Gangstalking and Randy Quaid

Along with his other dramas, including escaping to Canada to avoid criminal charges, I'm fascinated by the recent interview on Good Morning America where Quaid and his wife talk about "star whackers" and people "gangstalking" him in order to do... something... which isn't exactly clear.

I was just wondering if there's anybody here who has been the target of a gangstalking, or knows anybody who has been gangstalked. I understand that it's a kind of interesting spin on general paranoia, and involves attributing every bad thing that happens to you as part of a conspiracy of not just one, but a shadowy group of people aiming to bring you down, and eventually (I suppose) kill you. Celebrities are the most likely targets, but apparently ordinary people can have this happen to them, too.

It also reminds me of those people who claim to be gangstalked by Scientologists after quitting the organization, but I suppose people who quit an organization like that might be more susceptible to the notion that they're being gangstalked.

Anyway. I thought it was interesting. What do you think?

Well, I have no doubt that there are a lot of underhanded dealings and threats and what have you beneath the surface of the entertainment industry, including the involvement of organized crime. I mean, with the billions of dollars pulled in and the fact that the average person seems to care more about celebrities than what's going on in the world around them it would be ridiculous to think everything is on the up and up.
But gangstalking, imo, seems to be something dreamt up by paranoids and reinforced by other paranoids on the internet. There are nosy people out there, but I'd say most of them are too lazy to take to stalking someone, and I don't know where the resources would be coming from to orchestrate such gangstalking. Seems like there are easier ways to discredit someone, or simply ensure they have an untimely 'accident'.
At least Randy Quaid isn't claiming to be a victim of that *other* bit of internet-bred ridiculousness: bangbussing.
That would be truly horrifying. For all of humanity.

I think it is really interesting and there probably are cases where some sort of mafia or fraternal clique try to deal with certain celebrities for reasons we don't know. I think the situation is a little to vague with Quaid and I would like to see where it leads.

reply to post by FuzzyDunlop


When not just read an FAQ to ensure you have a basic grasp of what Gang Stalking is and who might be doing it and why people would have the time. It would save a heck of a lot of these repetitive questions, like who has the time. Who has the money, etc.

gangstalkingworld.com...

Takes about 5 minutes to read, and saves a lot of these questions from popping up.

FAQ

Below are some questions, comments are popular believes that the aveage person often has to overcome in order to believe that Gang Stalking is happening to other citizens.

It’s Costly. Who has the time?

1: When you think about it, gang stalking is illogical. First, it is costly. Secondly, who has the time, unless they’re paid a lot, which brings us back to “it’s costly.”

(Skipp Porteous. www.Sherlockinvestigations.com...)

A: The reality is that Gang Stalking is not costly. The network for surveillance and monitoring a Targeted Individual is already in place. When a name is added to the notification registry all that has to be done is send out the targets information. Resources are simply reallocated to keep the latest target under surveillance.

The Stasi were successfully able to control and monitor East Germany society using this method. The citizens have the time to monitor their communities, and to protect their communities from what they believe are dangerous, or unstable people in their neighborhoods.

The listings work the same way that listings do for violent offenders, in the U.K. Jane Clift was placed on the exact same list for violent sex offenders, she was listed as medium risk only to be seen in pairs, even though her offense was primarily writing an unkind letter, with strong wording.

gangstalking.wordpress.com...

Someone would blow the whistle

2. If my own files were tagged “violent individual, only approach in twos or more” I know that my GP would be questioning it, sor starters.I don’t believe that we yet live in a world where some ‘entity’ could contact everyone I know and make them believe that I’d flipped my lid and must therefore be watched and reported on 24/7 without SOMEONE saying something directly to me about it, or querying it with authorities sufficiently to raise questions about the origin of the flagging/notification.

(marrya. www.message.snopes.com...)

A: The reality is that if you recieve a notification letter you are bound by a none disclosure agreement and are forbidden from saying anything to the person the letter is pertaining to or discussing the details with everyone else. Think of it as the same way others have found themselves bound to secrecy due to the national security letters. When the request is from an authority figure, and it comes with a possible penalty, people will keep silent.

In the scenario above your GP would be bound by law to not give you the details. Though your GP may have questions, they may not be able to do anything other than trust the system to conduct it’s own investigation. If you were flagged as medium risk, only to be seen in pairs. Your GP would simple ask an assistant to accompany them during your visit.

Many targets falsely believe that friends and family would disclose something like this, but the reality is many do not. Many follow the directions that they have been given.

gangstalkingworld.com...

There are like about 15 FAQ's in all, try it, you just might like it. At the very least they should solve some of the repetitive questions that keep popping up in these threads.

