For the purposes of gathering significant information in one place, I am using the term “documents” here somewhat broadly. This section includes affidavits, reports, and correspondence, but also self-published articles, and other materials.

I post the (relatively uncommon) mainstream news media articles about gang stalking in the “Gang Stalking News” section of this website – listed in order by their publication dates.

Most of the articles in that “News” section are only indirectly related to gang stalking; you need to scroll through them to find those which are specifically on topic. As I see it though, a realistic assessment of claims about gang stalking requires a familiarity with related issues – such as police corruption and government secrecy.

Reasons for the limited amount of documentary evidence

Probably the first “rule” for people engaged in criminal activity is to avoid creating documents which could be used as evidence. It’s my understanding, for example, that no documents were ever discovered in which Hitler explicitly ordered the mass murder of Jews.

A common practice at many corporations now (including the one where I was the victim of “mobbing”) is to purge all the email records every few months. By the standards of modern computers, the amount of data storage space needed for text documents is exremely small, so the only logical reason for such policies is to eliminate documents which could be found later in legal inquiries – such as the discovery phase of lawsuits. But the simplest and smartest policy – for corporations and governments – is to avoid creating potentially incriminating documents in the first place.

If someone insists that allegations of a secret government policy of acquiescence in gang stalking are not credible in the absence of official incriminating documents, that insistence is an indication that the person is naïve at best, or at worst is a government shill.

In some cases though, conspiracies are broken by the revelation of key documents such as policy memos, reports, and correspondence. Something like that might eventually happen with gang stalking, but here are a half-dozen serious challenges for such revelations:

1. The Catch-22 Problem

Until gang stalking is investigated by Congress – as was eventually done by the U.S. Senate’s Church Committee in the 1970s regarding Cointelpro and MK Ultra – the amount of solid information on the subject will be limited. Obviously, there is a “Catch-22” situation at work: neither the press nor Congress will be inclined to investigate the matter in the absence of hard evidence of a conspiracy, and such evidence will be difficult to obtain without investigations by the press and Congress.

2. The Prosecution of Whistle-Blowers Problem

The ideal development would be for a whistle-blower in the U.S. agencies involved to leak information about the program to initiate such inquiries. Unfortunately, by all accounts, the federal government has become more aggressive in recent years about prosecuting whistle-blowers.

This April 15, 2013 article describes the prosecution of employees of the National Security Agency (NSA) who revealed what they perceived to be a vast unconstitutional program of domestic surveillance following the 9/11 attacks. The reaction by the government generally was not outrage over the surveillance, but rather an attempt to hammer the whistle-blowers for exposing a program they described as “better than anything that the KGB, the Stasi, or the Gestapo and SS ever had.”

The seizure by the Department of Justice (DOJ) of two months of phone records of the Associated Press in the spring of 2012 (and revealed in May 2013) might well intimidate anyone who is considering leaking information to the press about government transgressions. The famous Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein said that he believed this was the very intention of the records seizure: “The object of it is to intimidate people who talk to reporters.”

3. The Fear of Being Targeted for Gang Stalking Problem

This challenge is similar to the whistle-blower problem. Just as a government employee whistle-blower must worry about possible career repercussions and legal trouble for exposing government malfeasance, anyone who is not already a targeted individual has to consider the possibility that his or her efforts to expose a Cointelpro-type conspiracy could conceivably result in him or her becoming a stalking victim. Document #3 below is the affidavit of a former FBI agent whistle-blower (Ted Gunderson) who tried – with some success – to expose the government’s acquiesence in gang stalking. He claimed that his efforts resulted in him becoming a targeted individual himself.

4. The Nature of the Evidence Problem

The organizational structure and tactics of gang stalking are specifically chosen for their lack of directly observable and legally persuasive evidence. People familiar with it often describe it as a crime which leaves no fingerprints. Victims’ accounts tend to be dismissed as paranoia since their experiences sound like commonplace occurrences – because that is indeed what they are: strangers who are rude to them, noises from neighbors, being cut-off in traffic, etc. These are things which happen to everyone. But for gang stalking victims, these things happen constantly – which becomes a form of real psychological torture. Having no one believe their accounts only makes it worse.

