Truman Show Delusion

Truman Show Delusion.

I know some people in the TI community have mentioned that they are going to be keeping an eye on this new syndrome.

So I just had a couple of quick suggestions about questions that you might want to ask.
Since some suspect that this might be in part designed to have the public think that anyone complaining about 24/7 surveillance is delusional or crazy, here are some things you might want to look at when checking into this further.

Start with the doctors in question who are researching this. The Doctors Gold Ian and Joel.First you always want to check out the credibility of these individuals. Make sure that there are no military ties. This has played a role in the past, so this is something that you would want to look into. Too many people remember Ewen Cameron and his experiments. This is not in anyway to compare the doctors Gold to him. The point however is, Dr Cameron was a doctor with good credibility that conducted illicit Mind Control experiments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewan_Cameron_(MKULTRA)

[quote]Donald Ewen Cameron (1901-1967) was a Scottish-American psychiatrist. Born in Bridge of Allan, he graduated from the University of Glasgow in 1924.

Cameron lived and worked in Albany, New York, and was involved in experiments in Canada for Project MKULTRA, a United States based CIA-directed mind control program which eventually lead to the publication of the KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation manual.

Cameron was the author of the psychic driving concept which the CIA found particularly interesting. In it he described his theory on correcting madness, which consisted of erasing existing memories and rebuilding the psyche completely. After being recruited by the CIA, he commuted to Montreal every week to work at the Allan Memorial Institute of the McGill University, and was paid $69,000 from 1957 to 1964 to carry out MKULTRA experiments there. The CIA appears to have given him the potentially deadly experiments to carry out, as they would be tried on non-US citizens. However, documents released in 1977 revealed that thousands of unwitting, as well as voluntary subjects were tested on during that time period. These subjects included United States citizens
[/quote]

Assuming that our esteemed doctors are what they say they are and what they appear to be, you would want to next look at the patients. Joel Gold has said that in 2002 in New York, he saw 5 patients, white males that were complaining about this delusion. Three specifically mentioned the Truman show. They felt their families were reading from a script and that their actions were being watched 24/7 and that the whole world was part of this. It encompassed their lives.
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/features/truman-show-delusion-real-imagined


[quote]
Joel Gold, who is on the psychiatric faculty of New York’s Bellevue Hospital and serves as a clinical assistant professional of psychiatry at New York University's School of Medicine, first began to see the symptoms dubbed Truman Show delusion in 2002 with patients at Bellevue Hospital. He initially treated five white male patients with middle-class upbringing and education, all who likened themselves to actors on reality TV shows. Three specifically referenced the movie The Truman Show, giving rise to the disorder’s name. [/quote]

We have thousands upon thousands of people complaining about Gang Stalking, Electronic Harassment and Mind Control, but 5 White male patients of upper middle class backgrounds say they are part of a reality show, and that's enough to get a study done on the Truman Show Delusion?

So with what we know about Cointelpro, we went to look into the credibility of the patients. Make sure that they have no military ties. Look at their past histories make sure that there is no reason to believe there was any financial motivation, or that they were not couched or exposed to influences that lead them to this belief.

This is not to insult or make aspersion's about anyone. Doctor Gold could really just have come across 5 patients out of the hundreds that he saw, and decided this would be a good study. The patients might really have these delusions and might really feel this way, but with what we have seen of Cointelpro, some of us were waiting and watching for a similar new illness or something similar to come out.

We have seen people pretend to be targets, who's only goal is to make other targets look delusional. We have seen people pretend to be targets who's only goal was to further harass real targets, etc. To not ask the questions would be unwise and well.

Since this summer for some reason, the doctors now in 2008, cause that was 2002, shared their findings this summer, and other doctors have said they have seen similar cases about 40-50 more. What is not clear is are their patients complaining about Truman Show as well, or just about being watched, about their families reading from scripts? The related case information that I could find was pretty sparse, if anyone is looking into this, maybe they can update this information.

Beyond that, I am going to be continuing on with looking into Gang Stalking, but these are some questions that I thought might be nice to ask for those looking into the Truman Show Delusion.

Mind Hacks

Is there a pattern forming?

http://gangstalkingworld.com/Forum/YaBB.pl?num=1227694042

I asked this question after realising that an article about Truman Show delusion, Internet delusion and climate change delusion came out back in August 29, 2008. It was written by Sarah Kershaw and in the article she mentioned Joel and Ian Gold, both brothers. Both psychiatrists, one out of New York, one now in Toronto, who are writing about Truman show delusion.
The second article which you might be more familiar with is the New York Times article again by Sarah Kershaw, November 13, 2008, with mentions of Vaughan Bell, Dr Hoffman and unnamed concerned health professionals.

The third article is by Jennifer Peltz, where she writes about Truman Show Delusion, this came out 11/24/08. She also references the brothers Gold and Vaughan Bell again in the article.
Now wither or not it's a new trend to write about delusions or as some suspect an actual attempt by the system to give society the impression that people claiming to be watched are delusional is anyone's guess.

I was going back over my writings and I did want to make one thing clear. When I first read the Sarah Kershaw article, I wrote about it. Now the pen or in this case my typing fingers might have been a bit faster than my mind. What I mean is, I was looking back at what I wrote, and it seemed to be critical of the article. I never meant to be critical of the article, and I apologize if it came across that way. What I was actually concerned about was the new "syndromes" that had appeared in the article. Specifically the Internet Delusions and to a lesser extend the Truman show delusion.

http://gangstalking.wordpress.com/?s=keep+the+faith

The first article by Sarah Kershaw was actually an interesting, informative and insightful read. It was a pretty well written article, I didn't mean that I wanted the article to fail. What I meant was that I had really specific concerns more specifically, about the findings that had been exposed in the article.

Here is some background information about my concerns. Since coming across the David Lawson book Terrorist Stalking in America and his conclusions that this is being done by vigilante groups and then his follow up book which claims this is being done by terrorist or anti-government groups, I have long suspected the work to be a disinformation piece that was meant to destroy and harm the credibility of targets should they go to the police or health professionals with his conclusions.

This is what I wrote about David Lawson back in December 2006.

[quote]If what he says about these stalking crews are true. These crews are illegal, dangerous, well connected and you would not want to be writing a book about their activities without consent. Members stay in the group out of fear, blackmail, the sense of power it gives them. The reason they work so well, and have become so powerful is because they work in secrecy. Secrecy, and yet he was allowed to write a book about them and go on his merry way?
No reprisals? No revenge? He is either really brave, and lucky. Really deceptive and wrong. Or maybe somewhere in between?[/quote]

Since then David Lawson has reappeared, his book is off the satellite stealing website, and it's now widely available at amazon, with the new conclusions, that this is being done by terrorist, and anti-government groups.

David Lawson claims to have been a detective for 12 years, then he claims that he was a part of these stalking groups for several more years. My question has always been, why was he allowed to write the book if they are so dangerous? He claims to have been one of them for several years, so how do we know he can be trusted? Later after doing my own research and talking to others, I realised that his conclusions were false and that a detective of 12 years could not have come to such false conclusions easily, especially one that claims to have travelled with them for several years. I have maintained that I think the book is disinformation.

I wondered if at some point the establishment would have an illness similar or one that matched his conclusions. After reading the article and doing some research, I came across this.

http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2005/05/internet_delusions.html

[quote]This paper analyzes four case-reports and notes that, contrary to the traditional view, the cases are examples where an internet-theme has particular clinical implications.
In one case, a patient began to have paranoid thoughts and used an internet search engine to investigate suspicions about an ingredient on a chewing gum packet.

Her searches led her to believe she had discovered a secret terrorist network, and was therefore being personally targeted by the authorities using phone taps and hidden cameras.[/quote]
I read over the case study, and the first case study presented was unrelated. My concerns however with these new findings is that they don't take current factors into consideration when making their diagnosis. Eg. The real danger that people's concerns about surveillance could have some basis in truth.

The other concern is the fact that there might be disinformation material being deliberately distributed to the public by specific sources. I am sure this is a foreign concept for many members of mainstream society, but practices such as Cointelpro have shown us that, false Media Stories, Faked dirty letters, poems, and satirical comic books were among the FBI’s many devices for pitting activists against one another.

In the past it was used to discredit dissidents, today it could be providing a similar function.

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/electronic-publications/stay-free/archives/19/fbi.html

When the truth finally comes

This article is to prepare you for when the truth finally comes.

There have been a lot of revelations in past years. Dark, dirty, dank secrets, that were hidden. Some were happening on a main stream level, but the truth did not come out for years. When the truth finally did come it does not get the reaction that we were hoping for. In some cases, articles make their way into the main stream papers for a time, and then the issue goes away, but it never really goes away. I present to you the following examples of truth coming out, and society once again remaining in it's trance like stupor.

I am writing this to prepare you. A lot of people think that when the truth comes out, it's going to be like some magic pill, and just automatically make things better and make all this misery stop, and the truth is, past examples have shown us this is not the case. All it will likely do is make our lawsuits easier in some cases, or getting our Freedom Of Information Requests more accessible.

The world is not as fully unaware of what is happening to us, as we would like to believe. You know those large groups of people, strangers, friends, family that take part in what is going on for their various reasons? Enough are aware, that this should not be happening in darkness, but it continues. You know those human rights organization that spill the bs about human rights, while they get dozens, or hundreds of calls, letters, etc each month, which they ignore, or cover up. Those organisations, they know. Your politicians which you have called and written to, many of them know. So all I am saying is when this does come out, please be mentally prepared, that this might not change things for us that rapidly, if at all. At best it might only be a gradual change. It might only be getting the satisfaction of saying, ha we were telling the truth.

Case in point. Some other major stories that by some miracle finally broke through to the main streams trance like stupor. Some change happened for a time in some cases, but then it was back to business as usual. This seems to be a pattern of how the world works, it's disgusting, it's disgraceful, and you are the only ones that can help change it. Why you don't do so on a large scale is one of those mystery's that boggles the mind.
Cases in point.

Mind Control

The world at some point saw the revelation of MK Ultra. The truth came out that the government had been conducting mind control experiments on unwitting people. They had been doing this for years, to try to control the human mind. They did this at home in the U.S. and aboard.

Canada recently paid out some nice money for allowing these abuses to take place on it's citizens in Montreal back in the 50's.

So when you use the term mind control, you would hope that people would understand the concept, and the fact that if it happened then, it can happen now? No that's often not the case. People hear mind control and it's like some mythological creature. That doesn't exist. Why would the government do that? The ignorance and the naivete is massive.

Not too long ago, I might have been in that boat with my awareness about what had gone on in the past.

If you want to learn more about mind control you can start with the following links, videos and articles. It's a quick way to to get a brief introduction. Remember this barely scratches the surface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_ultra
http://www.targetedindividuals.com/MindControl.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2007/07/04/qc-brainwashingsettlement0704.html

Cointelpro

This was a program sponsored by the FBI, the program was used to not just squash dissidence, it was used to wipe out most of the left movements of the 50,60, 70. The program focused on ethnic minority movements, their leaders, and the organisations they were trying to build. Canada had their own version called. V.I.P.S. other countries may also have had similar programs.

The programs used rumours, false arrest, false imprisonments, set up, break in's, life disruptions like what we see in gang stalking, disinformation, murder to get what they wanted. They had a lot of agents in the KKK. They eventually infiltrated most of the movements of that time to destroy them, from the inside out.

This wiped out the black panthers, Martin Luther King Jr has a file, where they called for his termination, he was dead a month later, Malcolm X was a target, Puerto Rican and Indian Movements. This was about destroying dissidence, and any future attempts groups might have of starting up.

This quote is from J.Edgar Hoover, but I think it fits in very well with the present situation.
"We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. ... The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst."

When the evils of Cointelpro came out it made headlines, the news stories came out, proportionate to people's outrage and fury. People were horrified, a committee was formed. Senator Church did his job so well that he was never re-elected again.

The real truth however is that it did not change a damn thing for many of the targets. Some are
still in jail, on the run, reputations and lives are still ruined, lives are still torn apart. Many of those that were murderer or forced to commit suicide never got justice.

The truth is, this never really ended, it just went back into the abyss till it was safe enough to come out again and continue what it was doing. A lot of things are like this.
Oh to read about Cointelpro or to get a brief introduction, you can go here.

http://www.targetedindividuals.com/Cointelpro.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro

Gary Webb's revelation that the CIA were in part responsible for helping or at least turning a blind eye towards drugs being smuggled into ethnic minority neighbourhoods.

First we had the big news article. Apparently there were the appropriate marches and demonstrations in the streets. Then the people who were preaching just say no with one hand, and who were dishing out the drugs with the other didn't like what Gary Webb was saying, so he lost his prized post, eventually quit his job, lost his credibility, got attacked by the major news papers.

Gary put up his own website, presented the evidence and then wrote a book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4897

He was allowed to continue on, but not like before. Then suddenly he was talking about a new
book. There are some people who make mention of this.

That's when he was found with the 2 bullet holes in his head. Yeah an apparent suicide. Right.
Anyways, there is still talk, speculation, but that's about it.

Oh and for the victims of the CIA drug operation, well they tried to hire lawyers, one of the few lawyers that would take the case was Anita E. Bell. She tried to take on the system for those victims and would later become a target. She was falsely disbarred, she fled the U.S. sought refuge in Canada, and had to again flee to Israel.

She says they made many attempts on her life, threatened witnesses, till they dropped the case, etc. Most traces of Anita E. Bell are
gone.

http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Social/article.php?sid=69

Sexual abuse of children by priests. I hope that you have at least heard about this one. For years priest in all or most countries, were having sex with young boys primarily and with some young girls.

For years sometimes the families didn't believe their own kids, or if they did, they were persuaded to keep it quite, while these priests were moved from one location to the next, where they continued to pray upon child after child after child. Many of the victims never got any real justice, but some did get money. A few priest went to jail, but many are still roaming free, doing the same things, and believe it or not still being moved around by the church.

From what I have read, based on new laws in Rome in some cases now make it harder to take these cases to court. I have also read of some of these men fleeing to Vatican city for sanctuary.
What's changed? Our awareness, a belief that this stuff does happen, and not much else. Some parents are more secure with their children, but many are not. Also in very poor countries you still have this happening a great deal. It has not changed in many regards, even with all the awareness. The young still get victimised, and their predators are moved to another location to start the whole process all over again.

Child pedophile ring. The big story that children were brought to the white house for the purposes of sex. The story would break with many coming forward to say that they had been used as child sex slaves, many to import drugs. Many would tell the tale of being used in all sorts of sexual ways by very rich, high profile people. The case is disturbing. The witnesses were threatened, falsely discredited, or jailed, or suicide, whatever. The people they accused went on to have even better lives, and moved into higher positions of power.

Senator DeCamp was left with the question of why people covered this up, when they knew the kids were telling the truth. The answer is always the same. To protect the system. Then he was left with one more question:

"But then I have one final, nagging question. How do I know when, or if, the "system" itself has become so corrupted, that evil is the rule, rather than the exception? And when that occurs, what do I do about it? But I think I know the answer to that one - my oId commanding officer in Vietnam told me what I had to do. I made some promises to Bill, and I intend to keep them."

Here is a link to the story and his book. It's disturbing, but it's the system. This is what it does and this is what it allows, and only we can change it.

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/franklinc...erpt.shtml

The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska

http://www.amazon.com/Franklin-Cover-Up-Satanism-Murder-Nebraska/dp/0963215809


Mobbing. This was not a shock for many of us, but what you might not know is that before it was studied and confirmed, it lead to many suicides, to many people suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, many were never able to work or function the same again, and others committed mass murder in the workplace. Oh and of course others were written off as paranoid. This was causing so much harm in society and again it was a struggle to get it recognised and acknowledged and even after that happened, it's not as if the mobbing gates opened up. Mobbing cases that have been won are few and far between. I can think of one off the top of my head that was won. Laws are still not complete across the board, and proving that you are a target of workplace mobbing is as difficult as ever. Proving that HR, and top management, plus co-workers are conspiring against you and that you are not the problem, almost impossible.

http://www.psychologistethics.net/http://www.Mobbing-USA.comhttp://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/mobbing.htm

Awareness and exposure does not always equal change. We hope that it will, but it that has not often proven to be the case. Doesn't mean that we should give up, but we should move forward with a realistic expectation that even when this does come out into the exposed open, it might not change things that much.

Right now this is a big open dirty secret like Enron was. Lot's of people knew, people did nothing, and the mechanisms that allowed Enron to happen, allowed parts of the recent financial crisis to happen, and will continue to allow other things to happen. People have to take personal ownership and responsibility. It begins with me. We all too often expect others to do it, to go the mile to go the distance so that our path will be easier, but sometimes you might have to put hand to shovel, or foot to gravel and help smooth out parts of that path. If we are going to have any true meaningful change, and not just the surface change we have seen so many other times before.

The Witch Hunt

Some time ago I came across a posting that concerned me.

The forum in question had started a witch hunt. The forum decided they were going to start in my personal opinion attacking other websites.

These people who many of which, may be government agents decided that they were going to go on a witch hunt of legit and some none legit websites.

I clearly started to stay away from these people after that stage.

Here is a copy of the first witch hunt in point. You can always know when these things are going to be starting, and it's disgusting. We are getting targeted by the government, our lives are being disrupted, and if that was not bad enough, we now have potential government parasites in our midst's trying to discredit what little we are able to do, as we try to function everyday. It is my opinion that people who try to deliberately, and knowingly destroy other innocent persons are the worst vermin. Corrupting and destroy from the inside out is disgusting and worst than what out external predators do.

I've been aware of this for sometime, and I have tried to simply not feed the pigeons. To let them alone by themselves so they could pretend to peck and argue by themselves, while making sure our movements never goes forward. Now it would seem they want to take it there.
Exhibit A. I saved this for a rainy day.

[quote]>I need your help in collecting Names and Websites that are discrediting our>movement to bring this to an end. These people and websites that discredit the>victims hurts you the victim and will only prolong you staying a victim.> These people who misrepresent us Must Be Separated From the TI Community> before the Damage is Irreversible. I want all TI's to be aware of these people> and websites. We want what is happening to us stopped not prolonged. Kelly> Taylor

Trying to do this aggressively could be a muchlarger project than is obvious at first glance,Kelly.
Some disinfo sites are EXTREMELY subtle, likean organized stalking site in which the posterdiscredits by posting some good information,while at the same time, posting photos of "perps"doing nothing at all beyond, say, just driving alongthe street or parking, and fronting silly things like"brighting" as THE NUMBER ONE THREAT totargets. Ooooooo ... those bright lights are justthe worst torture anyone could possibly imagine!
http://www.stoporganizedstalking.org

VERY slick and professional, but leaves thenon-target visitor with the impression that allwe have to worry about is "brighting," and thatwe take pictures of cars and people doingabsolutely nothing wrong.

You don't want to go after "sites," but individualpages, very methodically, very patiently, alwaysin the spirit of constructive criticism at first, soas to avoid the appearance of "a crazed witchhunt."

This IS a worthy project, but it has to be donepage by page, statement by statement, andnot by just railling against a site as a whole.And to maintain support of the other targets,your work has to be seen as motivated bya genuine desire to get the best informationout to the public.
Always talk about the information, don't lapseinto personalities and accusations of being aperp. Even when you feel it's obvious. Thejob is to correct the information, and nothingmore.
A long hard battle, and I congratulate anyonewho is willing to do the long hard, patient workinvolved.
Eleanor White[/quote]

The same unjust attack that you used on stop organised stalking, isn't that the same unjust attack you are using on my website? You are doing this apparently because I like things alphabetised? Disgraceful. Also I notice the stop organised stalking website is no longer online?

These methods are the Internet's version of how the German's went after the Jews bit by bit. I seriously find these methods disgusting. When I saw the witch hunt beginning many months ago, I really should have tried to shut you down then, before you started trying to load our websites into little Nazi trains for website extermination. Are you going to have our websites wearing a yellow stars on their opening pages?

Oh no that's right. http://www.raven1.net/reviews/cr000002.htm

Instead you are going to have some of our legitimate websites wearing a yellow badge as approved by you. It must be nice to play judge and jury for a whole community.

When targets that don't know any better come across these false tactics, they will just take their word for it, not knowing any better, while real targets get left in the dust, and then the only thing that get's out there is the official spell as approved by them?

Our websites are not the reasons that journalists have stayed away. Some of our websites clearly do get requests for media interviews, and some do grant them.

I am going to politely ask, that you and your assessment crew stay away from my website. I want nothing to do with this type of accreditation, because I think this practice is nothing than a witch hunt for legitimate people who are trying to get this exposed. The only persons who should have Bogus stamped on their forehead are people who choose to take part in this type of
practise.

The next point that I would like to draw your attention to are the search engines. They gradually are either killing search terms. Eg. 2 years ago, the Gang Stalking term on google had 1.3 million search results. I blogged about this before, because at the height of the terms popularity, the term suddenly in a matter of days, had 75,000 hits instead of 1.3 million hits. After blogging about it, the search term had gone back to normal 1.3 million hits, and now today, with the Gang Stalking term still being very popular, the hits that google bring back are 364,000. Not only that, but on some other search engines they are starting to replace more popular legit sites, in my opinion with sites that are controlled by questionable sources. Others have complained about this with 9/11 sites, UFO, conspiracy sites, etc.

