Gang Stalking World

United we stand. Divided they fall.

The eye of the storm

This week as you know should have been Indigo Ribbon Week and the focus was going to be on what has happened over the last year since the Indigo Ribbon was introduced into the Targeted Individual Community.
Because the New York Times article came out, the focus this week was shifted onto mitigating and managing the outcome of the article.

I believe that whenever a new element is introduced into an environment it’s possible repercussions should be a key focus and that is where the focus has primarily been this week.

I did want to spend time on talking about some of the high profile targets in our community. Those who have been compromised by the system. Those who have gone missing, those who have filed lawsuits, and any targets who have died as a result of their targeting.

Indigo Ribbon is a time of remembrance. It is also a ray of hope for Targeted Individuals everywhere. Support for Targeted Individuals, Light for those in the dark. Hope for the Survivors.

Instead we were what I am nicknaming the eye of the storm this week. We had an article in the New York Times that described Gang Stalking and other Targeted Individual Communities as Extreme Communities. I would later on confirm with Vaughan Bell that he has never studied the subject of Gang Stalking, or Gang Stalking Communities. The experts in the article seem to have focused on Mind Control Websites. I have written several articles disputing, rebutting, or clarifying the original article, but since my readership might not be as wide scale as the New York Times readership, we can assume that many read the article and will never see the follow articles.
I am not sure if Vaughan Bell or any of the other named researchers, psychiatrists, or psychologists will be contacting the New York Times to have the correction made, but for the Integrity of their work and study I suspect this might be the case. No researcher wants to have their work plagiarized anymore than they would want to have research attributed to them that was not their own, or more importantly that they have not done.
Part of what I did this week was to spend time tracking the articles, while trying to also compile a very brief and sparse list of our missing Targeted Individuals. This did leave me really tired and I was not able to focus on my inner world as much as I wanted to, so I will have to redouble those efforts a bit later.
The only other point I wanted to add to this is that when people are researching any of these phenomenon, I hope they will keep in mind that there are deliberate elements within these communities that are there for the sole purpose of making the community look paranoid, or worst. I see this from time to time, and I am aware that we do have Citizen Informants that are there for this specific purpose, just like any other activism movement. It’s something that any true researcher should be cognizant of.

In the mean time I did want to bring your attention to a couple of individuals. I recently realised that when I visit websites other than Youtube.com videos by “theninthtrust” no longer show up. You get a message that says the videos are no longer available. I don’t remember this happening before, and so I tried to email her. She was last online seven months ago, and she lives in Texas I believe.

http://www.youtube.com/user/theninthtrust
http://forums.jetcareers.com/youtube-aviation-videos/69964-theninthtrust-terroristic-stalking-program.html#post972290

I found her address on another forum, the forum was not a favorable one, and they have a current thread going in regards to her. That’s the most up to date information that I have been able to find. With her videos no longer being made available on other websites outside of YouTube, which was not the case before, this is a concern. The greater concern is that she was very active, she has not posted for seven months.

She described herself as a witness of police brutality and said that she had been harassed ever since then. This is taken from her  youtube.com profile.

[quote]It’s taking every last bit of energy I have to get some of these videos out for public viewing as I have been ‘assaulted and battered’ for over the last five years with sound so severe, the sound forcefully induces severe headaches that go back and forth with incapacitating migraines. The videos I’ve taken, a few representative samples of which are on this website, are just a small percentage of the staggering number of abusive/severely abusive/severely abusive and migraine triggering flights overhead, an insane deliberately created situation, in addition to coordinated collaborated stalking to terrorize and attempt to kill/silence witness of police brutality and victim of violence, violence they approve and support against women.[/quote]
If anyone has any information, or can do a bit of Targeted sleuthing into her situation that would be great. I just want to know that she has not gone missing, been locked away, or put in jail. She may have simply become financially unable to keep posting, or maybe she is ok, but that is not usually the case, so any information would be great.

I wanted to focus on several other cases, but I will just do a reminder regarding Anita E. Bell and her story. The story amazes me because she tried to take on the CIA/FBI and sue them for bringing drugs into ethnic minority communities. After Gary Webb, who is now dead exposed the fact that the CIA were bringing drugs into ethnic minority communities deliberately. She was hired by several of the families who would also be harassed if I remember correctly. She was hired to sue the system.

