The link between gang stalking and prostitution: narrative control of women

We have seen the definition of feminism change and morph over the last several decades, much as we see the definition of prostitution(….).

There is an undeniable link between the two, and then, a link between prostitution abolitionists, policing of prostitutes and sex workers, and especially- all of this is linked to “speech policing.”And, it is also linked to historic banking practices that used the narrative of saving women to gain a foothold in societies they otherwise could not access.

Related Story: How Edward Bernay’s secular “cosmopolitan” Judaism used non-Jewish women as “Liberty Torches” to sell everything from vacuum cleaners to cigarettes; and to sell other “things” not least of which was Democracy.

Without irony, this is merely “pimping by another name,” as we see the exact tactics waged across centuries, and across cultures, by the same banking interests. Russia in 1917 provides the best example, but also, Germany in the Weimar republic, and Osweisczim Poland, as old Rothschild money wgaed capitalism in Silesia.

Then, there is the historic and well documented link between “control of the sex supply,” and “pimping disguised as policing and social services through charity organizations as well,” which I will write about later.

So-before I get too deep in this post, let me state a few things for the record.

For the record: this blog has been “closed” for three days, and yet, several posts about sex workers have been accessed, as well as posts about Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas shooter, where I make a link between narrative exploitation (the connection between mass shooters and domestic violence). Then, today alone, the US and the Netherlands have accessed this blog despite it being closed (this will be important at a later time, and I will write a post then about this).

Update 02/18/2019:

I was alerted to the fact that the FBI has a strong presence in the Netherlands, and that because of “relaxed privacy protections,” that agency routinely exploits internet communications by redirecting them through Holland
, as we saw in the wiretap of El Chapo Guzman, but also that under the James Comey FBI,the Israeli mafia worked frim within the FBI and warred against the Russian Jewish mafia, and used the Netherlands to wiretap the alleged Russian hackers, Fancy Bear .

Lastly- he only person requesting access so far has been a sex worker, who I will not name-yet.

Then, I will state:

  1. I am 100% in favor of letting women do ANYTHING They want with their bodies, and that sex is a matter of choice that should never be criminalized, provided that
  2. men have the equal and same rights, and especially, because male labor and male choices are different-that men’s commodity shall not be defined as a “producer” of income and capital against their will
  3. that in matters of children that come form human bodies, that all things are not equal, which is a different discussion-but that children are a woman’s choice, and this choice protected by law, and men do not have similar advantages or similar protections, and shall not be burdened against their will with debt or enslavement because of women’s choices
  4. that all things are exploited fully by sexist and gendered narratives; and as stated throughout ROGS here, children are the goal of full exploitation by social entities, institutions and forces of political exploitation to the disadvantage of both the children, and to society.
  5. that of tthose who have writtenon organized gang stalking, the great majority derive income from the exact groups thta have so far precluded insight into OGS. And, of these, prostitution “aboliionists” top the list, as we see with the Swedish Model, and its attendant derivatives ranging from the United Nations Transatlantic Organized Crime initiative, to Hamish Brown’s piggy-backing of police funding initiatives and pleas onto sex workers causes, and so on.
IMG_5149.JPG
Speech Crimes and “gag” stalking: This blog was closed for three days, but somehow, these posts are being viewed-and without irony, from the Netherlands, where certain “save the sex workers” and “stalk the stalkers” types derive funding.

So: here is a snippet of Dr. Lorraine Sheridan and David V. James “study” of targeted individuals of gang stalking:

First, they define “gang stalking” in terms that presume rational and  legal means of policing-and clearly, policing is neither reasonable or rational, as I have pointed out in the cases of “gang strike forces,” and SWAT, and Israeli death squads policing American activists in the Occupy movement via the agency blur of “training”.

