The Gang Stalking File

The case against me and what I understand of it.


The gangstalking file.


http://www.workplacebullying.org/2009/05/14/uk-green2/

[quote]The largest part of the award is the £640,000 awarded for future loss of earnings and a pension, and it is this portion which marks the case out as unusual.

“We have seen cases like this before a number of times but the court has awarded such a large amount because it took the view that this person would not be able to work at this salary level for a long time in the future,” said Tom Potbury, a lawyer specialising in employment law at Pinsent Masons.

Green, 36, had said she was subjected to “offensive, abusive, intimidating, denigrating, bullying, humiliating, patronizing, infantile and insulting words and behavior” and subjected to crude and lewd comments from her former colleagues. Her colleagues would move her papers, hide her post and remove her from document circulation lists. She alleged that some of the colleagues had ignored and excluded her, that her personal and professional authority was undermined, and her workload increased to unreasonable and arbitrary levels.

Her lawyer said medical experts on both sides of the case agreed that Green developed a major depressive disorder, but there was disagreement about its cause.

Deutsche Bank said it had not breached its duties to Green and denied that she was bullied, saying she had had a predisposition to mental illness. Deutsche Bank paid for stress counselling and assertiveness training for Green but she had a nervous breakdown before returning to work and suffering a relapse.[/quote]


I have read the above case scenario several times. It's funny because the workplace mobbing that I encountered was very similar in some regards to some of the things that went on in this case. Instead of being on the winning end of a lawsuit, I am on this end of an investigation, which is being used to falsely used to portray me as mentally ill.

It's funny, someone is dehumanized and degraded for several years and they no longer wish to put up with it, or emotionally can not, and the employer in this case a bank wants to place all the blame on them.

Part of what I have been trying to do is better understand the mechanisms used to place me under this investigation. One that has continued for years.

What's happening to me goes back a really long time. As mentioned before, I first became aware of the actual Gang Stalking, about three years ago, but my workplace mobbing had gone on for several years before this.

At work I was in a similar situation where workplace mobbing was daily, it was continuous and it made it impossible for me to perform my job functions. I eventually filed a complaint with the human rights commission after trying to work things out with Human Resources.

Shortly after filing the complaint C. Coughlin from HR called me into the office, in the presence of my senior manager at the time and advised me that if I did not drop the complaint, I would be required to see a Dr Brown. If I however dropped the complaint, things would back to normal. This play was disgraceful, and dirty but not uncommon.

Apparently if you decide to stand up for your rights or blow the whistle you need to speak to someone, if you instead choose option b and drop the case against them, you are of sound mind and body. Fascinating how these companies work. They use these investigations to discredit and disenfranchise their enemies. They destroy people's lives to protect their own interests. That's the true purpose of human resources in these companies.


The harassment I was exposed to included slander, lies, derogatory comments, rumors, and a stimuli which was anchored to said rumour. The stimuli was what was used for the bulk of the harassment. Because I complained primarily about the stimuli, they used this to try to portray me as mentally ill.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1144462/Man-jailed-harrassing-elderly-neighbours-whistling-Addams-Family-theme-time-saw-them.html


[quote]
Leopold Wrobel harassed the pensioners for more than four years, making them feel like prisoners in their home.

His victims, Michael and Kathleen Sharpe, said Wrobel had 'nearly succeeded' in destroying their lives.

Wrobel, 51, had been handed an anti-social behaviour order last December for harassing the couple.

But a court heard his nuisance behaviour, which had already lasted for four years, continued on the day the order was imposed.

The court was shown CCTV footage from cameras on the Sharpes' property, which picked up Wrobel's repeated whistling when they arrived at or left the house.

Michael Treharne, prosecuting, said each incident taken in isolation would probably seem silly or almost pathetic.
Leopold Wrobel taunted the elderly couple with the Addams Family theme tune

Leopold Wrobel: He taunted the couple

But he added: 'If something happens on an ongoing basis and goes on and on and on, eventually it reaches the stage of being absolutely intolerable.'

Mr Sharpe, from Wingerworth in Derbyshire, told the court Wrobel's behaviour had made his wife ill and she had started losing her hair.

'It's been devastating and it's done what he wanted to do, to try to destroy our lives,' the 68-year-old said. 'He very nearly succeeded.'

His wife told magistrates they could not leave the house without Wrobel being there. [/quote]


This couple was harassed using a stimuli, in this case the Addams family theme. It was one man, against this couple, but he managed to almost ruin their lives. In my case, I was one person, and about 80% of the peope I worked with, including most of the managers were taking part in what was ongoing. I worked with about 130 people at the time.

The very things that I complained about, at the time and filed the human rights complaint about are some of the very things individuals are now winning court cases over currently, yet in my case, it's being used to portray me as crazy, and keep a fake investigation ongoing.


Part of what I complained about is that a manager, let's call him "hateman the hitman saw", who was currently working in the same company that I was, had years earlier at a different company started a derogatory rumour about me. I stated in the complaint that I felt that this rumour had continued onto my current job.

Since I was once again working with this person, I had reasonable grounds to believe that this person was helping to fuel the flames of this degrogatory rumour, once again. I had grounds to believe it, because I heard back that this was the case. The bulk of my complaint focused on the fact that the derogatory rumours/comments had been anchored to a stimuli, and said stimuli was being used on a daily basis to make it impossible for me to perform my job functions. Eg. If the stimuli had been keys jangling, you would have the people directly around me, jangling keys for the whole shift, on several occasions, I had customers asking me about the noise in the background.

Sounds pretty simple right, not so simple, since the workplace decided to go along with what was happening.

After researching this, what I now know is that the stimuli and my reaction to it were deliberately created. I had worked with someone at the first job who was in the military. He had tried to sensitise me to three stimuli. I didn't know it at the time, that it was deliberate, but I do now. The other stimuli was pens clicking, and the actual stimuli which I became sensitive to.

What I also now know is that James, and "Hateman The Hitman Saw", were both part of the snitching friends network. What James did with the anchoring of the stimuli was deliberate. What I don't know is if he did this on his own accord, or if in fact this was more deliberate than that. James outside of work did have military connections, so I don't have the answer to this yet.


The other thing that was happening at that time is the same tactic was being used outside of the workplace to harass me in public. I was aware of this, but I was not aware of the snitching friends network.

So what you have is a target that has been deliberately sensitised. A corrupt company that wants to keep the target quite and stop them from going forward with a human rights complaint. I am not saying that this company is the only place an investigation could have originated from, because I have reason to believe that this might have started years before this, but I do believe that they used my complaint to the human rights commission to try to portray me as mentally ill, when really I was being harassed, and any actions I took to protect myself from being harassed day in and day out were fully justified. I will also state that the harassment was happening outside of the workplace, and the same applies.

So the target is aware that they are being harassed and a stimuli is being used. What they do in the course of these investigations is they try to incite and instigate incidents to further the perception of mental illness, or whatever the target is being billed as. If the target is being billed as a racist, they try to encourage negative interactions with persons of different races. If they are being billed as homophobic, they try to encourage negative interactions with people who are homosexual, if the target is being billed as a terrorist, they try to portray the target as such and make their actions look suspicious.

Since I have been targeted, they have tried the mentally ill angle several times and several different ways. I am aware that one incident that happened recently involved my handing out activism material to a group in a small cafe, about 7 people. I decided to try some viral activism, so I very impromptu handed out some papers directing the informants to visit one of the Gang Stalking websites. I mean I get people coming up to me all the time handing me flyer's for clubs, and other events, or their activism materials so I don't see the difference. However my understanding is that they are using me handing out what I consider essentially activism material to further the myth of mental illness. Right because naming informants as such and directing them to Gang Stalking websites is insane? Right. I really have to wonder about the shrills that they are using to make these types of assessments and then further disenfranchise targets?

They could in essence use a simple incident such as this and use it to get employers current to flag you. Yet is not activism what I do on a daily basis? Why should my handing out activism material be seen or evaluated any differently than anyone else?

When they can't prove that you are crazy, the scope of the investigation might shift. It's what I call a fishing expedition. Remember these investigations are often the life blood for many. The informants get a bit of money, lot's of men get construction jobs, and they use these investigations to push targets to the edge, hoping that when they do snap, they will have further proof that the informant network is doing a good job. So every time they can put a target in a mental hospital, get them behind bars, to kill themselves or others, or just attack someone, this gives them cause, and in some cases additional funding, so it's in their best interest to make you look crazy.

Recently what some informants did is that they started a group with a list of people. Many on that list did not ask to be on that list, but they started sending out emails. In those emails they used some racist or other language that might be cause for an investigation. So for example you find yourself a part of this list, which is in effect a group. You don't say anything wrong, but others in the group do, surprise, you might find yourself being investigated, because you now belong to a group spewing hate speech. The hate speech will ofcourse have been provided by the informants themselves, but what does that matter?

I had another incident where I was in the park. I had put up with 20 minutes of some idiot informant doing stupid dogs tricks while trying to keep an eye on me. Normally if you were not aware of what was happening it would not be that irritating, but it was. I was grateful when the dog boy left, and was just getting comfortable, when yet another informant showed up, this one even worst than the first, because he just stood there and stared. Well I had it, and I just gave him a glaring look before reaching into my case to get something. I had just gotten some groceries and was pretty tired, and just wanted to sit there without being disturbed.

The next thing I know, the little man pansy is running across the park like a bat out of hell, and I am thinking what the heck? I have been known to give some pretty squelching looks, but I didn't think I was that good. Next thing I know before I leave the park, there is a helicopter that literally accompanied me home on my walk from the park, and for the next two months I would become acquainted with what I call airstalking.

When I got home, the serve your drug sentence as an informant neighbour above me, decided to make contact with the neighbour below. Suddenly all friendly, can I come and hang out? This neighbour had never spoken to me before. All this other stuff and I am thinking what the heck? Apparently I came to find out that, man pansy, who ran out of the park like a bat out of hell, seems to have given them the impression that I had wires in my case, (which I did for an electronic device, I think a battery charger), and therefore maybe a bomb or incendiary device? So upstairs neighbour was just making sure I didn't blow myself and him up, and the suddenly friendly Susan above me, as I call him, was just trying to get into my apartment to look around. Well that makes sense.

Now what really get's me here is all it takes is the word of a snitch. They don't have to be logical, or truthful, they can make up anything. Now to be fair to man pansy, I don't know if he did it to be spiteful because I gave him a squelching look, or if he really believed I was dangerous, and I really don't care. These people are told the target is crazy, or what have you, and normal behaviour that would normally never be questioned suddenly becomes oh did you see that, the target blinked, what do I do, what does that mean? They are irrational and dangerous.

The other problem is positive identification. There have been so many times where I know that I was flagged as someone at a location doing xyz, and I was not. If I could see my file, I am sure I would find several incidents that were attributed to me to make me look crazy, and were not in fact me, but the way these investigations work is that you are guilty, and you never get a chance to prove your innocence.

I have seen so many times where they give the signal that I am away from home, which means that they are following someone else somewhere, and this means that if there is an incident, it will be ascribed to me, and it will not be me. I have been on the train and other locations where they have the wrong target, but they are provoking someone else and I have seen the other person react. Yet this will be ascribed to me.

Corrections will never be made, because the target is not allowed any input whatsoever and most of this is based on the word of informants, staged incidents which are designed to make the target look like anything you want them to look like, pedophile, drug dealer, racist, homophone, crazy, you name it, they can stage it.

The other question I have is about the types of psychiatrists or professionals that are being used. Based on what I saw in regards to the articles that they wrote about Gang Stalking online, you have people trying to write a whole entire community off as mentally ill, when in fact these investigations are on going. Then when that does not work, you write them off as extremists or conspiracy theorists. Yet everything that has been stated just about, has been proven, by external sources. If the same types of people are being used to remotely diagnose targets as crazy, we should be very worried.

As it is, they have been investigating me for years. I was never crazy. I was being harassed. Because I choose to stand up for myself and take the company to the commission, HR used it as an opportunity to open an investigation when I failed to comply with the threat of dropping the suit. Since that time, I have been openly harassed, had my communications interfered with, had several staged incidents, some involving me, many not involving me, but all used to further portray me as mentally ill. I have never been allowed to see my file, or directly address any of the said incidents that would be used to portray me as mentally ill.

Normal activity such as handing out activism material has been used to portray me as mentally ill, keep in mind, I have never had anyone tell me that they did not want something being handed to them. So if this is the case, how can an incident be used against me? Further how can said incident be used to further try to disenfranchise me from employment?

What I do know is we have a very corrupt system. Many informants see about 15-30 minutes of skits and harassment that is running in a targets life 24/7. They perform their surveillance. The ones below me, play human target with my body, often using lasers, radar gun, pulse weaponry, what have you to burn my skin from the apartment below. They still try to do the sleep deprivation thing when they can, much of this by a human rights stand point would be considered torture, and against the law.
These people feel that it's ok to perform such actions on targets that they have been told are mentally ill, or rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, users, prostitutes etc, because these groups are seen as less than human, they don't feel that their actions are immoral, or unethical. They think that what they are doing is just fine.

Lastly again these investigations are the life blood of these programs. I had one person tell me that he was offered a construction job. Person had been sent to befriend me. The construction job was to be the benefit. They hire a lot of these people and they put a lot of money into the area around the target where the surveillance is happening and unfortunately these perks makes a targets community more likely to go along with, and take part in the harassment. Remember for the community doing the harassment/surveillance, they are often having the time of their lives, in some cases. They are working together, some feel like they are James Bond, it's fun for some of them, so fun, that they forget that their is a human being on the other side of the door, as was apparent with the maintenance guy who was so caught up in his role of being informant, that he forgot that the target has rights and the target is not ascribing to their mental pathology.

I have said it before and I will say it again, these people in many cases are not smart, many don't realise that they are being used to set people up and destroy lives. Lives like Jiverly Wong, Kimveer Gill and many others. When the target kills themselves or shoots others, they see it as proof that the target really was mentally ill, and not proof that their harassment drove the target to the end result. They then feel that they did a good job, that they are valuable and relevant and they continue on as before, feeling more justified than ever.

I also suspect that they have the odd staged incident that also further serves to justify the informant network, and the incidents further serve to make them think that what they are doing is valuable and relevant. When I researched the Stasi, many had been a part of the Stasi by choice and not by force and even after the Stasi fell, they did not see a problem with what they had done. In Hitler's Germany it was the same as well, with many enjoying a sense of corporation, neighbourliness, not seeing anything wrong or malignant in their actions, they were just following orders, or the laws of the land. It's the same for our informants.

Thus targets are guilty, we will never be proven innocent because we never get to see our files. The evidence gathered is staged in many cases, normal incidents that would not be questioned if it was done by someone else not under investigation, are being used to further justify their cases against us. When they fail to find proof for one aspect of the investigation, they set up other incidents, go on fishing expeditions and claim the scoop of the investigation has changed. This is used to continue these investigations indefinitely. Remember I recently spent time studying the extremist community, the informants are now trying to set up incidents to portray me as someone that I am not. Think about how this works if you are being investigated as a pedophile. You are likely to get emails containing kiddy porn from you friendly neighbourhood informants, and then the other informant monitoring your internet connection is likely to just focus on the content of that email. Or like the other example that I gave, these groups that you join, or that people add your email to, you have to watch what is being said, because they could use that to change the scope or add to the scope of the investigation.

If you spend anytime reading about how the police are abusing the informant system, then you might begin to have some idea of what we are up against, and then might be able to better protect yourself and others from these deliberate investigations, which have no end, and are continually staged to paint the targets in the worst light, real or imagined.

Is this democracy? No I don't believe it is, but this system has been like this for some time, and as it spreads more are likely to be affected by it, so it's very important that people become aware of how the system is operating and functioning so they can try to avoid some of the pit stops associated with it.