Gang stalking paranoia

[LightinDarkness]

I have noticed among the conspiracy crowd a recent increase in people claiming that they are being "gang stalked" - basically, they believe that there are tens to hundreds of people hired to "stalk" them (for reasons unknown, they usually believe they have 'exposed' the government or something) by harassing them every time they are out in public.

This is a rather scary phenomena because the claims are similar to paranoid schizophrenia. These people have grouped together online and have formed their own little mini-victim's community and language - they call themselves "targeted individuals."

Of course, anyone who questions them is told they are part of the gang stalking, and no proof or evidence can be offered for the claims. The people who claim they are gang stalked take every day normal events and say that is "proof" that they are gang stalked. For example, if they see the same person that lives around them somewhere else in town, this is proof of gang stalking.

Is the conspiracy crowd now catering to the mentally ill (I guess they always have, but this is a bit extreme), or are these people infiltrating the conspiracy crowd? Any thoughts on this?

[neltana]

For those of you who haven't heard about this before, here is a NY Times article that gives some background:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/fashion/13psych.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

[gtc]

Those who were just using the movement to further their own agenda (money, fame, anti-Americanism, religious ideology) are moving on because the truth movement is dying. The true-believers have probably exhausted 9/11 and have incorporated it into the wider CT (just as you see few dedicated JFK researchers these days). The suckers who were drawn into 9/11 have wised up and moved on and the lack of publicity means that new punters aren't being drawn into the movement in the same numbers. This just leaves the mentally ill, who have always been a part of the movement but are now the most visible remnant.

That's my guess.

[TitanPilot]

I had an employee who this year announced that he was a "targeted individual" of gang stalking. In reality he was developing paranoid schizophrenia.

The sad part, besides this brilliant young man's decline, was discovering this online community. Not only are there other people out there who believe they are victims and supporting each other's delusions but there are also people profiting from them. There are scumbags offering seminars for "targeted individuals" and selling various gadgets for their protection.

These people know they are preying on the mentally ill.

[Trojan_Jockey]

I had an employee who this year announced that he was a "targeted individual" of gang stalking. In reality he was developing paranoid schizophrenia.

The sad part, besides this brilliant young man's decline, was discovering this online community. Not only are there other people out there who believe they are victims and supporting each other's delusions but there are also people profiting from them. There are scumbags offering seminars for "targeted individuals" and selling various gadgets for their protection.

These people know they are preying on the mentally ill.

You raise a VERY good point here. The net, for all its great aspects, has also enabled those suffering from paranoid delusions to reinforce each other's beliefs systems. If you are delusional the last you need to do is to talk to other schizophrenics who confirm all your false beliefs.

Again, I suggest this is why CTs are so popular on the net, yet they barely touch people in their daily lives. "Turn off the net and it goes away", as someone said on here.

Also, bear in mind that the peak age for the onset of schizophrenia is late teens, early adulthood, possibly around about the same age as many of the most passionate and paranoid troothers. It will be interesting to see the consequences of the net on the incidence of psychosis in the future.

[Lisa Simpson]

Even if these people are not suffering from paranoia, it's a way of feeling special. "See, I'm so important, I'm being stalked"

[zaphod2016]

These people know they are preying on the mentally ill.

Agreed 100%. Disgusting.

From the NYT article linked by neltana: (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/fashion/13psych.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all)

For people who say they are the target of mind control or gang stalking, there may be enough evidence in the scientific literature to fan their beliefs. Many sites point to MK-ULTRA, the code name for a covert C.I.A. mind-control and chemical interrogation program begun in the 1950s.

Just enough reality to seem plausible to those already on the edge.

And what about Jim Guest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Guest)?

And the users of some sites have found the support of Jim Guest, a Republican state representative in Missouri, who wrote last year to his fellow legislators calling for an investigation into the claims of those who say they are being tortured by mind control.

“I’ve had enough calls, some from credible people — professors — being targeted by nonlethal weapons,” Mr. Guest said in a telephone interview, adding that nothing came of his request for a legislative investigation. “They become psychologically affected by it. They have trouble sleeping at night.”

He added: “I believe there are people who have been targeted by this. With this equipment, you have to test it on somebody to see if it works.”

So what's the deal with Jim Guest?

Pandering to "the crazy vote"?

Another Paulian crackpot?

And who are the "credible people" (professors) in question?

I am extremely skeptical of any "mind control" actually in existence, but the reality of the MKULTRA project really makes me wonder sometimes. :boxedin:

[Cuddles]

Even if these people are not suffering from paranoia, it's a way of feeling special. "See, I'm so important, I'm being stalked"

This. As with so many things, there can be a fine line between normal behvaiour and mental illness. In fact, there was an article on the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7722074.stm) on that just yesterday. Some of those people are almost cetainly suffering from genuine mental illness, but that does not mean all of them are. It's clear that many in the conspiracy movement want to see themselves as special, and this is just another way of doing so. Mentally ill, mildly paranoid, role playing, gullible, lying, and probably many other explanations exist for this kind of behaviour. You don't have to be mad to be weird.

[tomwaits]

The NYT article touches on something that seems very counterintuitive:

“We know, for example, that things like social support, all of these positive social aspects are very good for people’s mental illness,” Dr. Bell said. “I wouldn’t say it’s entirely and completely positive, but it can be positive.”

Some research has shown that when people with delusions undergo group cognitive therapy, the group process can be helpful in their treatment.

But the Web sites are not moderated by professionals, and many postings discuss the failure of medication and say that mental health professionals are part of the conspiracy against them.

“These people lead quietly desperate lives,” said Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University. “And if they are reinforcing each other and pulling people toward something, if they are using the Internet and getting reinforcement, that’s good.”

So maybe they will still carry the delusions, but the group getting together online may help them lead a relatively normal life.

[LightinDarkness]

I think its a good point that some of these people just simply NEED to feel special. Believing that the government is paying hundreds of people simply to harass you covertly simply means you must be a very special person.

I wonder how long it takes though before someone who is simply approaching this from a "gang stalking is real because I'm special" approach really begins to believe themselves. I mean, after a while it would become apparent to even the most unintelligent that the "evidence" of gang stalking is actually nothing more than evidence of daily living.

I was looking at one of the "gang stalking" forums and one of the people claimed their "proof" was that people would look at her in a odd way every time she would go outside her house and video tape the gang stalkers. Her fellow delusional posters told her this was a key sign of gang stalking. It seemed not to occur to her that going outside your home and pointing a video camera at people and screaming at them that they are gang stalkers might cause them to look at you strangely.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

For those of you who haven't heard about this before, here is a NY Times article that gives some background:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/fashion/13psych.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all


Very interesting and quite sad. Another hit against the Internet?

Just don't flash back when someone flashes their high-beams at you. :scared:

[Horatius]

Just don't flash back when someone flashes their high-beams at you. :scared:



No no, that's Gang Initiation. [/OldInternetGuy]

[Almo]

The extent of the community, Dr. Bell said, poses a paradox to the traditional way delusion is defined under the diagnostic guidelines of the American Psychiatric Association, which says that if a belief is held by a person’s “culture or subculture,” it is not a delusion. The exception accounts for rituals of religious faith, for example.

From the article. I think this has very interesting implications about religion.

[Checkmite]

For those of you who haven't heard about this before, here is a NY Times article that gives some background:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/fashion/13psych.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Wow. I followed the link to Gang Stalking World, and it is incredibly disturbing. Most disturbing so far is the list of techniques the bad guys use (http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Techniques.html). It is no exaggeration to say that according to these people every single sound you hear, every single mishap you have, every single stranger you meet, and every single relationship problem of any type that you have, is proof that you are being stalked and manipulated.

[LightinDarkness]

Here are the "characteristics" of those who are "targeted":
http://gangstalkingworld.com/Forum/YaBB.pl?num=1205738832/0

Basically, things that can characterize everyone. So everyone can be targeted for any reason. I find it fascinating that some organization is dedicated to stalking so many people and spending so much money to do it...instead of doing the simpler thing of just killing them. But no, they would rather hire thousands of people to stalk...

[ktesibios]

Well, the NWO's contract with the Faceless Evil Minion's Union requires that they get a minimum of 32 paid hours per week.

They're on the clock, so we've gotta find something for the featherbedding weasels to do- and it has to be evil.

[Horatius]

Most disturbing so far is the list of techniques the bad guys use (http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Techniques.html).



Random Encounters

This will be people on the street who you randomly and unexpectedly run into. It looks completely natural and it seems to be a random encounter.

They might ask for your phone number after engaging you in conversation. Ask you out, or just ask you where you are going. Anything from small talk to lengthier conversations.

All with the purpose of finding out something about you, or even just getting you to do something.


Oh, yeah, great. Let's get a bunch of sad, lonely, isolated people, and then convince them that the one time someone wants to ask them out on a date, the person is a government spy....Real nice, that.

[JoeyDonuts]

What...Who?!? All of you...stay away from me!!!!!

Alex Jones!!! Save me with your witchcraft!!!!

they're coming to take me away ho ho ha ha hee hee...

In all seriousness, has anyone seen the tinfoil hat site that has warmarks to identify spots in urban areas where mind control is taking place and what type? I can't remember the URL but I have got to believe it's a parody of some sort - it's THAT ridiculous.

[tomwaits]

Don't worry folks, we are hard at work (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_is_the_government) on the solution to this problem.

[Alareth]

OMG! Everything I own has been stolen and replaced with exact duplicates!

Everyone I know has been cloned as well ... Including me!

[Whiplash]

You raise a VERY good point here. The net, for all its great aspects, has also enabled those suffering from paranoid delusions to reinforce each other's beliefs systems. If you are delusional the last you need to do is to talk to other schizophrenics who confirm all your false beliefs.

It goes both ways though. People also are more connected to real knowledge and people who are brilliant and have facts and information to share with those that want to learn.

To some extent, there has always been a way for people of certain mindsets to get together and feed off each other. Newsletters, radio shows, even little conventions and stuff. Yes, it's more easy now for them to get bad info and pool together on insane beliefs. But the world is also interconnected and people have access to reams of knowledge and facts, and can be educated much more than ever before. I think, on balance, that the net is going to be much more of a positive force in human development than a negative. I think there will be a time in the future where the interconnectivity of the whole world is going to be remembered as a major milestone in our overall enlightenment as a species.

[Hans]

Well this is just weird

I read this thread last night and then went out to get some milk at the local market. It was fairly late at night and the guy ahead of me in the check out line gave me a strange look and said a few things to the check out girl I couldn't hear. When I came up for my turn. The checker whom I know faintly said. "That man said you were following him and that you worked for the government".

We just looked at one another and laught.

Oh that was just weird - or did I just say that?

[JoeyDonuts]

Don't worry folks, we are hard at work (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_is_the_government) on the solution to this problem.

I'm anxiously awaiting the day I see that video referenced or linked to on a Gang Stalking site as proof the media is also following them.

[Trojan_Jockey]

It goes both ways though. People also are more connected to real knowledge and people who are brilliant and have facts and information to share with those that want to learn.

I think the net has also shown us that many people don't know how to separate valid facts from ********. It's true that there is so much information out there, but not all of it is "real" knowledge at all. You have people with no reasoning skills and little formal education, who are being bombarded with all these theories presented in flowery language and with so much passion that it sounds convincing. Plus, logic tells them these guys only want to make the world a better place so they must be good.

We can't limit what is put out there, so people have to be able to filter out what is a good source from a bad source, what statements are supported by facts and what isn't. The 9/11 CT showed just how much garbage people will swallow. Yes, the net is a good thing, but I dont think humans are quite as good at filtering out the "real" facts from the garbage as we'd like to think.

[FriendlyAndLively]

I'm interested, could you tell me about this "conspiracy crowd" whose members suddenly believe that they are being gang stalked?

I find the language and tone of the original post fascinating. LightinDarkness seems to know an awful lot about these people. Could he elaborate?

Could he also explain to the survivors of East Germany's regime, many of whom experienced the Stasi's 'zersetzung' tactics which are similar to gang stalking, that they were imagining things? He could let them know that an anonymous poster on an Internet bulletin board has figured out that no government which is trying to whitewash its international reputation would possibly waste resources on ruining dissidents' lives, instead of simply executing them.

In post #3, gtc says the truth movement is dying. This is also fascinating. Could you show us graphs, charts, etc., demonstrating this?

[LightinDarkness]

Oh look, we have a CTer who...wants to bump year old threads! Im glad you did. The gang stalking paranoia is always such a good example of CT lunacy/mental health issues that rise with CT belief, so its nice of you to do so.

I'm interested, could you tell me about this "conspiracy crowd" whose members suddenly believe that they are being gang stalked?

Sure. You can read up about it for yourself here:

http://gangstalkingworld.com/
http://www.multistalkervictims.org/

I know this probably doesn't occur to you, but belief in conspiracies is just about required to suffer from gang stalking delusions. Thus, those who suffer from gang stalking paranoia are members of the "conspiracy crowd." A national organized group hell-bent on harassing people otherwise unimportant in subtle ways that can't be proven to anyone else is a conspiracy.



I find the language and tone of the original post fascinating. LightinDarkness seems to know an awful lot about these people. Could he elaborate?

I find your smug arrogance amusing. You seem to know a lot about it. Can you elaborate?


Could he also explain to the survivors of East Germany's regime, many of whom experienced the Stasi's 'zersetzung' tactics which are similar to gang stalking, that they were imagining things? He could let them know that an anonymous poster on an Internet bulletin board has figured out that no government which is trying to whitewash its international reputation would possibly waste resources on ruining dissidents' lives, instead of simply executing them.

Sure.

You see, there is a difference between living under East Germany's regime and living in a modern democracy. Of course, the reality is that even if you wanted to fantasize that some secret police exists in the US or in European countries, you would need to provide some evidence. We know that the Stasi existed - where is your evidence of these gang stalking police forces and governments spending millions of dollars to covertly harass people for no obvious reason?

Perhaps the government has better things to do than spend countless amounts of money hiring and training covert police forces in complete secrecy whose only job appears to be "harassing" people who pose no threat to the government?



In post #3, gtc says the truth movement is dying. This is also fascinating. Could you show us graphs, charts, etc., demonstrating this?

As a truther I know this is hard for you to accept, but 9/11 was not an inside job and your movement is dying. We know this due to the surveys on the belief in the twoof movement, which show that not only is it laughably small, but its decreasing in numbers. There are numerous posts linking and analyzing these surveys in the 9/11 forum.

[Sledge]

Did the Stasis routinely break into people's homes and replace items of clothing with similar but inferior ones, or start going out with a subject's sister with the intent of ruining the subject's love life? It doesn't sound like the sort of thing a secret police force would do.

[FriendlyAndLively]

Those aren't terribly good sites. Gang Stalking World, in particular, is only at the top of the Google results because it has Gang Stalking in the title.


I know this probably doesn't occur to you, but belief in conspiracies is just about required to suffer from gang stalking delusions.


What if the gang stalking isn't delusional?


Thus, those who suffer from gang stalking paranoia are members of the "conspiracy crowd."


You say "those who suffer from gang stalking paranoia". What about people who are being stalked by a single person or a small group of people, which is a phenomenon I hope you will not dispute the existence of, seeing as how it's in the DOJ's statistics - they are undoubtedly 'suffering from paranoia'. Are you trying to anchor feelings of being hunted to mental illness?


A national organized group hell-bent on harassing people otherwise unimportant in subtle ways that can't be proven to anyone else is a conspiracy.


Yes, indeed it would be a conspiracy, but what does that have to do with delusional thinking?


I find your smug arrogance amusing. You seem to know a lot about it. Can you elaborate?


I find your word games, disguised as logic, to be transparent.



You see, there is a difference between living under East Germany's regime and living in a modern democracy.


First of all, we in the US don't live in a democracy. Technically, we live in a Constitutional Republic. Second, East Germany called itself a democracy AND a republic, specifically, the German Democratic Republic. The outside world might have known differently, but to the East German citizens who weren't being persecuted by the Stasi, the GDR was a democracy. And the reason they knew this was because the GDR made a point of telling them how free they were. That wall, you see, was there to protect them.


Of course, the reality is that even if you wanted to fantasize that some secret police exists in the US or in European countries, you would need to provide some evidence. We know that the Stasi existed - where is your evidence of these gang stalking police forces and governments spending millions of dollars to covertly harass people for no obvious reason?


You could step back in time to the 1970's as an East German citizen and make the same argument about the existence of the Stasi. The GDR did not tell its citizens they lived in a fascist dictatorship. The citizens had to learn it, the hard way.


Perhaps the government has better things to do than spend countless amounts of money hiring and training covert police forces in complete secrecy whose only job appears to be "harassing" people who pose no threat to the government?


The East German regime switched tactics from execution squads and forced labor camps to more subtle Zersetzung tactics (gang stalking tactics) when it wanted to whitewash its appearance to the world due to the 1975 Helsinki accords; the ranks of the Stasi grew enormously. They did this because from the perspective of people with power, no amount of money is too great to spend to stay in power. The most powerful people in corrupt governments co-opt the machinery of government for their own gain. This is not terribly conspiratorial in nature.


As a truther I know this is hard for you to accept, but 9/11 was not an inside job and your movement is dying. We know this due to the surveys on the belief in the twoof movement, which show that not only is it laughably small, but its decreasing in numbers. There are numerous posts linking and analyzing these surveys in the 9/11 forum.

Obviously, I can't respond to this off the cuff, as I'll have to check through the 9/11 forum's posts. Thank you for that tidbit of information.

[gtc]

The stasi had hundreds of thousands of people working directly for them or as informants. Most East Germans also had access to West German broadcasts.

For these reasons, I would be surprised if the East Germans weren't acutely aware of their situation.

[fromdownunder]

Why is it that we in Australia are so much more knowledgeable and sophisticated than others. The C.S.I.R.O has developed technology that does not require people to stalk people. We use nano-technology with highly sophisticated computer devices in insects - bees, ants, flies, mosquitos, cicadas, spiders (birds proved to be too expensive and had a tendancy to fly into power poles) and simply monitor them remotely. All such insects carry cameras, and recording devices.

And unlike people, we do not have to pay or feed the super spy spiders. They don't eat. You don't even want to know what we have done with trees.

It is so much easier and cheaper to do it this way. Please, people outside Australia catch up, or contact the C.S.I.R.O. for further information, and a chance to join the revolution.

Norm

[Howie Felterbush]

From the Gang Stalking site

Mimicking

This is trying to copy things in a targets life.


Leaving when they do.
Dressing like they dress.
Throwing out the garbage
Going to the bathroom
Doing whatever the target is doing.

This is all designed to be psychological warfare, so that the target again feels like they are under observation at all times.
-----------------------------

Oh crap. Mrs. Beirman next door always takes her garbage out at the same time as me, you know, Wednesday morning, right before the garbageman arrives. I knew she was up to something...Well, I best go kill her. Be right back.

Kidding. I'm a kidder. This is sad. I work with a lady who is very paranoid about, well, everything. She always tells me about this person or that person and how they are persecuting her. She stands really close when she talks and she hardly ever moves her lips while speaking, as if these persecutors are somewhere with binoculars, reading her lips. I try to put her at ease, but I think she believes I'm in on it.

I'm not, by the way.

[Brainache]

From the Gang Stalking site

Mimicking

This is trying to copy things in a targets life.


Leaving when they do.
Dressing like they dress.
Throwing out the garbage
Going to the bathroom
Doing whatever the target is doing.

This is all designed to be psychological warfare, so that the target again feels like they are under observation at all times.
-----------------------------

Oh crap. Mrs. Beirman next door always takes her garbage out at the same time as me, you know, Wednesday morning, right before the garbageman arrives. I knew she was up to something...Well, I best go kill her. Be right back.

Kidding. I'm a kidder. This is sad. I work with a lady who is very paranoid about, well, everything. She always tells me about this person or that person and how they are persecuting her. She stands really close when she talks and she hardly ever moves her lips while speaking, as if these persecutors are somewhere with binoculars, reading her lips. I try to put her at ease, but I think she believes I'm in on it.

I'm not, by the way.

Oh sure! Mr Felterbush... She stands really close? Suddenly your surname makes sense...

[LightinDarkness]

Those aren't terribly good sites. Gang Stalking World, in particular, is only at the top of the Google results because it has Gang Stalking in the title.

Your opinion doesn't really matter. They are both excellent sites for presenting the delusional and fantastical nature of gang stalking conspiracy claims.


What if the gang stalking isn't delusional?

Argument from ignorance logical fallacy. You have provided no evidence that gang stalking is real, nor has anyone else. Meanwhile, all the evidence suggests - its paranoia and mental illness:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/fashion/13psych.html?pagewanted=all


You say "those who suffer from gang stalking paranoia". What about people who are being stalked by a single person or a small group of people, which is a phenomenon I hope you will not dispute the existence of, seeing as how it's in the DOJ's statistics - they are undoubtedly 'suffering from paranoia'. Are you trying to anchor feelings of being hunted to mental illness?

What about people who are being stalked by a single person? No one has ever claimed such does not exist. You are beating up a straw man. People claiming to be stalked by small groups of people? Unlikely, but sitll unrelated to the gang stalking claims. Nice try to use DOJ statistics on individual stalking to prove gang stalking - shows you really don't have an argument?


Yes, indeed it would be a conspiracy, but what does that have to do with delusional thinking?

Do you even read what you write? You are the one posting arrogant posts about how this isn't conspiracy theory.


I find your word games, disguised as logic, to be transparent.

I find your attempts to ignore logic and reason pretty normal for most conspiracy theorists.


First of all, we in the US don't live in a democracy. Technically, we live in a Constitutional Republic. Second, East Germany called itself a democracy AND a republic, specifically, the German Democratic Republic. The outside world might have known differently, but to the East German citizens who weren't being persecuted by the Stasi, the GDR was a democracy. And the reason they knew this was because the GDR made a point of telling them how free they were. That wall, you see, was there to protect them.

Yawn. First of all, we live in a representative DEMOCRACY. Second of all, if you are incapable of understanding the difference between what systems of governments are and what they call themselves there is little help for you. Do you think China is a republic because its called the Peoples Republic of China? Are you that ignorant?


