DO THEY EVER ADMIT THEY LIED OR TWISTED THE FACTS?

"The NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) illusion of superiority is a facet of a generalized disdain for reality. These individuals feel unconstrained by rules, customs, limits, and discipline.

Their world is filled with self-fiction in which conflicts are dismissed, failures redeemed, and self-pride is effortlessly maintained. They easily devise plausible reasons to justify self-centered and inconsiderate behavior. Their memories of past relationships are often illusory and changing.

If rationalizations and self-deception fail, individuals with NPD are vulnerable to dejection, shame, and a sense of emptiness. Then they have little recourse other than fantasy. They have an uninhibited imagination and engage in self-glorifying fantasies. What is unmanageable through fantasy is repressed and kept from awareness.

As they consistently devalue others, they do not question the correctness of their own beliefs; they assume that others are wrong.

The characteristic difficulties of individuals with NPD almost all stem from their lack of solid contact with reality. If the false image of self becomes substantive enough, their thinking will become peculiar and deviant. Then their defensive maneuvers become increasingly transparent to others (Millon & Davis, 1996, pp. 405-423).

Sharon C. Ekleberry, Dual Diagnosis and the Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

DO THEY EVER ADMIT THEY ARE LYING OR TWISTED THE FACTS?

from this site

(EOPC believes Cyberpathy is probably an expression of Destructive Narcissism and/or Sociopathy)

We work to try to understand the essence of the narcissist. When I was trying to explain the N to a friend, she understood an N as someone not "able to face the pain of imagining they did something wrong". I wasn't sure about this so did a quick internet search on narcissists and admitting wrong and accepting fault, and got these quotes:

- The narcissist sometimes notices that something is wrong with him and with his life -- but he never admits it.

- ... the narcissist is incapable of admitting that something is wrong with THEM

- They will never admit fault, they will never say they are sorry. If something goes wrong, they will play the victim. They will concoct conspiracy theories against them that do not exist.  They will always blame others.
- Remember they will never admit they are wrong, they will never debase themselves with an real apology. They will never laugh at themselves.

"[I suspect my husband is a narcissist]... He tries to place blame on anyone and everyone but himself."

- Narcissists ...live for themselves, they think they can do no wrong and will not admit to wrongdoing [re: traits common to 6 year olds and adult narcissists]  They often fabricate 'facts' to suit them and have a persecution complex when caught.


- [For the narcissist] to admit to one failing, to acknowledge a mistake, even a simple human error of judgment, would be to open the door to the deep internal lack within. ... Such feelings of worthlessness are like an ocean being held back by a fragile dyke. The illusion of perfection, maintained by projecting faults onto someone else, is a barrier to be constantly tended, mended and shored up. To admit any feelings of deficiency would be the equivalent of poking a hole in the dyke, an event to be feared as a total disaster.

Narcissists blame all problems on the "all-bad." It's never the narcissist's fault; it's always someone else's.

The last paragraph speaks truly from a narcissist's perspective. It's the victim's fault.

If the two of you have a conflict, they'll tweak the facts as much and as often as they have to to make it all your fault. (And if you EXPOSE the Narcissistic Cyberpath? Expect the SAME treatment as well as a full-tilt hate & smear-campaign!)

"His perverse way of turning everything into my fault and his blaming left me battered and exhausted."

Narcissists
Externalization of Blame -- The child cannot allow the bad feelings of being at fault for anything. He/ she/ they/ YOU are the problem!

He avoids feeling vulnerable by blaming others. The fragile self esteem cannot be punctured by taking responsibility for behavior. His script is "Do not expose me to those intolerable feelings inside. I can't handle it."

For making a change (whether great or small) implies that the narcissist has been two things they "cannot stand": imperfect (something is actually wrong with "them") and at fault ("they" actually were wrong, weak, or inferior somehow).

It can't be THEIR fault - THEY are perfect.

The narcissist says in effect, "Something doesn't feel right. I'm too special to be the cause, therefore it must be your fault."

EOPC is loaded with examples of this, here's our sampling:
(scroll over content to find embedded links)

BRAD DORSKY - According to him his victim supposedly 'led him on.' Dorsky not only tried to rage at his victim, he sent a "friend" to EOPC to find out who exposed him.

Obviously, DORSKY thought we were a bunch of barely legal kids on a social networking site; his favorite sort of target!

Dorsky said the relationship was 'consensual.' This is a common one! A relationship can not possibly be consentual when the victim does not know the truthful facts to make an appropriate decision.

• Lying to her
• Telling her she's the only one
• Playing mind games with her
• Moving in on her when she & her husband/ partner/ family are having a hard time
• Moving in when she's vulnerable
• Having a 'hidden agenda'

...does not make for consensual.
It does make for predatory exploitation!

CHARLES "ED" HICKS aka CHARLES GREENE - This guy's a piece of work. Said in court, to a judge, after 2 of his 7 known wives were questioned and hard, clear legal documentation was researched and presented by an Assistant D.A.: "It's false, all false." Guess that orange jumpsuit should have been a straightjacket.

Has recently gone back on dating sites under various nicknames using CHARLES HICKS or CHARLES GREENE to try to defuse people googling ED HICKS and finding out he's the 'Dr. Phil Bigamist.'

Tells people he's retired from a government job (he was fired and his security clearance revoked).

Additionally is not always honest about his criminal record on the numerous dating sites he's on now. This includes his using new names or versions of names on the dating sites.

On the Dating Sites he states his age as 56 LOL! (Shaves off about 9+ years)

(Here's the best one EOPC's heard!) Rumor has it that HICKS tells new prey he is shopping for a publisher for his book where he will tell the truth (he means his version of it a.k.a. complete fiction) and show how two of his wives 'set him up just to get on T.V. (EOPC is sure they had a great time telling the world how naive & used they were by Mr. Hicks) and have lied about him as well as them being 'mean' to his children (a.k.a. feeding, clothing, housing and taking care of his kids during their marriages while these kids sponged everything they could off them and various girlfriends of Mr. Hicks' simultaneously - just like Daddy!).

Additionally he says he plans to 'take legal action" against the producers of "Dr. Phil" and the WE show VERY BAD MEN who profiled him and showed him a bad light and ruined his good name!

Good luck with that, Mr. Hicks... Maybe now that O.J.'s in jail Hicks can help keep on looking for that illusive "real killer."

WILLIAM MICHAEL BARBER - back in jail after leaving the State in which he was incarcerated without permission and found having a false Social Security Card & Number and falsified identity papers on him. (After his wives and victims repeatedly told probation officers he would do it again and he was let out of jail early anyway!)..

BARBER was also profiled on the WE show VERY BAD MEN. He was released October 2007 so be careful! Spread the word about this serial predator! Don't you think these people would be thrilled they are so famous?

Jeff Dunetz/ YIDWITHLID - Where to begin with this one?
1. EOPC ran his expose for the third time in June 2007. This time he became of aware of it and he attacked one of his victims as the sole person causing him "public embarrassment." He gave no acknowledgment that his real name and location were not used by us on this site, at this same victim's request.

No mention that his new nickname and website are now linked to yet another 'false personna and location' made up by him.

No thank you for the consideration one of the victims he decided to bully showed his family. Typical of the backwards reactions of pathological persons!


2. Sammy Benoit/ Jeff Dunetz/ Yidwithlid blames just one person for all the postings about him despite her trying to get them taken down in March of 2007. (Now which one of EOPC's victims really controls the internet? All our Cyberpaths swear its THEIR victim!)

Note: SHE WAS NOT THE PERSON WHO HAD POSTED HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

All Cyberpaths have this "because THEY say it's so - has to be REALITY!" trait... please re-read the paragraph at the top of this article for our take on this pervasive trait of Cyberpaths

IF she (or anyone) had done something that heinous and he has hard proof -- Why isn't she in jail or doing community service? Why hasn't he sued her? (Our guess? Because then the REAL TRUTH about him and his escapades would come out!)
3. Dunetz swears it was 'consensual', but also neglects to mention that none of his targets knew they:

• had online casual sex partner-wanted ads since 2000 (he started up with the first victim we know of in 2002)
• downloaded one of his victims AOL buddy list and sent filthy messages to all the females on it - all of them on file with NYPDCI and the FBI
• was seeing sexual escorts at brothels (two brothels are now closed in part to him threatening this same victim, her going to the police and the police finding out that he was posting online about his exploits at this brothel. [By the way, Yidwithlid -- this Madam is BACK IN BUSINESS! But you probably know that already] Good going, Jeff Dunetz / YidwithLid!)
• the police reverse traced his computer to be full of porn and his credit cards traced back to phone sex lines from 1999/ 2000.  He got rid of that computer as soon as possible and has had a series of laptops since then.

-----------------------

1. Did any of his targets know this?
2. Did he tell any of his targets he was lying and it was 'just a game' to him?
3. Did his targets know he was playing with their emotions, trust & using them for freebies?
4. Did we mention he's tried to erase it all and say it never existed or was planted? (His excuse is that its "hurting his wife" - since he was doing this since 1999; according to police - why didn't he think about that the years PRIOR to victimizing these women?)
5. And what do these targets have to do with HIS sex addiction?

Sound familiar?

Again -

A relationship cannot possibly be consentual when the victim does not know the truthful facts to make an appropriate decision.

• Lying,
• telling her she's the only one and you've never done this before,
• playing mind games with her,
• moving in quickly on her when she & her husband/ partner are separating,
• not supporting her when her husband/partner finds out about their online affair and abuses her worse,
• knowing she's mentally & emotionally vulnerable,
• as well as having a 'hidden agenda' does not make for consensual.

It makes for predatory exploitation.

According to these predators their victims aren't allowed be hurt, complain or look for support either. And they just deny, deny, deny. How's that for 'nice guys'?


DOUG BECKSTEAD - an "investigator" from the Air Force Base which Beckstead's associated wrote us and subsequently one of his victims trying to find out who she was, get her to phone them, etc etc. How much should we bet that it was one of Beckstead's buddies trying to be sure which of his online victims blew the whistle on his online predation so Beckstead could attack her?

Beckstead came here and ALSO tried to say it was "all a game" and his victims "knew what they were getting into." Incredible gall, but familiar. Again, Beckstead neglects to factor in that:

• Lying,
• telling her she's the only one,
• playing mind games with her, moving in on her when she & her husband are having problems,
• lying to other targets about your numerous online affairs & porn addiction,
• while knowing she's emotionally vulnerable,
• as well as having a 'hidden agenda'

DOES NOT MAKE FOR CONSENSUAL.
IT DOES MAKE FOR PREDATORY EXPLOITATION.

