A World of Stalking Fools: Strange Tales of Homeland Security and the Future of Mass Surveillance (Part Three: Surveillance Role Players)

[Part Two of this series can be found by clicking HERE.]

The desire for control runs rampant through our 21^st century society.  What with the advent of Facebook, YouTube, and other such self-surveillance technology, many citizens aren’t afraid of the rise of Big Brother anymore.  Instead, they want to be Big Brother.  To find evidence of this strange sociological phenomenon, glance through your local newspaper; you might come across a mysterious ad searching for “surveillance role players.”  You may very well have seen these ads and passed right over them, not understanding what you were seeing (yes, just like Poe’s purloined letter). 

In August of 2013 an intriguing ad popped up on Craigslist.  This ad seems to give an official name to the perpetrators who engage in gangstalking.  For years targeted individuals had no idea what the gangstalkers called themselves.  One can’t ignore the significance of the Orwellian, bureaucratic language at play here:

Surveillance Role Players and Practical Exercise Role Player (San Diego)

The MASY Group is looking for motivated surveillance role players (SRPs) and scenario driven practical exercise Role Players (RPs) to support military training activities in the San Diego, California region.  Qualified personnel should demonstrate an established track record of conducting surveillance operations at various discretion levels, supporting surveillance training and military practical exercise training.  Individuals with previous military, intelligence community and law enforcement experience are highly preferred. 

Please note that the mandatory prerequisite qualifications for Role Players are as follows (b):  “A minimum of 5 years of counterintelligence (CI) and or human intelligence (HUMINT) experience with at least 2 operational deployments in a CI/HUMINT military occupational specialty (MOS) or as a member of a civilian intelligence community organization” [emphasis mine].

This is tantamount to placing an ad on Craigslist searching for a military veteran who’s had either five years of experience in the Navy or has at least ridden the submarine ride at Disneyland twice in one week.  This demonstrates how highly these corporations regard any level of involvement in gangstalking activity, even if you’ve simply spent a few years keeping a detailed journal on your neighbor’s highly subversive consumption of The Daily Show.  Also note that the ad specifically states that the “place of performance” will be the “San Diego region.”  For those who have already read my book Chameleo, you will know that most of the gangstalking activity endured by my friend Dion occurred in the Pacific Beach area of San Diego, the military town of all military towns.  

(By the way, it's also important to note that someone apparently decided it was time for the phrase "Surveillance Role Player" to morph into the far more innocuous sounding "Cultural Role Player."  See my 12-12-15 Cryptoscatology post entitled "Cultural Role Player" for more information about that development.)

Anyone familiar with the 1974 Alan Pakula film, The Parallax View (or the 1970 Loren Singer novel upon which the film is based), will be unable to overlook the similarities between this ad and the one placed in the classifieds by the fictional Parallax Corporation.  In The Parallax View, the purpose of the Parallax ad is to lure in violent, antisocial males as guinea pigs for their brainwashing program which transforms these eager new employees into mind controlled assassins who are summarily disposed of the second they’ve fulfilled their deadly function.  One wonders if Loren Singer, a member of the Office of Strategic Services (the forerunner of the CIA), based his fictional scenario on real life events to which he might have been privy thanks to his contacts in the intelligence world.  (Potential gangstalkers out there might want to keep the Parallax View firmly in mind before responding to such a promising ad.  If you wish to purchase a one-way ticket on the Oswald Train, however, please feel free to submit an application posthaste.)

 

According to a panoply of targeted individuals with whom I’ve communicated in recent years, the corporations involved in hiring “Surveillance Role Players,” and who are therefore at the forefront of the gangstalking phenomenon, include:              

● the aforementioned MASY Group (whose website describes the company as “a global provider of high impact National Security, intelligence, and private sector capital management solutions”);

● EKS Group, LLC (who promise to provide their loyal clients with “subject matter expertise with hundreds of years of experience in areas surrounding intelligence operations, law enforcement, counterintelligence, human intelligence, information operations, counter-terrorism, force protection, security matters, international diplomacy and foreign area knowledge”);    

● Prescient Edge (whose website ballyhoo trumpets the company as “a global operations and solutions integrator delivering full spectrum intelligence, technology, and security offerings to corporate, federal, and international clients”);

● and ITA International (a “global support services company” that specializes in “security and antiterrorism awareness” with a “focus on the maritime and coastal environments”). 

Other sources who have communicated with me in the wake of Chameleo’s publication report that three of the prime corporations involved in gangstalking activity are as follows: 

● InfraGard (which describes itself as “a partnership between the FBI and the private sector […] an association of persons who represent businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies, and other participants dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile acts against the U.S.”);

● Whitney, Bradley & Brown (who “understands the world of global security and international affairs” and “the challenges faced by U.S. and foreign governments, as well as their defense contractors as they navigate the complexities of technology and export control”);

● and DSAC (Domestic Security Alliance Council), a “strategic partnership between the U.S. Government and U.S. Private Industry” whose mission is to “advance the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)’s mission of preventing, detecting, and deterring criminal acts by facilitating strong enduring relationships among its private industry members, FBI Headquarters, FBI field offices, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Headquarters and Fusion Centers, and other Federal Government entities.”  Their website also boasts that the DSAC program is “free to members, and it offers high-value benefits including centralized access to security information, ongoing access to a network of diverse security experts, continuing education for its members, and opportunities to participate in DSAC committees.”

           

I can understand how the benefits would be considered “high-value,” particularly if you can use this network to initiate terroristic programs against those who have rubbed you the wrong way.  Case in point:  Not long before Chameleo was published, I was contacted by a former member of the U.S. military with experience in the corporate security industry who now runs a website called “fightgangstalking.com.”  Though the context may be different, the way this person became a targeted individual is not at all dissimilar to what happened to my friend Dion:

           

I got on the bad side of a corporate security executive at a major international corporation (at the U.S. headquarters of a Japanese car company).  Instead of firing me, he orchestrated a campaign of “mobbing” (intense workplace harassment) against me by his department full of corporate lackeys.  I very strongly resisted that harassment in various ways that did not go over well.

Because of his position and background, the aforementioned executive had connections to U.S. federal agencies.  (He was almost certainly a member of the Corporate-FBI alliance called InfraGard/DSAC.)   He also had connections with local law enforcement departments—and some sleazy private investigators on his payroll.  He arranged to have me blacklisted.

In gang stalking parlance, I’m a “targeted individual” (TI)—which, in a society with lots of servile farm animal citizens, is perhaps a badge of honor.

           

Despite all the grandiose claims of helping protect the free world from terrorism, the ugly truth is that these mass surveillance programs are being used every day for a far less noble goal:  revenge.  It’s very clear that when Dion refused to cooperate with the NCIS, a particular member of that agency decided to contact her cronies in the gangstalking community in order to bring the hammer down on my friend.  Put in simple terms:  Dion pissed off the wrong person.

Again, the irony should be clear:  These corporations and civilian organizations, ostensibly created to combat terrorism, are themselves the most dangerous terrorists of all.  I’ve never met anyone who was personally harmed by a member of al-Qaeda; however, I’ve come in personal contact with many innocent American civilians who have been stalked, harassed, and physically tortured by homegrown terrorists of the George Zimmerman variety.  Fifteen years after the events of 9/11 we must now ask the crucial question:  Who poses the greater threat against the citizenry, Middle Eastern terrorists or the corrupt American corporations who use Middle Eastern terrorists as a convenient excuse to run ramshod over every freedom guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution?

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by these developments.  After all, this situation is not at all unlike the Communist witch hunts of the ‘40s and ‘50s that destroyed the lives of so many innocent people.  As demonstrated by Christopher Simpson’s excellent 1988 book, Blowback, the “Red Menace” propaganda that whipped up so much hysteria in the United States beginning in the late 1940s, and continuing throughout the 1950s, was mainly dreamed up by ex-Nazi General Reinhard Gehlen who concocted elaborate—and almost entirely fictitious—warnings about the Communist menace in the United States in order to keep his new masters in the United States interested in his “expertise” regarding Russian affairs.  As a result, men powerful enough to change lives with the utterance of a single sentence merely had to suggest that a hated enemy—perhaps the next door neighbor whose puppy kept urinating on a Senator’s prized azaleas in the front yard—might have Communist sympathies in order to ruin an entire career once and for all.

If you think the above example is absurd or overblown, you would be wrong.  Not many people are aware that Gloria Naylor, the respected American author of such acclaimed novels as The Women of Brewster Place and Mama Day, has been a victim of gangstalking for almost twenty years.  In fact, she wrote an entire novel about her experiences entitled 1996 (the year her horrific experiences began).  Naylor’s nightmare very much reflects the outlandish torture undergone by my friend Dion in San Diego; however, the trigger for Naylor’s harassment is even more absurd that what Dion underwent.  She became a targeted individual over a trivial dispute with her next door neighbor, who just so happened to have a brother in the National Security Agency.  When the neighbor’s cat ended up poisoned, the neighbor blamed Naylor.  That’s when her experiences with gangstalking began.  To those of you who think this type of psychological warfare will never be waged against you, think again.  If you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time, and you happen to pique some asshole’s wrath on the wrong day, kiss the illusory freedom you’ve always depended on farewell.  

 

And for those of you who think, “Gee whiz, maybe it’s a good thing that these spooks are watching all these scumbags 24/7.  That’s exactly what this country needs—good old-fashioned brute justice, not more red tape.”  Perhaps that attitude would be correct… except for the fact that the “scumbags” (i.e., terrorists, rapists, pedophiles, conmen, and criminals of all sorts) aren’t the ones being scrutinized.  For the most part, in fact, the ones in charge are the very same “scumbags” listed above.  As I said before, many of the perps involved in gangstalking are being blackmailed into performing these acts.  Those most open to blackmail are those who are already engaging in criminal behavior.  So now we have a situation in which criminals are being funded by the United States black budget to monitor innocent civilians being accused of terrorism by far rightwing spooks with over two thousands years of Christian righteousness fueling the religious war of purification waging quietly and covertly in their disordered brains. 

The alphabet soup of intelligence agencies whose budgets soared after 9/11 will look us straight in the face and claim that their efforts have made this country a better place.  Stop a moment and ask yourself a variation on a crucial question that President Ronald Reagan once asked the American people.  During the 1984 Presidential race, Reagan asked his constituents, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”  At the time the question was a resounding, “Yes!”  Ever since then, savvy politicians have used variations on the same question to win votes from the American people.  But the one question that no politician will ever ask the American people is as follows:  “Do you feel more free than you did four years ago?”

The reason this question will never be asked is because the answer would be the same for every single American across the political, sociological and racial spectrum.  The resounding answer would be “NO!”  Even the gangstalkers feel less free than they did in the past.  Many of these perps are speaking out about the positions in which they find themselves.  They’re monitored more closely than the people being stalked.  My friend Dion saw this firsthand when one of the gangstalkers actually broke character just long enough to try to pass along a piece of advice in a random public restroom in Minnesota before the perp’s handler barged into the bathroom and practically dragged the man out by the collar. 

If the purpose of this nationwide gangstalking program really was to curb mass violence and domestic terrorism, why have so many outrageous, violent scenarios increased since 9/11?  Consider this:  These operatives had enough money, time, and manpower to monitor my friend Dion—who was doing absolutely nothing to anybody that warranted such insane violations of the United States Constitution—but they were not at all aware of the suspicious activities—both online and off—of a blatantly disturbed teenager like Adam Lanza who enjoyed spending his downtime at the local firing range with his gun-loving mother?  They were not at all aware of the murderous schemes of Syed Rizwan Farook who posted her ghastly intentions on Facebook years before she picked up an arsenal of semi-automatic firearms and gunned down fourteen of her husband’s co-workers in a San Bernardino banquet room?  They were not aware of the catastrophic plans of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bombers, despite the fact that the two terrorists ostensibly made no secret of their intentions among their network of college friends in Boston?  They were not aware of the reprehensible activities—both online and in the classroom—of organized pedophiles operating blatantly out of elementary schools and Catholic churches in Southern California in recent years?  And yet somehow these super sleuths had the wherewithal to monitor my friend’s phone calls to such a degree that they once went out of their way to cut off phone communication between us in order to prevent me sending him money via Western Union.  How can both these realities be true at the same time?  If they have enough time to monitor the most mundane activities of Dion Fuller or Gloria Naylor or the thousands of other targeted individuals in the United States, then they must have enough time to monitor the real threats as well—the Adam Lanzas, the Boston Marathon bombers, all the domestic terrorists who have plagued our headlines during the past few years.  But they don’t.  Instead they waste literally thousands of dollars gaslighting a male Caucasian heroin addict in San Diego and a female African-American novelist in South Carolina?  Why?  

Because they’re not interested in stopping crime. 

Because the true terrorists are the ones in charge of the gangstalking program.

The inner workings of these gangstalking cells are quite similar to those of secret societies throughout the ages.  This is also rather ironic, since many gangstalkers appear to be heavily invested in extreme rightwing ideology, which often harbors deep paranoia regarding non-Christian fraternities of all sorts, including the Freemasons, the Rosicrucians, the Shriners, etc.  And yet the cosmic joke’s on them, because their little gangstalking cells are without a doubt distorted, warped extensions of these very same secret societies—at least in terms of the internal structure of the operation.

Listen carefully here, for this explains why the gangstalkers often exhibit polar opposite qualities.  Sometimes the architects of the operation seem to be strategic geniuses who can pull off surveillance and/or harassment schemes with the coordinated grace of the Bolshoi Ballet, and yet at the same time the individual perps themselves can often come off as third-rate bunglers completely lacking in finesse, stealth, or improvisational skills (i.e., the ability to quickly modify a plan once a situation has abruptly altered).  Like many secret societies, the operation has a pyramidal structure.  This explains why some of the street level operatives can seem so amateurish at times—because, unlike the taskmasters at the top of the dog pile, many of them are indeed amateurs. 

To Be Continued In “A World of Stalking Fools” Part Four (Coming Soon)….

A World of Stalking Fools: Strange Tales of Homeland Security and the Future of Mass Surveillance (Part Two: Total Deniability)

[Part One of this series can be found by clicking HERE.]


Plausible deniability, so in vogue during the Watergate era, has now been supplanted by total deniability.

How was this accomplished?  The answer is so obvious one wonders why it took so long for the Cryptocratic Bad Brains to implement it on a mass scale:  Make sure these violations of the law are not committed by any current member of a police organization or intelligence agency.  The field work—involving active harassment, spying, psychological warfare, and physical torture from a distance—is farmed out to eager civilians, some of whom may not even be paid for the privilege of stalking their fellow citizens.  In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest that many of these civilians actually pay others in order to be trained in these techniques. 

Since my book Chameleo was published, specific information has come to the fore about who these gangstalkers really are.  Official police organizations and intelligence agencies are forbidden from tormenting people they “suspect” are guilty.  In our glorious post-9/11 society, these watchdogs of ethical purity have conjured up a rather circuitous route by which to enact their vengeance against those who they believe are rotting away at the moral structure of modern society.  They use civilian organizations—those that have been founded by former members of the law enforcement and/or intelligence communities—to attack these “suspicious” types by proxy.  According to a very well-respected Constitutional lawyer (whose identity must remain anonymous for the time being), one such organization is the LEIU, the Law Enforcement Intelligence Units. 

No doubt, the vast majority of you have never heard of the LEIU, and yet this is by no means a covert organization.  It's quite a trick to hide in plain sight, a trick made famous over one hundred and seventy years ago by none other than Edgar Allan Poe.  Poe taught us all a valuable lesson in 1844 when he wrote his classic short story, “The Purloined Letter,” featuring the world’s very first literary detective, C. Auguste Dupin.  In “The Purloined Letter” Dupin is recruited by the French police to locate a stolen letter, the contents of which might reflect unfavorably upon the royal family.  The police have torn apart the thief’s apartment in search of this letter and have come up empty-handed.  Out of desperation the police approach Dupin, who makes a great display of showing off his superior intellect by immediately pointing out the obvious:  The thief, a man known only as Minister D--, never hid the letter at all.  He simply placed it on the letter holder on the mantelpiece.  The object of their quest had been staring the police in the face the entire time.

Poe’s principle applies to intelligence agency tactics in the present day.  As Marshall McLuhan once wrote, “Only the small secrets need to be protected.  The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity” (Take Today 92).

Jim Steinmeyer, a world-renowned expert in the history of stage magic, offers a similar perspective in his celebrated chronicle of the illusionist’s art, Hiding the Elephant:  How Magicians Invented the Impossible and Learned to Disappear: 

[T]here’s a long, important tradition of magic being recorded and published.  As my good friend Jay Marshall, the man behind the counter at the magic shop, has said for many years:  “If you want to keep something a secret, publish it.”  Once in print, information is often filed, forgotten, or dismissed.  Publishing a secret takes away its cachet and causes it to be overlooked.  (xx) 

Let’s pause a moment and kick off our Dupin-like investigation at the most obvious starting point of all.  Like the purloined letter sitting out in the open on Minister D--’s mantel, the LEIU maintains a public website, which describes the organization as follows:

In 1956, the Association of Law Enforcement Intelligence Units (LEIU) was founded to facilitate the sharing of confidential criminal information between law enforcement agencies.  Over the ensuing decades, LEIU has expanded its role by providing professional training for criminal intelligence practitioners and analysts while setting nationally accepted criminal intelligence standards.  Today, with 200 member agencies and a voice at the national level, LEIU’s mission is to provide leadership and promote professionalism in the criminal intelligence community in order to protect public safety and constitutional rights.

This requires some amount of reinterpretation.  What they mean is that they intend to protect the constitutional rights of their friends and relatives and cronies in the intelligence community and to hell with everyone else, particularly if “everyone else” are commie-pinko-symps who engage in peaceful civil disobedience against a government sliding rapidly into outright fascism.  According to my source (the aforementioned Constitutional lawyer), this is precisely what occurred to the Clamshell Alliance in New England.  The attorney hired to defend the unconstitutional actions of the aforementioned atomic power plant casually confided in the Alliance’s attorney that a “vigilante group” named the LEIU had been responsible for infiltrating the anti-nuclear activist group.  The New England gentleman did not swear the attorney to secrecy when telling him this; he was simply sharing an open secret.  He even gave the attorney copies of the LEIU newsletter.  Here’s just one choice quote from the March, 2012 edition of the newsletter:  “As we sit here 10 plus years since the September 11th attack, I believe the one thing that we can agree on is that intelligence and information-sharing opportunities have never before been this prevalent” (Godsey 1).

Indeed.  The LEIU uses carefully worded language on its website to reveal to the initiated, with a wink and a nod, the true purpose of the organization: 

After 9/11/01 the demand for and consumption of intelligence became a national priority.  The National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan endorsed the concept of an intelligence system which would allow connectivity and sharing among local, state, tribal and federal authorities for the purpose of effectively protecting the homeland.  This Plan also endorsed the need to have universal adoption of and adherence to certain proven rules for the collection, maintenance, dissemination and purging of intelligence information.  The rules endorsed, the Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit Criminal Intelligence File Guidelines and Code of Federal Regulations, Title 28, Part 23, have long been in use in local and state jurisdictions.

One of the many advantages of these two sets of rules is that they have been tested and have proven to strike an appropriate balance between the legitimate needs of law enforcement and the legitimate concerns of the civil liberties community.  When properly followed they avoid situations in which there are revelations of unnecessarily broad invasions of citizens’ privacy without a legitimate law enforcement purpose or the creation of intelligence files without existence of a criminal predicate.

Study carefully that last sentence:  “When properly followed they avoid situations in which there are revelations of unnecessarily broad invasions of citizens' privacy without a legitimate law enforcement purpose….”  The sentence doesn’t say that the organization refuses to engage in “unnecessarily broad invasions of citizens’ privacy.”  It simply says that if the LEIU’s time-tested methods are followed, “revelations” of such invasions will be avoided.  Again, the purloined letter is right there for all to see, sitting on the mantelpiece, a glowing sign attached to it that reads:  SEE HOW VERY CLEVER I AM.

Not only does the Law Enforcement Intelligence Units sell their own line of specialized product (e.g., polo shorts, mugs, coins, lapel pins, pencil caddies, paper weights, mouse pads, and shot glasses) for the LEIU enthusiast, but more significantly they offer “training events” in major metropolitan cities all across the United States to those willing to pay the not-so-exorbitant fees in order to be initiated over the course of five days into the mysteries of civilian law enforcement, i.e., vigilantism, i.e., gangstalking.  Their last gala event was held in Phoenix, Arizona from May 4^th to the 8^th, 2015.  For only $650.00 you too could have gained “access to all non-law enforcement sensitive training, refreshments, and social events (including Banquet).”

 

Think about all the stories of police brutality that assail us every year via the news.  Think about how common it is for trained professionals with decades of experience to overreach their authority and take upon themselves the role of judge, jury and (more and more common these days) executioner.  Now think about how much more common such “incidents” will be when you give some wanna-be cop a week’s intensive training, and then send that person out into the world under the auspices of a “civilian” watchdog organization like the LEIU.  If you pause for a moment and think back to some of the most prominent headlines of the past few years, I think you might come to a reasonable conclusion:  that we’ve already seen the results of such vigilantism on a tragic scale that have made headlines around the world. 

Did George Zimmerman have some connection to the LEIU (or an LEIU-type organization) before he decided to play Neighborhood Watchcop and viciously murdered an innocent black teenager named Trayvon Martin on the night of February 26, 2012 in Sanford, Florida?  If so, why haven’t we heard of any such connections?  Because no investigative journalist has bothered to look into the matter, because the issue of “gangstalking” is completely off the radar of mainstream journalists.  The total blackout of gangstalking is not at all dissimilar to the way that the conspiracy known as “Watergate” was completely off the radar of mainstream journalists when Mae Brussell (often referred to by fans and critics alike as “the Queen of Conspiracies”) first wrote about the cover-up in the pages of Paul Krassner’s The Realist, an alternative magazine that was mainly known for its scathing satire, not for its serious investigative journalism.  Similarly, when the growing government corruption that surrounds the issue of gangstalking breaks in the mainstream media at last, thousands of professional journalists will once again be revealed as the barely competent cheerleaders-for-hire they really are.

When George Zimmerman was found “not guilty” of Trayvon Martin’s murder on June 13, 2013, despite the overwhelming evidence against him, the world community couldn’t believe it.  The day Zimmerman escaped his due punishment, my friend Dion Fuller (the subject of Chameleo) sent me an email in which he wrote, “…in my very valuable opinion, this ‘kid’ has the stink of the all new American Secret Police from day one.  He’s a gaslighting closet cop who is obviously too nutty to make it as a real cop, but that didn’t stop the new and improved crypto-control apparatus from exploiting that douche bag to Hell and back.”

Obviously, Dion is speculating a great deal here, so let’s pause a moment and assume that Zimmerman has no real ties to the gangstalking community at all.  If so, this wouldn’t change the fact that Zimmerman is the perfect poster boy for the type of drone drawn into the world of gangstalking.  Motivated by a deadly combination of far-rightwing politics and Christian outrage, these “perps” (as targeted individuals often refer to these criminals) seem to exhibit all the signs of being self-righteous control freaks who suffer from the overwhelming desire to stick their noses into the lives of others, perhaps because they have none of their own—just as Zimmerman decided, for no good reason, to insert himself into the life of Trayvon Martin with the barrel of a 9mm pistol.  The novelist William S. Burroughs once pithily referred to these types as “basic shits”:

Most of the trouble in the world has been caused by folks who can’t mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has.  Now your virus is an obligate cellular parasite, and my contention is that evil is quite literally a virus parasite occupying a certain brain area which we may term the RIGHT center.  The mark of a basic shit is that he has to be right […].

This RIGHT virus has been around for a long time, and perhaps its most devoted ally has been the Christian Church:  from the Inquisition to the Conquistadores, from the American Indian Wars to Hiroshima, they are RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT.  (The Adding Machine 15-16)

 

Zimmerman is the classic example of a Burroughsian basic shit.  Now, let’s speculate that such a shit is itching to become involved in law enforcement, but is prevented from doing so due to the fact that, as my friend Dion so eloquently put it, he’s “too nutty to make it as a real cop.”  The answer to such previously unattainable desires can now be satiated by giving the LEIU 650 bucks and a week of your time.  Assuming you survive the no doubt rigorous standards of such training, you can now move on to become a member of what is referred to as “a civilian intelligence community program,” i.e., people who specialize in spying, harassing, and collecting intelligence on their neighbors.  Keep in mind that this eager new initiate into the exciting and shadowy world of “community intelligence” isn’t exactly the brightest bulb in the batch.  If he was, he’d already be on his way to becoming a real cop and not a pretend one.  These people are not critical thinkers.  They tend to accept what they’re told.  If the organizer of the “civilian intelligence community program” tells our new initiate that the young couple who live down the block are anti-government terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda, or child pornographers, or just plain old drug pushers who need to be watched 24/7, for the most part said initiate will simply take this on faith and proceed to harass and spy on the young couple in question.  Here’s the ultimate irony:  Thinking they’re fighting rampant terrorism and crime, they’re unknowingly engaging in terrorism and crime.  The way these “civilian intelligence community programs” are organized is very similar to the structure of a terrorist cell. 

Terrorist cells are structured in such a way that if one member is ever captured or interrogated, he can never reveal any significant information about the organization because he was never given such information in the first place.  In fact, he may not even know that he’s part of the organization at all or, if he does, the exact nature of his true function in that organization.  The intelligence community has employed this structure for years on classified projects.  The vast majority of the scientists employed by the Manhattan Project didn’t know they had been working on an atom bomb until the day Hiroshima was decimated.  The big difference here is that helping to develop the atom bomb was not unconstitutional.  Gangstalking is. 

It’s very possible that some of the low-level initiates into the “civilian intelligence community programs” and/or gangstalking programs are reading this very article.  If so, you should understand something:  You are being duped into committing criminal, unconstitutional acts for the benefit of manipulative authoritarians who have no interest whatsoever in the well-being of you or your country.  This illegal activity will be exposed.  Just like Watergate, the cracks in your organizations will grow wider and wider.  And just like Watergate, the exposure will come from within.  Consider the strong possibility that there are many people working within these organizations who are very unhappy with how this situation has devolved over the course of the past fifteen years.  What seemingly began as a way to protect the United States from another devastating terrorist attack has now transformed into an all-out assault on innocent civilians who are arbitrarily considered “unworthy” to live a peaceful life—either because such people are deemed to be unruly agitators due to their political point of view, or simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time and had the misfortune of getting under the skin of some uptight bureaucrat who decided to exploit the resources of the black budget to “get even” with said individual. 

There are some perps who are literally being blackmailed into taking part in this illegal surveillance, and these reluctant gangstalkers are turning against their masters in subtle, covert ways.  There are also high-level architects who, growing more and more disgusted by what their beloved program has become, are trying their damndest to cover their own asses when all of this eventually blows up in the faces of the empty suits who signed off on this mass surveillance program.  Such survivalists are no doubt slowly gathering evidence against their compatriots.  Despite having similar religious and political beliefs, the people in charge of this program do not trust each other at all.  Addiction to surveillance naturally leads to more surveillance.  The watchers begin watching each other.  Sooner or later, no one can be trusted.  As with the dictatorial “Leader” in Alan Moore and David Lloyd’s classic dystopian graphic novel, V for Vendetta, the role of Big Brother can be a very lonely and paranoia-inducing one—particularly if you serve on an entire committee of Big Brothers, all of whom are vying for the top position.  Such power plays become untenable after a while.  Again, all you have to do is look at what happened to Nixon’s White House.  Or as William Burroughs once said, “Control is controlled by its need to control.”

 

To Be Continued In “A World of Stalking Fools” Part Three (Coming Soon)….

Making a Murderer, Jessica Jones, and Gang Stalking

I just finished watching Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos’ ten-part Making a Murderer documentary (now available to be seen on Netflix).  By the end of episode 3 it should be clear to anyone familiar with the insidious patterns of gang stalking that Steven Avery, the focus of the documentary, shows several telltale signs of being a classic gang stalking target.  His tragic case involves illegal police surveillance and harassment to a Kafkaesque degree, not at all dissimilar to what Dion Fuller (the main subject of my book Chameleo) and numerous other Targeted Individuals have consistently reported for so many years.  If there’s anyone out there who’s still skeptical about the perverse lengths to which local law enforcement and American Intelligence agencies will go to torture an American citizen once they’ve elected to set their sights on him or her, then you need to watch all ten episodes of Making a Murderer.  

It’s worth noting that this is the second hit series that Netflix has released during the past few months that revolves around the phenomenon of gang stalking.  Back in November, Netflix premiered a series entitled Jessica Jones starring Krysten Ritter.  Though ostensibly a gritty superhero tale with noir flourishes, the truth is that the dilemma of the title character metaphorically reflects the realities of gang stalking in a fictionalized form.  Over the course of the thirteen-part series, Jessica is blatantly gang stalked by a group of perps who are being mind controlled by one man, Killgrave (portrayed by David Tennant), as opposed to an official intelligence agency; nonetheless, the emotions of distrust, alienation, anxiety, and justifiable paranoia displayed by Jessica over the course of the series will be readily recognized by any Targeted Individual.

Though the term “gang stalking” is never once uttered in Making a Murderer, Ricciardi and Demos’ documentary is very much a literal expose of the corrupt political machinery that allows gang stalking to occur; Jessica Jones, on the other hand, is a metaphorical examination of the emotional impact of gang stalking on an individual.  It’s fascinating that one network would be responsible for the production of two shows that spotlight—in a relatively artful, subtle manner—a phenomenon considered to be nonexistent by mainstream journalists.  

Does the emergence of gang stalking in recent pop culture reflect the pervasiveness of the phenomenon in general, or is there someone in charge at Netflix who actually knows the score?  As political researcher Dave Emory likes to say, “Food for thought and grounds for further research….”

An important sidenote regarding Making a Murder:  People should find it very suspicious that Nancy Grace, professional Fox News harridan, appears to be spending all of her energy these days desperately attempting to discredit Ricciardi and Demos’ documentary.  The other day Grace was quoted as saying, "I don't think our justice system should be on the shoulders of two film students [i.e., Ricciardi and Demos]."  Does Nancy Grace actually live in a universe in which she thinks justice is best served when left "on the shoulders" of judges, cops, lawyers, and Fox News tabloid hacks?  If so, she lives in a universe that's clearly not in accordance with the reality experienced by most Americans on a day to day basis.  

One of the main questions Making a Murderer asks is:  "Did Steve Avery receive a fair trial?"  Grace and pundits like her are attempting to reframe the question as follows:  "Is Steve Avery a good person?"  This is a straw man argument.  The question is irrelevant, and the purpose of this tactic is to deflect attention away from the numerous failures of law enforcement in Avery's case.   Like many gang stalkers, Grace believes that people who do not live up to her shallow, capricious moralistic principles deserve to be harassed and, if need be, railroaded into prison.  "The Ends Justify The Means" is the only commandment that exists in the gang stalker's religion.

“Justice is meaningless without freedom.”

--V for Vendetta 

by Alan Moore and David Lloyd