Gang Stalking World

United we stand. Divided they fall.

Gang Stalking Community Notifications

Community Notifications and Gang Stalking

Targeted Individuals have spent several years trying to understand the mechanisms that would allow the type of targeting that is happening to them to exist. Many have tried to understand how a system could exist that could monitor and track them 24/7. That could follow them from community to community. A structure that could label them, even from country to country.

Most targets see themselves as innocent individuals. People that have done no wrong, yet many started to experience, psychological torture, electronic harassment, and systemic wide targeting almost as if overnight in some cases, and in other cases it slowly built up over years.

Targets looked at structures such as Cointelpro, The Stasi, Stalking Groups, Vigilantes, the types of structures that had occurred in the past that had lead to a similar types of harassment. Many were close and very similar to what targets experienced, in their scope, and potential for systemic life disruptions and destruction, but none were ever quite perfect.

Jane Clift

Then last year the case of a woman in England named Jane Clift was brought to light as she made headlines in the U.K., and beyond. Ms. Clift tried to perform what was her citizens duty in reporting a man that had become angry and violent with her. In reporting this man, she herself was embroiled in a verbal altercation with the community worker that she tried to report his anti-social behaviours to. Ms. Clift followed up their heated discussion with a letter, and for this simple act, Ms. Clift was placed on a list with sex perverts, and other criminals. She was placed on what the U.K. calls the violent persons registry. It’s a listing for individuals who have displayed violent or other inappropriate behaviour. Ms. Clift found that being under the spotlight of this flagging system was too much and she was forced to move from the area that she had lived in for over 10 years.

Ms. Clift unlike many targets had been given notification that she was to be placed on such a list. The nature of her perceived offence, and the length of time she would be on such a list. She described her experience, which in some pivotal ways matched some of what Targeted Individuals had mentioned in their harassment.

She sensed that, everywhere she went, there was “whispering, collaboration, people scurrying about”. “Everywhere I went – hospitals, GPs, libraries – anywhere at all, even if I phoned the fire service, as soon as my name went on to that system, it flagged up ‘violent person marker, only to be seen in twos, medium risk’.” 2

Ms Clift’s targeting if not identical was at least fraternal to what targets had described. People collaborating. Whispers, scurrying, life disruption that had caused her to move. In Ms. Clifts case the warning markers, and flags had been sent out to quite a few agencies, and thus everywhere she want this warning marker followed her.

The question then became was such a system, or similar system available in other countries? Which laws were being used and who was responsible for keeping or organizing such information?

Further research showed that under occupations health and safety laws, there was such a structure in place, that would allow an individual to receive a warning marker, or flag on their files for various perceived offences. The structure matched and covered all the various markers that targets had complained about. The structure also allowed for those around the accused to be fully aware of what was ongoing, while it allowed the accused to be unaware, unable to defend themselves. This structure upon further and deeper examination fit extremely well with what was ongoing.

Under the Occupational health and safety, or community health and safety laws, which have been established in many countries, individuals can be flagged and a notification about them can be sent out to the community at large, all without the targets awareness. These laws give workers the right to be made aware if they are about to encounter potentially violent situations or individuals. These laws however do not give the target any foreknowledge of the violence, and harassment they will soon receive from the community, once placed on such a notification system.

Workers have the ’ right to know ‘ all risks and safe work procedures associated with the job. This may involve identifying individuals with a history of unpredictable or violent behaviour.

Training workers to recognize escalating behaviour that has the potential to result in violence is a common way to minimize risk. Five warning signs of escalating behaviour and possible responses are listed in Appendix C.

In the service sector this may require identifying to employees persons who have a history of aggressive or inappropriate behaviour in the store, bar, mall or taxi.

The identity of the person and the nature of the risk must be given to staff likely to come into contact with that person. While workers have the right to know the risks, it is important to remember that this information cannot be indiscriminately distributed. 3

Workers do have a right to know if they are going to encounter violent situations or individuals. On the surface this sounds like a good thing, and if used properly should be a good thing, yet the innocent were and are being targeted by this system. How were innocent individuals, whistle-blowers, and others ending up on such lists without any kind of warning or notification? Even convicted prisoners get warnings if they are going to be placed on a notification system, thus legally it would be presumed that other individuals would have the same rights and protections if there lives were going to be disrupted in a similar manner. This does not seem to be the case.