Again:
A relationship cannot possibly be consentual when the victim does not know the truthful facts to make an appropriate decision.

Guess what! Beckstead was mentioned in the same Air Force Base's newspaper so - he must have been looking to clean up his image before they added to his overblown ego. Rumor has it he's got another victim 'on the hook' already. Watch out, he likes to portray those used-up sources of his as MENTALLY ILL - when in fact these cyberpaths appear to be the ones with 'mental issues.'

He's even tried to tell people that her exposure of him only HELPED HIM... and hurt his victims! LOL - too much protesting, huh? Don't we already know what he's telling his latest victim?

All the stuff he's posted (and continues to post) all over the web - trying to drown out the truth and glorify his 'reputation' when he's really a predator!

JULIA BISH-JUDAH-HUNT-McGOVERN? Just look at her interview. That says it all about how 'innocent' she considers herself after meeting men online and marrying them without even meeting them in person, among other things.

Completely nuts and a serial predator!

PHIL HABERMAN - click here for an update on this story. Haberman continues to use the legal system against ANYONE who has his number and speaks out about it.


UPDATE: LORI DREW - the real "Josh Evans" and Tormentor of the Late Megan Meier - who not only sued the Meiers for a destroyed foosball table but when she ran into the Meiers told them to "give it a rest" about her CAUSING Megan's suicide. Sick beyond belief. Convicted on 3 misdemeanor counts, may face civil action.


DAN JACOBY - turns to his "old standby" of smearing his victim, saying she's 'crazy' and doesn't have the "love of God in her heart." Of course he owes his victim money for things she bought him (he told her he was divorced and broke - NOT!).

Jacoby? Mr. Nice Guy? 1. Well turns out this predator took webshots of his victims during chat sessions without telling them and threatens to post them online if they expose him. Then he changed and scrubbed everything and went to the police to say his victim was "harassing" him. Why would you need to do that Dan, if you were HONEST?

Guess what? These women LOVED you and you can't do anything wrong if you love someone. The scumbag liar? is YOU! Besides what kind of sicko-perv picks on vulnerable women trying to recover from prescription drugs??


The two things all our predators seem to universally hate:

1. being called an abuser
2. being called a PREDATOR

Ouch!! -- yet their victims are not allowed to feel hurt or pain? That's the cyberpath's sociopathic self - the real self with no empathy - coming out.

Do you think that when these predators behind a keyboard find out they are wrong about their assumptions they apology to us or their victims? go ahead and guess!

The "scorned woman" defense. The "they are lying/ making it all up/ obsessed with me/ stalkers/ just jealous/ never happened" defense. The "she had it coming" excuse!

You name it - you'll hear it with these people. Unfortunately sometimes their families or friends still believe them. Until its too late and they are caught doing it again.

Do we see a pattern here? As it says above: IT'S NEVER THEIR FAULT. MUST BE THE INVISIBLE PERSON OR THEIR VICTIM! NEVER THEM!

By the way, any Cyberpath who wants to write a full and accurate confession as well as an open, honest apology to any of the victims they have hurt, caused emotional & mental trauma, forced into counseling, caused rifts in their families, raged at, used and abused... we would be more than happy to publish it for you and see to it your victims get a copy of your healing words as well.

The 'Cyberpath's' Absolute Narcissism

extrapolated from the great work of Claudia Moscovici:

Psychopaths (or cyberpaths) suffer from the most extreme form of narcissism. Narcissists put others down, or dominate them, in order to get validation as superior to them. Usually such individuals seem to be exactly as they are: smug, snobby, self-absorbed to the point of being ridiculous. Since psychopaths (or cyberpaths) wear a mask of sanity, however, their narcissism is better camouflaged, at least initially.
 
It’s also far more acute and dangerous. Psychopaths (or cyberpaths) put others down in order to crush them. No matter how charming and modest they may seem in superficial contact, their ego feeds upon the victimization of others, including–or rather, especially–their family members, spouses, lovers and children. They aren’t satisfied with simply proving their superiority. They need to also humiliate and harm those around them in order to feel empowered and superior to them.

Clinically speaking, narcissism constitutes what Hervey Cleckley calls in The Mask of Sanity a “pathological egocentricity and incapacity for love.” Narcissists are so self-absorbed that they can’t envision the needs and reactions of others. They regard others as mirrors whose main role is to reflect–and magnify–the image of their own greatness. Although psychopaths (or cyberpaths) are narcissistic to an extreme, they’re also far worse than most narcissists. At least most narcissists—excluding perhaps “malignant narcissists”–can experience self-doubt. They also need love and validation from other individuals.

Psychopaths (or cyberpaths) embody narcissism with a grotesque twist. They lack the depth to experience or need a personal, individuated kind of love. As Cleckley observes, “The psychopath (or cyberpath) is always distinguished by egocentricity. This is usually of a degree not seen in ordinary people and often is little short of astonishing.” (The Mask of Sanity, 347) Furthermore, unlike narcissists, who, as mentioned, often show themselves to be vain to the point of self-caricature, psychopaths (or cyberpaths) don’t usually appear to be arrogant, self-absorbed or boastful. They can mask much better their grossly inflated egos, as they camouflage everything else that’s deviant and dangerous in their personalities.  They compellingly present themselves as loving, affectionate and other-regarding individuals.

