Gang Stalking World

United we stand. Divided they fall.

Is it real or is it memorex?

The odd time, every now and then, I get a question about the whole “Gang Stalking” thing, I mean is it real? Are you all mental, and so forth. At this stage, I am not as worried, because I am pretty clear the vast majority are those who have not truly done any real research, investigation, and some are just there to keep agency profiles going in the background.

Informant System

At this late stage between information into the informant system, from several good sources, about how vast the system is, how far back it goes, how many individuals are truly getting onto the criminal informant system, and in too many cases for simple things, such as the young girl who became an informant, and not just an informant, a “drug informant”, because she had unpaid parking tickets, the informant system is no joke, is vast, in every part of just about every society, and has taken over more than anyone can image.

The research is there, on just how far back this system goes, how the system functioned in East Germany, how it’s affecting communities in America and other societies. Research from lawyers and other “credible sources” since that’s who some are willing to believe, and story after story, about lives affected by this system, such as the Rachel Hoffman story.

Threat Assessment Teams

Also the other part of the research Continue reading

January 17, 2013 Posted by | Awareness, CIA, Citizen Informants, Conspiracy, Controlled society, Gang Stalking | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The DT STockton Document Reexamined.

The DT STockton Document Reexamined.

Several years ago someone under the name of DT STockton posted a document about his investigation into the informant system. Quite a bit of it agreed with information that I had already come to agree with, but how much could be verified?

Do the informants really have communication via a special frequency? Are most people in major cities on the informant system?

Are some of the businesses being taken over by government agents?


The answer to the above questions, in my opinion, estimation, and investigation is confirmed, and then some. The world is scarier than we realize. To investigate any of this information, without being familiar with the informant system or government agencies is almost impossible. For a normal, fairly sane person to try to investigate the information can be cumbersome, but in this community of Targeted Individuals, to stay alive and survive, many have had to become minor investigators in their own capacities.

Threat Assessment Teams, the topic has been covered several times, that’s what the community was up against, for case history, I give you the Jane Clift case.

Her case is exactly what most people on a minor scale are up against. In Jane’s case she was advised she was getting listed as medium risk, only to be seen in pairs, and that a warning would come up every time she was in any situation.

The case is what we end up seeing in the Gang Stalking community, on a minor level.

Eg. Threat Assessment Team, evaluated her as a danger to the community, in her case it was the local council, in other cases HR get’s the person listed, however it happens. Once the person is listed, they are monitored by the local monitoring units, or individuals in the community, in her case she was monitored for trying to be a good citizen. Others have complained about monitoring for arguments with those in the community, or workplace, who have the know how to get individuals listed.

Once the local monitoring unit is called in, you have positions in some countries, such as community advisors, unit commanders, shift commanders, who are responsible for the monitoring, of the individuals. The unit and shift commanders or in some cases “case workers” as one liked to fancy himself as, are responsible. In too many cases some are criminals themselves, and organize a deliberate campaign of harassment, against the individuals.

Thus people on the street are literally being given directions, the ones that are on the informant system, or in some simple cases co-workers are being given a warning about the person. Mostly however it’s the informant class, and the government agent class that create the problems for innocent individuals.

Deliberately trying to destroy their lives, and removing them all too often from their existences.

NOw try coming into any of the above positions without being on the informant system, or agency and those in charge have no idea what to do with you. It would be almost impossible to get into a community advisor role, unit commander role, or shift commander role without being in one of these situation, but if you could get into one of these roles, slip in unnoticed, or accidentally come into the role, then those who interface with these units, have no idea how to interact with the individual, because the systems are now creepishly designed to work with the informant system. Period.

Government Agents


Whenever I read the case of John St Clair Akwei, and what governments are capable of doing, or allegedly capable of doing as per the lawsuit that the signal intelligence agent filed against the government, pertaining to aspects of his work, it always sounds so futuristic, so Matrix like in some ways, but it’s a lawsuit that’s been there for over 15 years now?

The stuff that could be done back then, would scare most people now, but image what they are capable of now, if brain mapping, remote neural monitoring and other situations were common place when he worked for NASA.

John St Clair Akwei VS Nasa


Detecting EMF fields in humans for surveillance A subject’s bioelectric field can be remotely detected, so subjects can be monitored anywhere they are. With special EMF equipment, NSA cryptologists can
remotely read evoked potentials (from EEGs). These can be decoded into a person’s brain-states and thoughts. The subject is then perfectly monitored from a distance.

NSA personnel can dial up any individual in the country on the Signals Intelligence EMF scanning network and the NSA’s computers will then pinpoint and track that person 24 hours-a-day. The NSA can pick out and track anyone in the U.S.

NSA’s Signals Intelligence use of EMF brain stimulation NSA Signals Intelligence uses EMF brain stimulation for Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) and Electronic Brain Link (EBL). EMF Brain Stimulation has been in development since the MK Ultra program of the early 1950′s, which included neurological research into “radiation” (non-ionizing EMF) and bioelectric research and development.

Tracking a person via their emf fields. Brain mapping technology that allows you to map a persons mind, but at a distance. [quote]

The NSA has proprietary electronic equipment that analyzes electrical activity in humans from a distance. NSA computer-generated brain mapping can monitor all the electrical activity in the brain continuously. The NSA records aid decodes individual brain maps (of hundreds of thousands of persons) for
national security purposes. EMF Brain Stimulation is also secretly used by the military for Brain-to-computer link (in military fighter aircraft, for example).

For electronic surveillance purposes, electrical activity in the speech center of the brain can be translated into the subject’s verbal thoughts. RNM can send encoded signals to the brain’s auditory cortex thus allowing audio communication direct to the brain (bypassing the ears). NSA operatives can use
this to covertly debilitate subjects by simulating auditory hallucinations, characteristic of paranoid schizophrenia.

Without any contact with the subject, Remote Neural Monitoring can map out electrical activity from the visual cortex of a subject’s brain and show images from the subject’s brain on a video monitor. NSA operatives see what the surveillance subject’s eyes are seeing. Visual memory can also be seen. RNM can
send images direct to the visual cortex, bypassing the eyes and optic nerves.

NSA operatives can use this to surreptitiously put images in a surveillance subject’s brain while they are in R.E.M. sleep for brain-programming purposes.

Remember it’s been claimed that this stuff has been available for decades. The lawsuit that brought this technology to light was almost 20 years ago, and this is a person who worked for the agency, and I think with this technology.

If this is being used remotely and at a distance on people, how many people in society might not even be aware that such programing has been used on them until it’s too late?[quote]

Capabilities of NSA operatives using RNM There has been a Signals Intelligence network in the U.S. since the 1940′s.

The NSA, Ft. Meade, has in place a vast two-way wireless RNM system which is used to track subjects and non-invasively monitor audio-visual information in their brain. This is all done with no physical contact with the subject. RNM is the ultimate method of surveillance and domestic intelligence. Speech, 3D sound, and subliminal audio can be sent to the auditory cortex of the subject’s brain (bypassing the ears), and images can be sent into the visual cortex. RNM can alter a subject’s perceptions, moods, and motor control. [/quote]


The informants are contacted on the street with a special frequency, and they do get instructions, if you could hear the stuff they are advised, literally walk really close to this person, we just want to see if he reacts, we just want to see if she has a reaction to it, mostly the average person would just do what they are told, because most do not see the bigger picture. They are innocent in a way, but some are pretty specific, eg. Driving close enough to cause an accident, deliberately, some are all too knowing, and cognizant, meaning fully aware. It’s a scary balance, and I can now personally attest to the fact that they do have in most cases, directions that are being conveyed to them. A frequency is being utilized, and that’s pretty scary.

Could a variety of individuals be on the informant system? I mean to be an informant don’t most people have to be criminals? It’s pretty scary, because in most people’s mind’s informants are criminals, at least in my mind they were, but in today’s society, they get all sorts onto the informant system. I do feel that some groups are targeted more than others, just based on attitudes and mentalities of those that are deliberately assigned with ensuring school children get placed on the informant system. High School and the informant system, jr high and the informant system. Yes that’s the fate of some of our school children, isn’t that nice.

You would think that people have to commit some major crime, but even with just the items I’ve researched online, eg. Rachel Hoffman.

Or even the girl who got stopped for parking tickets, had no drug use or drug selling history, from a small town, and was placed on the informant system as a confidential informant. In that specific case, her dad went back with her to the station, and removed her from the informant system, in that case she had a lawyer in the family. The point is innocent people who have no idea how this working, are being destroyed, converted, etc. So when a document appears online explaining that many in major cities are already on the informant system, don’t be surprised, because the above example, was from a small town, and if the small towns are this far gone, then that becomes problematic.

{November 10, 2009
Posted by Alexandra Natapoff at 06:27 AM
Recruiting new informants

Here’s a revealing article in the Buffalo News: Walking thin line in Village of Attica: Would-be informant says police coerced her into cooperation. It’s about Bianca Hervey, a 20-year-old college student who got pulled over by police for failing to pay her traffic tickets. The police threatened to put her in jail for the night, unless she agreed to become a drug informant. Although Hervey did not use drugs or have any connections to the drug world, police told her it didn’t matter–she could still work as a snitch and try to set people up. Frightened of going to jail, Hervey signed the informant agreement. When she told her father, attorney Richard Furlong, what had happened, however, he “went ballistic.”

Furlong went to the police and to the City of Attica and complained about the recruitment of young people into the world of drugs, but the police and the Village Board refused to change the policy.

This story illustrates how snitching has quietly become such an immense part of the criminal justice system. Many cities have policies like Attica’s, in which police can recruit any potential offender as a drug informant–even a 20-year-old guilty of nothing more than a traffic violation. It was this same
type of policy that led to the death of 23-year-old Rachel Hoffman in Tallahassee, Florida, and triggered Florida’s ground breaking legislation on the subject of informant-creation. See post: Florida’s “Rachel’s Law” offers some protections for informants.}

Alexandra Natapoff, has done some wonderful research into the informant system, she is a lawyer, and the above summary is from her. Her statistics more importantly, back up much of what has been said about the numbers, and figures of those on the informant system in most major cities, and some communities.

In summary, it’s not paranoia when they are out to get you, as the saying goes, and it’s not paranoia to believe that too many people are on informant systems, and in or a part of government agencies. The things Targeted individuals blog about, satellite tracking, etc, that’s common knowledge, because their are articles which cover, how local police and others have access to these minor technologies, and have had access for years. The items less well known, but that have also been pretty common are things like the John St clair Akwei case, and the technologies used there. The figures on the informant system are understated, to say that have or above that in cities are on the informant system, is understated.
To say that school children are being stopped, interrogated for minor things, and then placed on the informant system, similar to how Bianca Harvey was, is not an exaggeration. “Weed” children is not a good look, and it’s also, one of the ways these kids in today’s society are getting themselves into these situations, but also at times they are foolishly, and unwisely being set up by their little friends, who are already on the informant systems.

October 22, 2012 Posted by | Awareness, CIA, Citizen Informants, Civilian Spies, Community harassment, Conformity, conspiracies, Cults, Echelon, Gang Stalking, Gangstalking | , , , , , , | 7 Comments

How did I become a Target?

How did I become a Target?

Scenario 1 Work.

Jane has been employed at Mcat Technotronics for several years, recently her and some co-workers have not been getting along. They have started rumors, moved her stuff around, and been hostile. Jane has complained to HR and finally an investigation was opened. All the co-workers denied any harassment was ongoing. HR to keep the situation quite has placed the blame on Jane. She has been referred to the company psychiatrist. She has refused to go. The HR staff is now getting reports from those that Jane complained about, saying that they fear for their safety, and that she is a problem. HR worried about getting sued if Jane does act out violently has referred her to the companies, Threat Assessment Team.

The team reviews Jane’s file, past employers, social networking sites, family, friends. Jane lives alone, has few associations. The team has decided that Jane requires further monitoring. She is assigned a threat level, and monitored at work. A company psychiatrist has evaluated her remotely and diagnosed her as possibly suffering from a persecutory disorder, and suffering from a false belief that she is being persecuted.

Jane later acts out, get’s into a verbal confrontation with one of her harassers, and is put on probation. Jane decides to leave the job. The employer decides that Jane was very disgruntled, and alerts the Threat Assessment Team. The team decides that Jane requires further monitoring. If she acts out violently in anyway, and they did not alert those around her, they can be sued. Remote monitoring is soon to be set up around Jane. She is also given an elevated threat level.

Scenario 2. School

Raul has started college. He is getting comments and taunts, they don’t like his accent, he is a stranger to many people around him. Raul makes it clear that he does not appreciate the taunts, but this spurs on his harassers more. Eventually Raul and one young man get into a psychical altercation. All the harassers come to the defense of the harasser, placing all the blame on Raul. The student affairs department is notified. After this Raul notices increased harassment, and starts to complain. Complaint after complaint is ignored. Complaints to staff or about staff who are also taking part is ignored, and his mobbing continues. Eventually the Student Affairs department have his file sent to their threat assessment team, after some of the students express concern about his being around them, and that they feel uncomfortable or threatened. Raul is unaware of this, and just trying to get his mobbing stopped.

The Threat Assessment Team review his file, determine that he owns guns, and could be a real threat to the campus. They determine he might be suffering from schizo-affective disorder.The campus and those around Raul are put on alert, they are asked to not say anything, and to report any actions that might be deemed suspicious or problematic. Eventually Raul decides to leave the program due to the overwhelming harassment and lack of support, but since there is no way to tell if this now disgruntled young man will return, he is assigned to remote case file monitoring.

This means that those around him will be alerted, and asked to be the eyes and ears, and report any little incidents, or odd behavior. All the information will be logged and stored in a central database for processing, and review, by the team. Those around Raul are contacted made aware of the situation, and comply with the request for none disclosure as they are legally bound to do.

Scenario 3. Community

Emily Claft see’s a child ruining a flower bed, she confronts the parents, the father tells her off. She goes to her local council to complain, and the customer service rep over the phone is no help. Emily slams down the phone in disgust. She writes a letter saying that the woman was very unpleasant to deal with, she says she wishes the woman would drop dead, and feels that if they had been in person, she would have hit her.

The council review the letter, determine that Emily could be violent, and she is assigned a medium risk classification, only to be seen in two. Emily has noticed that she is seeing strangers around her where they should not be, such as the clinic, and other previously private places. The strangers are alerted every time her name comes up, that she is dangerous and should only be seen in pairs. They are asked to report any future incidents. Her information is disseminated to a wide variety of agencies.

She is placed on a community notification list. The list is also used to alert the community of pedophiles and other violent criminals.
Emily finds it impossible to function, and decides to move.

Later I will review how the local monitoring team functions. How individuals are moved in around the target as part of the monitoring process. Also understanding the role that Community Oriented Policing likely plays, and how community notification lists function.

The information is all there, and the reality is it’s all backed up. The above information can be found by reviewing the Threat Assessment Teams guidelines, and a real life case scenario.

Please keep in mind there are likely dozens upon dozens of ways that an individual could become a target, the above are just a few scenarios.

October 21, 2010 Posted by | Gang Stalking | , , , , , , | 2 Comments


I notice a new post that I felt needed to be addressed.

Now I contacted Jeremy recently, he had reviewed some of the books relating to Gang Stalking and I shared my feedback with him. I don’t believe the comment was posted to his site, so let me repost it here. He had listed Gang Stalking World and felt that it was a red flag that only some links were posted, while others were not. Just like a certain other person has tried to paint that site as a poison pill. Either way, they come and…

gangstalking said
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:21 am

The only red flag is that I don’t promote informant sites. If that’s a red flag too bad. I have watched informants come and go, a new kid be crowned, and then dethroned. I have watched informants pitch the Lawson book, and the idiotic nonsense in the book about vigilante gangs. I have watched as some listed my site as a poison pill, while supporting the Lawson book without any proof.

I am familiar all too well with how this system works. The shrills all work together, pitch who they want to pitch and slowly discredit who they want to discredit. All under the guise of doing the community a favor. I have watched them come and go, and fought my battles for the community, and will continue to fight them.

If you missed it by the way, it’s sites like Gang Stalking World that even have these forums taking the topic seriously. I have personally fought most of the battles over the years, to ensure that the topic could be discussed in a rational manner, to ensure that the topic got “normalized”, while watching every newly crowned shrill take pot shots at my site.

I continue as I am, most times they come, they are the flavor of the month, they sell themselves, and then God willing they go again.

If that’s a red flag, then I suggest targets start waving it proudly. I have proven myself, and I have proven the test of time, while withering the slander, that’s been more than unjust. Anyways, let the Karma balance where it may.

I believe the proof is in the pudding, some of the only decent articles like psychological harassment in a group setting happened because of Gang Stalking World, it actually got a none target to sit up, pay attention and write a decent article.

I can only imagine that other similar material will also do the same.

Now Jeremy dear has a new article that again seems to pinpoint the Gang Stalking World website. I have seen worst, and I could ignore it, I could write some professional response, or I can take it there. So which response should I go with?

Well let’s see what Jeremy Stalked has said. Oh before I do that, I just want to say that I think it’s great that Jeremy as a target manages to be able to afford google ads seven days a week, most targets I know can not do this, but it’s great that he can.

Now I don’t know a lot about Jeremy, I think he is loosely affiliated with the FFCH group, or does his own thing, and does something conference call like a lot of them do today.

Either way, I am going to examine his latest post.

The top search results for gang stalking or organized stalking are sites that lead targets to believe one variation or another of these manpower-intensive theories must be true. For example, Gang Stalking World takes it for granted that a Stasi-like organizational structure is behind what targets are experiencing, allowing targets to believe that any signs of hostility exhibited by a person are proof that person has been “recruited” or “threatened”.16 A targeted individual who acted on this belief, and accused mind-controlled patsies of being “in on it”, would end up ruining his reputation by his own hand; meanwhile, the web sites he got his belief from would simply egg him and others like him on, saying the incredulous reactions of accused parties just shows how extensive the cover-up is.

Jeremy Stalked probably doesn’t realise this, but unlike a lot of other sites, Gang Stalking World gives you proof. Gang Stalking World tells you point blank, do your own research. Use the information there, but do your own research, trust your own judgment, think for yourself. All the other sites tell you what to think, or in subtle ways they tell you who you should follow, and who not to follow. If you can say the government is doing this, or not doing this. Gang Stalking World points to the government programs, under occupational health and safety, but then you are presented with proof.

Eg. The Jane Clift case, that was not a rabbit pulled from a hat, and further investigation, unlike others, pointed out that these lists exist in every single city. The lists are given out to those around the target. Letters are sent out. So to say that those around the target are in on it, is not wrong or inaccurate.

It’s not manpower intensive when you realise that many people who own stores, work in the community, in the colleges, etc, are aware of this program. Many do not realise how widespread it is, but it is everywhere. Do your own research.

Oct 6th, 2010, 10:18pm

Warning System, Fast Action Saved Lives At UT
Posted 9/29/2010 6:30 am by Ron Hogan

When a gunman dressed in black was spotted on the campus of the University of Texas, there was no hesitation on the part of school officials. In the wake of the shootings at Virginia Tech, and UT’s own history with crazed gunmen going onto the campus for shooting sprees (Charles Whitman), Texas does not mess around with this kind of stuff, and the quick actions of campus officials and the coordinated responses of campus security, school staff, and the Austin, Texas, police department saved many lives yesterday.

The gunman, 19-year-old Colton Tooley of Austin, was a UT student majoring in math and actuarial studies. At just after 8 in the morning, students spotted the armed man wearing black, firing bursts of gunfire into the air and at the clock tower where Charles Whitman went on his famous killing spree. They panicked and called the police. Police informed campus officials, and in 15 minutes the entire campus was alerted via text messages, warning sirens, and Twitter updates. That kept students out of the way, kept people alive, and made the job of the police easier as they tracked Tooley to the sixth floor of the Perry-Castañeda Library. At 8:50, Tooley committed suicide.

This prompt response it heartening, in that it shows officials can handle these sorts of situations when they come up with the proper training, but isn’t it kind of disheartening that we need these sorts of disaster preparedness plans for people going crazy on our college campuses? It’s a sign of the times, I guess.

Warning System, Fast Action Saved Lives At UT
Text Warning System

Arkansas Tech University has an early warning text messaging system as an additional means of communicating with the campus community during emergency situations on the Russellville campus. Students who register for the service will receive a text message warning in the case of a serious campus emergency. Signing up for the system is optional, but it is strongly encouraged.

here have been several attempts to use text messaging as an alert system, with universities, including Boston University, making it mandatory for students to sign up to such a system. This is despite the notable failure at Louisiana State University when a misunderstanding prevented alerts being sent out to students.

Students, faculty, and employees sign up and opt in for text alerts by providing their cellphone numbers. When an emergency situation occurs, administrators at the college can use a web-based service to send text messages to every phone on the list, reaching people who are sitting in class, walking around on campus, or in mid-commute.

Already, the services have been used in emergency situations. Mobile Campus Inc., based in Austin, Texas, is available on 11 campuses and has used its service to notify students and faculty of everything from a campus closure because of a severe ice storm this year at the University of Texas, Austin, to an emergency closing due to tropical storm Ernesto at University of Central Florida in 2006.

Omnilert LLC , a Leesburg, Va., company that delivers emergency text message alerts for colleges and businesses, already offers a text-messaging alert product, called e2Campus, to 30 universities. Florida A&M University used the service to alert students when a pit bull was loose on campus. g.php

(9) Communication is the heart of a good emergency plan. When a traumatic event occurs in the workplace, employees expect to be informed immediately about the nature of the event and the measures to take to protect themselves. To respond to this vital need for information, lines of communication must be established ahead of time between you and:

* Your employees
* Your senior manager
* The workplace health and security team on your floor
* Your Departmental Security Officer
* Others as appropriate.

Do you and your employees know the names and telephone numbers of those listed above? If this information is not readily available, precious time may be lost. Finding vital information in the middle of a crisis can be complicated by anxiety and fear.

(10) Set up a warning system (code) so co-workers can alert one another if urgent help is required. Possible scenarios include a physical assault, or the presence of a disgruntled employee or an angry client in the workspace. The building’s security response team is responsible for deciding the types of code to be used. The warning system should be standardized and all employees should be informed. Colour codes can be used, for example, to describe various dangers. This will help reassure employees that help can be accessed quickly in case of danger.

(11) Warning messages. In addition to increasing fear and anxiety, waiting for a warning message can lead to confusion and disorganization. Insist that the building’s security response team know how to write brief, clear and accurate warning messages. Standard warning messages need to be written ahead of time and kept on file so people can access them readily when danger threatens. They also need to be updated periodically.

The goal of a warning message is to empower people by providing accurate and appropriate information on what has happened, where it has happened and what protective measures people need to take immediately. If exits are blocked or filled with smoke, or there is a chemical substance in the ventilation system, employees need to know immediately what measures to take (i.e., whether to exit or stay in the building, when to leave, how to protect themselves).

It’s been shown time and time again that this interconnected network exists. It’s been shown how the listings are used. The fact that the warnings on a targets files are transfered when they move from one location to the next location. That the warnings with personal information can go out into the community. That’s pretty Stasi like. It’s not labour intensive, because the system is already in place, and most people are required to be aware of it, or take part in advance.

“In the service sector this may require identifying to employees persons who have a history of aggressive or inappropriate behavior 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.

These listings work in conjunction with community threat assessment teams, which can be and are often comprised of officers, health professional, psychiatrist, etc. If they get a report that a target has done something is acting irregular, or an event happens, they might well send out a new notification. Eg. Target is medium risk, only to be seen in pairs. So you are at work and suddenly the boss who’s office you use to be able to go into by yourself, you now are required to have another person present, and this did not happen before. This is an example of how the warnings could work. It does not mean everytime someone else is in the boss’s office with you, you are on a list, but that is how the listings can and do work. It’s like when they had those crazy terror alerts for terrorists, today it’s code orange, tomorrow it’s yellow, the terror alerts kept people in these states of stupidity, but trusted the terror alerts, and people trust the listings and the warnings. Don’t forget this system does work sometimes, it’s not all bad, but if you are an innocent person, wrongly accused, wrongly listed, with a bunch of people in the background making assessments based on third party evidence, people who have never met you face to face, there are going to be problems. Period.

For example, Gang Stalking World takes it for granted that a Stasi-like organizational structure is behind what targets are experiencing, allowing targets to believe that any signs of hostility exhibited by a person are proof that person has been “recruited” or “threatened”

The occupational health and safety lists are real, they operate in every country, and community, and the individuals on those lists are treated the same as if you had a pedophile lose in the community. Period. Anyone who has ever been a part of a community or neighborhood watch program knows how this works. Someone is dangerous and lose in the community, you get a phone call, be on the look out for such and such. These programs use email and phone message, now many also will be using text messages.

People might be hostile on their own, who knows, but what has been said is that trust your own judgment. It’s not paranoia when they are out to get you. I would rather take things seriously and err on the side of caution, than not take things seriously enough, and end up like Randy Weaver who the state destroyed. People assume that these agencies don’t lay deep traps to destroy people, but I can tell you example after example from years of research that they do. They plot and they lay deep cover to trap people.



the unethical recruitment of drug informants
Submitted by bobbie (not verified) on September 19, 2008 – 4:34am.

[quote]My son was targeted by local law enforcement simply because they valued him as a potential drug informant.

They were interested in him because he did construction work for someone who had a permit to grow marijuana plants.

He had no drug violations. The detectives targeted his specific vulnerabilities, and played on his sympathy with an older informant who said he was going through a bad divorce, and needed marijuana for his anxiety.

The 4 detectives witnessed and videotaped the sale, but did not arrest him. They waited until he reported for a scheduled jail time for a DUI, and rearrested him without publicity, and without family support.

They told him he was “screwed”, and would he work for them? When he didn’t want to consent without talking with his girlfriend, they went after her at work and threatened to prosecute her. He pleaded guilty and got 2 years prison, leaving his 8 yr old son without a dad. Please take a stand against this unethical activity.[/quote]

These systemic setup’s have been going on for many years unchecked. The above example should be helpful in comprehending how these set up’s are being conducted. If you think there is no such thing as a conspiracy in society you would be wrong.

The local law enforcement wanted this woman’s son as an informant. I am not sure if they asked him first, but most likely they just created a scenario where a set up could happen.

They were not really interested in her son, the true target was his employer, look at the steps they went through to get to this person.

1. They profiled her son, to figure out what his vulnerability would be.

2. They hired an Informant who had access to her son. It’s hard to say if they set up the Informant first or not.

3. They used the Informant to entrap her son, assuming that he would become a snitch.

4. Had they been successful, it would have been a matter of time before this woman’s son would have been asked to either set up his employer, or do something to make him look guilty and set him up in that manner.

That’s the way it’s working, and has been for some time now. This happens in society a lot. It’s systemic. If you don’t think this way, operate this way, you might not know it when you see it, or experience it.

People don’t have to be recruited or threatened, in too many cases, they are already a part of this network, and believe anything that they are told. Remember people are willing to do terrible things if they feel that an authority figure is telling them to do it. Many times they will do it without any after thought.

Watch the video, this is what your average unthinking person is willing to do to a complete stranger. Now imagine if they know that you are on a list and think that you are crazy, a druggie, a pervert, or whatever. What do you think the good people of the community are going to be willing to do then. There are so many stories of communities organizing to rid themselves of perverts, well unfortunately, anything on these listings get’s the same treatment, but most targets do see themselves that way, and believe that they are innocent.

Since Jeremy can take pot shots at the Gang Stalking World website and the information presented there, perhaps he could present a better theory, or since he seems so keen at doing research, I am sure with the information presented, he could just CSI this theory in no time. There is enough information there, he loves exposing information that’s already been exposed by others, so this should be fairly straight forward.

Otherwise the information remains the same. Do your own research, learn the one handed sign language, or the bits that have been pieced together, test it out, research the threat assessment teams, occupational health and safety, research the other theories out there. What makes sense, what is plausible, what is logical, what instinctively feels right? Then stop letting others think and speak for you. They work as a network, a group, and they seem to be independent, but all too often are not, and while they can be happily sitting back, while real targets are often having to defend themselves from their little barbs here and there, while they sit back ranting about harmony in the Targeted Individual community.

The reality is Gang Stalking World gives something else that the others do not, it gives you the truth. How many of them are discussing the occupational health and safety laws, and these lists? How many are doing extensive investigations into it, even to just disprove the theory?
I will leave it at that for now.

I will leave you with the lovely Beyonce, I think the video is fun.

I have worked hard for this. I took the bumps, bruises, burns, attempts at my person, slander, betrayal. I have researched this, and I have a huge personal stake in this, especially right now, when they are working every angle around me. I can not afford to sit back like I sometimes do. It’s too important now more than ever, this has to get exposed, and the sooner, the better.

October 14, 2010 Posted by | Gang Stalking | , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Sherlock Investigations

Sherlock Investigations.

I just had a visit from Skipp Porteous from Sherlock Investigations. He dropped by to assure me that his company is real, and not fake. He says that he still thinks that Gang Stalking is fake. Now I really respect that he took the time to drop by, so I wrote a response, and I hope he will do me the favor of reading the quick links, and looking over the Jane  Clift case.

I suspect like many other good people Mr Porteous has been mislead into thinking that Gang Stalking is vigilante Gangs or Groups of some sort. I hope the information provided will disavow him of those beliefs, and I hope the correct information will provide him with new and informative insight into this phenomenon.

Here is his post, and here is my response.

Skipp Porteous

Sherlock Investigations Inc. is real, but gang stalking is not.


Hi Skipp, thank you for taking the time to stop by, I really appreciate it. Are you telling me that people are not being placed on occupational health and safety lists? That they are not being followed around after being listed? Are you telling me that the psychiatric reprisal is not being used? Because i have a whole whack of evidence that says that it is. Now Skipp, I am not going to ask you to do anything as difficult as read a book on this topic. I am going to ask you to politely humor me, and have a quick look at the Jane Clift case, and the Gang Stalking quick guide. If you can read these over, and tell me this stuff is not happening, I will be very surprised.

Again thank you for dropping by, here are the links.

Now Skipp the evidence in the Jane Clift case is not information from my site, this is an independent investigation into what happened to this woman. After being placed on a list for sending a nasty letter to a customer service rep, her information was populated everywhere she went, and she was followed around. She was listed as medium risk, only to be seen in pairs.

I don’t know what your impression of Gang Stalking is, but the information that comes from the main Gang Stalking site is pointing to these occupational health and safety lists, which are very real. Threat assessment teams are putting people on lists, who they suspect have a mental illness. Notice the word is suspect? Meaning that they might not, yet these people are being treated as if they do, and their names are being flagged the exact same way that Jane Clifts was. As they go from community to community, an automated notification is sent via phone, or email, and the members of those communities do follow them around. Under these laws, the workplaces are sharing these listings with other workers, the community, and family members. For those closer to the target, a letter is sent out, just like it was with Jane Clift. Remember Skipp, this innocent woman was listed as medium risk, only to be seen in pairs, and added to a registry with violent sexual offenders.

So Skipp if you were lead to believe that Gang Stalking was something else, or that it does not exist you are dead wrong. As a private investigator, I honestly hope that you will give your clients the service they deserve and take a through look into the information that is being provided to you. It’s been well researched, well documented, and it is fact. If you have any points you are unsure of, please feel free to drop by again.

I do once again appreciate you taking the time, and I would love to hear back from you, after your review the information provided.

More Jane Clift case file references.


I think this case does have some relevance to housing law. It touches on a situation that (in my experience anyway) comes up in practice where a client has information about them, possibly highly prejudicial to them, shared between organisations. The case requires an authority to consider the proportionality of that distribution lest it be vulnerable to a claim for defamation. No HRA claim was brought, so this decision is, strictly speaking, confined to a claim for defamation, but in my view the reasoning on the duty of public bodies has wider application.

In practical terms it means that public bodies should be rather more careful about keeping records of alleged criminality or anti-social behaviour and about any distribution of those records. That, in my view, can only be a good thing. Calling a document a “Violent Persons Register” if you know full well that some of those persons have never used violence.

Clift Case additional reading
Clift Case additional readings 2


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’.”



“These people have this ability to do this and they can abuse it. Not many people know, I didn’t even know, that such a register existed.



Jane CliftJane Clift: Libel victory after a four-year legal battle

Jane Clift saw it as her public duty to report a drunk she saw trampling flowers in a park.

But her efforts led to a surreal nightmare in which she was branded potentially violent and put on a council blacklist with thugs and sex attackers.

Her details were circulated to an extraordinary range of public and private bodies, including doctors, dentists, opticians, libraries, contraceptive clinics, schools and nurseries. Their staff were advised not to see her alone.

The 43-year-old former care worker was forced to withdraw an application to become a foster parent and, eventually, to leave the town where she had lived for ten years.


September 25, 2010 Posted by | Gang Stalking | , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Quick Guide

This is a quick little 5 page pdf that you can download print off and share with lawyers, doctors, and others who you might be seeking assistance from or trying to gain help from.

The guide covers:

  • The Jane Clift Case
  • The Awareness Registry for Torbay Council in the UK
  • The Canadian version of the Registry and it’s use
  • The American version and the process for being listed
  • The Psychiatric Reprisal and how people are being listed as mentally ill, without any face to face assessments.

It’s very brief, can be read in under 5 minutes and is a nice very brief introduction for anyone who claims they are not familiar with such a system, that you try to gain assistance from. You are welcome to download, print, share and freely distribute. You can reupload the guide to your own sites as well. (Please provide a credit link. Not mandatory, but appriciated.)
Alternative link

June 25, 2010 Posted by | Gang Stalking | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jane Clift Case Highlights

Jane Clift Case Highlights

This case is great. She was placed on a list. She used the Data Protection Act and Human Rights Act to sue and win her case.

6# The words complained of contain personal information relating to Ms Clift. That is data which is subject to the Data Protection Act 1998 (“DPA”). This Act implemented in English law some of the rights recognised by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”). Later those rights were more fully incorporated into English law by the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”). The Council is a public authority. HRA s.6 (1) provides:

“It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention Right”.

Physical Contact. This is an area that some targets might be able to build a case on, in regards to who was given access to their data.

Data Protection Act. Human Rights Act. These are the two acts that she was able to use to file her case.

8# The question in this case is whether, and if so how, the Council must demonstrate that it has complied with its public law duties under HRA (and incidentally DPA) if it is to be able to assert that it has the interest or duty required at common law for there to be a defence of qualified privilege.

This is what the case came down to. The same would likely be true for the Acts in other countries.


9# As a responsible employer the Council has a policy to protect its employees from violence at work. The policy is set out in a document headed “Safe System of Work (Codes of Practice) H&NS/COP/1.14 Version 1.0 date issued 11/3/03 Violence at Work (Inc Potentially Violent Persons)” (“the Policy”).

This also fell under Violence at Work

15# Mr Kelleher then conducted a number of other interviews. One was with Mr Gulfraz, a friend of Ms Clift. She was accustomed to helping him in making telephone calls and filling out official forms. She was at the time also helping him in a complaint he was making against the Council on a housing matter. He was present at the time Ms Clift made her call to Ms Rashid on 11 August. He heard the whole conversation over the speaker phone. Other witnesses were fellow employees of Ms Rashid. Ms Rashid did not have the phone on loud speaker but her colleagues sitting near her heard her side of the conversation. It was sufficiently unusual to attract their attention.

Witness close to Jane Clift were interviewed. Just like witnesses, family, friends, would be interviewed.

21# Also on 1 December 2005 Mr Kelleher filled out a standard form prepared in accordance with the Policy. It is known as a Violent Incident Report Form.

Same type of reporting form used in other countries as well to document incidents.

22# Mr Satterthwaite is the author of the Policy and the officer of the Council responsible for compliance with Data Protection and other related matters. He maintains the Register. It is a document prepared on Excel spreadsheet software. It contained ten columns and, at the relevant time, about 150 rows. Each row related to a person identified by name and address given in the first two columns. Ms Clift’s name was entered on the Register by Mr Satterthwaite upon information provided by Mr Kelleher. Details of the incident are given in column 5 as “threatening behaviour on several occasions”. The duration for which the person is to remain on the register is given in column 8 and in respect of Ms Clift the period is 18 months. The ninth column contains a title “Risk Rating VH, H, M and L” the entry for Ms Clift is M for medium. Two entries are admittedly inaccurate. The location of the incident is given at column 4 as “via correspondence”. The date of the incident is given in column 6 as “30/11/2005”.

All your information get’s documented.

24# The precise means by which the Register was circulated did not emerge clearly in evidence. Ms Clift protested immediately at her inclusion on the Register and asked if there was a right of appeal. She was informed there was not. In a letter dated 13 December 2005 Mr Satterthwaite (signing himself as Data Protection/ Health and Safety Co-ordinator) explained his decision in terms which implied that the Register had already been circulated by that date, as might be expected. Some information as to whom the Register had been shared with was given in that letter. More detailed information as to the publishees is not recorded in the form of an email before one that has survived dated 27 January 2006.

Health and Safety Co-ordinator did not give her the chance to appeal, so she took it to court.

30# The letter dated 13 December 2005 from Mr Satterthwaite to Ms Clift includes the following:

“Re – your letter dated 10 December 2005 – PVP Marker

A request for information that you sent to the Council, has been passed to me to answer, as I am the Data Controller for the PVP register.

Under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (1992), we have a duty of care to ensure that we do not put our employees into situations that may cause them physical or mental harm…

This register is shared between the Council’s Health and Safety co-ordinators to distribute on a need to know basis to managers, (especially those services that interface with our customers) so they can take the appropriate actions to protect their staff. This register is also sent to our partner organisations that may provide a service on our behalf (i.e. Slough Accord, Interserve, NHS Primary Care Trust and The Community Safety Partnership). Once the time limit has expired, using the same communication chain, a request is made that all traces of the warning marker is removed from the individual’s name.

This is what get’s distributed, and this is the same wording in most of the documents that I have been reading up on.

31# That letter reflects guidance from two sources. Whether it does so correctly is another matter. The first source is the Policy. This includes what, in another context, would be called sentencing guidelines, listing the activities that may render a person liable to have a violent person marker placed on their file and the “set period” said to be commensurate with the activity. The second document is one issued by the Information Commissioner covering five pages, entitled “Data Protection Act 1998 Compliance advice Violent Warning Markers: used in the public sector” (“the Compliance Advice”).