Instead what happened was that she was targeted. She was falsely disbarred from practicing law. She and her family due to the targeting had to flee to Canada. After fleeing to Canada, she hired lawyers, but she lost her right to stay in Canada and could not go back to the States, she then flee to Israel. She did have a phone number there, but now her pages are gone, and I can find no information about what should have been a very high profile person. Her case is almost literally buried and gone.

[quote]U.S. Supreme Court to rule on Belle’s petition for rehearing on or around February 20, 2004. Will the Justices disclose their Masonic affiliations?
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Anita E. Belle, President, The International Reparations Litigation Fund, Inc.

Address: P.O. Box 161, 31 Adelaide Street East, Toronto, Ontario M5C 2J5, CANADA

Phone: (416) 464-2461 or Toll-Free Voicemail in Canada & U.S.: (877) 728-5183

Email: irlf@ureach.com & Website: www.afrocide.com

January 23, 2004

U.S. SUPREME COURT RUBBER-STAMPS FLORIDA DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS: MODERN-DAY COINTELPRO FORCES WHISTLE-BLOWER INTO EXILE.

A Florida attorney suing the federal government alleged that seven car accidents occurring on or around her court deadlines were deliberately staged counter-intelligence program (COINTELPRO) murder attempts. When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld federal appellate rulings that the alleged COINTELPRO was frivolous, the attorney sought political asylum in Canada. Then, despite undisputed evidence of being disbarred from practicing law without due process, the high court upheld the Florida Supreme Courts ruling that disbarred the whistle-blowing attorney.
COINTELPRO was a FBI program begun by its former and long-time director, J. Edgar Hoover, in 1956 to neutralize American political dissidents. The program officially ended in 1971 to afford additional security to our sensitive techniques and operations of disrupting racially-related activities in the name of internal/national security.
Anita E. Belle, a black female practicing law in Florida, alleged that COINTELPRO reared its ugly head against her after she filed cases on behalf of blacks and whites in seven states harmed due to the Central Intelligence Agency or CIAs role in importing illegal drugs into black communities. She alleged that at least one reputed CIA agent admitted the agency conspired with organized crime to use illegal drugs as a means of pharmaceutically enslaving African-Americans. In early 2000, five of her seven cases were consolidated as the Nicaraguan Contras Narcotics Trafficking Litigation, MDL 1331, in the federal court in Gainesville, Florida.
Belle claims that the cases became so sabotaged that she and her family were forced to flee Florida in fear of their lives. She first moved to North Carolina, but left there after witnesses in the CIA cases were threatened. She then returned to her hometown of Detroit, Michigan.
Belle recalled the Iran-Contra scandal that plagued the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. During the 2000 Florida election debacle, Belle made a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request to the FBI for the criminal records of the former president and his sons, Florida governor Jeb Bush and presidential candidate/Texas governor George W. Bush. The FBI denied her FOIA request on privacy grounds. Belle then sued the FBI, arguing that the federal criminal records of public officials should not be protected by privacy, else Americans may unwittingly elect organized crimelords who will undermine the integrity of the government. Meanwhile, Belle claims the retaliation against her and her family continued in Detroit to such an extent that she added COINTELPRO allegations to her case against the FBI.
Belle alleged the Florida Bar was a co-conspirator with the FBI in the agencys COINTELPRO activities, accusing the Florida Bar of disbarring her so as to discredit her and halt her suits against the federal government. She alleged that the Florida Bars investigator on her disbarment case, Bill Freeh, was a retired FBI agent and a close relative of Louis Freeh, the director of the FBI at that time.