5. The Disinformation Problem

Disinformation is a major component of counterintelligence operations. A major example of this strategy as it relates to gang stalking is the disinformation front group called FFCHS. The significance of FFCHS as a source of disinformation is such that I devote an entire section to it in this website. As I argue there, the organization is itself a strong piece of evidence of a larger conspiracy, because its disinformation objective is absolutely clear when you analyze the FFCHS in detail.

I make the same case below (see Document #3) regarding a New York Times article about gang stalking – namely that it not only fails to be convincing in its attempt at creating skepticism, it is actually so heavy-handed that it’s impossible to dismiss it as merely being bad journalism.

6. The Fear of Association with a “Conspiracy Theory” Problem

Media organizations, such as magazines and newspapers, and human rights groups, such as the ACLU, need to be circumspect about publicly discussing anything which is likely to be dismissed as a “conspiracy theory,” to avoid possibly damaging their reputations.

This is not to make excuses for their inaction though; the more you find out about gang stalking, the more you realize that – given its apparent scope – there must be many individuals in groups such as the ACLU and news organizations who are familiar with gang stalking.

It’s inconceivable, for example, that a group like the ACLU does not have any clue about it. As noted below, the National Center for Victims of Crime receives frequent reports of gang stalking. No doubt, the ACLU does also. Given their awareness of the history of similar programs – such as the persecution of political dissidents under Cointelpro – you have to assume that they know damn well what is going on, but they’re reticent about getting involved partly out of cowardice and careerism concerns.

It’s one thing to be willing to antagonize groups of citizens by advocating and litigating on controversial political issues; it’s another thing to risk the wrath of the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI.

Documents Currently Available

These are not, for the most part, “smoking gun” type documents such as leaked official secret policy memos. Currently, evidence of the widespread existence of a modern version of a Cointelpro/MK Ultra-type program is mostly in the form of numerous accounts by self-proclaimed victims.

The sheer number of such accounts ought to at least pique the curiosity of anyone considering the issue. Internet search engine queries about gang stalking yield over a million results, and the DOJ apparently receives numerous contacts about the subject, as noted below.

Anyway, for now information about gang stalking is limited and – regarding some issues – unavoidably speculative. Here is a brief survey of some of the documents currently available that are noteworthy for their evidentiary persuasiveness or for their presentation of information.

Readers should keep in mind that these are not the only examples of evidence about the prevalence and nature of organized stalking. Relevant news articles, TV reports, academic studies, books, self-published victims’ accounts, and historical background information (posted elsewhere in this website) are also part of the body of evidence to be considered. These are just some of the text documents (excluding published media articles – which I post in the “Gang Stalking News” section of this website).

(1) U.S. Department of Justice crime survey statistics about the stalking of individuals by multiple perpetrators.

This information was obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Freedom of Information Request No. 10-00169 to the U.S. Department of Justice) in March 2010 by attorney Keith Labella.

Incidentally, Mr. Labella writes for NowPublic.com under the pseudonym “PeaceFrog.” I cite him as a valuable source in the “Recommended Websites” section of this blog.

The information provided shows that the DOJ’s own crime survey statistics indicate a significant number of incidents of organized stalking by multiple perpetrators.

An alternate site with the same document:

(2) Affidavit about the results of contacting the National Victim’s Crime Center

Another indication of the apparent pervasiveness of organized stalking is this account by the aforementioned Mr. Labella, in which he details his contacts in October 2008 with the National Center for Victims of Crime, which is funded by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Labella inquired about the frequency of reports the center receives about organized stalking crimes, and was informed that they receive “thousands of calls per month.” Notwithstanding the frequency of calls to their victims helpline about the subject, they offered no guidance or referral to other agencies or organizations.

No doubt, the affidavit strikes a chord with other gang stalking victims, who are well aware of the government’s indifference to their suffering. This document appears in a number of other places online – for example, on page 49 of Eleanor White’s Organized Stalking (see the self-published articles below).

(3) Affidavit about gang stalking by the late Ted Gunderson, former head of the Los Angeles FBI office – and an important related “document” – a New York Times article about gang stalking, which inexplicably fails to mention Mr. Gunderson

When someone with no particular expertise or professional credentials makes a claim about the existence of a conspiracy, it’s generally easy to dismiss the person. However, skeptics of the government’s acquiesence in gang stalking don’t have that particular excuse for dismissing the testimony of the late Ted L. Gunderson.

As someone with a high-profile career in law enforcement (including serving as the head of the Los Angeles FBI office, for example), Mr. Gunderson was in a position to know what he was talking about. He publicly claimed that gang stalking is widespread and facilitated by rogue members of law enforcement agencies – and that his efforts to expose it resulted in him becoming a victim of organized stalking himself. Here is a link to his affidavit on the subject:

In a counterintelligence program, sometimes the conspicuous absence of disussion of something is an indication of disinformation. A lengthy New York Times article on gang stalking (“Sharing Their Demons on the Web” – Nov. 13, 2008) for example, makes no mention of Mr. Gunderson. Even if the “reporter” had determined that Gunderson’s claims arose from the fact that he simply became delusional for some reason after a long high-profile law enforcement career, you would think that finding would be worth mentioning. Not a word.

That lengthy article also failed to include any interviews with the licensed private investigators who have written on the subject of gang stalking, such as David Lawson and John B. Lopes.

Instead, the only “experts” interviewed for the article were four mental health professionals (psychiatrists and psychologists) who discussed mental illness and delusions. The one other person interviewed was someone who supposedly claimed to be a victim of gang stalking, Derrick Robinson, who is identified as a janitor in Cincinnati, and president of FFCHS – a support group for gang stalking victims.

Most readers of the Times article would not be familiar with FFCHS, and would have no way of knowing – or even suspecting – that it’s a disinformation front group – as I detail in the FFCHS section of this website.

Note that none of the mental health experts was asked about their knowledge of crimes (such as stalking), let alone their views on the plausibility that a modern version of the FBI Cointelpro operation might exist. In fact, the article makes no mention of Cointelpro whatsoever.

Also note that the one supposedly self-proclaimed gang stalking victim, Mr. Robinson, is a janitor – and he is the head of the victim support group. The intended takeaway is that the very most capable member of the community of self-proclaimed victims of organized stalking – the one with the wherewithal to become head of their organization – is a janitor. The reader is left to infer that the rest of the community must really be losers if he’s their brightest bulb. It simply would not have served the objective of the “reporter” to discuss gang stalking victims who were professionals, such as the aforementioned FBI special agent in charge, Mr. Gunderson, or the attorney, Mr. Labella.

Just to be sure readers got the message though, the psychiatrists quoted in the article mention that “These people lead quietly desperate lives.” (Read “losers.”)

A final point about the article: none of the websites cited are legitimate, credible websites, such as those I have listed in the “Recommended Websites” section of this blog. If the Times readers had been directed to any of the sites which I recommend, they would have encountered discussions of gang stalking very much at odds with what they were reading in the Times. The websites mentioned in the article – such as Gang Stalking World (as distinguished from Gangstalkingworld.wordpress.com) are badly edited and filled with extraneous garbage. Most likely, they are also examples of disinformation.

You can read the article at the link below if you want to see a textbook case of disinformation planted by the government in the mainstream news media – the sort of thing Noam Chomsky gets marginalized for warning people about.

If, despite the historical background of Cointelpro, and despite all the other information provided in this website, you conclude that this article is simply an example of journalistic incompetence at the nation’s “Paper of Record,” then I have a bridge to sell you.

Incidentally, by a remarkable coincidence, an article that was virtually identical to the Times piece was published by ABC News one month later (although it makes no reference to the Times piece that preceded it). By remarkable coincidence, the “reporter” at ABC interviewed the same psychiatrist who was interviewed by the Times, Ken Duckworth. By remarkable coincidence, the “reporters” in both cases were third-tier shills no one has heard of – rather than, say, Pulitzer prize winning investigative journalists.

Also by coincidence, the ABC article failed to include any reference to the important high-profile credible whistle-blower key witness who supports the claims of gang stalking victims, Ted Gunderson. The ABC News article which involved such an extraordinary number of coincidences also failed to even mention Cointelpro or MK Ultra – or any other actual and relevant non-disputed government conspiracies, and focused exclusively on discussions of delusional thinking. If you want to read this ground-breaking, hard-hitting piece of brave investigative journalism by the intrepid Lauren Cox, here is the link:

(4) Letter from Police Lieutenant Larry Richard of the Santa Cruz, California Police Department describing gang stalking (dated March 30, 2011)

One of the video clips in the “Gang Stalking Videos” page of this website is a January 29, 2011 news report broadcast on local TV in California (Channel 46 – KION and Channel 35 – KCBA), featuring Larry Richard, a police lieutenant with the Santa Cruz P.D., in which he mentions the crime of “gang stalking.”

On the basis of the California Public Records Act, attorney Keith Labella requested and obtained additional information about this incident – specifically, a letter from Lieutenant Richard dated March 30, 2011, in which he describes gang stalking.

This is the body of the letter (including typo’s etc.)

“Candice Nguyen from KION is doing a story ion this phenomenon called “Gang Stalking”. It has nothing to do with “gangs”, rather it is a form of cyber-bullying. The intent is a psychological impact and socially ostresizing the targeted person. With tools available to track someone (Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, etc) it has made people more vulnerable to this. It has implications to workplace violence, love relationships gone bad, etc. I told Candice it is like Mean Girls or cyber-bullying on steroids.”

Here is the letter:

Here is the video clip of the TV broadcast.

(5) Report on the connection between mobbing and workplace violence

Mobbing is intense harassment (group bullying) in a workplace or school; it is often a component of gang stalking.

Studies by Dr. Kenneth Westhues, Professor Emeritus of Sociology, University of Waterloo, Canada, have found a link between mobbing and mass shootings in recent years in North America.

Professor Weshues has authored a number of reports on this topic – which I address in more detail in the section of this website about “Mobbing & Workplace Violence.”

This link is to his November 2007 report Mobbing and the Virginia Tech Massacre.

This next link is to a website featuring correspondence between Professor Westhues and attorney Keith Labella, discussing the apparent causal relationship between mobbing and workplace violence “rampage killings.” Westhues estimates that at least a third of all such incidents can be attributed to mobbing (systematic harassment).

As with gang stalking generally, articles occassionally appear in the mainstream press about the workplace harassment component of gang stalking (mobbing). Here is one example from Newsweek/Daily Beast:

(6) “Cause Stalking” by David Lawson – A licensed private investigator’s purported first-hand account of how gang stalkers operate

This out-of-print book was self-published in March 2007 by a licensed private investigator who claims that he personally accompanied gang stalkers for years. His descriptions of the tactics of the stalking groups seem to be accurate and consistent with other information.

On the other hand, Lawson’s analysis of the overall structure of gang stalking is not credible. He essentially attributes the phenomenon exclusively to vigilante and criminal groups. He either doesn’t grasp – or pretends not to grasp – the implication of the wide scope of gang stalking – namely, that it could not possibly exist without the acquiescence of the U.S. federal government (for reasons explained by many observers and by me in other areas of this website).

The only significance of Lawson’s document is that it’s a detailed account of gang stalking operations by a licensed private investigator who claims to be a first-hand witness of how it works.

Here is a link to the book on Amazon.com

Self-Published Articles About Gang Stalking:

(1) “Organized Stalking” by Eleanor White (a pdf file)

This document is noteworthy because it is detailed (51 pages long), and has been widely posted online at various gang stalking websites. It contains good descriptions of many of the psychological operations (“psyops”) tactics commonly used to harass victims.

Although it’s worth reading, the document falls short in two areas as I see it. First, although the author mentions the problem of disinformation websites about gang stalking, she apparently fails to recognize that FFCHS is one of them.

Secondly, while she accurately reports that gang stalking is supported by some members of law enforcement, she does not seem to fully grasp the extent to which it is basically a modern version of Cointelpro that has been delegated to criminals. In other words, the whole thing is ultimately supported by (but not directly orchestrated by) the federal government (the FBI, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, etc.).

No other conclusion is possible in view of the massive intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure that now exists in America. The sophisticated and interconnected networks for sharing data about terrorism and crime make it impossible that a nationwide gang stalking phenomenon could exist off of the government’s radar and without its approval. The analysis by Keith Labella of the government’s involvement (documents #9 and 10 below) offer a more sophisticated and plausible explanation of what is happening.

Update – June 2013….

For more about my concerns regarding Ms. White’s positions on gang stalking (and her credibility generally) please see the online comments she and I exchanged in the “Gang Stalking and Psychological Harassment” forum in June 2013. The exchange occurs on pages 599-601. I won’t try to characterize it here; readers can judge for themselves.

I would only add this caveat: As I explain in the “Recommended Websites” page of this website, the names used in online forums about gang stalking must always be viewed skeptically. Anyone can post comments under any name; I have no way of knowing the actual identity of the person(s) posting comments under the name “Eleanor White.”

Here is a link to the forum:


Eleanor White’s document was revised in October 2012, and is available here:


(2) “The Hidden Evil” by Mark M. Rich

A detailed and disturbing explanation of gang stalking. Much of the material is speculative, but it’s mostly consistent with my own experiences and accounts by other self-proclaimed victims of gang stalking.

The Hidden Evil/State Sponsored Terror Campaigns is posted in various places on the Internet as a 79-page pdf document, which was revised in May 2006.

A paperback book version released in 2008 (published by Lulu Enterprises, Inc.) is available on Amazon.com. The full title is The Hidden Evil: The Financial Elite’s Covert War Against the Civilian Population.

A customer review from Amazon.com:

The Hidden Evil ties together research from several sources to create a picture of governments (including those of all NATO nations) that are heavily corrupted and controlled by the wealthy elite. This book also recounts historical and current evidence for the existence of a system that I’ve been made aware of, in which governments wage war against small groups of people and even individuals who are perceived as potential threats to the elite. This highly targeted warfare is conducted with the goal of corrupting and recruiting individuals, or destroying them.

This covert war is waged against individuals at all levels of society, including some highly respected politicians. The Hidden Evil argues that only people who have been successfully recruited are allowed any real power. People we think of as powerful and respected members of the political elite are often mere pawns, who are blackmailed into submission through participation in illegal activities, the more taboo the better. Secret societies are often heavily infiltrated or even fronts for these blackmail operations, and the taboo rituals are not only used for blackmail, but to corrupt the participants’ psyches and make them see outsiders as tools to be exploited.

Here is a link to the book on Amazon.com

Keith Labella’s Analysis

In addition to obtaining important evidentiary documents (such as the first four documents listed above), attorney Keith Labella has posted many informative and insightful articles on gang stalking under the pseudonym “PeaceFrog” at NowPublic.com – and now also at the site gangstalkingismurder.wordpress.com.

Here are two of his articles which offer an overview of the nature of organized stalking.

(3) “How Widespread is Gang Stalking?” by Keith Labella November 10, 2011

(4) “Gang Stalking is Cointelpro” by Keith Labella June 18, 2012

Also see my June 12, 2013 entry in the “Gang Stalking News” section about Labella’s article on conspiracies and the current American government.

Etiketlendi:, , ,

2 thoughts on “/// ZİHİN KONTROLÜ VE TEKNİK TAKİP İLE İLGİLİ DÖKÜMANLAR /// Gang Stalking Documents ///

  1. […] /// ZİHİN KONTROLÜ VE TEKNİK TAKİP İLE İLGİLİ DÖKÜMANLAR /// Gang Stalking Documents ///.wp-caption-text{display:none!important;} /*Enter custom css here…*/ .recentcomments a{display:inline !important;padding:0 !important;margin:0 !important;} […]


  2. […] and remote electronic torture (synthetic telepathy, mk-ultra, nano-implants, etc) – read this/// ZİHİN KONTROLÜ VE TEKNİK TAKİP İLE İLGİLİ DÖKÜMANLAR /// Gang Stalking Documents ///.wp-caption-text{display:none!important;} /*Enter custom css here…*/ .recentcomments […]


Bir Yanıt Bırakın

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logosu

WordPress.com hesabınızı kullanarak yorum yapıyorsunuz. Log Out / Değiştir )

Twitter resmi

Twitter hesabınızı kullanarak yorum yapıyorsunuz. Log Out / Değiştir )

Facebook fotoğrafı

Facebook hesabınızı kullanarak yorum yapıyorsunuz. Log Out / Değiştir )

Google+ fotoğrafı

Google+ hesabınızı kullanarak yorum yapıyorsunuz. Log Out / Değiştir )

Connecting to %s

%d blogcu bunu beğendi: