[quote]Gang Stalking: Psychological Targeting in a Group Setting
March 09, 2010
The average functioning individual does not have a lot to be logically paranoid about. Sure, there’s the occasional whisper that you overhear and think is about yourself. There’s also the fear that someone is following you. Then there is gang stalking.
This is the ultimate form of paranoia that turns out to be a well-founded suspicion and mistrust. Gang stalking is when a group of people decide to target an individual and attempt to control aspects of that individual’s life and monitor them 24/7. Generally, this is done without the person actually knowing about this organized stalking group, but if a person does find out, the results and helplessness can be devastating.
According to gangstalkingworld.com, “gang stalking is experienced as a covert psychological, emotional and physical attack, that is capable of immobilizing and destroying a target over time.” [/quote]
A brand new article has come out about Gang Stalking and workplace mobbing. I think this article might finally do what the community has been trying to do for some time. Bridge the Gap between what the Targeted Individual experiences, and what the average person is able to understand of the harassment.
Ever since researching the Human Flesh Search Engine people are probably a little confused. What is the difference between something like that and Gang Stalking?
Well I thought that this would be a good time to briefly go over some of the harassment’s that are similar, and what the differences are. If I have forgotten anything forgive me in advance.
-Subtle and Covert. Mobbing has many aspects similar to Gang Stalking. The emotional and psychological abuse that the Targeted Individual suffers is very similar to what targets of workplace mobbing suffer. On this level the mobbing community are our closest relations, and this is why Gang Stalking has also been termed community mobbing by some.
Mobbing can be understood as the stressor to beat all stressors. It is an impassioned, collective campaign by co-workers to exclude, punish, and humiliate a targeted worker. Initiated most often by a person in a position of power or influence, mobbing is a desperate urge to crush and eliminate the target. The urge travels through the workplace like a virus, infecting one person after another. The target comes to be viewed as absolutely abhorrent, with no redeeming qualities, outside the circle of acceptance and respectability, deserving only of contempt. As the campaign proceeds, a steadily larger range of hostile ploys and communications comes to be seen as legitimate. …
Not infrequently, mobbing spelled the end of the target’s career, marriage, health, and livelihood. From a study of circumstances surrounding suicides in Sweden, Leymann estimated that about twelve percent of people who take their own lives have recently been mobbed at work.”
~ Kenneth Westhues, Professor of Sociology
Mobbing can be ongoing for years, it can cause health problems, and can even cause the targets to become violent, or have emotional breakdowns. Mobbing is hard to prove, and changing jobs might stop the mobbing, but it may not. Mobbing can cause you to be blacklisted from your field of employment.
-This is an overt form of harassment that involves 24/7 surveillance . The targets cell or cameraphones are used to track and monitor them 24/7.
Emotionally it’s stressing to the targets just like Gang Stalking, but with cellphone stalking and the overt nature of the harassment, targets often have evidence to present to the police. Also the targets could get rid of their phones to stop the harassment.
Human Flesh Search Engine
-This is often overt and swift. In Korea it’s called Cyber Violence, and in America it’s called Cyber Vigilantism.
Human flesh search engines: Chinese vigilantes that hunt victims on the web
A new phenomenon is sweeping China after the quake: digital witch hunts of those who dare to be outspoken or criticise
Ms Wang’s Chinese name, Chinese identification number and contact details in America were tracked down and posted across the internet. She received hate mail and threats that if ever she returned to China, she would be “chopped into 10,000 pieces”. Her parents’ address in China was published and they were forced to go into hiding.
Tibetans have also been targeted. After 44-year-old Lobsang Gendun was photographed protesting at the Olympic torch relay in London, Paris and San Francisco, the human flesh search engine whirred into action.
With huge overseas communities, it took just a couple of hours for Chinese web users to collate the pieces of Mr Gendun’s life – replete with Google satellite map and photos of his American home.
“I suggest assassination,” wrote one poster. “Execution by shooting,” said another. No, no, insisted yet another: “Use China’s most ancient form of execution – dismember him.”
In an unfortunate case of mistaken identity, it turned out there was another exiled Tibetan called Lobsang Gendun living in Utah. Since the targeting of his namesake began, Mr Gendun, a self-proclaimed “Olympic supporter”, has received hundreds of aggressive emails and telephone calls.
The speed to which the vigilantes can mount an attack is amazing, not just in China, but in Korea and America as well.
The digital age allows critics to quickly find a fair amount of information about their targets. One day last November, at about 11:30 a.m., a blog focused on making New York streets more bike-friendly posted the license plate number of an SUV driver who allegedly accelerated from a dead stop to hit a bicycle blocking his way.
At 1:16 p.m., someone posted the registration information for the license plate, including the SUV owner’s name and address. (The editor of the blog thinks the poster got the information from someone who had access to a license-plate look-up service, available to lawyers, private investigators and police.) At 1:31 p.m., another person added the owner’s occupation, his business’s name and his title. Ten minutes later, a user posted a link to an aerial photo of the owner’s house. Within another hour, the posting also included the accused’s picture and email address.
The SUV’s owner, Ian Goldman, the chief executive of Celerant Technology Corp. in the New York City borough of Staten Island, declined to comment for this article. According to an email exchange posted on the blog, Mr. Goldman said that he had lent the vehicle in question to a relative with “an urgent medical situation” and that he was not aware of any incident. The alleged victim has decided to drop the matter since the damage to the bicycle, which he was standing next to at the time, was under $20. Last month, Aaron Naparstek, editor of the blog, says he removed Mr. Goldman’s home and email addresses from the site after receiving a “lawyerly cease and desist” email asking that the whole posting be deleted.
This is in America and I see very little difference to some of the stories that happened in China.
Here is one more from Korea where they call it cyber violence, or online Mobbing.
SEOUL Kim Myong Jae’s estranged girlfriend was found dead in her room in Seoul on April 22 last year, six days after she poisoned herself.
