Book recommendation; the Reid Technique of Interrogation and Confession

Learning the Reid Technique is good for both offensive and defensive purposes. Defensive, in the event of ever being investigated by the police (TL/DR deny the crime with a simple no, then don’t talk. Guilty people talk about other things, say “I’m not the kind of person who would do that” and don’t talk about the crime directly and are resistant to saying it is bad or say that the person should be punished. For example, a guilty person won’t say, ( Someone stabbed that person with a knife and killed them? Horrible! I hope you catch the bastard! I wish I could help you, but I don’t talk to police under any circumstance – that’s how an innocent person talks but it’s best not to even say that much).

But offensive is more interesting. Liberals are the guilty party, we are the police investigating them, investigating the guilt in their mind, and drawing it out. In the old days, cops threatened people, beat people (still do sometimes) but now the Reid Technqiue is more enlightened and effective — it is how to psychologically game someone.

In MindWar, we should think of ourselves as the freelance psychological police, trying to get liberals and anti-whites to confess their sins, admit their guilt. This is better than threatening violence or trying to be menacing.

We are not the agents of vengeance. The world is scary enough and mean enough. There’s enough violence and vengeance out there. It is not us.

We portray the terrifying world as it is, like the ghosts of Christmas in Dicken’s novel, and gently urge the sinners to repent using the Reid Technique and our accumulated knowledge of what is happening, and what is likely to happen (without ever being threatening). Making a threat destroys credibility instantly. We are the Kind Inquisitors, and our goal is to flip a switch in peoples’ minds. If we win that way, we truly win.


About Rob

Come with me if you want to live
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Book recommendation; the Reid Technique of Interrogation and Confession

  1. LaQueeta Jones says:

    Boycott YKW owned companies. They never employ Whites.

  2. Stary Wylk says:

    Certainly, after years of anti-white propaganda exposure there are excuses (face-saving reasons) for behaving as if one believed the stuff. What other facesavers can we think of?

    • I had a grandmother who was raised by a very domineering mother. My grandmother was not the type of girl to lie and sneak around her mother’s back, nor was she an in-your-face type of girl. She simply refused to argue with her mother, allowed her mother to believe she would follow her edicts and then did what she wanted. Because she was not a fighter, she perfected this kind of taquiyaah with all people who tried to control her. They’d make her “helpful suggestions” and she’d listen intently,nod and smile and even THANK them, then they’d be confounded to later discover she hadn’t “listened” (obeyed them) at all.

      So when some leftist libtard who might be in a position to hurt you makes you “helpful suggestions” or offers you “constructive criticism,” White Taquiyaah dictates that you listen intently, nod and smile and then say, “That’s very interesting. You’ve given me a lot to think about. Thank you.” DO NOT ARGUE WITH THEM. Do not debate with them or try to undermine their arguments or expose their faulty thinking. That will just piss them off and give them an opportunity to further mess with your life. Just go on your way and do your own thing.

      Proverbs 26:4-14 says, “When arguing with fools, don’t answer their foolish argument.” Variations of this saying include, “Wise men never argue with fools, because people from a distance can’t tell who is who” and finally, “Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.”

      Prohibition (against alcohol) was once the law of the land. Most people did not like it. They did not take to the streets or riot; they simply ignored it. When FedGov closed down the pubs, they made their own alcohol. After years of spinning their wheels and feeling impotent trying to enforce a law that no one observed, the only way FedGov could save face was to voluntarily repeal it.

      Think about this. What would have happened if, when SCOTUS decided to desegregate schools, the Whites had not engaged in violent protest, but simply, unilaterally, across the board, removed their children from the public school system?

      Thanks to increasingly outrageous TNB, Whites have had to withdraw their children from various public school systems anyway. They have had to either relocate to Whiter suburbs and pay the Danegeld by having to pay for longer commutes back to work. Or they have had to put their children in parochial or private schools.

      Race realists like the Whites of Arkansas (many of whom were descendants of the defeated Confederates of the War Between The States) should have realized a) that they could not beat FEDGOV with open defiance as well as b) no way, no how was integration going to work. Had they acted collectively across all class lines to create a private school system of their own, they could have established a template that would have been adopted across the country and stopped FEDGOV in its tracks.

      Imagine what would have happened if smug reporters gleefully anticipating “blead-lead” coverage of Bigoted White Race Rioters Being Put In Their Place by FEDGOV found NO ardent segregationists blocking the doors to formerly all White public schools, because they had been abandoned right after SCOTUS handed down its verdict? Can you just picture the looks on their faces? I can and I LMAO.

      White race realists should have seized upon the opportunity that Desegregation offered to wrest the schooling of their children away from the Cultural Marxists already infesting the public education system. Had they done so, we would not be dealing with the dictates of Political Correctness today. This would have prevented a whole shitload of miseries like the Detroitification of cities across the nation, etc.

      • mindweapon says:


        Great points. Absolutely. We should find the term for this, “agree, but do your own thing anyway.”

      • aryangoddess says:

        Good comment C. MW another term for what she is discussing is the dumb fox routine. Agree with the person in theory and do what you want anyway.

      • What is perfect about this trick is that you are not agreeing to a damned thing! You have not committed yourself to their agenda at all. What you are really doing is “considering the idea.” Because you are not arguing, but being politely respectful and listening intently, your “advisor” thinks s/he is swaying you like a good little sheeple, and feels vindicated. All you have done is offered a Non-Commitment.

        Of course, if they find out that you didn’t follow their suggestion, s/he will not confront you, because s/he never nailed you down into any kind of commitment; verbal or otherwise. Even if you have gone ahead and done something the exact opposite of what was recommended, the beauty of The Accomplished Fact is that it is easier to be forgiven than get permission. Soft Power will have to forgive a Non-Commitment if only to save face.

        By throwing the gauntlet, Open Resistance vindicates any retaliation from Soft Power; to wit, when the Segregationists Now and Forever rioted to keep Negroes out of their school, they got NO support from Whites in the other part of the country, because they looked like they were bullying sweet little pickaninnies.

        But Soft Power is powerless in the face of Passive Resistance. For example, Little Rock, Arkansas circa 1957. Had all the Whites in Little Rock quietly withdrawn their children from the public school system, what could FEDGOV do? Their actions would have not only been non-violent, but legal. Moreover, many Whites throughout the country were already sending their kids to parochial and private school. If FEDGOV had tried to shut South private schools down to force Southern kids to integrate the public school system, there would have been havoc with the other Whites in the rest of the country.

        What gets me is that the Southerners had to know the ramifications from the Brown vs. Board of Education decision were coming their way in 1954; not only because of their status as a defeated region, but because they had the largest population of Blacks to integrate. They all had three years to plan for a Little Rock scenario. And they could have met the challenge formidably if they had just acting collectively across the South the moment the verdict had been rendered.

        Strength building experts have noticed that using resistance bands can be more effective at building muscle than hefting dumbbells. WN 1.0’s reliance on Reactive Aggression has been like trying to travel with assorted weights and dumbbells. The traveler is offered very little flexibility or mobility. WN 2.0 should focus on Passive Resistance instead.

      • clytemnestra57 says:

        I forgot to add this. Many Aryans feel very uncomfortable with the idea of lying even to the enemy. The Principle of Non-Commitment does not call for this kind of deception. In both your words and your deeds, you are actively “considering the idea.” Never mind that it took you only seconds after the conversation to consider it the most stupid idea that you ever heard. The ideologue proposing the idea does not need to know that.

        You haven’t lied about anything. Indeed, you kept your verbal promise to the letter of the law when you said you would think about it. Moreover, you were courteous and heard them out. They really can’t say you either lied or behaved like a reactionary racist. That’s the beauty of Non-Commitment.

  3. Ryu says:

    What inspired this post, MW? Interrogations and interviews are a very rich area to explore. I think it’s critical to dealing with police.

    • mindweapon says:

      I am more interested in using these techniques offensively, and teaching our people to do this.

      We need something to do besides being threatening and menacing, which actually betrays impotence. Reid Techniques can be used to psychologically attack our enemies, with the idea of getting them to confess their sins and repent.

      • Trainspotter says:

        MW, you make an excellent point about using these techniques offensively. But just from a defensive standpoint, watching each of the videos that you have posted is well worth the time. It takes about a half hour to watch all three, and it might be the best half hour investment a lot of people ever make.

      • mindweapon says:

        it’s good stuff to know, but all you really need to know is “don’t talk to the cops.” I don’t want people to focus too much on what an innocent person acts like — a little learning can be a dangerous thing.

        I’ll tell you how anyone dealing with the cops should act “I have nothing to say, I want a lawyer.” I hope in an interrogation situation, that’s all I’d say.

        But it is very very interesting material. heck, you might be in a position where you are the interrogator — not necessarily as a cop, but some other kind of authority. This is great stuff to know, and yes, good for you for watching those videos!

      • Trainspotter says:

        Agreed. The only sensible approach is “I have nothing to say, I’d like to speak to my attorney.” Most people don’t fully appreciate that giving any sort of information at all, even if apparently innocuous, can be used against them. It is these seemingly low key conversations that police use to place people at or *close enough* to the scene of the crime, establish relationships between people, possible motives, preempt alibis, etc. It’s a gold mine for the police, and nothing but danger for the person being questioned. Casual statements that a person makes, at a time when they sense no danger at all to themselves, can and are used against him.

        Gave a somewhat inaccurate answer earlier, when you didn’t realize the stakes and weren’t thinking things through carefully enough? Maybe had a foggy memory? Tough, the statement is already out there. “When we first talked to you, you said X…” The prosecutor will get that statement.

        I’ve known a fair number of people in law enforcement. Off the clock, most are pretty good guys. But what people need to understand is this: it’s just a job. They are trained, as the videos that you posted show, to build rapport and trust. If they are on the clock, the rapport is a ruse, a tool. Don’t fall for it.

        They just want the incriminating line – everything else is merely a means to get it. Then they want to go to lunch. Again, just a job. The most disturbing part is that some have the attitude of, “Well, even if the guy turns out to be innocent, that’s for the judge, prosecutors and defense attorneys to work out.”

        In other words, some will make the arrest on pretty flimsy grounds, and do so with a clean conscious. After all, they aren’t the ones who actually convict and sentence, so they aren’t “really” responsible. Many, perhaps most, prosecutors will take whatever they are given and work mechanistically toward a conviction. Frankly, it’s scary. Don’t give them the ammunition to operate in that fashion.

        People should not try to outsmart these guys. Even if you are far smarter than the officer in question, this is what he does for a living. Stick to “I have nothing to say, I’d like to speak to my attorney.”

  4. Cj aka Elderofzyklons Blog says:

    Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.

  5. Peter Blood says:

    Another approach is dealing with liberals as though they are in a cult. Lifton’s “Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism” is epic to see what we’re up against–society-wide cult of totalist mind-control.

  6. zek says:

    On the subject of don’t talk to the police… not sure if this has already been posted here, but it’s an entertaining presentation that everyone should watch:

  7. doomdigit says:

    ” that’s how an innocent person talks but it’s best not to even say that much”

    Yes, you have to be very careful. Last year I was in a difficult situation in which someone was fishing for information I could not legally reveal. The person was a master. I was in awe and knew I did not have the skill to defeat the person so I had to keep finding excuses to leave the room. (the situation was bizarre, and I don’t really want to go into detail). What you have to keep in mind is that there are people who possess the ability to make you want to talk, and once you start talking you don’t stop. I could see this person had the ability and knew I did not have the skill to play any talking game. There is always a temptation people will have to play a talking game, but it’s very dangerous.

  8. TabuLa Raza says:

    The phone rings- I must answer.

    Knock at the door- I must open.

    Question asked- I must answer.

    Be the gatekeeper of your own life. It is very hard to break the habit of answering questions, just because they are asked.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s