However, as Cleckley notes,  “Deeper probing will always reveal a self-centeredness that is apparently unmodifiable and all but complete. This can perhaps be best expressed by stating that it is an incapacity for object love and that this incapacity (in my experience with well-marked psychopaths (or cyberpaths) appears to be absolute.” (347) Cleckley correlates object-love, or caring about another person, with the capacity to feel empathy. Without empathy, you can’t understand what others feel. You therefore don’t have a disincentive to cause them harm or pain. Conversely, you lack the incentive to make them happier. Love, or even kindness, don’t exist without empathy.

That’s not to say that psychopaths (or cyberpaths) can’t experience any sort of fondness whatsoever. But their affection tends to be self-serving, fleeting and superficial. In some cases, it manifests itself as an intense, obsessive drive to possess another person. Cleckley grants that, “[The psychopath (or cyberpath)] is plainly capable of casual fondness, of likes and dislikes, and of reactions that, one might say, cause others to matter to him.” (348) He qualifies, “These affective reactions are, however, always strictly limited in degree. In durability they also vary greatly from what is normal in mankind. The term absolute is, I believe, appropriate if we apply it to any affective attitude strong and meaningful enough to be called love, that is, anything that prevails in sufficient degree and over sufficient periods to exert a major influence on behavior.” (347) Whenever they seem to be passionately in love or to experience genuine parental or filial devotion, psychopaths (or cyberpaths) are faking it.

Let’s return again to the case of Neil Entwistle. Opening the door for his wife, giving her romantic gifts, posting the pictures of her and their newborn baby on a joint website, doesn’t mean anything if he’s prepared to literally sacrifice his family to his whims. To this effect, Cleckley observes, “The psychopath (or cyberpath) seldom shows anything that, if the chief facts were known, would pass even in the eyes of lay observers as object love. His absolute indifference to the financial, social, emotional, physical, and other hardships that he brings upon those for whom he professes love confirms the appraisal during psychiatric studies of his true attitude. We must, let it never be forgotten, judge a man by his actions rather than by his words.” (348)

Because they can’t love others, psychopaths (or cyberpaths) also lack the motivation to improve their character and behavior. Cleckley concludes, “This lack in the psychopath (or cyberpath) makes it all but impossible for an adequate emotional rapport to arise in his treatment and may be an important factor in the therapeutic failure that, in my experience, has been universal.” (348)

Claudia's blog

Claudia's book

Anonymous Anger Rampant on Internet

by Todd Leopold

There's a whole world of people out there, and boy, are they pissed off.

On political blogs, the invective flies. Posters respond to the latest celebrity gossip with mockery or worse. Sports fans set up Web sites with names that begin with "fire," hoping coaches, athletic directors and sportscasters lose their jobs.

And though there are any number of bloggers and commenters who attempt to keep their postings and responses on a civil level, all too often interactive Web sites descend into ad hominem attacks, insults and plain old name-calling. Indeed, there are even whole sites devoted to venting, such as justrage.com (one screed there was titled, "I don't give a flying f***, so f*** you") and mybiggestcomplaint.com.

This is not a world Emily Post would want to be caught in after dark.

"The Internet can be a great tool," said Sara Black, a professor of health studies at St. Joseph's University who takes a particular interest in online bullying. "Like any tool, it can also be misused."

One reason for the vitriol that emerges on the Web, experts say, is the anonymity the Internet provides. Commenters seldom use their real names, and even if they do, the chance for retaliation is slim.

"In the [pre-Internet era], you had to take ownership [of your remarks]. Now there's a perception of anonymity," said Lesley Withers, a professor of communication at Central Michigan University. "People think what they say won't have repercussions, and they don't think they have to soften their comments."

Contrast that with a face-to-face conversation, or even a phone conversation, where you can judge people's moods from facial movements or vocal inflections, observes University of Texas psychology professor Art Markman. iReport.com: Second Life avatars grapple with reduced nonverbal communication

"It's hard to be aggressive when you're face to face," he said.

Moreover, he points out, aggression often carries a subtext of power.

"A lot of times, real anger is an attempt to get control over a situation where the person doesn't usually have it," he said. In that respect, comments to blog posts are attempts to strike back.

Those power games are innately grasped by children and teens, with schools serving as a perennial social laboratory.

Cheryl Dellasega, a Penn State women's studies professor, ticks off hypothetical examples that could have come straight from the scripts to "Mean Girls" or "Heathers."

"Girls who are getting teased come home and let their [aggressors] have it by putting something on their blog and starting a rumor campaign," she said. And instead of rumors simply making the rounds among peer groups -- which can be bad enough -- "they go out to a much bigger group, a worldwide group. The impact is devastating, and it's as easy as clicking a button."

"Kids don't realize that one post can destroy somebody's life forever," she added.

Indeed, such incidents have made headlines. In 2006, 13-year-old Megan Meier committed suicide after becoming attracted to a boy on MySpace who then turned on her. The boy turned out to be a hoax created by a neighbor family that included a former friend of Meier's.

In August, The New York Times Magazine did a story about trolls, some barely out of their teens, who antagonize others for the sake of "lulz": "Lulz is watching someone lose their mind at their computer 2,000 miles away while you chat with friends and laugh," one ex-troll told the publication.