Under these occupational health and safety laws, incidents must be reported. They can range anywhere from threatening looks, yelling, to actual physical aggression and everything in between. They can also include other inappropriate behaviours. Eg. Acts of sexual aggression, harassment, intimidation, inappropriate lewdness, etc.

Once a worker files a report, if the workplace has an Employee Assistance Program then this matter might be discussed with that department. If the behaviour is deemed to be a real concern, then it might be forwarded to a Threat Assessment Team. This team is where designation, warning markers, and notifications can be determined and applied to an individuals file, depending on the structure of the organization.

Employee Assistance Program and Threat Assessment Team

This is a pre-emptive team with a mission of early identification of intervention. The composition of the TAT shall be the following individuals or their designated representatives: 4

Early interventions can be misconstrued and lead to damaging consequences. There many assumptions that go into pre-crime policing, that can have damaging consequences for the target involved.

Oregon State Police Sgt. Jeff Proulx explained to South Oregon’s Mail Tribune why the operation was such a success: “Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach.”

There’s just one problem: David Pyles hadn’t committed any crime, nor was he suspected of having committed one. The police never obtained a warrant for either search or arrest. They never consulted with a judge or mental health professional before sending out the military-style tactical teams to take Pyle in.

“They woke me up with a phone call at about 5:50 in the morning,” Pyles told me in a phone interview Friday. “I looked out the window and saw the SWAT team pointing their guns at my house. The officer on the phone told me to turn myself in. I told them I would, on three conditions: I would not be handcuffed. I would not be taken off my property. And I would not be forced to get a mental health evaluation. He agreed. The second I stepped outside, they jumped me. Then they handcuffed me, took me off my property, and took me to get a mental health evaluation.” 5

This team consists of members from Human Resources and other organizations. In the case of one Florida University the organization consists of many different individuals from various areas that work together to make the determination of whether they thing an individual could be a cause for violence.

1. Chief, University Police Department 2. Director, EAP 3. Director, Personnel Services 4. General Counsel 5. Appropriate Vice-President 6. Others as needed and deemed appropriate by above representatives E. Workplace Violence Management Team: A Workplace Violence Management Team (WVMT) shall periodically review the workplace violence policy and recommend changes as needed. The WVMT shall consist of the following persons or their designated representative:

1. Chief, University Police Department 2. Director, EAP 3. Director, Personnel Services 4. General Counsel F. Crisis Management Unit – The University maintains a Crisis Management Unit (CMU) through a collaborative effort between the Psychology Department and the Campus Police Department. In the event of a situation which may require immediate police or psychological intervention, the Police department should be notified. The Chief of Police (or designated representative) will determine if the situation requires the attention of the police, the CMU or the TAT. 4

In addition to exhibiting violent or other inappropriate behaviours, there are other factors that could ensure that an individual has a warning marker, or flag placed on their file. Again this will differ with each organization, but the concept is the same. This structure or one similar is used in some cases to determine if individuals will end up on this system wide notification.

V. “Fitness for Duty” Issues

In addition to the definitions of violent, potentially violent, and abusive behaviors as discussed in Section IV, these Guidelines shall also be concerned with behaviors, physical and verbal, that may not appear to be violent, potentially violent, or abusive prima facie. Such behaviors that do not fall within the purview of the definitions in Appendix A, yet may be viewed as precursors to violent behavior and/or have the tendency to interfere with a harmonious work environment or with an individuals work performance, shall be deemed as “fitness for duty” issues. Examples of “fitness for duty” behaviors may include, but are not limited to:

A. Expression of bizarre and inappropriate thoughts. B. Excessive absenteeism without prior approval or rationale. C. Degenerating physical appearance. D. Acts of insubordination. E. Poor work performance. F. Poor workplace relationships with others. G. Indications of alcohol/substance abuse. H. Excessive complaining. 4

The additional criterias that can get a person flagged, are interestingly enough many of the same symptoms that harassment, bullying and mobbing victims targets experience, or have express experiencing at the height of their targeting. Remember that harassment can happen in the workplace, in the community, or on campus. Many victims of sexual harassment have expressed inappropriate thoughts of what they would like to see happen to those harassing them. Many targets of sexual harassment and other harassment’s do not always keep up their physical appearance, while being harassed. They might disobey supervisors if asked to work with their assailant. Targets of mobbing, bullying, and harassment do often start to exhibit poor performance, workplace reviews and assessments. Some do turn to alcohol and substance abuse to deal with the harassment. Almost all targets of these harassment do make complaints to human resources on a regular basis in order to have the harassment stopped. Yet these are coincidentally the criteria listed for determining if someone is fit for duty.

