4 ms·
> you don't have to have real surveillance to do this. All you need is the belief that the surveillance is going on A standard play these thugs often set up is
by vorg 12y ago
> you don't have to have real surveillance to do this. All you need is the belief that the surveillance is going on
A standard play these thugs often set up is a single intricate surveillance incident where the mark knows they're being watched very closely, then do another one much later on. This is intended to leave the victim in a state of constant paranoia during the majority of the times they're not being watched. It takes a lot of self-control to remain calm most times when this one's used against you.
Another technique when the surveillers have less control is the fatwa. I was in Hong Kong about 12 years ago on a ferry from some outer island when one (a young Australian-sounding male) of two people talking a few seats behind me suddenly said to the other (a young North American girl) "There's some people back home who want to know where in the world that guy up there is at all times. I better ring this in." He then talked loudly on the phone giving some details about me. The girl he was with had an embarrassed expression on her face like she couldn't believe what she was hearing. This all happened while I was moving from Melbourne (Australia, not Florida) to China to live. Unfortunately, that surveillance fatwa against me seems to still be in place over a decade later, and those who issued it are even willing to nudge along local people in China to use methods that would be illegal back in Australia/NZ.
Perhaps good news is that those in control of the surveillance always use intermediaries to hide themselves, and most intermediaries have a need to show off rather than hide themselves. By doing things like talking to yourself or "to God" a lot out loud within hearing of where bugs may be, changing what you say for different locations, you can often find out something about probable actors involved when stuff you've said comes back to you.
- tomlongson 12y agoWhy was there a fatwa against you?
- vorg 12y agoYou won't find the reason in any public court document, nor will asking the populace involved reveal the real intent because the reason such puppeteers give their intermediaries, often different reasons to different intermediaries, is never the real purpose behind surveillance. Much targeted surveillance using human agents becomes interference of some sort by those same agents. Often when surveillance becomes interference, the puppeteers tell their intermediaries they're trying to "help" the mark, but in reality, they're only pretending because the real intent of anyone behind this type of activity is always to harm. I experienced this when someone up here tried to shunt me out of work teaching college students and into work teaching children, telling people I should do the work that pays the most. They pretended to be helping so they would appear to be "good guys" to their intermediaries, but their puppeteers were really conducting harmful manipulation for their own ends. They ultimate reason behind surveillance, whether one-to-one or broadcasted "fatwas", seems to be to protect free cash flows, or maintain power structures, and what not.
- vorg 12y agoA day after posting the above reply came an event I was half anticipating: the Person of Interest episode 79 broadcast on 6 Jan 2015 in the U.S. featured a preachment saying "Anyone who treats life as a game of chess, treating people like pawns, deserves to lose". This could have been placed in response to a bait comment I left on Hacker News 2 months ago ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8548483 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8548483 ) but they are usually placed deniably. I've learnt from experience what the lagtime is between letting on I watch some TV show and something apparently targeted at me appearing in it, though this is the first time I left one on purpose. The preachment as presented was only pretending to be aimed at me, but was actually aimed at others. What I was being told was "My blog is bigger than your blog, our budget is bigger than your budget", a message given many times via CBS, ABC, Fox, etc over the past few years. The actual preachment line is for certain TV viewers, especially in places like Australia and China, saying it's OK to target me because I treat other people like pawns. This latest fatwa-style call to arms is of a similar method to many previous ones for surveillance like the one that came from Melbourne Australia 12 years ago which I mentioned 3 comments up in this thread. The preachment relies on erroneous assumptions of course. I never liked fighting other people, prefering instead co-operation and group activities like bush hiking (tramping) and camping, but I've since learnt that a more appropriate line instead of Harold Finch's is one by Leon Tolstoy: "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you". I've been attacked in various psychological ways over the past few decades, which I now recognize as being a formulaic and ongoing operation by some people to wear me down, originating in New Zealand but spreading to Australia and the U.S. These are the people the Groovy/Grails managers got into bed with when I first started to respectfully work my way into that community. And I've since learnt I have to respond to war with war, using many varied tactics such as timing bait comments with a 2 month lead. Another erroneous assumption in that preachment is that I use other people like pawns. I don't know any other people very well, and if I make an effort to build relationships with others, sometime down the line they'll start to experience anonymous harrassment in an apparent attempt to get to me. Warning someone that this might happen isn't sufficient because a warning is only words, and they wouldn't really know what I was talking about until it starts happening to them. I know this because 20 years ago someone in NZ said the same to me about himself and I had no concept of what they were really saying. I wouldn't want to ever knowingly be the cause of this to be in someone's future. It's the sociopaths behind these fatwas, who hide themselves behind layers of intermediaries, who are the real users of other people. I'm fighting the war as a lone guerrilla. Anyone involved as an intermediary in some action against me should realize that the reason they're being given is just a cover story to make their handlers look like "good guys". I know far more names of people involved than the very few I've mentioned on my blog but only wanted to name and shame the sociopath puppeteers, not their pawns, because the intermediaries "know not what they do". The only smart response by someone to a fatwa to fight me is to refuse to take part, but of course that might also suit the sociopaths now that I'm "losing" as a result of their previous attacks.
- dkmarta 12y agoYou appear to be a victim of Gang Stalking otherwise known as Organized Stalking. I am also a victim of similar tactics. “Gang stalking” – also known as “organized stalking” – is a slang term for a set of tactics used in counterintelligence operations involving the covert surveillance and harassment of a targeted individual. The goal of such operations – in the parlance of counterintelligence personnel – is to “subvert” or “neutralize” an individual deemed by a government agency (or corporation) to be an enemy. http://fightgangstalking.com/what-is-gang-stalking/ http://fightgangstalking.com/what-is-gang-stalking/
- A_COMPUTER 12y agoWho are you an enemy of? Who is doing it to you, and why?
- vorg 12y agoThanks for the link, I've read through it, and lots of it resonates.