Sexual Assault - New Meaning, New Normal or New Tactic?

Sexual Assault - New Meaning, New Normal or New Tactic?  

Opinion,  by ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

For some people now, sexual assault consists of what ever ruffled their feathers for a few moments.  Whether it be a kiss and a hand on their thigh in a public place, or a pinch and a squeeze of their butt by an old man,  these women want satisfaction.  Some are seeking what they are calling "justice", 5, 10 and even 30 or 40  years later, and are actually trying to make it seem as though, their cry baby drivel, is in some way comparable to REAL assault or abuse.

How can just moments or minutes of  "feeling uncomfortable" years or decades before, be compared to REAL assault or abuse, meaning causing severe and/or lasting physical or emotional harm!

So what's up with that?  Or maybe I just don't understand.

Thirty or forty years ago,  it was normal for teenagers of  the baby boomer generation to start touching and kissing each other.   Back then of course, it sometimes happened during what we called a "date" or more often, when pairing up during wild, unsupervised parties.  That was during the era of "drugs, sex and rock and roll" don't forget, or haven't you millennials heard that term?

It very much crossed my mind when reading about the allegations against Roy Moore.  The allegation's against Moore, were quite tame, if not very tame for that period of time.  One article noted for example that one of the girl's moms actually approved, of  the relationship, and I can see why.  What parent wouldn't want their daughter to be with a respectable, responsible, mature man, when the option of their daughter dating someone their own age, posed so many more risks.

Sexual activity between teenagers at that time, were often first stoked by alcohol, their minds then further clouded by marijuana, LSD, mushrooms and pills of every color and mood, up or down.  This of course, was not conducive as a backdrop for pleasant first time sexual experiences, which were often TRULY traumatizing and life altering.  This was made evident by the subsequent wake  of emotional, health and social problems, such as when Roe vs Wade first made abortion on demand legal in 1973.

But yet, these women are describing "dates"  with Roy Moore at his own home during this same time period as "sexual assault or abuse".  While there was only what MOST parents would hope their daughter's dates would consist of  "kissing" and "touching" over clothing. There was no alcohol, no drugs, no force or violence.  Not even consensual sexual intercourse, resulting in pregnancy or abortion.  These allegations failed to even mention any of the TRUE  predatory elements common to REAL abusive relationships. 

So what kind of satisfaction do these people expect?  Could it be a bully's satisfaction?

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

-Won't you Please Consider Leaving a Comment or Question. 

-Bottom of page-

-No Identifying Info is Required-

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content policy

Fact Or Fiction? More Allegations Against Former President George H.W. Bush

FACT OR FICTION? More Allegations Against Former President George H.W. Bush By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Ever since the Harvey Weinstein scandal first broke, the media continues to be bloated with yet even more "fresh" sexual assault allegations, stories and opinions. The problem is that between the media, victims and alleged perpetrators, there are so many contradictions and inconsistencies from all the lies they tell, it's impossible to know fact from fiction.
For example, I wrote two articles on this website in defense of former president George H.W. Bush, titled and linked-
-
Sexual Assault Without Sexual Activity

Sexual Assault By Old Men

--only to find out that the elder Bush REALLY had a creepy butt squeezing or pinching tactic while being photographed with much younger women, which extended well before it could be excused by issues of aging, which I really thought it was. Instead, as reported in an article titled and linked--

Bush Groped Photo Seventh Women In Office

--the former president had been getting his butt pinching and squeezing perverted jollies for DECADES, made evident by the quoted article content below-

"A 55-year-old woman, who asked to remain unnamed, told CNN that at a re-election campaign fundraiser in Dearborn, Michigan, in April 1992, the then-67-year-old Bush grabbed her rear during a photo op. We got closer together for a family photo and it was like, ‘Holy crap!’” she told CNN, describing the incident. “It was like a gentle squeeze.”"

"Holy crap!" is exactly what I said too, when I found out how wrong I was about Bush. The one thing I was right about though - Groping-Allegations-Would-Be-Hard-To-Prosecute!

And that's not all, I almost wrote an article defending George Takei! LOL

Here's to thinking thrice, before defending someone accused of sexual misbehavior or crimes!

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

-Please Consider leaving a comment. Bottom of page- -No Identifying Info is Required-

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content Policy

Sexual Assault by Old Men, More Allegations Against George H.W. Bush

Sexual Assault By Old Men,  More Allegations Against George H.W. Bush, Age 93  

NEWS and Opinion UP-DATE From Original Article, Titled and Linked  -  
Sexual Assault Without Sexual Activity  Published on 11-2-17   By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Sexual abuse allegations against former president George H.W. Bush, age 93, continues to grow.  These allegations, now spanning into the years before Bush was still ambulatory.  This time, in the titled article and video, linked below.

George H.W. Bush spanks Teri Hatcher

The article title states that the former president "spanked" Teri Hatcher, the video and the quoted text below tells otherwise-

"President Bush is seen walking with several male friends and Hatcher, 52. He then taps her bottom various times before waving goodbye to her and going back to his pals."

Although the article title tried to change perceptions about Bush's behavior years ago, while still ambulatory, it is the same "touching from the rear", typical of the former president's behavior alleged by women more recently, while in his wheelchair.

Just when you think you get it, the article content then, switches back to the more shocking, viewer grabbing, article title's assertion that Bush "spanks" Hatcher, as quoted text from the article-

 "In the 2007 video, however, Bush is walking, later stopping to purposely spank the much-younger Hollywood actress."

This is another example of the mainstream media to either maliciously mislead perceptions, or just for the purpose of luring readers to their content for profit, switches from the title's assertion and text content, together with the misuse of the single word "spank(s)(ing)",  between two, starkly different viewpoints.  

Divorced from the TRUTH,  and stoked by the last presidential election, the media, just like Heather Lind, Bush's first accuser, the NFL kneelers, and many others, now think of, and use their jobs as a platform.  The media now entrenched in lies and #Fake News. 

The article went on to say-

"Amid the video drama, a third woman has now come forward to accuse Bush of groping her during a photo shoot, and telling her the now infamous “David-Cop-a-Feel” joke. Recalled the alleged victim, novelist Christina Baker Kline, to Slate:

“President Bush put his arm around me, low on my back. His comic timing was impeccable. ‘David Cop-a-feel,’ he said, and squeezed my butt, hard, just as the photographer snapped the photo.”

I couldn't help but notice specifically -

"His comic timing was impeccable. ‘David Cop-a-feel,’ he said, and squeezed my butt, hard, just as the photographer snapped the photo.” 

This is something that Bush's first accuser, Heather Lind said in my first article about Bush titled, "Sexual Assault Without Sexual Activity" And I, implied that the drama of  Lind's description was PHONY -  I apologize to Miss Lind! Former president George H.W. Bush, is much more consistent with his tactics, than I thought possible! 

So who's the REAL bully?   

Like all normally caring people of integrity, I must admit, the former president's tactics, being so specific and spanning for at least a decade, is kind of creepy, and muddies the waters a bit as to his motives and intentions.

But bottom line, this article failed to prove that Bush Sr.'s "touching from the rear" revealed any thing more concerning than his more recent encounters with women's "rears".

"Actual" assault, sexual or otherwise, causes serious and/or lasting harm.  Where as these incidents with Bush Sr., lasted just minutes, even moments, and obviously caused no physical injury or left any visible scars.

  

Touching, or worse, such as being kissed or groped by an old man, is actually quite common.  Most women have experienced these usually moments long "assaults",  at least once in their lives.  Finding the moments it takes to defend against quite easy, most women hardly find cause or reason at all for emotional upset.

Personally, I have never been sexually assaulted in my life.  But I have been suddenly kissed, grabbed and pinched, many times by old men.  These experiences, left me so unaffected, that I was half way through writing this article, before realizing that my own experiences were similar, to the women making these sexual assault allegations against Bush. 

The first time, I was just 14 years old while volunteering at convalescent home, when I was suddenly grabbed and kissed by an old man.  Later, as a registered nurse, it was quite common.  Many times, it seemed as though these old guys would get a little feisty and start grabbing just as they started feeling better physically.  After slapping their hand away and commenting how they must be feeling better, a big grin would almost always follow.

Being a normally caring person, I couldn't help but feel amused, when I saw that grin.  And I truly believe that most of these guys are just humorously motivated, thinking the reactions they elicit, are just as funny to the women.  After all, it's obvious that these guys couldn't hurt a fly if they tried - that being part of the humor!   

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

-Please Consider leaving a comment.  Bottom of page- NO IDENTIFYING INFO REQUIRED

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content policy

Devin Patrick Kelley Psychopath, NOT Successful

Devin Patrick Kelley Psychopath, NOT Successful

By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

I was hoping that Devin Patrick Kelley's mass murder at a Baptist church in Texas, wouldn't be as  gruesome as the media reported in descriptions of the atrocity that occurred last Sunday.  I don't even want to  repeat the details I read, thereby painting a picture in people's minds of what the horror was like as it played out. 

Remember, there is a small, but very dangerous segment of our society, who actually feel a type of satisfaction, even enjoyment over these heinous crimes that they themselves create.  I will repeat just one thing that Devin Patrick Kelley did to the small congregation of about 50, sitting in the pews that morning;

Not having  automatic, machine-gun style weapons like the famous "no motive", Las Vegas mass shooter Stephen Paddock, Devin Patrick Kelley squeezed off 400 ROUNDS, one at a time, and close-up, into the bodies of just the 26 dead and 20 injured, all of them sustaining multiple, if not dozens of gunshot wounds.

Devin Patrick Kelley was a bottom of the barrel psychopath who  undoubtedly, ENJOYED the pain and suffering he caused, made obvious by  the depravity of his crimes alone. There is a big difference however, between Kelley and the Las Vegas mass shooter Stephen Paddock.

If you've read my articles about Stephen Paddock, you'll notice I dropped the word "successful", when I describe Kelley as simply a "psychopath".  The difference is that Stephen Paddock was a psychopath who was also very intelligent.  Intelligent psychopaths are referred to as "successful psychopath", and  are able to conceal their true nature by mimicking normal caring emotions, amongst many other things that helped Paddock and others like him, blend in..

Where as Kelley, is a psychopath who simply isn't too smart, and/or has other coexisting mental, physical or social problems that make it obvious, that he posed a threat to society.  One article called it "red flags", or warnings signs that Kelley was dangerous.  Disastrously, this atrocity occurred NOT for lack of knowing.

This brings me to point out, that I, ABC, rarely mention "psychopath(s)" unless by comparison or just briefly as related to  the very intelligent, "successful psychopath", because psychopaths who are not smart, are OBVIOUS!  Here's a link to a well documented PDF,  titled 
Successful and Unsuccessful Psychopathy, A Neurobiological Model
 
When coming across an obvious psychopath in your day to day travels, do NOT engage the person in conversation, or step away using an excuse, when realizing you ALREADY engaged a psychopath.  Use one or two word pleasantries or responses etc.. Do not share personal details about yourself, family or schedule.  Seem uninterested, like most people really are, especially psychopaths! NEVER go into a room alone with a psychopath, make an excuse, you forgot something, anything, and walk away.  Bottom line, put distance between you and your suspected psychopath.

If anyone you come across, does or says anything that leaves you feeling concerned, even in retrospect, for the safety of yourself, family or others, notify the police if you think your concerns are URGENT.  When not, consider leaving a police report or notifying another authority etc. depending on the circumstances, such as if the concerning words or behavior were those of an employee within a school, or a workplace etc..

If you are a young person, or even an adult, who just feels uncertain or inexperienced about something someone did or said, leaving you feeling uncomfortable or threatened, talk to some one you trust. 

And, Don't Let The Bullies Get You Down!

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Please Consider Leaving a Comment. -Bottom of Page- No Identifying Information is   Required!

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content Policy.

Now, Devin Patrick Kelley, Motive-A Bully's Satisfaction?

First Rader, then Paddock,

Now, Devin Patrick Kelley, Motive - A Bully's Satisfaction? 

By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

There is just so much evil activity these days, what with all these shootings going on, it's hard to make sense of it all.  That is to most of us, being normally minded, caring people.  The psychopathically minded, are people born with a lack, or diminished ability, (within a spectrum of severity), to experience empathy or caring feelings for others.  These are the same caring feelings, that build strong caring families and relationships with others, and is the source of most people's enjoyment and satisfaction in life. 

Being very differently motivated, psychopathic minds think in ways that are unimaginable to others.  They actually feel a type of satisfaction, even enjoyment, over the pain, suffering or misfortune of others, that they often cause for the sole purpose of their own selfish satisfaction.

Even worse, some psychopaths are also very intelligent, and are referred to as "successful psychopaths".  They are "successful" in that their intelligence makes it possible for them to mimic normal caring emotions, while actually void of the sometimes troubling emotions that most of us express.  This leaves an appearance of mental stability, while actually capable of the most heinous crimes imaginable. For this reason, "successful psychopaths" are the most dangerous.

Good examples of these bottom of the barrel psychopathic minds, are Stephen Paddock, the famous "no motive" Las Vegas mass shooter, and the out-of-memory to most people, Dennis Rader.

Dennis Rader, was a serial killer who took people's lives, one or two at a time spanning between 1974 and 1991.  Rader enjoyed, even LOVED what would sicken most normally minded people, once bringing a corpse to his church, and taking a selfie with it, well before "selfies" were even a thing.  His wife and daughters had no clue, law enforcement arriving simultaneously at Rader's home to inform his wife, while taking Rader into custody a short distance away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Rader

Both Stephen Paddock and Dennis Rader are "successful psychopaths" who committed the most heinous crimes imaginable, while being so smart, they were undetectable as criminal psychopaths. I consider both of these psychopathic criminals, "pure evil", in that they seemed ONLY motivated by their own satisfaction, even enjoyment, derived from the experience of playing-out these gruesome scenes, that they themselves cause.   If more people remembered Dennis Rader, there wouldn't be so much confusion about Stephen Paddock's lack of motive.
 
Now, Devin Patrick Kelley, walks into a Baptist church in Texas and starts shooting into the congregation killing 26.  Once again, the confusion of investigators, victims, and casual bystanders alike, about what the motive might be, is palpable.

As more information becomes known about Kelley's history, it's like a barely perceivable collective sigh of relief, that maybe this time, there's a reason, even a motive.  Not just a bully's (psychopath) satisfaction, having no reason or sense at all-

-A Bully's Satisfaction - Pure Evil-

By  ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Articles with related content on this website are titled and dated below.  Their title links may be listed in more than one area on the right margin of this article.  All of them can be found on the BLOG ARCHIVE by Month and Year.

"Hatefulness Without Prejudice" Sept. 2017

"Pure Evil, Unrecognized and Hidden" Oct. 2017

ALL reader comments are welcome and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS;  1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of  Blogger Content Policy

Sexual Assault Without Sexual Activity, Who's The Real Bully?