VI. Reporting Procedures

All University employees and registered students, regardless of position, are responsible for the immediate reporting of any acts of violence, potential acts of violence, or threats they have received or witnessed, or have been told that another employee has witnessed or received. Employees and students should also report unusual, harassing, or threatening behaviors, as defined in Appendix A, even though such behaviors may not be in the form of an imminent threat, particularly if these behaviors make one fearful for his or her continued safety. Employees must make such reports regardless of the relationship of the employee to the person who initiated the threat or behavior or committed the act of violence. 4

Today’s workplace does not leave very much room for discretion. It is now routine for individuals to report acts of aggression, or other inappropriate behaviours. These can often have devastating affects on innocent individuals.

A medical technician killed himself after being suspended from work after someone complained that he made a politically-incorrect joke about a black friend.

Roy Amor, 61, who was devastated at the prospect of losing his job making prosthetics, shot himself in the head outside his house.

He was facing a disciplinary investigation after suggesting to the black colleague that he ‘better hide’ when they noticed immigration officers outside their clinic.

It is understood that the man was a close friend of Mr Amor and was not offended. However, it was overheard by someone else who lodged a formal complaint. 6

The above case shows how a seemingly innocent joke between two friends, can be overheard, taken as offensive by a third party, and lead to dire consequences. He made the remark to an individual who was a long term friend, but this remark lead to a disciplinary investigation. An investigation which might even have seen him fired from his job. Unable to face the consequences he committed suicide.

Due to the secrecy used in this program a target of harassment might well display anger, or other legitimate outbursts. Once this happens all the aggressors who are familiar with this system have to do is report the incidents. Explain how the target makes them feel threatened, uncomfortable, or express concerns about workplace violence. When in fact the target is the one being constantly provoked. Get a few friends involved and before you know it, the target is the problem. The target is the person who is aggressive, and the target is the one being disciplined or having a warning marker placed on their file. Targets are often being baited by complete strangers once they find themselves on these notification lists.

In future many more innocent people might just find themselves with such warning markers added to their files, as the DSM make the definition for mental illness that much wider and broader in scope.

DSM Updates

Proposed updates to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) are prompting many to question whether or not the psychiatric profession itself has gone crazy. The latest additions to the alleged “mentally ill” could include hoarders, people who get angry every now and again, lazy people, and even those who get outraged over things like sex and violence on television. 7

“For this latest revision they’ve set up a special task force to decide if behaviors like bitterness, extreme shopping or overuse of the internet should be included,” explained Professor Christopher Lane 7

Many Internet users who spend time on games such as World of Warcraft might meet this definition. People who spend too much time on chat forums. Lazy individuals, people who get angry, or who get upset about too much violence on television, people who like to shop too much, or hoard things, might all make the list in future. The criteria for these definitions are not only unscientific, they could easily incorporate most any individual in today’s modern society. If these definitions are successfully updated, there could be many more targets making the list in future.

Once a target is flagged, or a warning marker is placed on their files, depending on what the threat assessment team determines a community notification is sent out to the individuals around the target. Anyone that might come in contact with the target is contacted. Others who are part of these notification programs are also contacted when the target is nearby.

If a target makes a call, or their name is pulled up on a system, the targets warning marker will follow them. The community then naturally goes into hypervigilance mode, and they do anything they can to remove that individual from within the community. Most individuals treat these notifications the same way they would treat notifications about any other threat, be it paedophiles, rapists, the same hysteria is often present.

Community Notification

Some people might argue that they would feel more secure if they were aware of the identities of dangerous offenders in their neighbourhoods, but widespread community notification actually serves to heighten fear of victimization. In a large metropolitan area, hundreds of thousands of people are notified of a dangerous offender’s release, while only hundreds will come into contact with him in the community. This blanket notification propagates the belief that there are more “predators” in the community than ever before, and fearful attitudes among members of the public are reinforced. A vicious cycle results: widespread notification leads to an increase in the community’s fear of crime which, in turn, leads to more calls for notification. We would also argue that the use of inflammatory language such as “predator” by politicians and officials also works to heighten fear and increase calls for more punitive action. 8

Since the innocent target has no idea of what is happening behind their back, this system is being used in inappropriate ways. Based on the research that has been conducted,it seems this notification systems is being used to silence whistle-blowers, women seem to be targeted above average, and minorities. As Jane Clift points out, this system goes beyond race, gender. There are lot’s of men and non minority individuals who have also found themselves targeted by this system. This program is not only systemic, but these notifications are being used indiscriminately, with very little oversight, and they are being used beyond borders.