This is all very worrisome at a time when I just found out that Australia is going to be monitoring their Internet the same way China does. That's pretty scary, remember Australia is suppose to be a democratic country.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24568137-2862,00.html

[quote]Australia to implement mandatory internet censorship
AUSTRALIA will join China in implementing mandatory censoring of the internet under plans put forward by the Federal Government.

The revelations emerge as US tech giants Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, and a coalition of human rights and other groups unveiled a code of conduct aimed at safeguarding online freedom of speech and privacy.

The government has declared it will not let internet users opt out of the proposed national internet filter.

The plan was first created as a way to combat child pornography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia.

Communications minister Stephen Conroy revealed the mandatory censorship to the Senate estimates committee as the Global Network Initiative, bringing together leading companies, human rights organisations, academics and investors, committed the technology firms to "protect the freedom of expression and privacy rights of their users".[/quote]

Now you notice that along with trying to censor child pornography, they were also going to be trying to block controversial websites on euthanasia, or anorexia. Notice the recent New York Times article, trying to link specific websites in this community, to anorexia and suicide websites? Keep in mind that Gang Stalking Websites have not been researched.

Governments are trying to censor the Internet. Australia is just one starting point. Then it will be what they deem to be controversial websites, but only controversial websites. It's the way a society that is closing down, begins to operate. Once they get anything blocked or shut down, they will go after other websites, till they control what is seen or not seen.

If they can't do it externally with our websites, they will try to do it Internally. The problem of course is society. Society seems to just always blindly and sheepishly sit back and let this happen.

For once, I am going to ask some of you to do the near almost impossible. Please try to wake up a little bit, before it's too late. I think what we are doing is starting to work, but I think we have to do so in greater measure.

So far the killing of the term Gang Stalking seems to be failing. The term is now well known. However it is associated in some circles that will never get the correction as sites for paranoids. Other people know what it is, and they are supportive. I spent days getting the corrections made, because it's too important a subject matter.

I think the attempt by Internal forces to kill the term for the time being has failed, so we should be prepared for other things.

Eg. Let's keep an eye out in the near future for laws that go after controversial sites, and try to shut down Mind Control or other similar sites.

As you know the Gang Stalking World website has contacted the New York Times to request a correction and we await a response from them.

In the mean time, let's stop the Internal threats from killing legit websites. We have enough to worry about without none legitimate witch hunts internally. We are already being mobbed, stalked, harassed, and bullied by external threats.

What I have been doing is if I don't trust a website, or have reason to suspect it's not legit. I no longer direct targets there. I remove the links from my blogs. I just try to stay away from those websites, and make sure other innocent people who might not know better stay away from those sites. What I try to do instead is highlight websites that I think are doing a good job. This also goes for blogs, or external people who are helping to further our cause, by providing prove via their own external research.

If you really have a problem with a website, and think it's not legit, then don't promote it, or say you don't think it's legit. For those who want to go on Nazi witch hunts, we are already being hunted, we don't need to be hunted any further, not our blogs, our websites, or whatever else you are going to choose to go after in the future.

I hope those reading this, will ban with me, to see that this practice gets left where it belongs, back in the Nazi Witch Hunt files.

Thank You

Thank you for all your hard work and dedication

To all Targeted Individuals everywhere.

I just wanted to stop and take a moment to say thank you. We would not have come this far without your hard work and dedication in exposing our targeting.

Thank You. Please keep your lights shining & keep up the fight.

http://www.hallmark.com/ECardWeb/ECV.jsp?a=EG0979482974240M278699759Y&product_id=

The eye of the storm

This week as you know should have been Indigo Ribbon Week and the focus was going to be on what has happened over the last year since the Indigo Ribbon was introduced into the Targeted Individual Community.

Because the New York Times article came out, the focus this week was shifted onto mitigating and managing the outcome of the article.

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

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

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

Instead we were what I am nicknaming the eye of the storm this week. We had an article in the New York Times that described Gang Stalking and other Targeted Individual Communities as Extreme Communities. I would later on confirm with Vaughan Bell that he has never studied the subject of Gang Stalking, or Gang Stalking Communities. The experts in the article seem to have focused on Mind Control Websites. I have written several articles disputing, rebutting, or clarifying the original article, but since my readership might not be as wide scale as the New York Times readership, we can assume that many read the article and will never see the follow articles.

I am not sure if Vaughan Bell or any of the other named researchers, psychiatrists, or psychologists will be contacting the New York Times to have the correction made, but for the Integrity of their work and study I suspect this might be the case. No researcher wants to have their work plagiarized anymore than they would want to have research attributed to them that was not their own, or more importantly that they have not done.

Part of what I did this week was to spend time tracking the articles, while trying to also compile a very brief and sparse list of our missing Targeted Individuals. This did leave me really tired and I was not able to focus on my inner world as much as I wanted to, so I will have to redouble those efforts a bit later.

The only other point I wanted to add to this is that when people are researching any of these phenomenon, I hope they will keep in mind that there are deliberate elements within these communities that are there for the sole purpose of making the community look paranoid, or worst. I see this from time to time, and I am aware that we do have Citizen Informants that are there for this specific purpose, just like any other activism movement. It's something that any true researcher should be cognizant of.

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

http://www.youtube.com/user/theninthtrust

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

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

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

[quote]It's taking every last bit of energy I have to get some of these videos out for public viewing as I have been 'assaulted and battered' for over the last five years with sound so severe, the sound forcefully induces severe headaches that go back and forth with incapacitating migraines. The videos I've taken, a few representative samples of which are on this website, are just a small percentage of the staggering number of abusive/severely abusive/severely abusive and migraine triggering flights overhead, an insane deliberately created situation, in addition to coordinated collaborated stalking to terrorize and attempt to kill/silence witness of police brutality and victim of violence, violence they approve and support against women.[/quote]

If anyone has any information, or can do a bit of Targeted sleuthing into her situation that would be great. I just want to know that she has not gone missing, been locked away, or put in jail. She may have simply become financially unable to keep posting, or maybe she is ok, but that is not usually the case, so any information would be great.

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

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

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

Address: P.O. Box 161, 31 Adelaide Street East, Toronto, Ontario M5C 2J5, CANADA
Phone: (416) 464-2461 or Toll-Free Voicemail in Canada & U.S.: (877) 728-5183
Email: irlf@ureach.com & Website: www.afrocide.com

January 23, 2004

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

A Florida attorney suing the federal government alleged that seven car accidents occurring on or around her court deadlines were deliberately staged counter-intelligence program (COINTELPRO) murder attempts. When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld federal appellate rulings that the alleged COINTELPRO was frivolous, the attorney sought political asylum in Canada. Then, despite undisputed evidence of being disbarred from practicing law without due process, the high court upheld the Florida Supreme Courts ruling that disbarred the whistle-blowing attorney.

COINTELPRO was a FBI program begun by its former and long-time director, J. Edgar Hoover, in 1956 to neutralize American political dissidents. The program officially ended in 1971 to afford additional security to our sensitive techniques and operations of disrupting racially-related activities in the name of internal/national security.

Anita E. Belle, a black female practicing law in Florida, alleged that COINTELPRO reared its ugly head against her after she filed cases on behalf of blacks and whites in seven states harmed due to the Central Intelligence Agency or CIAs role in importing illegal drugs into black communities. She alleged that at least one reputed CIA agent admitted the agency conspired with organized crime to use illegal drugs as a means of pharmaceutically enslaving African-Americans. In early 2000, five of her seven cases were consolidated as the Nicaraguan Contras Narcotics Trafficking Litigation, MDL 1331, in the federal court in Gainesville, Florida.

Belle claims that the cases became so sabotaged that she and her family were forced to flee Florida in fear of their lives. She first moved to North Carolina, but left there after witnesses in the CIA cases were threatened. She then returned to her hometown of Detroit, Michigan.
Belle recalled the Iran-Contra scandal that plagued the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. During the 2000 Florida election debacle, Belle made a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request to the FBI for the criminal records of the former president and his sons, Florida governor Jeb Bush and presidential candidate/Texas governor George W. Bush. The FBI denied her FOIA request on privacy grounds. Belle then sued the FBI, arguing that the federal criminal records of public officials should not be protected by privacy, else Americans may unwittingly elect organized crimelords who will undermine the integrity of the government. Meanwhile, Belle claims the retaliation against her and her family continued in Detroit to such an extent that she added COINTELPRO allegations to her case against the FBI.

Belle alleged the Florida Bar was a co-conspirator with the FBI in the agencys COINTELPRO activities, accusing the Florida Bar of disbarring her so as to discredit her and halt her suits against the federal government. She alleged that the Florida Bars investigator on her disbarment case, Bill Freeh, was a retired FBI agent and a close relative of Louis Freeh, the director of the FBI at that time.

Belle further alleged that both George Bushes were members of Masonic fraternities that vow to keep and cover up their brothers secrets. She accused that when politicians, law enforcement, lawyers, physicians, and the judiciary are also freemasons, then organized crimelords could racketeer the Masonic vow to avoid prosecution and punishment for their crimes. She cited that the United Kingdom had recognized this above the law danger and required judges to disclose their Masonic affiliations. Belle thus requested that the judges on her cases make disclosure similar to that being done by British judges, a motion that was denied. Belle argued that Masonic disclosure was of heightened importance in southern states such as Florida where white masons founded the Ku Klux Klan.

She later discovered that Robert Cleland, the Michigan federal judge who dismissed her FBI case as frivolous, was a white freemason. She also discovered that Florida Supreme Court Justice Leander Shaw, who concurred in her disbarment, was a black mason. Belle had also filed a reparations case that was dismissed as frivolous by a Maryland federal judge, Alexander Williams, who was also a Prince Hall mason. Belle accuses the judges of harboring secret bias and discriminating against her, a non-mason, in favor of fellow masons.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Areas to consider when researching Gang Stalking

In researching Gang Stalking there are many factors to be considered. It's not a subject matter that should be studied lightly. Also the average psychiatrist if not familiar with some of the other issues that are affecting members of many communities might not be able to make an iron clad assessment without looking at several factors. Here are factors that I think should be considered.

Areas to be aware of when studying Gang Stalking.

Workplace Mobbing.

It's our nearest and dearest cousin on an emotional and psychological level. The methodology used in workplace mobbing are some of the same that we see happening with Gang Stalking.

http://mobbing-usa.com/

Awareness is slowly growing in the U.S. and in Canada about the darker side of
work and the devastating effects that mobbing and bullying can have on the self,
health, organizations and society. Our colleagues in North America, though still
rather few, do their part to contribute to the growing interest. For example:
Three conferences on the topic have been organized in the U.S. since 2000, in
California, Massachusetts and Iowa; the Department of Environmental Quality for
the State of Oregon has established the first anti-mobbing policy in the U.S.;
efforts to add new anti-mobbing legislation are under way in California, other
states and in Canada; and several new Internet self-help and advice groups and
websites address specific professional groups or aspects of incivility at work.
In the aftermath of the Columbine and other school shooting tragedies, the media
has increasingly discussed bullying in the schools, thus also raising awareness
of adult bullying/mobbing in the workplace.

The Snitching system

Websites such as http://www.november.org/ are doing a really nice job of showing the world the other side of snitching, and it's true affect on society.

Also Alexandra Natapoff has done some wonderful research into the wider and more impacting issues of the Informant system and how it's affecting members of some communities. In some areas over 50% or more of ethnic communities had been inducted into becoming police informants. Both men and women.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mav9tOvmWcQ
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/natapoff-snitching.html

From what I have seen, the numbers are higher than this and it's no longer limited to the communities focused on in her research.

Community Based Policing

This method of policing is changing how societies think, react and interact. It's basically turning our communities into societies like what they have in China, had in Russia, or East Germany. There is a U.N. agenda called 2020 that seeks to adapt this model for every country in the world by 2020.

http://www.albionmonitor.com/9711b/policing.html

"Ruling the community with an iron fist. “Savvy law enforcement types realized that under the community policing rubric, cops, community groups, local companies, private foundations, citizen informants and federal agencies could form alliances without causing public outcry.” Covert Action Quarterly, summer 1997.”

http://www.newswithviews.com/Raapana/niki4.htm
http://www.newswithviews.com/Raapana/niki2.htm

American communitarians promote the same kinds of surveillance and neighborhood
informants the communists used to control East Germans. Americans are slowly
being taught what East Germans had to learn very quickly. Today the KGB trains
"community" police all over America. Our friendly neighborhood cops are saving
our communities from criminals and terrorists.

Crisis Centers

When I tried to follow up on some of the research that "Norma" over at gangstalking.ca had done in conjunction with crisis center I found out that these are some of the places that targets were turning to for help. Before the Gang Stalking websites were available, woman and to a much smaller extent men were calling the crisis centers, more specifically the Rape Crisis Center to get some help, or to find anyone who knew about Gang (Organised) Stalking.

See what some of these psychiatrist do not realise is that before the websites were available, the beliefs were not going away. People were not accepting the false explanation that they were delusional. This was in many cases, too, real, to obvious, and far too life impacting. So when the police failed, doctors, psychiatrists, etc. They were calling the crisis centers.

Online before the Gang Stalking websites, they were visiting Mobbing, Conspiracy, Bullying, and mind control sites. These were the only places that were close to having any information, shared stories, or experiences that might help the target to further understand what they were going through.

Systemic corruption.

Before his death Tim Fields who shed some much needed light on the Bully phenomenon also saw a very obvious pattern of collusion amongst the targets that were seeking help. He started to research it and then passed away before he could get further.

http://www.bullyonline.org/action/obstruct.htm

Many targets of bullying report that they seem to be obstructed every step
of the way in their pursuit of justice. The management refuse to investigate, or
use an untrained investigator, or whitewash the case. The union refuses to help,
or initially shows interest but suddenly changes sides. The solicitor initially
shows interest but then starts acting in a manner which suggests they have the
other side's interests at heart rather than yours.

The employer's lawyers apply for, and obtain, adjournment after
adjournment, then obtain a pre-hearing review which the tribunal chairman
handles in favour of the employer. In the tribunal, favour is shown to the
respondent (employer) and you get the impression that the verdict has been
decided in advance. Your solicitor, the respondent's lawyers and the tribunal
chairman seem to know more about your case than you think they should.

After the tribunal you're left with no option but to privately sue the
employer, the union, and your solicitor, and appeal the tribunal decision, but
by this time you have no job, no income, your savings are gone, so is your
health, maybe your marriage too, and there's no prospect of ever being employed
again, especially in the professions.

Sound familiar? If so, you might be surprised to realise how often this
happens. Mostly it's in cases from the education sector, although it may happen
in any public sector case, for example the NHS. Occasionally, but less often, it
happens in private sector cases, and in rare cases from the voluntary
sector.

Although there's never any substantive proof, it seems that all the parties
arrayed against you have been colluding in secret. The question is, what
allegiance binds these individuals together, and where could they meet such that
the normal rules of confidentiality do not apply? What fraternal obligation
places their duty to support and protect each other above the moral, ethical and
legal obligations by which the rest of us are bound?

Tim Fields is not the only person to have noticed this type of systemic corruption when it comes time to finding help for issues of Bullying, Workplace Mobbing, etc but he might have been the one to shed the brightest light on it, had he lived.

http://www.crvawc.ca/documents/WorkplaceHarassmentandViolencereport.pdf
http://www.harassment101.com/Article5.html

Unchecked Surveillance

The unchecked surveillance that is happening to many private citizens all across the globe. We live in a new reality, but the diagnosis is the same. Think you are being followed around? Must be paranoia. Yet had the family in this article gone for help, thinking they were being spied upon, they might well have been diagnosed as paranoid, when in fact their concerns would have been fully warranted.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559130/Why-didnt-just-knock-door-ask-couple-tailed-weeks-council-spies.html?printingPage=true
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-559123/Why-earth-Stasi-state-spying-families.html

This wasn't just a cursory background check.The details of the three-week
surveillance operation read like an MI5 logbook: "Target vehicle pulls up and
parks.""Female and three children enter vehicle.""Curtains open and lights on in
premises."

This very average, unassuming family were spied upon, 24/7, followed around by (Informants) Covert Human Intelligence Sources, had their play by play activity recorded, all because someone thought they were falsifying the school district that they lived in. This is just a glimpse at what our societies have turned into and how these laws and unchecked surviellances ae being used and abused, to the unchecked power that has been handed out to many branches within society.

Lastly is the concern or question of wither Gang Stalking website help to enhance, or feed a delusion, and can these website prevent someone from seeking help for an illness?
It's a great question and one that no one can answer definitively. If someone believes that something is wrong and traditional points of reference are not providing answers or a solution, they will clearly look towards other points of healing. This is what was happening with Gang Stalking.

Before the websites were here, the beliefs were still held by individuals. When the websites were not here, people were still desperately seeking help and assistance. They were using outside sources which at times could not always formulate a basis of reference for what they were experiencing, but they were still using those points of references, because it was the best available at the time.

If someone goes to a mobbing website and it confirms a belief that they already have that co-workers are out to get them, then it's up to the individual how they further choose to use the information. The same is true with someone using the bullying website who believes that there is collusion within the system and that is what is happening to them.

The Gang Stalking websites are here, just like mobbing, bullying, etc and they are providing information, research, and shared experiences for the website visitor that chooses to review and consider the information provided.

Bedbugs, Policy Change, and Racial Barriers.

This is a follow up to several postings that I have written lately. I was going to title it Hodgepodge 2, but it's more specific than that. I also didn't want to spend too much follow up time on each point, so it's all part of one big follow up article.

The first is on Bedbugs. I can't make them go away for you, but for people who still have bedbugs, here are some things that I have discovered that might help the bedbugs to go away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5R8T1G38bYhttp://www.bedbugpowder.com/
http://www.badbedbugs.com/mattress-cover-for-bed-bugshttp://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=107650

[quote]mattress in a zippered plastic cover and greasing bedposts with Vaseline to keep the bugs from crawling up[/quote]

From everything that I have read online this is what will help to get rid of the little creatures. If you get rid of yours, it's with the hope that the Gang Stalking community will get rid of ours.

The other topic was that of policy change. I will not bother to point to the headlines that are trying to keep the terrorist threat alive and well, but it's clear that there does not seem like there will be any kind of policy change. I am sure the frustration is shared by many, many people. I think we saw the frustration this week expressed from some unexpected avenues.

Eg. If you were an Al-Qaeda leader hoping for change, apparently it's not going to happen.

We are from what I am reading, seeing many aspect of the former Clinton cabinet come back into play. I had no problem with Clinton, but with the savy use of the Internet in this campaign, it would have been nice to see something fresh, new, hip and happening, but we are seeing a rehash of what's been done before. Boring.

The last point is that of Racial Barriers. I wrote this week that it's great that the media is being very sensitive suddenly to the issues of racial barriers. Great but maybe the measure of how far a society has come should not be if they can vote in a black or bi-racial president, but if they can address the always present issues of race that already exist in the society. I mean it cute that you are censoring people for using the word colored, but what about accepting and acknowledging those of a mixed, or bi-racial heritage?

I did some research briefly on this some time ago. http://onedroprule.org/forum-2.html

In America today if you have one drop of black blood, when you are filling out applications, surveys etc, you must claim black as your heritage. There is often no spot for people of mixed race heritage. Many in America feel stigmatized by this rule. There are many bi-racial Americans who don't understand why all of their heritage can not be acknowledged, and why they in an open and modern society, still have to choose one part of their ancestry.

Tiger Woods made a point of not being classified by one part of his ancestry when he won at tennis, he made sure that all parts of his ancestry were acknowledged. I don't see a change in this acknowledgement happening across the society.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2008/07/01/man_3.jpg

(The one drop rule means that at 32 this man could go from a classification of white to black, upon learning that his father was African American.)
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/race/2008/07/incognito-from.html#more

So how should a society really be measured? By their choices at the voting booth, or by the way they treat and acknowledge the members of their society and the multifaceted realities that exist in the heart of that society.

http://onedroprule.org/about5108.html

Clarification

Just a quick update on the New York Times article.

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

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

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

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

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

I have enough people offline and online that I have spoken to, to know that I know what I am talking about with the Gang Stalking stuff.

Since the only psychologist thus far that I could find who mentioned extreme communities was again Vaughan Bell, he has not identified the Gang Stalking websites as such, since he has never studied them.

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

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

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

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

Indigo Ribbon Day

This Sunday is Indigo Ribbon Day.





The Ribbon has been adapted by some members of the Targeted Individual community as a way to show unity and solidarity.



Every cause has a symbol of hope, a ray of light. When people see this ribbon, it's with the hope that they will realise that there are Targeted Individual and that they are suffering.
It's a voice for those who are having to remain silent. If you have a web blog, website, etc you can paste this on your website.



If you campaign offline, you can paste the ribbon on just like you would for any other cause.
The Indigo Ribbon is a ray of hope for Targeted Individuals. Light for those in the dark. Hope for the Survivors.



http://www.indigoribbon.com/images/Ribbon3.jpg

If you are looking for Indigo Ribbon gear, you can find it here.

http://www.zazzle.com/gangstalking
Let's show our unity by spotlighting those Ribbons.

The Unforgivable Word

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/al_qaida_obama

I woke up to this headline. Al-Qaeda attacks Obama. Terrorist group uses racial slur to attack president elect.

I am going what? So I delve further into the article, because I am pretty sure, terrorist in the desert or not, whatever you want to think of them. I am hoping they know better than to use the other N word.

[quote]Ayman al-Zawahri's message appeared mainly aimed at persuading Muslims and Arabs that Obama does not represent a change in U.S. policies.

He said in the message that Obama is "the direct opposite of honourable black Americans" like Malcolm X, the 1960s African-American rights leader.

In al-Qaida's first response to Obama's victory, al-Zawahri also called him - along with former and current secretaries of state Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice - "house Negroes." [/quote]

So he didn't use the unforgivable word. Also this argument is one that I have heard from several other people, black or white. Some people do think that there is no change. Democrat or Republican, black or white it's the same agenda.

I also remember recently that Jesse Jackson had to apologize for his remark where he said he felt that Obama was talking down to black people.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/10/nation/na-jackson10

[quote]“Barack, he’s talking down to black people,” Jackson said in a short clip the network aired this afternoon on “Special Report with Brit Hume.”
[/quote]

Now it's not as flattering as being called the Magic Negro, which I still don't see how that was meant to be flattering, but apparently it was, when used by the L.A. Times.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,5335087.story?coll=la-opinion-center

[quote]
But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro."

The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro .
[/quote]

This follows on the heals of Lindsey Lohan, getting some heat for using the term Colored. I didn't watch the video, but even if she used the term colored, it's antiquated, but not generally in many circles considered racist.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/11/lindsay-lohan-calls-obama_n_143087.html

[quote]Lindsay Lohan is happy Barack Obama got elected after campaigning for him this year. But, she referred to the President-Elect with a mumbled adjective at the beginning of an interview with Access Hollywood's Maria Menounos that some say is offensive. Does she say "good" or "colored?"

"It's an amazing feeling. It's our first [mumble] president."
[/quote]

So let's recap here people, so I don't keep seeing those crazy headlines.
Colored is an antiquated word, but at the time of it's popularity was I don't think primarily a negative word. (Though it was used as a divisive word)

Black the preferred term outside of America, and the Afro American term. In Canada, the UK, and many other parts of the world Black is the preferred term.

Negro, Not a popular term in this time period, but still not considered a racist word. In fact the term is still used by the United Negro College Fund. Because a mind is a terrible thing to waste.
The last and final word which I will not debate here, but I still think falls into the unforgivable word category. The N_gger word. Used by some urban kids and some adults, the word has throughout history had a negative connotation. It still does in many circles. Urban culture has tried to reclaim and recapture the term and often use it amongst themselves, much to the shagrin of people like Oprah and many others in the black community and outside, who find the term highly offensive.

The term is a dubious one, because depending on who uses it, it's often over looked in some cases, Eg. If used by a black person, vs if used by another race. Some people think that the term should be not used by anyone. (I am in agreement with this.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6406625.stm

[quote]The city council of New York has voted to ban the use of the word "nigger".
The resolution to ban the so-called "N-word" is largely symbolic as it carries no weight in law and those who use the word would face no punishment.

But it reflects a growing unease that the racial slur is now part of everyday conversation and that the taboo against its usage has been swept away.

The word is in common usage among sections of the younger generation in the United States.
'Throwback to slavery'

For many years the "N-word" has been used by young African Americans who have appropriated it as a, perhaps ironic, term of endearment.

Now, other ethnic groups have started to use it in a similar context, and those who insist it should be banned are growing increasingly outraged.

Many African American community leaders, with the backing of fellow lawmakers, say it is offensive in every context and that is a word which should never be said. [/quote]

So that's a little bit of a history lesson on words that are popping up left right and center and dubious headlines that I keep coming across. Let's not go crazy people. Obama hopefully will not be the last black (bi-racial) president ever. I think it's great the media is taking care to make sure that he feels welcome and people are being sensitive on his behalf, wither it's making sure that the colored term is not used again, or other precautions, but let's keep things in context here.

Here are some pics of Obama with his grand parents.
http://www.moonbattery.com/ObamaGrandparents.jpg

With his dad's family
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/2008/03/31/obama_family.jpg

with his mom
http://maremare1225.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/sweet.jpg

His mom's family
http://theladnerreportblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/hard-working-white-people-should_13.html

With is family
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/03/15/mn_obama_family.jpg

With his grand daddy
http://a.abcnews.com/images/Nightline/ht_beach_080131_ssv.jpg

So unless someone uses the unforgivable word, can we stop with the crazy headlines, please.

The reactions are in.

As many know, I have been tracking the New York Times article to see what kind of reaction it's getting across the board.

It's gotten a lot of various reactions. I have come across people who now say that it's trendy to think that you are being followed around. Gang Stalking trendy? I don't know about that one.
We have people who think that we are paranoids getting together and sharing stories, but getting the help we need and that's a good thing. I didn't stop to find out if the person was Martha Steward or not, but apparently it's a good thing. LOL.

I came across one person who is researching the Jeremy Blake and Teresa Duncan suicides, or what they termed Gang Stalking by Scientology, and this person was a little bit concerned for their own well being after starting this research. I mean a general research is one thing, but any time you did deep like Gary Webb did, you do have to be careful.

I have had to join Digg, Reddit, Slashdot, and so many other places to track this article down, and the reaction to it. Cause it's nice to know the pulse of the Internet.

So Gang Stalking has become a household name. Which is good. It's not in the way we wanted it, in many cases, but the term is out there and that was a goal. Everyone has to start someplace. I see this like starting in the mail room. We have our foot in the door, it's our choice what we make of it.

We still have a lot of people who read the article, did not go and visit any of the websites mentioned, and formulated an opinion strictly based on the article. I found at least one person who tried to check out the website, but who said it was down. I know my website shows 100% up time over the last few weeks, so I suggested he try again.

My email is not working properly so if you do email me, and don't get me, please use the Wordpress blog to try for access. It's just within the last 72 hours that it's not working correctly. Email is either not arriving, or it's being delayed for several hours.

Also in tracking the article, I found a copy of it at this forum. I wanted to be able to respond to the article, because as you know, I have written a response.

http://forum.psychlinks.ca/showthread.php?p=103474

I used the user name gangstalking, because it's what I use all over the Internet, when speaking out about what is happening. Have a cause, use the name that goes with the cause, just common sense. Well after waiting to be approved. (We are not worthy, we are not worthy. Sorry flash back to Wayne's World the movie.)

Anyways, I received this response.

[quote]"Given the sensitive nature of the Psychlinks Forum, your chosen username, "gangstalking", is likely to be a trigger for certain members.
I have deleted this account. Feel free to re-register with a less triggering username.
Dr. David J. Baxter, C.Psych."[/quote]

So I wrote to him to find out what kind of trigger this was likely to be? It has not been a trigger for anyone over the last two years, but suddenly, it's going to be a trigger, because you are going to make it so perhaps?

So I wrote back to find out what kind of a trigger this was going to be? It seem a little neurotic to me. See my feedback below.

[quote]"I registered the user name gangstalking, because you had an article on this forum that I wanted to comment on.

I was told that I could not use the user name gangstalking, because it might be a trigger word. I am wondering what type of pre-conseived notions this forum has regarding the user name gangstalking.

http://forum.psychlinks.ca/index.php show details 8:39 AM (12 hours ago)"[/quote]

Apparently it takes a long time to be approved for this forum. 12 hours ago. I really do think people create neurosis themselves, at times. Anyways he writes back.

[quote]We have members who have experienced a variety of trauma, including sexual assaults and ex-partner stalking and violence. You need to understand and be sensitive to these issues if you are going to be a member of this community.That is a very strict forum policy. On your second registration, I changed your username to GS when I approved it. Dr. David J. Baxter, C.Psych.
[/quote]

Ok I can understand his surface concern, but remember associating with people who have been through these types of situations is not new for me or different. In the last two years, I have encountered and associated with a variety of people. So I wrote back.

[quote]So Dr Baxter, to understand you correctly. Even though I have used the user name on the Sexual Harassment Support forum, the Stalking Victims Sanctuary forum, and several other related forums of that type, you now feel that it would be insensitive to use this user name on your forum.

I am well aware of the sensitivity of these issues, having championed and dealth with these issues on a peer to peer support basis. I have conversed with several of these other support sites, and they did not come to the same conclusions that you have, thus I am trying to understand what is behind this concern with the user name.

I respect your forum guidelines, I however am still not clear why you personally feel that the user name will have a negative effect on your members, when it has not on other forums thus mentioned. I am just trying to understand what is at the heart of this matter. Regards, gangstalking.[/quote]

At this stage I am going to trust that Dr Baxter understands his community better than I do, and they may be more sensitive than other communities of a similar nature, and so I am going to decline to be a part of his community, because if my user name would offend, then what might my commenting do? Since the term Gang Stalking is likely to come up? Also if the term is so offensive that I can't use the user name, then why have an article with this on your forum?

http://forum.psychlinks.ca/showthread.php?p=103474

I don't want to be mean, but I am thinking that there are people coming across this article on that forum, seeing the name and wigging out. Either way, so that I don't risk offending, I am going to refrain from posting on this forum and responding to the article.

I really wanted to respond to the article, as I have on several other Internet websites, to help facilitate a better understanding of our community and what we are about and why we felt some portions of the New York Times article were unbalanced, but I feel at this stage, anything I write there, might be construed as harmful to the members. So out of respect for that, I will refrain from posting my article response, which many of you have now seen.

http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Social/article.php?sid=315&mode=thread&order=0

For better or for worst the term Gang Stalking is now a household name, offline and online. The question now is how do we as a community help facilitate further understanding and awareness to the general public, who still get their information from the mainstream media, in many cases without any relevant questions being asked?

Extreme assessments and paranoid conclusions

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

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

http://arginine.spc.org/vaughan/Bell_2007_JMH_Preprint.pdf

Extreme communities
One feature that has garnered relatively little
attention in the clinical research literature is the existence of what might be
termed ‘extreme communities’. Owing to the difficulty with which material can be
effectively censored or suppressed online, views considered extreme or
unacceptable to the mainstream can be expressed relatively freely, with online
communities often formed by those who share similar opinions. Some of these are
of particular interest to mental health professionals, as they attempt to
reframe what would otherwise be classified as ‘mental disorder’ in an entirely
different light.

According to what Dr Bell wrote in the article it was views considered extreme or unacceptable by the mainstream. Using this definition I wondered if things such as the 9/11 truth movement would be an extreme community? Their views are not considered mainstream. I also wondered who else might fall into this list based on Dr Bell's definition?

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

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

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

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

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

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

World of WarCraft reached 11 Million monthly Subscribers. Many of them sane individuals who go online to take part in these roleplaying games. For that community, I am sure they consider themselves normal and mainstream, just by their sheer numbers. I am sure there are still many in society who would not however consider going online to roleplay normal, mainstream or even healthy.
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170971

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bridging the gap.

Misdiagnosed as having paranoid delusions. This is exactly where many of our workplace mobbing cousins were 15 years ago before credible research was done into the phenomenon of workplace mobbing. They were often thought to be paranoid, some I am sure were equally locked away or put on medications, but a decade and a half later with more understanding into this deliberate phenomenon we not only realise how far reaching it is, but how systemic it is as well.

[quote]As a clinician, Leymann made his priority the healing of post-traumatic stress in those most severely affected by mobbing. With the support of the Swedish health service, he opened a clinic for mobbing victims in 1994, and published detailed research on the first 64 patients treated there. That clinic no longer exists and Leymann himself died in 1999, but 200 patients are currently treated in a similar clinic that opened in Saarbruecken, Germany, this year.

Competent, well-informed treatment of the many mobbing targets who suffer mental breakdown is obviously in order, especially since they have often in the past been misdiagnosed as having paranoid delusions.

Psychiatric injury, however, is but one possible harmful result of being mobbed. Some mobbing targets keep their sanity but succumb to cardiovascular disease–hypertension, heart attack, or stroke. Most suffer loss of income and reputation. Marital breakdown and isolation from friends and family are also common outcomes. [/quote]

When a problem is not understood, especially by outsides who might have a cold, calculating, or even dispassionate interest in the subject matter it's easy to falsely label something that is not understood. Such as the people that are part of that phenomenon or the phenomenon itself.
Today the concept of workplace mobbing is well understood, and has become more normalised in society, thanks to research by credible professors such as K. Westhues. Himself a target of workplace mobbing, he was able to ward off what was happening to him, and spent the next decade studying the phenomenon and assisting other targets. He is now a widely respected researcher in the field.

With subject matters such as bullying, gang stalking, mobbing, mind control, because the outside world is often unaware of the devastating effect the harassment is having, it's often up to the insiders of that community to bring knowledge and understanding to the forefront, and to the outside world at large.

10 years ago, bullying was not understood that well, but with the persistence of people like Tim Fields, it's now a household word, and a very well understood concept.

We as a community in the Gang Stalking World are on the precipice, where the term is becoming more well known, but with limited understanding, and preconceived prejudices about gang stalking, by people in various fields and outside communities.

This might also have been recently complicated by being falsely termed as an extreme community. We are not so much an extreme community as a misunderstood community. We are about 3-5 years behind where our fellow counterparts were. We do need more research into the subject matter, but because what is happening to us, is being enacted by the very governments we trust, this further complicates exposing what's happening to the general population, and then getting assistance, validation and understanding from the world at large.

We are at the crossing over stage, and for every move we do try to make forward, we have silent watchers in the background, from what the New York Times article stated, at times misdiagnosing our community, and mislabeling the members of that community, without giving any actual credence to the research being presented and the very real possibility that what we are saying is true, and that this is in fact really happening to us.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/fashion/13psych.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

The key emphasis then still relies on mechanisms within the Gang Stalking community to prove our innocence, because we have already been declared by some as guilty, or rather mislabeled as paranoid, delusional, or mentally ill. There is strength in unity, we have seen this with our cousin community, yet this is still a key point that alludes our community due to several key internal factors.

In moving forward, there has to be more focus on maintaining a unified community, which is hard at times because we do remain fragmented in many ways. We still have to place key emphasis on Awareness, and exposure. There is a lot of good research coming out in high profile mediums and those should be used to bridge that gaps that have hitherto prevented us from crossing over to where our cousins in the mobbing community are.