circumstantial evidence, communists, corrupt police, corruption, dirty tricks, fabrication of evidence, framing (evidence), gang stalking, gang stalking at University, guilt by association, hazards of University life, lies, slander, smear campaigns, students, terrorists, University, vigilante stalking at University
I only found out about “gang stalking” six months ago. It was obvious that I was being harassed when I was a student at University, and it was also obvious when I lived in London that at every address I lived, which had normal residents when I moved in, the most appalling neighbours moved in afterwards. But – I just assumed that was London – an over-priced hell-hole.
When I found out about gang stalking I discovered that all the events were connected. And realised that the ghastly neighbours had not just been put into the places I lived to make my life hell, but were also part of the defamation campaign against me to support the lie that I was a criminal. (Prostitutes residing in the house, drugs being posted to the house, welfare fraud being carried out, and the crowning glory at one address which caused a mass exodus of all the tenants – an IRA man moving in.) Please remind yourself that residents at multiple-occupancy addresses have no control over who their fellow tenants are – that is down to the landlord/letting agents who don’t have to live with them. Also bear in mind the near impossibility of finding any accommodation in London which you can afford out of a minimum wage.
So, I have done a lot of thinking in the last six months, having approximately 35 years of inexplicable events to examine in the new light of the awareness of being a Targeted Individual. The recognition, for instance, of how a smear campaign can be given credibility by manipulating the people in your vicinity.
That was how I arrived at the crashing realisation that while at University, despite the fact I had virtually no social life due to poverty, the few people I had met at University among the lecturers were communists. I thought nothing of it at the time. You expect to meet people with different viewpoints at University, it doesn’t mean you agree with everyone you meet. I was apolitical at that age. It is only recently I have developed an interest in politics and I am very middle-of-the-road which I suppose is next door to being apolitical. Each election is a headache as I strive to find ONE party which has policies which do not appear to be designed for the destruction of the country.
But since the gang stalking experience I have re-examined every part of my life to decipher what has been going on. Largely by doing a lot of reading. I have been reading about McCarthyism and how COINTELPRO targeted feminists – which must include nearly every female who attended University in the ’60’, ’70’s. And how the mind-set of both agendas was to cast the net as wide as possible. In other words, it was not necessary for you to BE a communist – having an association with someone known to be a communist was all it took to become a target. Likewise you did not have to belong to a woman’s group to be classed as a feminist. (I couldn’t join a feminist group at University, there wasn’t one). Being a non- upper class female at University was apparently reason enough. And of course if you were known to socialise with communists …….
In the light of what I now know about gang stalking it seems hugely unlikely that the only staff I met at University apart from my own lecturers just happened to be communists. That is too much of a coincidence. And worse, in the Northern Ireland context, outsiders sometimes make the mistake that the IRA are nationalists, but that is not the case. The IRA were communists. They did not want a green United Ireland. They wanted a red one. So socialising with communists in Ireland, even though all the lecturers I met were English nationals, implies association with terrorists.
So much for going to University to improve your life’s chances.
Again, as with the housing example given above, you can be discredited by the manipulation of who you meet. Just as I had no control over what kind of people the landlord/letting agent chose to put in the house, I also had no control over the lecturers that the University employed.
It is just a game to the gang stalkers.
If gang stalking is a continuation of the COINTELPRO protocol, and you can be smeared by association, then if you are at University you need to know the background of anyone you meet at University. An innocent chat with that friendly lad/lass over coffee, that you never meet again, may become the basis that when you were at University it was known you associated with communists/ terrorists/drug dealers/whatever. Gang stalkers will put a spin on it which will make it look as if you were the ring-leader of the group. At the very least you need to know if there is anyone on the University payroll who is a communist, or sends £5 a year to the Anti-Vivisection Society (domestic terrorist) etc, so you do not become smeared by association at a later date.
Out of interest I researched the University I attended to try and find out what members of staff were listed as communists. I think I did a pretty thorough job. I found zilch.
As it stands gang stalkers/the authorities? can make out that a student at University associated with communists when (a) the University employed them and (b) there is no way for the student to know IN ADVANCE that the person they are socialising with is a communist. And (c) the student’s “association” with communists is used against them at a later date.
If the gang stalkers had a charter it would be the freedom to criminalise anyone they choose.
PS I have nothing against communists, and nothing for them either. I am totally against terrorists. My point is if “authorities” act like this people need access to more information to protect themselves.
A Good Read
Snitch Culture, Jim Redden