Belle further alleged that both George Bushes were members of Masonic fraternities that vow to keep and cover up their brothers secrets. She accused that when politicians, law enforcement, lawyers, physicians, and the judiciary are also freemasons, then organized crimelords could racketeer the Masonic vow to avoid prosecution and punishment for their crimes. She cited that the United Kingdom had recognized this above the law danger and required judges to disclose their Masonic affiliations. Belle thus requested that the judges on her cases make disclosure similar to that being done by British judges, a motion that was denied. Belle argued that Masonic disclosure was of heightened importance in southern states such as Florida where white masons founded the Ku Klux Klan.
She later discovered that Robert Cleland, the Michigan federal judge who dismissed her FBI case as frivolous, was a white freemason. She also discovered that Florida Supreme Court Justice Leander Shaw, who concurred in her disbarment, was a black mason. Belle had also filed a reparations case that was dismissed as frivolous by a Maryland federal judge, Alexander Williams, who was also a Prince Hall mason. Belle accuses the judges of harboring secret bias and discriminating against her, a non-mason, in favor of fellow masons.

Belle appealed the FBI case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, Belle & Belle v. FBI et al, U.S. Supreme Court docket number 02-9357. Both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ignored Belles hundreds of pages of evidence of sabotage and judicial bias to cover up biased Judge Clelands ruling of frivolousness. The effect of the U.S. Supreme Courts ruling gives COINTELPRO permission to continue attempts to assassinate Belle, a non-violent political dissenter. Belle was therefore forced to cross the border between Detroit and Windsor, Ontario to seek Canadian refugee protection from the U.S.

The Supreme Courts ruling in Belles FBI case also means that the federal criminal records of public officials may be protected by privacy. This means that voters are denied freedom to information that could prevent drug-trafficking, organized crimelords from corrupting federal and state governments.

In her disbarment case, Belle v. Florida Bar, U.S. Supreme Court docket number 03-6857, Belle presented evidence that the Florida Bar denied her due process by sending notices of proceedings to obsolete addresses even though they knew of her Michigan address. She presented evidence that, contrary to its own internal operating procedures, the U.S. Post Office did not forward her mail. As a result of the lack of notice, most of her disbarment proceedings occurred in secret until it was almost too late for her to appeal. She presented evidence of collusion between the Michigan case against the FBI and the Florida disbarment, evidence of judicial bias of Masonic judges, and evidence of at least one lost court order, lost motions, docket errors, double jeopardy, and falsification of court documents. Despite these due process violations, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Florida Supreme Courts ruling of disbarment. The case is still pending, awaiting the high courts ruling on Belles petition for rehearing that seeks disclosure of the Supreme Court justices Masonic affiliation or other grounds for bias.
For more information, contact Anita E. Belle at (416) 464-2461 or email irlfcanada@yahoo.ca.

[/quote]
So here is her story, and it’s the last one I will focus on for the time being. For the other targets that have been compromised and describe it as whoring for the state, yes I do believe that is what it is when you are turned into a Citizen Informant against your will. For the missing, or locked away, you are remembered and acknowledged. At least I hope you are. For those who didn’t make it, the battle still continues on the other side, and I hope you will do what you can to see the light shine on these continued injustices, so that all targets including yourself might find some justice.

Going into another year of this, many realise we are at the heart of a great conspiracy. I will not lie, there is a deliberate effort by the state to keep what is happening undisclosed, but I do believe our continued efforts can and they must make a difference. There is no other choice.
As you know the research that Mark M. Rich, Nikki Raapana, and myself have done all point to a one world government forming, and these community policing programs are at the heart of it. Mini pieces of a larger puzzle, with each community slowly being over run with these citizen informant type programs under community policing. Just like it happened in East Germany, only here we have many people very unaware, uninformed, and disbelieving of the bigger picture.

Exposure and awareness should still be our key focus moving forward.

November 23, 2008 Posted by | Electronic harassment, Gang Stalking, harassment, Laws, mobbing, NWO, Snitches, society, Stalking | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Clarification

Just a quick update on the New York Times article.

I have just spoken to Vaughan Bell, one of the key psychologists mentioned in the article and he was kind enough to clarify that he has never studied Gang Stalking.

The research that he did, fully focuses on Mind Control sites. He has never studied Gang Stalking or the Gang Stalking World website more specifically.

I think one of the things that Sarah Kershaw did in the article, that many people do is that she lumped in Gang Stalking, Electronic Harassment, and Mind Control, all together.

