Gang Stalking World

United we stand. Divided they fall.

Tips and Tricks 4

Tips and tricks.

After doing this for sometime I am going to revise some suggestions.

Targets might want to consider wither or not to use their real identities or a faux identity while online. Mark was pretty open and used his real information as were some others. Over time from what I can see, targets might be better off while online using something different or in between. Eg. Anthony Brina and many others use faux names while online. I think this has worked well and might be applied depending on your situation. I have seen it now on several occasions where they think they know who a target is, and they will begin psychological targeting of the Targeted Individual they think it is. (I have
seen them be wrong, and right and the effects that it has.)

This will also depend on how comfortable or uncomfortable you are with your situation. The other thing I would recommend is that if you do use Youtube.com, then do it in a way that protects your identity.  Again Youtube.com can be very effective means of communication, but use it wisely.

Legal and Investigation means.

Over the course of this as you know, I have spoken to police, lawyers, investigators, community workers, individual sources, other targets, etc.

There are many different avenues that a target should try to use when seeking assistance with these covert investigations, or Cointelpro like investigations if you will.

Many targets by the time they find out what is ongoing are usually too improvised to do anything about it, but if you have the means, then you might want to try finding a private investigator, one with prior law enforcement experience, who are familiar with these Covert (Cointelpro) Investigations. (If they say they are not then maybe look elsewhere.)

For the rest who can not afford this means, you can see if you can get your Freedom of information records, keep in mind that you will often get an initial report that there is nothing being investigated, and you might have to follow up with several subsequent requests, or letters.

Going to the police as we have seen usually causes more problems, it does not mean that we should not try, but we have to be careful in our dealings with these people.

Lawyers, there are some that will take a case without proof, but again many will ask that you gather evidence first, and then take it from there.

Background checks.

As a target when doing a background check these are things to consider.

Here is some information one company provided about their background checks.

[quote]

EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

Your first step in making an informed hiring decision. We make it our business to know your business to provide a total solution for your human resource needs. From initial screening to data verification, qualitative assessment and even post-hire evaluations, we will free you to make decisions and not gather background information.

Through thorough investigations we can verify positions held, performance record, income, job skills, attitude, verify education and much more. Other optional information such as driving history, bankruptcy, financial background, and criminal records.[/quote]

Just some things to be aware of. Also some really good info from PrivacyRights.org. I think it focuses on California based background checks, but the information that can be gathered should be pretty consistent across the board.

http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16-bck.htm
If you take the time to read the page you will see that there is a great deal of information that can be gathered about you from a standard background checks, up to and including,

[quote]Part 2. What Is Included in a Background Check?

Background reports can range from a verification of an applicant’s Social Security number to a detailed account of the potential employee’s history and acquaintances. There is even some evidence that employers are now searching popular social networking Web sites such as MySpace and Facebook for the profiles of applicants.

Here are some of the pieces of information that might be included in a background check. Note that many of these sources are public records created by government agencies.

Driving records, Vehicle registration, Credit records,
Criminal records, Social Security no, Education records,
Court records, Workers’ compensation, Bankruptcy,
Character references, Neighbor interviews, Medical records, Property ownership, Military records, State licensing records,
Drug test records, Past employers, Personal references, Incarceration records, Sex offender lists.[/quote]

[quote]In both of these situations, the applicant would not have the ability to obtain a copy of the background check to find out what negative information it contained. We have learned of situations where the individual remained unemployed for years, not knowing that wrongful criminal records which resulted from identity theft were the reason for the individual’s failure to find employment. (Read “Identity Theft: The Growing Problem of Wrongful Criminal Records,” www.privacyrights.org/ar/wcr.htm.)[/quote]

So it’s really important as a target that you try to find out what information is out there about yourself, you might want to conduct your own background check and records check, again if you have the means. It might not uncover anything, but it’s a good place to start.

Just some things to think about.

Next time we will look into National Security Letters, the gift that just keeps on giving. I would like to thank the poster who tuned me onto these. If someone is being investigated and your information just happens to be in their possession, accidental or other wise, it could potentially put you onto a list as someone to be monitored. I am still doing the research on these, and I hope to post some good info about these next times. Just one more way society is being silenced, hushed, and turned into a zombie army of snitches, willingly or unwillingly.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032201882.html

August 22, 2007 Posted by | Background records checks, Censorship, Cointelpro, Covert investigations, files updated, Gang Stalking, Gangstalking, harassment, National Security Letters, Snitches, society, State target | 7 Comments

Corrupt to the core 4.

I just realised why they don’t want to update the file.
It’s the way I have written the report update. It makes mention of the city wide snitching program and has links and articles to back up what I am reporting. It also has reference to the the fact that I have confirmed this with several sources, all unnamed in the report ofcourse, but several sources none the less.

They don’t want a record of this, because if anyone ever goes looking, this will be of public record. That’s why when I first tried to file the report officer B would not include that in the report, and every attempt at a subsequent update has had that information included in the file.

Because they don’t want a record of this program. Why cause it’s societal and corrupt? Or because when future reports are filed of this nature, there will be a record of this, and your officers can’t then pull that forest gump, wide eyed ignorance that they like using with targets. The active deniability of this would be gone, and that is why you don’t want to do this.

I remember specifically the first officer that pretended to take the report, organised stalking, what’s that, but he knew. His coworkers also recognised the name, by their reactions to the mention of it. Not to mention the fact that you had five people being stalked in the same way in my community, but no one has ever heard of this.

Or the nice officer who acknowledged the program, but didn’t think I could get my name of the list, and then transferred me to the police investigations unit, only to have that officer pretended he didn’t think organised stalking existed, till I read him the article, and that shut him up, but when he couldn’t pretend anymore then he refused to help.

So this would take away the active deniability of the whole thing, and that is why they are refusing to do this. Ok well then my recommendation for future targets, no matter what the outcome of my records are, is to get a report filed, with content referencing the specific article or articles, mentioning these citywide eyes and ears programs. That seems to be the best way to do it.

Just a thought.

August 22, 2007 Posted by | Active denial, files updated, Gang Stalking, Gangstalking, Police Corruption, Record keeping, records updated, Snitches, society | 2 Comments