Since most civil workers are aware of this notification system, it means that targets reporting incidents of being followed around by various strangers should not have been unfamiliar to the police, and other agencies that targets reported their harassment to. In most cities this notification is well known, and used by many workers and employers. Yet Targeted Individuals have had to have mental health evaluations for making complaints about this structure, and the harassment that comes with it.

Workers

Not only will this program used the civil servant already mentioned, but it will expand who is used in the program. They will have secret sources of communication available to them. The members of these programs will connect with the fusion centres. None disclosure agreement or a confidential disclosure agreements will be signed by many in these programs to ensure that the information is protected. 9

Once the notification goes out, the target literally feels as if they have become enemy of the state, because the community is getting a notification with information that may or may not be fully accurate. Remember a lot of the reporting that happens, happens by individuals who could have ulterior motives, such as revenge. For someone familiar with this structure, it’s the perfect way to systemically destroy someone’s life and keep them out of the loop for years, if not forever.

The portion of the harassment that targets refer to as Gang Stalking is a deliberate psychological operation that happens within this structure. Involving community harassment, community mobbing, gaslighting, street theatre, electronic harassment and dozens of other techniques that all work together to help systemically destroy the target over time. It also paints those complaining as mentally ill. This structure is capable of destroying the targets reputation, and credibility. As the target seeks to get help for the community harassment that will inevitably occur under such a notification, their cries and pleas for assistance are ignored. Their stories of harassment, stalking, mobbing, electronic harassment, are all conveniently written of as signs of mental illness,while the Targeted Individuals life continues to be systemically interfered with, and continues to fall apart.

Most participants of this notification structure seem to be under some kind of confidentiality or none disclosure agreement. There is also a structure in place that seems capable of punishing anyone who is part of this structure that steps out of line, thus most people do not discuss this program, even as those close to them are being destroyed.

These occupational safety and health laws are in most communities, workplaces, and educational facilities. They are in most democratic countries, such as Canada, U.S., U.K. and the rest of Europe. At this stage many other countries seem to be adapting this structure, and from the feedback targets have provided it seems that this structure is already in most countries.

What this means is that wittingly or unwittingly. There is a systemic, surveillance structure that is fully capable of monitoring and targeting an individual who has been flagged in this manner. This structure is not limited to states, or provinces, and can go beyond borders. The targets information might also be indiscriminately distributed to a wide range of individuals. Individuals that the target might never come in contact with face to face, yet who the target might have an acquaintance, or business relationship with. It’s basically a net that is capable of touching everyone connected to the target, and poisoning them with the information contained in the targets file, wither accurate or not. Because most targets have no idea what is happening, or how such a structure could exist, they are floored as they try consistently to get help within the normal structures, while being written off as having a mental illness.

I believe that this notification system will continue, because it works for many. Many like feeling as if they are part of a secret club. Unless it happens to them, most will never truly understand how devastating such a structure can be to an innocent person. I can only suggest that those with the know how, financial ability, and dedication, work towards implementing laws to get this structure corrected.

Suggestions

This structure should be required to give written notification to targets. If an investigation is ongoing, then the time frame for the investigation should be limited. Targets complain of years, upon years of targeting. If the targets guilt has been established in some capacity, then invite them to a hearing. If not then it should be mandatory to remove these notification after a specific time frame. Most lawyers, mental health workers, police, are all fully in the know about this notification system, thus targets and their complaints of harassment should be taken seriously. Instead this notification system is being used to destroy innocent lives, or harass them for years on end with dire consequences to themselves, and the communities at large.

What many in society still do not understand or realize is that there is a dark side to many of those shootings and violent incidents, there is a dark side that society would rather not have you know about. A dark side that happens masked just below the public’s eye and awareness, but that is often very real and traumatizing for the Targeted Individual. 11

This notification system in scope and breadth is no less damaging then the Stasi’s system of harassment, or the American Cointelpro program. The difference now is that the state has masked these offences under the guise of doing what is right for the community. Leaving innocent targets at the mercy of the mob, and individuals who use this system to openly target, harass, oppress and control those who have been targeted.

