Harrison Koehli is interviewed by Kevin Barrett from Truth Jihad Radio. The discussion is on Political Ponerology, the nature of evil, and psychopaths.


Kevin Barret: Alright, welcome back to the second hour of Truth-Jihad radio, right here in AmericanFreedomRadio.com. I am talking with Harrison Koehli of Red Pill Press, publisher of Political Ponerology. Harrison is in the vanguard of this movement, studying this science of psychopaths in power. I think that is probably the hottest new psychological science out there, at least on the internet, and mainstream will be catching up. It's an honour and pleasure to have you here Harrison. How are you doing?

Harrison Koehli: Oh great! It's good to be back. I've been researching this topic since the book came out, we published it in 2006 and like you said in the first part of the show, it is a pretty difficult book to get through, so when I read it I could understand and see that it could explain a lot of what was going on in the world today and so I kind of made it my goal to research it as much as possible and get as good a grip on it as possible from doing all kinds of other research and that's what I've been doing for the last couple of years.

Kevin: Well good for you! I think in retrospect, you ought to be seen as being on the edge of a really important movement to understand something that we all need to understand. You know, Harrison, one of the reasons that so many people really can't come to grips with issues like 9/11 and this torture scandal is that they really can't imagine that fellow human beings could be so evil. How can people be so evil?

Harrison Well, you mentioned something in the first hour about this idea or this rumour that people in the White House were watching these torture videos for fun. And really if you think about it, it isn't such an "out there" idea. If you think about all the true crime books out there about sadists who do enjoy this kind of thing, not only torturing people but video taping it and watching it. These are the kind of people that you read about in these books and on the news, are kind of people who would do this in front of a child's mother, just to not only devastate the child but the mother as well. They just have no conscience, they don't care about people and the sadistic ones enjoy this kind of thing.

And so when you look at it, there isn't really any question that it happens in life. And even when we look at other governments it's obvious that it happens. If you look at the anti-Communist propaganda, a lot of it was based on something close to the truth. Because the Communist and the Nazi systems were atrocious, they were psychopathic. If you look at Stalin's Beria, according to the latest and conservative even biographies of him, he personally tortured people in his office. Well, Lobaczewski in his book Political Ponerology makes the point that it seems that Beria was Stalin's psychopath, he was the one that kind of manipulated behind the scenes. And if you read Stalin's daughter's Svetlana Alliluyeva's book, you can see this...

Kevin: Right, yes, she's actually a neighbour of mine here in Spring Green area of Wisconsin.

We'll be back in a few minutes. This is Kevin Barrett talking with Harrison Koehli of Red Pill Press. The science of psychopaths in power called Political Ponerology, an important science these days! Stick around...


We're talking about Political Ponerology, which is the title of a book by a fellow named Lobaczewski, it came out on 2006, published by Red Pill Press, and I've got Harrison Koehli on the line. He is with Red Pill Press and he's been studying this issue of Ponerology, the science of psychopaths in power, the relationships between the psychopaths in power, for a few years now. And as I was saying, I think this is one of the most important theoretical topics out there, because it's got immense pragmatic and practical implications. Harrison, why don't you go ahead and pick up where you left off, tell us about what you've been learning about this topic in the past few years.

Harrison: Alright, well, I was talking about the kind of disconnect that people have about not being able to believe these sorts of things and the fact that it kind of doesn't make sense as these things happen all the time. I think where the disconnect really is, is that people have a hard time believing that these kind of people attain positions of power. If you look at situations in other countries, in totalitarian governments, it becomes pretty obvious that yes, they do. But if we look at a system like ours, do psychopaths rise to the top?

Well, in looking at the literature, there isn't a whole lot on this topic, in the actual psychological literature. After World War 2 there were a bunch of psychologist and psychiatrists that talked about this. These were mainly the guys that were analyzing the Nazi's that were on trial at Nuremburg, among them Gustov Gilbert, Leon Goldenson, David Kelly. Most of them, Gilbert in particular, made the observation that psychopaths made a large percent, a significant portion of the top Nazi positions, the most notorious being Herman Goering, who Gilbert had the chance to interview and to meet with on a daily basis for over a year, before Goering committed suicide the day before we was schedules to be hanged.

Now, in the years since then, there hasn't been a lot that's been done. What we have seen in the last few years has been a book called Snakes in suits by Robert Hare and Paul Babiak. This book is about psychopaths in corporations and business, and I think it is a really good book, it's really important for understanding the links, because the corporate environment and the Wall Street environment are very similar to the political environment; the two overlap.