Stalking primarily concerns the actions of single individuals. However,
some victims state that they are being targeted by groups of people, a
phenomenon known as ‘group-’ or ‘gang-stalking’. The simplest definition of
‘group-stalking’ is that it is stalking that ‘involves the use of multiple indi­
viduals to stalk, harass or threaten the victim’ (Paullet, Rota, & Swan, 2009,
p. 640). However, the definition can be substantially refined. Firstly, a group
comprises an absolute minimum of three persons (US Department of Justice,
2005). Secondly, group-stalking is an organised, shared endeavour with a
group purpose. This is differentiated from the situation where an individual
stalker recruits others to assist their stalking campaign, a phenomenon known
as ‘stalking by proxy’, in which, ‘for the most part, the involvement of others
in unwitting’ (Mullen et al., 2009, p. 157). In addition, the stalking being the
work of a group acting in concert, it is generally not possible for the victim
to identify one lead person involved in carrying out the activities. Likewise, it
is a characteristic that the victim is generally unable to provide any evidence
as to who is behind the group-stalking, although he/she may come to attribute
it to a particular agency (e.g. an ex-partner).
It is clear that this study blurs each and every kind of stalking that has been described in the extant literature, from workplace mobbing to group stalking, to other forms of stalking where individuals describe stalking by more than one person-but also, that the extant literature itself is a blur of those who are paid to do such biased work. And-that the study has NOTHING to do with illegal, warrantless, intrusive, invasive, perverse, and otherwise odd behaviors BY police that is not yet described.
The Sheridan-James study is itself a classic form of academic navel gazing, that is now, and will later have the net effect of targeting those who even know of it. And, the partisan bias cannot be missed, as the researchers themselves virtual provide a template, or a how-to manual to political stalkers of all stripes.
Now, we will look at Hamish Brown’s recommendation that stalkers be stalked-and I will apply his advice to the general dialectic of gang stalking by noting that he advises that those who seek to confront stalkers “think outside the box.” And, I will also note without irony, that this blog has been accessed from Holland, which once housed Andrea Dworkin, despite it not being available-that it is marked “private” and that three day ago, I closed it to the public.
So, here below is where Hamish Brown’s work-a memetic phrase that started a “butterfly wings” of connecting domestic violence with both stalking, AND hidden behaviors by police, and sex abolitionists, and now, they link it to mass shooters as well.

Domestic violence plays a significant part but stalking can be connected to many other reasons as well including resentment, bullying and intimidation. It must be taken into account that whilst it is normally the case of men stalking women but women can, and do, stalk men with males often seen as too embarrassed to report it and there is same sex stalking as well.

What is unique about the crime of stalking is the acts are usually not specific criminal offences but it is the circumstances or totality of the behaviour that counts. For example, it is not a crime to constantly stand outside a person’s house or persistently follow them about but this can be upsetting for the recipient all the same. It is precisely this type of seemingly innocent behaviour that is often used by stalkers to cause victims’ psychological distress and it is essential to think outside the box when looking at stalking activity.

Outside the “box” indeed

Now- a bit more about Hamish Brown, and his credentials. He has been featured arund the world in cloistered, semi-private talks and other engagements ‘teaching’ FBI agents, DHS agents, local and state law enforcement officers, and others about how “Stalk the Stalkers.”

Here is Hamish Brown For services to victims of harassment, Hamish Brown receives the MBE from Prince Charles, the Prince of Wales:

In 2004 Hamish retired from New Scotland Yard’s Specialist Crime Directorate after over 30 years service with the Metropolitan Police. He was awarded the MBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List for his services to victims of harassment. Hamish has been praised for his efforts with many tributes.

Hamish now offers his services as a consultant, trainer and lecturer on stalking legislation, celebrity stalking and workplace violence as well as one-to-one advice for those in fear of being stalked. He was a guest speaker at a conference of the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals (ATAP) in Los Angeles.

He is the author of ‘Stalking and other forms of harassment, an investigator’s guide. ‘ He was commended by the then Home Secretary, Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, for his research into this booklet. This is the most requested Home Office publication with a print run of over 10,000 copies.

Hamish is also the author of the Metropolitan Poice advice leaflet ‘ Protection from Stalking and Harassment: A Guide to minimising the risk to children‘.

Hamish was presented with a commendation, by the then Assistant Commissioner Denis O’Connor, for a ground breaking successful prosecution of a stalker, who was convicted of GBH of the mind

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s