You could step back in time to the 1970's as an East German citizen and make the same argument about the existence of the Stasi. The GDR did not tell its citizens they lived in a fascist dictatorship. The citizens had to learn it, the hard way.

Wrong. You couldn't. Everyone knew about the existence of the Stasi. NO ONE can provide any evidence of these millions of government operatives trained to harass unimportant people for no obvious reason.


The East German regime switched tactics from execution squads and forced labor camps to more subtle Zersetzung tactics (gang stalking tactics) when it wanted to whitewash its appearance to the world due to the 1975 Helsinki accords; the ranks of the Stasi grew enormously. They did this because from the perspective of people with power, no amount of money is too great to spend to stay in power. The most powerful people in corrupt governments co-opt the machinery of government for their own gain. This is not terribly conspiratorial in nature.

Wrong as usual. Gang stalking tactics involve the supposed training of millions of normal people whose only job is to drive people nuts by doing things like staring at them. Quite different from any tactics the Statsi used.

You can keep beating the dead horse all you want, but you've been debunked. Screaming "but..but..Stasi!!" is not proof of gang stalking claims.

[LightinDarkness]

From the Gang Stalking site

Mimicking

This is trying to copy things in a targets life.


Leaving when they do.
Dressing like they dress.
Throwing out the garbage
Going to the bathroom
Doing whatever the target is doing.

This is all designed to be psychological warfare, so that the target again feels like they are under observation at all times.
-----------------------------

Oh crap. Mrs. Beirman next door always takes her garbage out at the same time as me, you know, Wednesday morning, right before the garbageman arrives. I knew she was up to something...Well, I best go kill her. Be right back.

Kidding. I'm a kidder. This is sad. I work with a lady who is very paranoid about, well, everything. She always tells me about this person or that person and how they are persecuting her. She stands really close when she talks and she hardly ever moves her lips while speaking, as if these persecutors are somewhere with binoculars, reading her lips. I try to put her at ease, but I think she believes I'm in on it.

I'm not, by the way.

Wow. I can't imagine working with someone like that. People who are that paranoid could get violent if they think you are in on it.

By the way...would our new conspiracy theorist please tell us how the Statsi used throwing out the trash to harass people? Please describe exactly how the above tactics quoted from the gang stalking site have any similarities to the Stasi. I can't believe anyone could be so ignorant as to read these claims and not see the obvious signs of mental illness, we ARE dealing with CTers...

[Eddie Dane]

Think about the logistics of gang stalking.

Imagine being the supervisor of just one gang stalking.

You have to hire about forty people from an enormous pool of willing professional gang stalkers. Do you place an ad or is there a tem agency specialising in this stuff?
Alternatively you have to recruit people from the targets surroundings.

Then you have to instruct them to a lot of very subtle things like dressing alike etc.

What a headache that would be.

I once saw a documentary about the wife of a jailed Chinese dissident. They assigned three goons specially to her. On would guard the entrance of her apartment building. The other two moved into her apartment!

Imagine that: some alfa hotel sitting in your kitchen, smoking, with his feet on the table.
She was not allowed to close the toilet door. This lady was going crazy.

that's what it looks like when a repressive government wants to get it's point across. It's not subtle.

Surveillance is another matter. It's supposed to be covert.

If you're under surveillance and the agents take care to give you subtle hints. Call your shrink.

[Sunray Breaker]

I wonder...Would the old Co-intel-pro tactics from the 60's qualify as gang stalking in the past?

I know cointel is dead, but would this be comparable?

Also, I'm curious about this video and what it suggests...From the Gang Stalking Website you listed above:
((((OKAY, NEVER MIND, HOW THE HELL DO YOU EMBED?)

I don't really believe in the woo anymore, but the process underwhich its debunked has become fascinating to watch...

[carlitos]

Wow. I just saw "November" and didn't notice this was a year-old thread. Over at the Jesse Ventura show discussion board (http://boards.trutv.com/showthread.php?p=28362), I had just read that one of the guys involved with the show is apparently a victim of this (http://www.duncanofinioan.com/). MK Ultra. Project Talent. Open letter to the President. Project Camelot. Etc. Should be a great show!

[Eyeron]

The problem is the word gang is misleading. Because of the media supersaturation many people tend to associated it with gang bangers such as the Crips and the bloods. All a gang is a group of people.

[carlitos]

From that site FAQ:

What are other Names for Gang Stalking?


There are many names for this form of systemic control and harassment. Under the Gang Stalking label you will also find such terms as Organised Stalking, Cause Stalking, Multi-Stalking, Community Mobbing, but it's all part of the same harassment protocol. What many people do not realise is that Gang Stalking is just one appendage of this systemic form of control. There are other forms of control used to repress, and keep individuals in line. Other forms or appendages include, but are not limited to: Mobbing, Cointelpro, The Buzzsaw, Covert War, Electronic Harassment, etc. These are the just some of the names being given to a very old game, that is once again being played by governments on their unsuspecting citizens.
Why not just call it paranoid schizophrenia since that gets the idea across more accurately?

[LightinDarkness]

I wonder...Would the old Co-intel-pro tactics from the 60's qualify as gang stalking in the past?

I know cointel is dead, but would this be comparable?

Also, I'm curious about this video and what it suggests...From the Gang Stalking Website you listed above:
((((OKAY, NEVER MIND, HOW THE HELL DO YOU EMBED?)

I don't really believe in the woo anymore, but the process underwhich its debunked has become fascinating to watch...

I don't think even cointeopro would be an example of historical gang stalking. The CIA used it to target political groups, not individuals. The point of the program was to destroy such movements from within COVERTLY - gang stalking isn't covert, its (supposedly) extremely obvious by those claiming to be gang stalked.

For example, if I want to disrupt a communist group the last thing I want to do is train 20 people to wear coordinating T-Shirts saying DEMOCRACY and have them walk past the communist group leader when he goes out for a walk. All thats going to do is make it obvious.

[FriendlyAndLively]

I will be back later - probably in a few days - to remark on organized stalking tactics, especially those that seem "crazy". In the meantime, I'll leave you with some better sites to critique.

Gang Stalking World has serious execution problems. I think its presentation trivializes the concerns of targeted individuals, and Eleanor White agrees ( creviews.net/cr000002.htm ). GSW shouldn't discredit the claims of targets, any more than a website by a raving loony in whatever your occupation is would discredit you.

I also think you should show a little more compassion and understanding. Targets of gang stalking experience things that are so far out of what they might have previously considered the norm, they have no place to turn for help. They aren't like you; they can't log on to a site of like-minded people to find out what they should be thinking.

Targets will be subjected to years of sleep deprivation and continuous fight-or-flight responses, neither of which are good for the mind or body. The ones who manage to survive long enough to connect to other targets have a kind of mental toughness that I think is admirable. However, they aren't at their best by the time they've started connecting with others. What you guys are doing is like a bunch of well-fed suburbanites pointing and laughing at the residents of a concentration camp - what's the matter with them, why don't they eat more?

Now for some better sites.

Citizens Against Technological and Community Based Harassment: catchcanada.net

North American Freedom Foundation: naff.org

Christians Against Mental Slavery (I have problems accessing this site, but nobody else complains... so...): slavery.org.uk

Mind Justice: mindjustice.org

[gtc]

I also think you should show a little more compassion and understanding. Targets of gang stalking experience things that are so far out of what they might have previously considered the norm, they have no place to turn for help. They aren't like you; they can't log on to a site of like-minded people to find out what they should be thinking.

Targets will be subjected to years of sleep deprivation and continuous fight-or-flight responses, neither of which are good for the mind or body. The ones who manage to survive long enough to connect to other targets have a kind of mental toughness that I think is admirable. However, they aren't at their best by the time they've started connecting with others. What you guys are doing is like a bunch of well-fed suburbanites pointing and laughing at the residents of a concentration camp - what's the matter with them, why don't they eat more?

Some people here may ridicule these people but most of us will show compassion and understanding for what these people are going through - in many cases because they have experienced similar feelings themselves or witnessed this in others. The difference is that the vast majority of people here believe that mental illness is the most likely explanation for what is being described.

[FriendlyAndLively]

LightinDarkness wrote:
Yawn. First of all, we live in a representative DEMOCRACY.

For a long time poster on this forum to make such an obvious mistake, and not be called on it, speaks volumes.

No, "we" (by which I assume you mean US citizens) are not in a democracy. We are in a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution is supposed to limit the power of the government.

Looking at everything else you've posted in the light of an obvious misconception which goes uncorrected by your fellow skeptics - I see your cheap high school debate-team tactics exposed for what they are. You don't actually debunk anything. You score points and appeal to authority. You ask for 'proof' that can never be provided, because the only kind of proof you'll accept is an admission of guilt by the current power structure, which defies any reasonable expectation.

I will be happy to share insights with people viewing this thread, but I'm not interested in debating an anonymous Internet troll who doesn't even know what type of government we have. I recommend that other targets who sign onto this thread likewise be wary of a person who is only interested in belittling and disrupting under the guise of 'skepticism'.

Back later.

[Sledge]

Dude, it's not real. It's a delusion. These people aren't being stalked by a horde of professionals who go to great lengths to follow them, then tip them the wink to let them know. It's a mental illness, and pretending otherwise is reprehensible.

[gtc]

The claimed distinction between republic and democracy pops up all the time on these forums. Its not really relevant to the discussion but maybe we can get it out of the way.

To the best of my knowledge a republic is simply a country without a monarchy and a democracy is simply a country where politicians are voted for in reasonably free and fair elections (or where government policies are voted for directly).

The USA is a democracy and a republic and the powers of the government are limited by its constitution.

The UK, Canada, Australia and Denmark are monarchies but are also democratic with government powers limited by constitutions.

The Soviet Union and the GDR were republics but not democracies (even if they claimed otherwise).

These definitions seem to be in use throughout the Commonwealth but maybe things are different in the US.

[LightinDarkness]

I will be back later - probably in a few days - to remark on organized stalking tactics, especially those that seem "crazy". In the meantime, I'll leave you with some better sites to critique.

Please don't bother. First, you need to provide evidence gang stalking exists. Commenting on gang stalking tactics when there is no proof they exist is a pointless endeavor.

And before you come back, please see a mental health professional.


Gang Stalking World has serious execution problems. I think its presentation trivializes the concerns of targeted individuals, and Eleanor White agrees ( creviews.net/cr000002.htm ). GSW shouldn't discredit the claims of targets, any more than a website by a raving loony in whatever your occupation is would discredit you.

I see, so you apparently are one of the people who thinks gang stalkers are after them and all the popular gang stalking sites don't display the horrors you go through. Elenor White is a gang stalking woo who reinforces delusions by telling woos that they are being gang stalked no matter what the evidence actually is.


I also think you should show a little more compassion and understanding. Targets of gang stalking experience things that are so far out of what they might have previously considered the norm, they have no place to turn for help. They aren't like you; they can't log on to a site of like-minded people to find out what they should be thinking.

I think you should know a little more about reality. Reinforcing delusions of gang stalking is extremely cruel and only further damages the mental health of individuals (like yourself) who believe it. Target of gang stalking aren't really being gang stalked, and the best place they have to turn to help is a mental health professional.


Targets will be subjected to years of sleep deprivation and continuous fight-or-flight responses, neither of which are good for the mind or body. The ones who manage to survive long enough to connect to other targets have a kind of mental toughness that I think is admirable. However, they aren't at their best by the time they've started connecting with others. What you guys are doing is like a bunch of well-fed suburbanites pointing and laughing at the residents of a concentration camp - what's the matter with them, why don't they eat more?

No, they don't, because gang stalking doesn't exist. All of these are symptoms of the mental illness associates with people claiming to be gang stalked - schizophrenia, multiple personality disorders, delusions of grandeur, etc. Connecting with others just reinforces the delusions. Please seek help.


Now for some better sites.

These are horrible sites and a good example of the types of reinforcement the New York Times article talks about - sites in which woos gather to reinforce their delusions.

[LightinDarkness]

For a long time poster on this forum to make such an obvious mistake, and not be called on it, speaks volumes.

This is a classical woo tactic of misdirection. Unfortunately, its one that not only are you completely wrong about but a tactic that is completely irrelevant to your claims of gang stalking. The United States system is indeed a democracy. No amount of you flailing about is going to change that.


No, "we" (by which I assume you mean US citizens) are not in a democracy. We are in a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution is supposed to limit the power of the government.

We operate in a representative democracy. You fail again.


Looking at everything else you've posted in the light of an obvious misconception which goes uncorrected by your fellow skeptics - I see your cheap high school debate-team tactics exposed for what they are. You don't actually debunk anything. You score points and appeal to authority. You ask for 'proof' that can never be provided, because the only kind of proof you'll accept is an admission of guilt by the current power structure, which defies any reasonable expectation.

Your elementary attempts to obfuscate the reality that your points have been devoid of facts and that you suffer from delusions of gang stalking have failed. You have been debunked, and your continued elementary and childish tactics only further highlight why you should seek mental help. Even here your rantings about the "power structure" are signs of your mental illness.


I will be happy to share insights with people viewing this thread, but I'm not interested in debating an anonymous Internet troll who doesn't even know what type of government we have. I recommend that other targets who sign onto this thread likewise be wary of a person who is only interested in belittling and disrupting under the guise of 'skepticism'.

As someone who suffers from delusions of gang stalking, this is another sign that you need to seek help. I, in debunking you and providing you with facts that show you are not being gang stalked, have already become part of the conspiracy against you.

Please take a few days and seek help from a competent mental health professional.

[LightinDarkness]

Dude, it's not real. It's a delusion. These people aren't being stalked by a horde of professionals who go to great lengths to follow them, then tip them the wink to let them know. It's a mental illness, and pretending otherwise is reprehensible.

Thats the thing about mental illness - to people suffering from it, its real. We all know its not, but as you can see in his few posts here I have already become part of the delusion for debunking him. Hes already frantically trying to misdirect and obfuscate the topic by ranting and railing about the definition of democracy which has no relevance to the thread.

[fromdownunder]

The thing I find odd about this, and with other woo which requires a belief in "they are out to get me", is how do these people think that posting on the internet is safe?

Anybody who wishes to could find out a helluva lot about me simply through tracking my internet history on BBs and other public domain sources. Name, age, address, occupation, phone number, marriage status, no. of kids (even pictures). And yet these people seem to think that (20?) people are stalking them and that they can happily post such stalking on to a (semi) public forum and ask for help.

The internet is an open invitation to knowledge about anybody who uses it to anybody who cares enough to find out. Using people is too expensive, as I suggested on another thread (NWO related, and much the same thing). Just use on-line sources, and do, maybe, a one on one stalker.

It just does not make sense. Unless everybody is stalking everybody else?

Norm

[fromdownunder]

I wish I could recall the name or author of a SF short story I read many years ago where a guy moved to his own planet to get away from it all, and over the next few years it became heavily populated, but the rest of the population were all people spying on him, or each other. It was hilarious, and actually mirrors the Gang Stalking conspiracy pretty closely.

It was something like "My Spy" (and I tried googling this, and came up with a whole different novel) but that is all I recall.

Norm

[Mongrel]

For example, if I want to disrupt a communist group the last thing I want to do is train 20 people to wear coordinating T-Shirts saying DEMOCRACY and have them walk past the communist group leader when he goes out for a walk. All thats going to do is make it obvious.

And frankly if you want to make it obvious you just wheel out the MiBs ;)

[fuelair]

Why would anybody be paranoid about stalking gangs? I think they should be stalked, treed and .....................:D

[FriendlyAndLively]

Side note: if you refrain from using cultural slang such as "woo" in the below context, I will take it as a positive sign that you are willing to engage outsiders and are not using mental shortcuts to stifle unwelcome ideas. I am doing my best to explain an alien world to you; I would appreciate it if you'd try to meet me quarter-way.

The thing I find odd about this, and with other woo which requires a belief in "they are out to get me", is how do these people think that posting on the internet is safe?


What makes you think gang stalkers don't already know everything there is to know about the target? In fact, what targets find out (and one of the elements of gang stalking even they find it hard to believe in at first) is that gang stalkers are fed information about the target by a highly sophisticated intelligence gathering system.

You're right; "they" can find out a lot about you just from your Internet activity. What targets find out is that the gang stalkers already took that step.

These campaigns may appear to come out of nowhere; it is common that when a target first becomes aware of gang stalking, they hit him hard from multiple directions at the same time - but there is an intelligence gathering aspect that may build up for months or even years before the target learns he's been targeted.

Of course, as a good skeptic, you are wondering where the manpower and funding for same might come from. Stay tuned.

[FriendlyAndLively]

Did the Stasis routinely break into people's homes and replace items of clothing with similar but inferior ones, or start going out with a subject's sister with the intent of ruining the subject's love life? It doesn't sound like the sort of thing a secret police force would do.

Tactic #1, going into people's homes on a regular basis and moving objects around or making small changes over time - that is known as Gaslighting. See the Wikipedia entry on that. It is a highly effective tactic for undermining a person's memory, and sanity. How many times have you said to yourself, "I know I put this somewhere, where is it?" Now imagine this sort of event occurs several times a week, or even multiple times a day.

Tactic #2, I can't comment on without knowing the particulars. However, it is a common tactic to "go after" people who are in the target's life, including friends, coworkers, and family members.

[FriendlyAndLively]

... These people aren't being stalked by a horde of professionals who go to great lengths to follow them, then tip them the wink to let them know...

This is a tactic called conspicuous surveillance, and was used by the FBI in their COINTELPRO operations. The point is not to gather information on the target - chances are, they already know everything there is to know about the target. The point is to unnerve the target.

My only quibble with the above sentence fragment is that you imply the people stalking the targets are 'professionals'. What makes you think that?

For many people, especially the type of low-life who follows a target everywhere, becoming part of a group like this will be the greatest thing they ever do.

I will be happy to show you real life examples of people engaging in highly sophisticated and coordinated group skits, for free. Not only do they participate for free, they beg to be allowed to join in.

[fromdownunder]

This is a tactic called conspicuous surveillance, and was used by the FBI in their COINTELPRO operations. The point is not to gather information on the target - chances are, they already know everything there is to know about the target. The point is to unnerve the target.



Why unnerve the target? Is there an ultimate purpose in who is targetted, or is it just some form of mind game and part of a super secret experiment, and the targets are randomly selected?

Norm

[LightinDarkness]

Side note: if you refrain from using cultural slang such as "woo" in the below context, I will take it as a positive sign that you are willing to engage outsiders and are not using mental shortcuts to stifle unwelcome ideas. I am doing my best to explain an alien world to you; I would appreciate it if you'd try to meet me quarter-way.

I don't really care what terms you want me to use. I appreciate you trying to explain your delusions and its a important insight into the powerful paranoia you live with, but the best thing you can do is see a mental health professional. By engaging you and humoring these delusions we are probably making things worse to begin with.


What makes you think gang stalkers don't already know everything there is to know about the target? In fact, what targets find out (and one of the elements of gang stalking even they find it hard to believe in at first) is that gang stalkers are fed information about the target by a highly sophisticated intelligence gathering system.

Well, first, you would have to provide some evidence that the gang stalkers exist. You would also need to explain why you are so important as to have someone hire dozens of people and spend millions of dollars investigating you and harassing you in subtle ways that just happen to mirror the symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.


These campaigns may appear to come out of nowhere; it is common that when a target first becomes aware of gang stalking, they hit him hard from multiple directions at the same time - but there is an intelligence gathering aspect that may build up for months or even years before the target learns he's been targeted.

Again - why? Why are you so important that some malevolent entity is spending millions of dollars to gang stalk you?


Of course, as a good skeptic, you are wondering where the manpower and funding for same might come from. Stay tuned.

Of course, before we get to that, we would need to provide evidence for gang stalking actually existing. Still waiting on that one.

[carlitos]

What makes you think gang stalkers don't already know everything there is to know about the target? In fact, what targets find out (and one of the elements of gang stalking even they find it hard to believe in at first) is that gang stalkers are fed information about the target by a highly sophisticated intelligence gathering system.

You're right; "they" can find out a lot about you just from your Internet activity. What targets find out is that the gang stalkers already took that step.

I'd like evidence for just one target having info fed to just one group of gang stalkers. And I'd like it soon, before you devolve into 'tactics' etc.

[LightinDarkness]

This is a tactic called conspicuous surveillance, and was used by the FBI in their COINTELPRO operations. The point is not to gather information on the target - chances are, they already know everything there is to know about the target. The point is to unnerve the target.

No, not it was not. Please provide evidence that COINTELPRO used this, because all the real evidence suggests quite the opposite. Cointelpro used covert methods to infiltrate groups that the government viewed as politically threatening with the end goal being to dismantle them. Gang stalking - if it was real - is designed to (for some reason) spend millions of dollars on tweaking individuals for no obvious reason and making it obvious to you what is going on. Completely the opposite of cointelpro.


My only quibble with the above sentence fragment is that you imply the people stalking the targets are 'professionals'. What makes you think that?

Well, its a very reasonable assumption. Given that no one who claims to be gang stalking can EVER produce these people or any evidence they exist, they must all be consummate stalking professionals. Otherwise they would leave actual trials of evidence that would convince people other than those suffering from these delusions.


For many people, especially the type of low-life who follows a target everywhere, becoming part of a group like this will be the greatest thing they ever do.

And where exactly do we find information about how these low lifes are recruited? Is there a jobs board somewhere?


I will be happy to show you real life examples of people engaging in highly sophisticated and coordinated group skits, for free. Not only do they participate for free, they beg to be allowed to join in.

Except all you will be showing us is youtube videos taken by people with paranoid schizophrenia. I've seen them before - they drive around and think EVERYONE around them is taking part in some elaborate skit against them, when in reality its just normal people going about their daily normal lives.

[LightinDarkness]

Tactic #1, going into people's homes on a regular basis and moving objects around or making small changes over time - that is known as Gaslighting. See the Wikipedia entry on that. It is a highly effective tactic for undermining a person's memory, and sanity. How many times have you said to yourself, "I know I put this somewhere, where is it?" Now imagine this sort of event occurs several times a week, or even multiple times a day.

Tactic #2, I can't comment on without knowing the particulars. However, it is a common tactic to "go after" people who are in the target's life, including friends, coworkers, and family members.

You have provided no evidence that the Stasi used either of these tactics. The Wikipedia article on gaslighting simply notes it was used by the Manson family..not the Stasi.

We are still awaiting evidence that any group in history has engaged in these gang stalking tactics.

[LightinDarkness]

Interestingly Wikipedia, which has just about as low standards for sourcing as you can get, doesn't allow a gang stalking article because the editors note that the claims are completely unverified and not sourced:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stalking#.22Gang_stalking.22

As you would expect, those people suffering from delusions of gang stalking immediately jump on board and claim those who deleted the article are part of a gang stalking group. :)

Gang stalking has so little real evidence that it can't even garner an article on Wikipedia. Even 9/11 truthers get their articles on there!

[Sledge]

Tactic #1, going into people's homes on a regular basis and moving objects around or making small changes over time - that is known as Gaslighting. <snip for bevity>

Tactic #2, I can't comment on without knowing the particulars. However, it is a common tactic to "go after" people who are in the target's life, including friends, coworkers, and family members.
This in no way answers my question: were these tactics the Stasi used? I'm not interested in whether mentally ill people think these things are happening to them, I want you to tell me whether the Stasi used these sort of techniques (with relevant proof, of course).
This is a tactic called conspicuous surveillance, and was used by the FBI in their COINTELPRO operations. The point is not to gather information on the target - chances are, they already know everything there is to know about the target. The point is to unnerve the target.That doesn't make any sense. If the FBI have all the information they need on a subject, they'll either arrest them or leave them alone, depending on the information gathered. What is the logic for the FBI in continuing to follow a subject once they know everything?
My only quibble with the above sentence fragment is that you imply the people stalking the targets are 'professionals'. What makes you think that?You've compared the stalkers to the Stasi and the FBI. Those organisations would be regarded as "professional." But ok, let's assume these stalkers aren't professional. What are they? A bunch of office workers on a lunch break messing about? And what is their motivation if they're not being employed by anyone to spend almost incalculable man hours swapping people's clothes and taking the rubbish out at the same time as the target?
For many people, especially the type of low-life who follows a target everywhere, becoming part of a group like this will be the greatest thing they ever do.So who are these people and how do you know so much about them?
I will be happy to show you real life examples of people engaging in highly sophisticated and coordinated group skits, for free. Not only do they participate for free, they beg to be allowed to join in.
Dictionary: skit (skĭt)

1 A short, usually comic dramatic performance or work; a theatrical sketch.
2 A short humorous or satirical piece of writing.Thanks, but I did performing arts at college and have been in plenty of skits. Could you explain what relevance this apparent non sequitur has?

[LightinDarkness]

Thanks, but I did performing arts at college and have been in plenty of skits. Could you explain what relevance this apparent non sequitur has?

People who suffer from gang stalking delusions believe that, as part of the stalking, dozens of people coordinate in order to put on shows that they call "street theater" or "group skits".

Simple, normal things to you and me like two people walking past me with the same color dog on a leash is taken by these people to be a coordinated script to let them know they are being watched by "them." Or say, if I am on a plane and move my hand to the right and I notice someone else doing this - they believe this is a gang stalker mimicking my movement (instead of the fact that perhaps we both were in uncomfortable seats and happened to move our hand at the same time).

Its sad...

[carlitos]

I'm pretty sure he was referring to 'flash mobbing' which was big a few years back. Non-sequitur indeed.

[FriendlyAndLively]

This in no way answers my question: were these tactics the Stasi used? I'm not interested in whether mentally ill people think these things are happening to them, I want you to tell me whether the Stasi used these sort of techniques (with relevant proof, of course).


The answer is yes. You could read Funder's Stasiland (available on Amazon). I don't know if that meets your standards of proof.

Part of the problem with investigating the misbehavior of governments is that the only people who are in a position to tell you what really happened are the criminals themselves. It's like asking a Mafia Don what kind of illegal activities his family engaged in - what kind of answers do you think you're going to get?

What kind of proof do you think you're ever going to get of criminal behavior on the part of a government - given that for some crimes (such as murder, genocide, crimes against humanity, etc.) there is no statute of limitations?

The reason there is proof of Hitler's crimes against humanity is that he is dead. Likewise, the Nazi war criminals who tried to escape the system were hunted down. The Nazi war criminals who came to the United States and shared their scientific knowledge (under operation Paperclip) were protected.

That's the way of the world. Criminals get protected, and their crimes are covered up, when it suits the interests of powerful people.


(conspicuous surveillance) doesn't make any sense. If the FBI have all the information they need on a subject, they'll either arrest them or leave them alone, depending on the information gathered. What is the logic for the FBI in continuing to follow a subject once they know everything?


The organizations trying to suppress or silence political dissidents usually do not have a legal basis for arresting and/or imprisoning them, especially in Republics that allegedly protect the rights of the individual. This is an extralegal harassment tactic.

[FriendlyAndLively]

(targets) believe that, as part of the stalking, dozens of people coordinate in order to put on shows that they call "street theater" or "group skits".

It's not a delusion at all, and like I said, I have proof of such activities - and not the low quality videos on YouTube you were talking about.

People beg to be allowed to join in, and I have proof of that too. It is about empowerment. Many people want to belong, to feel like they're part of something important. Gang stalking campaigns can fulfill these people's psychological needs.

[carlitos]

It's not a delusion at all, and like I said, I have proof of such activities - and not the low quality videos on YouTube you were talking about.

People beg to be allowed to join in, and I have proof of that too. It is about empowerment. Many people want to belong, to feel like they're part of something important. Gang stalking campaigns can fulfill these people's psychological needs.

And when will you be posting this "proof?" I suspect that you are going to post a link to some flash mob in London, which doesn't have anything to do with surveillance. Feel free to prove me wrong.

ETA - I will bet a month's pay that there are zero tales of "Gaslighting" in Stasiland, by Anna Funder.

[LightinDarkness]

It's not a delusion at all, and like I said, I have proof of such activities - and not the low quality videos on YouTube you were talking about.

People beg to be allowed to join in, and I have proof of that too. It is about empowerment. Many people want to belong, to feel like they're part of something important. Gang stalking campaigns can fulfill these people's psychological needs.

Again, these things are not real. I must keep pointing out they are a delusion because it would be unethical and very wrong of us to support your delusions. Instead of posting on this board you should be seeing a mental health professional, and I cannot stress that enough.

If all of the people suffering from gang stalking delusions were REAL, it would require countless billions of dollars and be one of the largest employment sectors in the United States. There would be job boards advertising for gang stalking positions, office buildings to coordinate gang stalking, etc. You would be able to actually provide examples of real ex-gang stalkers who had actual, real paper evidence.

Indeed, many people do want to feel important - that is why you are embracing these gang stalking delusions. You want to feel special. You want to feel like someone cares enough about you to spend this much time and man power to drive you nuts for no obvious reason.

But you can provide none of this because it doesn't exist.

[FriendlyAndLively]

And when will you be posting this "proof?" I suspect that you are going to post a link to some flash mob in London, which doesn't have anything to do with surveillance. Feel free to prove me wrong.

I didn't say my proof had to do with surveillance. It has to do with the willingness of people to engage in sophisticated skits, for free, and even beg for the privilege of being allowed to participate.

If you're wondering where all the manpower comes from, this is part of the answer.

[carlitos]

I knew I was right.

Now, are you going to provide evidence of one person being 'gang-stalked' so we can see it?

[LightinDarkness]

What kind of proof do you think you're ever going to get of criminal behavior on the part of a government - given that for some crimes (such as murder, genocide, crimes against humanity, etc.) there is no statute of limitations?

We have proof all the time of horrible things governments do. Lots of currently leaders that are living on trial for their crimes:
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&PHPSESSID=1389b485f73bc1e5237004c435cabbee
http://www.hrw.org/en/publications

And yet no one can provide a single example of gang stalking recognized as real by such bodies as the Hague or Human Rights Watch, both of which are quite interested in such issues and have no problem upsetting governments with their investigations. If gang stalking were real, surely we could find one case with loads of evidence given the millions of people, billions of dollars, and endless reams of paperwork that would be involved...

But we don't because. They are delusions.

[LightinDarkness]

I didn't say my proof had to do with surveillance. It has to do with the willingness of people to engage in sophisticated skits, for free, and even beg for the privilege of being allowed to participate.

If you're wondering where all the manpower comes from, this is part of the answer.

Great, then I'm sure we can come up with a interview from one of these gang stalkers who so happily participated for free. I'm sure in order to stalk you we would need to pass out paperwork with acting directions. After all, if they are free gang stalkers then we would need to send them to gang stalking school for instructions on how to do all of this. Im sure that would create paper trails as well.

PROOF?

[FriendlyAndLively]

If all of the (targets) were REAL, it would require countless billions of dollars and be one of the largest employment sectors in the United States....

Why do you assume there is a Department of Gang Stalking that employs these people?

Are you familiar with the way police informant networks operate? (NOTE: I am not saying this is where gang stalking comes from.) They are clandestine operations, practically every anti-war operation is infiltrated by them, yet where does the funding come from? Do you know how many police informants are in your state? Do you know which of your neighbors are police informants? Can you say for certain that none of your friends and family are police informants?

Have you considered that there are large segments of the economy that are covert, and you simply don't know anything about, and can't find out about just by posting witty bon-mots on James Randi's forums?

[fromdownunder]

Why unnerve the target? Is there an ultimate purpose in who is targetted, or is it just some form of mind game and part of a super secret experiment, and the targets are randomly selected?

Norm

I would appreciate an answer to this question.

Norm

[LightinDarkness]

Why do you assume there is a Department of Gang Stalking that employs these people?

Why do you assume that it is possible to engage in gang stalking without someone coordinating it? If there is no centralizing of gang stalking activities, then that makes it even look worse for you - since that would mean there should be EVEN MORE evidence available...and you have provided us with no evidence.


Are you familiar with the way police informant networks operate? (NOTE: I am not saying this is where gang stalking comes from.) They are clandestine operations, practically every anti-war operation is infiltrated by them, yet where does the funding come from? Do you know how many police informants are in your state? Do you know which of your neighbors are police informants? Can you say for certain that none of your friends and family are police informants?

Unfortunately for you, there is no material similarities between police informant networks and gang stalking delusions. The role of informant networks is to inform the police covertly of illegal activities. Gang stalking is not covert, since you know all about it and know all about the tactics used. We know informant networks exist, we have no evidence of gang stalking to exist.


Have you considered that there are large segments of the economy that are covert, and you simply don't know anything about, and can't find out about just by posting witty bon-mots on James Randi's forums?

Have you considered that the larger and more elaborate these gang stalking accusations become, the more unlikely they are to exist? How is it that with the hundreds of thousands of people analyzing the economy, we just happen to miss the multi-billion dollar gang stalking industry?

Your slipping even further into your delusions. Perhaps you should stop trying to insult people and see a mental health professional?

[FriendlyAndLively]

I would appreciate an answer to this question.

Norm

Sure. Let's suppose that gang stalking exists, and is criminal in nature (both of which are true). Let's further suppose that it is possible, through networks of covert operatives, to turn an entire neighborhood against a person through slander and whispering campaigns; that these operatives have "the goods" (blackmail or other forms of leverage) on many authority figures including lawyers, police, and judges; and it goes on and on. Everyone involved knows they are doing something underhanded, even if they are on a need to know basis, so they are highly motivated to cover their tracks.

So you have a network that can mobilize every figure in a target's life against him. And that can ruin his life anonymously, without a trace.

Then what you have is basically a political weapon. A perfect murder weapon.

Targets believe there are multiple entry points by which a target can be selected for attention by this system:

1. Witness intimidation: someone who is a credible witness to crimes by powerful people will be targeted to discourage him from testifying, or if he is too principled, to eliminate him.

2. Crossing the wrong person: you may be involved in a legal dispute with someone who knows people. Or, perhaps, the person simply recommended you as a person to watch to your local neighborhood watch, then they passed the information to their police liaison, who went to the National Sheriff's Association, who went to USAonWatch, who went to Homeland Security... and you're on the Master **** List. Kiss your life goodbye.

3. Easy prey: you live alone, you're socially isolated, you have no family who will miss you if your government decides to experiment on you. The gang stalking is part of the machinery that covers up the experimentation; you spend the rest of your life fleeing from the stalkers instead of speaking up about crimes against humanity, which is just how the experimenters like it.

4. Criminals who refuse to turn informant: Police informants who turn snitch to stay out of jail have basically given up their constitutional rights. They can be sent back to jail at any time if they don't do as they're told. Criminals who refuse to play along, or even worse threaten to expose this system, can be discarded of. The occasional criminal who gets targeted for gang stalking campaigns helps to legitimize the gang stalking machinery (made up of neighborhood watch members and other volunteer informants) in the eyes of the participants.

[scissorhands]

FzoXQKumgCw

[carlitos]

And now we are onto tactics, without proof that this phenomenon actually exists.

[Sledge]

The answer is yes. You could read Funder's Stasiland (available on Amazon). I don't know if that meets your standards of proof.Excellent! Now we're getting somewhere. Now, of course, I don't own a copy of the book, but I'm sure you'll have no trouble providing a quote from it to support your claims?
Part of the problem with investigating the misbehavior of governments is that the only people who are in a position to tell you what really happened are the criminals themselves. It's like asking a Mafia Don what kind of illegal activities his family engaged in - what kind of answers do you think you're going to get?
I take it from this that you've abandoned your "what makes you think the stalkers are professionals" detour? Very wise, but you'd come across as a better person if you admitted your error instead of trying to hide it.

Yes, our governments are certainly never investigated for their crimes. I don't know how Richard Nixon got away with it, but he completed his presidency without a hint of scandal, let alone him having to resign. We just never see governments or their agencies investigated. Apparently.:confused:
What kind of proof do you think you're ever going to get of criminal :confused:behavior on the part of a government - given that for some crimes (such as murder, genocide, crimes against humanity, etc.) there is no statute of limitations?Sorry, that doesn't quite seem to make sense. What does the lack of statute of limitations have to do with the difficulty you perceive in finding evidence against a government?

As for what sort of evidence I expect to find, that's going to depend on the nature of the crimes, isn't it? In the case of some mass organised stalking attempt against all the people claiming to be gang stalked, I expect all sorts of proof. The testimony of former stalkers would be a good way to get the ball rolling. With all the stalkers involved, there must be quite a few willing to break such a massive story and get all the fame and fortune that would follow.
The reason there is proof of Hitler's crimes against humanity is that he is dead.Er, no. It's because he killed millions of people. That's kinda difficult to hide.
Likewise, the Nazi war criminals who tried to escape the system were hunted down. The Nazi war criminals who came to the United States and shared their scientific knowledge (under operation Paperclip) were protected.Which is connected to gang stalking... how exactly?
That's the way of the world. Criminals get protected, and their crimes are covered up, when it suits the interests of powerful people.Yes, the Nazis certainly never answered for their crimes...

... IN THE NOVEL "FATHERLAND!" Here in the real world, they were brought to trial and made to answer for their crimes, an endeavour that continues to this day.
The organizations trying to suppress or silence political dissidents usually do not have a legal basis for arresting and/or imprisoning them, especially in Republics that allegedly protect the rights of the individual. This is an extralegal harassment tactic.
So it's a good thing we don't have such organisations in America or Britain, isn't it?

[FriendlyAndLively]

Hi Scissorhands, yes, I've seen that video too. I think it is very funny.

[scissorhands]

Hi Scissorhands, yes, I've seen that video too. I think it is very funny.

Glad you liked it.
BTW are you personally being gang stalked at the moment?

[FriendlyAndLively]

Excellent! Now we're getting somewhere. Now, of course, I don't own a copy of the book, but I'm sure you'll have no trouble providing a quote from it to support your claims?


I've read the book before, but I don't have it handy. I'm sure it's available at your local library. I may eventually be able to get my hands on it again and provide a quote, but of course I can't do this immediately.

The reason I like to refer to Wikipedia is not because I think it's the most wonderful source of information in the world, but because it's right there, one click away.


I take it from this that you've abandoned your "what makes you think the stalkers are professionals" detour? Very wise, but you'd come across as a better person if you admitted your error instead of trying to hide it.


I haven't abandoned that suggestion. Most of the people involved are (in my opinion) not 'professional gang stalkers'. However, there is apparently some government involvement.


Yes, our governments are certainly never investigated for their crimes....


Can you name the people involved with Project MKULTRA who were arrested and tried?

Some crimes are more serious than others. And let's not forget that just as Al Capone was busted on a technicality, what Nixon was actually caught doing was very minor compared to what he (and his associates) might have been up to.

A lot of investigations - the sorts of investigations which are performed by the organization that is accused of wrong doing - are whitewashes. It is a question of how outraged the public is, and how little they can get away with doing, and who can be sacrificed to appease the public's anger.


As for what sort of evidence I expect to find, that's going to depend on the nature of the crimes, isn't it? In the case of some mass organised stalking attempt against all the people claiming to be gang stalked, I expect all sorts of proof. The testimony of former stalkers would be a good way to get the ball rolling. With all the stalkers involved, there must be quite a few willing to break such a massive story and get all the fame and fortune that would follow....
[quote]

As I've alluded to in a previous post, most of the gang stalkers are on a need to know basis. The small minority who really know what it's all about have extralegal incentives - ranging from blackmail to credible death threats - for not speaking up.

What you're looking at is an open secret. Many police informants know they are being asked to harass people, how could they not know? They probably also realize the people they're being sent after have been targeted for extralegal harassment. What they don't know is just how extensive the targeting is.

[quote]
Er, no. It's because he killed millions of people. That's kinda difficult to hide.
Which is connected to gang stalking... how exactly?
Yes, the Nazis certainly never answered for their crimes...


I realize you're being sarcastic. What I'm saying is that the Nazis who were exposed to the harsh light of justice were either dead (hey, let's blame the dead guy!) or unwilling to cooperate with the demands of authorities who were willing to look the other way. The ones who were alive, AND willing to cooperate (as in Operation Paperclip) escaped all prosecution.

[FriendlyAndLively]

Glad you liked it.
BTW are you personally being gang stalked at the moment?

Hmmm, I'm not sure if I should answer that question yes or no. If I say yes, I'm one of those crazy gang stalking people. If I say no, then how could I possibly know anything about this?

I'm going to have to take the Fifth. :cool:

By the way, one doesn't have to be a target to recognize the targets' claims as legitimate. See: Christians Against Mental Slavery, or the North American Freedom Foundation.

[scissorhands]

Hmmm, I'm not sure if I should answer that question yes or no. If I say yes, I'm one of those crazy gang stalking people. If I say no, then how could I possibly know anything about this?

I'm going to have to take the Fifth. :cool:

By the way, one doesn't have to be a target to recognize the targets' claims as legitimate. See: Christians Against Mental Slavery, or the North American Freedom Foundation.

You are posting on the internet, busting wide open a secret program that targets individuals for gangstalking, yet you arent sure whether you personally are being gangstalked?
Surely you are a prime candidate?

[FriendlyAndLively]

You are posting on the internet, busting wide open a secret program that targets individuals for gangstalking, yet you arent sure whether you personally are being gangstalked?
Surely you are a prime candidate?

Shucks, why would all those people bother with li'l ol' me? :rolleyes:

[FriendlyAndLively]

You are posting on the internet, busting wide open a secret program that targets individuals for gangstalking, yet you arent sure whether you personally are being gangstalked?
Surely you are a prime candidate?

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment.

Suppose you think gang stalking doesn't exist. Then try compiling all the information about how police informant networks and neighborhood watches are abused into a helpful info-packet and distributing it at your local neighborhood watches. Put flyers on cars at the mall parking lot. Disseminate it widely.

Since this secret network doesn't exist, what harm could possibly come to you?

[LightinDarkness]

Sure. Let's suppose that gang stalking exists, and is criminal in nature (both of which are true).

Whoops! Do not pass go, do not collect $200. We can't suppose this. You see, its entirely crucial to your whole gang talking thing that we first prove gang stalking exists.

We await your evidence that gang stalking exists. Everything else you say about the delusions you experience is meaningless until we see evidence it exists.


Let's further suppose that it is possible, through networks of covert operatives, to turn an entire neighborhood against a person through slander and whispering campaigns; that these operatives have "the goods" (blackmail or other forms of leverage) on many authority figures including lawyers, police, and judges; and it goes on and on. Everyone involved knows they are doing something underhanded, even if they are on a need to know basis, so they are highly motivated to cover their tracks.

Nope, sorry, this doesn't work. You see, even if you had proven gang stalking exists (which you have not), this sort of logic assumes that everyone around you is malicious and intent on destroying you for no obvious reason. Gang stalking on the level you imagine would require open recruiting - where are all the people who have been asked to gang stalk but declined because of their personal morals? Where is all the undercover gang stalk reporting? If a reporter could expose even 1 real gang stalking ring, they would be the sensation of the year.

[Sledge]

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment. <snip>

That's not a thought experiment, that's you asking us to go and prove your argument for you. Doesn't work like that. You assert that this is happening, you prove it to us.

Besides, what's the point? Aside from making people think I'm a crank, even if I did do all this and nothing happened, you'd then claim I was part of the conspiracy or that they've left me alone to further discredit you.

[scissorhands]

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment.

Suppose you think gang stalking doesn't exist. Then try compiling all the information about how police informant networks and neighborhood watches are abused into a helpful info-packet and distributing it at your local neighborhood watches. Put flyers on cars at the mall parking lot. Disseminate it widely.

Since this secret network doesn't exist, what harm could possibly come to you?

Cant answer right now, Im busy making some phonecalls.;)

[LightinDarkness]

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment.

Suppose you think gang stalking doesn't exist. Then try compiling all the information about how police informant networks and neighborhood watches are abused into a helpful info-packet and distributing it at your local neighborhood watches. Put flyers on cars at the mall parking lot. Disseminate it widely.

Since this secret network doesn't exist, what harm could possibly come to you?

The problem is you have already been debunked on how there is a difference between gang stalking delusions and police informant networks.

I can go to the police station and ask them if they have a informant network. If its a larger one that actually needs one, they won't deny it. The existence of informants is all over the public record as is how they have been used historically. The problem is, NONE OF THAT IS TRUE FOR GANG STALKING.

[Elizabeth I]

I will be back later - probably in a few days - to remark on organized stalking tactics, especially those that seem "crazy". In the meantime, I'll leave you with some better sites to critique.

Gang Stalking World has serious execution problems. I think its presentation trivializes the concerns of targeted individuals, and Eleanor White agrees ( creviews.net/cr000002.htm ). GSW shouldn't discredit the claims of targets, any more than a website by a raving loony in whatever your occupation is would discredit you.

I also think you should show a little more compassion and understanding. Targets of gang stalking experience things that are so far out of what they might have previously considered the norm, they have no place to turn for help. They aren't like you; they can't log on to a site of like-minded people to find out what they should be thinking.

Targets will be subjected to years of sleep deprivation and continuous fight-or-flight responses, neither of which are good for the mind or body. The ones who manage to survive long enough to connect to other targets have a kind of mental toughness that I think is admirable. However, they aren't at their best by the time they've started connecting with others. What you guys are doing is like a bunch of well-fed suburbanites pointing and laughing at the residents of a concentration camp - what's the matter with them, why don't they eat more?

Now for some better sites.

Citizens Against Technological and Community Based Harassment: catchcanada.net

North American Freedom Foundation: naff.org

Christians Against Mental Slavery (I have problems accessing this site, but nobody else complains... so...): slavery.org.uk

Mind Justice: mindjustice.org

FriendlyandLively, saying that some people are suffering paranoid delusion is not laughing at them. It is not discounting their misery or dismissing their fears. It is saying that their fear has no foundation in reality and that there are ways to help them understand this, and perhaps emerge from that awful place.

Encouraging them in their unfounded fears is not the way to do that.

Tactic #1, going into people's homes on a regular basis and moving objects around or making small changes over time - that is known as Gaslighting. See the Wikipedia entry on that. It is a highly effective tactic for undermining a person's memory, and sanity. How many times have you said to yourself, "I know I put this somewhere, where is it?" Now imagine this sort of event occurs several times a week, or even multiple times a day.

In fact, this does happen to me several times a week. In fact, with my glasses it sometimes happens several times a day. I also sometimes walk into a room, forget why I came, and have to go back and start all over again to remember. The difference is that I believe this happens because I do stuff without thinking about it, rather than that I actually put things where they belong, after which some shadowy persecutor sneaks into my house or office and moves them around.

I didn't say my proof had to do with surveillance. It has to do with the willingness of people to engage in sophisticated skits, for free, and even beg for the privilege of being allowed to participate.

If you're wondering where all the manpower comes from, this is part of the answer.

People clamor to go on the Jerry Springer show and make asses of themselves in front of millions of people. That just shows some people will do anything for attention. I'm not sure it supports your claims at all.

Shucks, why would all those people bother with li'l ol' me? :rolleyes:

That is the question. I think a lot of us would greatly appreciate your answer.

[Sledge]

Egad, this thread is moving on at quite a pace! Didn't spot this reaction until a second read through of the page.
I've read the book before, but I don't have it handy. I'm sure it's available at your local library. I may eventually be able to get my hands on it again and provide a quote, but of course I can't do this immediately.

The reason I like to refer to Wikipedia is not because I think it's the most wonderful source of information in the world, but because it's right there, one click away.So no one online has any sort of quote from this book that would back up your claims? This seems very odd. I would certainly expect the frankly bizarre behaviour you claim the Stasi exhibited to be mentioned at least in the Wiki article. Perhaps, seeing as you have the book, you could update the article?
I haven't abandoned that suggestion. Most of the people involved are (in my opinion) not 'professional gang stalkers'. However, there is apparently some government involvement.And your proof for this...?
Can you name the people involved with Project MKULTRA who were arrested and tried?Not seeing the relevance. You said "What kind of proof do you think you're ever going to get of criminal behavior on the part of a government," I pointed out that such proof has been found and acted on before. Are you denying this?
Some crimes are more serious than others. And let's not forget that just as Al Capone was busted on a technicality, what Nixon was actually caught doing was very minor compared to what he (and his associates) might have been up to.Yes, we have this crazy legal system where you can't hold people responsible for what they might have done, only what they have done. It's utter lunacy that allows me to get away with the fact I might have killed my great-grandfather. I didn't, but I might have done.
A lot of investigations - the sorts of investigations which are performed by the organization that is accused of wrong doing - are whitewashes. It is a question of how outraged the public is, and how little they can get away with doing, and who can be sacrificed to appease the public's anger.And proof. I suspect this is where your case would fall down long before public apathy could do anything.


As I've alluded to in a previous post, most of the gang stalkers are on a need to know basis. The small minority who really know what it's all about have extralegal incentives - ranging from blackmail to credible death threats - for not speaking up.Yes, you still haven't explained how you know this. Go on...
What you're looking at is an open secret. Many police informants know they are being asked to harass people, how could they not know? They probably also realize the people they're being sent after have been targeted for extralegal harassment. What they don't know is just how extensive the targeting is.And your source for this...?
I realize you're being sarcastic. What I'm saying is that the Nazis who were exposed to the harsh light of justice were either dead (hey, let's blame the dead guy!) or unwilling to cooperate with the demands of authorities who were willing to look the other way. The ones who were alive, AND willing to cooperate (as in Operation Paperclip) escaped all prosecution.To be honest, I don't care about the Nazis as regards this conversation. You're postulating the existance of a vast organisation that harrasses innocent civilians for reasons you are unable or unwilling to reveal, and your proof for it is that the United States decided Werner von Braun could help them with the fledgling Cold War arms race. That's a pretty big leap from "the government did something a bit dodgy 60 years ago" to "therefore a government agent hid my glasses."

[dtugg]

FriendlyAndLively, please get professional help. You are mentally ill.

[carlitos]

I've read the book before, but I don't have it handy. I'm sure it's available at your local library. I may eventually be able to get my hands on it again and provide a quote, but of course I can't do this immediately.
Liar

However, there is apparently some government involvement.
Evidence please?



As I've alluded to in a previous post, most of the gang stalkers are on a need to know basis. The small minority who really know what it's all about have extralegal incentives - ranging from blackmail to credible death threats - for not speaking up.
Evidence please?

What you're looking at is an open secret. Many police informants know they are being asked to harass people, how could they not know? They probably also realize the people they're being sent after have been targeted for extralegal harassment. What they don't know is just how extensive the targeting is.
Here would be a good place for you to give even one sourced example. One police informant that knows they are targeting a person and harassing them.

Thus far, you have provided zero evidence for your extraordinary claims. I would echo the previous posts and ask you to please seek help. Or, if you prefer, provide evidence for your claims.

[Mr.D]

FriendlyAndLively,

Do you believe _ALL_ people who believe they are being "gang stalked" are actually being targeted? Might a few/some/many/most be mentally ill? Are there people being "gang stalked" for long periods of time who remain unaware of it? (Hey, I don't know about you, but I know a few oblivious and extremely self-involved people)

[fromdownunder]

Sure. Let's suppose that gang stalking exists, and is criminal in nature (both of which are true). Let's further suppose that it is possible, through networks of covert operatives, to turn an entire neighborhood against a person through slander and whispering campaigns; that these operatives have "the goods" (blackmail or other forms of leverage) on many authority figures including lawyers, police, and judges; and it goes on and on. Everyone involved knows they are doing something underhanded, even if they are on a need to know basis, so they are highly motivated to cover their tracks.

[snip]



[Examples snipped, to avoid repitition of already posted material]

So what you are basically saying is that anybody who is "in the know" may arrange gang stalking for anybody else that they want to harass, for whatever reason, and that it is relatively easy to get professionals, volunteers and amateurs to help whatever cause that they are actually promoting?

Norm

[Eddie Dane]

Please FriendlyAndLively, imagine actually doing this.

If I had to gang stalk someone in my neighbourhood. How on earth would I get my neighbours to participate? Invite them over for coffee and basically go 'say I work for the government, why don't you give me a hand driving Mrs Y over the edge of reality?'

Somehow I don't think my neighbours would jump at this opportunity to drive someone crazy.

I know where you're going with the Nazi and Stasi examples. After all, somebody ratted out my grandfather and his family during WWII. But these regimes created a whole culture where dissidents were openly vilified and painted as a danger to society. There was also a strong culture of fear that helped that process along. It could be a favourable to be in the authorities books as someone who'd given information at some point. That could be a used as currency if the authorities ever would shine a light on you.

But none of the above applies in today's western societies.

I also note that you cannot provide a singe source for your information. It seems that all your theories are interpretations of unrelated bits of information. if you think you are a target of gang stalking -and I think you believe this- please see somebody about this.

You are obviously intelligent and well read, but you are going all 'Beautiful Mind' IMHO.

[Par]

What kind of proof do you think you're ever going to get of criminal behavior on the part of a government - given that for some crimes (such as murder, genocide, crimes against humanity, etc.) there is no statute of limitations?... That's the way of the world. Criminals get protected, and their crimes are covered up, when it suits the interests of powerful people.


You’re making the following argument:

Since these supposed stalkers are given to secrecy and covering their tracks, proof of their existence will be difficult if not impossible to come by.
Therefore, the need for evidence should be waived.

It’s classic conspiracy theory stuff. You’re cynically attempting to insulate your hypothesis from evidential assessment by building the lack of evidence back into the hypothesis itself. This is circular. It is also nonsense. That your hypothesis is impossible to prove says much more about its weakness than our supposed need accept it unquestioningly.

[carlitos]

I hope that the original poster is OK.

[Rogue1stclass]

The first rule of dealing with the mentally ill is to never feed their delusions.

The second rule of dealing with the mentally ill is that you are probably going to have to feed their delusions.

It's a paradox of mental health.

[carlitos]

I hope that the original poster "FriendlyAndLively" is OK.
Just thought I had better clarify. :)

[sigmund]

Been 'gangstalked'.

Here's how it really happens.

A guy wanted a relationship with me and would not accept the word 'no'. He had his friends or 'proxies' as the gangstalking community and would call them to text each other whenever one of them saw me.
He showed up wherever I was for a while there, and when he realised I was taking note of his behaviour he would get others to do so who would then crap on about what a great guy he was in my hearing range and what a bitch I was for refusing him.

This is not sophisticated surveillance because I have the secret to the location of the Holy Grail, some insider knowledge of lizard people, climate change conspiracies or whatever it is that people blame for this phenomenon. I am your ordinary average girl.

The guy bugged my house, and stalked me because he is individually a narcissistic freak who could not accept no for an answer. His proxies were clients - I said no because he was a drug dealer, which is I assume how he could afford to bug my house.

Obsessive stalkers can bug peoples houses, do get 'proxies' to do their dirty work and are hard to get rid of. Google narcissistic personality disorder and stalking to get an idea of how freaky they can be. Some can stalk up to 40 years.
It is a real shame that some genuinely sick people and attention seekers who are likely trying to make out they are more important in the scheme of things than what they really are have hijacked this probably very rare phenomenon and made it into some sort of joke.

I've spoken to a few people in person, and the ones I believe are genuine have all been attractive women and all have been trying to get away from obsessive men with links to organised crime like drugs. I learnt alot along the way about psychological principles such as mobbing in the work place and the bystander effect. I spoke to some of his proxies and some of them hated what they were doing but were sadly addicted to drugs and owed money.

My stalker pissed off when I told the police about the drug dealing and named names. I did not tell the police about the bugging and the following because, hell, who would believe it.

So gangstalking = sometimes real
Global government conspiracy behind gangstalking = delusional crap

[fromdownunder]

Here's how it really happens.

A guy wanted a relationship with me and would not accept the word 'no'. He had his friends or 'proxies' as the gangstalking community and would call them to text each other whenever one of them saw me.
He showed up wherever I was for a while there, and when he realised I was taking note of his behaviour he would get others to do so who would then crap on about what a great guy he was in my hearing range and what a bitch I was for refusing him.



I can relate to this because one of my daughters recently went through a similar situation. Her partner went off his meds (again), started smoking pot (again), and decided to use his friends to get back what he wanted.

But as you say, it is not what gangstalkers refer to - it is just somebody using their personal network of "friends" (using the term very loosely) to try to attain a personal goal. It is not a conspiracy.

And as you also say, calling the police and getting an intervention order usually puts a pretty quick stop to this sort of thing. "REAL" Gangstalking victims cannot call the Police, as the Police are apparently part of it.

Norm

[sigmund]

Hi fromdownunder,

Hope your daughter is okay. It is pretty freaky to realise there are men like that out there, and they can be anyone; your neighbour, your work colleague, the guy you wave at when getting your mail.

Good thing she's got you looking out for her.

[Eddie Dane]

Been 'gangstalked'.

Here's how it really happens.

A guy wanted a relationship with me and would not accept the word 'no'. He had his friends or 'proxies' as the gangstalking community and would call them to text each other whenever one of them saw me.
He showed up wherever I was for a while there, and when he realised I was taking note of his behaviour he would get others to do so who would then crap on about what a great guy he was in my hearing range and what a bitch I was for refusing him.

This is not sophisticated surveillance because I have the secret to the location of the Holy Grail, some insider knowledge of lizard people, climate change conspiracies or whatever it is that people blame for this phenomenon. I am your ordinary average girl.

The guy bugged my house, and stalked me because he is individually a narcissistic freak who could not accept no for an answer. His proxies were clients - I said no because he was a drug dealer, which is I assume how he could afford to bug my house.

Obsessive stalkers can bug peoples houses, do get 'proxies' to do their dirty work and are hard to get rid of. Google narcissistic personality disorder and stalking to get an idea of how freaky they can be. Some can stalk up to 40 years.
It is a real shame that some genuinely sick people and attention seekers who are likely trying to make out they are more important in the scheme of things than what they really are have hijacked this probably very rare phenomenon and made it into some sort of joke.

I've spoken to a few people in person, and the ones I believe are genuine have all been attractive women and all have been trying to get away from obsessive men with links to organised crime like drugs. I learnt alot along the way about psychological principles such as mobbing in the work place and the bystander effect. I spoke to some of his proxies and some of them hated what they were doing but were sadly addicted to drugs and owed money.

My stalker pissed off when I told the police about the drug dealing and named names. I did not tell the police about the bugging and the following because, hell, who would believe it.

So gangstalking = sometimes real
Global government conspiracy behind gangstalking = delusional crap

Man, that is a uniquely unfortunate situation.

Its bad enough having a stalker. But having Johnny the mobster or Harry the drug dealer fall in "love" with you seriously sucks.

These people can actually influence people to participate.

It also rules out the only effective anti-stalking strategy. You know, the one that involves a baseball bat and severe head trauma.

I advise you to move far away from this sicko. But I'm sure that strategy had already occurred to you.

[WildCat]

Many years ago, back in the 80s, I was sent to an apartment by a real estate management company to change the locks of the tenant who lived there. He told me that people would come into his apartment when he was away and rearrange the clothes in his dresser, move things around, bugged his apt., etc, but never actually take anything. He had recorded a long series of "manifestos" (for lack of a better term) on cassette tapes he played for me the whole time I was there, detailing one crazy conspiracy against him after another. The man was clearly schizophrenic.

A month or 2 later he was found floating in Lake Michigan, an apparent suicide. I guess the only good part of this story is he didn't take anyone else's life as schizophrenics sometimes do.

It may not be a bad thing that these days people have the internet with which to share their fears with each other, rather than have to vent by making cassette tapes that no one else is likely to hear. Maybe having the internet around back then would have given him an outlet, and he wouldn't have felt so alone and hopeless until he jumped into the lake?

[Justin39640]

Hi fromdownunder,

Hope your daughter is okay. It is pretty freaky to realise there are men like that out there, and they can be anyone; your neighbour, your work colleague, the guy you wave at when getting your mail.

Good thing she's got you looking out for her.

I recently talked to a woman who had the same thing happen to her. She broke up with a controlling man who then bugged her house, cloned her cell phone, got into her emails, social networking profiles, etc etc. She tried changing numbers, emails, even her ISP, but he always got back in. I noticed and she told me about it when she realized he was back logging into her accounts and had blocked me (and I'd assume others) from contacting her. She was kinda freaked out and very annoyed. I felt very bad for her.
Men are crazy. Sometimes I'm ashamed to be one when I hear these horror stories.

Why these men think things like this would work is beyond me. If someone don't want me around, I'm not going to be around. lol

[sigmund]

Why these men think things like this would work is beyond me. If someone don't want me around, I'm not going to be around. lol

This should be made the manifesto for real men everywhere.

[Rogue1stclass]

This should be made the manifesto for real men everywhere.

For the most part it is. It's the "real men" part that is the problem here.

[mob123]

Gang stalking does exist. Take, for example, the schools where students are called "gay" even though they are not. There was an earlier post that challenged to "name a single gang stalker". Well, when someone walks by my cube at work and calls me a "fag", (even though I am heterosexual), I sometimes follow them and note their name. So, I have a whole notebook full of the names of gang stalkers. Which, I can't do anything about because I am dependent on good references and re-employability at those companies. If someone grabs the ID of a gang stalker in the general community, they can't write about it, because they are in jail. Think of school-yard bullying extended to adults in the community - that is gang stalking.

[LightinDarkness]

Gang stalking does exist. Take, for example, the schools where students are called "gay" even though they are not. There was an earlier post that challenged to "name a single gang stalker". Well, when someone walks by my cube at work and calls me a "fag", (even though I am heterosexual), I sometimes follow them and note their name. So, I have a whole notebook full of the names of gang stalkers. Which, I can't do anything about because I am dependent on good references and re-employability at those companies. If someone grabs the ID of a gang stalker in the general community, they can't write about it, because they are in jail. Think of school-yard bullying extended to adults in the community - that is gang stalking.

As we've been through before....no. Stalking is real, of course. But as the statistics show, its almost always done by a handful (usually one, actually) person and its personally motivated. There are some very, very sparse historical examples of things like the Stasi that actually did what could be called gang stalking for political and propaganda purposes. But the type of gang stalking here - stalking random people for no obvious reason at costs that would be in the millions of dollars per victim - does not exist. There is a reason why gang stalking claims line up so well with paranoid schizophrenia symptoms.

Your story here sounds exactly like paranoid schizophrenia to me. We have a few options here:
1) For no obvious reason someone has hired and paid off dozens of coworkers to covertly harass and stalk you at a high cost.
2) Your coworkers don't like you and call you names.

Which option is more likely?

[Cuddles]

Take, for example, the schools where students are called "gay" even though they are not.

Words change their meanings over time. Calling someone gay rarely has anything to do with them being homosexual, any more than it is calling them happy or lacking restraint. In that context, "gay" simply means something along the lines of "the opposite of cool". In case you have trouble understanding that, "coo"l in that context does not refer to temperature.

What children calling each other gay has to do with your claims of gang stalking I have absolutely no idea.

Well, when someone walks by my cube at work and calls me a "fag"

Do you ride a Harley-Davidson?

(even though I am heterosexual), I sometimes follow them and note their name. So, I have a whole notebook full of the names of gang stalkers.

So, you have a whole notebook full of records of your own stalking, but no evidence that anyone has ever stalked you. In fact, your own words clearly state that no-one has ever stalked you. Stalking involves repeated actions by an individual, by definition. Since that has not happened to you, you have not been stalked. End of story.

[Sledge]

If this chap (I'm assuming the poster is male as I don't think I've ever heard the term "fag" used as an insult to a woman) is following his workers around and noting their names in a book, isn't he in fact stalking them?

[Horatius]

If this chap (I'm assuming the poster is male as I don't think I've ever heard the term "fag" used as an insult to a woman) is following his workers around and noting their names in a book, isn't he in fact stalking them?



He could be collecting evidence to be used in his sexual harassment/negative working environment complaint.

That is, if it's real, and not just paranoia.

[Captain_Swoop]

Are the TV companies involved? getting their news readers and celebrities to incude 'coded' messages into their broadcasts that only the 'stalkee' understands?

If not then th US 'Gang Stalkers' aren't as good at it as MI5.

[Macgyver1968]

Didn't realize this was necromancy thread. I clicked on the forum of that site, and noticed something right away:

Our users have made 3735 Posts within 1618 Topics

Gangstalking
Administrator
*****
Posts: 3710

Are the TV companies involved? getting their news readers and celebrities to incude 'coded' messages into their broadcasts that only the 'stalkee' understands?

If not then th US 'Gang Stalkers' aren't as good at it as MI5.

Huh?

[Sledge]

He could be collecting evidence to be used in his sexual harassment/negative working environment complaint.

That is, if it's real, and not just paranoia.

If he was going to make a formal complaint to the company, it would be collecting evidence. I don't think our friend is planning to do that.

[Horatius]

If he was going to make a formal complaint to the company, it would be collecting evidence. I don't think our friend is planning to do that.



Well of course not, they're in on it!


:D

[Captain_Swoop]

Huh?

Sorry I can't post URLs yet but google Mike Corley he's a Usenet Celebrity

here is his web page www dot mi5 dot com

BBC newsreaders peek while reading the news, radio presenters interject abusive remarks in their commentary. "Set-up" situations have been organised, frequently during travel, with people briefed on what they are to say and in what manner. In public, people throw abuse in the knowledge that their cowardice will not be challenged. At a previous workplace, employers perpetrated verbal sexual harassment and repeated verbatim things said at my home and accommodation

He thinks he is the victim of the biggest 'Gang Stalking' of all time involving the BBC and even Hollywood movies.

[gnome]

For me the most compelling argument against this sort of thing as a widespread phenomenon, is the lack of any defectors that come on TV or radio and said "yes, I did this"... just for the attention. Trying to tell me there's nobody that when approached for this stalking plan, would play along and then blow the whole thing wide open, for attention, money, or even just moral opposition? There are plenty of people with nothing to lose or that don't fear the consequences as long as they can stick it to The Man.

[The Platypus]

This is paranoid, "they are onto me" game is nothing new, CT info nuts have been accusing anyone that disagrees with them as being an "agent" paid by the gov't to follow them around online and disagree with them, as part of some "disinfo" campaign, for as long as i can remember.

I've been called an agent and seen others called agents, more times than i can count. This very forum has been accused of being full of agents so many times, it's pathetic.

[Howie Felterbush]

This is nothing new, CT info nuts have been accusing anyone that disagrees with them as being an "agent" paid by the gov't to follow them around online and disagree with them as some "disinfo" campaign, for as long as i can remember.

I've been called an agent and seen others called agensts, more times than i can count. This very forum has been accused of being full of agents so many times, it's pathetic.

That's exactly the kind of thing they teach you to say in "agent" school.

:boxedin:

[Captain_Swoop]

Apparently as a Mod on BAUT I am also an 'Agent' of some sort.

I would like to know where they send the cheque.

[dudalb]

For me the good argument is if the Government really wanted to "get" somebody, drive them crazy, or scare the hell out them, there are much easier and surer and cheaper ways to do it then gang stalking.

[Eddie Dane]

For me the good argument is if the Government really wanted to "get" somebody, drive them crazy, or scare the hell out them, there are much easier and surer and cheaper ways to do it then gang stalking.

Exactly.

The costs of keeping suspected terrorists under surveillance are enormous.

What are these supposed 'gang stalkers' supposed to be paid with?
Theme park vouchers? Air miles?

[Sledge]

You've gotta remember that these stalkers aren't being paid. As FriendlyAndLively said back on page 3 of this thread:
Most of the people involved are (in my opinion) not 'professional gang stalkers'. However, there is apparently some government involvement.The government are involved, but people aren't getting paid for this. Now that really boggles my mind. The idea that the government would pay people to do this is nonsense, but the idea that people would do this for free? God damn.

[Eddie Dane]

And keep in mind that this is very different from informing on people when you happen to see them do something suspicious. This is confronting, labor-intensive and possibly dangerous stuff.

You know, confronting them in the street, having an argument about a parking space, breaking into their houses, switching the foot cream with their toothpaste, putting Celine Dion CD's in the Mötorhead cases, hiding their glasses in their shoes etc.

This is different from calling your friendly Stasi goon to inform him that your next door neighbor has been listening to BBC World again.

[Sledge]

That's what makes it so insane: the notion that scores of people are risking arrest and imprisonment just to mildly inconvenience someone they don't know. Batsqueak insane.

[Horatius]

That's what makes it so insane: the notion that scores of people are risking arrest and imprisonment just to mildly inconvenience someone they don't know. Batsqueak insane.



I'm glad you finally admit that those guys following me are psychotic nutbags! [/Paranoia]

[Sledge]

They're following you as well? :eek: We should meet up and discuss this.
*thinks*
Unless you're in on it and just trying to win my confidence so you can put my trousers in the sock drawer!

[Horatius]

They're following you as well? :eek: We should meet up and discuss this.
*thinks*
Unless you're in on it and just trying to win my confidence so you can put my trousers in the sock drawer!



My god! You're just as insane as the rest of them!

[FriendlyAndLively]

Hey, look! Even one of those crazy par-skitz "TI's" thinks there's no such thing as gang stalking!

http://areyoutargeted.com/2010/10/cia-disinformation-targeting/

[gnome]

"no such thing" is a dangerously unqualified statement. It implies that no gang has ever stalked anyone. Few people are in a position to know that with any confidence.

That is why I phrased it as skepticism that it exists as a widespread phenomenon.

[FriendlyAndLively]

I think we're all better off just assuming that anyone reporting these sorts of things is delusional. That way, we don't have to do anything.

I know that when I want to learn about the world, the very best way to do it is to hob-nob with a group of anonymous strangers who have gathered for a noble purpose, to categorize a group of people as delusional and make fun of them.

[LightinDarkness]

I think we're all better off just assuming that anyone reporting these sorts of things is delusional. That way, we don't have to do anything.

I know that when I want to learn about the world, the very best way to do it is to hob-nob with a group of anonymous strangers who have gathered for a noble purpose, to categorize a group of people as delusional and make fun of them.

I'm glad your back. I was worried about you.

There are two explanations for gang stalking, as we've discussed before:
1) There is a giant, malevolent conspiracy costing billions of dollars and involving millions of people that secretly coordinates to "target" individuals for no obvious reason and to "harass" them using tools and technology not even available to the military for no obvious purpose. Apparently, THEY would prefer to engage in all of this rather than just flat out killing these random people, which would be much cheaper/easier.

2) The reason why "gang stalking" targeted individuals exhibit the exact same symptoms as paranoid schizophrenics is because thats what they are, and by immersing yourself in these online gang stalking sites run by other ill people you are just making the delusions worse.

Now, one of these has all the evidence on its side, the other has 0 evidence for it. We're going with option 2 here because absolutely nothing has been presented to suggest otherwise. By the way, your little comments about "hob nobing with strangers and making fun of people" is just part of your delusion: no one here has made fun of you. We are genuinely concerned about your well being, as the best thing for you to do is seek treatment from a mental health professional but your illness is leading you to simply embrace the delusions. I am sorry you have to deal with this, and its terribly tragic, but its just a mental illusion.

[sadhatter]

I think we're all better off just assuming that anyone reporting these sorts of things is delusional. That way, we don't have to do anything.

I know that when I want to learn about the world, the very best way to do it is to hob-nob with a group of anonymous strangers who have gathered for a noble purpose, to categorize a group of people as delusional and make fun of them.

Can i ask why , instead of showing how the arguments against you are wrong, you choose to simply imply that the people arguing against you are not looking into the issue?

Points have been raised en masse about the logistical, social, and financial hurdles that would be in place for any "gang stalking" organization. Yet you ignore these.

It just doesn't make sense. If someone attempted to claim, for example, that anti homosexual activity ( a similar phenomenon, but a real, existent one) was non existent and that people were just delusional, i could provide examples of how they are wrong. Because i have access to real information, facts and figures. I wouldn't just try and say " your not looking into it" i would show them what they are not looking into , in a way that could not be denied.

But you on the other hand avoid this entirely, why would that be, other than the fact that

A) the information your basing your claims on is ethereal at best. And you know this. Further this would indicate that on some level that you know your beliefs are based on faulty evidence.

B) your having a laugh and don't want to let the subject die with the good points raised against you.

[carlitos]

I think we're all better off just assuming that anyone reporting these sorts of things is delusional. That way, we don't have to do anything.

I know that when I want to learn about the world, the very best way to do it is to hob-nob with a group of anonymous strangers who have gathered for a noble purpose, to categorize a group of people as delusional and make fun of them.

You missed this post; I'm sure it was just an oversight.
I've read the book before, but I don't have it handy. I'm sure it's available at your local library. I may eventually be able to get my hands on it again and provide a quote, but of course I can't do this immediately.
Liar

However, there is apparently some government involvement.
Evidence please?



As I've alluded to in a previous post, most of the gang stalkers are on a need to know basis. The small minority who really know what it's all about have extralegal incentives - ranging from blackmail to credible death threats - for not speaking up.
Evidence please?

What you're looking at is an open secret. Many police informants know they are being asked to harass people, how could they not know? They probably also realize the people they're being sent after have been targeted for extralegal harassment. What they don't know is just how extensive the targeting is.
Here would be a good place for you to give even one sourced example. One police informant that knows they are targeting a person and harassing them.

Thus far, you have provided zero evidence for your extraordinary claims. I would echo the previous posts and ask you to please seek help. Or, if you prefer, provide evidence for your claims.
Really, please feel free to answer any and all of the above.

As for your claim:
to categorize a group of people as delusional and make fun of them
I hope that FriendlyAndLively is OK.
:rolleyes:

[Ladewig]

I think we're all better off just assuming that anyone reporting these sorts of things is delusional.

That way, we don't have to do anything.

What would you have us go against such a government? Seriously, what would you have us do?

I know that when I want to learn about the world, the very best way to do it is to hob-nob with a group of anonymous strangers who have gathered for a noble purpose, to categorize a group of people as delusional and make fun of them.

I'm late to the thread, how many people were making fun of the sick people and how amny people were making fun of the people selling things to the sick people?

[Ladewig]

That's what makes it so insane: the notion that scores of people are risking arrest and imprisonment just to mildly inconvenience someone they don't know. Batsqueak insane.

Just to play devil's advocate.

If I were in charge of a government program to gang stalk people (and I am not). I would simply monitor local police activity for drug possession arrests. I'd show up, flash my badge and ask to talk to the suspect alone. I'd then tell him that his choices are to go to jail (and I will personally see that the judge is biased against him) or to do some chores for me. I'd explain that once a week, I want him to follow a person for a whole day. He is not to attack or threaten the subject in any way. If the subject notices him, he is to give the subject a suspicious look and leave. My suspect now has the choice of spending years in a state penitentiary or following a person without breaking any laws or causing the person any physical harm. I am untouchable, because even if the suspect tries to inform on me, I can say that his drug-addled mind made up the whole thing. Plus, I have the bonus that if the suspect decides to try to help the subject by approaching him and saying that the government is using blackmail to make people follow the subject, I have now tripled the paranoia of the subject and there is still no tangible evidence.

[LightinDarkness]

Just to play devil's advocate.

If I were in charge of a government program to gang stalk people (and I am not). I would simply monitor local police activity for drug possession arrests. I'd show up, flash my badge and ask to talk to the suspect alone. I'd then tell him that his choices are to go to jail (and I will personally see that the judge is biased against him) or to do some chores for me. I'd explain that once a week, I want him to follow a person for a whole day. He is not to attack or threaten the subject in any way. If the subject notices him, he is to give the subject a suspicious look and leave. My suspect now has the choice of spending years in a state penitentiary or following a person without breaking any laws or causing the person any physical harm. I am untouchable, because even if the suspect tries to inform on me, I can say that his drug-addled mind made up the whole thing. Plus, I have the bonus that if the suspect decides to try to help the subject by approaching him and saying that the government is using blackmail to make people follow the subject, I have now tripled the paranoia of the subject and there is still no tangible evidence.

Playing along with the scenario: If this sort of methodology were used, you mean to tell me that out of the tens of thousands (or more) drug possession arrests that happen every year, every single person has went along with this and no one at any time silently recorded the conversation, even though we have cases all the time of police interaction where a party silently recorded the entire event.

Of course, this also still leaves unresolved as to why the government would engage in such tactics and go to such lengths to gang stalk people. If the goal is to keep them silent on something, killing them would be cheaper and you'd be less likely to be caught.

[Toke]

It looks like you have explained both the gang stalking logistics and the conspiracy that keeps weed illegal. :D

ETA:
I take for granted that your plan include multiple layers of stalkers to stalk each others and ensure that all show up for their stalking duties.

[Ladewig]

Playing along with the scenario: If this sort of methodology were used, you mean to tell me that out of the tens of thousands (or more) drug possession arrests that happen every year, every single person has went along with this and no one at any time silently recorded the conversation, even though we have cases all the time of police interaction where a party silently recorded the entire event.

I think if I were a powerful member of the shadow government I could have the person searched and make the offer in such a way as to not be recorded. Furthermore, the person sent to make contact would not have any traceable connection to the Department of Gaslighting and Emotional Abuse.

Of course, this also still leaves unresolved as to why the government would engage in such tactics and go to such lengths to gang stalk people. If the goal is to keep them silent on something, killing them would be cheaper and you'd be less likely to be caught.

OK, you have revealed the crazy part of the whole scheme. I just wanted to point out that it could be done if the government were run by passive-aggressive sociopaths.


It looks like you have explained both the gang stalking logistics and the conspiracy that keeps weed illegal. :D

Yes. I like the way you think. You're hired.

ETA:
I take for granted that your plan include multiple layers of stalkers to stalk each others and ensure that all show up for their stalking duties.

Of course! You can't just tell potheads to do something and expect it to get done. You have to stalk the stalkers, too. And stalk the stalkers stalking the stalkers. And stalk....

OK, I see the flaw in my plan.

[Sledge]

Has anyone ever put forward a reasonable explanation as to why the government would engage in this activity?

[Hans]

http://www.mydocsonline.com/pub/Cmbattles/avatar1550_2.gifThey are incredibllllyyyyy evil?

[AaronAgassi]

From the article. I think this has very interesting implications about religion.

Sigmund Freud, the founder of Psychoanalysis, classified religion under “obsessional neurosis,” suggesting that a belief in a God was the result of an “immature infantile helplessness” to then seek comfort in the fantasy of an omnipotent protector.

[AaronAgassi]

The interplay of reality and delusion

The leading cause for feelings of persecution remains actual persecution. To begin with there is such widespread denial regarding bullying generally. People will tend to believe you if you tell them you've been robbed in the street, but often become the more credulous regarding accounts of mean spirited and devious harassment. Another manifestation of denial about gang stalking specifically, employs paranoid crank conspiracy theory. Much as pseudoscientific cranks deny that the Pyramids, for example, could ever have been constructed without the technology of ancient extraterrestrial astronauts, likewise the conspiracy theorists deny that gang stalking is possible without direct supervision from vast powers, cabals and shadow government, even though in reality, it's not really all that complicated or resource intensive: Just for example, any violent sociopath can call upon their sociopathic buddies for menacing surveillance in order to keep tabs upon and intimidate a terrified battered spouse. Any bullies can slink about and follow their target around the school yard, whispering malicious gossip and exerting exclusionary peer pressure right there behind the target's back. Soon the abuse escalates. And exactly such extremely damaging covert relational hostility propagates unchecked throughout every walk of life. But the delusional conspiracy theory accomplishes two things for the believer: Whereas constant harassment and social isolation understandably bring about feelings of helpless inadequacy, the imaginary drama of enmity with vast unseen powers promotes a sense of personal significance. Also, precisely by conjuring such an overwhelming and intangible enemy, conspiracy theory promotes passive inaction and relieves the stress of the difficult and frustrated responsibility to active resistance, but only deepening anxiety and depression in the long run.

Worse, paranoid crank conspiracy theory no matter how fantastical, has also always been a handy propaganda platform for hate speech such as even to inspire organized gang stalking, cause stalking, in the first place, if not pogrom outright. Conspiracy begins close to home. Bullies and thugs cooperate and network most readily and capably in isolating and victimizing targeted individuals. Organized gang stalking remains, after all, a pervasive behavior socially, a mode of bullying and abuse of power relationships that is so often one way or another community based and a feature of rising fascism.

Know more at at the CliqueBusters webpage

[carlitos]

And exactly such extremely damaging covert relational hostility propagates unchecked throughout every walk of life.

...

Bullies and thugs cooperate and network most readily and capably in isolating and victimizing targeted individuals. Could you please present some evidence for these assertions?

[mob123]

Actually, I recently purchased a voice recorder disguised as a watch, and took that to the office. So, I now have concrete evidence of this behavior by others. Note: that I said I "sometimes" follow the person to their cube - that could mean ONE time.

[mob123]

Words change their meanings over time. Calling someone gay rarely has anything to do with them being homosexual, any more than it is calling them happy or lacking restraint. In that context, "gay" simply means something along the lines of "the opposite of cool". In case you have trouble understanding that, "coo"l in that context does not refer to temperature.

What children calling each other gay has to do with your claims of gang stalking I have absolutely no idea.



Do you ride a Harley-Davidson?



So, you have a whole notebook full of records of your own stalking, but no evidence that anyone has ever stalked you. In fact, your own words clearly state that no-one has ever stalked you. Stalking involves repeated actions by an individual, by definition. Since that has not happened to you, you have not been stalked. End of story.
Actually, I recently purchased a voice recorder disguised as a wrist watch, and wore it at the office. And, now I have concrete evidence of the behavior of others. Also, note that I said that I "sometimes" follow the perpetrator back to their cube: that could mean ONE time.

[Skepdan]

It really depends on what people mean by "gangstalking" as to whether it's plausible or not.

Some are using the term to describe bullying and intimidation in the workplace (or school, college etc) involving a couple of people, but others are making extravagant claims involving the government, the police, mind control, the Illuminati and god-knows-what else.

We already have words like "harassment" and "bullying" to describe some of this behaviour, so to me the specific use of "gangstalking" usually implies something on a grander scale, involving the government, the police and so on.

[Greedo]

....

No, that's bullying. I think you a wrong idea what stalking means.
From the OED: "stalk... v. pursue stealthily; follow and harass..."

Actually, I recently purchased a voice recorder disguised as a watch, and took that to the office. So, I now have concrete evidence of this behavior by others.

So, you bought a disguised voice recorder and recorded people without their consent? Cool.



Note: that I said I "sometimes" follow the person to their cube - that could mean ONE time.

Actually, sometimes indicates that you do do it occasionally, meaning from time to time, meaning more than once.

What are you trying to say?


The interplay of reality and delusion
....
Know more at at the CliqueBusters webpage

What are you trying to say?
Gang stalking, in the way that the "victims" describe it, is certainly not possible.

[catsmate1]

Actually, I recently purchased a voice recorder disguised as a watch, and took that to the office. So, I now have concrete evidence of this behavior by others. Note: that I said I "sometimes" follow the person to their cube - that could mean ONE time.
Depending on your jurisdiction that may be illegal. Even if it was legal any distribution or publication of such recordings without consent may not be.

[Greedo]

Depending on your jurisdiction that may be illegal. Even if it was legal any distribution or publication of such recordings without consent may not be.

Even if not illegal, it still could probably get you fired...

[AaronAgassi]

Could you please present some evidence for these assertions?

That bullies operate in any number of social contexts? That bullies often work together sneakily and secretively? This is what you truly doubt?

[AaronAgassi]

It really depends on what people mean by "gangstalking" as to whether it's plausible or not.

Some are using the term to describe bullying and intimidation in the workplace (or school, college etc) involving a couple of people, but others are making extravagant claims involving the government, the police, mind control, the Illuminati and god-knows-what else.

We already have words like "harassment" and "bullying" to describe some of this behaviour, so to me the specific use of "gangstalking" usually implies something on a grander scale, involving the government, the police and so on.

Exactly so do the paranoid crank conspiracists insist, but I for one disagree.

[AaronAgassi]

Depending on your jurisdiction that may be illegal. Even if it was legal any distribution or publication of such recordings without consent may not be.

Spying with a hidden bug invading another's privacy is one thing, but electronically recording one's own experiences, already transcribed onto ones own brain in memory, can be no more illegal than simply taking notes! What is of more real and legitimate concern, is that for purposes of admissibility in court, in a public location such as a restaurant, there is less legitimate expectation of privacy than in, say, a private home. Hence stings on braggart bullies are increasingly precedented.

[AaronAgassi]

Even if not illegal, it still could probably get you fired...

Before getting fired, always consult your attorney in best preparation for the most profitable wrongful firing suit. Getting evidence is arguably part of pursuing grievance procedures. And getting fired for taking appropriate action in pursuit of grievance, is retaliation, and retaliation is worth triple damages!

[Toke]

Before getting fired, always consult your attorney in best preparation for the most profitable wrongful firing suit. Getting evidence is arguably part of pursuing grievance procedures. And getting fired for taking appropriate action in pursuit of grievance, is retaliation, and retaliation is worth triple damages!

So if you get fired for following your colleges around with a tape recorder, you will have the recordings to prove it? :confused:

How often do people get notified in advance of being fired?

[Safe-Keeper]

Tactic #1, going into people's homes on a regular basis and moving objects around or making small changes over time - that is known as Gaslighting. See the Wikipedia entry on that. It is a highly effective tactic for undermining a person's memory, and sanity. How many times have you said to yourself, "I know I put this somewhere, where is it?" Now imagine this sort of event occurs several times a week, or even multiple times a day.Interesting -- I've heard of ghosts being blamed for this countless times, but someone gaining entry into your house without you noticing to physically move your stuff around, or steal your belongings, borrower-style? That's a new one.

Kinda like how in the old days people believed that you could be kidnapped by supernatural beings like trolls or elves, while today we believe the same thing, only now it's extraterrestrials in futuristic spaceships.

[catsmate1]

Spying with a hidden bug invading another's privacy is one thing, but electronically recording one's own experiences, already transcribed onto ones own brain in memory, can be no more illegal than simply taking notes! What is of more real and legitimate concern, is that for purposes of admissibility in court, in a public location such as a restaurant, there is less legitimate expectation of privacy than in, say, a private home. Hence stings on braggart bullies are increasingly precedented.
You are wrong. Depending on the jurisdiction recording a conversation without the informed consent, in advance, of all participants may be illegal.
Some USAian examples.

For example: Wisconsin
If the person who records the wire, electronic, or oral communication is a party to the conversation or has obtained prior consent from one party, he may lawfully record and divulge the contents of the communication, unless he does so for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act.

(Wis. Stat. § 968.31.)
Under the statute, consent is not required for the taping of a non-electronic communication uttered by a person who does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that communication. See definition of “oral communication,”

(Wis. Stat. § 968.27.)
So if you are a participant you can record a conversation. Whereas in Illinois:
In Illinois, an eavesdropping device cannot be used to record or overhear a conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation. 720 Ill. Compiled Stat. Ann. 5/14-1, -2. An eavesdropping device is defined as anything used to hear or record a conversation, even if the conversation is conducted in person.There you'd need consent from all participants. Likewise in Pennsylvania.
In addition the rules on divulging any such recording to others varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

I suggest you obtain some like advice rather than relying on your own judgement.

[AaronAgassi]

Covert recordings have been admitted in court, without countercharges arising. But if in doubt, consult your attorney. And of course, there is also always YouTube and the court of public opinion.

[little grey rabbit]

Covert recordings have been admitted in court, without countercharges arising. But if in doubt, consult your attorney. And of course, there is also always YouTube and the court of public opinion.

Pffffft.

How do you go from suing your employer to the pitiful revenge of putting something on youtube?

[AaronAgassi]

I'm only listing additional options. Your own choices remain up to you. Shall I take it then, that I've answered satisfactorily as far as admissibility and liabiliy?

Besides, it all rather depends how much of an ass ones employer or any other unsuspecting thug or bully, can make of themselves! Conniving bullies dread exposure. Indeed, a well promoted video might even help in locating even more damning evidence and other crucial connections and resources.

[Checkmite]

I think the truism that one can be harassed and/or stalked at work or school by more than one person at a time is an attempt to bog skepticism of "gangstalking" down in semantics. What we're referring to as "gangstalking" is what support websites for "targeted individuals" calls gangstalking - generally a massive organized effort involving a multitude of cohorts, paid and unpaid, who follow the "targeted individual" everywhere and spy on him at all hours of the day and night using all manner of sophisticated equipment, especially types that don't actually function as these sites allege.

[carlitos]

I think the truism that one can be harassed and/or stalked at work or school by more than one person at a time is an attempt to bog skepticism of "gangstalking" down in semantics. What we're referring to as "gangstalking" is what support websites for "targeted individuals" calls gangstalking - generally a massive organized effort involving a multitude of cohorts, paid and unpaid, who follow the "targeted individual" everywhere and spy on him at all hours of the day and night using all manner of sophisticated equipment, especially types that don't actually function as these sites allege.

I agree. Let's use the term as those who believe it exists use the term.

Welcome to Gang stalking World

Gang Stalking is a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life. Using occupational health and safety laws, warning markers can be added to a targets file. Individuals can be added to a Threat Assessment List for monitoring. Once a target is flagged, a notification is sent out, and the target is followed around 24/7 by the various communities that they are in. A covert investigation might be opened, and electronic means used by the civilian spies as part of the covert monitoring and surveillance process.

[little grey rabbit]

I think the truism that one can be harassed and/or stalked at work or school by more than one person at a time is an attempt to bog skepticism of "gangstalking" down in semantics. What we're referring to as "gangstalking" is what support websites for "targeted individuals" calls gangstalking - generally a massive organized effort involving a multitude of cohorts, paid and unpaid, who follow the "targeted individual" everywhere and spy on him at all hours of the day and night using all manner of sophisticated equipment, especially types that don't actually function as these sites allege.

The trouble is no one ever and no one ever ponies up any evidence. I long ago came to the view that such people were in fact the very problem they claimed to be opposed to.

That's just human nature, I guess. I don't expect it to change any time soon or probably ever.

[little grey rabbit]

Another day and still no evidence of gang stalking? What a surprise.

[AaronAgassi]

This is getting distinctly Orwellian: I vigorously deplore and reject the semantics of a lunatic fringe so bent upon hijacking such a serious matter of discussion. Actually, it remains gravely significant what evil stalkers collaborating together can accomplish. And I am extremely concerned with the discredit done to a very real and growing hate crime, done by the tabloid weird fantasies of paranoid crank conspiracists, and the sly truth suppression that exploits all said madness in cynical propaganda denial.

Indeed, as for the more moderate and reasonable claims, what would be acceptable for evidence? Believe you me, I am all for getting the goods!

[carlitos]

This is getting distinctly Orwellian: I vigorously deplore and reject the semantics of a lunatic fringe so bent upon hijacking such a serious matter of discussion. Actually, it remains gravely significant what evil stalkers collaborating together can accomplish. And I am extremely concerned with the discredit done to a very real and growing hate crime, done by the tabloid weird fantasies of paranoid crank conspiracists, and the sly truth suppression that exploits all said madness in cynical propaganda denial.

Indeed, as for the more moderate and reasonable claims, what would be acceptable for evidence? Believe you me, I am all for getting the goods!

Hi AaronAgassi,

It's unclear to me what you are responding to here. What is getting Orwellian? Who are the lunatic fringe? What is the growing and real hate crime?

In the future, if you are replying to a specific point, you could use the quote button.

[AaronAgassi]

Checkmite posted: What we're referring to as "gangstalking" is what support websites for "targeted individuals" calls gangstalking - generally a massive organized effort involving a multitude of cohorts, paid and unpaid, who follow the "targeted individual" everywhere and spy on him at all hours of the day and night using all manner of sophisticated equipment, especially types that don't actually function as these sites allege.

carlitos, you chimed right in: I agree. Let's use the term as those who believe it exists use the term.

Well, I say ******** to all of that! What is Orwellian, to reiterate since you ask, is how the paranoid conspiracy cranks have seized onto shunning and mobbing tactics and behavior manifest everywhere with a long history, and hijacked the conversation. What is even more Orwellian is how denial and trivialization of pandemic bullying in the schoolyard, the workplace, the neighborhood, and just about any other walk of life, seizes onto the conveniently flagrant lunacy of the paranoid conspiracy cranks, in order to lump together and summarily dismiss virtually all complaints of abuse a'priori.

[Horatius]

Well, I say ******** to all of that! What is Orwellian, to reiterate since you ask, is how the paranoid conspiracy cranks have seized onto shunning and mobbing tactics and behavior manifest everywhere with a long history, and hijacked the conversation. What is even more Orwellian is how denial and trivialization of pandemic bullying in the schoolyard, the workplace, the neighborhood, and just about any other walk of life, seizes onto the conveniently flagrant lunacy of the paranoid conspiracy cranks, in order to lump together and summarily dismiss virtually all complaints of abuse a'priori.


Yes, except you're the only one who applies the term "gang stalking" to "pandemic bullying". "Gang stalking" was a term created by the "paranoid conspiracy cranks" to describe their alleged experiences.

Trying to now insist that we should refer to workplace bullying and the like does everyone a disservice, in that it muddies the water, and makes it unclear what the **** you're talking about.

So, it's you who are making it possible to "lump together and summarily dismiss virtually all complaints of abuse a'priori", by trying to co-opt a term crated by others.

If you want to complain about pandemic workplace bullying, just call it that. Everyone will understand what you mean, and won't lump you in with the "The government rearranged my furniture!" crowd.

[carlitos]

Checkmite posted: What we're referring to as "gangstalking" is what support websites for "targeted individuals" calls gangstalking - generally a massive organized effort involving a multitude of cohorts, paid and unpaid, who follow the "targeted individual" everywhere and spy on him at all hours of the day and night using all manner of sophisticated equipment, especially types that don't actually function as these sites allege.

carlitos, you chimed right in: I agree. Let's use the term as those who believe it exists use the term.

Well, I say ******** to all of that! What is Orwellian, to reiterate since you ask, is how the paranoid conspiracy cranks have seized onto shunning and mobbing tactics and behavior manifest everywhere with a long history, and hijacked the conversation. What is even more Orwellian is how denial and trivialization of pandemic bullying in the schoolyard, the workplace, the neighborhood, and just about any other walk of life, seizes onto the conveniently flagrant lunacy of the paranoid conspiracy cranks, in order to lump together and summarily dismiss virtually all complaints of abuse a'priori.

Hi Aaron,
I can't understand what you mean here. The red part seems to disagree with the green part.

Could you please answer simply, and without a lot of drama:

Do you claim that "gang stalking," per the definitions I posted above, exists as claimed?

or

Are you interested in "pandemic bullying," which is a different thing?

or

Thanks.

[Horatius]

Hi Aaron,
I can't understand what you mean here. The red part seems to disagree with the green part.



That's because he's trying to quote people, but not using the quote tags.

This is what he meant:




What we're referring to as "gangstalking" is what support websites for "targeted individuals" calls gangstalking - generally a massive organized effort involving a multitude of cohorts, paid and unpaid, who follow the "targeted individual" everywhere and spy on him at all hours of the day and night using all manner of sophisticated equipment, especially types that don't actually function as these sites allege.


I agree. Let's use the term as those who believe it exists use the term.


Well, I say ******** to all of that! What is Orwellian, to reiterate since you ask, is how the paranoid conspiracy cranks have seized onto shunning and mobbing tactics and behavior manifest everywhere with a long history, and hijacked the conversation. What is even more Orwellian is how denial and trivialization of pandemic bullying in the schoolyard, the workplace, the neighborhood, and just about any other walk of life, seizes onto the conveniently flagrant lunacy of the paranoid conspiracy cranks, in order to lump together and summarily dismiss virtually all complaints of abuse a'priori.


Does it make sense now?

[AaronAgassi]

carlitos, when I posted: "Well, I say ******** to all of that!" I meant: to Hell with your statement, not to Hell with the circumstances that which you where inaccurately describing. I hope that clears things up.

Why predatory gang stalking?? Because that's a descriptive label for an important part of the problem. Mobbing may often include gang stalking, but not always Have you ever been stalked by more than one person at a time, in concert? And how do you know that the cranks coined the term: "gang stalking."? I'll need to research that. Actually, the term may have originally applied in the study of Mussolini's rise to power. Secondly, what difference does it make? It is perfectly sensible for me to say that a phenomena that would quality as gang stalking does occur, even while remaining adamant in rejecting the crank embellishments. -Much as science permitted to speculate on the possibility of microbial life under the permafrost on mars, without having to answer for crank Ufology. I will not let you tar the credibility of what is real and reasonable, by linguistically equating it with crankery. I do not owe that to you, simply because you declare one usage privileged over the other. And clearly, I have declared mu position and am not trying to smuggle in anything by the back door. So contend with what I actually say rather than what you think that I am obliged to say.

[Checkmite]

I will not let you tar the credibility of what is real and reasonable, by linguistically equating it with crankery.

You are linguistically equating it with crankery by deliberately using terminology popularized by cranks. Kind of like how Wicca practitioners decided to start calling themselves "witches" and then complained about being unfairly stereotyped as evil, even though the word "witch" had been associated with evil for centuries before they decided to use it.

[AaronAgassi]

Oh yeah? Well the cranks agree with you! Nevertheless, I am taking back a term misappropriated for crank distortion, and throwing it back at them. I oppose their flaming and suppression of all discussion of the problem that doesn't focus upon and conform to crank fantasy.

Incidentally, the Wiccans are correct on that one score: Historically, evil witches are a stereotype arising in the persecution of folkways. And they are within their rights to say so. The only criticism to be offered is that the point might be diversionary from other questions entirely.

[Horatius]

-Much as science permitted to speculate on the possibility of microbial life under the permafrost on mars, without having to answer for crank Ufology.



Yes, but when scientists discuss such subjects, they don't call it "ufological life" or "greys" or "reptillians", as they know those terms are used by the whackjobs.


Show that there are a large number of people using the term "gang stalking" to describe real-world bullying tactics, and you might have a point, but:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gang+stalking


virtually all the hits you'll find on that term are the crazy ones. That's not "Orwellian", that's just how language works. If you refuse to use language the way most other people use it, you've got only yourself to blame for being misunderstood.

[Checkmite]

Oh yeah? Well the cranks agree with you! Nevertheless, I am taking back a term misappropriated for crank distortion, and throwing it back at them. I oppose their flaming and suppression of all discussion of the problem that doesn't focus upon and conform to crank fantasy.

Well good luck and godspeed with that; but you'll have to come to expect the confusion that inevitably ensues from such efforts. Just ask the atheists here what happened a few years back when they tried to change their popular name from "atheists" to "Brights". It failed pretty painfully.

[Myron Proudfoot]

Speaking of gang-stalking. A mentally ill woman who stabbed several strangers in a store six years ago just did it again. She taped knives together to make a double-bladed weapon.

Starks provided her account of the Nordstrom incident to mental health professionals, saying that her “sole purpose for buying the knives and stabbing the victims with the knives was to send a message to the people that have been stalking her and following her for many years,” a doctor wrote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/woman-recently-released-from-psychiatric-facility-accused-in-stabbing-at-target-in-maryland/2011/10/12/gIQARawMgL_story.html

[AaronAgassi]

Oh yeah? Well the cranks agree with you! Nevertheless, I am taking back a term misappropriated for crank distortion, and throwing it back at them. I oppose their flaming and suppression of all discussion of the problem that doesn't focus upon and conform to crank fantasy.
Well good luck and godspeed with that; but you'll have to come to expect the confusion that inevitably ensues from such efforts. Just ask the atheists here what happened a few years back when they tried to change their popular name from "atheists" to "Brights". It failed pretty painfully.
When I am in online conversation with someone perfectly mild and civil who complains of suffering whatever bewildering paranoid experience, then all that I might try to suggest is that if they are indeed being gas lighted or gang stalked, it might be by the punk down the street and a hand full of cronies, rather than the global Illuminati with brain lasers! It would not make sense to tell them that at most they are only being mobbed because there is no such thing as gang stalking because it's not gang stalking unless it includes Tabloid Weird embellishment! It's hard enough as it is dealing with all the third party vitriol for daring to doubt conspiracist dogma!

And yes, there are important articles and videos on gang stalking that do not evoke Tabloid Weird conspiracism, particularly such as allege cause stalking and vigilante gang stalking, identifying the typical perpetrators as thugly cop wannabee losers! -Or such as focus upon rising Fascism and community based mobbing. But the lunatic conspiracists only tend to gloss over such fine distinctions.

[carlitos]

... Conniving bullies ...

... evil stalkers collaborating together ...

... shunning and mobbing tactics and behavior manifest everywhere ... pandemic bullying in the schoolyard, the workplace, the neighborhood, and just about any other walk of life...

...Why predatory gang stalking?? Because that's a descriptive label for an important part of the problem. Mobbing may often include gang stalking, but not always...
Hi AaronAgassi,

I see that you reject the definition of "gang stalking" as posted by those who say they are victims of "gang stalking." It's known that "gang stalking" per their definition doesn't exist. It's a manifestation of paranoid schizophrenia.

What might clear things up is if you could say what, exactly, you wish "gang stalking" to mean in this discussion? What do you claim is happening, and to whom?

Have you ever been stalked by more than one person at a time, in concert?
No.
And how do you know that the cranks coined the term: "gang stalking."?
Here is what the "cranks" (your word) posted at http://gangstalkingworld.com/ I'm taking them at their word.
Gang Stalking is a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life. Using occupational health and safety laws, warning markers can be added to a targets file. Individuals can be added to a Threat Assessment List for monitoring. Once a target is flagged, a notification is sent out, and the target is followed around 24/7 by the various communities that they are in. A covert investigation might be opened, and electronic means used by the civilian spies as part of the covert monitoring and surveillance process.



I'll need to research that. Actually, the term may have originally applied in the study of Mussolini's rise to power. No.

Secondly, what difference does it make? It is perfectly sensible for me to say that a phenomena that would quality as gang stalking does occur, even while remaining adamant in rejecting the crank embellishments. What would be helpful is for you to state exactly what you believe is happening, and to whom, and to provide evidence for your claim.

-Much as science permitted to speculate on the possibility of microbial life under the permafrost on mars, without having to answer for crank Ufology. I will not let you tar the credibility of what is real and reasonable, by linguistically equating it with crankery. I do not owe that to you, simply because you declare one usage privileged over the other. And clearly, I have declared mu position and am not trying to smuggle in anything by the back door. So contend with what I actually say rather than what you think that I am obliged to say.I am trying to "contend with what you actually say." You have said "conniving bullies" and "evil stalkers" and "mobbing" and "shunning" and "pandemic bullying" and "community-based mobbing" and even "rising Fascism." I can't tell exactly what your point is.

Oh yeah? Well the cranks agree with you! Nevertheless, I am taking back a term misappropriated for crank distortion, and throwing it back at them. I oppose their flaming and suppression of all discussion of the problem that doesn't focus upon and conform to crank fantasy.
....I'm afraid that you don't get to "take back" a term, by posting in an online discussion forum. Words mean what they mean. If you wish to claim that something is happening, please state it clearly, using terms that we all can understand.

[catsmate1]

Speaking of gang-stalking. A mentally ill woman who stabbed several strangers in a store six years ago just did it again. She taped knives together to make a double-bladed weapon.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/woman-recently-released-from-psychiatric-facility-accused-in-stabbing-at-target-in-maryland/2011/10/12/gIQARawMgL_story.html
Slightly off topic.
OK I'm all in favour of not locking people up in mental health facilities unnecessarily but that supervised release programme either needs better controls or more supervision; two cases, two dead, three injured.:boggled:

[carlitos]

Slightly off topic.
Not really:
Starks, 55, who has received a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia,

...

Starks provided her account of the Nordstrom incident to mental health professionals, saying that her “sole purpose for buying the knives and stabbing the victims with the knives was to send a message to the people that have been stalking her and following her for many years,” a doctor wrote.

[AaronAgassi]

It seems that you at least skirt the logical falsity of argument from definition, caerlitos: For example, a common logical falsity of argument from definition by pro-lifers, is the assertion that conception is the beginning of life, because that is the definition of the word. It remains, nevertheless, that conception is the inception of development of a new individual of whichever species. Obviously, the gametes that fused together, where already alive. Life began and continued in an unbroken chain, from the primordial ooze. For another example, consider the Biblical story of Jonah, swallowed by a whale. Indeed, there are real life documented stories of individuals swallowed by whales, and surviving inside. But literally, in the Torah, Jonah is swallowed by a great fish! For the ancients new nothing of Cetaceans, sea going bovines. But whereas whales suck in great fetid breaths before submerging, a human being would surely only quickly drown, trapped inside a giant water breathing fish! Obviously, whales are not fish. The question is Empirical, not linguistic. As can be seen from the examples of conception and whales, definitions or word usage, merely constitute hypotheses. And inflexible definition even in the face of new evidence, is dogmatic, as in the case of the paranoid crank conspiracy theorists. But it doesn't make them right, any more than the pro-lifers. Gang stalking too, is not as the words are employed by cranks who have misappropriated the term, but as howsoever actually occurs, an Empirical question, not linguistics. And vigilante cause stalking is a serious problem. And so is any predatory group stalking arising as part of mobbing in any social context. So yes, I can take back words for purpose of accurate usage is a good cause. And yes I can do it on an online message board. Don't blink, I just did it again! In order to challenge untruth, it makes no sense to protect inaccurate definitions! Honestly, caerlitos, I wonder if you are not simply trying to discredit the truth by so indelibly linking it to the crazy and disallowing the distinction on linguistic grounds. The current prevalent usage, after all, derives only from deliberate massively noisy repetition, big lie principle, surely all trumped Ontologically. Gang stalking is either conducted by super secret global cabals and shadow government, or else it is not. Gang stalking is either conducted by others than super secret global cabals and shadow government, or else it is not. What to suppose as likeliest, is only a matter of parsimony of explanation.

[calebprime]

Yes, but when scientists discuss such subjects, they don't call it "ufological life" or "greys" or "reptillians", as they know those terms are used by the whackjobs.


Show that there are a large number of people using the term "gang stalking" to describe real-world bullying tactics, and you might have a point, but:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gang+stalking


virtually all the hits you'll find on that term are the crazy ones. That's not "Orwellian", that's just how language works. If you refuse to use language the way most other people use it, you've got only yourself to blame for being misunderstood.

Spying with a hidden bug invading another's privacy is one thing, but electronically recording one's own experiences, already transcribed onto ones own brain in memory, can be no more illegal than simply taking notes! What is of more real and legitimate concern, is that for purposes of admissibility in court, in a public location such as a restaurant, there is less legitimate expectation of privacy than in, say, a private home. Hence stings on braggart bullies are increasingly precedented.


Laws and language are a matter of convention, surely. Here in Massachusetts, the police will arrest you and prosecute you for recording people without those people's consent. (Especially if you record the police.)

Language works the same way. Words mean whatever any large-enough group of people agree that they mean, and however they use them.

That being said, though, you could answer what Carlitos wanted to know--he was asking for clarification.

Is there some reason why you didn't respond to that part of Carlitos' post?

[AaronAgassi]

That has the ring of sheer timid and conflict averse urban mythology, calebprime. I would really be surprised if no covert recordings where ever admitted into evidence, let alone that they were all accepted as grounds for counter charges, even in Massachusetts. I invite you to double check your information.

Regarding linguistics, asked and answered. You are only gainsaying, repeating a disputed initial claim without fresh counterargument. Indeed, how does widest usage a'priori become so privileged? Doesn't that, in and of itself, already smack of the Orwellian? Those who appear to have initiated the discourse upon vigilante gang stalking made no connection to fantastic conspiracism. Nor do those who discourse upon community based mobbing and rising fascism. Nor do the victims of Church of Scientology "fair game" tactics. So, what loyalty to we owe to the Orwellian distortions, to begin with of the conspuracists hijacking the conversations, and then to the apologists in denial of bullying taking advantage of so indelible an association in the public consciousness?

[calebprime]

Here's the (Mass.) law. I don't like it, as I like to do field recording with a directional mic. So I simply ask people. I don't record without their consent.


http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/massachusetts-recording-law

Massachusetts's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. Massachusetts makes it a crime to secretly record an in-person or telephone conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99. If you are operating in Massachusetts, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording a telephone call or conversation, unless it is absolutely clear to everyone involved that you recording (i.e., it is not "secret").

As for language, if enough people say that "phat" means cool, awesome, commendable, neato, rad, then that's what "phat" means. Meaning is usage.

It's only really Orwellian if a small clique is purposefully controlling the flow of news, and if they're dictating language use, for the purpose of mind-control, or political control.

But these are tangents. Carlitos simply wanted to know what you meant.

[catsmate1]

Laws and language are a matter of convention, surely. Here in Massachusetts, the police will arrest you and prosecute you for recording people without those people's consent. (Especially if you record the police.)
I already tried to explain to him that, depending on the jurisdiction, being a participant to a conversation doesn't necessarily give one the right to record it; he doesn't seem to want to accept this.

[carlitos]

Regarding linguistics, asked and answered. You are only gainsaying, repeating a disputed initial claim without fresh counterargument. Indeed, how does widest usage a'priori become so privileged? Doesn't that, in and of itself, already smack of the Orwellian? Those who appear to have initiated the discourse upon vigilante gang stalking made no connection to fantastic conspiracism. Nor do those who discourse upon community based mobbing and rising fascism. Nor do the victims of Church of Scientology "fair game" tactics. So, what loyalty to we owe to the Orwellian distortions, to begin with of the conspuracists hijacking the conversations, and then to the apologists in denial of bullying taking advantage of so indelible an association in the public consciousness?

AaronAgassi, I asked a really simple question. It's not about linguistics. It's not "Orwellian." Here it is, again:

What do you claim is happening, and to whom?

I don't care if you label it Fascism, Scientology, mobbing, whatever. Please, could you please explain what you think is happening, and to whom? Thanks.

[Kid Eager]

That has the ring of sheer timid and conflict averse urban mythology, calebprime. I would really be surprised if no covert recordings where ever admitted into evidence, let alone that they were all accepted as grounds for counter charges, even in Massachusetts. I invite you to double check your information.

Regarding linguistics, asked and answered. You are only gainsaying, repeating a disputed initial claim without fresh counterargument. Indeed, how does widest usage a'priori become so privileged? Doesn't that, in and of itself, already smack of the Orwellian? Those who appear to have initiated the discourse upon vigilante gang stalking made no connection to fantastic conspiracism. Nor do those who discourse upon community based mobbing and rising fascism. Nor do the victims of Church of Scientology "fair game" tactics. So, what loyalty to we owe to the Orwellian distortions, to begin with of the conspuracists hijacking the conversations, and then to the apologists in denial of bullying taking advantage of so indelible an association in the public consciousness?

You appear to be trying to conflate two issues: the common use (and perceived hijacking) of the term "gangstalking", and denial of bullying.

One does not lead to the other. Nobody here, in re-reading the posts, is denying bullying. Several people have, however, been discussing the use of the term gangstalking and your unconventional definition of it.

It would be useful if perhaps you could get to the point of this thread without getting hung up on the term - unless that is your point?

[AaronAgassi]

I followed your link, thanks, calebprime, Most alarming! No wonder the law is coming under challenge.

carlitos, all kinds of different things can happen and sometimes actually are happening to different people, even within whatever spectrum, category or set of events and doings. What exactly are you asking me?

Kid Eager, allow ne to attempt clarification: Step one: crank conspiracists hijack the conversation, drowning out serious discourse upon gang stalking and indelibly linking any concept at all of gang stalking (collective collaborative generally convert harassment of an individual that first involves pursuit and surveillance, so that whatever modes of devious harassment then likewise follow the moving target) with all manner of fantastic urban mythologies of conspiracism. Step two, the apologists in denial of bullying, then seize upon the latter loony and inaccurate association in order to discredit all manner of claims of abuse, especially as contexted within any social context. Result: Both conspiracists and apologists for bullying together denounce all claims of abuse that are realistic.

[Horatius]

Step one: crank conspiracists hijack the conversation,



Problem is, you haven't established that this actually is "step one". The point is, the cranks haven't "hijacked" the discussion of gang stalking, they were the ones who created the discussion in the first place.

Go ahead and dispute that, but unless you can provide clear evidence of a widespread discussion of non-crank gang stalking prior to the rise of the crank version, it is, in fact, you who are attempting to hijack their term.

[carlitos]

gang stalking (collective collaborative generally convert harassment of an individual that first involves pursuit and surveillance, so that whatever modes of devious harassment then likewise follow the moving target)

The vast majority of people claiming the above are simply paranoid schizophrenics. There is no reason for anyone to "collectively collaborate on covert harassment" of an ordinary individual. Especially the ridiculous gang-stalking claims like "they rearranged my furniture when I was at work" and nonsense like that.

Step two, the apologists in denial of bullyingAgain, no one here is denying bullying. You are arguing against a straw man that you have created.

Again, please - Who is doing What to Whom? Of course all kinds of things can happen. What are you claiming that is happening?

[carlitos]

Result: Both conspiracists and apologists for bullying together denounce all claims of abuse that are realistic.

OK, maybe you don't understand my question that you keep not answering.

How's this - can you please give an example of a "realistic claim of abuse" that has been "denounced" by someone, somewhere, due to this theory of yours?

[AaronAgassi]

You need me to cite for you instances of anyone denying or trivializing bullying?

[AaronAgassi]

Let's try this: Take the crank conspiracist delusion of gang stalking, and remove the crank elements. First remove the exotic technology. Then remove the pervasive super secret world controlling cabals and shadow government. Imagine tasking the smallest possible number of bullying perpetrators. locally. Or, if you understand shunning and mobbing, imagine a mobile target and therefore add covert pursuit and surveillance. Optionally, include gas lighting. Add character assassination along social networks in order to encourage relational bullying.

[Kid Eager]

Let's try this: Take the crank conspiracist delusion of gang stalking, and remove the crank elements. First remove the exotic technology. Then remove the pervasive super secret world controlling cabals and shadow government. Imagine tasking the smallest possible number of bullying perpetrators. locally. Or, if you understand shunning and mobbing, imagine a mobile target and therefore add covert pursuit and surveillance. Optionally, include gas lighting. Add character assassination along social networks in order to encourage relational bullying.

okay, we have a definition - I think.

Now what is the point of this thread?

[AaronAgassi]

I had hoped that winnowing reasonable from crazy, likely from unlikely, even honesty from dishonesty and truth from falsehood, in the matter at hand, might have come anywhere into our agenda for discussion.

[AaronAgassi]

(Am I up to 15 posts yet?)

Know more at: http://www.FoolQuest.com/cliquebusters.htm#organized

[carlitos]

AaronAgassi,

Thanks. From the link you just provided:

Psychological warfare and covert relational hostility via organized orchestrated harassment

Any need of maintaining at all plausible appearances and rationalizations will tend to rule out the more overt mimesis of bullying in favor of whatever ambient or stealth abuse secretly or at least deniably. Therefore, often protected by abuse of power curried well in advance and usually also coordinated together with a wider disinformation campaign of damaging malicious gossip, an organized campaign of harassment is organized by cliques of sociopathic serial bullies, and deviously orchestrated against the target of bullying. Individual harassment episodes involving a handful of participants are carefully planned and arranged for the isolated and bewildered target of bullying to experience in a social environment thereby turned palpably hostile and frightening.

Whenever possible, and in whatever social context, cliques of bullies will consistently strive to pressure and estrange all others from the target of bullying. Not only are current friends and acquaintances pressured, but all potential new connections are obstructed or misdirected under any pretexts or by whatever defamation, disruptive dirty tricks of covert relational hostility, intimidation and intrigues of abuse of power.

Gas lighting is typically employed in order to condition and sensitize the target of bullying to certain cues that can be more readily employed to elicit stressful and maddening hypervigilance in the hapless target of bullying, to make them seem all the more haunted and undesirable, even in moments or upon occasions when in actuality only a small number of the bullies or unwitting proxies and utter tools are at all available within the harassment perimeter of the target of bullying for the ambient or stealth abuse that is organized gang stalking, and therefore there is no way for the target thereof to know how deeply community based or not.

...

Gang Stalking ... seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life ... the target is followed around 24/7 by the various communities ... Everyone in the targets life is contacted ... Advised not to discuss the notification and asked to be a part of the ongoing, never ending monitoring (systemic harassment) process ... harassed and placed under surveillance in this way for months or even years before they realize that they are being targeted by an organized protocol of harassment. [stalkers are] only to be seen in twos -- we often do not have the same proof -- Watching and recording the everyday activities...

The highlighted phrase is exactly what I posted earlier. "Gang stalking" doesn't exist. It's a manifestation of paranoid schizophrenia. No.

The wording on that site is very familiar. Have you been cutting / pasting these definitions here?

[carlitos]

Optionally, include gas lighting.

I have to ask why you were rejecting this definition and the gang stalking website before? Your site says exactly the same thing.

Gang Stalking -- Fair Gaming -- Freemason Silent Dagger -- Harassment -- Gaslighting

Gang Stalking is nearly identical to scientology's Fair Gaming, and the Freemason's Silent Daggar -- beginning with discrediting the target. To see what I mean, Google the term 'Gang Stalking' -- or 'Freemason Silent Dagger' -- it looks like the practice is far more widespread. Countless gangs of people worldwide, known as Gang Stalkers are available to scientology. It is huge, and it's happening daily, in your neighborhood, right under your nose.

I have seen many fruitless forum discussions about scientology's Fair Game, which always end up the same. Such as; there aren't enough OSA agents -- OSA is toothless these days -- you couldn't hire enough private investigators (PI's) to do the job.

Yet it is very rare to see the term 'Gang Stalking' referenced on scientology space cult blogs.

The best site I know of is: www.GangStalkingWorld.com -- here's an excerpt...

Gang Stalking ... seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life ... the target is followed around 24/7 by the various communities ... Everyone in the targets life is contacted ... Advised not to discuss the notification and asked to be a part of the ongoing, never ending monitoring (systemic harassment) process ... harassed and placed under surveillance in this way for months or even years before they realize that they are being targeted by an organized protocol of harassment. [stalkers are] only to be seen in twos -- we often do not have the same proof -- Watching and recording the everyday activities...

Sorry, the above doesn't happen. It's paranoia.

[Checkmite]

Tell me more about the "Freemason Silent Daggar". I'm intrigued.

[AaronAgassi]

carlitos, Gang stalking occurs and exists. There are people who do it to other people. "Gang Stalking" in scare quotes, such as necessarily must include fanciful elements of paranoid crank conspiracism, specifically: super secret masterfully all controlling cabals and shadow government equipped with exotic technology, does not exist. But it is a lie to suggest that simply because "Gang Stalking" as in scare quotes does not exist, real gang stalking (which indeed in actuality is hardly so resource intensive or difficult), is therefore manifestly impossible. Mythical "Gang Stalking" is purportedly omnipresent and omniscient in surveillance. Real psychological warfare of actual gang stalking in its mysterious intermittence, night simply feel that way.

FoolQuest.com is mine. Hence the same voice as mu posts here. Articulating myself in debate, helps me netter revise and improve my webpage.

Checkmite, you appear to have clicked a link from my Cliquebusters page to content offsite.

[Kid Eager]

carlitos, Gang stalking occurs and exists. There are people who do it to other people. "Gang Stalking" in scare quotes, such as necessarily must include fanciful elements of paranoid crank conspiracism, specifically: super secret masterfully all controlling cabals and shadow government equipped with exotic technology, does not exist. But it is a lie to suggest that simply because "Gang Stalking" as in scare quotes does not exist, real gang stalking, which indeed in actuality is hardly so resource intensive or difficult, is therefore manifestly impossible.

FoolQuest.com is mine. Hence the same voice as mu posts here. Articulating myself in debate, helps me netter revise and improve.

Checkmite, you appear to have clicked a link from my Cliquebusters page to content offsite.

Your website needs considerable work - its look and feel appears to have been inspired by the Timecube website. It does you no favours in whatever debate you are trying to articulate.

[carlitos]

carlitos, Gang stalking occurs and exists. There are people who do it to other people.
Please provide evidence that gang stalking, as you describe, exists. You will be the first to do so here.

[AaronAgassi]

What are the appropriate standards of evidence?

[carlitos]

What are the appropriate standards of evidence?

I'd settle for one case even being described effectively. If you could describe the facts for one "gang stalking" case in a concise manner, that would help.

Who is targeted?
Where are they targeted?
What are the "stalkers" doing? How are they "stalking?"
Most importantly - WHY? Why was an individual targeted? Who benefits from "gang stalking" that individual?

For evidence, I'd accept anything beyond the word of the "targeted individual."

[AaronAgassi]

I'm going to begin with your third question, carlitos: "What are the "stalkers" doing? How are they "stalking?"" Answer: Often essentially vigilantes, the stalkers may think if their howsoever covert or clandestine as: surveillance. But the stalking is seldom limited to unobtrusive observation. Gang stalkers are engaged in mobile covert relational hostility with incitation and even coercion towards shunning and mobbing. Where? In my case, at particular social events that they have completely poisoned for me. Cyber-bullying, too. I only hope that it will never escalate to the point of actually spilling out onto the sidewalks of my home town!

As for evidence, other than from online, all I have is my own experience and heresy of gang stalking against me that I had not hither to been aware, things overheard and how pthers had been approached. I have my self also been intimidated in efforts to isolate another. Divide and conquer! I'd only love to lay hands upon hard evidence. Would you be interested in helping me pr anyone else in a similar predicament, get covert video? Would you even just stick up for anyone you ever see being bullied, even very sneakily? Or better still, might you pretend to approve, and get the bullies bragging? Would that be evidence enough?

Motives? Covert relational hostility and bullying which is generally both heteronymous and sadistic, often takes the form of cockblocking: The purpose is sex, power, Existential validation. Take your pick! Or ask them. They won't say, of course. But some of those ******** simply owe me money.

[calebprime]

Your website needs considerable work - its look and feel appears to have been inspired by the Timecube website. It does you no favours in whatever debate you are trying to articulate.

I was going to say the same. You seem to be pretty articulate, but all the crazy colors, all the links, make it hard and strange to read.

I speak as one who, when I posted some of my first threads here, thought it was somehow more vivid or more clear to use different fonts and colors for emphasis. It's not. Instead, my posts just looked wacky.

Any document that's intended to communicate (as opposed to just being notes to yourself) should probably wear unobtrusive garb, not something that strains the eyes.

[deeper]

I'm going to begin with your third question, carlitos: "What are the "stalkers" doing? How are they "stalking?"" Answer: Often essentially vigilantes

You mentioned vigilanteism earlier, as the "evidence" you have offered only relates to yourself, what is the "perceived crime" that inspired this vigilanteism?

In my case, at particular social events that they have completely poisoned for me.

Could you provide detail on how they achieved this?

[Pup]

Everyone in the targets life is contacted ... Advised not to discuss the notification and asked to be a part of the ongoing, never ending monitoring (systemic harassment) process
Sorry, the above doesn't happen. It's paranoia.

Indeed, the part I quoted is the weak link.

I had a rival try the above on me, maybe 10 or 12 years ago. At the time, we were both vendors in a fairly small hobby and also both wanting to influence the direction the hobby was taking, so she had motivation to discredit me.

She tried secretly, as I found out later, to contact some mutual acquaintences with false accusations about me. Guess what? People are people; they don't necessarily believe what others tell them, or do what others say.

The whole thing blew up when she misjudged and contacted someone who realized what she was trying to do, told me about it, and I exposed the whole thing.

Sure, there are bullies with their cliques, and they can make life miserable for their victims. But it is indeed paranoia to think that if a stranger approached those close to you and invited them to help gangstalk you, all of your friends, family and acquaintances would either join in or keep quiet and let it continue. Human nature just doesn't work that way.

[carlitos]

I'm going to begin with your third question, carlitos: "What are the "stalkers" doing? How are they "stalking?"" Answer: Often essentially vigilantes, the stalkers may think if their howsoever covert or clandestine as: surveillance. But the stalking is seldom limited to unobtrusive observation. Gang stalkers are engaged in mobile covert relational hostility with incitation and even coercion towards shunning and mobbing. Could you please explain what you mean by the highlighted part. I have no idea what "shunning" has to do with harassment, and I can't understand what you mean by "mobbing."

Try explaining it in the form of a simple English sentence.
For example:
Joe followed me to work every day for 2 weeks and took my picture and called my girlfriend, mother and boss and told them to shut up about it.

Also, as noted, "vigilantes" take the law into their own hands after a crime. What was the perceived crime?

Where? In my case, at particular social events that they have completely poisoned for me. Cyber-bullying, too. I only hope that it will never escalate to the point of actually spilling out onto the sidewalks of my home town!
Again, could you please give specifics. You seem to be speaking in generalities and I can't tell what you mean. Change the names and places if you like.

As for evidence, other than from online, all I have is my own experience and heresy of gang stalking against me that I had not hither to been aware, things overheard and how pthers had been approached. I have my self also been intimidated in efforts to isolate another. Divide and conquer! I'd only love to lay hands upon hard evidence.
I assume you meant to say "hearsay." Again, what evidence do you have of what specific actions that you are calling "gang stalking?" I'd be happy to hear the about your own experience.

Would you be interested in helping me pr anyone else in a similar predicament, get covert video?I don't know what a similar predicament is, so I can't say.

Would you even just stick up for anyone you ever see being bullied, even very sneakily?Sure, but I've never seen someone bullied "sneakily." How does that work?

Or better still, might you pretend to approve, and get the bullies bragging? Would that be evidence enough? That would be awesome evidence, sure.

Motives? Covert relational hostility and bullying which is generally both heteronymous and sadistic, often takes the form of cockblocking: The purpose is sex, power, Existential validation. Take your pick! Or ask them. They won't say, of course. But some of those ******** simply owe me money.

1 - You really might consider writing with more simple terms. "both heteronymous and sadistic" makes about as much sense as "both rhyming and erotic."

2 - Cockblocking? Someone kept you from getting laid and that's "gangstalking?" This sounds like you are redefining terms to me.

[Checkmite]

carlitos, Gang stalking occurs and exists. There are people who do it to other people. "Gang Stalking" in scare quotes, such as necessarily must include fanciful elements of paranoid crank conspiracism, specifically: super secret masterfully all controlling cabals and shadow government equipped with exotic technology, does not exist. But it is a lie to suggest that simply because "Gang Stalking" as in scare quotes does not exist, real gang stalking (which indeed in actuality is hardly so resource intensive or difficult), is therefore manifestly impossible. Mythical "Gang Stalking" is purportedly omnipresent and omniscient in surveillance. Real psychological warfare of actual gang stalking in its mysterious intermittence, night simply feel that way.

Okay, AaronAgassi, please answer this one question: Which is more important to you, of the following two choices?

1. Addressing the actual problem that you refer to as gang stalking, or

2. "Taking back the term 'Gang Stalking'" from the crazies.


Because by focusing on choice 2, you distract attention from choice 1. If I had a problem I thought was serious, but was creating confusion because it was named similarly to a bunch of conspiratorial malarkey and this was causing people not to take me seriously - I'd call the problem something else without too much hesitation.

[AaronAgassi]

deeper, vigilantism of whatever sort need not actually follow legal statute. Although, accusations may range from the supernatural to the sordid, there is also innuendo that is just plain confusing even to the very perpetrators! Bullies are seldom candid as to their motives, and long lived grudges don't become more lucid over time. The varied motives for bullying are subject to a fairly vast body of study and surmise. But the example made by singling out targets for bullying is observably effective as peer pressure for keeping others in fear and under control. You ask how the community of the social events I attend has been poisoned for me. Do you understand what is a toxic social environment? I live in fear of being harassed, thrown out, banned, at anytime, because of the most transparent agitation by the most notorious liars. Complaints have even been lodged against me before my very arrival at the hotel! And I suspect that the process, such as it is, works entirely by gossip, with no written record. It is no secret how I am subject to the most hateful defamation as some kind of undesirable. And I am shadowed everywhere around the hotel whose function space serves the various functions of the event, every day, by the volunteer security of the function, intimidating others amid the crowds as we mill about, in order to prevent them from interacting with me. I learned about this from other who told me later. It was actually decades ago that I first learned of how a rotten cockblocking clique of bullies who had it in for me, were actually sneaking up behind girls I was talking to as the crowds were milling about, and asking them: "Is this guy bothering you?" Finally one of them attending the function from far out of town, had the guts and sense to tell me! Now the bullies volunteer for convention security in order to throw their weight around in socially isolating their targets of stalking, myself and some others I am finally learning about at all, round the clock for the entire three days or more. Often, they can get the collaboration of hotel security, who are often fairly thugly, bored and uneducated.

Therefore, Pup, surely because someone ineptly attempted to bully you behind your back and failed, cannot be taken as conclusive evidence that it never succeeds. There are many variables. Indeed, true, not actually everyone can be co-opted. But not literally everyone needs to be.

carlitos, as you request, I shall be more specific: Yes, I am a big nerd! And Science Fiction conventions are an important social outlet for me. Cons attract many kinds of vulnerable people to come and open themselves up, and interact more playfully than one ever will patiently hanging out in bars or whatever, but at the same time cons thereby draw the very bullies that prey upon people who are at all different. The socially inept in general, divide into two categories: the harmlessly awkward and oddball on the one hand, and the angry emotionally immature though actually well organized domineering social know-it-alls on the other. It's a disastrous mix! -like Junior High School on steroids, run by sadistic petty bureaucrats and Heterosexual vicious Queens and there toadies, and all completely unchecked, running rampant and rough shod over the most poorly equipped to deal with it and ever put a stop to it.

Checkmite, to answer your artificial hypothetical dilemma, addressing the problem is the most important of course. And I can see where your headed, but go on and play though!

A closing word about full on organized gang stalking or cause stalking out in the streets: I find that there are credible accounts and discourse, even history. But one must put aside the Tabloid Weird nonsense that couldn't have been better concocted in order to discredit any well possibly real and disturbing socio-political phenomenon.

Even in my own unpleasant experience, I repeatedly discover not that I am paranoid, but that I have not been paranoid enough!

[carlitos]

deeper, vigilantism of whatever sort need not actually follow legal statute. Although, accusations may range from the supernatural to the sordid, there is also innuendo that is just plain confusing even to the very perpetrators! Bullies are seldom candid as to their motives, and long lived grudges don't become more lucid over time. The varied motives for bullying are subject to a fairly vast body of study and surmise. But the example made by singling out targets for bullying is observably effective as peer pressure for keeping others in fear and under control.Really, your posts would be much more clear without all of this meaningless blather. Grudges cannot become lucid. Please consider using simple words that convey clear meaning.

You ask how the community of the social events I attend has been poisoned for me. Do you understand what is a toxic social environment? I live in fear of being harassed, thrown out, banned, at anytime, because of the most transparent agitation by the most notorious liars.

Banned from what? By whom?

It is no secret how I am subject to the most hateful defamation as some kind of undesirable. And I am shadowed everywhere around the hotel whose function space serves the various functions of the event, every day, by the volunteer security of the function, intimidating others amid the crowds as we mill about, in order to prevent them from interacting with me. I learned about this from other who told me later.
OK, you seem to think that security in a hotel is shadowing you. Thanks for something specific.