For the record I do believe that all three happen and are happening to Targets. I know about Mk Ultra, the experiments that happened, the law-suites for mind control. I am familiar with Electronic Harassment. How many times have I gone into the shower to have patches of my skin peal off from the burns of the night before?

I do however focus on the Gang Stalking aspect of it, because it comes down to what can you prove? Over the last two years, I have spoken to enough police officers, (who are no longer mentioned), health professionals, social workers, crisis centers, lawyers, Investigators, Human Rights, etc to find out what I could about what was happening with the Citizen Informants, and the programs that they are being used for.

I have enough people offline and online that I have spoken to, to know that I know what I am talking about with the Gang Stalking stuff.
Since the only psychologist thus far that I could find who mentioned extreme communities was again Vaughan Bell, he has not identified the Gang Stalking websites as such, since he has never studied them.

The article also does make it clear that in relationship to Dr. Ralph Hoffman, his patients have “told him of visiting mind-control sites, and finding in them confirmation of their own experiences.”

So we have two named professionals, one psychiatrist and one psychologist, both who have not it would appear studied, or actually made mention of the Gang Stalking Websites.

It seems the confusion and the lumping together of the terms might be coming from the author of the article Sarah Kershaw, and it is an easy error to make, if you are not familiar with the three phenomenons. We are all Targeted Individuals, but just because you experience or are a target of one, does not mean that you are a target of all.

I just wanted to clarify this factor for anyone who still had questions about this article or how the conclusions came about. I might do a bit more follow up, on this article with at least one more person, but these are important details that I thought should be clearifed.

November 21, 2008 Posted by | Electronic harassment, Gang Stalking, harassment, mobbing, society | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Extreme assessments and paranoid conclusions

After giving the New York Times article a little bit more time to settle there are three points that I wanted to review further.

The first was how the article came to use the term extreme communities. I did read over the Vaughan Bell article where a reference is made to such communities.

http://arginine.spc.org/vaughan/Bell_2007_JMH_Preprint.pdf
<blockquote>Extreme communities

One feature that has garnered relatively little attention in the clinical research literature is the
existence of what might be termed ‘extreme communities’. Owing to the difficulty with which
material can be effectively censored or suppressed online, views considered extreme or
unacceptable to the mainstream can be expressed relatively freely, with online communities often
formed by those who share similar opinions. Some of these are of particular interest to mental
health professionals, as they attempt to reframe what would otherwise be classified as ‘mental
disorder’ in an entirely different light.</blockquote>
According to what Dr Bell wrote in the article it was views considered extreme or unacceptable by the mainstream. Using this definition I wondered if things such as the 9/11 truth movement would be an extreme community? Their views are not considered mainstream. I also wondered who else might fall into this list based on Dr Bell’s definition?

Websites that cover conspiracy topics might well meet his definition of extreme communities. Many of the subject matters covered on websites such as http://www.AboveTopSecret.com would fall into this category. They would be a website of mini patches of extreme communities.

Another factor that I thought should be calculated in when defining a community as an extreme community is the obvious, is the community helpful vs harmful? What kind of purpose do they serve? If I go to a website that has what by some is considered an extreme view that encourages me to kill myself, then that should be considered different than going to a website that expounds none traditional views, but steers the website viewer away from inflicting harm to themselves?

There are lot’s of websites that conform to traditional or more traditional mainstream views that in my opinion are probably fairly harmful to some aspects of society, but we turn a blind eye, because it does pass mainstream muster.

The definition as is, in my opinion is fairly broad, and the references to the term were limited except for references to Dr Bell’s work and the New York Times article.

The other point that I am wondering about is who or what now defines what is mainstream or normal? In today’s society we have so many different variables to consider. At one time spending all your time online might have been considered the actions of lonely desperate people. Now with websites such as Facebook, and much of web 2.0 culture, being online is considered normal, and spending many hours online as long as it’s spent socialising is considered a fairly normal and healthy activity.

According to a report from Mediamark Research in a 30 day period 2.5 million adults participated in online dating. I am sure they find this to be completely normal and mainstream, but I am sure there are patches of society that do not agree with this.
http://www.mediamark.com/PDF/Nearly%202.5%20Million%20Adults%20Participated%20in%20Online%20Dating%20in%20Last%2030%20Days.pdf

World of WarCraft reached 11 Million monthly Subscribers. Many of them sane individuals who go online to take part in these roleplaying games. For that community, I am sure they consider themselves normal and mainstream, just by their sheer numbers. I am sure there are still many in society who would not however consider going online to roleplay normal, mainstream or even healthy.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170971

Thus what would be considered as abnormal or extreme view offline is often a normal and accepted view online, in many different circles. Eg. 9/11 conspiracy offline, might still be considered anti-government or none traditional, but online they are a fairly regular part of web culture and discussions. When defining mainstream and referencing the Internet, we might have to start finding different ways to do so.

Eg. I just read an article today, that talks about a real life couple getting divorced because he is cheating online with a virtual girlfriend. Traditional definitions are having to be adapted and redefined to accommodate an online culture.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/081114/world/lifestyle_britain_family_divorce_internet_offbeat

A second woman in Japan was arrested because she killed her online husband. She killed his virtual self. That’s right, she did not kill him, or have any intention of killing the real him, but when his online virtual self divorced her, she got even and killed him. She was arrested for hacking into the computer and other things, and now if she is formally charged, she could face up to 5 years in jail.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081023/koddities/japan_avatar_murder

It is becoming more and more clear that it is the offline world that is having to adapt to the new online realities and not often the other way around. Therefore what we considered traditional and mainstream yesterday for an offline reality, in many ways is being redefined, and it does not seem as if some offline structures are keeping up to date with this reality.

The third point of concern with the New York Times article is that people were being considered paranoid with simple offline assessments. Are these offline assessments adequate for some of the challenges that people are facing in the modern day world to define Targeted Individuals as paranoid?

Recent research has unearth a great deal of information to show that when people are being termed as paranoid, it might not be the case.

Research is showing that there are in fact networks of individuals being hired by the state in various countries to track and spy on average citizens. The spying includes email and phone taps. Being followed around in public by hired Covert Human Intelligence Sources. Having these same Informants move into the houses around the target when possible. Following them around in vehicle and foot patrols, plus many other forms of intrusive surveillance.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/04_02/007graphic1_468x1052.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-559123/Why-earth-Stasi-state-spying-families.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-559123/Why-earth-Stasi-state-spying-families.html

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2342364.0.how_local_counay%20cils_use_antiterror_laws_to_spy_on_ordinary_people.php

http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/privacy/fusion_update_20080729.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLpHitaKk1s

Individuals and Families under these types of surveillance are often not aware, and if they do become aware and go to seek help, they are often written off by the establishment as paranoid, psychotic, or crazy. The modern day reality is that without proper investigations, Freedom Of Information Act requests, and other proper forms of inquiry a true assessment might be impossible to determine. The secondary problem is that many of these investigations are ending up in secret databases, which the public has no access to. F.O.I.A. requests are no longer a sure fire way to determine if an individual is under surveillance.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559130/Why-didnt-just-knock-door-ask-couple-tailed-weeks-council-spies.html
http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20080214_snitch_state.htm

I think it’s fair and safe to say that before a community is considered extreme many factors should be considered, and the definition itself should factor into consideration what’s considered normal online as well as offline. Assessing if a community or individual is paranoid or psychotic in today’s modern surveillance society should be done with care and caution. It’s been shown time and time again that anti-terror laws are being abused, National Security Letters are being handed out left right and center, with over 30,000 being issued per year, and many groups and individuals are being spied upon and placed on watch lists, unfairly.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501366.html

In a society as the one described above, it is not only normal to have concerns about surveillance, but when there is a suspicion of such, the job of therapists in the future might not be first subscribing the patient to medication, it might be first asking if they have placed a F.O.I.A. request.

Society might even have to make it a mandatory law for psychiatrist to be notified if a person is under surveillance so that they are not falsely labelled, committed or medicated. This does not happen, the culture and society have changed within the last decade, but the methods used for determining paranoia, psychosis, and mental illness, in regards to the belief that one is under surveillance are still fairly antiquated in many cases, and might not pass muster for the realities of a modern day surveillance society.

November 18, 2008 Posted by | Gang Stalking, Laws, mobbing, society | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment