Gang stalking paranoia [Archive]

LightinDarkness

17th November 2008, 01:39 PM

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

17th November 2008, 01:58 PM

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

17th November 2008, 02:17 PM

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

17th November 2008, 02:48 PM

Trojan_Jockey

17th November 2008, 03:06 PM

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

17th November 2008, 03:09 PM

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

18th November 2008, 11:16 PM

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

19th November 2008, 08:11 AM

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

19th November 2008, 10:50 AM

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

19th November 2008, 11:14 AM

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

19th November 2008, 02:56 PM

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

19th November 2008, 06:02 PM

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

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

Almo

20th November 2008, 01:53 PM

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

20th November 2008, 03:30 PM

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

20th November 2008, 04:23 PM

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

20th November 2008, 04:52 PM

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

20th November 2008, 08:45 PM

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

20th November 2008, 10:29 PM

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

21st November 2008, 08:53 AM

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

21st November 2008, 05:52 PM

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

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

Whiplash

21st November 2008, 10:47 PM

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

21st November 2008, 11:17 PM

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

23rd November 2008, 11:08 PM

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

24th November 2008, 09:34 AM

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

26th November 2009, 09:35 AM

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

26th November 2009, 10:04 AM

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

26th November 2009, 10:20 AM

FriendlyAndLively

26th November 2009, 10:27 AM

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

26th November 2009, 06:45 PM

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

26th November 2009, 07:49 PM

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

26th November 2009, 07:50 PM

Brainache

26th November 2009, 10:40 PM

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

27th November 2009, 01:43 AM

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

27th November 2009, 01:46 AM

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

27th November 2009, 08:02 AM

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

27th November 2009, 08:42 AM

carlitos

27th November 2009, 10:10 AM

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

27th November 2009, 10:21 AM

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

27th November 2009, 10:24 AM

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

27th November 2009, 10:26 AM

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

28th November 2009, 02:38 AM

gtc

28th November 2009, 02:55 AM

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

28th November 2009, 03:29 AM

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

28th November 2009, 03:59 AM

gtc

28th November 2009, 04:19 AM

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

28th November 2009, 09:23 AM

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

28th November 2009, 09:30 AM

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

28th November 2009, 09:31 AM

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

28th November 2009, 04:20 PM

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

28th November 2009, 04:30 PM

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

28th November 2009, 05:31 PM

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

28th November 2009, 05:59 PM

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

FriendlyAndLively

29th November 2009, 11:11 AM

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

29th November 2009, 11:15 AM

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

29th November 2009, 11:21 AM

... 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

29th November 2009, 11:40 AM

LightinDarkness

29th November 2009, 11:43 AM

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

29th November 2009, 11:45 AM

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

29th November 2009, 11:47 AM

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

29th November 2009, 11:49 AM

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

29th November 2009, 11:54 AM

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

29th November 2009, 12:03 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:15 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:19 PM

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

FriendlyAndLively

29th November 2009, 12:19 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:23 PM

(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

29th November 2009, 12:28 PM

LightinDarkness

29th November 2009, 12:32 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:32 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:33 PM

I knew I was right.

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

LightinDarkness

29th November 2009, 12:36 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:38 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:38 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:38 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:46 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:54 PM

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

29th November 2009, 12:56 PM

FzoXQKumgCw

carlitos

29th November 2009, 01:02 PM

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

Sledge

29th November 2009, 01:03 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:04 PM

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

scissorhands

29th November 2009, 01:13 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:15 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:17 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:24 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:30 PM

FriendlyAndLively

29th November 2009, 01:35 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:41 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:41 PM

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

29th November 2009, 01:43 PM

LightinDarkness

29th November 2009, 01:46 PM

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

29th November 2009, 02:00 PM

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

29th November 2009, 02:22 PM

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

29th November 2009, 05:43 PM

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

carlitos

29th November 2009, 07:28 PM

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

29th November 2009, 07:29 PM

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

29th November 2009, 08:30 PM

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

30th November 2009, 02:00 AM

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

30th November 2009, 05:07 AM

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

30th November 2009, 09:50 PM

I hope that the original poster is OK.

Rogue1stclass

2nd December 2009, 06:18 AM

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

2nd December 2009, 07:13 AM

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

sigmund

3rd December 2009, 08:40 PM

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

3rd December 2009, 08:57 PM

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

4th December 2009, 12:00 AM

Eddie Dane

4th December 2009, 02:12 AM

WildCat

4th December 2009, 06:36 AM

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

4th December 2009, 08:02 AM

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