1. http://www.1brickcourt.com/files/cases/140CLIFT_58136.pdf
2. http://www.24dash.com/news/Local_Government/2009-06-24-Good-citizen-wins-12-000-damages-from-council-who-labelled-her-potentially-violent
3. http://www.wcb.pe.ca/photos/original/wcb_wpviolence.pdf
4. http://www.vpfa.fsu.edu/Employee-Assistance-Program/Workplace-Violence
5. http://reason.com/archives/2010/03/16/pre-crime-policing
6. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1265065/Man-kills-row-work-non-PC-joke.html#ixzz0mnwdyb9i
7. http://www.naturalnews.com/028529_psychiatry_mental_illness.html
8. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/pub/pdf/C20.pdf
9. http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Structure.html
10. http://www.progressive.org/mag/mc070208
11. http://www.articlesbase.com/news-and-society-articles/the-dark-side-2220672.html

May 2, 2010 Posted by | Citizen Informants, Community harassment, community mobbing, Conspiracy, control, Controlled society, Covert investigations, crazy, Cults, Gang Stalking, harassment, mobbing | , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The gangstalking File

The case against me and what I understand of it.
The gangstalking file.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/2009/05/14/uk-green2/

[quote]The largest part of the award is the £640,000 awarded for future loss of earnings and a pension, and it is this portion which marks the case out as unusual.

“We have seen cases like this before a number of times but the court has awarded such a large amount because it took the view that this person would not be able to work at this salary level for a long time in the future,” said Tom Potbury, a lawyer specialising in employment law at Pinsent Masons.

Green, 36, had said she was subjected to “offensive, abusive, intimidating, denigrating, bullying, humiliating, patronizing, infantile and insulting words and behavior” and subjected to crude and lewd comments from her former colleagues. Her colleagues would move her papers, hide her post and remove her from document circulation lists. She alleged that some of the colleagues had ignored and excluded her, that her personal and professional authority was undermined, and her workload increased to unreasonable and arbitrary levels.

Her lawyer said medical experts on both sides of the case agreed that Green developed a major depressive disorder, but there was disagreement about its cause.

Deutsche Bank said it had not breached its duties to Green and denied that she was bullied, saying she had had a predisposition to mental illness. Deutsche Bank paid for stress counselling and assertiveness training for Green but she had a nervous breakdown before returning to work and suffering a relapse.[/quote]
I have read the above case scenario several times. It’s funny because the workplace mobbing that I encountered was very similar in some regards to some of the things that went on in this case. Instead of being on the winning end of a lawsuit, I am on this end of an investigation, which is being used to falsely used to portray me as mentally ill.

It’s funny, someone is dehumanized and degraded for several years and they no longer wish to put up with it, or emotionally can not, and the employer in this case a bank wants to place all the blame on them.

Part of what I have been trying to do is better understand the mechanisms used to place me under this investigation. One that has continued for years.

What’s happening to me goes back a really long time. As mentioned before, I first became aware of the actual Gang Stalking, about three years ago, but my workplace mobbing had gone on for several years before this.

At work I was in a similar situation where workplace mobbing was daily, it was continuous and it made it impossible for me to perform my job functions. I eventually filed a complaint with the human rights commission after trying to work things out with Human Resources.

Shortly after filing the complaint C. Coughlin from HR called me into the office, in the presence of my senior manager at the time and advised me that if I did not drop the complaint, I would be required to see a Dr Brown. If I however dropped the complaint, things would back to normal. This play was disgraceful, and dirty but not uncommon.

Apparently if you decide to stand up for your rights or blow the whistle you need to speak to someone, if you instead choose option b and drop the case against them, you are of sound mind and body. Fascinating how these companies work. They use these investigations to discredit and disenfranchise their enemies. They destroy people’s lives to protect their own interests. That’s the true purpose of human resources in these companies.
The harassment I was exposed to included slander, lies, derogatory comments, rumors, and a stimuli which was anchored to said rumour. The stimuli was what was used for the bulk of the harassment.  Because I complained primarily about the stimuli, they used this to try to portray me as mentally ill.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1144462/Man-jailed-harrassing-elderly-neighbours-whistling-Addams-Family-theme-time-saw-them.html
[quote]
Leopold Wrobel harassed the pensioners for more than four years, making them feel like prisoners in their home.

His victims, Michael and Kathleen Sharpe, said Wrobel had ‘nearly succeeded’ in destroying their lives.