It was actually decades ago that I first learned of how a rotten cockblocking clique of bullies who had it in for me, were actually sneaking up behind girls I was talking to as the crowds were milling about, and asking them: "Is this guy bothering you?" Finally one of them attending the function from far out of town, had the guts and sense to tell me! Now the bullies volunteer for convention security in order to throw their weight around in socially isolating their targets of stalking, myself and some others I am finally learning about at all, round the clock for the entire three days or more. Often, they can get the collaboration of hotel security, who are often fairly thugly, bored and uneducated.
Are you saying that the security you perceive as stalking you are the same people that kept you from talking to girls years ago?


carlitos, as you request, I shall be more specific: Yes, I am a big nerd! And Science Fiction conventions are an important social outlet for me. Cons attract many kinds of vulnerable people to come and open themselves up, and interact more playfully than one ever will patiently hanging out in bars or whatever, but at the same time cons thereby draw the very bullies that prey upon people who are at all different. The socially inept in general, divide into two categories: the harmlessly awkward and oddball on the one hand, and the angry emotionally immature though actually well organized domineering social know-it-alls on the other. It's a disastrous mix!
You didn't say anything specific here. It's a simple question. Who is doing what to whom? A where and a why would really add to it. It couldn't be more simple. You claim that you are being gang stalked. Write a simple sentence to explain your claim. Include the subject, a verb and an object. You could do it in 5 words - Security are spying on me. Then, as a bonus - Where? In X location. Why? Because of Y. Seriously. Please write clearly.

Even in my own unpleasant experience, I repeatedly discover not that I am paranoid, but that I have not been paranoid enough!
I worry about this.

[AaronAgassi]

"Banned from what? By whom?" Banned from attendance, by the convention committee. "Are you saying that the security you perceive as stalking you are the same people that kept you from talking to girls years ago?" No. They were merely instrumental in getting the ball rolling. In the words of Thomas Jones: “Friends may come and go, but enemies accumulate.”

[carlitos]

You said you "live in fear of being harassed, thrown out, banned, at anytime." You didn't say that these things actually happened. Did they? What were the specifics (who what why when where)?

So the events from years ago are completely unrelated, but you are relating them by the common element that you perceive these people as "enemies." Got it.

[AaronAgassi]

carlitos, if you truly cannot make the leap of inference, plenty of those things have happened, indeed in a constant stream. And it's overwhelming enough without your browbeating. Ease up! You think that more concrete instances will help you understand, whereas, perhaps what you lack is broader conceptual underground for context. If you really don't know how bullies are so often sneaky and devious, then you need to go back to http://www.FoolQuest.com/cliquebusters.htm and click the pertinent links.

[uke2se]

carlitos, if you truly cannot make the leap of inference, plenty of those things have happened, indeed in a constant stream. And it's overwhelming enough without your browbeating. Ease up! You think that more concrete instances will help you understand, whereas, perhaps what you lack is broader conceptual underground for context. If you really don't know how bullies are so often sneaky and devious, then you need to go back to http://www.FoolQuest.com/cliquebusters.htm and click the pertinent links.

I'm sorry if you perceive this as disrespectful, but you are joking, right?

[carlitos]

carlitos, if you truly cannot make the leap of inference,
Why in the world do I have to make a leap? If something is happening, please tell us what it is.

plenty of those things have happened, indeed in a constant stream. What things? You being "harassed, thrown out, banned?" Is there some dark force that prevents you from stating exactly what happened? Who did what do whom, where, when and why?

And it's overwhelming enough without your browbeating.
Browbeating? I keep asking you what is happening, and you keep not answering. What in the world is happening, that you are claiming as "gang stalking?" What?

Ease up! No.
You think that more concrete instances will help you understand, whereas, perhaps what you lack is broader conceptual underground for context.
The next "concrete instance" that you post will be your first. Only in your imagination have you posted a "concrete instance" of "gang stalking."

If you really don't know how bullies are so often sneaky and devious, then you need to go back to http://www.FoolQuest.com/cliquebusters.htm and click the pertinent links.
That site is unreadable. It links to definitions of gang stalking that you previously disavowed as being driven by "whackos." It adds no value to this discussion.

[AaronAgassi]

carlitos, it's not your skepticism but your irate and impatient disapproval that is becoming a problem. I just can't talk more about something this painful, with someone so manifestly unsympathetic and even scornful. And if you can be at all honest with yourself, I'm sure that you'll realize that you wouldn't, either. You are pressing the boundaries of civility. "links to definitions of gang stalking that you previously disavowed as being driven by "whackos."" Simply not so. Moreover, if you really don’t understand the sneakiness of bullies, then before we even get to shunning, mobbing and gang stalking, if you won't research covert relational hostility etc., even when the links are spoon fed to you, then I simply can't take you seriously. I wonder if you're not just busting my chops.

[Kid Eager]

carlitos, it's not your skepticism but your irate and impatient disapproval that is becoming a problem. I just can't talk more about something this painful, with someone so manifestly unsympathetic and even scornful. And if you can be at all honest with yourself, I'm sure that you'll realize that you wouldn't, either. You are pressing the boundaries of civility. "links to definitions of gang stalking that you previously disavowed as being driven by "whackos."" Simply not so. Moreover, if you really don’t understand the sneakiness of bullies, then before we even get to shunning, mobbing and gang stalking, if you won't research covert relational hostility etc., even when the links are spoon fed to you, then I simply can't take you seriously. I wonder if you're not just busting my chops.

So far your discourse on this thread does nothing to distinguish it from the lunatic fringe claims of gangstalking that you are railing against.

The website contributes nothing for the reasons previously mentioned.

You're going nowhere - it appears to be a circular discussion and circular thought process that you're locked into:
- the term gangstalking has be overtaken by the lunatic fringe
- gangstalking happens
- gangstalking is happening to me
- this is distinguishable from imagined gangstalking because..... ??????

[carlitos]

carlitos, it's not your skepticism but your irate and impatient disapproval that is becoming a problem. I just can't talk more about something this painful, with someone so manifestly unsympathetic and even scornful.
You haven't given one concrete example of "gang stalking." Not one. Not to you, not to anyone. You made vague allusions to you being "harassed, thrown out, banned" from some convention. After my asking you half a dozen times, you are unable to say Who did what do whom, where, when and why?

If I were stalked and then kicked out of a convention, I could tell you the story:

After following me around all weekend and making threats, on Sunday morning of the ComiCon in Los Angeles in 2009, 2 security guards wearing yellow jackets grabbed me and escorted me out of the convention, after I grabbed Stan Lee's ass. They took my credentials, threw me out and told me not to come back.

Why can't you do this? If it's too emotional for you, tell me of another gang-stalking victim besides yourself.

And if you can be at all honest with yourself, I'm sure that you'll realize that you wouldn't, either. You are pressing the boundaries of civility.

Look, I realize that this is an emotional issue for you. But your inability to articulate it beyond these grandiose, and frankly unreadable generalities, is your own problem. If you want people to take you seriously, you need to speak clearly and state your claim. That you can't or won't do so gives me suspicion that you are one of the paranoid cranks that you previously condemn.


"links to definitions of gang stalking that you previously disavowed as being driven by "whackos."" Simply not so.


Gas lighting is typically employed in order to condition and sensitize the target of bullying to certain cues that can be more readily employed to elicit stressful and maddening hypervigilance in the hapless target of bullying, to make them seem all the more haunted and undesirable, even in moments or upon occasions when in actuality only a small number of the bullies or unwitting proxies and utter tools are at all available within the harassment perimeter of the target of bullying for the ambient or stealth abuse that is organized gang stalking, and therefore there is no way for the target thereof to know how deeply community based or not.
Definition of gang stalking, linked by clicking the words "organized gang stalking" in your posted paragraph:

Gang Stalking ... seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life ... the target is followed around 24/7 by the various communities ... Everyone in the targets life is contacted ... Advised not to discuss the notification and asked to be a part of the ongoing, never ending monitoring (systemic harassment) process ... harassed and placed under surveillance in this way for months or even years before they realize that they are being targeted by an organized protocol of harassment. [stalkers are] only to be seen in twos -- we often do not have the same proof -- Watching and recording the everyday activities...

When I previously posted that definition, you denounced it as being co-opted by cranks. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Moreover, if you really don’t understand the sneakiness of bullies, then before we even get to shunning, mobbing and gang stalking, if you won't research covert relational hostility etc., even when the links are spoon fed to you, then I simply can't take you seriously. I wonder if you're not just busting my chops.

Your failure to clearly explain what you mean is not my fault. This is called projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection). I communicate just fine, and I am not at all busting your chops.

Please, pretty please with sugar on top, list one documented case of "gang stalking" per the common definition. Include the victim, the aggressor, the actions taken, and the reasons why. If not you, someone else.

[AaronAgassi]

Kid Eager, have you even been following this thread? I have explicitly rejected two distinct key claims so vehemently cleaved to by the crank conspiracists regarding gang stalking.

carlitos, I regret that I simply cannot give you the kind of blow by blow account of an ongoing retraumatization that you demand under the current pressure you insist upon exerting. You have even begun to chop up my sentences to the point of quoting me out of context. I am done with you until you amend your short attention span badgering tone and b) you click the damn links that will explain to you most generally, about how bullies tend to be sneaky, and understand the concept to your own satisfaction. There is nothing that I can explain to you until then. You are just unteachable.

[carlitos]

Best of luck with your issues. If you haven't already, I'd ask a mental health professional for an opinion on your website, and maybe share your POV about how you are being stalked. Couldn't hurt.

[AaronAgassi]

Thanks for the tip, carlitis. And let me return the favor: Perhaps there is anyone you respect, whim you might feel comfortable to consult on the inappropriateness of your demeanor. I hope that you have anyone with greater sensitivity than yourself, in order to help you deal with your hostility issues that so manifestly undermine your critical thinking and Dialectic. All I asked you to do, was not to flame while questioning me on sensitive personal matters, to stop browbeating. Do you know what browbeating means, catlitos? Browbeating is not incisive or disputative, but merely uncivil, impolite, dickish. But don't take my word for it. Ask around. Curiosity is the medium of compassion. If being a dick is more important to you than getting your answers, then you are no more genuinely interested than you are sympathetic. BTW, my psychiatric diagnosis does indeed include ongoing traumatic stress from mobbing and bullying. I won't ask for yours

[Hans]

Of course Aaron you could have just answered the questions instead of evoking drama.....

[AaronAgassi]

Pay attention, Hans: No I couldn't. You have to be respectful when pressing for painful details in another person's life, that after all, aren't owed to anyone else.

[carlitos]

Just to clear the recorrd, I asked for one specific case of "gang stalking," from anyone at alll, not necessarily one from Mr. Agassi. He's got a whole website about this "problem" and he can't name one specific incidence of it. His ramblings are indistinguishable from those of a pananoid szhizophrenic. Asking someone that is claiming something for evidence is not bullying. On the converse, being deliberately vague and obtuse while avoiding direct questions is a control mechanism employed by people with passive- aggressive personality disorder. Pot, meet kettle. When I have to ask a queston half a dozen times, I feel like I'm being played. Adios.

[Hans]

Pay attention, Hans: No I couldn't. You have to be respectful when pressing for painful details in another person's life, that after all, aren't owed to anyone else.

Then why are you on a public site crying about something you don't want to discuss? If you weren't here no one would question you.

Again more drama and no answers.If you are so vulnerable don't post on public websites then NO ONE will 'press you'......

Asking someone that is claiming something for evidence is not bullying. On the converse, being deliberately vague and obtuse while avoiding direct questions is a control mechanism employed by people with passive- aggressive personality disorder. Pot, meet kettle. When I have to ask a queston half a dozen times, I feel like I'm being played. Adios.

Hmmm sound advice. Ciao

[Horatius]

Just to clear the recorrd, I asked for one specific case of "gang stalking," from anyone at alll, not necessarily one from Mr. Agassi. He's got a whole website about this "problem" and he can't name one specific incidence of it. His ramblings are indistinguishable from those of a pananoid szhizophrenic. Asking someone that is claiming something for evidence is not bullying. On the converse, being deliberately vague and obtuse while avoiding direct questions is a control mechanism employed by people with passive- aggressive personality disorder. Pot, meet kettle. When I have to ask a queston half a dozen times, I feel like I'm being played. Adios.

Then why are you on a public site crying about something you don't want to discuss? If you weren't here no one would question you.

Again more drama and no answers.If you are so vulnerable don't post on public websites then NO ONE will 'press you'......



Hmmm sound advice. Ciao



And in addition to all of that, being the one who bumped this thread after almost a year of no posts. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=7534061#post7534061)

[Kid Eager]

Kid Eager, have you even been following this thread? I have explicitly rejected two distinct key claims so vehemently cleaved to by the crank conspiracists regarding gang stalking.



there's the irony - you reject two distinct claims, then embrace the rest for yourself as if the rejection validates the remainder. Doesn't work that way, I'm afraid.

As I said before, the website is doing you no favours at all - it's incoherent and looks like it was designed by an octopus on crack.

[AaronAgassi]

Since I am now accused of inconsistency, not so: I also have an anti-flaming page. And until we can agree that hostility and personal attack are simply out of bounds, then we are at an impasse that you cannot sidestep. I'm simply not pouring out my heart to some snarky douche bag. The ball remains in your court.

Kid Eager, I have no idea what you are talking about. What do you think are the two claims I mentioned? Just checking.

[Agatha]

Nobody's asking you to 'pour your heart out'; you are simply being asked to illustrate your claims that gangstalking exists with an actual example of the phenomenon. This does not have to be something which happened to you, it could be an anecdote from someone else.

[LightinDarkness]

Like everyone else, I've read the posts by Aaron trying to figure out what exactly type of claim hes making...and then I read this:


carlitos, as you request, I shall be more specific: Yes, I am a big nerd! And Science Fiction conventions are an important social outlet for me. Cons attract many kinds of vulnerable people to come and open themselves up, and interact more playfully than one ever will patiently hanging out in bars or whatever, but at the same time cons thereby draw the very bullies that prey upon people who are at all different. The socially inept in general, divide into two categories: the harmlessly awkward and oddball on the one hand, and the angry emotionally immature though actually well organized domineering social know-it-alls on the other. It's a disastrous mix! -like Junior High School on steroids, run by sadistic petty bureaucrats and Heterosexual vicious Queens and there toadies, and all completely unchecked, running rampant and rough shod over the most poorly equipped to deal with it and ever put a stop to it.

I think what hes had happen here is people be rude to him in public. If you go to a "con" your going to run into all kinds of people as you say...including people there to point and laugh at the people who dress up/do "nerdy" things.

It almost seems like Aaron is borderline trying to explain why people make fun of him and he immediately jumps to needing to find some all-encompassing conspiracy explanation for it. People are mean. If you do unusual things in public consistently, it wouldn't surprise me if people are rude to you occasionally...its not right, but people are people. That isn't gang stalking...its just how humans operate.

And he NEEDS this stuff to be true because organized gang stalking is, lets be honest with ourselves, much more exciting then simply telling them perhaps they shouldn't dress up and go full on nerd at cons and expect NO ONE to snicker in the background.

Again, I am not condoning being mean to people here...but snickering at people who are dressed up at comic cons (and things like that) is not organized stalking.

[Pup]

It almost seems like Aaron is borderline trying to explain why people make fun of him and he immediately jumps to needing to find some all-encompassing conspiracy explanation for it. People are mean. If you do unusual things in public consistently, it wouldn't surprise me if people are rude to you occasionally...its not right, but people are people. That isn't gang stalking...its just how humans operate.

I think you've nailed it. I gave my own specific example in a post above, which coincidentally was in sort of a similar hobby, living history, which still involves groups in public in costumes. Though it gets a bit more respect from the public by default, because it includes historians, museum docents, etc., as well as drunken rednecks.

But the "gang" aspect breaks down quickly, because it's hard to organize people and get them to agree on anything. Sheesh, just try to get them to all agree on the standards for a single event, let alone organize them into bullying somebody for years. It only works for a little while, then the cliques shift.

But yes, there's always going to be that dull roar in the background of people--different people--who like to pick on others, make "innocent" fun, disrupt things, bully the newcomers, engage in power struggles, etc. They're remarkably consistent, not because they all conspire and communicate, but just because they're the same personality type.

Some people have mental... I don't want to say illnesses, because it's not necessarily carried that far--but mental glitches, that make them seek patterns in everything, way more than what are really there.

The bullies who seem to be at every event, making fun of the awkward nerds, don't have to all communicate and plan in a vast conspiratorial pattern, because just like there will be awkward nerds at every event without some great nerd-scheduling conspiracy, there will also be bullying personality types without some great bully-planning conspiracy.

[Horatius]

Since I am now accused of inconsistency, not so: I also have an anti-flaming page. And until we can agree that hostility and personal attack are simply out of bounds, then we are at an impasse that you cannot sidestep. I'm simply not pouring out my heart to some snarky douche bag. The ball remains in your court.




One of these things is not like the other.

[AaronAgassi]

Agatha, sorry for any confusion, but carlitos was indeed actually nagging me for sensitive details, blow by blow, of my own travails, because, unfortunately, I have little more to offer in the way of evidence. So I asked carlitos to amend his demeanor and to stop pressurizing me, and he flatly refused, becoming even more overtly abusive. Hence my non cooperation. Notice that carlitos will not agree with me that hostility and personal attack are simply out of bounds. -Nor has anyone else here, for that matter.

LightinDarkness. Overt rudeness and nastiness, even more subtle hostile social environment, are indeed the very least of it. But when you characterize me as alleging pervasive conspiracy, how pervasive do you mean? I have been fairly explicit on that very topic. Let's consider mobbing as observed in animal communities. Deliberate planning thereof would be fairly ruled out. And similar behavior is observed in human society as well. But in human society there can also be deliberation. That's hardly uncommon. Still, perhaps planning is unnecessary, and to whatever extent, serial bullying in society might nevertheless be apprehended as a propagation of habitual spontaneous and unthinking cruelty. It's still highly organized. Indeed, even preparatory activity might be viewed behaviorally, rather than cognitively. That might even help explain things. Still, I am also aware of actual scheming by any standard. As for organized stalking, do you even understand my definition? I am regularly stealthily followed around for purpose of harassment. And I'm not the only one, according to my inside source. So if you think that never happens, then you are mistaken.

Indeed, Pup, it is an absurd denial to insist that bullies do not forge relationships, organize and cooperate in serial bullying. Indeed, for that matter, bullying is often institutional and thereby features distinct abuse of power.

[Pup]

As for organized stalking, do you even understand my definition? I am regularly stealthily followed around for purpose of harassment. And I'm not the only one, according to my inside source. So if you think that never happens, then you are mistaken.

Indeed, Pup, it is an absurd denial to insist that bullies do not forge relationships, organize and cooperate in serial bullying. Indeed, for that matter, bullying is often institutional and thereby features distinct abuse of power.

The problem is, it's all a matter of degree, and without specifics, it's hard to tell what you're saying.

For example, take the claim of being followed around for the purpose of harrassment.

If someone said they were followed by bullies from a bar outside to the parking lot, I'd believe it easily. I'd even believe it if they said it happened a couple of times in a couple different cities over the last year, in unconnected incidents, because maybe they're the type who goes to the wrong places and looks vulnerable (a nerd who tries to act cool in tough bars, for example).

If another person said they were followed by a group of bullies from work to a gas station and then to a coffee shop after work, a couple times in the last week, I'd figure that's some serious harrassment, but still possible.

If they said they'd been followed by a series of different bullies everytime they went out in public, no matter where they were, in several different cities for the last ten years, and those bullies were all in communication with each other, I'd say they were suffering from a common symptom of mental illness.

So it's not as simple as saying that bullies follow people to harrass them, and us agreeing or disagreeing that it's plausible. It's a sliding scale from plausible to paranoia, depending on the specifics.

[fromdownunder]

Agatha, sorry for any confusion, but carlitos was indeed actually nagging me for sensitive details, blow by blow, of my own travails, because, unfortunately, I have little more to offer in the way of evidence. So I asked carlitos to amend his demeanor and to stop pressurizing me, and he flatly refused, becoming even more overtly abusive. Hence my non cooperation. Notice that carlitos will not agree with me that hostility and personal attack are simply out of bounds. -Nor has anyone else here, for that matter.



(bolding mine)

Now I understand why you think you are being gangstalked.

Norm

[AaronAgassi]

Pup, I think that we do see eye to eye. Indeed, I have never experienced the different cities scenario whereof you allude, and confess that I am somewhat skeptical about it in general. I will only say in all fairness, that there seem to be those that do suffer from that experience, and speak of it with any candor instead of hostility and flagrant intellectual dishonesty typical of conspiracism. I can only gently suggest to such the possibility that they have become sensitized, and might be mistaken.

[AaronAgassi]

(bolding mine)

Now I understand why you think you are being gangstalked.

Norm

Still too oblique. Do spell it out for me. I wouldn'd want to misconstrue.

[carlitos]

:rolleyes:

[Kid Eager]

who's construe, and why do you want to miss them?

[Sledge]

AaronAgassi, please quote an example of carlitos being abusive so we all know what we're talking about.

[Hans]

AaronAgassi, please quote an example of carlitos being abusive so we all know what we're talking about.

I believe that AA will find that your asking him that is abuse.....lol

[carlitos]

I believe that AA will find that your asking him that is abuse.....lol

I think he was offended by me himself calling him me a "snarky douche bag (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=7680712#post7680712)." There is no place for abuse like that on the boards.

I'm sure he will list as many example of my abuse as he has actual examples of "gang stalking."

[AaronAgassi]

Indeed, carlitos cannot be even so sarcastic as he has just been right now, while he is in the process of interviewing me for a blow by blow account of painfully remembered abuse. Otherwise, my defenses will come up and I simply will not be able to recall such fine details as he demands. This is nothing unusual, incidentally.

Besides, I simply find personal attack tiresome. The bulk of postings have consisted of little more substance than persistent Sophistry to put words in my mouth.

[Sledge]

You seemed to miss this, Aaron:
AaronAgassi, please quote an example of carlitos being abusive so we all know what we're talking about.
Given the level of abuse you claim, one example should be easy for you to present. :)

[Toke]

I believe we have already covered the logistical problems of gang stalking in this tread.

Perhaps you could address that first just to get the basics out of the way?