Two weeks later, Kim, a 30-year-old accountant, found that he had been transformed into the No. 1 hate figure of South Korea’s Internet community, a victim of a growing problem in a country that boasts the world’s highest rate of broadband use.
First, death threats and vicious text messages flooded his cellphone. Meanwhile, spreading fast through blogs and Web portals were rumors that Kim had jilted his girlfriend after forcing her to abort his baby, that he had assaulted her and her mother, and that his abuse had finally driven her to suicide.
“By the time I found out the source of this outrage, it was too late. My name, address, photographs, telephone numbers were all over the Internet,” Kim said. “Tens of thousands of people were busy sharing my identity and discussing how to punish me. My name was the most-searched phrase at portals.” News reports and portals confirmed that his name was at the top of such lists.
The next time someone tells you that people would not waste the time in harassing others, or stalking others, just smile knowingly and point to these articles.
-This is often covert and done over a period of time, and the goal is to drive the person crazy, or to freak them out, or give them a breakdown.
Gaslighting is a form of intimidation or psychological abuse in which false information is presented to the victim, making them doubt their own memory and perception. The classic example of gaslighting is to change things in a person’s environment without their knowledge, and to explain that they “must be imagining things” when they challenge these changes. Popular usage of the term can be traced to at least the late 1970s.
The term derives from the 1938 stage play Gas Light, in which a wife’s concerns about the dimming of her house’s gas lights are dismissed by her husband as the work of her imagination, when he has actually caused the lights to dim. His action is part of a wider pattern of deception in which the husband manipulates small elements of his wife’s environment, and insists that she is mistaken or misremembering, hoping to drive her to insanity.
Use in real life
An example of gaslighting being used in real life was by the Manson Family during their “creepy crawler” burglaries during which nothing was stolen, but furniture in the house was rearranged.
Apparently this is an ongoing storyline. However if you want to see a really good storyline look up Drucilla being Gaslighted, also from the same soap opera, but from a few years ago. That was so well done, that the character ended up in a mental ward. It was a wonderful example of Gaslighting. I have not seen the Ashley storyline yet.
-Covert and ongoing. On an emotional and psychological level this is very similar to mobbing.
Bridging The Gap is a disturbing, yet poignant look into modern day democratic surveillance societies. The book examines how this structure is used to discredit, disenfranchise, and destroy innocent citizens. Gang Stalking, The Buzzsaw, Cointelpro, what do these words mean and more importantly what do they have in common? They are names that have been used to describe the systemic apparatus that reaches out to destroy and discredit those declared enemy by the state. This book will open your eyes to how the informant system has taken over these democratic countries, and how they are being used to further create a surveillance society where no one will be out of reach, should they too become persona non grata by the system.
I would say it’s a tie between stasi Germany and what happened under Cointelpro, however Stasi Germany probably most mirrors what is happening now.
You mean to tell me that it is legal for corporations from the private sector to team up with local law enforcement officials in efforts to spy on innocent members of our society? You also mean to tell me that the synthesis of law enforcement authority and the drive of for-profit companies operate under little to no guidelines or restrictions and it is unclear to whom they are responsible to?
COINTELPRO (an acronym for Counter Intelligence Program) was a series of covert, and often illegal, projects conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) aimed at investigating and disrupting dissident political organizations within the United States. The FBI used covert operations from its inception, however formal COINTELPRO operations took place between 1956 and 1971. The FBI’s stated motivation at the time was “protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order
The Ministry for State Security, (German: Ministerium für Staatssicherheit, commonly known as the Stasi [ˈʃtazi] (abbreviation German: Staatssicherheit, literally State Security), was the official secret police of East Germany. The MfS was headquartered in East Berlin, with an extensive complex in Berlin-Lichtenberg and several smaller facilities throughout the city. It was widely regarded as one of the most effective and repressive intelligence and secret police agencies in the world. The MfS motto was “Schild und Schwert der Partei” (Shield and Sword of the Party), showing its connections to the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED), the equivalent to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
As a part of the Gang Stalking psychological harassment, gaslighting may also be used.
The bigger picture is that the structure functions like a cult does.
In how it keeps the members in line, how they obey and how they punish and try to destroy those outside the cult and those who would leave the cult.
This is just a very quick and brief introduction to this subject matter. To learn more, I suggest doing your own research and reading up on the subject matter.
I have not blogged for awhile, so that means that I have a lot to say.
The first thing that I was thinking about was the movie Marlena. I saw this movie years ago, I am not sure why, but at the time it reminded me of something similar that was ongoing.
The movie starts with this young very beautiful widow, who’s husband goes missing in the war. Because she is young and beautiful the cats in the community start in on her with rumours, and they basically try to destroy her life. What happens in the movie is malicious, but it’s done in such an everyday way that it was a good reflection of society.
Throughout the movie there is this young boy who witnesses it all, and he is almost the narrator of the movie if I remember correctly. What I remembered most about that movie, is that after destroying her life, when the vermin in the town finally succeeded, they were at the end trying to give her free food, I just could not understand why she didn’t throw it back in their face. I never understood why her and her husband even moved back amongst such people. People in society are so like that, and that is the one part of the movie that I really wish I could have changed.
I however think the movie is a good reflection of how this society works, and many others and it’s a well worth watch. What these vermin try to do to targets is very similar to what they do to the character in the movie, they damage her reputation, then make it almost impossible for her to support herself, they turn her father against her, and then destroy her life, till she becomes what they tried to make her into. It’s a great reflection of society, and how it functions.
The only time these vermin in many cases are truly sorry is when they have destroyed someones life. Most of them when they issue their fake I sorry, don’t mean it, because they simply do not understand the concept and do not have enough humanity to issue forth such. The end reminds me so much of these people who take part in Gang Stalking.