32# Ms Clift pursued her rights of access and sought further information under the Data Protection Act. By a letter dated 11 January 2006 Mr Satterthwaite wrote as follows:…..

Mainly social services related activities – Supporting People, Community Mental Health Team and Community Nursing

– Community Safety Partnership

Neighbourhood Wardens

Disclosure was made to the above organisations as they may all have cause to visit your address, for face to face contact. A good example of this is one of the many satisfaction surveys carried out.

She wrote the request under the Data Protection Act. Note her file was shared and distributed to quite a few people.

42# After further submissions on the questions to be asked of the jury counsel agreed that I should direct them as follows:

“If you assess damages, then you take into account circulation to 30 people for the e-mail and 150 for the Register. You leave out of account the remainder of the 66 to whom the e-mail was addressed unless you answer question 2 yes [in other words unless they find malice].

If you answer yes to question 2, you take into account all 66 people to whom the e-mail was sent and 150 for the Register”.


These two acts played heavily into her defense.

43# The first proceedings brought by Ms Clift were in the County Court under the DPA. She commenced those proceedings on 13 January 2006 alleging that the Register was inaccurate. Those proceedings have been stayed to await the outcome of this libel action.

This is what Jane Clift had to do to clear her record.

(a) The widespread publication of information that a person is ‘violent’ and their inclusion on a register of ‘violent persons’ is a serious interference with that persons Article 8 rights which requires cogent justification.

(b) Ms Clift had never used violence towards the First Defendant’s employees and had never threatened any such employee with violence. No employee had complained about Ms Clift’s conduct and no contemporaneous ‘Violent Incident Report’ relating to Ms Clift had been completed by any person.

Point 46. interference with a persons Article 8 rights.

47# There followed a plea of malice which is summarised in para 2 above. The plea of publication set out the facts I have already recited in relation to the circulation of the e-mail with the Register as an attachment on 27 January 2006. The next paragraph material to be cited reads as follows:

“10 The Register entry and the e-mail were distributed excessively widely to persons and bodies with whom [Ms Clift] had no contact and had no interest in [Ms Clift].

When I have no contact with individuals across boarders, why is my information shared with them? Clients or associates in other countries should not have this information disseminated, but they are.

50# Nevertheless, it is appropriate to set out the terms of the draft amendment as follows:

“12A Further by publishing the e-mail and the Register Entry the [Council] has interfered with [Ms Clift]’s rights under Article 8 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights without such interference being justified under Article 8 (2) and as a result its actions were unlawful under Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

The targets in European countries could start to look into this via data protection and Human Rights Conventions, Articles 8 and 6. See a lawyer first.

66# It is understandable that Mr Beggs should have ordered his arguments as he did. The Council has policies on both health and safety, and on data protection. Mr Kelleher and Mr Satterthwaite made the decisions they did make after considering these policies. Mr Satterthwaite directed himself on the law of health and safety at work, and on data protection, as set out in the Policy and the Compliance Advice. He did not mention the law of libel. Whether or not Mr Satterthwaite directed himself correctly is an issue for the court. But it is understandable that the Defendants should wish to be judged by the law which they understood to be applicable. Mr Beggs may also have taken the view that the course I adopted in the Westminster case at para 151 would be difficult to support. If so, he did not say that.

Health and Safety at work.

75# Mr Beggs submitted that the Council owed a duty to ensure the safety of their staff. He cited Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 ss.2 and 3 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/3242), in particular regulations 3-5 and Schedule 1.

Health and Safety consistently cited throughout this whole case, used for justification.

90# The absence of a system of monitoring to whom the Register was published means that the Claimant may not be able to prove the full extent of the publication. The onus of proof is upon her, and if she is unable to discharge it, that cannot be relevant to the defence of qualified privilege that might be available in respect of other publications which she can prove.

A disgraceful lack of oversight is what I like to call it.

94# Para 16 provides that:

Data controllers should ensure that only those members of staff who are likely to come into physical contact with a potentially violent individual, through visits or by meeting in open plan reception areas, or who can otherwise demonstrate a need to know, have access to violent warning marker information. So for example where a member of staff is required to visit a potentially violent individual, at this point they should be advised of this fact”.

Physical contact. There is that word again.

98# The Compliance Advice does not assist on the definition of violence or violent behaviour. The Policy gives what it states are “Examples of violent behaviour covered by the Code of Practice”. They include: “Shouting, Swearing, Racial / Sexual Abuse, Threats, Pushing, Spitting, Object Thrown, Damage, Hostage and Actual Violence”. These are all things which an employee should expect to be protected from. But to refer to them all as examples of violence, or even potential violence, gives an extended definition of that word. It normally connotes at least a threat of physical force, and one which is meant seriously.

An expanded definition of violence. So shouting by someone’s standards could get you and did help to get Jane Clift on the list. You have to be so very careful with these individuals.

109# Documents are now normally held and communicated electronically. It is easy and common to circulate by e-mail to very large numbers of people, within (and outside) an organisation, information which, in the past, would have been addressed in a letter or memo to very few. It is therefore much more likely than in the past that information will be communicated to persons to whom no duty is owed, or who do not have a legally sufficient interest in receiving the information. It was in order to address this change in practice that the data protection legislation was introduced, first in a limited form in 1984, and then as it is now in DPA. HRA was not specifically targeted at this issue, but it undoubtedly applies to it.

How far and wide is information getting shared? This is going to be an interesting question to look into. I get the feeling with limited oversight, they are using this to smear targets left, right and center.

112# The historical cases show that the values set down in the Convention in 1950 as rights under Articles 8 (including the right to reputation) and Article 10 (including the right of freedom of expression in the giving of references and warnings) were not invented in 1950. These and some other Convention rights can be traced back, not only to the American Bill of Rights and the French Declaration in the eighteenth century, but also to the very beginnings of English law. So one thing that HRA has achieved is to provide a means through which the courts can review the relative priority that the common law gave to those rights (which it already recognised), and adjust those priorities to meet contemporary needs.

This case was very interesting. Lot’s of good points, targets might be able to use. Check with a legal expert.


On the one hand looms the probability, often amounting to a certainty, of damage to the individual, which in some cases will be serious and may indeed be irreparable. The entire future prosperity and happiness of someone who is the subject of a damaging reference which is given carelessly but in perfectly good faith may be irretrievably blighted. Against this prospect is set the possibility that some referees will be deterred from giving frank references or indeed any references.”

Yes slander can ruin your life.

120# The DPA has created new statutory rights which are in no way related to employment or other relationships, although they affect such relationships. That Act requires attention to be focussed on the rights of those who are the subjects of references and warnings, as well as on the rights of those to whom the references and warnings are addressed. Personal data must be processed (which includes disclosed) “fairly and lawfully”, and it must be accurate: see Sch I. There are extensive provisions on the interpretation of these and other principles and a number of statutory instruments containing further provisions. I shall not consider these further, because Mr Tomlinson made no submission based upon them. He confined his submissions to the new rights and duties created by the HRA, which apply to the defendant council, but would not apply directly to a private sector employer.

Wow you mean people can’t just create fake incidents, data must be accurate? Guess it’s time to start reviewing some files and see what is actually out there. What has been said, attributed to individual files vs what is accurate. There has to be a way to do a class action for inaccurate information, especially if there is a systemic practice that is occurring.

128# The jury answered No to each of the first three questions: they rejected the defence of justification and the allegation of malice. They awarded damages of £12,000 to Ms Clift. So, Ms Clift left court with her reputation vindicated and Mr Kelleher left court without a stain on his reputation.

March 28, 2010 Posted by | Gang Stalking, Gangstalking, Health and Safety, Isolation, Laws, Minorities, Monitoring, Record keeping, Social Control, society, Spying, Stalking, State target, violent persons registry | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

The List

The List

How do you get placed on a list?

There are a few ways.

*Someone reports you as a drug dealer, terrorist, pedophile, crazy. They report an incident. A community investigation is opened.

