As many know, I have been tracking the New York Times article to see what kind of reaction it's getting across the board.

It's gotten a lot of various reactions. I have come across people who now say that it's trendy to think that you are being followed around. Gang Stalking trendy? I don't know about that one.

We have people who think that we are paranoids getting together and sharing stories, but getting the help we need and that's a good thing. I didn't stop to find out if the person was Martha Steward or not, but apparently it's a good thing. LOL.

I came across one person who is researching the Jeremy Blake and Teresa Duncan suicides, or what they termed Gang Stalking by Scientology, and this person was a little bit concerned for their own well being after starting this research. I mean a general research is one thing, but any time you did deep like Gary Webb did, you do have to be careful.

I have had to join Digg, Reddit, Slashdot, and so many other places to track this article down, and the reaction to it. Cause it's nice to know the pulse of the Internet.

So Gang Stalking has become a household name. Which is good. It's not in the way we wanted it, in many cases, but the term is out there and that was a goal. Everyone has to start someplace. I see this like starting in the mail room. We have our foot in the door, it's our choice what we make of it.

We still have a lot of people who read the article, did not go and visit any of the websites mentioned, and formulated an opinion strictly based on the article. I found at least one person who tried to check out the website, but who said it was down. I know my website shows 100% up time over the last few weeks, so I suggested he try again.

My email is not working properly so if you do email me, and don't get me, please use the Wordpress blog to try for access. It's just within the last 72 hours that it's not working correctly. Email is either not arriving, or it's being delayed for several hours.


Also in tracking the article, I found a copy of it at this forum. I wanted to be able to respond to the article, because as you know, I have written a response. http://forum.psychlinks.ca/showthread.php?p=103474


I used the user name gangstalking, because it's what I use all over the Internet, when speaking out about what is happening. Have a cause, use the name that goes with the cause, just common sense. Well after waiting to be approved. (We are not worthy, we are not worthy. Sorry flash back to Wayne's World the movie.)

Anyways, I received this response.







So I wrote to him to find out what kind of trigger this was likely to be? It has not been a trigger for anyone over the last two years, but suddenly, it's going to be a trigger, because you are going to make it so perhaps?

So I wrote back to find out what kind of a trigger this was going to be? It seem a little neurotic to me. See my feedback below.




Apparently it takes a long time to be approved for this forum. 12 hours ago. I really do think people create neurosis themselves, at times. Anyways he writes back.




Ok I can understand his surface concern, but remember associating with people who have been through these types of situations is not new for me or different. In the last two years, I have encountered and associated with a variety of people. So I wrote back.



At this stage I am going to trust that Dr Baxter understands his community better than I do, and they may be more sensitive than other communities of a similar nature, and so I am going to decline to be a part of his community, because if my user name would offend, then what might my commenting do? Since the term Gang Stalking is likely to come up? Also if the term is so offensive that I can't use the user name, then why have an article with this on your forum?

http://forum.psychlinks.ca/showthread.php?p=103474

I don't want to be mean, but I am thinking that there are people coming across this article on that forum, seeing the name and wigging out. Either way, so that I don't risk offending, I am going to refrain from posting on this forum and responding to the article.

I really wanted to respond to the article, as I have on several other Internet websites, to help facilitate a better understanding of our community and what we are about and why we felt some portions of the New York Times article were unbalanced, but I feel at this stage, anything I write there, might be construed as harmful to the members. So out of respect for that, I will refrain from posting my article response, which many of you have now seen.

http://www.gangstalkingworld.com/Social ... ad&order=0

For better or for worst the term Gang Stalking is now a household name, offline and online. The question now is how do we as a community help facilitate further understanding and awareness to the general public, who still get their information from the mainstream media, in many cases without any relevant questions being asked?