The next thing that came to my mind was a case I came across with a young boy that had been molested by a priest. It was a real life case and it just served to show the pathology of this society. See the priest had molested before, but the priest was moved by the church to a poor community in South America somewhere. He offered to give music lessons to the 5 year old boy. Anyways in time the young boy revealed to his grandmother that the priest had taught him how to “make love”. He felt safe enough to tell his grandmother, anyways she did the right thing and reported the priest. You would think that the community would do the right thing and protect the child right, remove the vermin from amongst them, and not side with him? Wrong, worms support worms, another reason that society does not change. No they picked on the family, called the 5 year old boy the priests little wife, make it seem like he asked for it, and tried to pick on the family until they would bend and drop the case. See this is a large part of why society does not change, you see this in all aspects of society, but this was one of the worst examples, because it was society failing to protect it most innocent members. I never forgot that case.
Now I also think about how many times did this happen before? How many times in our societies were priest caught harming children and society pressured, or tried to pressure those that wanted to do the right thing by stopping it or exposing it? I think this is what happens more often than we think. I also recall a case where an officer came across a community where sexual molestation of children was ongoing, and had been happening for years, in the end he tried to do the right thing, and they destroyed his life to protect the vermin amongst them. They are if nothing else consistant.
I have now seen this example with workplaces and sexual harassment suits, mobbing suits. The case study after case study of a community going after the target, and protecting the perpetrators. That is why society in many cases is the way it is.
I think we saw this in the movie North Country as well. When I was doing research into this, before my research started into Gang Stalking, what was most interesting about that movie was the fact that the women in the movie were just as bad as the men in some cases, not just the women, but some of those same women who were being harassed tried to work with the harassers to shut Lois Jensen up. It was that boys with be boys mentality, the she was a slut, she deserved what happened to her. See they refused to take any ownership for their actions, and the community protected them, and the workplace protected them, and that had been ongoing in that community for some time, till Lois took a stance. Ofcouse that case changed laws across the US. The first class action lawsuit of it’s kind.
What is amazing to me is that is society that prevents change from happening, it is society that protects the perpetrators, it is society that often refuses to allow positive changes to come about, even when it would be to their own benefit. Kind of like a group think, but you can not call it a group think, because they do not think.
It’s this dirty code of silence, where men, women, and children are used to try to silence targets, and make the actions of perpetrators seem acceptable. It’s this disgusting code that lacks honour that makes it ok for societies to keep silent about very detrimental things, that protect people that should not be protected and to lash out and to try to destroy the targets. Society has for the most part managed to continue to be this way, and it does not change. Many go along with it out of fear, they suppress what they know is right, be it defending children, women, or others, they do what they can to protect the perpetrators. It might even be out of a sense of misplaced loyalty, the individual does not have a reason to get involved, or they know that to side against the perpetrator will be detrimental towards them, either way the society continues down this path, and that is why society is the way that it is. That is why it does not change.
These cases all saw the targets being dehumanized, made to seem less than, the child was called the wife’s little priest, Lois Jensen was made to look like a slut, the officer of several years was harassed till his life was ruined, and in the movie though a fictional account, the character goes through a similar process of having herself broken down. Society is this way at every level and it is too often because people allow it to be that way.
Can society ever change? Not while the monkeys are happy to live in the cage. Silencing anyone and anything that exposes that their are some real problems in society. Rather than looking at it and examining what is ongoing, the worms side with the other worms and thus it continues.
Like attracts like, and worms attract worms, and thus the decent in society is often removed to make way for the indecent, and even when it is bad for the society and the community, it’s still continues.
Troubling incident recently.
I have mentioned this before, but I will mention it to targets again, and I would have you be on the look out for this.
I have mentioned that what I believe is ongoing in many cases to keep these so called cases of investigations ongoing are a great deal of set up’s, and deliberate provocations, so let me go over a couple of recent incidents that I have noticed.
What I have tried to do off and on is if I notice a troubling incident, I will try to report it, provided that I am aware of it. I am trying to do this, because I believe there is clear evidence to indicate that what they are doing during these investigations is that they are using other people who fit the description to try to portray targets as crazy, perverts, drug dealers, etc, whatever they are trying to portray you as, they will them if they can’t get you, you get what I like to refer to as doppelgangers to do the dirty work for them.
I use the term doppelgangers very loosely, because these people are not doppelgangers, they are simply what I call fits the description. In other words if you are male, 45, white, 6’4 that is what they would ruffly try to use. The person does not have to look like you, dress like you, or anything else, they just have to fit the description. So if they are trying to get you to look like a pervert, they would use someone like, and have them insult females near where you are, look at them, or watch children etc. It does not have to be you, the incident just has to be attributed to you, and this will keep their investigations going, it will keep the informants who are getting paid to follow you, employed, and it keeps the need for this system going, and going.
So Eg. If you are an Asian, female, 5’2, 25, and they are trying to portray you as crazy, then let’s say that they can not get you to act out in public, they will get a female, who looks around that age, most likely Asian, maybe not, and then they will have that person act out in public. What’s most disturbing for me, is that I have blogged about this before, but I have seen it enough now, to be able to confirm that this is what they are doing deliberately.
I think you get the idea. What I have seen lately on a few separate occasions are that they deliberately have targets who fit the description crossing my path, (I use this term very loosely, because they dress nothing like me, and hygiene wise they look very unkempt, and I would say crazy. One Saturday as I left the house about 4 weeks ago, I had one cross my path who was talking to themselves and carry some bags in their hands, seemingly mentally unwell, but that has to be determined. Eg. I have seen informants, pretending to be crazy, I mean literally sane informants, who are pretending. In this particular instance, I do feel that the person really was crazy whoever, just by appearance, and unkempt manner, but there is no way to tell.
They were going in one direction, and I was going in another, but the thing with the informant force is they do not seem to be required to comment on appearance, or state of dress. Eg. I am always well dressed, never unkempt, and for the most part pretty polite. Except if I am making sarcastic comments under my breath, or commenting on the snitches. This happens very rearly, but I am guessing that these are getting used as well, as oh target was disturbed and talking to themselves.
The other incident recently involved someone who was in my opinion clearly disturbed and talking to themselves, the person was much much older looking, very unkempt in appearance, and clearly not looking anything like me to any sane and rational observer, yet I passed this person talking to themselves and telling people off, I left the location where this was happening, and walked not a short distance.
Within a short space of time, I had the street theater begin. Eg. People trying to run into me, etc, they were doing things to try to provoke me. Now I was in a pretty good mood, so just ignored them. What was disturbing however was there was a woman with a baby stroller, she was deliberately oncoming in my direction, in my direct path without making any attempt to adjust where she was going, and as I adjusted, she adjusted to keep in my path, from a far away enough distance that there was no reason to that I could see, however, and this is what’s disturbing, but I am reporting it, because I believe my observation on this is sound. She looked behind her to the side, and made eye contact with the cop in the car that was right near us both which I had not immediately noticed, and even though I could clearly see that she really did not want to aim her baby stroller at me, after looking behind at the car for instruction, she continued to do that, the look on her face was clear, she did not want to be doing that, she was clearly being instructed, and from what I could tell it was by whomever was in the cop car, whom I assume was observing the deliberate incident. It happened fairly quickly, yet it felt like it was in slow motion, because I had enough time to see the exchange with her and the person in the car, so all I could do after seeing this, was smile at her, and encourage her to do what she was doing, while moving out of her way, the best that I could, because she kept a direct path at me.
I was so sickened, but not for myself, I mean what kind of a society is this, where you get a young mother to pimp out her kid like that? What if I really was a dangerous and crazy person, you were willing to gamble that the brave officer sitting in the car would get to her, before an incident happened with the baby? I am not wrong in my observation of this, but shocked and disgusted. I don’t know why I am disgusted. I have an idea of how the Stasi worked, I know with these community policing programs they work similar, I know people are being asked to do things like this, but when you see it like this, it’s gross.
The thing is if that really had been me having a bad day, they were trying to provoke an incident. See when something is happening like crazy person talking to themselves, the snitches start to put in their little reports, so I don’t know how long the crazy person had been set up and in position.
I do know that this is happening and the best thing that I can do is report what I have been observing. Now I have had the neighbours watching and leaving when I am leaving, and we have the snitch force trying to chart my way from when I leave my home, to work and back etc. Since I am clear that I don’t require the babysitting, I don’t appreciate it. What’s interesting is that when there are people around that I know, I have never seen one of these little incidents happen, but when it’s people that I do not know, suddenly these incidents happen. So I have no way of knowing how many of these incidents that I am not aware of are happening and being attributed to me.
Shy of my baby stroller incident that I reported, and handing out flyer’s about a year ago, which I have also reported on these blogs, these people in my opinion are continuing to stage incidents, using the doppelgangers and the fit’s the description reporting. We do not have a moral society, we have a Stasi society, and the corruption that when on there is what is happening here. I believe the incidents are in many cases staged, set up’s, I believe the motivation is to portray the target as whatever they see fit, and I believe that it’s also to keep these programs going, and the informant force employed. Much like a lot of the fake hate posting online are designed to keep up the appearance of a threat to society, I believe these incidents continue in the same way. Eg. Jiverly Wong was reported as a drug user who was going to rob a bank by an informant, there does not seem to have been any validity to this, but after his death, thanks to the police, these details made it into every paper across the nation.
I find that these little incidents tend to happen more when I openly talk about the fact that we have informants in the city, or identify one of their citizen informants as such. I don’t know why they care, it’s not like most of them are not informants anyways, I guess gangs are like that however and don’t like their members identified as such.
As I pointed out before, legal action is I believe effective, but only if you can afford to do so, and second if you can find a law and lawyer that would allow you to do so. As for me, I refuse to be followed around the city like a child, the only disturbed people that I have seen are the people that have to take part in these programs, I find it very disgraceful, that citizens are being at times forced to do such things. I think it’s one thing to volunteer to go along with something like this, there are enough bottom of the barrel people to go around, but what I saw and witnessed today was fear, and cohesion. The female should not have been used in the prescribed manner I described above, I think it’s wrong, and again I would not take the time to report this, unless I sure the observation was correct. It’s also not the first time that I have seen something similar, with citizens being coerced by cops in similar manners. To serve and protect, who’s interests?
What I can tell you is that this society is what has become paranoid and disturbed, with good reason, because when you are a Stasi state, you will have people in disagreement with you, and it’s sad to see something that I though was good, as something that is not. I don’t view the citizens the way I once did. They are still the very polite people I once thought, but what is behind this is something that is quite scary. A Stasi society is apparently a polite society. It’s also a society where activists, and dissidents are portrayed as enemies of the state and are dealt with by being made to appear as mentally disturbed.
I think someone needed a little bit of free publicity so here it is. Eleanor White dropped by one of my blogs and left a comment. This post is in response to the comment that was left. I don’t want to spend too much time on this, but as I said before, I felt this issue had gone on long enough and recently choose to intervene.
[quote]I’m sorry the author of the “gang” stalking web sites and e-book can’t seem to grasp why I object to the term “gang” stalking. I thought my reviews explained that pretty clearly.[/quote]
Eleanor, I appreciate that you, object to the use of the term. I appreciate that you and those working towards the same goal as you, want to have people discontinue the use of the term Gang Stalking.
I disagree with this. I think if you and yours wish to use the term, then please use the term for your activism. You are deterring the efforts of others, others who have had success with the term.
I have pointed out that some use the term Community Mobbing, Community Harassment, and several others to describe the same thing, and I think that is fine, as long as they get the correct message across to the audience.
[quote]I’ve been an activist for 13 years, and during three of those years, I spent some time almost every day right out in the street, discussing the crime of organized stalking and electronic harassment with the public.[/quote]
That’s great Eleanor, I have spent just under three years and I have been using the term Gang Stalking, and that has worked just fine for me and several others. If this term does not work for you, then I appreciate this. However by telling others that the preferred term is Organised Stalking, you are interfering with the rights of others to use the terms they prefer. I have now seen others on the Internet telling others that they have to use Organised Stalking now, and that is not correct or accurate.
