presentation video of Political Ponerology
- Thread starter stardust
- Start date
Very cool. One nitpick, though. Not all the faces shown had psychopathy in common. Some are/were characteropaths, and some are probably normal people who buy into the ideology of benevolent American imperialism.hoangmphung said:
I have made a PP video and promoting SOTT aswell you can watch it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33P-GBoRZlI ratings and comments are appreciated.
(thanks to the advice from Beau I have added more pictures and made the music fit it a bit better , although 1 or 2 pictures can be fuzzy.)
(thanks to the advice from Beau I have added more pictures and made the music fit it a bit better , although 1 or 2 pictures can be fuzzy.)
)
N
noise
Guest
Adam that owned! I mean that really kicked.. hmm... It really resonated with me, yeah that's what I meant. Thank you very much, that really, I dunno, pulls together a unifying perspective. The quote about the world speaking in one voice ENOUGH! heh, I'm giddish with the perspective I got from it, it really struck square and is delivered well!
I'm of the opinion that it adds to the replay value but, man you must read pretty fast. Meaning I will watch it more than once.
Thanks for sharing your videos all!
I'm of the opinion that it adds to the replay value but, man you must read pretty fast. Meaning I will watch it more than once.
Thanks for sharing your videos all!
I have doubts, which are so persistent (like struggle between yes and no) that i decided to give them a voice to calibrate a reading instrument, because i very well am biased and need a mirror.
One person whom i deem very educated and empathetic said once to me: 'You can do a thousand good deeds, but if you will commit just one mistake, people will remebmer you not by thousand beneficial things you did; but they will remember that one unfortunate mistake you did.' I think when we flash some faces on the screen and a label 'essential psychopath' appears then on that screen, we associate ALL of these faces with clinically diagnosed essential psychopathy. As responsible for our deeds humans we should be able to prove with facts of behavioral patterns, facts of moral deprivation and negligency of human moral norms that each of flashed individuals does indeed fall under psychiatric clinical category of being an essential psychopath.
I had very serious doubts about Putin being an essential psychopath when i first saw PP video, but i like shut myself up
thinking that i'm biased toward him and he is my blindspot, and if the whole group thinks that he is an essential psychopath, so it must be. But in my later trying to find any facts in his actions, his speeches, his overall 'moral outfit', his behavioral patterns i came to a complete halt. Do we have facts to support his alleged diagnosis as a clinical essential psychopath? I listened his last speech in Guatemala, and he is rationale human being with empathy, emotions, working hard to benefit his country. Overally i see him so consistently normal human being, and not falling into humanoid cathegory at all.
I think we should be extremely prudent and thoughtful when labelling this or that individual as a clinical psychopath (humanoid). Such labelling should be supported by objective facts. My problem well might be that i'm very emotionally biased toward him, that i think he in probably last hundred years is the first leader of Russia, empathetic, intelligent, hard working person for the better future of own country.
I see him as Russian Kennedy, whom history allowed to implement his policy.
Would someone please give me a mirror?
One person whom i deem very educated and empathetic said once to me: 'You can do a thousand good deeds, but if you will commit just one mistake, people will remebmer you not by thousand beneficial things you did; but they will remember that one unfortunate mistake you did.' I think when we flash some faces on the screen and a label 'essential psychopath' appears then on that screen, we associate ALL of these faces with clinically diagnosed essential psychopathy. As responsible for our deeds humans we should be able to prove with facts of behavioral patterns, facts of moral deprivation and negligency of human moral norms that each of flashed individuals does indeed fall under psychiatric clinical category of being an essential psychopath.
I had very serious doubts about Putin being an essential psychopath when i first saw PP video, but i like shut myself up
thinking that i'm biased toward him and he is my blindspot, and if the whole group thinks that he is an essential psychopath, so it must be. But in my later trying to find any facts in his actions, his speeches, his overall 'moral outfit', his behavioral patterns i came to a complete halt. Do we have facts to support his alleged diagnosis as a clinical essential psychopath? I listened his last speech in Guatemala, and he is rationale human being with empathy, emotions, working hard to benefit his country. Overally i see him so consistently normal human being, and not falling into humanoid cathegory at all.
I think we should be extremely prudent and thoughtful when labelling this or that individual as a clinical psychopath (humanoid). Such labelling should be supported by objective facts. My problem well might be that i'm very emotionally biased toward him, that i think he in probably last hundred years is the first leader of Russia, empathetic, intelligent, hard working person for the better future of own country.
I see him as Russian Kennedy, whom history allowed to implement his policy.
Would someone please give me a mirror?
CarpeDiem, do you remember when Putin praised Olmert's "virility" on his having raped his staff members?
Putin said, "What a mighty man he turns out to be! He raped 10 women - I would never have expected this from him. He surprised us all - we all envy him!" - followed by laughter. It was confirmed that he spoke these words by the Kremlin spokesperson.
Putin said, "What a mighty man he turns out to be! He raped 10 women - I would never have expected this from him. He surprised us all - we all envy him!" - followed by laughter. It was confirmed that he spoke these words by the Kremlin spokesperson.
stardust
Jedi Master
http://news.stcom.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=592
http://www.lefigaro.fr/internationa...hvili_poutine_est_un_chef_d_etat_raciste.html
http://www.diploweb.com/forum/thom2.htm
Some articles (in French, sorry) about the one who said to the french paper "Figaro" that Gandhi was his only friend !!!
When one has been part of KGB, it is difficult to not use the same ways what KGB learned you to reach your goals.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/internationa...hvili_poutine_est_un_chef_d_etat_raciste.html
http://www.diploweb.com/forum/thom2.htm
Some articles (in French, sorry) about the one who said to the french paper "Figaro" that Gandhi was his only friend !!!
When one has been part of KGB, it is difficult to not use the same ways what KGB learned you to reach your goals.
Actually, Putin was an intelligence officer in GRU, not KGB – they are two different organizations. I agree all organizations are to this or that extent ponerized, but does that imply that KGB and GRU are 100% ponerized, comprising exclusively of clinical characteropaths, schizoids, asthenics?
I’m going for some shock here.
Is for a scientifically objective assessment of psychiatric diagnosis of essentially psychopathy of given individual enough to have several phrases on record;
n one of which he admitted, (could be with irony?), that let’s say if he had a choice to spend some time conversing and ‘friendicating’ with other world leaders like Bush or Blair, or Berlusconi; he would gladly ‘friendicate’ with Gandhi instead. I interpret his phrase about Gandhi this way; that he values his time, and aims to spend that little time he has on ‘friendicating’ in the most productive and emotionally friendly way possible. Besides, he shares the same neighborhood with film director and actor, Oscar laureate Nikita Mikhalkov, with whom he friendicates in very normal human way.
I think words which someone once said have to be matched with actions to rule out any even very shaky assessment at all. My mother more than once was telling me when actually I did something wrong: Okay, you are not my kid any longer! I refuse being your mother!’
Or if I tell my little kid: ‘don’t do this, or I will, you know, I will eat you!’ or in another situation, when I’m kissing his feet I tell him: ‘oh, you little toes are so-so yammy, I would eat them!’ , if somebody who doesn’t ‘like’ me, happens to record what I was saying, should I then be forcefully isolated from society because I’m a threat to society as a potentially dangerous ruthless cannibal eager to consume children for the dessert? If to take my words literally, at face value; i did admit to be loving to eat my son's body parts and if i said that they are tasty, i surely have eaten kids before that! So i am a body snatcher! My only save boat in this case is that I’m not a president or any other public figure, otherwise yellow press would label me as a cannibal on spot!
In Russian there also is also a very popular expression 'to love to death'. Imagine what the world press would say if they have in record that he whispered these words in his wife's ear! She is Laurea Lode in Spanish literature, by the way, and the expression means to love very very much, as to death!!
Let’s analyze his last speech in Guatemala, whether it would permit to assess him as a clinical essential psychopath. Being a former intelligence officer, he is proficient in German, probably speaks it almost without accent. Let’s start that there was no necessity for him to appear in Guatemala to support a Russian bid, there were appropriate officials to do that. That means he had cancelled urgent meetings, etc. to fly to another continent to support a Russian bid. Then, there is an army of qualified simultaneous translators available, but, as you have seen, his speech in support of Russian bid for Winter Olympics 2014 was in English, and then he ended his speech in French, the official language of the int. Olympics Committee, to reinforce his message and to demonstrate his respect for the official language of Olympics.
You do know, that you can’t learn language in one day, you need to dedicate a lot of time to be able to convey any text at all to your audience. So, he by some miracle did found that time to learn English and French to be able to demonstrate his respect to audience. I think his coming and the effect of his speech was the winning key of success of Russia by 4 votes over S. Korea.
My question is did he do that with the goal to boost his self-image as die-hard guy in the eyes of world public? Did he do that because he genuinely wanted Russia to win the bid of Olympics?
Would an essential psychopath get himself into trouble of learning more or less 2 new languages to demonstrate his respect to the audience? That’s not to mean that essential psychopaths could/t be language proficient, I think assessment should come from analyzing intentions.
Let’s analyse available data with scientific approach. I mean, if I am standing before an audience and I am saying a statement in affirmative above the table; below that table and very neatly to me I should hold a heavy briefcase filled up to the neck with hard objective data to support my statement in affirmative, should that need arise. Otherwise if even one statement which I made publicly would be proven not to have an scientifically objective basis, there is a danger that anything other I ever said publicly would be disregarded to at least undervalued by association.
I’m not yelling: “take him down from there, as I think he is not an essential psychopath!’,
Could be he is.
Is for a scientifically objective assessment of psychiatric diagnosis of essentially psychopathy
of given individual enough to have several phrases on record?
What Lobaczewski would have to say about alleged essential psychopathy of Putin?
I’m going for some shock here.
Is for a scientifically objective assessment of psychiatric diagnosis of essentially psychopathy of given individual enough to have several phrases on record;
n one of which he admitted, (could be with irony?), that let’s say if he had a choice to spend some time conversing and ‘friendicating’ with other world leaders like Bush or Blair, or Berlusconi; he would gladly ‘friendicate’ with Gandhi instead. I interpret his phrase about Gandhi this way; that he values his time, and aims to spend that little time he has on ‘friendicating’ in the most productive and emotionally friendly way possible. Besides, he shares the same neighborhood with film director and actor, Oscar laureate Nikita Mikhalkov, with whom he friendicates in very normal human way.
I think words which someone once said have to be matched with actions to rule out any even very shaky assessment at all. My mother more than once was telling me when actually I did something wrong: Okay, you are not my kid any longer! I refuse being your mother!’
Or if I tell my little kid: ‘don’t do this, or I will, you know, I will eat you!’ or in another situation, when I’m kissing his feet I tell him: ‘oh, you little toes are so-so yammy, I would eat them!’ , if somebody who doesn’t ‘like’ me, happens to record what I was saying, should I then be forcefully isolated from society because I’m a threat to society as a potentially dangerous ruthless cannibal eager to consume children for the dessert? If to take my words literally, at face value; i did admit to be loving to eat my son's body parts and if i said that they are tasty, i surely have eaten kids before that! So i am a body snatcher! My only save boat in this case is that I’m not a president or any other public figure, otherwise yellow press would label me as a cannibal on spot!
Is that enough to diagnose someone as a clinical essential psychopath? Given his current occupation as a president he also has meetings with Rabbi of Russia Ber Lazar, who may be a Zionist, and maybe not.Shane said:
In Russian there also is also a very popular expression 'to love to death'. Imagine what the world press would say if they have in record that he whispered these words in his wife's ear! She is Laurea Lode in Spanish literature, by the way, and the expression means to love very very much, as to death!!
Let’s analyze his last speech in Guatemala, whether it would permit to assess him as a clinical essential psychopath. Being a former intelligence officer, he is proficient in German, probably speaks it almost without accent. Let’s start that there was no necessity for him to appear in Guatemala to support a Russian bid, there were appropriate officials to do that. That means he had cancelled urgent meetings, etc. to fly to another continent to support a Russian bid. Then, there is an army of qualified simultaneous translators available, but, as you have seen, his speech in support of Russian bid for Winter Olympics 2014 was in English, and then he ended his speech in French, the official language of the int. Olympics Committee, to reinforce his message and to demonstrate his respect for the official language of Olympics.
You do know, that you can’t learn language in one day, you need to dedicate a lot of time to be able to convey any text at all to your audience. So, he by some miracle did found that time to learn English and French to be able to demonstrate his respect to audience. I think his coming and the effect of his speech was the winning key of success of Russia by 4 votes over S. Korea.
My question is did he do that with the goal to boost his self-image as die-hard guy in the eyes of world public? Did he do that because he genuinely wanted Russia to win the bid of Olympics?
Would an essential psychopath get himself into trouble of learning more or less 2 new languages to demonstrate his respect to the audience? That’s not to mean that essential psychopaths could/t be language proficient, I think assessment should come from analyzing intentions.
Let’s analyse available data with scientific approach. I mean, if I am standing before an audience and I am saying a statement in affirmative above the table; below that table and very neatly to me I should hold a heavy briefcase filled up to the neck with hard objective data to support my statement in affirmative, should that need arise. Otherwise if even one statement which I made publicly would be proven not to have an scientifically objective basis, there is a danger that anything other I ever said publicly would be disregarded to at least undervalued by association.
I’m not yelling: “take him down from there, as I think he is not an essential psychopath!’,
Could be he is.
Is for a scientifically objective assessment of psychiatric diagnosis of essentially psychopathy
of given individual enough to have several phrases on record?
What Lobaczewski would have to say about alleged essential psychopathy of Putin?
Adaryn
The Living Force
Here's an article - in French - talking about Putin and his reducing the democracy in Russia :
http://www.ledevoir.com/2007/04/25/140778.html
It seems like Putin has control freak tendancies (as Sarko, we should add) :
I translated a few passages :
Recently, the occidental press reported images of demonstrations, in Moscow and St Petersbourg, denouncing the more and more facticious nature of Russian democracy. The most striking thing is not the existence of such expressions of discontent -- barely 2000 or 3000 persons out of a population of 142 millions people -- but rather the brutality with which they were repressed by Vladimir Putin's police, and furthermore, in the absence of any provocation.
(...)
Accessing to the presidency, Putin inherited this political system [initiated by Eltsine] which allotted him most powers. Yet, this didn't seem to be enough. He meticulously undertook to impose a greater control of the State over the electronic and written Press : TV networks were closed or bought by the State. According to Reporters without Frontiers, Russia would be ranked at the 140th position (out of 160 countries) in matters of freedom of the Press. The country is number 1 of the world top rank for the number of lawsuits against medias and journalists. If Russian citizens don't have any problem to access the infos about the number of dead or wounded and failures undergone by the US army in Iraq, they barely know what's going on in Chechenia.
(...)
Putin also proceded to reinforce the central power of the federation. He abolished direct universal suffrage for the election of the governors of the 89 regions and republics. The latter are now chosen by the president, with the approval of the legislative assemblies.
If the choice of the president is rejected 3 times, he can dissolve the legislative assembly in question and choose the governor who will be in charge. Thus, the domination of the president over the legislative assemblies is supreme. It is under this "reform" that Putin chose Ramzan Kadyrov, 30, as the president of Chechenia, an individual considered by several international organisations to be a torturer and a psychopath.
http://www.ledevoir.com/2007/04/25/140778.html
It seems like Putin has control freak tendancies (as Sarko, we should add) :
I translated a few passages :
Recently, the occidental press reported images of demonstrations, in Moscow and St Petersbourg, denouncing the more and more facticious nature of Russian democracy. The most striking thing is not the existence of such expressions of discontent -- barely 2000 or 3000 persons out of a population of 142 millions people -- but rather the brutality with which they were repressed by Vladimir Putin's police, and furthermore, in the absence of any provocation.
(...)
Accessing to the presidency, Putin inherited this political system [initiated by Eltsine] which allotted him most powers. Yet, this didn't seem to be enough. He meticulously undertook to impose a greater control of the State over the electronic and written Press : TV networks were closed or bought by the State. According to Reporters without Frontiers, Russia would be ranked at the 140th position (out of 160 countries) in matters of freedom of the Press. The country is number 1 of the world top rank for the number of lawsuits against medias and journalists. If Russian citizens don't have any problem to access the infos about the number of dead or wounded and failures undergone by the US army in Iraq, they barely know what's going on in Chechenia.
(...)
Putin also proceded to reinforce the central power of the federation. He abolished direct universal suffrage for the election of the governors of the 89 regions and republics. The latter are now chosen by the president, with the approval of the legislative assemblies.
If the choice of the president is rejected 3 times, he can dissolve the legislative assembly in question and choose the governor who will be in charge. Thus, the domination of the president over the legislative assemblies is supreme. It is under this "reform" that Putin chose Ramzan Kadyrov, 30, as the president of Chechenia, an individual considered by several international organisations to be a torturer and a psychopath.
He confiscated exactly networks which belonged before to Berezovsky and Gusinsky. You can read more about them.
In Chechnya, i think, is a particular situation, a clan system, like still Medieval one, there are local family clans that rule, dynasties. Chechnya and all Caucasus is a region with high propensity of clan aversity to each other and to public, or clan, unrest. I don't have objective data at hands to label Kadyrov as torturer and psychopath. What are these organisations?
He is a psychopath - sez who? Well, may be he is... but may be not. Do you believe information that some unidentified international organisation have labeled someone as a psychopath? I don't believe, a request facts, data.
If article appears in some newspaper where Hugo Chavez will be allegedly named by 'some international organizations' as
a paranoid schizopath - you will believe it or do what?
In Chechnya, i think, is a particular situation, a clan system, like still Medieval one, there are local family clans that rule, dynasties. Chechnya and all Caucasus is a region with high propensity of clan aversity to each other and to public, or clan, unrest. I don't have objective data at hands to label Kadyrov as torturer and psychopath. What are these organisations?
He is a psychopath - sez who? Well, may be he is... but may be not. Do you believe information that some unidentified international organisation have labeled someone as a psychopath? I don't believe, a request facts, data.
If article appears in some newspaper where Hugo Chavez will be allegedly named by 'some international organizations' as
a paranoid schizopath - you will believe it or do what?