Originally posted by Harassment101
There are like about 15 FAQ's in all, try it, you just might like it. At the very least they should solve some of the repetitive questions that keep popping up in these threads.

Now, you seem pretty well-versed on the subject. Do you know anyone personally who has had something like this happen to them, or maybe had it done to you? What kind of evidence is there of it. At least the Morgellon's people at little bits of colored fiber to show people.

reply to post by Harassment101


yeah, I actually read the 'information' on that gangstalking site a few days ago (it came up elsewhere on the interwebs in reference to this Quaid ridiculousness). I didn't buy it then, you reposting information I'm aware of doesn't sway me. Don't get me wrong, I feel for people who no doubt honestly believe they're being 'gangstalked', but I think it's the result of mental instability (caused by either mental illness or stress). Humans are programmed to instinctively look for patterns even when their are none. For example, I live in a major city and surprisingly often I pass by a small but not insignificant number of strangers that I see on the streets with some regularity. I don't mean 'outside where i live' or 'in my immediate neighbourhood', but randomly throughout the city. Sometimes they end up behind me at grocery stores that I almost never shop at. They're certainly not keeping tabs on me, or I them, it's just a matter of coincidence. I've had the tires of my car slashed and windows smashed, lost a job, as well as have a relationship end in the space of 48 hours. It's a horrible feeling, but in the end it's nothing more than chance - the events were in no way connected.
IMO the idea of gangstalking is nothing more than trying to find an explanation for a string (possibly lasting several years) of bad luck and crappy events, and buying into the idea that it's part of some conspiracy against you can lead to alienation from family and friends which would only further reinforce that belief.

reply to post by Blue Shift


Yeah just look around ATS there are loads of people, usually they post in these threads. They will show up sooner or later, but just do a search.

reply to post by FuzzyDunlop


It's not a matter of what you believe or don't believe. You have many people describing the same thing, and then you have an organization that actively targets people in this manner. Wither you want to believe in Gang Stalking or not, the truth is these occupational health and safety laws exist. Fact not fiction and Threat Assessment Teams exist. Fact not fiction. They ask your friends, family, co-workers, online peeps to spy on you, fact, not fiction. So if you don't want to believe people who say they are being targeted in this way, and their is a a central database of people being targeted in similar fashion then that's your issue.

The point is people ask for proof, for some people no proof is needed, for others, no proof will ever be enough. Does not change the fact that this is happening, the only difference is that there is now proof. You can also read the Jane Clift case from the U.K. and some others, but people who want to believe probably did before the evidence presented itself, and some will never believe no matter how much evidence there is, or until public opinion tells them what to do. That is the sad truth of human nature.

Someone in the other thread asked for proof. I see where this thread is going, so let me save some time and repost what I posted in the other thread.

gangstalkingworld.com...

www.threatassessment.vt.edu...

rems.ed.gov...

The threat assessment team works in a four part process.

1. Identify persons of concern
2. Gather information/investigate
3. Assess information and situation
4. Manage the situation

First they use a four part process. Then once they decide to put you on this list for additional monitoring, or in their words keep your case file open, you can be set up for remote monitoring, this means that your friends, family, co-workers and others are asked to keep an eye on you and report back the details.

The information is stored in a central database, similar to how the fusion centers operate, and then as reports come in, they are evaluated by these teams.

Gather Information (Full Inquiry)
• Think broadly and creatively about those who
might have information:

• Co-workers
• Other staff
• Friends
• Family
• Online friends, web sites, etc.
• Previous schools / employers
• Others?
• Document information and use it to answer the
Key Investigative Questions.

The above are the people that they go to, to gather information, in other words they ask them to spy on you and report back.

Initial Screening
Helpful Internet sites include:
Google.com Bebo.com
MySpace.com Xanga.com
Facebook.com Snopes.com
YouTube.com thehoodup.com
Technorati.com
(searches blogs)
craigslist.com
(search the relevant city/town)
Twitter.com JuicyCampus.com
Blackplanet.com RateMyProfessor.com
MiGente.com Cuil.com

Some of the social networking sites used. Anyone you have contact with online can be contacted and asked to report back your behavior according to their manual. Those are some of the initial sites they use when gathering information, keep in mind the manual was from a few years back.

2. Have there been any communications
suggesting ideas or intent to attack?
• What, if anything, has the person
communicated to someone else (targets,
friends, co-workers, others) or written in a
diary, journal, email, or Web site concerning
his or her grievances, ideas and/or intentions?
• Has anyone been alerted or “warned away”?
Source: U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education, (2002)
Guide to Managing Threatening Situations and Creating Safe School Climates.
Key Investigative Questions

Using those around you to spy on you, is how they gather information and elevate your threat level. There are five threat levels, and most targets being followed around are likely on level 3-5.

Information Sharing: HIPAA
• Check with legal counsel as to which laws
govern counseling center records.
• Confidentiality is held by client, not MH provider.
• In cases where privacy laws apply, can try these
strategies:
• No legal prohibition against providing
information to health/MH professionals.
• Inquire about Tarasoff – type duty.
• Ask subject for permission to disclose.

Record Keeping
• Centralized incident tracking database;
• Document reports and actions – include date,
time, subjects, targets, behaviors of concern,
witnesses;
• Data;
• Assessment;
• Plan;
• Preserve evidence: Keep copies of email,
memos, etc.
Record Keeping
Incident tracking database;
• Incident Information:
• Date, location, nature of incident, means of approach;
• Subject information:
• Name, DOB, sex, description, affiliation, status, etc.
• Target / Victim Information;
• Name, DOB, sex, description, affiliation, status, etc.
• Witness/Reporting Party Information:
• Name, DOB, sex, description, affiliation, status, etc.

Assessing Information and Situation

Once all the reports are in from the eyes and ears around the target, then the assessing of information begins.

Think creatively about resources, as well as
“eyes and ears.”
• Anticipate likely change in the short and midterm,
and how the subject may react.
• Monitor using available resources. Who sees
the person regularly, inside work/campus,
outside, on weekends, online, etc.?

In many cases they use creative ways to bypass some privacy laws to get information shared, and in some cases the files are protected, so the target can not use Freedom Of Information Acts to get their records.

While the case is open the team should:

• Continue to monitor and modify the plan as long as the individual still poses a threat

• Recognize that a person can continue to pose a threat even after he/she ceases to be a Closing a Case
member of the campus community

• Continue to monitor the situation through its relationship with local law enforcement agencies and mental health agencies, as well as in direct cooperation with the person, if possible

The files can be left open for years. I refer to these files as a list, because well the targets information is going into a central database, along with the information of other targets, the same way they keep no fly lists, and other lists.

If someone who has been reviewed by the Threat Assessment Team leaves the area, do you continue to monitor him/her?

If the situation warrants reviewing the case after the subject leaves the area, the team will continue to do so. It is important to remember that when the subject has relationships in his/her life, there is a lesser chance for violence to occur. A failure to communicate or interact with a subject encourages problems to fester, which could lead to violence.

See people this is who would have the time, and the money to employ the monitoring of targets, it says so right in their own guidelines, and yes most companies, especially Hollywood would have such teams. Randy Quaid peeved off a bunch of his co-workers in 2008, and they filed a complaint about verbal and physical threats, bad sexist behavior, that would be more than enough. Now that he has stepped forward to complain about the monitoring, they will call him paranoid, cause he is not explaining himself well, with Hollywood Star Whackers or whatever he is calling it.

www.wcb.pe.ca...

“In the service sector this may require identifying to employees persons who have a history of aggressive or inappropriate behavior 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.

Some of the reasons again you can be listed. But people are getting listed for blowing the whistle, filing complaints, and being dissidents, etc.

Assessment: Case Priority Levels

PRIORITY 1 (Extreme Risk): Poses clear/immediate threat of violence or self-harm and requires immediate containment, law enforcement involvement, target protection, and case management plan.

PRIORITY 2 (High Risk): Poses threat of violence or self-harm but lacks immediacy or access to target. Requires active monitoring and case management plan.

PRIORITY 3 (Moderate Risk): Does not pose threat of violence or self harm, but exhibits significantly disruptive behaviors and/or need for assistance. Requires active monitoring, case management plan, and appropriate referrals.

PRIORITY 4 (Low Risk): Does not pose threat of violence or self-harm at this time, but may exhibit some disruptive behavior and/or need for assistance. Requires passive monitoring. Utilize case management and referrals as appropriate.

PRIORITY 5 (No Identified Risk): Does not pose threat of violence or self-harm nor is there evidence of disruption to community. No case management or monitoring required.

So let's say you start a level 5, a target would likely not see much of the monitoring, let's say someone falsely says that you threatened to harm them, you could jump up to priority 3, that is when you would see more of the Gang Stalking behavior that targets complain about. Remember everyone around you then get's a message, could be danger to self or others, only to be seen in pairs, and ofcouse if you get a higher ranking, well....

So yeah, this is who has the money, and the time. If you have more questions about these lists. Let me know.

I believe this is very plausible. Just look at Marilyn Monroe and Sharon Tate.