If we look at the recent example like Bernie Madoff, I've read numerous articles on the internet with professionals and experts in the field of psychopathy, who speculate that Bernie Madoff perhaps is a psychopath. They don't come out and diagnose him officially, but they can see the correlations. I was actually at a conference that happens every two years, a conference for the "Society of Scientific Study of Psychopathy", and at that conference several speakers made the same point that Bernie Madoff does appear to be a psychopath. Now if anyone is familiar with the story of...

Kevin: Harrison let me just interrupt for a second, in Snakes in Suits Robert Hare says that psychopaths never last very long in power because they screw things up so badly. So his paradigm that when somebody rises rapidly in the business community, suddenly everybody thinks: "Wow, this guy is so charismatic, he's really hot", and then this person just screws everything up, doesn't do any of the detail work, takes everybody for a ride and then blows up and gets caught, which is pretty much what happened with Madoff. But he suggest that the power elite is probably not full of psychopaths because the psychopaths are so incompetent, that is, they are unable to sustain their performance, and yet that's at odds with the view of ponerologists like yourself.

Harrison: Yeah, and that's one of the problems that I've been looking at for a past couple of years. What I have been able to find is that... if you look at the actual case studies, that's where you need to go, because even in Snakes in suits Babiak, who is the first guy to really look at the issue, said that before he did his analysis, before he started seeing these things, the general consensus among the experts was that you wouldn't find psychopaths at all in corporations for exactly that reason, that they are just too incompetent, they wouldn't manage to get past the screening process, because they are impulsive, they are rude, they are bullying, all these things. But what they found was the exact opposite: that these individuals pass with flying colours because they were so charismatic.

And if you look at the case studies like I said of other governments you'll see that these kind of people do manage somehow to keep their mask on for significant period of time and it seems to have something to do with, just as there are variations within normal populations, there are variations within psychopaths. So you get the less intelligent psychopaths and more intelligent, you get the more impulsive and the less impulsive, and the more sadistic and the less sadistic. So you have this very small percentage of even psychopaths who are not only extremely intelligent, extremely sadistic, but also have the self-control to be able to plan their crimes better than anyone else.

And you find the same kind of dynamic in common criticisms of conspiracy theories, like 9/11 for example, that if there was a conspiracy it would have been revealed by now because all conspiracies get revealed. And it is an illogical argument because it presupposes that all conspiracies that have happened have been exposed by this point...

Kevin: It's a totally illogical argument. It says that all conspiracies are exposed, because all the ones that we know about have been exposed, well by definition that's the ones we know about. [laughter]

Harrison: Exactly, and it's the same thing with psychopaths, because we only know about the ones that get caught, and those are the ones that become case studies. If you look at Bernie Madoff, he was a successful business man for what, 50 years, something like that. So what about all that time? So you might be able to make the argument that eventually most of these people get caught, but that's something that really has to be dealt with in an empirical manner and not just off the top of your head verbalistically.

Kevin: Well, you know, that's a really interesting connection Harrison, between the so-called conspiracy theories and the idea that psychopaths are able to successfully get into power and stay in power. Because there are cases, similar to people like Madoff, who are psychopathic perhaps and stay in power for a long time and then flame out years later, decades before they are caught. Likewise with things like Operation Northwood, this plan were top US military brass, entire Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on the plan to set off bombs on American cities, killing civilians, sink American ships on the high seas, kill more civilians, stage a fake airliner shoot down, a bit like some of what may have happened on 9/11, in order to create the illusion of a non-existent Cuban attack, to justify an invasion of Cuba. So we know that the entire top level of US military hierarchy was ready to murder hundreds of Americans to start a war with Cuba in 1962, and yet, nobody knew about this until about 2001.

So there again, the people that say that there couldn't be any conspiracies because they can't be kept secret, well that was kept secret for nearly 40 years. And then, of course, their response, if they're falling for this fallacy, is that, "well we finally found out about it didn't we?" [laughter] It's maddening to try to argue with these people.

But you're suggesting that the easily discovered psychopaths are those who are unsuccessful and the more successful ones are discovered much more slowly.

Harrison: Exactly. So the ones we have to study are the unsuccessful ones, which says something. We could use example of Goering and Hitler, because, looking at the case studies, it appears that Goering and Martin Bormann were the most psychopathic. Now Gilbert, the psychiatrist, one of the psychiatrists that analysed these people, he wrote a book called The Psychology of Dictatorship that was published in 1950. Unfortunately it's out of print so you can't really find it unless you go to a used book store or find it used online. But, one of the things he points out, that makes sense, and it accounts partially for the argument people make against the idea, is that even in the top clique, in the top Nazis, psychopaths were still outnumbered. He makes the point that perhaps Goering was the most psychopathic of the bunch, but Hitler and Striker and Himmler, and all these others were more paranoid or schizoid personalities and that it's this combination of different kinds of types of individuals that really makes the network of the political, you could call it "the new bourgeoisie", as Lobaczewski called it. So it's not just psychopaths, and that can personally account for the idea that maybe psychopaths wouldn't be so great in these positions, because where they do excel is manipulating from behind the scenes, and this is where Snakes in Suits is really important, because Babiak and Hare get into the techniques and the exact method of manipulation that psychopaths use in a corporate environment.

Upon entering the business they immediately suss out who the important people are, who the unimportant people are, who can help them and who can't help them. And what they'll do is they'll foster these relationships, so with the people in the upper echelons of the corporation they'll establish these friendships, they'll get along really well with them, those are the patrons. But the people that can't do anything for them they just ignore, or they can be pawns if they are useful. So, a psychopath may be friendly with someone he views as a pawn, someone he can use, just to help in his accent to the top of the corporation. What he'll do, is he'll use their work, have them make excuses for him, and psychopaths will basically create conflicts within the environment, they'll set people against each other, and then they set it up in such a way that they are the ones that benefit from these conflicts.

And when you expand that into a geopolitical environment you can see this is exactly what a false flag operation is, it's setting up these rivalries, setting up these conflicts that benefit a hidden group. So we have Americans fighting Muslims, and it's this manufactured conflict that only benefits the psychopaths. If either side of the actual fight was to know the whole story, they wouldn't want to do it, they'd want to find out who really is responsible, and that's the whole 9/11 movement, we've got people who are seeing this, and that's really what it comes down to, 9/11 is a typical psychopathic manoeuvre.

And you find this in all kinds of true crime books, the same kind of thing, but people aren't really comfortable applying to a political level. Again, going back to the true crime literature, you read about families of psychopaths, who upon learning of who and what their, let's say their father really is, many of them can't believe it and are in complete denial. If you apply that to the American system and the American public, a lot of people are in denial because it is like a family, it is like finding out that their father is a serial killer, it's just, for some people it can be so life shattering that they won't even go there, and unfortunately that's a big block, and this block is what makes it so unbelievable, and like you said, hopefully for people who read Ponerology, that read the books on psychopathy, like Snakes in Suits, it creates a framework from which these things are more understandable and not so unbelievable.

Kevin: And that gives us a chance to defend ourselves against it. I see patterns, Harrison, in American politics, where the really bad stuff, the big lie, the big crime, gets covered up just by people turning away from it, whereas smaller crimes get prosecuted and acknowledged and written in to the historical record.

A couple of examples, Watergate, of course, the break into democratic headquarters, that's what people think of when they think of Watergate, it's just this break in to try and get political dirt or something, which is really pretty minor compared to other stuff that's gone on, the murder of the Kennedy's, Martin Luther King and so on, the attempt at a military coup against Franklin D Roosevelt, the Pearl Harbour deception, operation Northwoods, the Liberty deception which Johnson apparently conspired with the Israeli's to murder hundreds of American seaman on an unarmed ship, and on and on and on, there are these really huge things, I mean of course, 9/11 and anthrax and so many things going on since.

These really big crimes, we can't face, they're too evil. Instead, Clinton is caught with his pants down, or Nixon is caught with some burglars in an office, and that we can deal with and maybe when people read Ponerology, they'll be able to stretch their minds enough to deal with some of these larger crimes, which really need to be acknowledged if they're going to be prosecuted and corrected.

Harrison: Well, I want to make another point about the relationships involved in these big crimes, and on the topic of torture. The whole torture scandal is another typical psychopathic manoeuvre and it's straight out of the totalitarian hand book, the idea of creating this outside enemy. First of all that's right out of 1984, Orwell could see that the government was the one setting up the resistance bombings and I just find it somewhat annoying that people that cite Orwell can't see this happening in ordinary real life.

Anyway, so we've got this fake enemy. Well how do you create a fake enemy? You need actual people, so you do exactly what the communists did, and what the Nazi's did, you get a whole bunch of people, you round them up. Most likely and probably they're completely innocent of the crimes you're going to charge them with. What you do is, you torture them, you get them to admit to what you want them to admit to and then you stage a public show trial where they reveal that they are what the government needs them to be. This serves a bunch of purposes, not only does the torture fulfil the aggressive desires and urges of the psychopath doing the torturing, it serves as an intimidation factor for the rest of the population.

This is what the communists did in all the eastern bloc countries. People were afraid and the government knew it. The government, the secret intelligence agencies, secret police, would torture people and the people knew about it, even if it wasn't talked about in the news or even in public conversation, this was really private stuff, people knew and they were terrified. And that's one of the purposes of this whole torture scandal, because this is showing that this is what we do to you when you're a terrorist. And whose a terrorist? Well that definition is expanding more and more every day, so that people who merely descent, people who don't agree with these policies can and will be labelled as terrorist, and this is what they're saying, this is what we're going to do to you.

Kevin: Yeah, it's a lesson to the heard, stay in line. Well some members of the human heard aren't willing to put up with this forever, and I'm certainly one of them and I hope you are too.

Harrison, in the work I've read on psychopaths, there's often this sense that you get from authors like Martha Stout, who has written a couple of good books on the topic, that these psychopaths are kind of shallow or empty inside in a certain way, that they can put up a good imitation of just about anything, but what they're imitating just isn't there, she says that you can't imagine a psychopath actually understanding great poetry or even ok poetry. Is that something that you've encountered in your work, this notion that they're kind of empty people?

Harrison: Yeah, absolutely, and that idea goes right back to the first real great work on psychopathy, the Mask of Sanity by Hervey Cleckley. The idea is that psychopaths lack something. Normal people growing up, they have this emotional content, Lobaczewski calls it an instinctive substratum. We have these instinctive reactions to things that happen in our environment, these emotional reactions. Growing up, we learn empathy, we learn to feel another's pain, and these things become totally natural, so that things that seem to us self-evident, really aren't to a psychopath, and that's again where confusion comes into the picture here because psychopaths are born without any of these higher emotions. They may feel what some of the experts call proto-emotions, now this can be simple anger or frustration or just adrenalin rush of being chased by a police officer, being shot at or something like that. You hear stories like that in Robert Hare's book Without Conscience, about the criminal type. But psychopaths lacking this, they don't have any comprehension or even any idea of what it really means to be a human. Like you said, they wouldn't be able to appreciate poetry or art or anything that has any emotional content. Now the emotional content, like I said, is what makes us human, psychopath's lack that. So, for a parent who see that their child is a monster is a tough thing. Now, most parents wouldn't be willing to go that far.

And if you read a book that Cleckley recommends, called The Incredible Charlie Carewe, it's a novel with the main character being a psychopath, and from an early age Charlie Carewe realises that he's different. And Cleckley recommends it as probably one of the best portrayals of a psychopath in fiction. And Charlie, growing up, can see that he's not quite the same, and what he does is, he tries to figure out the correct responses to certain situations. So, when he gets in trouble, he learns the correct responses, to pretend that he's crying and to say that he's sorry and that he feels really bad.

So from an early age psychopaths learn to use these outward cues and the words that we use when in an emotional situation. But the thing is, is that they're completely acting, they have no awareness of the emotional content behind the words or behind the actions. So, they may cry, they may be really good at it, they may express joy or happiness or friendship, but these are really just manipulations, they don't feel any of these emotions. And they use these reactions to manipulate us, because that's the way psychopaths manipulate us, they manipulate using our emotions.

And, again, 9/11 is a perfect example, because the easiest way, as Goering said, to manipulate a person, is by using their tendency towards revenge or anger, hatred. You tell a person that they're being attacked and the person naturally thinking that the attack is real, is going to want to attack back, and that's just a simple manipulation of an emotional response, and you can get those kind of manipulations from any emotion, you can manipulate towards something that the person wants, you can manipulate them to do something because they will be rewarded for it, you can manipulate out of fear, out of anger, out of revenge, out of disgust, by turning outsiders or enemies into things that are below human, then people will become almost psychopathic, as you called it, psychopathic in effect. The kinds of people that would do the work in concentration camps, they might not be psychopaths, or in the military, but they've been conditioned and put in this environment where they will act psychopathically, and that's another problem we have to deal with.

Kevin: These Abu Ghraib torture photos that we we're talking about, some of these people seem like ordinary American kids that got set up to do this by the higher ranking psychopaths, mostly CIA it appears.

Speaking of fictional portrayals of manipulative psychopaths, I think I recently re-read the Shakespeare play, Othello. In Othello, the bad guy Iago strikes me as kind of ultimate manipulative psychopath, he tricks Macbeth into thinking that his wife has been unfaithful and plays on him in a really painful way, it's actually kind of gruelling play to experience. I think that people down through the ages have noticed that there are other people out there like that, often in the halls of power, I think Iago was a classic portrayal.

Getting back to the torture scandal, this is another situation where we can ask, will people turn away from this or will they face up to it? Will we get a kind of public investigation or commission to publicize this and go after the people responsible, or will it get swept under the rug because people just don't want to face it?

Harrison: Yeah, it's hard to say, it could go either way. If you look at the criminals involved, chanced are you will never get a confession out of them. It was the same way with the Nazis, trying to get them to admit to what they did is next to impossible. So people unfortunately aren't going to get the satisfaction of seeing their leaders fess up to what they've been doing. Now, people may be charged if it ever gets to that point, I'm sceptical that it ever will, but, I just don't see it very optimistically.

Kevin: We do have the possibility of foreign war crimes prosecutions, as has happened with Pinochet, currently there is a case in Spain against Bush for war crimes, in fact William Pepper, who will be on the radio with me in a couple of weeks, just spent few weeks working on a case for those Spanish courts going after Bush. I don't know Harrison, I think there's a chance that one way or another this is going to come out before too long, there will be prosecutions, there will be enough that these guys aren't going to be retiring comfortably. On the other hand you have to worry about the possibility that they could always pull off bigger manipulations to cover up the past crimes. Do you think, at what point would they be able to try another 9/11 style event, is that something you see as a realistic possibility in the not too distant future?

Harrison: Well, I don't know, I definitely think it's a possibility, but there are certain things that I don't know if they weren't planning on or what, because if they would have done this 60 years ago, I think they would have had an easier job of doing it. If you look at the example of the Reichstag fire, it's been, what, 70, 75 years, close to 70 years since it happened and still, only recently has there been, what people are calling irrefutable proof that it was a Nazi operation and not the work of a lone deranged communist. And I think that if there would have been something like the internet in the 30's when this happened, you might have had a movement like there is today in the 9/11 truth movement.

So it's hard to say because once the next big thing that happens they're going to have 1000's, 10,000's of people scouring the internet, looking for every contradiction and every lie and they're probably going to see a lot of them, and that's what's being done now in the alternative news, on the internet. So, it will be harder to get away with, but, again, the thing with psychopaths is that they don't really have that kind of inner break when it comes to these sorts of things. Like Bernie Madoff, they'll go to the very end, having no clue that they're the ones that are going to pay. Lobaczewski described it as the germ that invades the body has no idea that it's going to die with the body that it kills. So, if there is another huge attack like 9/11, then I think it just might be enough to finally be the straw that breaks the camel's back perhaps.

Kevin: Well, one would hope that non psychopaths in positions on power, and there are clearly are some who aren't psychopaths at higher levels of the military, in the intelligence community and, I should say the so-called intelligence community, and the political establishment, and some of those non psychopaths must realise that these kinds of things, like 9/11, as spectacular as they are and as successful as they are in certain respects, are really very dangerous and insane path for a nation or an empire to go down. And, I would hope that some, the people that supposedly met the top military officers, people who met after 9/11 to discuss the fact that it was an inside job and what to do about it, we're hearing more and more about that now. That these kind of people would be able to sort of solidify their position to protect these institutions that they work in from psychopaths. That's the hope I would have, not so much that they're going to tell the truth and expose their psychopathic colleges right now, but rather that they're laying down the law and saying, ok, you've gone this far, don't do it again.

Harrison: I think one of the things that can be done and that Lobaczewski recommends in the book, is that even if these crimes go unpunished, even if we don't get to the bottom of everything that they've been doing, one of the best things we can do is prevent further crimes of this sort by introducing some kind of screening process for all positions of political leadership. Now, they've started to do this in the business environment, again Babiak has been working on this B-scan or business scan for companies, corporations to use to screen out possibly psychopathic individuals before hiring, this should be applied to the political environment.

Kevin: Well, unfortunately some of these bureaucracies do it the opposite way, they screen out the non-psychopaths. Wayne Madsen got busted in the national security agency after he went after some paedophile sex criminals in the intelligence community. Hopefully we'll turn that around at some point.

We're talking about unspeakable truth that psychopaths, well, I don't know if they rule our world, but they have a slightly disproportionate influence. And right now in the top levels of the US government, for the past 10 years or so it's just been beyond obvious, the psychopaths are in command and out of control, hence the mass murders in Iraq, the atrocity on 9/11, when they blew up the World Trade Center with US military advanced nano-tech thermite, and they took us to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, against countries that never threatened us, never done us any harm, had some energy resources.

So we're in the midst of a psychopathic period of history and it's always easier to see this in other countries and other places. When it happens in your own country and it's your own leaders, there's kind of disconnect there, it's hard to break through and see the truth.

My guest, Harrison Koehli of Red Pill Press, is one of the, I'd say, leading experts, that I know of at least, on this subject. So Harrison, you were talking about screening potential psychopaths and the idea that corporations can do some kind of a test, to screen perspective psychopaths. Tell us a little bit more about that and how you would go about getting that test spread around to places like political candidates and military intelligence applicants and places like that?

Harrison: I think most of the details about that are a bit above my level of expertise. I'd like to talk to some of the experts involved in doing this in the business environment. I haven't yet, but I know a little bit about how it works. First of all, in the criminal environment there's what's called a psychopathy checklist and so you have to be trained to use this, and those that are, use it along with an interview to assess the level to which you have traits in common with the proto-typical psychopath.

Now, with the business scan, it's a similar thing, where they basically test personality traits. Now, as far as I know, it can be just a simple personality quiz, that self-report that you get when applying for a certain position. So, for anyone applying for certain position, to have one of these little personality quizzes done on them, it's a bit more complex than a personality quiz, but that can give an idea of the extent to which you have these psychopathic traits. Well, just at the level which it tests, you might not be able to tell for sure if this person is psychopathic or not, but if they have a high enough score on the test, you can be pretty sure that you don't want them working in your company. Now, this can be, I think, just as easily applied to a political environment. The problem, of course, is getting it to start being used, and this is where you run into problems because, just as in Poland and these eastern bloc countries, psychopaths seem to have some degree of self-awareness of who and what they are. In the communist countries they put an embargo on the psychopathy research, so officially you are not allowed to publish or research psychopathy, because that's the Achilles heel of the system.

Now, in North America we have a bit of an advantage in that psychopathy research has been going so strong for the past 60 years, that you can't yet just completely eliminate it, so we do have these kind of precedence of research that we can use, but you can expect a whole lot of hollering and filibustering for these things to be applied to politics, you might even get people saying that you need psychopaths in politics because they get the job done, they do what other people can't, they have the tough job of doing what normal people just have trouble doing. And unfortunately that kind of thinking might be an additional stall to getting this kind of legislative path, because I think it would have to be at a legislative level.

Kevin: Well that raises the question, what do you do with these psychopaths? Let's say we were able to screen them out, do you send them off to some island or imprison them just for being psychopaths, or can they be put to use in any way besides being professional killers?

Harrison: That's when it gets controversial. In the legal community they've had some debate of this issue. It's not really commonly known, but the insanity plea doesn't get applied to whole bunch of cases, it isn't as highly used as the movies portray it, but when this happens, when a criminal says that they are insane, when they were committing a crime, that means they get put away indefinitely in an institution. Now, if this was to apply to psychopaths and there's some debate if this is what should be happening, then we would have the dangerous ones put away indefinitely, and because there is no real evidence to show that they can be changed, that they can be cured, then it would be for the rest of their lives.

Now, if you just look at the business world, just because you score high on a test, let's say the B-scan, it doesn't mean you're going to go to prison or something, it just means you won't get the job. So at the very least, what a screening device can do in a political environment is just ensure that these people don't get positions of power in politics. Now, we also have to apply this to all the special interest groups, all the lobbies, and all of these, because in politics it is these other people that have a lot of say as well and not just the politicians.

Kevin: Right, well we've probably pretty much amputate a big chunk of the top level of a lot of areas if we did this, but I think we need to do it.

Well alright, thank you Harrison Koehli, it's been a great as always, I wish we had brought you on earlier here tonight because we could talk about this for hours. Keep up the good work and give us your website once again.

Harrison: Okay, you can go to RedPillPress.com or Ponerology.com.

Kevin: One of the most important words that you may have not heard much about. Well thanks Harrison, it's been great.

Harrison: Thanks Kevin.

Kevin: Take care. Harrison Koehli of the RedPillPress.com, Ponerology.com, I'm Kevin Barrett of TruthJihad.com. That's it for tonight's show, until next week and stay tuned to an American Freedom Radio.