Wrobel, 51, had been handed an anti-social behaviour order last December for harassing the couple.

But a court heard his nuisance behaviour, which had already lasted for four years, continued on the day the order was imposed.

The court was shown CCTV footage from cameras on the Sharpes’ property, which picked up Wrobel’s repeated whistling when they arrived at or left the house.

Michael Treharne, prosecuting, said each incident taken in isolation would probably seem silly or almost pathetic.
Leopold Wrobel taunted the elderly couple with the Addams Family theme tune

Leopold Wrobel: He taunted the couple

But he added: ‘If something happens on an ongoing basis and goes on and on and on, eventually it reaches the stage of being absolutely intolerable.’

Mr Sharpe, from Wingerworth in Derbyshire, told the court Wrobel’s behaviour had made his wife ill and she had started losing her hair.

‘It’s been devastating and it’s done what he wanted to do, to try to destroy our lives,’ the 68-year-old said. ‘He very nearly succeeded.’

His wife told magistrates they could not leave the house without Wrobel being there. [/quote]
 

This couple was harassed using a stimuli, in this case the Addams family theme. It was one man, against this couple, but he managed to almost ruin their lives. In my case, I was one person, and about 80% of the peope I worked with, including most of the managers were taking part in what was ongoing. I worked with about 130 people at the time.

The very things that I complained about, at the time and filed the human rights complaint about are some of the very things individuals are now winning court cases over currently, yet in my case, it’s being used to portray me as crazy, and keep a fake investigation ongoing.
Part of what I complained about is that a manager, let’s call him “hateman the hitman saw”, who was currently working in the same company that I was, had years earlier at a different company started a derogatory rumour about me. I stated in the complaint that I felt that this rumour had continued onto my current job.

Since I was once again working with this person, I had reasonable grounds to believe that this person was helping to fuel the flames of this degrogatory rumour, once again. I had grounds to believe it, because I heard back that this was the case. The bulk of my complaint focused on the fact that the derogatory rumours/comments had been anchored to a stimuli, and said stimuli was being used on a daily basis to make it impossible for me to perform my job functions.  Eg. If the stimuli had been keys jangling, you would have the people directly around me, jangling keys for the whole shift, on several occasions, I had customers asking me about the noise in the background.

Sounds pretty simple right, not so simple, since the workplace decided to go along with what was happening.

After researching this, what I now know is that the stimuli and my reaction to it were deliberately created. I had worked with someone at the first job who was in the military. He had tried to sensitise me to three stimuli. I didn’t know it at the time, that it was deliberate, but I do now. The other stimuli was pens clicking, and the actual stimuli which I became sensitive to.

What I also now know is that James, and “Hateman The Hitman Saw”, were both part of the snitching friends network. What James did with the anchoring of the stimuli was deliberate. What I don’t know is if he did this on his own accord, or if in fact this was more deliberate than that. James outside of work did have military connections, so I don’t have the answer to this yet.
The other thing that was happening at that time is the same tactic was being used outside of the workplace to harass me in public. I was aware of this, but I was not aware of the snitching friends network.

So what you have is a target that has been deliberately sensitised. A corrupt company that wants to keep the target quite and stop them from going forward with a human rights complaint. I am not saying that this company is the only place an investigation could have originated from, because I have reason to believe that this might have started years before this, but I do believe that they used my complaint to the human rights commission to try to portray me as mentally ill, when really I was being harassed, and any actions I took to protect myself from being harassed day in and day out were fully justified. I will also state that the harassment was happening outside of the workplace, and the same applies.

So the target is aware that they are being harassed and a stimuli is being used. What they do in the course of these investigations is they try to incite and instigate incidents to further the perception of mental illness, or whatever the target is being billed as. If the target is being billed as a racist, they try to encourage negative interactions with persons of different races. If they are being billed as homophobic, they try to encourage negative interactions with people who are homosexual, if the target is being billed as a terrorist, they try to portray the target as such and make their actions look suspicious.

Since I have been targeted, they have tried the mentally ill angle several times and several different ways. I am aware that one incident that happened recently involved my handing out activism material to a group in a small cafe, about 7 people. I decided to try some viral activism, so I very impromptu handed out some papers directing the informants to visit one of the Gang Stalking websites. I mean I get people coming up to me all the time handing me flyer’s for clubs, and other events, or their activism materials so I don’t see the difference. However my understanding is that they are using me handing out what I consider essentially activism material to further the myth of mental illness. Right because naming informants as such and directing them to Gang Stalking websites is insane? Right. I really have to wonder about the shrills that they are using to make these types of assessments and then further disenfranchise targets?

