Gang stalking paranoia

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

 

[Sledge]

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

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

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

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

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

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

You've compared the stalkers to the Stasi and the FBI. Those organisations would be regarded as "professional." But ok, let's assume these stalkers aren't professional. What are they? A bunch of office workers on a lunch break messing about? And what is their motivation if they're not being employed by anyone to spend almost incalculable man hours swapping people's clothes and taking the rubbish out at the same time as the target?

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

So who are these people and how do you know so much about them?

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

Dictionary: skit (skĭt)

1 A short, usually comic dramatic performance or work; a theatrical sketch.
2 A short humorous or satirical piece of writing.

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

 

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

Its sad...

 

[carlitos]

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

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

 

[carlitos]

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

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

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

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

 

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

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

 

[carlitos]

I knew I was right.

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

 

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

But we don't because. They are delusions.

 

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

PROOF?

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

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

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

 

[fromdownunder]

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

Norm

I would appreciate an answer to this question.

Norm

 

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

I would appreciate an answer to this question.

Norm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[scissorhands]

 

[carlitos]

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

 

[Sledge]

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

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

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

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

Yes, our governments are certainly never investigated for their crimes. I don't know how Richard Nixon got away with it, but he completed his presidency without a hint of scandal, let alone him having to resign. We just never see governments or their agencies investigated. Apparently.

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?

Sorry, that doesn't quite seem to make sense. What does the lack of statute of limitations have to do with the difficulty you perceive in finding evidence against a government?

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

The reason there is proof of Hitler's crimes against humanity is that he is dead.

Er, no. It's because he killed millions of people. That's kinda difficult to hide.

Likewise, the Nazi war criminals who tried to escape the system were hunted down. The Nazi war criminals who came to the United States and shared their scientific knowledge (under operation Paperclip) were protected.

Which is connected to gang stalking... how exactly?

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

Yes, the Nazis certainly never answered for their crimes...

... IN THE NOVEL "FATHERLAND!" Here in the real world, they were brought to trial and made to answer for their crimes, an endeavour that continues to this day.

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

So it's a good thing we don't have such organisations in America or Britain, isn't it?

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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