It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Rather than trying to address the underlying problem (the anti-social behaviour directed against C and her unhappiness that it had not been properly addressed) the council’s Head of Public Protection (Mr Kelleher) investigated the incident itself and decided to enter Mrs Clift’s name in the “Violent Person Register”. She was rated as medium risk, her name to remain on the register for 18 months. The reason being noted as “threatening behaviour on several occasions” together with some inaccurate particulars of the incident.
By way of comparison, another entry on the register of medium risk referred to someone who had prevented a council representative from leaving premises for a period of 2 hours.
Mr Kelleher had circulated an email to 54 individuals stating:
“I have requested that Jane Clift’s name be added to the register of violent persons following repeated threats of violence towards a member of staff.
Whilst we will continue to provide her with our normal range of services, I would ask that any officer making a site visit, or conducting a face to face interview with Ms Clift does so in the presence of an accompanying officer. Equally, any member of staff receiving a telephone call from Ms Clift should make a full note of that conversation including Ms Clift’s manner”.
A hard copy was also sent to 12 council community wardens. The Register itself was circulated – though precisely how and to whom was unclear to the court. Evidence from Slough suggested that there would not have been more than 150 recipients of the Register but the exact number was not an issue left to the jury.
Jane Clift saw it as her public duty to report a drunk she saw trampling flowers in a park.
But her efforts led to a surreal nightmare in which she was branded potentially violent and put on a council blacklist with thugs and sex attackers.
Her details were circulated to an extraordinary range of public and private bodies, including doctors, dentists, opticians, libraries, contraceptive clinics, schools and nurseries. Their staff were advised not to see her alone.
The 43-year-old former care worker was forced to withdraw an application to become a foster parent and, eventually, to leave the town where she had lived for ten years.
Now, after a bitter four-year legal battle with Slough Council, the stain on her character has finally been removed.
Woman sues council for libel after being labelled
‘potentially violent’ for complaining about a vandalised flowerbed
Ms Clift told the court that she had to leave Slough, where she had lived for 10 years, and had initially moved to Southampton.
Originally posted by ChickNorris
The theory of stabbing them would do just that, send youto jail. Most of these people are employed by government or large corporations that have govenment clearence & are above the law. You will never be able to prove self defense or any other charges because the tacitcs are so vague and hard to prove.
If you go to the police, a lawyer, or FBI, like I did, once they have taken the steps to surveillance inside your hosue, they know every move you make, so they are always a step ahead and have paid off or blackmailed your means of help. You eventiually give up and either deal with it, or you outsmart them.
through the wall weapons aimed at their reproductive parts, very eugenics like, and no one is helping.
Originally posted by john124
They can't recruit everyone, so you can form a coalition against them. If they are breaking into your home or office - get cameras installed. If they are talking about you - record the conversations and then confront them INDIVIDUALLY with the recorded message. See how they like being in the room alone with the person they've been stalking.
And then tell them individually to go to hell, and if necessary hand over evidence to the cops showing them on video damaging your property and tell them you're being harrassed by this person constantly. Are the rest of them going to risk becoming a criminal as well or maybe just back off.....
Job done.....
Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by Harassment101
The title of your thread is as follows:
Gang Stalking: Psychological Targeting in a Group Setting'
So you respond to my post with: ' Gang stalking ? What are you talking about ? '
Clue: I'm 'talking about' the title of the thread. YOUR chosen title
In YOUR opening post, you have this to say:
The average functioning individual does not have a lot to be logically paranoid about. Sure, there's the occasional whisper that you overhear and think is about yourself. There's also the fear that someone is following you. Then there is gang stalking.
This is the ultimate form of paranoia that turns out to be a well-founded suspicion and mistrust. Gang stalking is when a group of people decide to target an individual and attempt to control aspects of that individual’s life and monitor them 24/7. Generally, this is done without the person actually knowing about this organized stalking group, but if a person does find out, the results and helplessness can be devastating.
According to gangstalkingworld.com, “gang stalking is experienced as a covert psychological, emotional and physical attack, that is capable of immobilizing and destroying a target over time.”
Ok. So now we return to my questions ---- such as, WHO pays for this 24/7 targeting and monitoring (your choice of terminology, not mine)
WHO PAYS for these gang-stalkers (your words, not mine) to 'monitor and control a target 24/7' (your description, not mine) ?
Tell me who pays, please
Because NO-ONE devotes a goodly proportion of their day, their week, their nights, their LIFE, to 'stalk and monitor' a target unless SOME one is compensating them for their time and efforts
Who pays ?
That needs to be clarified
“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.”
“You mean to tell me that it is legal for corporations from the private sector to team up with local law enforcement officials in efforts to spy on innocent members of our society? You also mean to tell me that the synthesis of law enforcement authority and the drive of for-profit companies operate under little to no guidelines or restrictions and it is unclear to whom they are responsible to?”
The way the Web site, www.gangstalkingworld.com, talks about gang stalking, it seems to be more of a government issue, and organized by government bodies, in European countries like Germany and Russia. The closest thing to happen in the U.S., according to the Web site, would be certain scenarios and events like McCarthyism.
Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by MajorDisaster
Might it be suggested 'they don't leave any evidence' --- because there is no evidence --- because it didn't happen, apart from the fevered 'me centred' imagination of the self-claimed 'target' ?
Same with the alleged 'psychic attacks' ?
The List
How do you get placed on a list?
There are a few ways.
*Someone reports you as a drug dealer, terrorist, pedophile, crazy. They report an incident. A community investigation is opened.
In a normal society this should go on for a few months and be over with, but in the case of Jiverly Wong, this went on for close to 20 years, and in the lives of many others it goes on for years as well, never ending, and it’s used to harass an innocent person.
'You said Stalker Gangs? I asked you what Stalker Gangs? I never said Stalker Gangs. I did say Gang Stalking however. Very different. I choose the thread title, because it's the title of the article. So technically not my words.
Originally posted by Dock9
Might it be suggested 'they don't leave any evidence' --- because there is no evidence --- because it didn't happen, apart from the fevered 'me centred' imagination of the self-claimed 'target' ?
Same with the alleged 'psychic attacks' ?
Originally posted by Nventual
I gotta say, this gang-stalking this seems like a woo woo belief.
I don't see why a group of unknown people would stalk someone everywhere when the person hasn't done anything to warrant the stalking and most times lives alone and doesn't even do much with their life.
When police stalk/follow someone they are in a group, but they don't all appear at once.
One car will follow you to an intersection, then turn the opposite direction as you while a new car follows so that the person never realises. I assume if anyone was going to stalk as a gang they'd follow the same sort of procedure.
I've seen some gang-stalking videos on youtube and at first I thought they were a joke.
One woman films random people on the street and wonders why they're looking at her. She even filmed a kid sitting on her fathers lap at a bus stop and said the guy was molesting her. Both the child and the father were giving her weird worried looks, as I would too.
I find it sort of sad that people believe they are being gang-stalked, since it isn't happening and it's pretty much breaking the persons mental state even further when people are like "oh yeah it's certainly happening, blah blah blah".
In this case she was informed that she was on the list, many others are not.
Originally posted by ItsAgentScully
reply to post by Harassment101
Sounds more like manipulation or pressing up someone because they don't fit the standards to the point someone else decides to take charge and do it for them. It sounds annoying and genuinely frightening. It makes the "attacker" sound almost robotic, if the words control freak doesn't describe them enough in a plastic sense.
The state is co-coordinating efforts with the local citizenry.
' 24/7 monitoring and controlling of targets by Gang Stalkers/Stalker Gangs'
The really good gangsters know how to .... with people without leaving evidence, that's the whole point.
Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by Harassment101
through the wall weapons aimed at their reproductive parts, very eugenics like, and no one is helping.
'Through the wall weapons', huh ?
Do you have any credible sources to validate this claim ?
If so, please cite them
Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near 1/2 Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient amplitudes to cause such excitation. It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be imbedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed effectively by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with subliminal intensity.
Originally posted by Nventual
I had been giving the poster some leeway in terms of realism but after saying they shoot things through walls at reproductive organs and the verbal abuse is actually 'psychic' or in the head, I really have to wonder..