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).
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:
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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.
- 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.
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, aphenomenon known as ‘group-’ or ‘gang-stalking’. The simplest definition of‘group-stalking’ is that it is stalking that ‘involves the use of multiple individuals to stalk, harass or threaten the victim’ (Paullet, Rota, & Swan, 2009,p. 640). However, the definition can be substantially refined. Firstly, a groupcomprises an absolute minimum of three persons (US Department of Justice,2005). Secondly, group-stalking is an organised, shared endeavour with agroup purpose. This is differentiated from the situation where an individualstalker recruits others to assist their stalking campaign, a phenomenon knownas ‘stalking by proxy’, in which, ‘for the most part, the involvement of othersin unwitting’ (Mullen et al., 2009, p. 157). In addition, the stalking being thework of a group acting in concert, it is generally not possible for the victimto identify one lead person involved in carrying out the activities. Likewise, itis a characteristic that the victim is generally unable to provide any evidenceas to who is behind the group-stalking, although he/she may come to attributeit to a particular agency (e.g. an ex-partner).
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 :
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