In a normal society this should go on for a few months and be over with, but in the case of Jiverly Wong, this went on for close to 20 years, and in the lives of many others it goes on for years as well, never ending, and it’s used to harass an innocent person.

*The workplace. Someone reports a violent incident. You create a harassment complaint, they decide that you are just delusional and decide that you might go violent. A report is filed.

I should add that based on what I have come across in the research, it seems as if workplaces and educational facilities are routinely using this as a retaliatory method. They use it to target people who file complaints. Most workers have no idea that such lists exist.

[quote]My great-est gift was the discovery of my inner strength to be able to survive the retaliation, mobbing and harassment by the Livermore Lab, the University of California and the Oakland police department.[/quote]

I learned that more than 500 women and minorities had filed lawsuits against the University of California and had then experienced retaliation by the University of California apparatus of mobbing by employees, alumni and law enforcement.1The lawsuits were for denial of tenure, whistleblower retaliation and theft of intel-lectual property. These women had similar complaints about the destruction of their own lives and careers. The information gathered by the University of California is used to takeyour life apart; to destroy all that makes you feel safe; to bankrupt, isolate and alienate you from society and from yourself; and to attempt to make you look crazy.

Crosty and Murtagh don’t know each other. It is unlikely their worlds would ever intersect, but they have at least one thing in common. They both are victims of an increasingly popular employer weapon against whistleblowers: the psychiatric reprisal.

Across the United States, companies have seized upon concerns about workplace violence to quash dissent. Hundreds of large corporations have hired psychiatrists and psychologists as consultants to advise them on how to weed out “threatening” employees. They say they are only responding to a 1970 directive from the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration that they maintain a “safe and secure work environment.” But by drawing the definition of “threatening” as broadly as possible, they are giving themselves a new club to bang over the heads of workers.

This is not just happening in American workplaces either.

*Universities are also reporting people, and filing reports.

In the workplace and universities, from what I have seen quite a few outspoken females are getting targeted. Minorities, and other single individuals. Men that are smart outspoken, and ofcourse the whistle-blowers. Many I  assume who are not aware of the system that is currently in place. If this is the case could informants be specifically targeting non informants for harassment, or using this program specifically to weed out from the universities, and workplaces, the outspoken, radicals, whistle-blowers, non compliant?

From previous research I know that colleges and universities have been infiltrated with these types of agents, along with the normal citizen informants. Could some be working an alternative agenda?

[quote]Spying 101: The RCMP’s Secret Activities at Canadian Universities, 1917-1997

If you attended a Canadian university in the past eighty years, it’s possible that, unbeknownst to you, Canadian security agents were surveying you, your fellow students, and your professors for ‘subversive’ tendencies and behaviour. Since the end of the First World War, members of the RCMP have infiltrated the campuses of Canada’s universities and colleges to spy, meet informants, gather information, and on occasion, to attend classes. Why they were there is the subject of a new book by Steve Hewitt.[/quote]

A lot of the targeting starts with mobbing, harassment, the target tries to file a complaint, get’s targeted more. Maybe they say something, lash out, or just seem angry due to the mobbing. This system is being used unfairly, just like we saw with some zero tolerance programs, that were used to specifically target minority children.

[quote]While critics are holding their applause until they see the changes, the move is being hailed by some who say the Safe Schools Act unfairly targets black youth and drives them into gangs.[/quote]

Most of the targets seem to come from these three areas. Workplace, Educational outlets, and the community.

In Canada and the U.S. they have workplace safety and standards guidelines that are similar to what is in place in the U.K. Similar reporting systems to what the U.K. has in place.

As we saw in the Jane Clift case, once on a list, your name pops up if you call the police, ambulance, doctors, ect. Employers, Landlords and a variety of others are given similar information about you.

In the U.K. this marker can be something that the victim is make aware of, but in other instances they are not.

In the U.K. this is being abused. Jane Clift being one example.

[quote]Mrs Clift added: ‘What is terrifying is that there is almost no proof required and no hearing to determine the truth of the allegation. It could happen to anybody who gets into even the most minor disagreement with their council.’


She said that after the council acted, she sensed that everywhere she went, there was ‘whispering, collaboration, people scurrying about’.

‘One time I went to the contraceptive clinic and I felt that there were way too many people hovering about for me than should have been there, making me feel very insecure.

‘It did serve as a reminder that 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’.’

Canada and the U.S. have similar lists, that employers, schools must report.

Most communities as shown before have networks of informants. These informant networks are working with other community programs.

“Ruling the community with an iron fist. “Savvy law enforcement types realized that under the community policing rubric, cops, community groups, local companies, private foundations, citizen informants and federal agencies could form alliances without causing public outcry.” Covert Action Quarterly, summer 1997.”

“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?”

In addition to these newly formed alliances, as the ACLU has pointed out, they are opening spying on innocent members of our society.

Informants due to various police initiatives are in every community.

So these networks operate and are in place, using the one handed sign language. The informants then feel empowered, they patrol the neighborhoods, and other areas. Since these networks are already in place, it is therefore not necessary to hire hundreds of people to follow one person, they just go about their regular patrols, and once a target enters their place of employment, business, community, or other location, the citizens are place on alert.

To the target it seems as if hundreds of people have been hired to follow just them, but the reality is, this informant network is and has been in place, and once you are on the radar, they just shift attention to you.

Eg. In Stasi Germany a large part of the state was devoted to spying, if the state added one more target, they did not need to hire hundreds of people, the network is already in place.

This can be done with phone calls, I have seen this happen, the community you are in is alerted that a pedophile, mentally disturbed person, drug dealer is in their area. They get phone calls as you pass through the area, thus some will go stand out on the porch to be visual look out, report back what you are doing.

The foot patrols alert the business, thus why we are followed into stores, they use the one handed sign language, maybe stay to see if there is an incident they can make themselves useful for and report. In other cases, they are around to create an incident, and report that.

Keep in mind that the very concept of being monitored and under this kind of surveillance 24/7 is enough to make any sane person act out. Add to this that the informants are told to circle you, sit near to you, follow you, and they don’t try to do it very subtly, a target is bound to notice.

Somewhere along the lines our societies were taken over. We helped. Without firing a bullet, or invasion, these countries have become what East Germany and other countries were.

The gaslighting of targets is illegal. Yet in WWII we saw a government create over 500 ways to mess with Nazi sympathizers. Similar tactics were used under VIK.

[quote]BSC invented a game called “Vik”, described as “a fascinating new pastime for lovers of democracy”. Printed booklets described up to 500 ways of harassing and annoying Nazi sympathisers. Players of Vik were encouraged to ring up their targets at all hours of the night and hang up. Dead rats could be put in water tanks, air could be let out of the subject’s car tyres, anonymous deliveries could be made to his house and so on.[/quote]

If they had a game that consisted of 500 ways to harass and annoy, people then, what do you think they have now. Remember this game was invented by a UK government branch, to be used against innocent Americans.

The police, firefighters, community members are all in on it. Just like Nazi Germany, they have this false sense of community, that they are doing something good. Yeah we got that crazy drug dealer out of town. We protected our community. In reality you drove someone like Jiverly Wong to the point that the was capable of mass murdering lot’s of people. Yeah you, don’t you feel good about yourselves?

These programs are not all bad, back in the day, that is what you did. If a pedophile was in town, you took some community action to get rid of the pervert, and never gave it a second thought you were protect yours, and that was that.

It’s a not in my back yard mentality. Even if you move you are still flagged, so the same thing starts again. If each area is set up like this, which many are due to community Policing, and agenda 21, then we will see more of this in the future.

What is alternative community activism?

When I first started going to my American neighborhood “meetings” I was a complete novice in Soviet style bureaucracy. I was confused and unsure about what was going on. I began by asking simple questions about the terms the leaders were using to descibe their “vision.” This opened Pandora’s Box, literally, because much to my suprise and dismay, my Seattle government representatives did not know what their terms meant either!