Adults aren't immune by any means. A Japanese woman, angry at her online "husband," killed his avatar after he divorced her. A South Korean actress committed suicide after being harassed by online rumors following a divorce. Celebrity gossip sites are full of snarky comments about stars; reaction from readers is often brutal, turning the story into the online equivalent of a pile-on.

Markman is quick to observe that he doesn't believe there's more anger out there. But, he said, "there are more ways of expressing it on the Internet."

"We've all had interactions with unpleasant people, but we don't confront them. We take it out elsewhere," he said. "What the Internet has created is groups of people where there are no repercussions with being too aggressive."

Indeed, though electronically transmitted anger has parallels throughout human history -- the bitter letter, the village gossip -- the speed at which it travels, and the number of people who may come in contact with it, is something new, says St. Joseph's Black.

"[Electronic] media can increase potential for violence in a number of ways," she said in an e-mail interview. "First, it introduces ideas (good and bad) that people may not have come up with on their own. Second, it is easier to depersonalize the victim, facilitating perpetration. Third, aggressive behaviors may be reinforced with points, attention or status, especially in games."

Withers has seen that first hand. She teaches a course on the "dark side of communication" at Central Michigan, involving "the mean or evil things we do on a day-to-day basis," as she describes it: cheating, for example, or lying.

As part of the course, several of her students work on a collaborative project with students at other schools, and they come together in Second Life, the virtual reality environment. If someone isn't pulling his or her weight, says Withers, others can be harsh in their judgments -- harsher than in real life, because the anger is expressed at the person's avatar. Sidebar: Dealing with anger in Second Life

Which led at least one of Withers' students to forget that the avatar was attached to a real person.

"One student went off on another student and she was sitting in the classroom a few rows behind him," she said. "He knew she was there, but didn't -- there was that distancing."

Is there a way to restore civility to the Internet? Among children and teenagers, say Dellasega and Black, it's up to parents to exercise control.

"I think parents need to take responsibility," Dellasega said. "They give kids computers and leave them alone. ... When a child is 8 or 9, the computer should be in a public place. Kids should understand that using a computer is a privilege, not a right."

Schools can also play a role, she says.

Black adds that parents should set clear rules on behavior and build empathy in their kids by having them reach out to those who are different.

As for adults, human nature dictates that people will always lash out at others, whether it's over a perceived insult or simply because of a power differential. Web sites may ban the worst offenders, but they'll almost always pop up elsewhere, using a different name, e-mail address or even computer.

"Some people are just bitter and angry," said psychiatrist Dr. Terry Eagan, medical director of the Moonview Sanctuary in Santa Monica, California. "Sometimes, they're against everyone, other times against a specific group. That person can get really stimulated and can say all sorts of horrible things. But I don't think it's not like they didn't exist before."

Whether the problem will get control of us, or we will get control of the problem, is in the way we face up to it, he says. Anger, he says, is rolled up with anxiety and fear, and nothing creates more fear like a lack of understanding.

"I tell patients that I'd rather know everything about people; information is powerful," he said. "When the climate of the world is more fear-based, it permeates everything."



ORIGINAL ARTICLE FOUND HERE


SITES BY VICTIMS OF CYBERPATHS
(we believe many of these people have a right to be upset and using writing as a healing & informational tool for them can be very empowering)

Cyberstalker: Felicity Jane Lowde

Marilyn McAboy

The Laura Knight-Jadczyk Fraud

Harassment is My Job

Nancy Lynne

Too Good To Be Real

Kim Stewart - Bink, Briesis, Allie

Victim of Gareth Rodger Speaks Out

Judy Lyman (?)
Jakob Maltese

One Victim of William Michael Barber Tells Their Story

Sandra Brown MA - No License 


(readers -- if you know of others, please tell us!  thanks to those who sent us these)

TIPS FOR DEALING WITH A CYBERPATH

(excerpted from ALBERT J. BERNSTEIN, Ph.D's work on EMOTIONAL VAMPIRES)

1. KNOW THEM, KNOW THEIR HISTORY, AND KNOW YOUR GOAL
The way to anticipate a cyberpath is by knowing how they've acted in the past. Chances are pretty good that they'll do the same thing in the future. The big mistake you can make with cyberpaths is assuming, without evidence, that though their record has been bad in the past, that they have learned their lesson, and will do better this time. When you deal with cyberpaths, always ask yourself what you're trying to accomplish and why. If you're not sure, don't do anything until you've thought about it carefully.

2. GET OUTSIDE VERIFICATION
Cyberpaths want you to listen to them alone. To control you, they'll try to isolate you from your usual sources of information. Always check out what they say with a trusted friend or other resources, especially when you'd rather not. Cyberpaths, like vampires, can't operate in the "light of day." (Be aware: Once you check them out a Cyberpath will accuse you of "stalking." Ignore the accusation and find out everything you can about them!)

3. DO WHAT THEY DON'T
To prevail over Cyberpaths you must rush in where they fear to tread. Your greatest strengths lie in doing the things you can do that Cyberpaths can't. (Like telling the truth or doing a background check when they asked you not to)

4. PAY ATTENTION TO ACTIONS, NOT WORDS
What cyberpaths say is often very different from what they do. To avoid being drained, always focus on what they do NOT what they say!

5. IDENTIFY HYPNOTIC STRATEGY
Cyberpaths are consummate hypnotists. When you see through the smoke and mirrors, their illusions don't work nearly so well.

6. PICK YOUR BATTLES
To be an effective Cyberpath fighter, you have to be able to pick the important battles and ignore the rest. You also have to avoid fighting battles you can't possibly win (such as getting them to admit the truth or trying 'force' them to apologize or praying they will change!)

7. LET CONTINGENCIES DO THE WORK
A contingency is an if-then situation. If someone does a particular thing, then certain consequences will follow.

The only way Cyberpaths learn anything is by experiencing the consequences of their own behavior.

If you're ever tempted to rescue a Cyberpath, think about what you're teaching him or her about how the game of life is really played.

8. CHOOSE YOUR WORDS AS CAREFULLY AS YOU PICK YOUR BATTLES
With Cyberpaths what you say, how you say it, and when you say it are all crucial to the outcomes you are likely to achieve.

9. IGNORE TANTRUMS (Attacks, Idol Threats)
When Cyberpaths don't get their way, they throw tantrums. They can explode into all sorts of emotional outbursts or attacks/ threats whose only purpose is to get you to give in or hurt you so you do something against your better judgment for THEM. Don't.

10. KNOW YOUR OWN LIMITS
Dealing with Cyberpaths requires a lot of effort. Stay Strong.

The Modus Operandi of the Emotional Blackmailer

He is too good to be true - He is soft-spoken and polite, he smells good, he looks good, he is kind and loves women, he is respectful, he doesn't come on too strong FOR THE FIRST FEW MEETINGS ONLY. He's always on the lookout for a patsy, but he's in no hurry as there's always another one around the corner so he'll take his time in coming on to you.

He'll be there more and more frequently -gazing at you with puppy dog eyes; wanting to know everything about you, asking your advice, making it look like you are getting to know each other and forming a bond.

He will put himself in the best possible light - including lying through his teeth about his ambitions, activities, hopes and dreams.

His seduction techniques are often subtle and well-practiced - It will seem he did nothing to seduce you until you look back and analyze it. He sat and stood close to you, he brushed against you, but it didn't seem to be on purpose.

He suddenly "Turns on the Charm" and turns up the heat - Once you're hypnotized by his sweetness and modesty and respectfulness, he will pounce on you one night and turn into a Mr. Hyde. It "just happened." This is the critical moment to run away, don't let him touch you. He'll leave you breathless wondering what exactly happened. He'll turn on all the charm full force and you'll be wanting him from then on, yet wanting some breathing room. You won't get any. Ever. It won't bother you at first - you'll think he's attentive and ardent.

He starts using the lines technique - Once you're "seeing" each other, he'll be a real swain, discussing how amazing this new relationship is, how different you are from any woman he ever met; and he'll talk about your remarkable beauty and how "alike" you are. He will talk about your "resonance" and describe all the awful women he knew before who didn't want a good man - who wanted someone to abuse them. All of this is meaningless talk.

He uses the same lines on every woman.

He will whine and even shed tears - if you say you have other things to do, other people to see, or want to be alone after seeing him 8 days in a row. He enjoys being abused, so if you scream at him it only makes him feel more secure. He got used to fighting all around him as a child and he equates fighting with love.

He'll start demanding that you "prove your love" - You have become nothing but his prop. He has become your jailer. The key is: he demands CONSTANT proof of your love.

He will "seem" to accept your decision to break up - As the months roll along and you are tired of his constant presence, begging, whining and having unreasonable control of your life, you will decide to break up with him. He will then agree to back off, give you some space, and try to do better. These are all lies.

He'll tell you he has "changed" - No matter how many times you break up with him, he will call you to tell you that he needs you, that he has changed, and he will say it all in a calm voice as if he respects your decision to come back or not. His game is to stay away just long enough that you forget his annoying traits and miss the good parts. But if you agree to even one meeting it will be back to daily visits and demands for constant pampering again.

Getting Rid of the bastard
The only way to get rid of the emotional blackmailer is when he has found another willing victim to be his patsy. He will already be courting her while seeing you (he is juggling two or more women per day). Once he has the new person in his "thrall" and has nothing to lose by losing you, he will drop you like a hot potato.

He prey's on sympathy, and lives to control - his purpose is to have many women in his control - perhaps one for money and one to scream at him, and both for companionship. He gets a high from controlling people, because as a child he had no control over anything and frequently felt abandoned. This is why the more women who feel sorry for him, listen to him, go out with him, the better he feels and behaves. However, he is telling each of them the same thing: they are the best, the most beautiful, the most like him, he wants to spend the rest of his life with ONLY THEM.

The character of the Emotional Blackmailer
Everything he says or does is for gain. He does nothing for the sheer joy of it, or because he likes people or wants to build a relationship: he is looking ahead to what he can get out of the person: sex, housekeeping, emotional support, someone to listen to him spin his tales of woe, what have you. Loyalty or faithfulness are not in his nature.

He will become vicious and even violent if he is crossed, contradicted, found out, exposed or denied what he wants. It looks exactly like the tantrum of a five year old. That is still his emotional age, although he has the smooth moves of a Casanova down pat.

How to extricate yourself from the Emotional Blackmailer
One way out is to cut off all contact. Even email mayl put you back in his control if you get back into the same pattern of doing what he wants when he wants it. He is a master manipulator who will prey on your sympathy for him as a human being.

Any time spent reasoning with him is wasted - he doesn't hear a word you say. All arguments are circular. If he has no answer to your logic he will remain silent and wait for you to shut up, then start with his argument again.

After you have cut off contact, he will stalk you for a while if he doesn't have a replacement lined up yet, but this will cease because it isn't fulfilling enough for him. He NEEDS feedback, anger, someone to scream at him. Any kind of attention pleases him - he is a true masochist who would enjoy being slapped. If you catch him? He will accuse YOU of stalking HIM!

Turning the Tables
Another way to ditch the Emotional Blackmailer is to turn the tables on him. A man who is so good at manipulating is also easily manipulated to do whatever you want IF you do it the right way. You can be rid of him within a few weeks without avoiding him by doing the following:

* Exhibit jealousy and make it clear that you won't share him with anyone else, and you expect to spend the rest of your life with him and have exclusive rights over him. This will make him feel suffocated for a change and he will be eagerly stepping out on you while claiming he wants only you.
* Lose interest in doing anything you used to do for him or with him; stop taking him seriously; don't listen to his rants about his job; ridicule his ideas, act bored and make it clear you see him only as a useful decoration.

* Tell him to grow up, tell him you are well aware of his manipulative games but you like him anyway and demand he be faithful to you. This will scare him and make him step up his efforts with the other women, and he will soon be out of your life.

*****************************

A Final Note:
Healthy, non-manipulative men:

* Don't beg (or lie)* Don't tell you that you're "the best" or "the only one"

* Don't use the lines "if you really love me", or "prove you love me by doing this for me" or "I need help to get through this time so could you send me some photos, etc"...

* Don't put down their former girlfriends or wives, even mildly; and don't accuse women of being "scorned"

* Respect your right to have other online friends

* Share all their information with you: address, phone numbers, job, etc.

They don't mind if you double check on them for your own safety!


(this article was written in the male gender, your cyberpath may be female - EOPC)



original article found here

Another Online Dating Horror Story

by Eileen Park

(U.S.A.) With over 50 million users, online dating is showing no signs of slowing down. But with its increasing popularity, risks of meeting someone misrepresenting who they really are, is increasing as well.

Lisa of Raleigh, didn’t want to be identified. But she did want to tell us her story. She said, “I’ve met some dangerous people that were not what they represented themselves to be. He [Len] was very charming to begin with and within 72 hours, the real person emerged. The horrible person.”

Lisa’s talking about a man she met on Facebook and a dating website called "Plenty of Fish". She said she went against her better judgment and invited the man -- Len -- to her home just a few weeks ago, then went into his car for a ride.

That was when things went downhill. “Len, took me out and threatened to put me out a major interstate, that was very scary” Lisa explained.

Len was someone she was attracted to online, but he ended up being a completely different in person. Lisa, like millions of other women, often decide to go on date, based on their gut instincts.

But Online Dating Expert Julie Spira says, instinct is not enough. She explained, “People make up even where they work and what they’ve done for a living or even if they have a college degree or not...”

Dating experts say, go a step further. Invest in a criminal background service. We checked out a new service called LUVFAX.com that charges $30 a report and asked Lisa to give us the names of three of her worst dates. One by one, we plugged their information in. Two of names came out clean. One name, did not.

Len, the date who tried to kick Lisa out of his car in the middle of a highway, had a criminal history, with multiple pending felonies. Something he failed to mention to Lisa.

Julie Spira, Author of “The Perils of Cyber Dating” says this kind of misrepresentation happens all the time. Often it’s innocent, like a person’s height or their weight. But increasingly a person will try to hide their criminal history. Spira said, “We know that 1 out of 10 sexual predators are using online dating services now. But the online dating sites take this very very seriously.”

So we asked the biggest online dating websites how they’re protecting their users. E-Harmony sent this statement to NBC17. “First, we have industry-leading technology and full-time staff dedicated to monitoring the quality and integrity of the user base. Second, we provide our members with a number of ways to report suspicious or harmful behavior so we can investigate and take appropriate action.”

E-Harmony says they check the names of users in the States, against public sex offender registries.

BEST defense? Don't do Online Dating at all! Users of dating sites change their names, their data - all the time. See Ed Hicks for a perfect example.


Dating sites take action? They remove them from the site so the person comes back with a new IP, new name and is back doing it again.  These sites have no real way to check or deal with anything.  They are simply worried of losing business.  - EOPC

original article found here

PETRAEUS: Proble of Mistress' Cyberharassment Uncovered the Affair

The affair that brought an end to David Petraeus' tenure as CIA director came to light during an FBI investigation into a complaint that his biographer Paula Broadwell was sending harassing e-mails to another woman close to him, a U.S. official said Saturday.

During the investigation, other communications surfaced between Petraeus and Broadwell, a married mother of two, according to the official.

The official did not identify the woman who made the initial complaint and did not know the nature of her relationship with Petraeus.

The FBI interviewed Petraeus in the course of its inquiry, said the official, who stressed that the CIA director was never the target of the investigation and his communications were never compromised. The official did not know whether Broadwell was interviewed.

The official did not have an exact timeframe for the investigation and could not say if it is still ongoing.

CNN has not been able to reach Broadwell for comment.

The Obama administration first learned of the affair in a phone call from the FBI to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper at 5 p.m. on election night, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official.

On Saturday, questions arose about why congressional leaders were not informed of the investigation immediately.

According to a congressional aide familiar with the matter, the House and Senate intelligence committees weren't informed that there was an FBI investigation into the situation until Friday.

"The committees are required to be kept informed of significant intelligence activities," the aide said Saturday. "If there was an official investigation that was looking, at least in part, at information that was compromising the CIA director, then I think there's a solid argument to say that the committee leadership should have been notified to at least some level of detail."

The resignation also comes days before Petraeus was slated to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the September 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The attack, in which four Americans were killed, became a point of contention during the presidential campaign.

Some have even suggested that the timing of Petraeus' stepping down is suspect, given the expected grilling in Congress. Acting CIA Director Michael Morell will testify instead.

"Director Petraeus' frank and forthright letter of resignation stands on its own," said a senior U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic. "Any suggestion that his departure has anything to do with criticism about Benghazi is completely baseless."

Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Peter King, R-New York, who is also a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, insisted that Petraeus should not back out of plans to testify.

King, a vocal critic of the Obama administration's handling of the Benghazi attack, said on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" that Petraeus is "an absolutely essential witness, maybe more than anybody else."

"David Petraeus' testifying has nothing to do with whether or not he's still the CIA director, and I don't see how the CIA can say he's not going to testify," King said.

"I think his testimony is certainly valuable, it's certainly necessary," King continued. "He was at the center of this, and he has answers that only he has."

If Petraeus does not testify as originally scheduled on Thursday, King said, "It should be very soon after that."

Broadwell spent a year with Petraeus in Afghanistan interviewing him for the book she co-wrote, "All In: The Education of General David Petraeus."

Petraeus' departure Friday appeared to be an abrupt end to a spectacularly successful career in public service.

"After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours," Petraeus said in a letter to colleagues, explaining his decision to step down.

"Teddy Roosevelt once observed that life's greatest gift is the opportunity to work hard at work worth doing. I will always treasure my opportunity to have done that with you and I will always regret the circumstances that brought that work with you to an end," he said.

Petraeus, 60, had a distinguished 37-year career in the military before joining the CIA, helping turn the tide against insurgents while commanding forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Earning praise from both sides of the political aisle, the retired four-star general took the helm of the CIA in September 2011.

Petraeus met with Obama on Thursday to offer his resignation and explain the circumstances behind it, according to a senior administration official. The president accepted Petraeus' resignation during a phone call Friday, the official said.

"By any measure, he was one of the outstanding general officers of his generation, helping our military adapt to new challenges and leading our men and women in uniform through a remarkable period of service in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he helped our nation put those wars on a path to a responsible end," Obama said in a statement.

"As director of the Central Intelligence Agency, he has continued to serve with characteristic intellectual rigor, dedication and patriotism."

Petraeus assumed command of the NATO International Security Assistance Force and U.S. Forces Afghanistan in July 2010, after serving for more than 20 months as commander of U.S. Central Command. He previously commanded multinational forces in Iraq, leading the so-called surge.

The general literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency techniques by overseeing development of the Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Manual.

Before his nomination as CIA director, Petraeus was considered the nation's most well-known and popular military leader since Colin Powell.

Petraeus and his wife, Holly, live in Virginia. They have two grown children.

original article found here

Remember, if or when you defame and cyberharass others - it often reveals more about you than your target.  EOPC

6 MONTHS FOR CRIMINAL CYBER HARASSMENT OF HIS EX

by Sam Pazzano

(CANADA) A Toronto osteopath who sought to ruin his former mistress' life by disseminating pornographic shots and videos to her family, friends and church pals was slapped Friday with a blended six-month conditional sentence.

Justice Peter Harris handed Oleg Korbut a mixture of house arrest to be served Monday through Friday -- which enables him to keep working and supporting his wife and six-month-old son -- plus 90 days of weekends in jail, starting next Friday night.

Harris was sentencing Korbut, 43, for criminal harassment plus stealing his now 30-year-old lover's cellphone and diary in January 2010.

While the judge said this sentence would signal that the "theft of one's most private and personal information will not be tolerated," he tempered the six-month sentence -- by making it conditional, instead of six months of straight jail time -- so that Korbut could keep supporting his family.

The victim's embarrassing videos on the internet cannot be retrieved, so her suffering and embarrassment may never end, the judge sadly noted.

"Unquestionably, Mr. Korbut's premeditated, escalating campaign in the form of deliberate, callous and vindictive harassment has had a profound and devastating impact on Ms. K's reputation, her integrity and her self-worth," the judge said. The victim cannot be legally identified.

Korbut -- who had taken sexual photos and videos of the victim during their two-year relationship which he ended in late 2009 -- stole her cell-phone and diary in January 2010 after she revealed she was seeing another man. Korbut had forbade her from doing so for a year or more.

The Ukrainian-educated medical doctor became enraged and then distributed those images to the e-mail addresses of her family, friends and church-going pals. He also started posting her on on-line dating websites between Feb. 16, and March 6 2010.

Korbut also dropped off a "Valentine's Day" gift of a sexually explicit DVD at the home of the woman's new boyfriend on Feb. 14, 2010.

Korbut "was unable to restrain his scornful attitude towards Ms. K., and referred to her as a ‘whore' and ‘f---ing scum' while testifying in his own defence," Harris noted. "He lacks insight and respect for others. . his unbalanced perspective on gender equality and sensitivity was apparent."

Korbut is a first-time offender who enjoys a solid reputation and solid support in the community and represents a low risk to re-offend, Harris said.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE FOUND HERE