They could in essence use a simple incident such as this and use it to get employers current to flag you. Yet is not activism what I do on a daily basis? Why should my handing out activism material be seen or evaluated any differently than anyone else?

When they can’t prove that you are crazy, the scope of the investigation might shift. It’s what I call a fishing expedition. Remember these investigations are often the life blood for many. The informants get a bit of money, lot’s of men get construction jobs, and they use these investigations to push targets to the edge, hoping that when they do snap, they will have further proof that the informant network is doing a good job. So every time they can put a target in a mental hospital, get them behind bars, to kill themselves or others, or just attack someone, this gives them cause, and in some cases additional funding, so it’s in their best interest to make you look crazy.

Recently what some informants did is that they started a group with a list of people. Many on that list did not ask to be on that list, but they started sending out emails. In those emails they used some racist or other language that might be cause for an investigation. So for example you find yourself a part of this list, which is in effect a group. You don’t say anything wrong, but others in the group do, surprise, you might find yourself being investigated, because you now belong to a group spewing hate speech. The hate speech will ofcourse have been provided by the informants themselves, but what does that matter?

I had another incident where I was in the park. I had put up with 20 minutes of some idiot informant doing stupid dogs tricks while trying to keep an eye on me. Normally if you were not aware of what was happening it would not be that irritating, but it was. I was grateful when the dog boy left, and was just getting comfortable, when yet another informant showed up, this one even worst than the first, because he just stood there and stared. Well I had it, and I just gave him a glaring look before reaching into my case to get something. I had just gotten some groceries and was pretty tired, and just wanted to sit there without being disturbed.

The next thing I know, the little man pansy is running across the park like a bat out of hell, and I am thinking what the heck? I have been known to give some pretty squelching looks, but I didn’t think I was that good. Next thing I know before I leave the park, there is a helicopter that literally accompanied me home on my walk from the park, and for the next two months I would become acquainted with what I call airstalking.

When I got home, the serve your drug sentence as an informant neighbour above me, decided to make contact with the neighbour below. Suddenly all friendly, can I come and hang out? This neighbour had never spoken to me before. All this other stuff and I am thinking what the heck? Apparently I came to find out that, man pansy, who ran out of the park like a bat out of hell, seems to have given them the impression that I had wires in my case, (which I did for an electronic device, I think a battery charger), and therefore maybe a bomb or incendiary device? So upstairs neighbour was just making sure I didn’t blow myself and him up, and the suddenly friendly Susan above me, as I call him, was just trying to get into my apartment to look around. Well that makes sense.

Now what really get’s me here is all it takes is the word of a snitch. They don’t have to be logical, or truthful, they can make up anything. Now to be fair to man pansy, I don’t know if he did it to be spiteful because I gave him a squelching look, or if he really believed I was dangerous, and I really don’t care. These people are told the target is crazy, or what have you, and normal behaviour that would normally never be questioned suddenly becomes oh did you see that, the target blinked, what do I do, what does that mean? They are irrational and dangerous.

The other problem is positive identification. There have been so many times where I know that I was flagged as someone at a location doing xyz, and I was not. If I could see my file, I am sure I would find several incidents that were attributed to me to make me look crazy, and were not in fact me, but the way these investigations work is that you are guilty, and you never get a chance to prove your innocence.

I have seen so many times where they give the signal that I am away from home, which means that they are following someone else somewhere, and this means that if there is an incident, it will be ascribed to me, and it will not be me. I have been on the train and other locations where they have the wrong target, but they are provoking someone else and I have seen the other person react. Yet this will be ascribed to me.

Corrections will never be made, because the target is not allowed any input whatsoever and most of this is based on the word of informants, staged incidents which are designed to make the target look like anything you want them to look like, pedophile, drug dealer, racist, homophone, crazy, you name it, they can stage it.

The other question I have is about the types of psychiatrists or professionals that are being used. Based on what I saw in regards to the articles that they wrote about Gang Stalking online, you have people trying to write a whole entire community off as mentally ill, when in fact these investigations are on going. Then when that does not work, you write them off as extremists or conspiracy theorists. Yet everything that has been stated just about, has been proven, by external sources. If the same types of people are being used to remotely diagnose targets as crazy, we should be very worried.

