Gang stalking paranoia

[scissorhands]

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

I'm going to have to take the Fifth.

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

 

[scissorhands]

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

I'm going to have to take the Fifth.

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

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

 

[FriendlyAndLively]

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

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment.

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

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

 

[LightinDarkness]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Sledge]

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

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

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

 

[scissorhands]

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment.

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

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

Cant answer right now, Im busy making some phonecalls.

 

[LightinDarkness]

But that does suggest an interesting thought experiment.

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

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

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

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

 

[Elizabeth I]

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

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

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

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

Now for some better sites.

Citizens Against Technological and Community Based Harassment: catchcanada.net

North American Freedom Foundation: naff.org

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

Mind Justice: mindjustice.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Sledge]

Egad, this thread is moving on at quite a pace! Didn't spot this reaction until a second read through of the page.

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

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

So no one online has any sort of quote from this book that would back up your claims? This seems very odd. I would certainly expect the frankly bizarre behaviour you claim the Stasi exhibited to be mentioned at least in the Wiki article. Perhaps, seeing as you have the book, you could update the article?

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

And your proof for this...?

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

Not seeing the relevance. You said "What kind of proof do you think you're ever going to get of criminal behavior on the part of a government," I pointed out that such proof has been found and acted on before. Are you denying this?

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

Yes, we have this crazy legal system where you can't hold people responsible for what they might have done, only what they have done. It's utter lunacy that allows me to get away with the fact I might have killed my great-grandfather. I didn't, but I might have done.

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

And proof. I suspect this is where your case would fall down long before public apathy could do anything.

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

Yes, you still haven't explained how you know this. Go on...

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

And your source for this...?

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

To be honest, I don't care about the Nazis as regards this conversation. You're postulating the existance of a vast organisation that harrasses innocent civilians for reasons you are unable or unwilling to reveal, and your proof for it is that the United States decided Werner von Braun could help them with the fledgling Cold War arms race. That's a pretty big leap from "the government did something a bit dodgy 60 years ago" to "therefore a government agent hid my glasses."

 

[dtugg]

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

 

[carlitos]

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

Liar

However, there is apparently some government involvement.

Evidence please?

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

Evidence please?

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

Here would be a good place for you to give even one sourced example. One police informant that knows they are targeting a person and harassing them.

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

 

[Mr.D]

FriendlyAndLively,

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

 

[fromdownunder]

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

[snip]

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

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

Norm

 

[Eddie Dane]

Please FriendlyAndLively, imagine actually doing this.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Par]

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

You’re making the following argument:

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

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

 

[carlitos]

I hope that the original poster is OK.

 

[Rogue1stclass]

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

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

It's a paradox of mental health.