Sexual Assault Without Sexual Activity?  Who's The Real Bully?

Allegation Against George H.W. Bush Age 93 -  By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Prominent in the national news last weekend, were accusations made against former President George H.W. Bush age 93, for what is being described as "sexual assault".

It all started when actress Heather Lind age 34,  accused the former President of  "sexual assault" while posing for a photo shoot alongside the former president in his wheelchair, together "with his wife Barbara Bush" and a few others.  The photo shoot was to promote what Lind said was "a historical television show" that she was working on.

Lind stated that the "assault" consisted of  Bush Sr. "touching her from behind while in his wheelchair", "patting her rear", "telling a dirty joke", and the worst and last part of the "assault", described as a "pinch", dramatically occurring just as the camera clicked it's final shot.  Oh, and one more thing, "this incident occurred four years ago."
  
The problems though, are that Lind's description of the events that played-out, simply don't add up as "actual sexual assault".  Even the "pinch", is not in its self, illegal.

This all came out to the general public when Lind, describing herself as feeling “disturbed”,  "detailed her accusations in an Instagram post (now deleted) after first seeing a recent picture of former President Barack Obama with Bush Sr.", reminiscent of her own photo shoot with Bush Sr., four years ago.
 
Bush Sr. not motivated to do harm, together with the reality of Bush's behavior having NOT ACTUALLY causing serious or lasting harm, doesn't even meet the criteria of  "tactics" commonly used by "psychopathic bullies" -  "bully" more commonly known as a "successful psychopath" in the U.S.

Bush Sr., like all  "normally caring" people, just assumed that Lind, didn't understand. So in response to Lind's allegations, a statement from Bush Sr.'s spokesperson, tried to be candid, by describing in detail how the former president's behavior was really good, even humorous intentions, saying that Bush Sr. has been "confined to a wheelchair for roughly five years." Adding "When posing for pictures his arm falls on the lower waist of people with whom he takes pictures. To try to put people at ease, the president routinely tells the same joke — and on occasion, he has patted women’s rears in what he intended to be a good-natured manner." 

When these explanations were not accepted, Bush and his spokesperson, likely realized that this is NOT about a misunderstanding, nor resolving issues. Instead, like all psychopathic bullies, it's about taking their "target" down, for no REAL or VALID reason at all, except their own satisfaction.  In Lind's case, the "satisfaction" of  jumping on to the "sexual assault" bandwagon, by manipulating perceptions, using lies, half truths and deception, all for satisfaction of fraudulent financial gain.

That said, Bush Sr.'s spokesperson didn't bother denying  or explaining the allegations further. Instead, a more formal apology was made through the Daily News, stating;

“President Bush would never — under any circumstance — intentionally cause anyone distress, and he most sincerely apologizes if his attempt at humor offended Ms. Lind."

Lind, later made some rather odd, even cryptic comments, and was likely referring to her job as an actress, as her platform, when she stated - "What comforts me is that I too can use MY power, which isn’t so different from a President really." Further stating that she can "enact positive change", help people etc...as well as "call out other abuses of power when I see them." 

Lind's assertions about her "power" being "not so different from a President really", and how she plans to use her "power", "to enact positive change", etc,,,as well as to "call out other abuses of power" -- Is Lind's not so veiled attempt, to threaten Bush Sr., for what she PRETENDS to perceive, to be an "abuse of power." While, if you think just a little bit deeper, you come to realize who the REAL psychopathic bully is. 

For example:

Although Lind uses the term "abuse of power" as related to Bush Sr. and this incident, there is no mention as to how exactly, Bush Sr. is thought to have abused his power.  On the other hand, This all started when Lind, FIRST abused her OWN power, by making publicly disparaging comments against Bush Sr., detailing "her accusations in an Instagram post", before Bush Sr. even knew there was a problem at all.

Bush Sr. through his spokesperson responded to Lind's allegations immediately.  Where as abnormally uncaring people like Heather Lind, make publicly disparaging comments against their "targets"  (Bush Sr.)  often times, before their target is even aware a problem exists. And when the target becomes aware, their attempts to reconcile or to simply understand the allegation(s) are met with silence, or even worse, more allegations.

Lind also reportedly, "told her cast mates about the alleged sexual assault and that she decided to come forward because of  the bravery of other women who have spoken up and written about their experiences”, referring to the women who have accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault and harassment.  

Coming forward after a "sexual assault", NOT because of your OWN experience, but because of  “the bravery of other women who have spoken up”, -  Seems very nice, even noble, while just breezing through the article for the first time. But when you really read it or just think a little bit deeper, the inconsistencies and contradictions to the truth, become obvious.

For Example

Lind is using the term "sexual assault", while her descriptions don't include violence, force or sexual activity, not even kissing or groping, as if it some how compares to ACTUAL sexual assault victims. This is a common tactic used by psychopathic bullies, who sees an opportunity to exploit, such as the ever growing sexual assault and harassment complaints regarding the Harvey Weinstein scandal. Not to mention the newly evolving epidemic, of many other similar claims, against other high profile actors, producers, directors, photographers etc..
  
Hoping to change the perception of others about the validity of her own allegations, is likely the primary reason Lind made the statement about coming forward because of the “the bravery of other women". 

Many people reading articles about this incident, saw nothing wrong with Lind's perspective and motivations for making these publicly disparaging comments against Bush Sr., Made evident, when a few other women came forward with these same, almost exact allegations.

So who's the REAL bully? 

Ever hear of  "the uncanny similarity of tactics used by psychopathic bullies" ?

An article by that title can be found on the margin, on the right side, of this article.  Probably hidden in the BLOG ARCHIVE -Written in August 2017

Another resource, is an article, titled and linked below, written 2009.  It also talks about this "similarity of tactics" as related to psychopathic workplace bullying.

Tactics, The Bully Boss's First Brutal Tactic

A Curiosity If Your Interested;  I first wondered if phony sexual assault allegations made by younger women, against wealthy, prominent seniors, is one of those "unique tactics used by bullies alone" when I read an article a few years back, titled and linked below.

Retired-Judge-Accused-of-Sexual-Assault-

Here's to looking just a little bit deeper, for the inconsistencies and contradictions to the truth!

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador   

-Please Consider leaving a comment.  Bottom of page-

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation o .blogger content policy 

Lies, A Contradiction Of The Truth

Lies, A Contradiction Of The Truth. -Examples, Teaching and Opinions-

By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

I came across an article yesterday, titled and linked below, that caught my attention.

Flake and Corker Feel Liberated to Speak Minds That Should Terrify Trump

As a backdrop, before this article was published, there had been several  reports that Senator Jeff Flake had been critical of  President Trump's "behavior" even using the word "dangerous" at one point, while at the same time, he announced his decision to not run for re-election. This article is related.

To keep things clear, quoted content from the linked, complete article content, will be in BLUE print.  ABC's commentary, teaching and opinions will be in the default BLACK print.
The article starts off with the statement;

THE BIG IDEA: Now Jeff Flake can listen to his conscience, not his consultants.
As if Flake couldn't listen to his own conscience BEFORE?

Looking at this statement at face value, most people didn't think twice, but the few who did noticed that the statement implies that Jeff Flake did NOT listen to his own conscience UNTIL just now, after FIRST deciding not to run for re-election.

Further more, according to various news reports, Flake also NOW feels free to say publicly, that President Trump's state of mind is "dangerous"!  This has been stated in many different ways by many different people, starting from well before the election. 

Most recently, talk intentionally meant to emphatically declare that President Trump is mentally unstable, has been  parroted by three top Republican lawmakers, Flake, Corker and John McCain.  The three, either by coincidence or by the hand of God, share  both the distinction and the experience, of now living within their closing days as lawmakers. The significance of this, has yet to unfold.

Having experienced and studied "psychopathic bullying" for over 15 years, I can tell you that the "mental health card" is a common tactic used uniquely by REAL psychopathic bullies. But like all psychopathic bullying tactics, being built on lies and deception, they are intended to change perceptions against their "targets". 

But like all lies, they are a contradiction of the truth.  When you look just a little bit deeper, the contradictions become obvious.

For example, It would be scary to believe that Flake, Corker and other top lawmakers, REALLY believe their own lies about the president's mental health.  The contradiction being, that if the president's mental health was really all that dangerous, nobody in their right mind with a  moral conscience, especially a top lawmaker, would have hesitated a moment to say it. Never mind first waiting to decide about running for re-election!

The second example starts with the quoted text.

"As one of the most authentically conservative members of Congress, Flake has a level of moral authority rivaled by few others."

This statement was supported by the next statement about Flake's political history, or did it?

"Flake was proving his conservative bona fides by leading the charge to kill earmarks, voting against Medicare Part D despite arm-twisting from George W. Bush himself and speaking out against deficit spending by his own party."

The words and terminology alone, throws some doubt about Flake's "level of moral authority", but before your mind can even begin to wonder about how "speaking out AGAINST his own party" is "proving his conservative bona fides"  When the next sentence;

"House GOP leaders even removed Flake from a choice slot on the House Judiciary Committee in 2007 as retaliation for his criticism." -

-Throws in, yet a bigger question,  How does being removed by your own party's leadership "from a choice slot", "as retaliation for criticism", add-up,  to some how mean that Flake "has a level of moral authority"? 

The article then repeats the point that the article failed to convince you of.

"This part of his background makes it hard for anyone to credibly argue that Flake speaking out against Trump is anything but principled." 

Does it REALLY?

I have noticed recently, that the news media has been repeating or reinforcing their points and conclusions again toward the end of the same article, more than they used to. Especially  articles like this one, where the major points are not clearly stated in the first place.  It's as  if stating it twice, makes you believe something the article had failed to convince you of.

-Just an observation though-

In conclusion, read important articles slowly or re-read articles that you found compelling enough to base your opinions on.  Read between the lines and watch for the inconsistencies and  contradictions that become obvious, when the assertions are either contradicted within an article content its self, or by logical consideration of the "usual course of events" one would normally expect.  

Here's to learning just a little bit more, about the importance of looking just a little bit deeper!

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador 

-Won't you consider leaving a Comment?  No identifying information is required-

ALL Reader Comments are welcome and are especially ENCOURAGED when your comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS;  1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content Policy.

"ABC Misled by Satire, But STILL Believes Trump's Critics Lie"

ABC Misled by Satire, But STILL Believes Trump's Critics Lie, What's The Point?  

Link to Snopes

By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Dear Readers,                                      

I apologize to everyone, but after doing further research regarding the post I published yesterday  titled "The Best article EVER in defense of the President, The Lies of Donald Trump's Critics..."   I have reason to believe that the content and conclusions of the linked article I was commenting on, titled "The Lies of Donald Trump's Critics..."   may NOT BE FACTUAL.

Although I knew that the website "snopes" who published the article had "satirical" content, I was misled by a link on my news feed, which led me to believe that the linked article was first of all "news", and that it was surprisingly Pro Trump news from an unlikely source.  When reading the article before originally publishing the post, it came across to me as if the author had changed their views about Trump, based on what appears to be undeniable proof that Trump's critics really do lie. These assertions, were almost exhaustively backed by dozens of links and references.

Like most of the Presidents' supporters, I already know without a doubt that Trump's critics DO IN FACT LIE!  I just thought it would be really nice, to have analytical  evidence to sway the few logically minded people out there who are still on the fence.

People like me who are very naïve are frequently targeted by bullies. Although I know logically, that some people think and are motivated very differently than myself, I STILL have a hard time applying it!  My mind just couldn't believe and therefore never questioned that someone would actually write such a lengthy, detailed article just for the sake of "satire"'?!?  I only realized the article might not be factual after "digging just a little bit deeper" (something I always advice), finally noticing that the article was originally published last July!

Still very much confused about the article, the website and the author, I decided to "dig a little deeper" (something I ALWAYS advice) by writing to the author at "snops", quoted below.  I hope he replies, I am serious about wanting to know his answers.

To Dan MacGuill: Hi Dan,  I came across your article yesterday titled "The Lies of Donald Trump's Critics" and found most of the very detailed content supportive of the President and his supporters' claims of media abuse against him.  Being Pro Trump myself, and now blogging about "bullying and hatefulness USA"  I thought your article would be good to cite as examples.  Now, learning that your website is meant as "satire" and after looking at other content on "snopes" I'm still left VERY confused. 

What if anything in your article is TRUE? If there is reliable, quotable content, how can I tell the difference between true content and "satire"?  I know I am VERY naïve and have a hard time understanding people who are differently minded than myself, but one more question please, Why exactly would you muddy the waters of truth further?  Especially seeing how important the matters you write about are?  Is there a specific motive in mind or just for your own satisfaction?

-Just Curious-
ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Successful Psychopathic Bullying, Useful Information For The General Public

Successful Psychopathic Bullying, Useful Information For The General Public 

By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

There is so much useful information about bullying and hatefulness that the general public needs to know, it's hard to figure out where to start exactly.  The amount of confusion  accentuated by the Stephen Paddock investigation brought me to fully understand how little people know about these matters, although it's no secret that many people meet their end that way.

In articles about the Stephen Paddock investigation, it  was commented more than once, that some people didn't want to know, if Paddock is eventually found to have had no valid motive.  The general premise being, that it's impossible to defend yourself against someone like Paddock.  Knowing that there are psychopathic criminal minds amongst us, that appear normal but are capable of killing for no reason, is just too hard for some people to stand. 

Having tangled with a serial workplace bully boss (also referred to as a "successful psychopath") or two myself, I nearly met my end that way too, eventually totally undone though, and losing my job. This happened even after learning everything there is to know about work bullying, while trying to save my job.

Knowing everything there is to know about "successful psychopathy" doesn't necessarily mean you can totally take one or any of them down. It is so much more than that, but at least you gain an understanding of the whys, how's and don'ts, that may make things easier and keep you safer.

Criminal psychopathy is ONLY "indefensible" for people who have little or no true information and thereby understanding, of the real threats, as well as their real (and evolving) solutions, that help to ensure pubic safety.

More critically, days and now weeks have passed with an overwhelming number of both news and speculation articles published daily about the Stephen Paddock investigation. Just about all of these articles share factually incorrect information about "psychopathy" and many other mental health and social problems and conditions. This is causing a national resurgence of  misconceptions, especially in regards to the very intelligent and more dangerous "successful psychopaths".
 
Even before the Las Vegas shooting, I came across several articles and commentaries etc. which gave workplace or adult vs adult bully advice, more fitting for dealing with "schoolyard bullies". 
Feeling very concerned about totally false, even dangerous information out there, I think it best to start in the middle of what you need to know. 

Basic Bottom Line:  Criminal "psychopathic" minds, more commonly referred to as a "bully" and in the US, a "successful psychopath" are born with a genetic difference in their brains causing an inability or diminished ability by spectrum, to experience caring feelings and empathy for other people.  Instead, they derive a type of satisfaction, even enjoyment over the pain and suffering of others that they often cause.

FALLACY - Schoolyard bullying and workplace or adult bullying elsewhere, is the same thing. I should react to adults who bully in the same way as a child, I will "stand-up" and "call out" adults who bully me.

LESSON 1 - First of all it depends on what you mean when calling an adult a "bully".  Often the term "bully" is used to describe just about any adult who is expressing angry feelings.  There is a BIG difference, which at first is hard to distinguish, almost impossible when judging by appearances alone.  It might be easier to judge by the severity or intention of tactics they are known to have used in the past.  Normally caring adults who are just angry, use tactics that are not intended to do great or lasting harm.

Dealing with an adult (psychopathic) bully, is far more serious than a schoolyard bully who is first of all just a child, and most of them being just bratty and immature.  Adult psychopathic bullies (or "successful psychopaths") use premeditated tactics, that are uncannily similar case to case, even in detail as if they share some kind of common knowledge. Many of their tactics seem specifically used by bullies alone.  Whatever tactics they choose, they are intended to eventually cause serious and/or lasting harm.

"Standing-up" or "calling out" an adult psychopathic bully, is literally DANGEROUS
.
FALLACY - It's easy to recognize a "successful psychopath", they are "antisocial" and don't like to be around other people. They don't care about anyone but themselves.

LESSON 2 - Everything written in the FALLACY above IS TRUE!  I am just calling it a "fallacy" because it might as well be. People who do not look a little bit deeper than superficial appearances, just don't see it!

Examples in the Stephen Paddock investigation include several different statements made by investigators, family members as well as just public speculation, as to why Paddock could NOT have been a "successful psychopath" while if looked at just a bit deeper, actually prove it.

One example given was that Paddock was known to enjoy making family members and a few other people he was described as being "close to" happy, by sharing the free amenities and luxury accommodations he got for his high stakes gambling.

"Successful psychopaths" are so intelligent that they come to realize at an early age, that they lack the caring emotions that they see others express so spontaneously.  Viewing their "differently mindedness" as an advantage over others, they quickly come to realize the crippling disadvantages of behaving in ways that reveal their true nature.  Instead, highly intelligent criminal psychopathic minds like Paddock's, carefully learn to mimic the normal caring emotions of others.

I'm not saying that "successful psychopaths" never really enjoy making family members and people they feel close to happy.  Keeping in mind that "psychopathy" is experienced in a spectrum of severity, some psychopaths likely do experience a level of genuine enjoyment. 

More likely in my opinion, criminal "successful psychopaths" who enjoy being generous with close relatives and friends, experience a different type enjoyment over these relationships. Either their "differently mindedness" is something that they have in common with those few, or the few fulfill a different more personal (and hidden) need that casual bystanders like myself, can only guess at.

Behaving in normally caring ways though, is very advantageous for criminal "successful psychopaths" who are actually immune to the caring emotions that they mimic. Freed from the normally caring emotions that are so troubling to most people, leaves the impression of mental stability, while really capable of causing great harm.

This impression of mental stability is something  they can fall back on, if by chance "the mask of sanity" should somehow slip, and questions are asked.

One thing  to keep in mind  while trying to determine some one's true nature, is to not base your opinion on just a few superficial examples. Look at the big picture.  For example, Paddock was known to maintain relationships with close family members and a girlfriend.  He was married for a short time many years ago. People cited these relationships as reasons why Paddock could not have been Psychopathic.

While if you think about it just a little bit deeper, you come to realize things such as;  His whole life, and that's the extent of his relationships?  How come no one came forward claiming they were friends with Paddock?  He hunted and had lots of guns.  So where are his hunting and gun buddies?  This guy was a millionaire, yet there were no parties at his house or the tons of friends that people with tons of money attract!

So again, when relationships are looked at like this, just a bit deeper, it becomes obvious when Paddock and people like him, really are loners.

Remember - Think just a little bit deeper and Consider from a broader perspective. -SeekingTruth-

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

BEST Article EVER in SUPPORT of TRUMP. "Lies of Donald Trump's Critics...

BEST Article EVER in SUPPORT of TRUMP. "Lies of Donald Trump's Critics...

Commentary by ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

10/21/17 1 PM - PLEASE DISREGARD ALL INFORMATION REGARDING THE LINK ARTICLE BELOW TITLED "THE LIES OF DONALD TRUMPS CRITICS".  I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE IT IS NOT FACTUAL - PLEASE CLICK ON SEPARATE ARTICLE TITLED  "ABC Misled by Satire, But STILL Believes Trump's Critics Lie", listed on the right margin of this web page.  Thank you, ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

I came across the MOST positive article EVER, to help in the defense of President Trump, titled and linked below

"The Lies of Donald Trump’s Critics, and How They Shape His Many Personas"

It's described as;

"An in-depth analysis of the false allegations and misleading claims made against the 45th President since his inauguration."

I love this article so much I wanted to copy the whole thing onto this post.  Below is just a few copied paragraphs from this very detailed original linked article above, so you get a general idea.  Looks like a wonderful piece that we can cite in defense of the President.

QUOTED FROM ORIGINAL CONTENT

"This article is intended as a neutral, reliable analysis of the lies, false allegations and misleading claims made about and against Donald Trump since his inauguration in January 2017. We’ve attempted to strip away the hyperbole, name-calling and generalizations, and examine the patterns and trends at work: what characterizes these lies and exaggerations, the effect they have, what might explain them."

"in the current cultural atmosphere, where “the truth” is universally, even manically, exalted as an abstract concept but then widely degraded in practice, it’s essential to confront, correct, and analyze patterns of falsehoods like these".

"The focus here is on attacks against Trump. So for the purpose of this article, we’re not interested in false claims that are intended to reflect favorably on him. Nor does this analysis address claims made against his family members, of which there have been many".

"We’re going to take a look at the four major types of falsehood we found, which correspond with Donald Trump’s five public personas, and point out along the way how various errors in thought have played a role in their origins and their spread."

"What’s remarkable is the extent to which false claims about the President revolve around body language, nonverbal gestures and symbolism, all phenomena that are notoriously open to interpretation. These lies and misrepresentations are also often based on snapshots — visual evidence presented without proper context."

In DEFENSE of TRUMP! Making America Great Again !

Thank You Snopes!

GOD BLESS AMERICA, THE TRUTH AND PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

"Mental Health Card", Bullying Tactic Used Against President Trump!

"Mental Health Card", Bullying Tactic Used Against President Trump! -In Defense of the President-

By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

In defense of the president, I can't help but notice how obvious the intense bullying campaign continues to grow against President Trump.  This bullying against our president is being perpetrated by psychopathic members of the media, various government officials and many others. 

I don't think I need to point out specific articles being so obvious and all, but generally speaking it's obvious that "the mental health card" a specific tactic uniquely used by psychopathic bullies alone, is being used by a barrage of different individuals now, who are suggesting that President Trump is mentally unstable and/or "inappropriate" in one way or another, while the examples they cite are either far from convincing, bipartisan, or completely lame having been based on widely varied and twisted or exaggerated half truths or complete lies. 

This is slanderous and the President seems to have no legal recourse against it. 

 
Then, on top of all those allegations, there are all these stupid tweets and what not, addressing the President from one corner or another insisting, Senator Cain even demanding, that the President address their specific concern or crisis, then like childish brats, they compare the level of attention the President provides, then twist that into something even more horrible that he did or said. 

MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

THEN someone commented today, that the President is inconsistent with his responses!  He simply can't win!  "Targets" of psychopathic bullies, rarely do. 

Let's pray for President Donald Trump, that God keeps him safe and healthy while going about the business of MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! -Despite the bullies! 

-GOD BLESS PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP-

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Moving On From Las Vegas Massacre Harder For Most

Moving On From Las Vegas Massacre Harder For Most  By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusasdor   

Moving on from Stephen Paddock's shooting massacre in Las Vegas is harder for most people than I thought it would be. Most people, still waiting for Paddock's "motive".

Now over two weeks, and three published articles about Stephen Paddock on this website later,  I continue to standby by my original assertions made in this, and the three previous articles on this subject, although varying in focus, wording, and depth of detail. My "assertions" are now in a bullet list below, OR you can read it like a paragraph, it's original format.

• Stephen Paddock was a "successful psychopath" and
• That alone, "successful psychopathy", was the sole cause (not motive) of this atrocity.
• I stated further that I believe it is a well known fact to experts in the field, that bottom of the barrel
• "Successful psychopaths" have no real, valid "motive(s)" at all for their psychopathic crime(s) against other people. Instead, They
• Experience a very differently minded type of "satisfaction" even enjoyment over
• The pain and suffering of other people, that
• They often plan and cause, for the
• Sole purpose of that experience alone. I stated further, that I was
• Repeating the (Bullet List) info, being
• Both 
• Hard to believe, and thereby, 
• Harder to remember. (Repeated, yet AGAIN)

Despite my confidence in my own understanding and ability to teach and reach others about these  matters, my hope of moving my readers forward into more personally useful information is some what stalled.  The Nation now standing paused and struggling to first understand Paddock's 'lack of motive' that "investigators" have as yet, failed to admit. 

"Investigators" as reported by the news media, continue to refer to Paddock's "motive" as something 'not yet found', when the truth is 'there is no motive' at all,  except for the psychopathic mind's own satisfaction.  

The good news is, that at least by some of the newly published news articles, it seems as though the media is just now starting to ease in to the possibilities that Stephen Paddock's reason (remember, he had no real or valid "motive") for the shooting, had more to do with his father's history of criminal psychopathy than not.

In that article titled (and linked), "Father's History Could Offer Insight Into Mind of Las Vegas Gunman", Stephen Paddock's father's criminal psychopathic history is described, along with commentary and quoted statements "typical of psychopaths".  This information is significant, in that "psychopathy" is a known genetic disorder likely passed down by young Paddock's father. The content is also useful in that the descriptions serve as good beginning examples of psychopathy, in which readers may then build on later, when learning more about recognizing psychopathy.

While yet another article titled (and linked), "Why The Unknown Motive In Las Vegas Is So Unsettling" explores why Paddock's 'lack of motive' is so unsettling (or is it REALLY a hint as to WHY, the Media IS HIDING (the no motive) TRUTH (for awhile)?  Either way, it is an interesting read which may play out in a significant way some how, only time will tell.

In the mean time, I intend on moving forward with the "more personally useful information"  that I mentioned, starting with my next article.  Readers may either "pause" with the rest of the Nation at this time, or may move on to the next article as soon as it's published and whenever you are ready.

I will step back with additional commentary, if and when the mass media ever publishes more articles that addresses Paddock's lack of motive any further in their coverage.

God Bless Target's of "workplace" and "adult vs adult bullying and mobbing" wherever it may be.


ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

Tiny Hint 4U2 REMEMBER, Whether it be a workplace, a schoolyard or a single criminal psychopath shooting into a crowd at a concert, it is all the same - small, large or in between.  Dig deeper, if you find uncanny similiarities between your experience and that of unrelated KNOWN bullying and mobbing campaigns, that too may reveal them. ABC

Rise Above Bullying and Hatefulness

Rise Above Bullying and Hatefulness.  In Reflection By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

I don't think anyone would argue that we live in very perilous times.

Witnessing and experiencing so much bullying and hatefulness not only in our marriages, schoolyards, neighborhoods and workplaces,

but broadly spanning every corner of our society and at every level, all the way up to our Nation's highest courts, esteemed leaders, and the President of The United States himself, it is all very concerning.

When adding global bullying and hatefulness between the people and nations of the world, the possibility of war and even the involvement of supernatural unseen forces, it is even more confusing.

When these same issues of bullying and hatefulness muddy the already murky waters of our own personal, moral and religious beliefs,

Then challenges our strength of character, perceptions and everything we once held dear and true,  then, and only then, with bullying and hatefulness surrounding from every angle, 

This is when it will either consume you, or elevate you above it. 

Rise Above it and NEVER Look Back Again!  

GOD BLESS ALL THE CARING HEARTS WHO PRAY FOR THOSE WHO CAN'T

Pure Evil, Unrecognized and Hidden in Plain Sight

"Pure Evil" Unrecognized and Hidden in Plain Sight.  By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

 Stephen Paddock's Dad-Psychopathic Criminal

I have been feeling  more and more concerned with each passing day since the unprecedented mass shooting in Las Vegas.  Starting with the very first breaking news reports of that tragic event. it seems obvious to me that Stephen Paddock was a "successful psychopath".  Yet, more than a week later, few have even suggested that possibility, and even fewer (if any) have suggested that possibility, as the sole cause (not motive).

 It is a  well known fact to doctors and other "experts" in the field of psychology, that bottom of the barrel spectrum psychopathic minds, have no real or valid motives at all for their crimes, except for their own personal satisfaction, even  enjoyment over the pain and suffering of other people, that they often cause.
.
What's concerning is that commentary by "officials", innocent bystanders and the general public, as reported by the media, show how little people know about "psychopathy".  Our collective understanding as a Nation, seems to even worsen with the passage of time and memories of previous psychopathic atrocities fade. 

Misconceptions about psychopathy accentuated by the Stephen Paddock investigation seemed fueled by an abundance of fresh examples, dismissing the possibility of psychopathy as a cause, but when looked at from a deeper perspective, actually prove it.  This superficial perspective continues unabated while the list of misconceptions grows only longer each day.

 It has been one of my long standing opinions, that the activities of "psychopaths" or even worse, the very intelligent "successful psychopaths", pose the largest hidden threat that people are both exposed to, but know little or nothing about.  Dispite holding and publishing this opinion for over a decade, the puplic understanding of the issues that psychopathy pose, only worsens, my reach far to small.

The Nation has witnessed "pure evil" and the events and speculation that continues to follow.  Many thousands of people witnessed it up close being at the center of the violence in the crowd targeted by Stephen Paddock.

Paddock, perched in a hotel room 32 stories above, attacked the crowd below using  gunfire, reminiscent of "tower covert hunting blinds".  ("Hunting" a sport Paddock "enjoyed" and pointed out as an example, as to why he couldn't be psychopathic.)

The crowds' screaming in a panicked frenzy to get away, people scrambling in every direction, leaving behind all their belongings, including cell phones, car keys and wallets.  Some, even leaving behind loved ones separated by the rushing crowds or pursuing their own way out, while hundreds lay wounded or dead.  Horrific! That is, to the normally minded.

Stephen Paddock and other intelligent successful psychopathic minds, seem very normal on the surface, but think very differently, literally enjoying and experiencing a type of satisfaction over the pain and suffering of other people that they often cause.  I know I repeated this, but I also know how hard it is to believe!  

People in that crowd who walked away from that experience with their lives, will likely never walk away from the traumatic memories, intrusive thoughts and flash backs that are now a part of what defines them.

While the psychopathic minds, go unrecognized and hidden in plain sight.

Let's Learn To Recognize, Name It, and End Psychopathic Adult Bullying Together!

Learn more about Successful Psychopathic Minds today!

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

For more details, read articles with related content, listed on the right margin of this web page,  titled;

"Hatefulness Without Prejudice"
"Stephen Paddock Successful Psychopath Reason Enough to Kill"
"Elusive Motive of Stephen Paddock Not So Elusive"

If NOT listed, TRY the newly installed "Search This Blog" box, ALSO on the right margin of this web page.

-Please Consider Leaving A Comment Bottom of Page-    -No Identifying Info is Required-

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content Policy

Stephen Paddock Successful Psychopath, Reason Enough To Kill

Stephen Paddock Successful Psychopath, Reason Enough To Kill, By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

After reading my last news article of the day titled "Sheriff 'Absolutely Believes' Motive for Las Vegas Massacre Will Be Found", I decided to try and clarify some of the misconceptions  out there, and within this article its self, by commenting on two quoted parts of the article as examples. The article's full content is  linked below.

http://www.nepal24hours.com/sheriff-absolutely-believes-motive-for-las-vegas-massacre-will-be-found/

Quote from article linked above-

"(VOA): Las Vegas sheriff  Joseph Lombardo says he "absolutely believes" investigators will find a motive for the worst mass slaying in U.S. history. Investigators are mystified about why Stephen Paddock, 64 — a man who was financially well off and with no criminal record or apparent political or religious ties —"

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador's Commentary AND Opinion, related to the quote above, from article content linked above.

It's unbelievable that NOBODY investigating Stephen Paddock's mass shooting, has not even suggested the obvious.  Psychopaths are KNOWN to share the same motivation - Having no real or valid motive at all!  "EXCEPT for  the SATISFACTION of a BULLY" ("Bully" more commonly referred to as "psychopaths" in USA)

 Stephen Paddock, obviously highly intelligent, is more accurately referred to as a "successful psychopath" in the USA. They are successful, in that their intelligence makes it possible for them to recognize their lack of caring emotions, that they see others express so spontaneously. Seeing this as an advantage, they carefully mimic the caring emotions of others.

They also fail to derive feelings of enjoyment like other people. Instead, they experience an odd type of satisfaction, even enjoyment over the pain and misfortunes of others, that they often cause.

Second Quote from article linked above-

"We cannot even rule out mental illness or some form of brain damage, although there's no evidence of that either," a Department of Homeland Security official said Tuesday".

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador's Commentary AND Opinion, related to the second quote above, from article content linked above.

The way the article quote is stated, leaves doubt as to the depth of  true understanding.  By "mental illness", some people DO consider psychopathy a mental illness which is one of the largest misconception there are.  Fully grounded in reality and knowing the difference between right and wrong, psychopaths are NOT considered to be mentally ill in the usual sense of the word.

Stephen Paddock, was a bottom of the barrel spectrum successful psychopath. Expert at mimicking normal caring emotions while actually immune to the troubled emotions that normal caring people experience, leaving an impression of mental stability, while motivated very differently and capable of the most heinous crimes imaginable. 

Although the vast majority of  people consider the shooting in Las Vegas,  as extremely horrifying, Stephen Paddock carefully planned these events, for the SOLE PURPOSE of experiencing the MOST satisfying and enjoyable mayhem possible,  That he, himself caused!


For More Details, related articles on THIS website are accessible by clicking on the article title, listed on the right margin of this article.

"Hatefulness Without Prejudice"

"Barron Trump Bullied, How Real Bullies Think" -

For More Details, related articles on ABC-AntibullyingCrusador's Weblog are accessible by clicking on the titled links below.  To access the entire Weblog, Click on the tabs ABOVE article posts.


Adult Bully or Successful Psychopath, A Matter of Semantics

Schadenfreude A Bully's Satisfaction-By ABC


May God Bless and Protect, The United States of America and President Donald Trump

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusasdor

-Consider leaving a comment bottom of Page. No identifying information required-

Elusive Motive of Stephen Paddock, Not So Elusive

Elusive Motive of Stephen Paddock, Not So Elusive

Just about every news agency in the nation is asking the same question, what was Stephen Paddock's Motive? What's strikingly concerning about this question is that his motive is obvious.  Most people already have some knowledge of previous mass killers reported by the news media, but few are making the connections, that the depravity of their crimes alone, made the motive clear, in fact having NO real or valid motivation at all, EXCEPT for the psychopathic bully's satisfaction.  Think about it, did anyone question the validity of Jeffrey Dahmer's stated motive, "his own pleasure" ?

Psychopaths lack or have a diminished ability to experience feelings of empathy, instead, experience a type of  enjoyment or satisfaction over the pain and misfortune of others, which they often cause.
 "Successful psychopaths" like Stephen Paddock, are very intelligent making it possible to learn and mimic normal caring emotions.  Not only that, there are many other things that successful psychopaths do and use to support the false impression of normalcy.

In my opinion, people affected by psychopathy, especially successful psychopaths, pose the greatest hidden threat that most people are both exposed to, but know little or nothing about.

Even worse and accentuated by this horrible tragedy, is the amount of false and inaccurate information reported by the media, regarding psychopathy, successful psychopathy,  and the word  "bully".  The over use and misuse of the word "bully" probably the most egregious example of broad misconceptions perpetuated by the media.

Learn more about topics mentioned in this article individually linked below -

Workplace, Adult Bully or Successful Psychopath, A Matter of Semantics. By, ABC

Hatefulness Without Prejudice, Workplace Bullying. by ABC

Schadenfreude” – A Bully’s Satisfaction. By ABC.

The articles individually linked above, are from ABC's previous website titled                               ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador's Weblog. It focused on workplace and/or adult vs adult - psychopathic bullying and mobbing.  It contains some of ABC's BEST content, enriched by the BEST reader's comments, that only personal experience can provide. Articles such as "Tactics of a Workplace Serial Bully Boss" and "Workplace Mobbing. Workplace Little Mobsters" brings the reader through these experiences which are typically very similar case to case.  Readers, who are real  "targets" of workplace bullying and mobbing, but uncertain, come away knowing for sure. Dozens having commented how unbelievably close their experiences match my own.  Read about this and more, at the link below.

/ABC-AntiBullyingCruador's Weblog


Keep up with  new content on this website BULLYING AND HATEFULNESS USA - Focused
on subjects related to bullying and hatefulness within the USA, that is affecting the presidency, nation and the entire world. Related events continually unfolding before our eyes.


-Won't You Consider Leaving a Comment? - No identifying information is required.

Kim Jong Un or President Donald Trump, Who's The REAL Bully?

Kim Jong Un or President Donald Trump, Who's The REAL Bully? By ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador

WE have two leaders in conflict which may lead to war.   Both have been described as a "bully". So who's the REAL bully? 

I 'll  start off by describing what I mean by a "REAL bully".  When adults are described as being a "bully" it is very different than children described with the term "bully".

MOST children who use behavior described as "bullying" are simply immature and outgrow bullying behaviors. There are the few exceptions however who don't out grow bullying. When children continue bullying behaviors into their late teens and beyond, it becomes more concerning, especially if the severity of their bullying tactics worsen. 

When they do, it is likely that the child, now young adult is a "REAL bully".  The word "bully" was first used to describe behavior problems of adults, by  the "workplace anti-bullying and mobbing" movement, in the United Kingdom. Both Canada and Australia followed suit, adopting the same terminology in their workplace anti-bullying and mobbing movements. All three countries, recognizing "workplace bullying" well before the United States.

Adults correctly referred to as  "bullies" have a level of psychopathy.  Meaning, they are lacking or have a diminished ability to experience empathy.  Instead, they actually experience a strange type of pleasure or satisfaction over the misfortune of others, which they often cause.

Most bullies involved in workplace bullying are also very Intelligent, and are commonly referred to as "successful psychopaths" in the United States.  They are "successful" in that their intelligence makes it possible for them to mimic the normal caring emotions of others, that they are incapable of experiencing.  Contrary to popular belief, intelligent psychopathic bullies, are not mentally ill in the usual sense of the word.  They are rooted in reality and know the difference between right and wrong.  Most have no feelings of guilt or anxiety.  The most dangerous psychopathic bullies, seem more mentally stable than most of us, despite thinking and being motivated VERY differently, and in ways that most people could not even imagine.

So who's the REAL bully, President Trump or Supreme Leader of North Korea, Kim Jong Un?

I think it's fair to say that both leaders are very intelligent. Based on that alone, it's possible that both men are REAL bullies, both intelligent enough to mimic normal caring emotions. 

Other ways to determine who the REAL bullies are, is by their relationships especially with family members and the severity and motivation for the bullying tactics they use.  Having a reliable source of information to answer these questions is a bonus.

Luckily, we live in the age of the Internet, where all the details of famous people's lives are revealed. True details are usually first published by reliable sources, then repeated many times more by many other sources.
 
We also know already that normal caring but angry adults, use tactics similar to tactics used by children called bullies. They use tactics "to call out" or to "stand up" against their adversaries as a show of strength.  They may raise their voice, make insulting comments or call them names. Bottom line, normally angry adults use tactics that cause little if any REAL harm.

This is what we know about Kim Jong Un's reported  relationships and past behavior towards other people;

Although it has been reported that Kim Jong Un has has a wife and three children, there are no details publihed.  Skipping to his other relatives, the most recent incident involves the death of Kim Jong Un's half brother Kim Jong Nam in February 2017.  Kim Jong Un's half brother was attacked by two women at an airport, where they quickly ran over and smeared a nerve toxin onto Kim Jong Nam's face.  He was dead within 20 minutes after describing excruciating pain moments before.

It was widely reported that the assassination was meticulously orchestrated by the North Korean government  and  that Kim Jong-Un wanted the killing to be so ‘gruesome’ that it would ‘horrify the rest of the world’ and intimidate his adversaries.

Another example of how Kim interacts with family members is the case of Jang Song-thaek who was thought of as a father figure to Kim Jong Un, and served as the second-in-command to the supreme leader. But when he ran afoul of Kim in 2013 for "anti-state acts" and "double-dealing," his familial ties couldn't save him from his nephew's wrath.

Many different articles describe thousands of gruesome public assassination, the worst "pulverized their bodies using anti-aircraft guns".   Other assassinations were carried out by hungry dogs who ate them.

Public executions and enforced disappearance to political prison camps serve as the ultimate means to terrorize the population into submission.

Michael Malice, author of "Dear Reader: The Unauthorized Autobiography of Kim Jong Il," said Kim's real favored means of murder is simply presiding over what Malice calls "the worst country on earth."

Conclusion:  Kim Jong Un is a REAL bully.  His  motivation  towards adversaries  is clear if not deadly. Known to not only assassinate for petty reasons, but to assassinate gruesomely, even his own family members.

What about President Trump, isn't it possible that they are both REAL bullies?

This is what we know about President's Trump's reported  relationships and past reported behavior towards other people.  Privacy matters keeps us from the minute details, but there is so much reported information, there's more than enough to go on.

President Trump seems happily married to his wife Melania who lives at the White House together with their young son Barron.

We know that the President has two x-wife's,  and  two adult sons, Donald Jr. and Eric.  He has a daughter, Ivanka with first wife Ivana,  a college-age daughter, Tiffany with second wife Marla Maples.

We know that all of the President's adult children, at least appear to have a good relationship with him.  Not knowing every thing of course, I think it's safe to say that most, if not all of his adult children actually work with the President or in charge of the President's former businesses. 

Have you EVER heard of anyone else who could boast that they too got along with their family as well as Trump?

Moving on to the hard part for REAL bullies, that being their "tactics" or behavior and the  motivation behind them.

This is where the "Trump is a bully" thing just falls apart completely!  Despite reading over and over again that Trump "rants and raves", I could never find video supporting that description. What I have seen is the President speaking with conviction about things that he is either passionate about or angry about.  At the very worst, I've seen him use a stern tone of voice with an angry expression. Considering the amount of  hatefulness against him, it's amazing how controlled he is.

 I'm thinking that maybe the people using those terms to describe the President, really don't know what "ranting and raving" really is.  Most, probably not even born or too young to remember President Nixon, the president who actually framed in my mind (and everyone else over 60) what REAL presidential "ranting and raving"  really looks like..

 Like many people my age, memories from my youth are much clearer than what I had for breakfast.  My memory of  President Nixon is one of those. With just his face and upper shoulders filling the TV screen,  I clearly remember Nixon sweating and red faced, his jowls actually shaking with every word that he spoke. Sounding like a lunatic he screamed  "I am NOT a crook!"  Happening well before the Internet, I  couldn't find any video. 

Then of course, there is the king of "ranting and raving", likely the most famous and the first ever captured on motion pictures for all perpetuity, Adolph Hitler. 

President Trump has been accused of just about every negative attribute that I can think of.  From bully to racist the list never ends.  Keeping up with the details of the news, I have yet to find validity for what the headlines imply.

I realize that general impressions based on things I've previously read, may not hold true.  So to make sure I wasn't missing anything, I did search engine checks regarding the President's previous reported behavior, using Trump's name, together with all kinds of negative attributes, such "assault", " "violence", "harming", "rape" etc.

 All of the negative attributes which are usually thought of as physical, such as "assault", "bashing" etc. searched together with Trump's name, showed links describing violent words, or angry tweets,  NOT real physical violence or harm.

The harshest description I found about the President's response or retaliation against an adversary, is that he "angrily lashed out on twitter using ALL caps!"  Most of the time, the President delivers insulting tweets, using the same measure of harshness, that they first delivered to him. 

Not knowing all of the history behind President Trumps insulting tweets, I must admit, that some of his tweets may cross the line of civility, especially before his presidency.  But seriously, tweeted words? When has a presidential tweet caused lasting, serious harm? 

Compared to Kim Jong Un, I think it's obvious who the REAL bully is. 

I'll put my trust in President Donald Trump, who is NOT a REAL bully!

Lets Learn to Recognize, Name it and End Workplace and/or Adult Bullying and Mobbing, Together!

ABC-AntiBullyingCrusador              ABC's Twitter Post Promoting This Article-Click Link  hhttps://twitter.com/ABCrusador/status/913103893135073280ttps://twitter.com/ABCrusador/status/913103893135073280  https://twitter.com/ABCrusador/status/913103893135073280https://twitter.com/ABCrusador/status/913103893135073280



-Won't You Consider Leaving a Comment?  *No* Identifying information is required-

ALL reader comments are welcomed and are especially ENCOURAGED when the reader's comments differ from that of the article or offers a different perspective or experience as RELATED to the article. With the following EXCEPTIONS; 1) Any reader comments expressed in such a way, that may be interpreted as "incivility" or "Adult Bullying" will be moderated by ABC individually for determination. 2) In violation of Blogger Content Policy