If this is the term you prefer, then great. I think it’s wonderful that you and some of yours wish to use the term. I think that there is more than enough room in the Targeted Individual community for a variety of terms.
[quote]I tried a number of terms. Other anti-OS activists have also tried a number of terms.
With “gang” stalking, I found that the mind of my listener immediately and consistently got the image that I was talking about being stalked by some sort of ordinary gang, such as race gang, youth gang, biker gang, or Mafia.[/quote]
Great Eleanor, I don’t know what your demographics are, and I don’t know who you come across in your activism.
Eg. Someone coming across someone from the Cointelpro era might wish to use that term. Someone coming across a demographic that is riddled with the stop snitching, informant culture, might wish to use another term, and coming across people from Eastern Europe, I find reference to Stasi to work a bit better.
I encounter a lot of younger people, I also encounter a lot of cultural diversity and I use the term that best suits the situation. Not every term will work for every person, so I use what’s appropriate and make sure that the right concept is getting across. I adapt to the situation and that works for me, because of who I am.
Maybe organised stalking worked for you, because of who you were and the types of people that you came across.
[quote]That is clearly the WRONG picture of current day organized stalking groups.[/quote]
The way you do it, yes. But for some of the demographics that I reach it’s not. There are people that like the slang Gang Stalking, and it works with some demographics. The ones that will get this culturally accepted as other methods have not worked as well. So why not work all angles? What’s the reason for trying to get rid of the term that has been a success for three years, and starting from scratch. It’s the same as if we tried to get rid of the term Targeted Individuals, it would just destroy those efforts.
[quote]I have tried “vigilante stalking” too. That worked to some degree, but didn’t seem to paint a really clear picture in the minds of my listeners.[/quote]
Again Eleanor it’s how you present it, and who is presenting it. It’s all based on who the activist is, and the demographics that you try to reach, what works for one, does not work for another. If you look across the net, the term has reach a variety of groups, they are familiar with the term and they use it. I refuse to see that effort killed because you have a preferred term.
I have a preferred goal of getting this exposed, and I think using whatever terms work, to get the concept across. I could not use the term vigilante stalking with a straight face, because I hate the term, add all the false disinformation bs that goes with it. Another person whoever could use the term with no discomfort and probably over 85-95% success rate.
I say give them a bunch of terms. Having reviewed discussions about this, and the conversations people get up to, I see some refer to it as Cointelpro again, others as Stasi, let people use what they want to use, as long as the end message is the same, more or less and the concept get’s across, because exposure is the key.
In the modern day world Eleanor, it’s not the up to down effect that get terms introduced into society, it’s often the other way around. The terms start at a ground level, or urban level, gain popularity and go from there, that is the trend I am seeing with other terms and concepts that have become popularised and mainstream, and that is the angle that I am using.
Please don’t take this the wrong way Eleanor. You tend to be very old fashioned about certain things, and I like to take a modern approach, look for new ways to get things done, to reach and work with a modern audience. I like to use those methods and concepts, that works for me, and some others like me. This might not work for you, that’s fine.
[quote]Then Lynn Troxel originated “organized” stalking. By FAR, that term brings the unaware listener to an accurate picture of the crime of OS, and does so quickly.[/quote]
It does not however. When I sought help, the terms and concept that worked best was community mobbing, because people have an idea of what mobbing is, and by saying it happens in the community, they got that. The same was true when I sought help at the other websites. Two of the mobbing sites based on the description I gave, immediately decided to add links to Gang Stalking websites, I emailed about 10-15 stalking sites, and they did not see the relevance to what happens to them. Think about that, those activists did not see the relevance or significance.
[quote]In the effort to first educate the public, and eventually get the crime stopped, I feel the term which creates an accurate picture of the crime, and does so quickly, is quite important to find and use. The unaware public is not interested in taking on “another headache” or another worry, and doesn’t give anti-OS activists much in the way of attention span. Often just seconds.[/quote]
I think if you use the most accurate term and do not add the appropriate information this does no good. I have spoken to you before about the continued effort of letting people think this is vigilantes, or right wing extremists behind this, but you keep pushing David Lawson. Oddly enough.
[quote]This is why I speak out against “gang” stalking and promote “organized” stalking. Nothing more mysterious than that.[/quote]
I don’t know if I believe that, but it does not matter. The point is what you and the others associated with this effort are doing is killing other efforts that have gone before. Where to really have maximum effectiveness, people should have a variety of terms at their arsenal to help with getting this exposed. Many hate the term organized stalking, and do not feel that it truly expresses what is happening to them. The stalking term vs the mobbing term for example. They don’t feel that stalking even comes close to describing what is happening, and it takes the attention away from the meat and potatoes. I let people use what they want. I want to train people up to do their own thing, not be told what to do, and use. I do agree that uniformity is nice to have in some quarters, but I fully disagree in this one.
[quote]I also object to activism materials that state government is doing the stalking. We do not have evidence, as of today, which proves that. Such claims are part of the e-book “Bridging the Gap.”[/quote]
Oddly enough, you were happy to support David Lawson and unsubstantiated claims of vigilante stalking, but you have a problem with this. You never had more than David Lawson claiming this was done by vigilante gangs, but you never objecting to misleading people down this path, but with so much proof that government is doing this you object.
We have Tim Rice telling us that they were doing 24/7 surveillance on Journalist and others.
We have the ACLU telling us about Fusion centers and what they are doing, and about people being put under investigations. That these people will be communicating in code.
We have a billion and one articles from the Uk press telling us about the covert surveillance that individuals are being placed under, and the tactics being used, which match ours in many cases.
I have posted a passage from a police training manual about how to handle informants, and the book even says that they use a one handed sign language.
Bob the lawyer some of you all hired has said this. The success that people have had with court cases mostly involve going after the government. I speak of Donald Friedman and the FOIA released, and Jesus Medoza and what he heard back from his case, that he has blogged about.
Not to mention the book the Buzzsaw, which show how journalist go through something similar.
Plus the history of Cointelpro and the Stasi.
With all this you were willing to put forward and support a theory and book, that had the potential to get targets in trouble, but you object to hard information.
The ebook in question, just like the hiddenevil.com, have you had a chance to review that site? http:www.TheHiddenEvil.com let me know what you think. You must have just been sleeping, and missed this site.
Have evidence to show that the government could be behind this.
I think the ebook in question that you are referring to, asks the question of why would the government do this to their own citizens, and the book answers the question. Do you want books, and material looking at the issue of Gang Stalking to leave this stuff out? That does not sound right to make. I get that you making unfounded accusations is not good, but that is not the case. The books back up their theories with current research. Including research from the ACLU on modern fusion centers.
[quote]There is nothing hidden or nefarious in my credibility reviews on:[/quote]
When I fist say you and Kelly discussing this I thought oh my gosh, witch hunt. I left it as it was. I wondered how long it would be till my site and other legit sites made the witch hunt, but I left it as it was, because I knew it was coming, but I hoped the community would be smarter than that.
Those reviews are again, your opinion of what you think is good and bad, and you want others to mindlessly agree to this without thinking.
As per the email I sent you, requesting you remove my site, because I did not appreciate it there. I did not think that you had the right to label my site bogus, because you do not like alphabetical order. I did send you an email and you said if I changed the order of my listing, I might get approved, well you know what I think of that?
You are putting sites there for minor things, so instead of going after the people, these so called credibility reports allow you to go after their sites, which amounts to the same thing. You go after their sites, and then it’s all done under the guise of what’s best for the community. I really do care about this, because it’s my life, and I do need to get this stopped. Joining the dark side is not an option for me.
Case in point. I will use my site but I think there are a few others on their that should not be there.
The so called credibility review says:
Eleanor White rating: BOGUS (trivializes the crime)
November 21, 2008
[quote]WEB SITE: http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Techniques.html
SITE TITLE: Gang Stalking World
EW: This well-executed web site rates a BOGUS because it
misleads the visitor from the public into believing that
targets of organized stalking and electronic harassment are worrying about things that are trivial and not serious, and in fact common occurrences of every day life.[/quote]
The site misleads the visitors in what capacity? This is not the front page of the site, which is what people see.
Second of all, the page is in alphabetical order, because some of us who do research like it that way.
If this is your reason for calling a site bogus, how much good are these reviews actually doing for this community? Honestly, they are targeting some good sites, that could help people for minor things, which I believed was going to be the case all along.
[quote]Next notice the very first, most prominent technique this site describes. The first item is presumably the one that causes targets of organized stalking the most grief. It is listed as “Air Stalking.” In other words, the site cries out against aircraft stalking targets on the ground!
That concern literally shouts “paranoia” to the world.[/quote]
No really Eleanor to the educated public who can think for themselves, this shouts alphabetical order, and I wont be changing this for anyone.
Oh yeah, the other thing about these so called credibitlity reviews when you and Kelly first cooked them up was that you were going to be reviewing specific pages or sections to say what could be impoved, or why it was or was not good, instead you have used the oppertunity to use the reviews to discredit websites in whole.
Youre reviews are not saying, I don’t like websitex.com because of this page or this section, you are targeting the whole website, by picking one little section.
Eg. You primarily are picking on the techniques page for Gang Stalking World, and a picture or something, but using this to declear the whole site as bogus, notice the word you choose to use? Not Eleanor disapproves, but bogus, making people think the site has no credibility, which is not the case. It’s just like if I did this, but used the word fraud, to describe some of your websites.
If you really were interested in anything other than a witch hunt, you would have also used better words, and reviewed the pages and listed the pages specifically and not attacked the full site.
You on your website
I think the picture of the militia guy that you have on your site, just does not work for me, for various reasons. I also think the section about Terri Schindler, on your site would give people the wrong message. I know it gave me the wrong message when I first started looking for stuff that could help.
You also have things about people’s cats being tortured to death. Though I respect this, as part of the targeted individual community, are you kidding me, do you think a new site visitor might not think we are a little Lonnie for this?
I know when I first saw your site, no offense, but I was really put off, from your site and a couple of others, and stayed away from it for some time. I think your site has some good information, but you talk about giving the wrong impression. I am going to leave it at that, because I am not hear to bash your site.
If I like a site, I like to it and use that. I try to avoid bashing things, unless I think it will be detrimental to real targets, and then I take a stand.
I think if you have sites that you like, then create a website of good and approved information that you and yours can use. That’s what I do, there are so many YouTube videos that I know are not good, but I don’t attack those, the same way I don’t for the most part out agents. I just try to point people to good sites or material I think will help them.
[quote]My only purpose is to assist targets in selecting the best materials for the fight to expose and stop organized stalking.
With all due respect Eleanor, I do not feel that you are doing this with your credibility reviews, and i definitely don’t feel that you are doing this with your members, telling people which terms they can use. It’s not cool, and it’s not right.
People should be able to use what they are comfortable with. This is very quickly becoming use the sites we say and the terms we say or be a pariah, and isn’t the point that people are already segregated in one way, why should their blogs, websites, and materials be also treated the same way?
I don’t think these are good, and when your members get called on this stuff, they accuse others of causing divisions in the community, but realistically, it’s these reviews and your members telling people which terms to use that are causing some of the problems.
I do appreciate you dropping by, at this moment there is nothing else that I feel a need to add to this conversation, if there is anything else that you would like to add, I will be happy to have you post it.
So that those interested in this discussion can read it, I will post it on the blogs.
*Free advertising to none credible sites removed.*
After giving the New York Times article a little bit more time to settle there are three points that I wanted to review further.
The first was how the article came to use the term extreme communities. I did read over the Vaughan Bell article where a reference is made to such communities.
One feature that has garnered relatively little attention in the clinical research literature is the
existence of what might be termed ‘extreme communities’. Owing to the difficulty with which
material can be effectively censored or suppressed online, views considered extreme or
unacceptable to the mainstream can be expressed relatively freely, with online communities often
formed by those who share similar opinions. Some of these are of particular interest to mental
health professionals, as they attempt to reframe what would otherwise be classified as ‘mental
disorder’ in an entirely different light.</blockquote>
According to what Dr Bell wrote in the article it was views considered extreme or unacceptable by the mainstream. Using this definition I wondered if things such as the 9/11 truth movement would be an extreme community? Their views are not considered mainstream. I also wondered who else might fall into this list based on Dr Bell’s definition?
Websites that cover conspiracy topics might well meet his definition of extreme communities. Many of the subject matters covered on websites such as http://www.AboveTopSecret.com would fall into this category. They would be a website of mini patches of extreme communities.
Another factor that I thought should be calculated in when defining a community as an extreme community is the obvious, is the community helpful vs harmful? What kind of purpose do they serve? If I go to a website that has what by some is considered an extreme view that encourages me to kill myself, then that should be considered different than going to a website that expounds none traditional views, but steers the website viewer away from inflicting harm to themselves?
There are lot’s of websites that conform to traditional or more traditional mainstream views that in my opinion are probably fairly harmful to some aspects of society, but we turn a blind eye, because it does pass mainstream muster.
The definition as is, in my opinion is fairly broad, and the references to the term were limited except for references to Dr Bell’s work and the New York Times article.
The other point that I am wondering about is who or what now defines what is mainstream or normal? In today’s society we have so many different variables to consider. At one time spending all your time online might have been considered the actions of lonely desperate people. Now with websites such as Facebook, and much of web 2.0 culture, being online is considered normal, and spending many hours online as long as it’s spent socialising is considered a fairly normal and healthy activity.
According to a report from Mediamark Research in a 30 day period 2.5 million adults participated in online dating. I am sure they find this to be completely normal and mainstream, but I am sure there are patches of society that do not agree with this.
World of WarCraft reached 11 Million monthly Subscribers. Many of them sane individuals who go online to take part in these roleplaying games. For that community, I am sure they consider themselves normal and mainstream, just by their sheer numbers. I am sure there are still many in society who would not however consider going online to roleplay normal, mainstream or even healthy.
Thus what would be considered as abnormal or extreme view offline is often a normal and accepted view online, in many different circles. Eg. 9/11 conspiracy offline, might still be considered anti-government or none traditional, but online they are a fairly regular part of web culture and discussions. When defining mainstream and referencing the Internet, we might have to start finding different ways to do so.
Eg. I just read an article today, that talks about a real life couple getting divorced because he is cheating online with a virtual girlfriend. Traditional definitions are having to be adapted and redefined to accommodate an online culture.
A second woman in Japan was arrested because she killed her online husband. She killed his virtual self. That’s right, she did not kill him, or have any intention of killing the real him, but when his online virtual self divorced her, she got even and killed him. She was arrested for hacking into the computer and other things, and now if she is formally charged, she could face up to 5 years in jail.
It is becoming more and more clear that it is the offline world that is having to adapt to the new online realities and not often the other way around. Therefore what we considered traditional and mainstream yesterday for an offline reality, in many ways is being redefined, and it does not seem as if some offline structures are keeping up to date with this reality.
The third point of concern with the New York Times article is that people were being considered paranoid with simple offline assessments. Are these offline assessments adequate for some of the challenges that people are facing in the modern day world to define Targeted Individuals as paranoid?
Recent research has unearth a great deal of information to show that when people are being termed as paranoid, it might not be the case.
Research is showing that there are in fact networks of individuals being hired by the state in various countries to track and spy on average citizens. The spying includes email and phone taps. Being followed around in public by hired Covert Human Intelligence Sources. Having these same Informants move into the houses around the target when possible. Following them around in vehicle and foot patrols, plus many other forms of intrusive surveillance.
Individuals and Families under these types of surveillance are often not aware, and if they do become aware and go to seek help, they are often written off by the establishment as paranoid, psychotic, or crazy. The modern day reality is that without proper investigations, Freedom Of Information Act requests, and other proper forms of inquiry a true assessment might be impossible to determine. The secondary problem is that many of these investigations are ending up in secret databases, which the public has no access to. F.O.I.A. requests are no longer a sure fire way to determine if an individual is under surveillance.
I think it’s fair and safe to say that before a community is considered extreme many factors should be considered, and the definition itself should factor into consideration what’s considered normal online as well as offline. Assessing if a community or individual is paranoid or psychotic in today’s modern surveillance society should be done with care and caution. It’s been shown time and time again that anti-terror laws are being abused, National Security Letters are being handed out left right and center, with over 30,000 being issued per year, and many groups and individuals are being spied upon and placed on watch lists, unfairly.
In a society as the one described above, it is not only normal to have concerns about surveillance, but when there is a suspicion of such, the job of therapists in the future might not be first subscribing the patient to medication, it might be first asking if they have placed a F.O.I.A. request.
Society might even have to make it a mandatory law for psychiatrist to be notified if a person is under surveillance so that they are not falsely labelled, committed or medicated. This does not happen, the culture and society have changed within the last decade, but the methods used for determining paranoia, psychosis, and mental illness, in regards to the belief that one is under surveillance are still fairly antiquated in many cases, and might not pass muster for the realities of a modern day surveillance society.
The term Gang Stalking. A few years ago when I came online I learnt about Harassment, Mobbing, and then Gang Stalking.
Two years ago when I first learnt about this stuff there was one website that was doing a lot to help and had some useful information.
The other terms for Gang Stalking at the time were also not very popular in the search engines. Vengeance Stalking, Organised Stalking, Cause Stalking, etc. There were all names that were not fitting and at the time google and other engines were giving the term Gang Stalking the most publicity. I also like the professional looking nature of one of the more useful sites online.
One of the things I did before starting my own Gang Stalking site was to network with other sites in the community. Not in the Gang Stalking community, but in the outer world, the place where we have to bring the gap.
Because of my work on getting things like Harassment and Bullying exposed, I had made friends with several other sites and asked if they would be kind enough to link to that specific Gang Stalking site. The friends from many of the other stalking sites did not identify with Gang Stalking at the time, which is understandable. Remember in the harsh client of a couple of years ago, just to mention of any term associated with Gang Stalking would get threads shut down, or attacks of you are crazy, etc. This has changed with hard work.
The members of the mobbing sites which I contacted, I think there were about 3 really good mobbing sites at the time that I was in touch with. Two of those sites readily identified with Gang Stalking and were kind enough to add the link to the gang stalking site, which I was still referencing to a couple of years ago.
Shortly after this I realised that things were going very slowly and that many of the sites seemed to be be doing the opposite of being helpful. At that time I was still on the forums, and you can really learn a lot of those, but there is a price at times to be paid.
One discussion that came up was should the name of the cause be changed or should a gradual shift be made to use something else. Since Gang Stalking might be confusing for some people. At the time I was still open to the idea and working with others to see if we could advance this as quickly as possible.
Any articles that came out about the subject matter at the time had gone under the term Gang Stalking. That includes the Lynn stuter article, Sharon Weinberger and a few others. Some were good articles others were not, but that was the spoken or unspoken agreed to term.
At the discussion which I was a part of I suggested if a name change should occur, community mobbing should be considered, because people were at the time finally starting to understand the concept of mobbing, how it worked, how it affected the targets, and many in that community had also committed suicide, or workplace shootings. As you will see in later research there is a reason for this strong correlation.
Anyways I asked the person who was running a popular forum at the time this question. How does a name change occur? I mean who get’s to decide if a movements name should get changed? Especially when we are a pretty disjointed movement. Just like tomorrow if we were calling each other Targeted Individuals and someone decided to change this, who get’s to decide? At the time there were several Gang Stalking sites, some hard to find, other impossible to find.
The person who is in my opinion looked upon as a community leader, said no one really decides this, we just discuss this and then start using the term and then take it from there. Really who get’s to decide since many of those sites are not part of the forum? Ah I guess only the members of that discussion and everyone else get’s left out.
I at this time decided that I really didn’t think this was a helpful course and decided to leave the term Gang Stalking as is. Those a rose by any other name would still smell as sweet, if Roses are known as Roses today and we start calling them stink weed tomorrow, it will be an adjustment for the public. Eg. Let’s try changing the name of Electronic harassment to shock wave syndrome, you basically almost have to begin from scratch and it wastes precious time in getting people readjusted to new terms and it does not move things forward, especially for activism online or offline.
The community really just needed education about what was happening. If proper content was used, in my two years online, people do understand the terms, and again with Gang Stalking citizen informants on forums fell into two, many three categories. The ones who automatically tried to discredit the thread as paranoid or crazy, and the ones who even after reading a thread still when, well I hate Gang’s anyways. Most of the general public that I tried to introduce information to, are quit capable of reviewing the information and understanding it.
It’s the same as Cointelpro or any other name.
I really do not think the people who invented the term expected Gang Stalking to catch on so quickly, or for the truth of the fact that this was being done by the government to get out. Remember these same persons that I spoke of in this article, till not too long ago, still had people chasing vigilante gangs, and I think many of us still would have been chasing those phantoms if we had not branched out on our own and started our own research.
So where does that leave everything? Where it’s always been. You have a movement that often have Citizen Informants or agents from what I have been told controlling some most aspects of the community. They have the share numeric capacity to control each other, and to control what get’s said, what get’s disseminated. Which terms become changes or moved around.
If they choose to go in a direction that is not helpful, you have to then stay on course. Remember for every step forward, they try to make sure it’s two steps back.
Most people that are new, will not understand or grasp this concept at first, or really will never grap it.
So the preferred term for me and for what is happening to me, and still for many others is Gang Stalking, if I ever leave off using this term. My second preferred term would clearly be community mobbing. Which two years ago was very helpful in getting others to understand what was happening to us, because they understood the term mobbing.
- Above top secret
- Abu Ghraib
- Active denial
- Active Denial Weapons
- as the world turns
- Asain Male
- Asian Female
- Astral Plane
- Background records checks
- bad luck
- Black female
- Black Females
- Black Male
- black women
- Brain reading device
- Britney Spears
- brown coats
- Buffy The Vampire Slayer
- changing vibrations
- Citizen Informants
- Civilian Spies
- Community harassment
- community mobbing
- community policing
- concentration camps
- constitutional change
- Controlled society
- Covert investigations
- Cultural diversity and multiculturalism
- david icke
- devinci code
- domestic spying
- East Germany
- electromagnetic frequency
- Electronic harassment
- Emotional Vampires
- False Prophets
- files updated
- Gang Stalking
- government corruption
- GPS tracking
- Guantanamo Bay
- Health and Safety
- Heath Ledger
- High technology
- Honey Trap
- Indigo Ribbon
- Intimate Infiltarations
- Jeremy Blake
- Joan of Ark
- John Lennon
- Kilmeer Gill
- Lord Of The Rings
- Marian Fisher
- Mark M Rich
- Markus Wolf
- Martin Luther King Jr
- Meat production
- mental concentration camps
- metropolitan police
- militarized police force
- Mind Control
- Mind Reading
- Minority women
- Naomi Ebersole
- National Security Letters
- Neurolinguistic programing
- New World Order
- one handed signals
- Online Stalking
- Passive Aggressive Manipulative
- Personal Identifiers
- Police Abuse
- Police Corruption
- Police State
- Production Company
- psychological harassment
- Quantum Physics
- Record keeping
- records updated
- Red Squads
- Robot Sentient Project
- Rosa Parks
- School Shooting
- sexual harassment
- sign language
- Skin Heads
- Social Control
- Spy cameras
- spy satellites
- State target
- Stop snitching
- Targeted Individual
- The Matrix
- Theresa Duncan
- Third wave
- Thought Police
- Threat Assessment Teams
- time travel
- twilight zone
- violent persons registry
- Voice to skull
- walls of jericho
- whistle blower
- white female
- White Male
- workplace mobbing
- Young and the restless
- zero tollerance