Gang Stalking Initiatives
A poster wrote in to clarify my opinion as to why I distance myself from some Gang Stalking initiavites. He asked me specifically about Ms. White and here is my response.
Ms White does several things that I am personally not in accord with.
She focuses on the Stalking aspect of Gang Stalking. Nothing wrong with that, but the few times I have come across her initiatives she has focused on linking this primarily to stalking and changing those laws. Nothing wrong with that, but I don’t believe this will change what is happening to Gang Stalking targets. Changing stalking laws will not change community notifications if that is what we are looking at. You have to name it if you are going to claim it.
I have always focused on the mobbing aspect of this harassment and focusing on the stalking aspect in my opinion is going to be less effective. I have from the start believed that mobbing and the way mobbing targets emotionally act out, best corrolates to the Gang Stalking movement.
Ms White has often criticized websites as bad sites, poison sites, etc, for linking the Gang Stalking harassment to government and state initiatives. That fine, yet other sites seem to get a pass for doing the same thing, and she manages to keep them off her credibility review websites. Ms White has continued to advocate Terrorist Stalking in America, a book that links Gang Stalking first to Stalking crews then to terrorists. She is always asking for proof, when someone mentions the government, yet never has the same issue with openly advocating something that even in her words has a wrong conclusion. She should be also screaming for proof on the Terrorist Stalking book but fails to. This seems to be a double standard that she has. I would love to see the book on her credibility review site, which I feel she covertly uses to attack others, under the guise of these reviews, but she is allowed to do what she wants to.
Ms White in my opinion often leads targets in directions that I do not often agree with. I think her site has loads of useful and valuable information, but when new targets come online, I just need it to be very clear that I am not affiliated with many of her initiatives. All too often they think that all sites share the same opinions and we often do not. In distancing myself from her initiatives, I hope to move targets in more useful directions. Get them more streamlined with things that might help them.
I have been on Eleanor’s forum, things always seem to move forward, but nothing ever seems to actually get done, but she conducts them very professionally. I just feel that we often disagree in various ways and I just like that to be made clear.
The FFCHS site is currently working with John Hall and a politician on laws that I don’t think will fix the problems in the Gang Stalking community. John Hall if focusing on Satalights, which is fine, but to get to the heart of the problem, I think the local initiatives like community notifications need to be addressed. They are getting good press and it feels like things are happening, like things are going forward, but like the time they got targets to write in with information about a multiple lawsuit, I don’t think this will work any better. Thus I don't want targets linking the two, and thinking that we all share the same ideas. Thus even when laws get passed the angle that is being taken I don’t feel will move things along the way that they need to go, in the direction that they need to go in. That is why I personally have chosen to distance myself from the direction that those initiatives have moved in.
I also had a discussion with a lawyer, who blasted all the Gang Stalking sites, and I asked why? It was because he had a disagreement with FFCHS and possibly Eleanor and thus he wrote off all the Gang Stalking sites. This really opened my eyes, and I didn’t think that was fair. So thus now, it’s made very clear that not all Gang Stalking sites share the same views. Thus if I do an initiative that they don’t agree with, they are not linked and visa versa.
I also have distanced myself from a poster who suggests that targets write a wild Freedom Of Information Act request. I do agree and fully support Freedom Of Information Act requests. I don’t support what was being suggested. Everytime certain fractions and their so called authority are challenged, character assassinations begin by their members, and those affiliated with those movements, they have a consistent habit of doing so, and thus one more reason I often choose to disassociate. Very simple really.
Lastly those fractions prefer to call this Organized Stalking, and sometime ago, I had to really fight to keep the term Gang Stalking after Eleanor decided that Organized Stalking was the term to use. She tried to have the term annexed after four years of really hard work to get the term popularized, in favor of a term most that is not as popular and would have set the movement back. Again at that time, I had to have unneeded character assassinations from some of their members, website attacks, which always happens when openly disagreeing with them. So now I am just very clear about which direction I am going in and which direction they are going in.
Some see this distancing as attacks on those sites, but it's really just to ensure my initiatives do not affect them, and visa versa.
I hope this answers your question.