier to control and didn’t stay out late. Sick.).

      This is psychopathic behavior, the use of destructive so called treatments, to make it to where people don’t have to deal with the difficulties of life because they can ignore these difficulties by drugging themselves into a stupor.

      This brings me to another thought. It seems that we have no framework to actually help people fix problems when they want to. So they try to avoid them? Maybe i was worng in a way to say psychopathy is normal due to the pscyhopathic behavior of society. But still, without a sense of responsibility for this behavior, whether the psycopathy is induced as a dissociative effect of helpessness or not, this behavior will not stop. And it still would not fully explain the psychopathy of, let’s say, racism for example. Where a person can act kindly toward their own “kind”, maintaining their social power base just as a psychopath would, while at the same time commiting horrors toward those they view as easy targets. Racism being undeniably pervasive, especially in the past. Such psychopathy as that was certainly not the exception.

      Perhaps people ar e truly plastic and any goodness simply comes from… where?

      Perhaps were going at this backward. We wonder where psychopathy comes from and how people can be that way.

      Perhaps we should ask where goodness comes from and how to expand its influence. That can’t be done until its source is identified. How do peoplenbeclme truly empathetic and and eve more importantly sympathetic?

      • mike33 says:

        I’m aware of their apathetic effect, however this doesnt jive with a deliberate attempt to crash the aircraft. Furthermore evidence is thin on the ground and is changing every week. We were told the flight recorder was unrecoverable, now we’re told it is. We were told the plane was accelerated by the pilot on descent to crash when this would be physically impossible for a pilot to do at that rate of descent. We dont actually know anything other than the plane crashed. Everything else is hearsay and presumption – taking in faith was chiefly what the NYT has printed.

        This plays into an earlier podcast where Sibel mentioned the facts change all the time until something sticks – and by then nobody remembers all the inconsistencies.

        • A Name says:

          It could explain it. I’ve read an account of people on these drugs running over other people, in the case I read the other people was a cop, while driving. So it is possible. But there is no way to know I suppose for certain what happened.

          People ask the question of why. But why aren’t we asking the question of how to find out and how to not be tricked?

          • mike33 says:

            I fall back on instinct because its probably too difficult to describe a set formula. There probably is one, however ‘instinct’ tends to cover what we cant articulate in a reductive manner.

            With airline crashes, given the billions of dollars in contracts, not just with commercial but also with military and the cut throat competitive nature of the two major manufacturers – there’s always some obfuscation of facts.

            I dont know what happened here but I’m pretty sure the explanation given is a cover up. Most likely something wrong with the fly by wire software or the plane itself, but that doesnt mean thats what happened. My mind is open to a few possibilities, but its not open to swallowing the official story on this one given the number of conflicting statements.

          • A Name says:

            You know, was this an airbus? Airbus is big on the computer controlling the plane during emergencies. It could have gone haywire or been hacked into thinking a dive was necessary. Like in a depressurization event and I think there are other events that require a similar maneuver. I’m not an pilot so I don’t know the other events.

          • mike33 says:

            Well that’s one of the inconsistencies I was referring to. How could the pilot/co-pilot accelerate the descent prior to the crash, firstly because of the literal break neck speed would make it impossible to do anything and secondly the software wouldnt allow it.

    • 344thBrother says:

      On the IMPORTANT topic of anti-depressant/SSRI medications and wildly inappropriate behavior, I did a thorough data compilation and analysis from this database : << I wound up with 2,000 legitimate cases that I ran through various data sorts and analysis. Yes it was BRUTAL and took me a month to go through all those hideous reports. (Please pardon my inclusion of that website address Sibel.)

      I have that original analysis and anyone who is seriously interested in this issue, just let me know and I'll send some of the results I obtained in EXCEL format.

      And yes, if you're a betting person, whenever one of these seemingly unexplained bizarre (and violent) things happens bet heavily that SSRI's were involved. You can make good money. I haven't been wrong yet. (Too bad I don't bet).

      You can easily sort the data on that web site by clicking on the highlighted headings. It makes sorting and copying into spreadsheets convenient.

      There are about 2,000 new reports there that I haven't gone through. The web site owner died "Rosie" and the site no longer collects new reports.

      • 344thBrother says:

        @A Name you wrote:

        “You know, was this an airbus? Airbus is big on the computer controlling the plane during emergencies.”

        Nice observation. I suggest you pose the question that followed to the FB page of pilotsfor911truth.

        • I dont have face book. You should try it. I prefer to keep to this site as it seems safer to do so. This is a more backwoods place where no one cares what i post.

      • And doctors will try to script SSRI’s for anxiety disorders before benzodiazepines, 50 year old, extremely well studied class of anxiolytic (anti-stress/panic) drugs, like Valium, Restoril, Xanax, Klonopin. When the real reason they will be “benzophobic” is that these drugs are all extremely cheap and have generic versions, while many SSRI’s don’t, and even when they do, cost a hell lot more and when a patent is over they’ll slightly modify the molecule of an SSRI and bam they got a new one to patent! I’m probably BFP’s only resident Pharmacologist, so you can believe me or not, but I get Valium for insomnia/GAD and the side effects are non existant, the only times I tried a sample of an SSRI/SNRI, it was Effexor XR, and the starter doses are 37,5mg normally to be raised up to 75 or 150mg. 37,5mg gave me LSD trip-like pupils, nausea so bad I had to go back to the pharmacy to buy anti-emetics and felt kind of manic (unable to sleep, excited) for about 24 hours without any sleep. So you have my scientific background and personal empirical experience. Not all medication is bad. SSRI’s/SNRI’s being scripted for anxiety issues without any depression is one of the biggest scam going on.

        • steven hobbs says:

          Hi Marty,
          Thank you for the update on your tedious pharmacology review. Good for you that you digested all that data and arrived at an insightful end. More than one person tells me about wanting to switch to Valium from SSRIs, and docs say no. This statement “When the real reason they will be “benzophobic” is that these drugs are all extremely cheap and have generic versions, while many SSRI’s don’t, and even when they do, cost a hell lot more,” however, suggests a possibility of attribution error. There seems to be multiple causes for prescription fads way beyond self interest of docs for their stock in pharmaceuticals, if that’s what you are suggesting.

        • They do a lot more than that. Theyll screw up your hormones and cause severe somnolence.

          Read brain disabling treatmemts in psychiatry by peter breggin. These drugs all work by causing brain damage.

          • Uhm…I hate to bring up my job and diploma here. But no, they do not work by causing brain damage. Anything constantly shapes your brain due to brain plasticity. I know a guy who was a straight edge vegan skinhead in Boston in the 90’s, and they would have baseball bat fights with nazi skinheads and such. One time he was knocked out cold by a nazi skinhead. Doctors said he would never walk again, the man was on his 2 feet 4 years later through what was called a will miracle. Of course, this could never have happened without the anti-epileptic drugs he was scripted while basically a vegetable on a wheelchair, the same kind of drugs who are sometimes used for mood stabilization. He became a peaceful vegan militant afterwards, but that’s not difficult to imagine.

            The crackpot “all medicine is big pharma made to kill us” group of the…irate minority should not actually be here, it’s on par with christian fundies and zionism in it’s belief in dogma no matter what evidence (which many don’t have…the nuts and bolts to understand…)

          • I forgot… I’m pretty sure I mentioned elsewhere that my recollection was you had expertise on software/technology/web etc, but this reminds me that it was professional expertise regarding medication (I know; only off by a little there 😉 )

            For the record, would you care to remind me what your “job and diploma” are, in as specific or general terms as you feel inclined to do so. If your not inclined to elaborate beyond that, I understand, I’m just curious/interested to know.

          • It is not really urban legend with studies and clinical reports to back it up. Have you read the book?

        • Oh, and the benzos are quite dangerous too. Triazolam i think it was was actually shown to be the most violence inducing drug there was. Read the benzo chapter in brain disabling treatments.

          • Urban legend, like how a man on PCP beat up 10 cops in the 90’s.

            Oh and LSD makes people jump outside windows too.

          • I thought I had posted this earlier.

            But it is not urban legend when there are clinical reports and studies showing it. You may want to read that book, brain disabling treatments in psychiatry.

        • Oye, I just re-read part of your earlier comment and you’re very specific that you’re “BFP’s only registered Pharmacologist”. I feel like I’ve put my foot in my mouth so many times the last week I’m going to have to rinse out my mouth with a Dr Scholls product =p

  32. That should be “how do people become truly” in the last sentence.

  33. Also something to ponder, does psychopathy come from a position of superiority or does superiority comes from psychopathy.

    Keep in mind that superiority can be a matter of opinion. For example, saying our civilization is superior to a dead native american civilization. Very dependent on perception.

    • I think the gist of much of what I gather is that psychopaths are extremely coercive and influential and, as I just outlined in my previous comment, are able to wield their influence within the realms of the social structure they create extremely effectively.

  34. A Name says:

    Maybe dog minded is the best term to differentiate the true psychopath from the person which simply behaves in a psychopathic manner. But even this doesn’t work as these people can be just as predatory. I recall when I was in high school the kids would makes fun of this fairly severely autistic kid. But why? Some to fit in. But some simply because they liked it. Maybe I have been wrong to a degree. You’re right “In my opinion, part of what occurs is that we have the elites shaping a culturally flat, superficial, and materialistic society, because this represents what they see as an ideal state of affairs.” except this also happens on a much more common and less grandiose level. People go along with it to fit in. I think that psychopath, especially the kind that’s not quote so hard core is much more common than some may think.

    Here’s the tiering I’m using from top of society to bottom.

    1) extreme or pure psychopath

    2) common psychopath (parasitic and cruel but not as grandly or extremely)

    3) dog minded

    4) the semi awake

    5) the more awake

    I don’t think anyone is completely awake.

    Why are the dog minded more attracted to the psychopath? Reminds me of the black community, desperate for a sense of power they too often turn to what initially feels good, a destructive pop culture derived culture, instead of something less self destructive but not so glitzy and initially feel good?

    The dog minded behave as they do because they are ignorant and stupid?

    How do we crack through the stupidity to melt away the ignorance when people favor the sugar instead of the meat? So to speak.

    The only way to.make the truth more attractive than the lie is to show how ugly the lie is. But how do you do that?

    The crap has to hit the fan before anything can be done? That won’t work as the costs are already too great to wait around for that. The crap hitting the fan could be extinction. We already have two ongoing and maybe unstoppable ELE’s right now. Its already hit the fan. But these events are not so spectacular just yet as to cause the necessary alertness. And even if they did would people just fall into another Hegelian dialectic?

    • 344thBrother says:

      A Name : Define “Dog minded” please? I think dogs are getting the short end of the stick on this one. Perhaps “Attack dog minded”? “Sheep dog?”

      I’m a dog person, I think of dogs as great loving beings who just want people to love them.

  35. A Name says:

    Also I don’t mean to single out the black community. Its just been far more visibly destructive for them than others. Although this is changing and others and now joining in the same misery of being exploited.

  36. A Name says:

    The solution is to drag down the view that the dog minded have of those they look up to. A survellience society is the only way to do that. Just like is happening with cops right now.

    I really am dumb to have gone through all of that just to have arrived back at the point I was already at to begin with.

  37. steven hobbs says:

    Been noodling on different words for “psychopath.” So far completely failed — miserably.
    However, I’ve a jocularly biting neologism for a refuse-neck contextually situated within epistemic injustic. “I am Subalternet!” A Sub-Alter = An alternative perspective on epistemic rationality emerging from non-dominant groups, just add “net,” for obvious reasons. I may make a T-shirt.
    *”One way of understanding this claim is methodological: thinking from subaltern standpoints is more fruitful than confining one’s thinking to dominant perspectives. This shifts the privilege claimed on behalf of subaltern standpoints from the context of justification to the context of discovery. Another way to understand the claim is in terms of pragmatic advantages: thinking from these standpoints enables us to envision and realize more just social relations (Hartsock 1996)”*

    Some concepts new and useful concepts: “epistemic injustice”, “hermeneutic injustice”, and “combined epistemic injustice”. These concepts address some we’ve spoke of in this thread, namely: willful-active ignorance (sometimes called “stupid”), historical framework ignorance, and simple ignorance. Since there are so many flavors of psychopaths, and I’ll leave “psychopath” alone, and think about how to bestow succinctly descriptive names on sub-types, many have already been named.

  38. I like these discussions about psychology, I’d like to hear more of it. I know Sibel says she isnt an expert, but she probably knows more than most about the topic.

    I’m continually interested in the psychology of people I have online battles with on forums. The kind of mentality than cannot accept any possibility that isnt already accepted as the mainstream view. I was going to say not rubber stamped by an official authority, however there are cases where such things are but arent covered or propagated by mainstream media therefore it gets no traction when you provide actual proof to these people.

    What is it with the mentality of people that gets people like me banned from forums for being ‘provocative’ on topics relating to world events, science and politics no matter how polite I try to be?

    What is it that induces such anger when one traps an ‘opponent’ by highlighting where their logic has completely failed?

    • candideschmyles says:

      “What is it with the mentality of people that gets people like me banned from forums for being ‘provocative’ on topics relating to world events, science and politics no matter how polite I try to be?
      What is it that induces such anger when one traps an ‘opponent’ by highlighting where their logic has completely failed?”

      I think a good way to consider this is by employing the ideas of multiple universes to be found in certain branches of current theoretical physics. Those that have heard about the concept most likely think of other universes as being entirely separate realms totally disconnected from our collective experience. However what if each consciousness really inhabits their own universe where the only logical deductions to be made are those that annoy you and are shared with others who actually inhabit a universe of their own in a collective onion layer of hyper reality. So when you say they are from another planet you are actually just not thinking big enough!
      – See more at:

      • steven hobbs says:

        Hi Candide,
        “.. what if each consciousness really inhabits their own universe..” — This seems to posit solipsism, or an unstated pluralistic relativity indistinguishable from a solipsism.

        While, “..others who actually inhabit a universe of their own..,” suggests (the problem of) other minds with no indication of how the twain of minds shall meet, other than in “hyper reality.” I’m quite confused. These appear to me ontological postulates offering a different perspective for Mike, but I don’t know where they lead.

        To Mike, I say an argument that starts with adversity, usually end so. Consider having dialogues and conversations rather than debates and arguments. The former moves the ball forward with a project of discovery, the latter focused on justification tends to end flat. In other words, it’s less about being right than continuing to evolve our subalternet project. Socratic questioning is useful.

        One quote I love, “Never agree or disagree, but distinguish, distinguish, distinguish.”

        • candideschmyles says:

          Well to be human is to be a solipsistic narcisist whenever wealth gives you the luxury to afford it. So i am guilty of it for sure.

          Yet in this instance I was just being tongue in cheek.

        • Actually I dont start them as arguments and I tried to avoid a confrontational approach. However the information I provide usually results in multiple personal attacks in my direction until I’m the one blamed for provocation, when all I do is provide evidence, circumstantial or otherwise to support my positions.

        • 344thBrother says:

          “To Mike, I say an argument that starts with adversity, usually end so. Consider having dialogues and conversations rather than debates and arguments.”


          I’ve done some serious internet wars. I helped take down the official “United 93” web site and the National Geographic (Why do conspiracy theorists think the way they do) sites by simply ignoring the threats and abuse and addressing a point that they’re pushing (if any) with links that go to source documents with facts. When pictures are allowed, I post the ones that support my point without getting into name calling or debating at all.

          We had great success and both sites eventually had to close down because the official stories they were pushing were untenable. Within a few days, there were essentially no “Debaters” left and we held the field.

          And you can silently laugh at the stupidity that’s being tossed at you while it invites factual, neutral responses.

          Fun and effective.

          • 344thBrother says:

            On the flip side of my last post, however, I’ve also used this tactic in running forums, and I attracted the attention of really REALLY nasty mercenary types from “Global security” firms and they went about serious character assassination on me (All anonymous of course). Which, is right out of the Communist Manifesto playbook.

            It was brutal, and I finally had to leave the field because trying to defend myself against these shadowy (Expletive deleted) was consuming me. Even after I went silent and left the forum for good, these bastards continued to PRETEND TO BE ME and say stuff like (as me) “I think I’ll get my gun and go hunt cops today” or “I think I’ll go hang out at a school today and stalk the kiddies” and “I live at (so and so accurate description) I look like (so and so accurate description) I drive (so and so vehicle, license number such and such) come get me… yada yada.

            For a while there I was expecting a response from some doofus, but fortunately this is a small area and I’m well known in real life so no one took the bait.

            That stuff is creepy.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Hey Bro,
            “..these bastards continued to PRETEND TO BE ME and say..” — Sounds like you’ve had both some fun successes, and then some odd and scary intimidation thrown your way. Good for you getting out there and demystifying the BS at those false front sites. Looks as if you were so strong you became a target. Kinda bitter-sweet. My hat’s off to you!

  39. How would one submit a FOIA request to get a list of each drug company and the number of felonies it has engaged in? I want to make sure it is worded right.

    Also, is the following meant to deter these requests?

    “eFOIA Portal
    You are accessing a U.S. Government information system, which includes: (1) this computer, (2) this computer network, (3) all computers connected to this network, and (4) all devices and storage media attached to this network or to a computer on this network. This information system is provided for U.S. Government-authorized use only. Unauthorized or improper use of this system may result in disciplinary action, and civil and criminal penalties. By using this information system, you understand and consent to the following: -You have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communications transmitted through or data stored on this information system. At any time, the government may monitor, intercept, search and/or seize data transiting or stored on this information system. -Any communications transmitted through or data stored on this information system may be disclosed or used for any U.S. Government-authorized purpose. For further information see the Department order on Use and Monitoring of Department Computers and Computer Systems.”

    • 344thBrother says:

      “Also, is the following meant to deter these requests? ” It might deter me, depending on what it was I was looking for. On the flip side, it looks like an open invitation to hackers. “LOOK LOOK OVER HERE!”

      like that

      • 344thBrother says:

        @steven hobbs:
        Sorry i’m so late on this, I got side tracked by real life…

        Thanks for the props, and yeah I think I stung someone or a group of someone’s. I was mocking the FBI’s Fusion center in Fortuna , CA at the time and what started out to be a reasonable discussion devolved soon after I started talking about the Judi Bari bombing and how the FBI was probably complicit in it (Surely in the coverup) Look it up, it’s interesting and a very clear case of FBI misconduct at least and possibly a false flag by them or related group as well.

        Here’s a good place to start. It’s narrated by Judi Bari. You can start about 1/2 way down the website where the photo’s are and that should get you started.

        Judi won a 4 million dollar suit against the FBI for civil rights violations, but naturally the FBI just shut it’s mouth on the whole thing.

        Interesting stuff and I’m pretty sure that possibly one or more of the people involved in this crap was involved in torturing me on that forum. If you’re interested I’ll post links to the actual forum which is still up, but it creeps me out to this day. So, if you want I’ll do that.


        • steven hobbs says:

          Hi Bro,
          Thanks. Yes, it does seem FBI involved one way or another in the Beri bombing. Sometimes I wonder if rogue actor(s) so to speak, might just take such a project on themselves without higher-ups knowledge, and then have their fellows cover up for them after the fact. It would all fall in with there goals anyway, and could provide plausible deniability. Then later the “rogue” agent(s) gets promoted. In her case the FBI showed up so quickly assuming control, it is hard to imagine they were not the perps. I appreciate your offer regarding the blog, however, you’ve already provided enough of the lurid details. I’m reminded of the W.Madison report that the rigging of voting machines for 2004 election was by a rather good sized group of ex FBI.

          • 344thBrother says:

            No problemo steven.
            It’s uncomfortable anyway since they got so blatantly libelous and even reading that crap still makes me feel sick and angry at the same time.

            Thanks for taking the time to look at the stuff I posted. Yeah the Bari case was basically local and to me, clear cut, which led me to the assumption that I may have stepped on some local FBI perpetrator or “coverupers” toes, leading to the attacks.


  40. CuChulainn says:

    may i suggest an edition of Probable Cause with Doug Valentine on Sy Hersh, and this new story in particular? MoA is on the right track but check out Xymphora to see how even astute analysts can be taken in by CIA Hersh.

    • yeah my first thought is that if he’s allowed to appear on CNN then he’s been set up.

      ie fed something to be later torn down, or fed something that is minor in the relevance of the entire Bin Laden myth that really ends up just supporting the main gist of the raid.

      I think he has good intentions but perhaps he’s not equipped to deal with the cloak and dagger his own government are directing at him now.

  41. 344thBrother says:

    I would like to direct the folks here to the Processing Distortion Roundtable with Peter Collins, Guillermo and Sibel that up now! It’s GREAT!


  42. truthseeker says:

    Sibel, I’ve been a fan and member for some years now, have read both your books, and continue to steer people to you. I have to ask you to stop equating Stalin with Hitler – there is sound research published that debunks what we have been given to believe about Stalin. Grover Furr is the main US researcher, he teaches at Montclair University in New Jersey. I urge everyone here to check out Prof. Furr’s work, should be available on youtube, and his books are available online. Furr has published three books now, each one debunking the lies about Stalin that permeates the left, right and center. We need to stop taking it as a given that Stalin was a psychopath, he was not.

    • candideschmyles says:

      Even a cursory look at Furr leaves me pretty confident I should waste no more time on that. We cannot escape revisionism entirely but to try and rehabilitate dear old uncle Joe with such blatantly blind bias should only be attempted through the medium of satire. Stalins reign, his decisions and actions as a dictator, brought terrible hardship to Russia and its neighbours many many times. The west did not have to invent stuff about Stalin as just reporting the truth was sufficiently good propaganda without embellishments. In the same way that RT today only has to report the facts about American crimes against its own people and humanity itself. The most effective propaganda is the truth.

      • truthseeker says:

        With all due respect, I doubt you actually bothered to read the book. Furr’s work requires more intense study than just a cursory look. You’re doing a disservice to all if you think you know in advance what is truth and what is not. If you read Furr’s book, you would know he is not biased, and he is a good scholar. To say that the “most effective propaganda is the truth”, is meaningless in this particular context. Furr is bringing out the truth. It may not be the truth you and others want to know, but that doesn’t change the fact that these are documented, verified truths. BFP is about clearing away the cobwebs of brainwashing and disinformation we are nursed on from birth. The fascists foster the equation of communism with fascism (and of course, the fascists deny they are the fascists). So you are doing the fascists’ work for them when you refuse to look at hard scholarly research that puts the lie to their anti communism. I feel an outsider many times over, because I don’t believe the official stories, which is what brought me to Sibel and BFP in the first place. But I realized some time ago that I’m an outsider here as well, because I don’t buy into the anti communism that is promoted here. Remember in a few years, you read it here first: everything you thought you knew about the USSR and Stalin is dead wrong, is twisted history and disinformation, calculated to make even smart people reject marxism and communism. Sorry to say, this is true even in this BFP community. If there is anyone open minded here, I recommend getting a hold of Bruce Franklin’s book (now out of print) called The Essential Stalin. That is an easier read than Furr, and pretty mind blowing. I continue to support BFP nonetheless, because, frankly, there is nothing else out there questioning the official stories as well as BFP does, and also because, until I retire, I don’t have time to start my own webcast! It actually is my dream to do that someday, and I consider Sibel a mentor in that respect. And regardless of this disagreement, I do admire and respect Sibel tremendously, especially for her courage and tenacity.

        • steven hobbs says:

          Hi TS,

          “I don’t buy into the anti communism that is promoted here.. is twisted history and disinformation, calculated to make even smart people reject marxism and communism..” — I don’t really know what you are referring to by these comments. My impression is each conversation, here, has it’s own parameters. Some choose to speak off the cuff jocularly with wit, which is easily misinterpreted. I think I may have misinterpreted at least once, and put foot in mouth. No matter how intelligent or smart a listener, this single dimension flatland of words has it’s limitations. Defining our terms is most useful.

          When we speak of “isms” things get confusing quickly. As far as I know there’s been no attempt within this forum to do a thorough explication of political philosophy. We are just moving along in a spirit of discovery and creativity.

          I don’t have a lot of interest in “Uncle Joe”. I have noticed, however, some who were personally touched by his dictatorship are profoundly ideologically rejecting of any hint of ‘communism’ for whatever it means to them.

        • candideschmyles says:

          I do not represent BFP, Sibel nor anyone else here other than myself and quite why you have chosen to conflate what I said in response to you with BFP itself is a mystery to me. In good faith I did not just click on a link but sought out Furr to see what he was saying. And I stand by my asserted opinion that he is a fantastical revisionist not worthy of further time. The hardship of ordinary Russians and more so in the Soviet sattelite states was both immense and brutal directly because of Stalin as an individual. To use the intellectually redundant notions of Marxism and Communism in the same breath as uttering Stalins name is about as ridiculous as calling the Dalai Lama a Catholic. Stalin was a fascist dictator of the first magnitude . He barked commands that he knew would mean certain death for millions of his ‘own’ people. Life throughout the Soviet sphere was controlled by using scarcity as bullwhip on the people and they were whipped to death in their millions. As a boy I travelled to three nations living under the fascist hegemony of Stalins cruel paranoia and control freakery. If you think life was good there you have never witnessed its all pervading paranoia that turned daily existence into mental minefield and destroyed all community cohesiveness. As my Russian brother in law says to me “you cannot imagine it, it does not exist in the west”. But I saw enough myself to at least imagine and the terrible state of abject fear, isolation and distrust Stalin created in the daily lives of all Soviet and sattelite nations peoples. Trying to rehabilitate the architect of that demands not truth but a suspension of reason itself.

          • Candid,

            Thank you for this sincere sharing of your own experiences. Enlightening.

          • I think most agree that the USSR would have been a better example if Lenin didn’t get a fatal disease and I prefer Lenin’s friend Trotsky a lot more than Stalin, but the guy is right. First of all, did you know Stalin was a priest? Yeah, Georgian Orthodox Catholic church seminarian. That’s not a positive or negative trait, but it is something entirely ignored in western history books, for the most part, saying Stalin wanted an atheist USSR, which is false.

        • Ignore this guy, he trolls James (Corbett)’s comments in the same manner, taking 10% of someone’s point and then ranting about it. And doing that with the rebuttal, taking another 10% of it and ignoring the rest ad nauseam.

          • candideschmyles says:

            I try to keep my comments short and to the point I want to make. It may or may not be a point you think relevant or irrelevant but I don’t comment to appease your world picture.. If you thinking having a sceptical voice on these or James Corbett’s site is a problem then perhaps you are only seeking confirmation of your own infallible genius? Though someone who builds a straw man to kick down seems anything but infallible genius to me. You can can rest assured I won’t be reading your epics.

          • candideschmyles,

            For the record, I particularly appreciated what you had to say in this conversation. Your responses reflected a lot of what my initial reactions had been to truthseeker’s comments, but you brought the knowledge to back these thoughts up. Your firsthand insight from your own personal experience was particularly useful and informative. Just my two cents (not that you need it 😉

      • “We cannot escape revisionism entirely but…”

        Your discussion about Stalin aside, ‘revisionism’, as regards to history, should not be used as a pejorative. Revisionism is the only way the study of history becomes useful.

        • candideschmyles says:

          I am with you 100% on that and you are right to point it out. My language did infer some pejorative shade on the word. But only if you seek to claim it and redefine its linguistic heritage as a word. It is indeed itself a pejorative noun born to describe the Soviet State and Marxist doctrine. However I like that you want to claim it for its obvious meaning beyond what it has been used for in the past. We should be masters of our language not its slaves.

  43. Yeah. The one with the madam was interesting, but I think something happened because it is audio only. I never see any vids. Just audio. The comments don’t match up with what’s posted by BFP either. Kinda odd.

  44. Churchill. Hitler and Stalin…
    What a great time that was…
    Let us go back in time, to read A letter.
    Dear Father…!
    Kind Regards

  45. Or just another one saying…
    (The “united Islamic front” has, I may say, fallen into discredit. The Sunnis never lose an occasion for pointing out that it’s all the fault of the Shi’ahs and I take considerable pleasure in replying that the whole thing began from the Mesopotamians in Syria who were all Sunnis. At which they take refuge in God and “No doubt you know best – we’re not informed.”).

    Dear Father…
    Kind Regards

  46. Okay..Soviet State went home…
    Nice to have know You..
    Great, that you did leave me….
    And My little Island Bornholm in Denmark. Alone…
    Thank you for That…Russia.
    Iraq 1917.
    Kind Regards

  47. CuChulainn says:

    for those who imagined that Phil G. had left the Company

    • And he gives himself away in the first paragraph:

      “JFK’s assassination has the grassy knoll and second gunman, plus Mafia, CIA, and Cuban connections as well as a possible Vietnamese angle. 9/11 had the mystery of the collapse of Building 7.”

      Nice bit of conflating there throwing the “possible Vietnamese angle” of JFK with “the mystery of the collapse of Building 7.” Can we just hang a bell on him?

  48. 344thBrother says:

    @Candide you wrote: “If you think life was good there you have never witnessed its all pervading paranoia that turned daily existence into mental minefield and destroyed all community cohesiveness. As my Russian brother in law says to me “you cannot imagine it, it does not exist in the west”.”

    Yes, it is very hard to imagine, but it seems that the west is getting there in the all pervading paranoia front does it not?

  49. 344thBrother says:

    repost to mike33 to make sure you saw it.

    I FINALLY FOUND IT!!! It’s here:
    It’s great

  50. Will listen with great interest, although, seeing JFK described as a psychopath here really bothers me.

    Sure he loved orgies with women at the white house and drugs. That would mean many musicians are psychopaths…

    One of the very last speech by JFK (not the one everyone selectively quotes) he made about worldwide disarmament and a world where weapons of any kind would never be used or even exist is seen to me as a wonderful speech, very near his death too, it’s a UN address in late sept ’63…I think….James Corbett played it in one of his vodcasts or podcasts as a counter to the usual secret societies speech (which still contains a part that is very important).

    This deep state you speak of so often Sibel, its what organized his gruesome death on the brand new telescreens all americans pretty much had by then. That event is where that deep state took over, it wasn’t in control until they did away with JFK, it’s such a monumental pivot in American history where everything, EVERYTHING government and policy related took a turn for the worse (save for some environmental concerns which were minimally taken care of, even by Nixon, whom i’ll credit with acting fast to save lakes and drinking water, some lakes before his actions in the early 70’s would dissolve iron so much they were acidic, so there is at least one thing positive about Nixon….although I think he wasn’t as horrible as he is portrayed to be in much of pop culture (but that’ ssomething else). He wouldn’t bend down to Israel like LBJ and that’s one of the reasons he ended up resigning, Watergate being a sideshow to get the indignation going. Also he had crazy ideas like single payer health system…Watching all those tapes of Nixon in the white house is very interesting, his ramblings about communists were ramblings, but a lot of what he said of the kind of politicians who went to the Bohemian Grove for example was true for example, and how “we” needed to get revenge on Israel for the USS Liberty attack going as far as saying Israel picked that one NSA ship because of its name, Liberty.

    Anyways, now to listen.

    Do you believe psychopaths and sociopaths to be the same thing?

    • I’m sorry, I haven’t listened to the episode yet, but reading comments, it seems that you’re not placing JFK amongst the maniacs like LBJ, Bush Sr, Reagan, Bush Jr, Clinton, Obama….See how I left out Jimmy Carter? There is a reason for this. This man is good at heart, but he let his advisors/secretaries of X mess with his mind. I’ve read “The Golem – Israel’ss Nuclear Hell Bomb and the Road to Global Armageddon” by Michael C. Pïper….some don’t trust this guy but I do for the most part, he is friends with the ex PM of Malaysia, the one that is revered, I can’t come up with his name right now though sorry. A couple ex-generals said Carter said in the oval office when he was leading by 10 points the polls for elections that he was ” Gonna fuck the “Jews””, seems weird it would come out of the mouth of the always very polite Carter but I believe it, he wasn’t fond of Israel and like JFK wanted to prevent them from getting nukes, Carter wanted them to abide by the NPT and if they didn’t major sanctions and outright belligerence by the US would start towards Israel, not attacking it (unless the SIGINT was saying that Israel was going Samson Option or even just launch a single nuke in “self-defense”. I put that in quotes because Israel is not even a real country, it doesn’t even have a Constitution. Carter wanted the whole middle east completely disarmed, including Israel, if they would not sign the NPT (which they never did and never will, even the Chemical Weapons Use ban they signed to look good in the 90’s but didn’t ratify it in the House of Demagogues (Knesset, it’s what it means). Carter was surrounded by people he did not pick like Zbig and he had his hand forced into approving the SES ( by Kristine Marcy, a psychopath if there is one, I’m sure some here will know who she is.

      Jimmy Carter was basically sElected to be thrown in as a well meaning President while the deep state was in control as an experiment past JFK’s murder and deep state’s triumph. Just the fact that zero wars happened during Carter’s presidency, while if you look at a list of official (unfortunately it’s impossible for me to get a list of undeclared wars, except the obvious ones…) wars the US conducted since the end of WWII, you’ll notice a blank during Carter’s 4 years, well, of course ZBig got logistics started for the Afghanistan mess around the end of his Presidency (he was still winning according to polls until the last week before elections with that “october surprise”. Thing is, all US Presidents are sElected by the Royal Institutes on International Affairs (RIIA) and the Tavistock Institute, both UK “think thanks” very old think thanks, the former, probably the first one.

      Everything is being orchestrated by the inbred UK royal family and the nobility, still. The USA died in 1913, and had it’s most prosperous and general citizen happiness during Andrew Jackson’s Presidency to his death and to 1913. His epitaph on his grave is “I Killed the Bank”. The man defied death threats from british and american bankers who were friends with british bankers to force these First and Second Bank of Americas and creating money creating debt, he shut them down and escaped death twice when the obvious British controlled attempts to get rid of him would come. The US should have had their special relationship with France, like it did in its early days, that alliance being broken by the British, obviously, causing that maritime war between US and France only to attack the US on another front, from here in Canada.

      All the real scary secret societies/deep state clubs are in Britain. I kinda wish the guy who said the whole Trident subs program was fucked recently saying that a catastrophe could happen anytime with them, especially one, the Vanguard. It says it could explode on the shores of the UK even, I’m not well versed into weaponry because it disgusts me, but apparently a non-activated nuke missile could suddenly be shot upwards and fall back right on the Vanguard destroying it and it’s nuclear reactors….sometimes I wouldn’t mind…because the real disgusting slime in this world is all based there.

      Even Hitler’s half-sister wrote a book in the late 70’s where she said (the very suppressed truth) that little Adolf went to the UK for one year in 1907 and came back a completely different person. Most likely the first successful brainwash methods were used on him and some others who ended up high ranking nazisé Some claim Stalin also went to the UK the same year but that there is no reall proof of that’s available, Hitler’s half-sister’s book is still possible to buy….Sibel couldn’t write the book she really wanted in the 2000’s, which is too bad, because in the 70’s she could have done it.

      They even mess with my #1 passion in those 2 think-thanks, I think the Tavistock institute is the place that decided at what frequency music should be recorded, they changed the original frequency to a frequency that is said to be increasing anxiety and aggressivity. I guess that’s why even as a person with over 3000 vinyls and cd’s and cassettes (originals), I always prefered to go to shows where if the band is good live (some bands over-rely on studio and engineers and aren’t really tight live, they play their songs in 20 second parts and the engineer cuts, copies, pastes etc. the song into a track. Most of those who do that are excuse my language, shitty mainstream “musicians” (see how the top 10 of your local radio station probably has zero people who play instruments but only “singers”/rappers” in it. That’s why Courtney Love (and her extremely well hidden until not too long ago links to secret societies was exposed + she is a zionist jew) had Kurt Cobain killed too. KC killed 80’s meaningless pop music and ridiculous glam metal from the air and made punk and metal mainstream, many artists playing those kind of music since the 80’s suddenly could have videos (music videos were played then on emptyV) and their anarchist/individualist/etc. lyrics were broadcasted…big music execs killed what Cobain started (making real music, intense and often righteously angry songs) be on tv and the radio very often. They did it with gangsta rap, they tried to make a fake kind of metal and punk and kind of succeeded with the likes of Korn, Limp Bizkit, Blink 182, Green Day (who started legit but were hypnotized by dollar signs), Fenix Tx, Taking Back Sunday and all that crap where the clothes the people wear count more than the actual music for the fans (my ex gf saw her then favourite “metal” band that formed in the 2000’s and is on a big label owned by an arms distributor) live and after that wasn’t a fan anymore, she realized they were fakes by just seeing them for 30 minutes live. I know most people here most likely don’t care about this, but to me it matters, its part of my generation, the people who were 18 in 2000, the fact this kind of music and its lyrics were on the air gave a real vibe of something big going on, the devil himself Bush Sr didn’t get re-elected, even if he was picked to, the vote rigging just couldn’t stand to reality that time, and no it doesn’t mean these people voted for Bill Clinton, it means a lot of people stayed home, more than usual in the 18-34 group age in 1992. Hardcore Punk music and regular punk music being mainstream was a threat to national security, I know it because its what the UK said it was when the Sex Pistols and The Clash were getting big in the first wave of punk rock.

      Damn, I’ve typed a lot, sorry if its a lot to absorb or tl;dr but I just started to type what I think were 2 of the most important assasinations of the second half of the 20th century where the deep state took control and secondly said NO to an entire generation, culminating with 911 which was the ultimate “NO, You Will Not Have Life Become Easier Like Your Parents and Grand-Parents experienced, this is as good as it will get and as of now, sept 11 2001, will degrade like the infrastructure we built in the country in the 60’s and barely repair at all, with expected lifetimes of 50 years….(counting all bridges, overpasses, tunnels, city bus fleets, subway cart fleets, well they changed those, but they’re full of bugs because they’re all electronic and connected to the internet of course, to facilitate a false flag, of course.

Speak Your Mind