It not just you

They Know.

I was on another targets blog yesterday and she was talking about how deeply betrayed she was by her family, and how horrible it was to discover that they were in on it.

The other thing she talked about was taking a bus and being targeted and wondering how people around her could be so unaware. The reality is they might not be unaware in a lot of cases.

My first awareness of this came at a job, I was experiencing the vibrations, which I sort of thought was maybe just me, cause no one else seemed uncomfortable, but I did notice, that two other people in the room, who had something in common with me, were falling asleep the same time I did, after the vibrations begun. I started to suspect that it was not just me, but confirmation of this came later.

One of the persons that I ended up sitting near, could not stay seated when it started happening, and he pointed out to me a good temp way of avoiding what was happening. I was like in totally shock, so from there I realised a lot of this is not just you, but what is really amazing is how people just act like they don't notice, and like nothing is going on.

Anyways on subsequent jobs, I would have more forthright coworkers, one would always call the boss over when the vibrations would start, and we could all see the plexi glass shaking, and this co-worker would get upset and be like it's happening again. Eventually this co-worker was allowed to move. I changed locations, obviously the vibrations started again, and again those around me over time moved, so it's not just you. Also in the new area, someone around me would also call the boss when they would start happening. The fun part for me by this stage is that I had found a good workaround, and I could just sit there and pretend that nothing was happening. Remember if they complain, they are listened to. If the target does it, it's viewed as part of their mental illness, or delusions.

Realising this, what I do now when they get too happy with shaking the hell out of me at home, and it starts to vibrate my heart a bit too much, I just ensure that I am at a location that is sure to be felt by those outside of my location, and let them complain if they wish to. It's worked on a couple of occasion.

Remember people that I worked with were complaining about this stuff, after 8 hr shifts. People that have not had to sit around me for months or years at a time. As the target I am getting this at home, work, job after job, day after day, week after week, month after month. Like I said however, I was lucky to find a temp work around that worked at work, and somewhat at home, to lessen the effects. Ofcourse the idea is to leave the target so tired from lack of sleep they can hardly function, but then these creatures are the lowest level of degenerates. It's hard to believe that these Threat Assessment Teams, at least some of them, don't know exactly what and who they are contacting out these assignments to. Ofcouse if you can make the target look crazy, it's more funding for them, and they can pretend their fake Threat Assessments work. What the target committed an act of violence, clearly we were right to have this person on our list, when the reality is, the sick freaks that you hire to torment and torture people are often what cause them to lash out, commit suicide, end up in jail, and institutions.

Can't say that I never mentioned it.

Stagnation

Stagnation

I feel that some aspects of this mission are stagnating. In some ways I have done what was needed in exposing the upper echelon of what I believe is behind Gang Stalking, these Threat Assessment Teams then join forces with local appendages.

The local appendages are where you get all the strange and various different versions of what is behind Gang Stalking. Due to community oriented policing each area is governed differently, and when a target is stalked, they will be stalked in accordance to the area that they are in, so some areas it will be street gangs, others cults, other the mafia, others specific ethnic groups, or diametrically opposed groups, this could be also why some see criminals behind this, but others get chased by those in corporate suites, as I have pointed out, if you travel from one area to the next, one city to the next you will see the variations.

Some of these teams try to work as a group, so let's say they will try to coordinate and dress in something with a military theme, baseball hats, ribbons, missing hubcaps, things to let them know that they are working for the same team, tracking the same subject/target. It's all part of the lower monitoring process, that these teams use.

Anyways, I do feel in some areas a lot of progress has been made this year, but in other areas things have not progressed. I think when you are around the right people, the right places, the right circumstances come your way, and when you are not, well the opposite happens.

This year I have been lucky to feel that in spirit I was making the right progress and in the right places, but in flesh it's just continually been the opposite, and that has not changed. I have not found the right circumstances to appreciate my unique character as far as being in the right places are concerned. When you are in the right places, around the right people, things flow, the right ebb, everything goes well, since early last year this has been true in spirit, but in flesh it's the opposite and I need to fix that. Yes I know that I am being systemically destroyed, and the whole goal of that is to ensure that things don't go well, that things don't flow, but it is my belief that even with these odds stacked up against you, Karmically things can balance out if you are around the right people and places. Clearly I am not or there would be more of a flow.

Financially it's been a challenging year, and that has to change. The last several years have been challenging, and this year has been more so than most. For many of us, there is no rescue coming in this regard or this capacity. The only rescue is what we make for ourselves. There are lot's of people who want to offer aid and assistance, but if financial assistance is what you need, and that is not the aid being offered, then it does you little to no good. As I mentioned a well known author within the community has become homeless, and it's just made me realize that you can put a lot of effort into saving others, but sometimes you need to save yourself.

Someone did write in to say they had offered him a place to stay, but he has chosen to try the streets because for survival I think he realizes that his chances are better. It's really frustrating, because I know that over the years, I have been comforted by some of the material he has provided to this community, and it's frustrating because the assistance he needs is not something that I am able to offer at the moment, my circumstances are too close for comfort right now, and I really have to ensure that they stabilize. At times like these it's so easy to feel alone, even though I know there is a community, it's a community who's efforts at times support the shrill elements, while letting other elements out in the cold.

I am going to try to keep tabs, and hope he finds friends or others that he can stay with at least over the winter months, but having to share and live with others is still not a condition that any target really fancies seeing themselves in. Most of us are fairly independent, and as much fun as staying with friends and others can be, it also means giving up a great deal of independence, but most of us do not have huge resources that we can draw from, unlike many others.

On the other hand, I am sure that the truth is there, but many are reluctant to talk about it. For every break through like the Threat Assessment Teams, there is a drawback like Google suppressing the Gang Stalking search term.

The other target is very open, he has always been extremely explicit with describing all that they are doing to him, which I have always admired. I do share a lot of what is happening, but not all. There are some shocking abuses of power that I do not feel comfortable with sharing that are happening, but I know the risk that comes with being an activist and those are calculated risks that have to be taken if this is ever to be exposed.

So to sum things up, there are things that are going well, that are moving forward, but I have other things in my life that are stagnating, holding me back in a sense, preventing me from spreading my wings. I believe at my core that this happens when you are not aligning yourself with the forces or the resources that you need to align yourself with, so somewhere I need to take an introspective look at the things in my environment on all levels and assess what is not working, and correct that. So I am going to be spending some introspective time.

I feel that I have a lot of goodness inside that can be shared, but I also feel that a lot of that right now is being blocked and prevented, and I do wish to change this, so spiritually all that good that I have internally and I like to think that I have some left. I want to engender the circumstances that will allow that to come forth externally, that is my goal for the upcoming year. Yes I know, some wait till end of December for these little resolutions, but I like to strike while the iron is hot.

If you can do nothing else to be of assistance, then at least offer up your prayers at this time, they would be most appreciated.

Working Hard so you don’t have to

Working Hard so you don’t have to

I have been working deligently to get Targeted Individuals the information that they seek. To this end I have been in touch with legal services for Threat Assessment Organizations, and even law enforcement. I wanted to get a better understanding of how these teams worked, and the community monitoring. Before I do there are a couple of quick points I wanted to touch base on.

Indigo Ribbon Month

Now before I get to this I wanted to say it’s November so it’s Indigo Ribbon Month, place your ribbons on your websites, wear them in public, or where ever you think is applicable. If you don’t have your buttons you can get them at the store.

http://www.zazzle.com/gangstalking

Randy Quaid and Gang Stalking

Now this story has taken a bit of time away from some of the issues that I wanted to focus on, but I remember that Jeremy Blake and Theresa Duncan at one time sought help. I don’t think they ever discovered the Gang Stalking World website or they might have developed some strategies that might have assisted them. I don’t know, but they were lost, and I really would like to see the Quaids get through this.

I want to thank the posters online who have taken the time to say keep an open mind to this story, or to point out that Gang Stalking does happen, and that their story is either similar or identical to what others are going through.

The Quaids have not expressed or identified themselves as Targeted Individuals, but I know many have protectively welcomed them and embraced them, and I know that many will be keeping an eye on the story. Gang Stalking World was the first in the Targeted Individual community to see a possible link, and to report the story, and will try to keep the community updated in the coming days.

Threat Assessment Teams and F.O.I.A.

Recently I posted about discovering a clause that would prevent these teams from sharing the information under Freedom Of Information and I wanted to find out some more information, so I got in touch with some of the teams. I heard back from legal and police officials regarding the various policies.

The request really seem to differ from organization to organization. Eg. Some do allow you to make the request and will release information, many others hide or squirrell the information away under school or workplace security and thus the files are not stored in the employment records, or school records, but are stored as company security files, to which you do not or can not have access.

In these cases I think it would be good to try to use the available resources to gain access to those records.

This is what I found out. Threat Assessment Team records are part of a student’s education record, and are governing not by FOIA but by FERPA.

Apparently this should give students a right to access the records, and make corrections, but records of employment records ae not covered by FERPA, but at state levels, by employment privacy laws.

Some schools try to get around the FERPA freedom of information by listing these records as law enforcement records. The same is true for companies as well.

On the Threat Assessment Team documents it mentioned a central database where information is stored, so this again is something that needs further clearification, but this is something that targets might wish to look into.

ACLU

I contacted the ACLU, but they prefer that targets take this up with the individual offices for their state. If you do try to gain access to the information from the company you believe might have your files, or some files relating to this type of targeting, and you fail to gain access then what you might wish to do is use your local office. The same is true for Canada, the U.K. and other countries. If you try to gain these records and if fails, you may wish to try the referal services, or see if there is a way to use the commissions.

http://youthviolence.edschool.virginia.edu/threat-assessment/pdf/college-threat-recommended-practices.pdf

Example Request

Let’s use the case of Randy Quaid. In 2008, Mr. Quaid had a problem with some co-workers. They filed a complaint against him. Now let’s suppose that he is a Targeted Individual and is on some kind of occupational health and safety, or Threat Assessment List because of this.


http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/02/randy_quaid_banned_from_actors_equity

All 26 members of the Lone Star Love cast brought Randy up on charges with Actors’ Equity Association, claiming he physically and verbally abused his fellow performers and that his oddball behavior onstage and off forced the show to close, thus depriving them of their jobs.

On Friday, Equity handed down its decision. According to documents obtained exclusively by The Post, the union has banned Randy for life – life! – and fined him $81,572.

So this would be a good place to start, check with Human Resources, find out what they call their Threat Assessment Team. I am not sure if this would have been his employer, or just a division that handed down the decision, not familiar with Hollywood, but I am guessing he can find a lawyer who is, and will have more of an idea what to look for, then find out if you can make requests for your information, and if not sue, till you can.

I know it’s a simplified strategy, and again I am still in the research stage for a standard procedure, but these are some suggestions.

Happy Indigo Ribbon Month

Gang Stalking and F.O.I.A.

Gang Stalking and Freedom Of Information.

I put my sleuthing brain to the task and this is what I came up with. It's a bit of a data dump right now, but I wanted to get the information out there.

http://youthviolence.edschool.virginia.edu/threat-assessment/pdf/college-threat-recommended-practices.pdf

http://www.nabita.org/docs/whitepaper_risk_mitigation.pdf

4. Threat assessment files should be maintained in the law enforcement or security records of the institution rather than in the subject’s educational records or employment records.

5. Threat assessment files should be protected for security purposes as investigations of possible criminal behavior. The release of threat assessment information could jeopardize efforts to prevent an act of violence and it could disclose practices that nullify or reduce the effectiveness of threat assessments in future cases.

Because threat assessments are essentially investigations of criminal behavior, most, if not all, of the records created by a threat assessment should not be eligible for release under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Reports generated by the threat assessment team may be exempt under Va. Code §§2.2-3705.2(4), 3706(F)(1)(3), and 3706(G)(1). A response by the team that includes a criminal arrest and prosecution may be exempt from release pursuant to Va. Code §2.2-3706(F)(1) and (3). This protection from disclosure applies to records generated by the threat assessment team for threat assessment purposes.

Records obtained from other sources, such as student academic reports, employee records, or medical records, should be protected under existing laws and regulations regarding redisclosure of protected information. For example, student scholastic records maintained by a university may Virginia College Threat Assessment 21
be exempt under Va. Code §2.2-3705.4. Employee personnel records may be exempt under Va. Code §2.2-3705.1.

The Office of the Virginia Attorney General has provided guidance to the Department of Criminal Justice Services on the exemptions from FOIA that apply to threat assessment records, but recommends that each threat assessment team consult with its own institutional legal authorities. It would be desirable if the General Assembly would pass legislation that specifically excluded the records of threat assessment teams from FOIA release.

6. Institutions that do not have an internal law enforcement agency may designate a particular office or school official to maintain threat assessment records. In all cases, threat assessment records should be regarded as law enforcement/security related records, even if the person in charge of maintaining the records is not a sworn law enforcement officer. The person designated as the campus safety official for the purpose of fulfilling Clery Act requirements may be appropriate.

7. The creation of a threat assessment file will not prevent use of other records according to existing practices. For example, disciplinary actions that would ordinarily be included in the subject’s educational or employment record should continue to be placed in those records. Incidents of threatening behavior that would ordinarily be recorded in an institutional file, such as an employment record, should continue to be placed in those locations.

G. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
1. According to the U.S. Department of Education, HIPAA does not apply to education records: “The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) is a law passed by Congress intended to establish transaction, security, privacy, and other standards to address concerns about the electronic exchange of health information. However, the HIPAA Privacy Rule excludes from its coverage those records that are protected by FERPA at school districts and postsecondary institutions that provide health or medical services to students. This is because Congress specifically addressed how education records should be protected under FERPA. For this reason, records that are protected by FERPA are not subject to the HIPAA Privacy Rule and may be shared with parents under the circumstances described above.” (http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/hottopics/ht-parents-postsecstudents.html

2. HIPAA allows disclosure of protected health information, including psychotherapy notes, concerning a patient when it is considered necessary to prevent a serious and imminent threat to others. This can include disclosure to law enforcement, family members, potential victims and others if the disclosure can be justified as reducing the risk of violence. See CFR §164.512(j).

2. Institutions of higher education, such as some community colleges, which do not have mental health professionals who can serve on a threat assessment team should contract with a mental health agency or independent practitioner in the community who can serve as a team member.

3. Institutions of higher education, such as some community colleges, which do not have an institution-based law enforcement staff that can serve on a threat assessment team should contract with a local law enforcement agency to obtain a team member.

D. Threat assessment records
Threat assessment teams should maintain confidential records of all cases for legal and security purposes. The records will not be part of a subject’s academic, medical, mental health, or employment records, if any exist at the institution. This policy does not alter any other policy regarding the placement of information in a subject’s academic, medical, mental health, or employment records.

§37.2-808. Emergency custody; issuance and execution of order.
A. Any magistrate may issue, upon the sworn petition of any responsible person or upon his own motion, an emergency custody order when he has probable cause to believe that any person within his judicial district (i) has mental illness, (ii) presents an imminent danger to himself or others as a result of mental illness or is so seriously mentally ill as to be substantially unable to care for himself, (iii) is in need of hospitalization or treatment, and (iv) is unwilling to volunteer or incapable of volunteering for hospitalization or treatment.

F. A law-enforcement officer who, based upon his observation or the reliable reports of others, has probable cause to believe that a person meets the criteria for emergency custody as stated in this section may take that person into custody and transport that person to an appropriate location to assess the need for hospitalization or treatment without prior authorization. Such evaluation shall be conducted immediately.

Virginia Criminal Information Network system established and maintained by the Department pursuant to Chapter 2 (§52-12 et seq.) of Title 52. Where practical, the court or magistrate may transfer information electronically to the Virginia Criminal Information Network system. A copy of an emergency protective order issued pursuant to this section shall be served upon the respondent as soon as possible, and upon service, the agency making service shall enter the date and time of service into the Virginia Criminal Information Network system.

E. Each threat assessment team shall establish relationships or utilize existing relationships with local and state law enforcement agencies as well as mental health agencies to expedite assessment and intervention with individuals whose behavior may present a threat to safety.

Under current regulations, personally identifiable information (PII) includes a student’s name and other direct personal identifiers, such as the student’s SSN or student number. PII also includes indirect identifiers, such as the name of the student’s parent or other family members; the student’s or family’s address, and personal characteristics or other information that would make the student’s identity easily traceable. The final regulations add biometric records to the list of personal identifiers that constitute PII, and add other indirect identifiers, such as date and place of birth and mother’s maiden name, as examples of identifiers that should be considered in determining whether information is personally identifiable. In response to public comments, the final regulations define “biometric record” to mean a record of one or more measurable biological
Virginia College Threat Assessment 82
or behavioral characteristics that can be used for automated recognition of an individual, including fingerprints, retina and iris patterns, voiceprints, DNA sequence, facial characteristics, and handwriting. The definition is based on National Security Presidential Directive 59 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 24.
The final regulations remove from the definition of PII the reference to “other information that would make the student’s identity easily traceable” because the phrase lacked specificity and clarity, and possibly suggested a fairly low standard for protecting education records. In its place, the regulations add that PII includes “other information that, alone or in combination, is linked or linkable to a specific student that would allow a reasonable person in the school community, who does not have personal knowledge of the relevant circumstances, to identify the student with reasonable certainty.” This change brings the definition more in line with recent Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance to Federal agencies, with modifications tailored to the educational community. (See OMB M-07-16, “Safeguarding Against and Responding to the Breach of Personally Identifiable Information” at footnote 1:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2007/m07-16.pdf.) Under the final regulations, PII also includes “information requested by a person who the educational agency or institution reasonably believes knows the identity of the student to whom the education record relates.”

In a nut shell, these threat assessment teams take in anonymous reports that are used to assess if an individuals is dangerous, mentally ill, what have you. They also take in reports from those around the target. False information can come in, but the target does not have the access to clear false information, which is allowed under most privacy laws. This is similar to what the Fusion centers do, and this is what companies like the A.C.L.U. were essentially fighting against with the fusion centers, but then here are universities and companies getting away with hiding this information from the people who need access to it, so that they can legally clear up any misinformation on their records. Not only that, but these threat assessments are being used to slander the individual in many cases, but under these guidelines they might not have information or access to the records.

This is really wrong, and legally this has to be challenged. This is one area that targets might be able to start in with a privacy lawyer. Request the information it's your right, but when it's denied, then then legal challenges can begin. I don't know if this is the case in all States, or other countries such as Canada, but it will be interesting to find out. In the U.K. the laws do allow the request and disclosure of information, but I have not yet found a similar clause that hides the information away.

Threat Assessment Teams and success rates

Threat Assessment Teams and success rates.

The Threat Assessment Teams remotely evaluate people from a distance, but how do they know that they are not just dishing out junk science? How do they know that the assessment actuaually work? I imagine it's in part due to the success ratio. Eg. You diagnose someone as schizophenic, and within two months of your diagnosis, they start complaining of vibrations in the home, being burnt and tortured, clearly they were suffering from a persecution type syndrome. Right?

Let's say the team evaluates someone and they end up in jail, homeless, instituationalized, dead, start to hear voices or they freak out and shoot someone, the team feel justified in their original diagnosis. The complete disconnect from the end results allows them to enjoy a false reality of their success ratio, just like in Russia. There removal from the targets sphere allows them to ignore, belittle, and dismiss the dozens upon dozens of stories of torture, and human rights violations, set up's, gaslight, smoke and mirrors that are being used to achieve those end results. They are getting these successful outcomes because in many cases the monitoring teams, and those around the target are driving and creating these end results by harassing the targets.

http://gangstalkingworld.com/the-psychiatric-reprisal/

http://gangstalkingworld.com/the-psychiatric-reprisal-part-2-3/

Remember the team likely use the DSM guidelines to assess someone in the first place. In Russia they use to also do that. The DSM guidelines then, much like now are being set up to target and remove specific people from the workforce, or society. The outspoken, whistle-blowers, maybe independent thinkers, single people, etc. When a person is being evaluated to begin with, we are ending up with more single individuals, because some of their guidelines and profiling tell them that those who are single, with few attachement are more likely to be a danger. The guidelines do not allow for individuality. Eg. Many adults in modern society lead healthy, active, productive and single lifestyles. Being single is only a danger if you truly are lonely, but many people this is a new norm, which the guidelines don't properly recognize.

What needs to start to happen is some accountability. Either targets need to start to sue these teams for false diagnosis, misrepresentation, slander, or a combination of things. I don't know how much legal protection these teams are given, but enough lawsuits and publicity aimed at their heads, and the DSM guidelines they use and that might make a difference.

The people at the end level are not that smart. This is a generalization, and I am sorry if that hurts the feelings of some, but they are not. Eg. For one of my apartments, they use to constantly have the maintainance man, opening my door. They utilized him, and had him consistently abusing his power. Remember they get a variety of people on this, they are so sure that they are helping to keep an eye on someone truly disturbed, that they often forget common decency, but more importantly many forget, or have a false belief that they are not bound by the same laws they were previously bound by. After advising this person of my displeasure with their actions, this person advised me that it was their right to enter at will. Really? So I had to contact the upper managment and detail what was happening, what my actual rights were, and this is what got the sitution rectified. Many of them do not know the law, they think that because they are helping to monitor, they have a right to go above and beyond what is legal and the reality is that they do not. That is why if you can catch them in illegal activities they often get upset.

It can take a while, filing noise ordanances with the city, since this goes on for years at a time, if you manage to be in one location for a specific period of time this might give you a bit more leverage to prove some of what is on going.

Jane Clift for her situation was abel to have her records exponged, but without the right lawyer, or someone who knows what they are doing, you likely will not get the same results. What is needed are lawyers who know the law, understand the limits to what these Threat Assessment Teams are bound, and then continue from there. Also because they work in teams, writing down the times of specific harassments might work. Eg. On April 03, 2009 this person used or subjected my person to.... then you can fill in the blanks. I know a lot of targets believe that radiation is being used, it's a possibility. Because they do change who is on shift, if you pay attention, you will notice that different people have different styles, some are just plane sadistic, so making them accountable should be possible in future by documenting times, dates. I do believe however if we skip the lower level individuals and focus on the Threat Assessment Teams, and their legal obligations to the individual that this might be a more successful way to go.

Eg. You are misdiagnosed as having a mental illness, and for the last 5 years they have contacted your facebook friends, twitter followers, myspace friends, co-workers, friends, etc. That is slander and defamation of character if the accusations are false, which since they are doing remote assessments, using DSM guidelines they well could be. Remember recently a woman won the right to sue Youtube to reveal the identity of those who had called her a name. Targets might be able to take similar legal actions for those going around behind our backs, defaming our reputations, based on a false or inaccurate remote diagnosis.

Also how much of this violates the privacy laws? This is one area that I would like to examine, I believe many lines are being crossed in this area, and this might be one more area to bring a legal challenge.

The other thing that those in countries with human rights commissions might start to do is see if they can find a way to take these commissions to task. I believe in the U.K. and Canada you can sue for discrimination for race, gender and if you are being discriminated against due to a mental illness. I have to double check, but if that is the case, and these teams are listing targets as menatlly ill, then going after targets, and poisioning every perception around them, this might be another area where legal challeges can be brought. The situations are ongoing, so that would be within the timeframes. Targets without money and other means, might try to find a legal way to see if these commissions can be used in this way.

Then in the U.S. the ACLU is free, and could maybe be petitioned in similar fashion. At this stage I don't know if these approaches will work, or if they will work across the board, but if we have 12 cases going through the system, each attempting different angles, then we can get an idea of what works, almost works, etc. However targets should be aware of sabatage, and many of these commissions are corrupted, or have questionable practices, as Tim Field his research into obstruction.

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

Those are some thoughts and actions that we might try in future, and the more attention these teams get, bad attention the better.