As it is, they have been investigating me for years. I was never crazy. I was being harassed. Because I choose to stand up for myself and take the company to the commission, HR used it as an opportunity to open an investigation when I failed to comply with the threat of dropping the suit. Since that time, I have been openly harassed, had my communications interfered with, had several staged incidents, some involving me, many not involving me, but all used to further portray me as mentally ill. I have never been allowed to see my file, or directly address any of the said incidents that would be used to portray me as mentally ill.

Normal activity such as handing out activism material has been used to portray me as mentally ill, keep in mind, I have never had anyone tell me that they did not want something being handed to them. So if this is the case, how can an incident be used against me? Further how can said incident be used to further try to disenfranchise me from employment?

What I do know is we have a very corrupt system. Many informants see about 15-30 minutes of skits and harassment that is running in a targets life 24/7. They perform their surveillance. The ones below me, play human target with my body, often using lasers, radar gun, pulse weaponry, what have you to burn my skin from the apartment below. They still try to do the sleep deprivation thing when they can, much of this by a human rights stand point would be considered torture, and against the law.
These people feel that it’s ok to perform such actions on targets that they have been told are mentally ill, or rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, users, prostitutes etc, because these groups are seen as less than human, they don’t feel that their actions are immoral, or unethical. They think that what they are doing is just fine.

Lastly again these investigations are the life blood of these programs. I had one person tell me that he was offered a construction job. Person had been sent to befriend me. The construction job was to be the benefit. They hire a lot of these people and they put a lot of money into the area around the target where the surveillance is happening and unfortunately these perks makes a targets community more likely to go along with, and take part in the harassment. Remember for the community doing the harassment/surveillance, they are often having the time of their lives, in some cases. They are working together, some feel like they are James Bond, it’s fun for some of them, so fun, that they forget that their is a human being on the other side of the door, as was apparent with the maintenance guy who was so caught up in his role of being informant, that he forgot that the target has rights and the target is not ascribing to their mental pathology.

I have said it before and I will say it again, these people in many cases are not smart, many don’t realise that they are being used to set people up and destroy lives. Lives like Jiverly Wong, Kimveer Gill and many others. When the target kills themselves or shoots others, they see it as proof that the target really was mentally ill, and not proof that their harassment drove the target to the end result. They then feel that they did a good job, that they are valuable and relevant and they continue on as before, feeling more justified than ever.

I also suspect that they have the odd staged incident that also further serves to justify the informant network, and the incidents further serve to make them think that what they are doing is valuable and relevant. When I researched the Stasi, many had been a part of the Stasi by choice and not by force and even after the Stasi fell, they did not see a problem with what they had done. In Hitler’s Germany it was the same as well, with many enjoying a sense of corporation, neighbourliness, not seeing anything wrong or malignant in their actions, they were just following orders, or the laws of the land. It’s the same for our informants.

Thus targets are guilty, we will never be proven innocent because we never get to see our files. The evidence gathered is staged in many cases, normal incidents that would not be questioned if it was done by someone else not under investigation, are being used to further justify their cases against us. When they fail to find proof for one aspect of the investigation, they set up other incidents, go on fishing expeditions and claim the scoop of the investigation has changed. This is used to continue these investigations indefinitely. Remember I recently spent time studying the extremist community, the informants are now trying to set up incidents to portray me as someone that I am not. Think about how this works if you are being investigated as a pedophile. You are likely to get emails containing kiddy porn from you friendly neighbourhood informants, and then the other informant monitoring your internet connection is likely to just focus on the content of that email. Or like the other example that I gave, these groups that you join, or that people add your email to, you have to watch what is being said, because they could use that to change the scope or add to the scope of the investigation.

If you spend anytime reading about how the police are abusing the informant system, then you might begin to have some idea of what we are up against, and then might be able to better protect yourself and others from these deliberate investigations, which have no end, and are continually staged to paint the targets in the worst light, real or imagined.

Is this democracy? No I don’t believe it is, but this system has been like this for some time, and as it spreads more are likely to be affected by it, so it’s very important that people become aware of how the system is operating and functioning so they can try to avoid some of the pit stops associated with it.

June 18, 2009 Posted by | activism, Citizen Informants, Civilian Spies, community mobbing, Conspiracy, control, Corruption, Covert investigations, East Germany, Entrapment, Gang Stalking, Gangstalking, harassment, Informants, Kilmeer Gill, mobbing, Sensitize, society | , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments