Psycho-Babble Social | for general support | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: energy weapons.. **Possible trigger** --long

Posted by deirdrehbrt on March 25, 2006, at 20:13:54

In reply to Re: ray guns, directed energy weapons.., posted by lostforwards on March 25, 2006, at 13:13:17

lostforwards,
I just wanted you to know that I looked at the sites you had links to. Here are a couple observations:

1. One of the sites claims to have a document it references from Motorola. It makes a number of claims, but references no engineer's names, no Motorola department, no document number, no date, etc. Basically, there is nothing to link any information in the document to Motorola other than the author's assertions. They are claiming the authority of a major company, but offer no authentication.

2. One article claims as evidence of electronic harrassment a number of Amateur Repeater sites owned by a single Amateur that happen to be in a semi-circle around his house. This sort of thing can happen quite easily if a person is living in a valley surrounded by hills. While this person is assuming that energy is directed at him, every one of his neighbors is in the same physical position.
Amateurs, especially in the 220 MHz band are using low power communications in order to prevent interference with other services. (These repeaters are in this band). 220-MHz is a band used for data communications on the low end, and for mobile communications on the high end. To be effective for harrassment (according to the documents you referenced) they would have to operate at much higher power levels than authorized by the FCC. Such power would not go unnoticed, and the FCC would require the sites to be shut down, the owner's license to be revoked, or the sites to be immediately brought into compliance.

3. One of the sites showed as evidence of harrassment, or stalking, a number of stills taken by a video camera where a woman believed she was being stalked. The evidence amounts to a number of photos where she believes people to be watching her, and of a white car with one hubcap missing crossing a street 2 or three times. Perhaps, if I had seen these people stopping in front of her house, day after day, I might be inclined to give this a bit more credence, but in all honesty, she was paying far more attention to them than it seems they were to her. Who would you say was stalking whom? She was videotaping them, not the other way around.

3. The photographs of implants are completely unsupportable. A physician or a pathologist would not reference size using a coin. Microscopic observations are made with scales in milimeters or finer markings. If these devices were to be examined, they would also be debrided of tissue. Microscopic observation would reveal the actual circuitry. Spectroscopic analysis would have happened well after visual. An integrated circuit or hybrid circuit would have been visible. Even modern RFID has visible components such as the antenna. If the actual circuitry is encapsulated, it is quite common to use very fine grinding wheels to remove the epoxy and reveal the circuit beneath.

4. The questionnaire to help you decide if you are being harrassed has a number of items that happen to everybody, and often.
Almost everybody notices when streetlamps go out near them. Sometimes they go off due to heat, or the lamps are becoming defective. There are literally millions and millions of streetlamps in our country. To not ever see them go out would be far more unlikely than to see them go out occasionally. As humans, we notice when they go out and recognize it as an odd occurrence, but it is nothing more than a coincidence. Now, if every street-lamp you pass goes out, then maybe something is going on.

It mentions tones or static on telephones. That too can happen often. Now, with DSL being carried on the same lines, a faulty filter can impart static. Tones are used by the telephone company to control some of the switching. Some older circuits have a higher level of cross-talk (One line imparting audio onto another). Some cordless phones can receive audio from other near-by phones. There's lots of ways that these things can come about.

Ringing in the ears is a typical sign of high blood pressure. Starting or stopping coinciding with electronic equipment... some electronic equipment have flyback circuits... the high-voltage circuit in a TV, for instance. Cameras use a similar circuit to generate the high-voltage for the flash.

What I'm trying to say is that much of the "evidence" shown to support electronic harrassment as ubiquitous is really things that anybody could notice, and even more so if they become hypervigilant.

One of the web sites claims that it is a myth that an average person would not be targeted. I sincerely have to disagree with that position. If an organization were to spend perhaps millions of dollars on a weapon to harrass people, wouldn't they want to use it where it would have great effect? Say they were targeting Wiccans, like me. Would they wish to dedicate an expensive asset to try to discredit me, when there are those who are much more important and public? If they succeed in proving that I'm crazy, they've spent all that money in discrediting one person who 99.999999999999% of the world has never heard of, and will have accomplished nothing of consequence. There are though, well known authors and speakers and writers among us who would be much better and more effective targets.

Terrorism involves making a statement, either causing harm or death to lots of people, or to very important people. It tends to make it's purpose known. We all know what the IRA wants. We know why many Middle-eastern contries despise the USA. When an organization is going to pay for something either with lives or great deals of money, it wants some effect for it's cost.

In the end, all I'm asking is "what makes the most sense"? Why would I be targeted? If I can come up with no realistic justification, wouldn't it be wise to conclude that maybe it's not really happening? If I can find other more realistic reasons for the things happening around me, doesn't it make sense to suspect that the more mundane solution ought to be considered?

I'm not saying that you are, or you aren't being targetted. I'm just asking you to look for all of the possible solutions for the things you identify as happening to you. Pick the ones that make the most sense. If you see two people on bicycle a block and a half away facing in your direction, does that necessarily mean they are looking at you? They could be looking down the street. They could be looking at a house behind you. They could be facing at that particular angle because it is as likely as any of the other 360 degrees.

That's what reality testing is about. It's about finding plausible reasons for what we're seeing. It's about recognizing reality and discounting what may be positive symptoms of our disease.

I'll share one personal thing. I have had two broken hips. The evidence is there on X-ray. I have no idea how it happened. I have no memory of it happening. My parents can't tell me how it happened. Over the years, I've been convinced of one solution or another. At times, I was certain who was responsible. I could have made a stink about it. I could have had people charged. What I know though, is that many of the times I was certain, it was only in my head. It was my PTSD reacting to a situation and my mind interpreting it as reality. I don't know what "flashbacks" are real. I don't know what is me just looking for an answer. I do know that I've had conflicting "memories". I need to recognize that I'm not really sure what is real and what isn't. It's the same thing when I start seeing or hearing things. I try to keep just a bit of skepticism at hand that I can pull up and say "what about what I'm experiencing now just doesn't make sense?" Am I sure enough right now to actually accuse somebody? Would it hold up?

Anyway, I'm just advocating that you look for what makes the most sense. It may be contrary to what you believe, and that's ok. One time in the hospital, I saw thousands of fruit-flies around a trash can. I asked someone next to me if they saw them. They didn't. I had to conclude that even though I saw these bugs, they werent there. It's difficult. It's scary. It makes you feel a bit less-than. But at least you have a better idea of what's real.

I wish you well. I hope you can find the truth. I hope the meds work and that you can live without the paranoia.

Contrary to the idea that you have people out there who want to harm you, the reality is that you have people RIGHT HERE who want the best for you; who care about you. You can count on people here. We honestly want what's best. If you're not sure about something, ask us. If you're trying to find out what makes sense, ask.

(((((((lostforwards)))))))


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Social | Framed

poster:deirdrehbrt thread:622925
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060324/msgs/624628.html