Addendum: Pamela Meyer is CEO of social networking company Simpatico Networks. She collected and reviewed most of the research on deception that has been published, from such fields as law-enforcement, military, psychology and espionage. She received advanced training in deception detection, including multiple courses of advanced training in interrogation, microexpression analysis, statement analysis, behavior and body language interpretation, and emotion recognition.
You will notice, if you watched the whole video, that she uses examples from both the political right and left, as well as from the criminal spectrum to explain the basis of deception detection.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
I watched the whole thing.
I think the premises she presents are highly suspect, extremely subjective and mostly bogus.
But you go ahead and apply that B.S. pseudo-science to tonight's debate and you will come to the conclusion that Obama handed Romney his, um, "posterior".
You will also notice that every single story she relates has an incredibly pro-right-wing bias and agenda. So transparent.
I have doubts that this is even a LEGITIMATE video from a TED event.
Reeks of an O'Keefe hoax!
Who was LYING? This is a scandal; a total and complete media scandal committed by a woman who promised to violate her contract and to insert herself into the debate. All she did for weeks was brag about how she intended to grab the spotlight -- and boy did she ever.
Obama not only LIED but he had the help of despicable Candy Crowley that so called moderator who was absolutely disgraceful.
Crowley not only selected the questions, but she helped Obama with the UNTRUE answers. But the both got caught.Despite the fact that Romney had to debate 2 people instead of one, Romney cleaned Obama's clock all night.
And take a look at this!
New Threats to Riot if Obama Loses Election
http://www.infowars.com/new-threats-to-riot-if-obama-loses-election/
Only Obama lied. But if Mitt did lie, Obama`s lies were far worse because he hates freedom.
XO: So you would consider Richard Nixon and Dick Cheney to be left wing? She used them as examples in the piece. She also used known felons.
Maybe you didn't watch that far.
You just saw the first example and extrapolated to the rest.
Typical.
Turns out, that using her criteria (which by the way is well established scientifically), shows both men had some issues last night.
Too bad you're such a phoney.
LGS: I agree that Romney had two opponents last night. Crowley accepted Obama's answers and challenged Romney's.
Typical liberal tactics.
I do not agree that Romney cleaned Obama's clock, not because his facts, demeanor and/or presentation was wrong, but because the whole thing was set up to make him look defensive and bad.
It is Obama who should have been made defensive, as it is his policies that should have been on trial.
Crowley would not let Romney focus on Obama's record, but kept "moving along" to help Obama out.
I hope he gets helped out in November...right out of the WH.
RR: I'm not sure I would place too much credence on what seems to be more like bravado and empty threats.
Still....
Radical Redneck, thanks for linking to Alex Jones.
The national debate is already a pretty thin gruel. That doesn't help.
When you're whining about the moderator, you're losing.
Craig: You're right, of course. If it had been Rick Santorem moderating or Chris Wallace, you would have been very happy and satisfied with their moderation as well, right?
Chris Wallace, Yes. Rick Santorem? Non sequitur.
Craig: If you accept that a non sequitur is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion, Rick might be considered one if one misses the point.
The point was, of course, that you are perfectly happy with a left leaning interviewer, but would be unhappy with a right leaning one.
How many right leaning interviewers have been scheduled and/or used in these debates?
As it turns out, Candy supported Obama wrongly. He did NOT state that "the attack" was an act of terrorism (either from the Rose Garden or anyplace else) for at least 14 days.
By the way, her own body language, as well as her facial expressions, revealed when she believed what she said was true and when she she knew it was not true.
He did NOT state that "the attack" was an act of terrorism (either from the Rose Garden or anyplace else) for at least 14 days.
On Sept. 12 he didn't say "the attack" before he said "act of terror", but it was clear what he meant. The spinners are trying to finesse it to say he was talking about 9/11/01 or terrorism in general. It works with the rubes. On Sept. 13th in Colorado he was unambiguous,
"So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America," Source
You're wrong.
The Romney camp agreed on Crowley. The moderators are negotiated. She's hardly a lefty. I do think it's interesting that you lump Ricky and Wallace together. So, you're saying Chris is a crazy right wing hack, on par with Ricky?
Maybe you'll like this Candy. It's cute.
Notice how she cut off Gov Romney . Whereas with Obama she left him rambling on and on with lies and stupidity. When the question subject came up on Libya Candy Crowley a left of left Liberal helped Obama remember in the Rose Garden he had uttered a word terror or terrorist. A week later our Commander in Chief was at the UN continually mentioning to the assebly that it was the 14 minute amateur anti Islamic video that had started the uprising in Benghazi, Bob Shiefer a left winger will be the Moderator this coming Monday. Have you ever asked yourselves how did they arrive at the moderator selection??
Anon: Candy Girl interrupted Romney 29 times. She interrupted Obama 9 times.
Let's see 3 X 9 = 27.
Yep! She interrupted Romney MORE than three times the number of times she interrupted Obama.
But she was fair. Sure she was.
Oh, and I heard she was destined to become FLOTUS's poster girl for the nation's healty diet program.
Joe, let's get back to the terrorism question.
It seems to me you're splitting hairs.
How would the meaning change with terrorism used instead of acts of terror.
Does that set of acts somehow not include terrorism?
Remember, we are liberals and we need help understanding the right wing mind.
Ducky: In his Rose Garden comments, his "acts of terror" reference was general, not specific. Indeed, he specifically avoided specifically referencing the attack at Benghazi specifically.
Now he wants to claim that he WAS being specific, while for 14 days he totally denied that the Benghazi attack was anything but a reaction to a stupid video.
Candy Girl tried to help him, but it has all backfired on them.
Now, even though you are a liberal, you understand.
Not!
Post a Comment