I was absolutely floored to find out somebody, somewhere had come up with this bizarre idea that a few of my neighbors should partner with the Pentagon, the KGB and the Mossad, and together they would form neighborhood policing “task teams.” These new neighborhood committees, led by “new” Community Policing Officers trained in communitarianism, were empowered to rewrite Seattle Municipal Code. They claimed revisions to the law were necessary to “balance” our constitutional rights against the “health and safety” of the community. Yet, these “experts” couldn’t tell me the definition for any of their terms, and couldn’t tell me where these new ideas had originated. It took me a year of intensive research to find their source: Dr. Amitai Etzioni.

Though this might be still happening in some cases, the targets I come across are innocent. The lack of oversight of these programs, means that it’s being used to destroy innocent lives. The citizen informants never give it a second thought. Many never see the dirty under handed, smoke and mirrors used to set up targets to make them look crazy, like drug dealers, or pedophiles. They just unquestioningly believe what they are told.

I come across a lot of Woman that are single where this is being used to shut them up, rape them in other cases, and drive them to suicide or mental institutions in other.

I hear cases of abusive ex’s that got someone targeted. If you know how the system works you can manipulate it.

I come across minorities, who feel this is being used to target them. Lot’s of minority men and women.

I also come across whistle blowers. This is being used to target them.

The staged incidents and gaslighting are illegal, but since it’s crazies, pedophiles, drug dealers, who is going to believe them? The moment you call the cops too often, they also flag people. So it feels like you against the world literally. You know you are being harassed and followed, but most lawyers will not help, just like when McCarthyism was happening. The ACLU will not help. These programs do have a specific degree of secrecy, but not so that they outweigh the rule of law and justice.

Again this system is being used across the board, so I have come across people with extreme views, conspiracy views,  where this was used. Anyone outspoken, who is not following the status quo, this can be used against. Just like it was in Russia.

I think legal is the best way to go.

Use the U.K. example, find a lawyer who will confirm that there is such a list in your area, and then try to find the procedure if you are on such a list for getting off. The woman in the U.K. spent four years, clearing her name, and that was with proof that she was on a list. Most don’t have such proof.

Remember each area does it’s own thing, each person feels individually empowered to monitor the target the way they see fit. In many cases this includes electronic monitoring/harassment.

In addition to that, these people try to play James Bond, and in addition to innocent citizens who are just trying to do a good job, and protect their communities from being taken over by bad elements, you also have complete morons, and psychopaths in others cases, who are given access to innocent individuals who in most cases have no idea what is going on.

Pushing for legislation that makes it mandatory to alert people that they are on such lists might help in some cases. This is close enough, that legally we should be looking into this channel.

Remember the ACLU has confirmed investigations of innocent individuals are happening. In the U.K. they have exposed how the anti-terror laws are being abused, to include full investigation of individuals.

[quote]A freedom of information request by the Lancashire Evening Post has found that applications made by Lancashire county council under Ripa laws targeted cleaners who failed to show up for work and a care assistant who claimed too much on travel expenses. “A person in Chorley thought to be selling counterfeit goods via eBay, people pursuing false personal injury claims, and a retailer selling furniture not up to fire safety standards were among those investigated using powers granted under the act,” the paper reported.

In last year’s annual report, the surveillance commissioner, Sir Christopher Rose, raised concerns about direct surveillance such as the bugging of public places, taking photographs of suspects and the use of covert human intelligence such as informants and undercover agents. Of course this has always been part of police investigation into serious crime, but it is frightening to see these tactics routinely deployed in trivial circumstances.

His fears came to mind when I read a quote in the LEP from Jim Potts, a trading standards officer, who said: “We have simply recorded that a member of staff has seen another member of staff do something at work, in the way that managers can and do every day.” How easily that trips from Potts’s lips, but what of course he is unwittingly justifying is the informant society. In Staffordshire a FoI request made of the police by the Express and Star newspaper found that terror laws were being used to monitor drug dealers, people suspected of sex crimes, burglars and thieves. In 10 cases police tracked people suspected of minor public order offences.[/quote]

Many of our citizen informants that we encounter on the road, just think they are part of some great powerful network keeping dangerous people at bay. Then there are those who know the real game, those who set up targets. Also just like Germany, you have informants who bait targets, so they can act out. If they do it’s another marker, or jail, or a mental hospital, maybe even death. Remember the more crazy people, drug dealers, pedophiles, terrorists, the more funding, the bigger the network.

Employees and others have been using this practice for years, to destroy lives. Woman, minorities, whistle-blowers seem to be prime targets, but it’s not limited to them. If you read Leuren Mowet’s story, she knew 500 people, who had similar investigations opened on them, which was used to systemically destroy their lives.

If you look at the article make a stink see a shrink you will see that psychiatric reprisals is being heavily used in democratic countries.

If you visit the site Psychologist Ethics, you will see that psychiatrists were even willing to try to have one of their own declared as crazy, just because she blew the whistle.

When one imagines using mental health professionals to target undesirable individuals, one almost always thinks of totalitarian governments such as the former USSR, China, and Cuba. There is a long and ugly precedent of using mental health professionals in those societies to target politically undesirable people and have them placed in mental institutions involuntarily. Human rights groups refer to this practice as “political psychiatry.”

Victims of political psychiatry are usually people who have filed grievances or complaints against employers or officials, or are union organizers, people who have publicly criticized officials, members of minority religions, and whistle-blowers.[/quote]

But this is now happening in democratic countries.

Southern Illinois University and the American Psychological Association (APA)

A Canadian Police Department and the Canadian College of Psychologists

Lisa Blakemore-Brown and the British Psychological Society (BPS) [/quote]

[quote]In this case, the psychologist made an unsubstantiated assessment of the faculty member based solely on what the faculty member’s “enemies” had said about her. The psychologist made no effort to verify any of the rumors she had heard and instead wrote them as fact in her reports and made recommendations based on them. As part of the counseling and conflict resolution process, the psychologist also carried on e-mail communication with the faculty member but forwarded this communication to the university’s administration without the faculty member’s knowledge or permission. The psychologist never told the faculty member that there would be any limits to confidentiality nor did she tell her what process she would be following or that she would be writing reports to the administration. Obviously, if there had been any legitimacy to the psychologist’s conclusions and report, the matter would have been handled privately and compassionately by the university’s human resources staff.[/quote]

In the case of Lisa Blakemore-Brown the damage could have been far worst had not some bloggers picked up on what was happening.

[quote]Dr Rita Pal has weighed-in on the scandal of Lisa Blakemore Brown and the British Psychological Society (backstory here and here). Dr Pal has become an expert on the bullying of individuals by professional regulatory bodies through the abuse of mental health diagnosis after she was subjected to a campaign of intimidation by the General Medical Council [Link to court judgment]. The concerns that Dr Pal raised that led to her abuse (about patient maltreatment in a Midlands hospital – Link) have not to this date been properly addressed. She subsequently brought proceedings against the GMC, leading to a landmark judgment in which the GMC was described as a totalitarian regime by Judge Charles Harris – “Anybody who criticises it is said to be prima facie mentally ill – what used to happen in Russia”.[/quote]

The system is now routinely being used to destroy enemies of the state, people with views and opinions that the state does not like and the destruction of these innocent lives are being done with the help in many cases of other unwitting citizens.

Years of research have been spent trying to expose these systemic misconducts. Others have noticed them in their areas of research, some noting that the best and brightest are beint targeted, and still nothing gets done.

I still believe that awareness and exposure are still key, in getting what is happening exposed. I do think when targets can afford to do so they should see legal help, but in order to do so, they have to have an idea of what is being used against them.

March 3, 2010 Posted by | Citizen Informants, Community harassment, Gang Stalking, Gangstalking, harassment, Informants, Minorities | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments