CLOSING THE GAP

CLOSING THE GAP

 

Community Notifications

Targeted Individuals have spent several years trying to understand the mechanisms that  would allow the type of targeting that  is happening to them  to exist. Many have tried to understand how a system  could exist that  could monitor and track them  24/7. That could follow them from community to community. A structure that  could label them,  even from country  to country.

 Most targets see themselves as innocent individuals. People  that  have done no wrong, yet many started to experience psychological torture, electronic harassment, and systemic  wide targeting almost  as if overnight in some  cases, and in other cases  it slowly built up over years.

 Targets  looked  at structures such as Cointelpro, The Stasi, Stalking Groups, Vigilantes, the types  of structures that  had occurred in the past that  had lead to a similar types  of harassment. Many were close and very similar to what targets experienced, in their scope,  and potential for systemic  life disruptions and destruction, but none  were ever quite perfect.

 Jane Clift

 Then last year the case of a woman in England named Jane Clift was brought to light as she made headlines in the U.K., and beyond. Ms.

Clift tried to perform what was her citizens duty in reporting a man that had become angry and violent with her. In reporting this man, she herself was embroiled in a verbal altercation with the community worker that  she tried to report his anti-social behaviours to. Ms. Clift followed  up their heated discussion with a letter, and for this simple act, Ms. Clift was placed  on a list with sex perverts, and other criminals.

She was placed  on what the U.K. calls the violent persons registry. It's a listing for individuals  who have displayed violent or other inappropriate behaviour. Ms. Clift found  that  being  under the spotlight of this flagging  system  was too  much and she was forced  to move from the area that  she had lived in for over 10 years.

 Ms. Clift unlike many targets had been given notification that  she was to be placed  on such a list. The nature of her perceived offence,  and the length of time she would be on such a list. She described her experience, which in some  pivotal ways matched some  of what Targeted Individuals had mentioned in their harassment.

 She sensed that, everywhere she went, there  was “whispering, collaboration, people scurrying  about”. “Everywhere I went  – hospitals, GPs, libraries – anywhere at all, even if I phoned the fire service, as soon  as my name went on to that  system,  it flagged up ‘violent person marker, only to be seen  in twos, medium risk’.” 2

 Ms Clift's targeting if not identical  was at least fraternal to what targets had described. People  collaborating. Whispers,  scurrying, life disruption that  had caused her to move. In Ms. Clift’s case the warning  markers, and flags had been sent  out to quite  a few agencies, and thus everywhere she want this warning  marker  followed  her. Even when she went to the contraceptive clinic, a warning  marker  listing her as medium risk for violence only to be seen  in pairs would pop  up.

The question then  became was such a system,  or similar system available in other countries? Which laws were being  used  and who was responsible for keeping or organizing such information?

 Further research showed that  under occupational health and safety laws, there  was such a structure in place, that  would allow an individual to receive a warning  marker,  or flag on their files for various perceived offences.  The structure matched and covered all the various markers that targets had complained about. The structure also allowed  for

those around the accused to be fully aware  of what was ongoing, while it allowed  the accused to be unaware, unable to defend themselves. This structure upon  further  and deeper examination fit extremely  well with what was ongoing.

 Under the Occupational health and safety, or community health and safety laws, which have been established in many countries, individuals can be flagged and a notification about them  can be sent  out to the community at large, all without the targets awareness. These laws give workers the right to be made aware  if they are about to encounter potentially violent situations or individuals. These laws however  do not give the target any foreknowledge of the violence, and harassment they will soon  receive from the community, once  placed  on such a notification system.

Workers have the ’ right to know ‘ all risks and safe work procedures associated with the job. This may involve identifying  individuals  with a history of unpredictable or violent behaviour.

 Training workers to recognize escalating behaviour that  has the potential to result in violence is a common way to minimize risk. Five warning  signs of escalating behaviour and possible responses are listed in Appendix  C.

 In the service sector  this may require  identifying  to employees persons who have a history of aggressive or inappropriate behaviour in the store,  bar, mall or taxi.

 The identity  of the person and the nature of the risk must  be given to staff likely to come  into contact with that  person. While workers have the right to know the risks, it is

important to remember that  this information cannot be indiscriminately distributed. 1

 Workers do have a right to know if they are going  to encounter violent situations or individuals. On the surface  this sounds like a good thing, and if used  properly should  be a good thing, yet the innocent were and are being  targeted by this system.  How were innocent individuals, whistle-blowers, and others ending up on such lists without any kind of warning  or notification? Even convicted prisoners get warnings  if they are going  to be placed  on a notification system,  thus legally it would be presumed that  other individuals would have the same  rights and protections if their lives were going  to be disrupted in a similar manner. This does  not seem  to be the case.

 Under several laws designed to protect the worker and community, including  some  occupational health and safety laws, incidents must  be reported by the worker. They can range anywhere from threatening looks, yelling, to actual  physical aggression and everything in between. They can also include  other inappropriate behaviours. Eg. Acts of sexual aggression, harassment, intimidation, inappropriate lewdness, etc.

 Once a worker files a report, if the workplace has an Employee Assistance  Program then  this matter might  be discussed with that department. If the behaviour is deemed to be a real concern, then  it might  be forwarded to a Threat Assessment Team. This team  is where designation, warning  markers,  and notifications can be determined and applied to an individuals file, depending on the structure of the organisation. Not every workplace will have a threat assessment team, or an employee assistance program. Sometimes this will be handled by Human  Resources or the local council and they will put together a file to be evaluated. At the community level the reports are filtered and filed by workers, or those in authority.

 Employee Assistance  Program and Threat Assessment Team

This is a pre-emptive team  with a mission of early identification of intervention. The composition of the TAT shall be the following individuals  or their designated representatives: 17

 Early interventions can be misconstrued and lead to damaging consequences. There are many assumptions that  go into pre-crime policing, that  can have damaging consequences for the target involved.

 Oregon State  Police Sgt. Jeff Proulx explained to South Oregon's Mail Tribune why the operation was such a success: "Instead of being  reactive, we took a proactive approach."

 There's just one problem: David Pyles hadn't committed any crime, nor was he suspected of having committed one. The police never obtained a warrant  for either  search  or arrest.

 They never consulted with a judge  or mental health professional before sending out the military-style  tactical teams to take Pyle in.

 "They woke me up with a phone call at about 5:50 in the morning," Pyles told me in a phone interview Friday. "I looked out the window and saw the SWAT team  pointing their guns  at my house.  The officer on the phone told me to turn myself in. I told them  I would, on three  conditions: I would not be handcuffed. I would not be taken  off my property. And I would not be forced  to get  a mental health evaluation. He agreed. The second I stepped outside, they jumped me. Then they handcuffed me, took me off my property, and took me to get  a mental health evaluation." 18

 This team  consists  of members from Human  Resources and other organizations. In the case of one Florida University the organization consists  of many different individuals  from various areas  that  work together to make the determination of whether they think an individual could be a cause  for violence.

 A Workplace  Violence Management Team (WVMT) shall periodically  review the workplace violence policy and recommend changes as needed. The WVMT shall consist  of the following persons or their designated representative:

 1. Chief, University Police Department 2. Director, EAP 3. Director, Personnel Services 4. General Counsel  F. Crisis Management Unit - The University maintains a Crisis Management Unit (CMU) through a collaborative effort between the Psychology Department and the Campus  Police Department. In the event  of a situation which may require immediate police or psychological intervention, the Police department should  be notified.  The Chief of Police (or designated representative) will determine if the situation requires the attention of the police, the CMU or the TAT. 17

 In addition to exhibiting  violent or other inappropriate behaviours, there  are other factors  that  could ensure that  an individual has a warning  marker, or flag placed  on their file. Again this will differ with each organization, but the concept is the same.  This structure or one similar is used  in some  cases  to determine if individuals  will end  up on this system  wide notification.

V. "Fitness for Duty" Issues

 In addition to the definitions of violent, potentially violent, and abusive  behaviors as discussed in Section  IV, these Guidelines  shall also be concerned with behaviors, physical and verbal, that  may not appear to be violent, potentially violent, or abusive  prima facie. Such behaviors that  do not fall within the purview of the definitions in Appendix  A, yet may be viewed as precursors to violent behavior and/or have the tendency to interfere with a harmonious work environment or with an individuals  work performance, shall be deemed as "fitness for duty" issues. Examples of "fitness for duty" behaviors may include, but are not limited to:

 A. Expression of bizarre and inappropriate thoughts. B. Excessive absenteeism without prior approval or rationale. C. Degenerating physical appearance. D. Acts of insubordination. E. Poor work performance. F. Poor workplace relationships with others. G. Indications of alcohol/substance abuse.  H. Excessive complaining.

 The additional criteria that  can get  a person flagged, are interestingly enough many of the same  symptoms that  harassment, bullying and mobbing targets experience, or have expressed experiencing at the height of their targeting. Remember that  harassment can happen in the workplace,  in the community, or on campus. Many victims of sexual harassment have expressed inappropriate thoughts of what they would like to see happen to those harassing them.  Many targets of sexual harassment and other harassments do not always keep  up their physical appearance, while being  harassed. They might  disobey supervisors if asked  to work with their assailant.  Targets  of mobbing, bullying, and harassment do often  start  to exhibit poor  performance, workplace reviews and assessments. Some do turn to alcohol  and substance abuse to deal with the harassment. Almost all targets of these harassment do make complaints to human resources on a regular basis in order  to have the harassment stopped. Yet these are coincidentally the criteria listed for determining if someone is fit for duty.

 VI. Reporting Procedures

 All University employees and registered students, regardless of position, are responsible for the immediate reporting of any acts of violence, potential acts of violence, or threats they have received  or witnessed, or have been told that another employee has witnessed or received.  Employees and students should  also report unusual,  harassing, or threatening behaviors, as defined in Appendix  A, even though such behaviors may not be in the form of an imminent threat, particularly  if these behaviors make  one fearful for his or her continued safety. Employees must  make such reports regardless of the relationship of the employee to the person who initiated the threat or behavior or committed the act of violence. 17.

Today's workplace does  not leave very much  room  for discretion. It is now routine for individuals  to report acts of aggression, or other inappropriate behaviours. These can often  have devastating affects on innocent individuals.

 A medical  technician killed himself after being  suspended from work after someone complained that  he made a politically-incorrect joke about a black friend.

 Roy Amor, 61, who was devastated at the prospect of losing his job making  prosthetics, shot  himself in the head  outside his house.He was facing a disciplinary investigation after suggesting to the black colleague that  he ‘better hide’ when they noticed immigration officers outside their clinic.

 It is understood that  the man was a close friend of Mr Amor and was not offended. However, it was overheard by someone else who lodged a formal complaint. 19

 The above  case shows how a seemingly innocent joke between two friends, can be overheard, taken  as offensive  by a third party, and lead to dire consequences. He made the remark  to an individual who was a long term  friend, but this remark  lead to a disciplinary investigation. An investigation which might  even have seen  him fired from his job. Unable to face the consequences he committed suicide.

 Due to the secrecy used  in this program a target of harassment might well display anger,  or other legitimate outbursts. Once this happens all the aggressors who are familiar with this system  have to do is report the incidents. Explain how the target makes  them  feel threatened, uncomfortable, or express  concerns about workplace violence. When in fact the target is the one being  constantly provoked. Get a few friends involved and before you know it, the target is the problem. The target is the person who is aggressive, and the target is the one being disciplined or having a warning  marker  placed  on their file. Targets  are often  being  baited by complete strangers once  they find themselves on these notification lists.

In future  many more  innocent people might  just find themselves with such warning  markers  added to their files, as the DSM make  the definition for mental illness that  much  wider and broader in scope.

 DSM Updates

Proposed updates to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual  of Mental  Disorders  (DSM) are prompting many to question whether or not the psychiatric  profession itself has gone crazy. The latest  additions to the alleged “mentally ill” could include  hoarders, people who get  angry every now and again, lazy people, and even those who get  outraged over things  like sex and violence on television.

 “For this latest  revision they’ve set up a special task force to decide if behaviors like bitterness, extreme shopping or overuse of the internet should  be included,”  explained Professor Christopher Lane. 20

 Many Internet users who spend time on games such as World of Warcraft might  meet this definition.  People  who spend too  much time on chat forums.  Lazy individuals, people who get  angry, or who get upset about too  much  violence on television,  people who like to shop too  much, or hoard things,  might  all make the list in future.  The criteria for these definitions are not only unscientific,  they could easily incorporate most  any individual in today's modern society. If these definitions are successfully  updated, there  could be many more  targets making  the list in future.

 Once a target is flagged, or a warning  marker  is placed  on their files, depending on what the threat assessment team  or persons making  the determinations decide,  a community notification is sent  out to the individuals  around the target. Anyone that  might  come  in contact with the target is contacted. Others  who are part of these notification programs are also contacted when the target is nearby.

 If a target makes  a call, or their name  is pulled  up on a system,  the targets warning  marker  will follow them.  The community then  naturally goes  into hypervigilance mode, and they do anything they can to remove that  individual from within the community. Most individuals treat  these notifications the same  way they would treat  notifications about any other threat, be it pedophiles, rapists, the same  hysteria  is often  present.

 Since the innocent target has no idea of what is happening behind their back, this system  is being  used  in inappropriate ways. Based on the research that  has been conducted,it seems this notification systems is being  used  to silence whistle-blowers, women seem  to be targeted above  average, and minorities.  As Jane Clift points  out, this system goes  beyond race, gender. There are lot's of men  and non minority individuals  who have also found  themselves targeted by this system. This program is not only systemic,  but these notifications are being used  indiscriminately, with very little oversight, and they are being  used beyond borders.

 Since most  civil workers are aware of this notification system,  it means that  targets reporting incidents of being  followed  around by various strangers should  not have been unfamiliar  to the police, and other agencies that  targets reported their harassment to. In most  cities this notification is well known, and used  by many workers and employers. Yet Targeted Individuals have had to have mental health evaluations for making  complaints about this structure, and the harassment thatcomes with it.

 Workers

 Not only will this program used  the civil servant  already mentioned, but it will expand who is used  in the program. They will have secret  sources of communication available to them.  The members of these programs will connect with the fusion centres. None  disclosure agreement or a confidential disclosure agreements will be signed by many in these programs to ensure that  the information is protected. 21

 Once the notification goes  out, the target literally feels as if they have become enemy  of the state,  because the community is getting a notification with information that  may or may not be fully accurate. Remember a lot of the reporting that  happens, happens by individuals who could have ulterior  motives,  such as revenge. For someone familiar with this structure, it's the perfect way to systemically  destroy someone's life and keep  them  out of the loop for years, if not forever.

 The portion of the harassment that  targets refer to as Gang Stalking is a deliberate psychological operation that  happens within this structure. Involving community harassment, community mobbing, gaslighting, street theatre, electronic harassment and dozens of other techniques that  all work together to help systemically destroy the target over time. It also paints  those complaining as mentally  ill. This structure is capable of destroying the targets reputation, and credibility. As the target seeks to get  help for the community harassment that  will inevitably occur under such a notification, their cries and pleas for assistance are ignored. Their stories  of harassment, stalking, mobbing, electronic harassment, are all conveniently written  of as signs of mental illness,while the Targeted Individuals life continues to be systemically interfered with, and continues to fall apart.

 Most participants of this notification structure seem  to be under some kind of confidentiality or none  disclosure agreement. There is also a structure in place that  seems capable of punishing anyone who is part of this structure that  steps  out of line, thus most  people do not discuss this program, even as those close to them  are being  destroyed.

 These laws designed to protect the community, such as the occupational safety and health laws are in most  communities, workplaces, and educational facilities. They are in most  democratic countries, such as Canada,  U.S., U.K. and the most  of Europe. At this stage many other countries seem  to be adapting this structure, and from the feedback targets have provided it seems that  this structure is already  in many countries.

 What this means is that  wittingly or unwittingly.  There is a systemic, surveillance  structure that  is fully capable of monitoring and targeting an individual who has been flagged in this manner. This structure is not limited to states, or provinces,  and can go beyond borders. The targets information might  also be indiscriminately distributed to a wide range of individuals. Individuals that  the target might  never come  in contact with face to face, yet who the target might  have an acquaintance, or business relationship with. It's basically a net that  is capable of touching everyone connected to the target, and poisoning them  with the information contained in the targets file, wither accurate or not.

Because  most  targets have no idea what is happening, or how such a structure could exist, they are floored  as they try consistently to get help within the normal  structures, while being  written  off as having a mental illness.

 I believe that  this notification system  will continue, because it works for many. Many like feeling as if they are part of a secret  club. Unless it happens to them,  most  will never truly understand how devastating such a structure can be to an innocent person. I can only suggest that those with the know how, financial ability, and dedication, work towards implementing laws to get  this structure corrected.

 Suggestions

 This structure should  be required to give written  notification to targets. If an investigation is ongoing, then  the time frame for the investigation should  be limited. Targets  complain of years, upon  years of targeting. If the targets guilt has been established in some  capacity, then  invite

them  to a hearing. If not then  it should  be mandatory to remove these notification after a specific time frame. Most lawyers, mental health workers, police, are all fully in the know about this notification system, thus targets and their complaints of harassment should  be taken seriously. Instead this notification system  is being  used  to destroy innocent lives, or harass  them  for years on end  with dire consequences to themselves, and the communities at large.

 This notification system  in scope and breadth is no less damaging then the Stasi's system  of harassment, or the American Cointelpro program. The difference now is that  the state has masked these offences under the guise of doing  what is right for the community. Leaving innocent targets at the mercy of the mob, and individuals  who use this system  to openly  target, harass,  oppress and control  those who have been targeted.

 The Dark Side

 Many times on the news you hear a report about a shooting, killing or violent incident and the person at the heart  of the incident is passed off as mentally  ill, and the society reacts  by creating additional laws to protect themselves from the mentally  ill.

 What many in society still do not understand or realize is that  there  is a dark side to many of those shootings and violent incidents, there  is a dark side that  society would rather  not have you know about. A dark side that  happens masked just below the public’s eye and awareness, but that  is often  very real and traumatizing for the Targeted Individual.

 In many of these cases  if you look deeper into these incidents you will often  discover  that  there  was more  to the story. Before the target had a history of “mental  illness”, the target often  had complaints of mobbing, bullying, or harassment of some  kind. Often times the Target might  not even have a term to go with the form of harassment that  is happening to them.  They often  describe individuals around them,  or even complete strangers as being  mean,  taunting, doing  little incidents to provoke them.  Many of these targets have complained for years about the targeting, but with each successive complaint their actions  are often passed off as mental illness. Their very real concerns that  some type of organized or systemic  harassment, is happening around them often  goes  unheeded, unheard, and the target might  even be forcefully committed by concerned family. The reality is that  the target has often been exposed continually  overtime to a psychological operation of harassment and provocations, that  would be capable of breaking down most  sane  individuals.

 Recently society has become more  familiar with terms  such as mobbing and bullying.

 Mobbing

 This form of harassment has often  been referred to the cousin  of Gang Stalking. On a psychological and emotional level, the targeting experienced by the Targeted Individual is very similar if not almost identical  to what the mobbing target experiences.

 Mobbing in the context of human beings either  means bullying of an individual by a group in any context,  or specifically any workplace bullying.

 Though  the English word mob  denotes a crowd, often  in a destructive or hostile  mood,  German,  Polish, Italian and several other European languages have adopted mobbing as a loanword to describe all forms of bullying including  that  by single persons. The resultant German  verb mobben can also be used  for physical attacks,  calumny against teachers on the internet and intimidation by superiors, with an emphasis on the victims’ continuous fear rather  than  the perpetrators’ will to exclude  them.  The word may thus be a false friend in translation back into English, where  mobbing in its primary sense  denotes a disorderly gathering by a crowd and in workplace psychology narrowly refers to “ganging up” by others to harass  and intimidate an individual.

 Research  into the phenomenon was pioneered in the 1980s by German-born Swedish scientist  Heinz Leymann, who borrowed the term from animal behaviour due to it describing perfectly  how a group can attack  an individual based only on the negative covert  communications from the group”.

 Mobbing is also found  in school  systems and this too  was discovered by Dr. Heinz Leymann. Although he preferred the term bullying in the context of school  children, some  have come  to regard mobbing as a form of group bullying. As professor and practising psychologist, Dr. Leymann also noted one of the side-effects of Mobbing is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder  and is frequently misdiagnosed. After making this discovery  he successfully  treated thousands of mobbing victims at his clinic in Sweden.

 In the book  MOBBING: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace,  the authors say that  mobbing is typically found  in work environments that  have poorly organized production and/or working methods and incapable or inattentive management and that  mobbing victims are usually “exceptional individuals who demonstrated intelligence, competence, creativity, integrity,  accomplishment and dedication”.

 UK Anti-bully pioneers Andrea Adams and Tim Field used  the expression workplace bullying instead of what Leymann called “mobbing” although workplace bullying nearly always involves mobbing in its other meaning of group bullying. 22

 In the following article some  stories  of workplace mobbing are shared.

 Workplace Mobbing

 In the article workplace violence, it looks at some  of the reasons behind the mobbing phenomenon and why the violence continues.

 Workplace  Violence:

 Why it happens. Why it will continue.

 “The tiny percentage of mobbing victims – like Pierre Lebrun

– who lash back in violent attack  would probably have lived out their lives peaceably and productively had they been spared the excruciating pain of relentless humiliation.”

 ~ Prof. Kenneth Westhues,

At the Mercy of the Mob: A summary of research on workplace mobbing

 We’ve all seen  the news reports. A lone gunman returns to his workplace or former  workplace to exact revenge for harassment that  has gone on sometimes for years. We learn that  the gunman has lashed  back in the past  at those he considered to be abusing him, albeit in non-lethal ways. We are told the gunman has been disciplined in the past  for his behavior (reacting to the abuse)  and has been ordered to go to counselling or anger management courses.  Even though the precipitating abuse may have gone on for years any response in kind gives the bullies and management the opportunity to turn the tables  and claim that  the victim of abuse is the real problem after all.

 Of couse  what we don’t hear is that  the bullies provoking this reaction are almost  never disciplined or required to attend counselling themselves. At this point  targets of mobbing are often  further  humiliated by being  forced  to sign so-called ‘last chance agreements’ which threaten the target with termination if they dare  to challenge the bullies again. So once  the target of harassment returns to work after “counselling”  they are greeted by cynical bullies who simply renew  their attack  with added vigor now that  they know management will do nothing to stop  them  and will even join in the persecution. This tacit approval and participation by management guarantees the situation will only get worse.

 News reporters interview the gunman’s co-workers, union respresentatives and managers. Those not directly implicated in the harassement of the gunman usually describe him in positive  terms.  For example in the OC Transpo  shooting in Ottawa  a co-worker of Pierre Lebrun, Ozzie Morin, commented that  Pierre was “a pretty  peaceful lad”, “I didn’t think he was ill. I can’t really say anything today  that  would say he was whacko, you know.” Another  co-worker, Grant Harrison remembered Lebrun as “very clever, very nice”.

 While those closer to the abuse,  union  reps for example, intent  on distancing themselves from blame,  respond “We’re going  to look for causes  but really, I don’t think we’re really going  to find a cause,” said union  head  Paul Macdonnell. “This individual was just sick.” 23 The sad reality is that  when these shootings happen in society, the reaction of society is often  still to pass the target off as just a sick crazed  individual. Not much  has changed.

 The societies reaction is too  often  to pass the individual off as problematic, sick, disturbed, mentally  ill, a violent individual. The real causes  behind their violent and extreme outbursts often  remain  hidden. It’s easier  to think that  we have a few individuals in society that  are sick and disturbed vs the fact that  we have a society that  is doing  sick and disturbing things  to these individuals and their lives, which in turn leads to these violent outbursts and incidents.

Once educated it is easy to tell what is really happening, who the real victim is. Once it is named and brought out into the light for all to see bullies can no longer  operate in the grey area. Only once  everyone sees mobbing for what it is, brutal systematic psychological torture, will it become unacceptable. Only when co-workers, supervisors, department heads,  HR managers, EAP providers,  corporate executives,  doctors, lawyers, judges and politicians understand what is being  done and comprehend the staggering toll it takes  on individuals, companies and society as a whole will laws proscribing mobbing become effective.

 In the meantime, the body  count  will continue to rise.

 ~ Anton Hout 23

 The body  count  has indeed continued to rise, but where  workplace mobbing and school  bullying have become more  widely recognized, the issue of community mobbing and Gang Stalking are often  less well known, and when violent incidents happen, society does  not often readily link these incidents of violence to something more  dark and insidious  that  might  be just be happening in the community.

 The mobbing community over the years has done a fantastic job of documenting the link between workplace mobbing and violent shootings. They were able to establish that  in the case of many workplace shootings if you looked  a little deeper there  was workplace mobbing ongoing. Workplace  mobbing that  had gone on for years. The Target of the mobbing had often  been singled  out as the problem and their cries for help often  lead to measures which left them  unable to complain any further,  take any extra internal  actions,  and left them  at the mercy of the mob.


Exposing and Defeating Organized Gang Stalking - with Dr Eric Karlstrom on WorldBeyondBelief