The Gaslight Effect: The Master Of Induced Delusion In Gangstalking

Gaslighting has been called a covert form of control, which is 100% true.
In the hoax world of truth and lies that is Gangstalking the silly term Gaslighting has often come up to describe psychological harassment. Important tactics used in Gangstalkings have been called Gaslighting. But what is Gaslighting anyway, and how can someone know it when they see it, or when it happens to them?


You can search the web for the term Gaslighting, and still not find any real information on the topic, because it's a made up term that tried to get legitimized into the English lexicon by pranksters and at least one legitimate psychiatrist, Dr. T.L. Dopart. http://www.lawandreligion.com/sites/lawandreligion.com/files/Dorpat%20with%20Foreword.pdf Why would a psychiatrist pick a term like Gaslighting?


In the June 2007 issue of O magazine (Oprah Winfrey's publication) "The Gaslight Effect" appears as an article that can still be found on Oprah's website, but the article misses much. A search on the Internet won't tell you much either, and will relate Gaslighting to psychological or verbal abuse found in toxic relationships or ambient sound. But how did it get started?


Gaslighting is based on a 1944 movie staring Ingrid Bergman called "Gaslight", that involves a husband attempting to drive his wife crazy so that he could get rid of her to protect a secret. The movie is named "Gaslight" because one of the husband's favorite tactics is to mess with the gas lights in the house to dim the lights while his wife is home, and when the wife asks about the lights the husband denies that anything is happening with the lights dimming as if she is delusional The husband attempts to psychologically harass his wife covertly into a mental break down. More information can be obtained from the IMDB database concerning the film if interested. http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0036855/

What the websites on toxic relationships fail to mention is a book alleged to have been written and published in 1994 called "Gaslighting" about the art of revenge to harass people into madness, so the author claims. The book is real, but the publish date might actually be different. The book "Gaslighting" was named after the movie "Gaslight" which is where the term comes from.


There is also a serious published work by Dr. Theodore Dopart published in 1996 that uses the term Gaslighting in reference to the field of psychology and covert manipulation by therapist during psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. Though the work of Dr. Theodore Dopart probably has little to do with Gangstalking as a whole (?), I felt it important to mention the use of the term "Gaslighting" by a notable forensic psychiatrist and suicidologist.


Now what does an old black and white film and a revenge book have to do with Gangstalking. Well for one, it tells the age and tastes of the masterminds of Gangstalking, as well as their choices in reading materials, interest in old films and sociopathic tendencies. The movie is from 1944, and outside of film majors, people in the industry and old movie buffs, not that many young people would have seen or heard of the film. Knowledge of a sixty seven year old film staring Ingrid Bergman, without being an old movie buff, industry person or film student would give a average target age group of approximately 60-90 years old! The revenge book is not a mainstream publication, but instead the kind of book that was originally sold in the places that sell anarchist/militia/fight the system type media. Such as Paladin and Loompanics. That tells me that this is not the invention of people in their youth, but it would appeal to people in their youth. No teenager would come up with anything as antiquated as Gaslighting! Antiquated? Hmmmmm...


How Gaslighting relates to Gangstalking is in the use of using stupid and mondain everyday tactics to harass someone. In Gangstalking, people are targeted openly in legal yet immoral ways that are psychological in nature, aside from the illegal ways. Some of them alledged to be covered in the book.


Gaslighting is really a form of serious psychological conditioning. In conditioning the goal is to change behavior by introducing or removing stimuli from the subject's environment. So in the stupid world of made up terminology that is Gang Stalking, Gaslighting fills in for the term generalization by psychological conditioning, where everyday events take on a psychological agenda.


A person is targeted in ways that are meant to attack their sanity and make them doubt themselves. A targeted person might find that they are the subject of a negative gossip campaign or out right lies to their face. So what? Sure this has happened to most people at some point in their lives when they find themselves in the path of a jealous rival or jackass, but being attacked by a jealous rival or jackass is not Gangstalking! Nor is being the object of a bullies harassment necessarily Gangstalking.


Some of the psychological aspects of Gangstalking involve what would seem like routine haters, well just hating, and if that was the case it would be easy to stop, but that isn't the case. It isn't everyday people with grudges. A target might be told that they failed to do something that they were asked to do, or that something that happened around them never happened, and this is done on a repeated basis to the individual and those around the individual. The idea is to make the person doubt themselves and look foolish, delusional or incompetent in the eyes of anyone who matters or is available to watch. This is done to damage credibility.


Now of course It's not new for anyone to be a bitch or a jerk and make things difficult for a person because they don't like them or want what they have, and I think that's what most people think Gangstalking is. However, Gangstalking is not the average everyday office jerk, retched neighbor, or jealous individual acting alone or in a small group to make someone's life a living hell. The cooperation from law enforcement alone is beyond the everyday person, let alone the other things that can occur.


But in order to truly drive someone crazy, undermining their credibility with others is not enough, the target's credibility must be undermined with that individual against themselves as well, which is why psychological conditioning takes place on the broader scale to induce delusion.


A target may always see a certain thing, hear a certain noise, or phrase that in turn is meant to create an association. For example, a victim of Gangstalking tactics might find that certain types of people, events, cars, sounds, or smells are always occurring in their vicinity when in the act of routinely going about their lives without realizing their in the presence of their stalkers. This is done in order to create a psychological association to the object, smell, event, type of person, or sound in the target's mind. The key is that the stimuli that is introduced into the subject's environment must be common, so that after the initial stalking has subsided the target has become sensitized to the stimulus and will continue to be psychologically tormented, because the stimulus is still in their everyday environment, thus creating the generalization.


For more information on conditioning anyone interested can look up John Watson, the father of Behaviorism, and B. F. Skinner. I'm not here to try to teach anyone psychology by going in depth, I'll leave that up to the interested, because nobody wants to read technical stuff, and that is exactly why Ikea has the world's easiest directions for assembly :)


I do want to mention an example of conditioning here though. Now take for example the case of Classical Conditioning and "Little Albert", who was a baby subjected to ridiculous and traumatizing harassment at the hands of psychologist John Watson, in order to prove the point that fear is a learned response. The young baby was introduced to animals that he initially liked, and than the animals were reintroduced with the bang of loud noises in order to create an association between the animals and the startling noise. "Little Albert" was conditioned to expect an adverse reaction from any exposure to the animals that was so ingrained, that he even felt anxiety when a fur coat was given to him, well after the loud banging noise was no longer used to condition him. "Little Albert's" association was based on sensitizing him to the stimulus. "Little Albert" now had a rational but irrational learned response to all things furry (generalization), because he had been frightened so dramatically whenever something furry had been introduced that he expected it to continue.


Allegedly, Little Albert was desensitized to the association between furry animals and the learned anxiety of the expected loud noise. The point of mentioning "Little Albert" here is to show that everyday stimuli can be introduced into a normal healthy person's environment to condition that individual through generalization. That is why targets are so vulnerable to attack. Any person can become a victim of Gangstalking (seriously any person), because the stimuli are present in the everyday environment and presented only to that individual, just as "Little Albert" was the only one affected by the conditioning tailored for him without ever knowing it. That is unless a person is lucky enough to know psychological conditioning when observing it, or being subjected to it


The initial conditioned response is learned by exposure without the subject noticing that it's taking place. The unconscious mind recognizes the correlation between the stimuli and the occurrence, but the conscious mind only recognizes the anxiety or other emotion that is associated with the stimuli, without understanding the direct cause. At least ideally that is how it is suppose to work. A learned response without someone knowing that the learning is taking place or that they have learned to make the association is basically what Gaslighting is. But most people do notice that something is taking place, but the beauty is that only the individual is meant to see it. And since the events take place on a basis regular enough to draw attention to them by the subject, but rare enough to cause attention by others, it makes a person appear to be perceiving events that are not occurring because others miss it. However, the person is not delusional in any way, but overtime the victim is supposed to wonder is it all really happening, and to be driven mad by self doubt, alienation and the ingrained sensitization to stimulus through generalization. Making someone doubt themselves and their sanity is what the goal of the term Gaslighting is all about. Gaslighting is meant to trick the victim into believing a state of Induced delusion. It's the mind game of all mind games. It takes at least 100 people and law enforcement cooperation to pull off a true Gangstalking.


I think it was very stupid and cruel for Dr. Watson to choose a baby, had he really wanted to prove a point he would have got a consenting adult, not an impressionable child. I guess we should all be grateful to the horrific anxiety that was imposed upon "Little Albert" in the name of science, because behaviorism sprang from it. Still we would consider what Watson did in today's world child abuse, psychological harassment and just plain mean. Yet thanks to Noam Chomsky, behaviorism's ideas were scrutinized for neglecting certain aspects of behavior in cognition. If it weren't for the unwitting subject where would most of the advancements in psychology and medicine be? I guess there always has to be a guinea pig, even baby guinea pigs. I'm sure "Little Albert" never had an adverse episode in his life that could be traced to that traumatic time in his infancy (sarcasm). Of course Freud and Piaget might have argue that "Little Albert" had been affected.


Gaslighting is real even if it is based on a silly made up term someone decided to use for the purpose of describing Classical and Operant Conditioning to psychologically harass a person. The tactics used to target people show that the individuals who decided to form Gangstalking are not only very sick but knowledgeable and stupid, and in need of serious mental help. They clearly have certain knowledge that helped create this, and they know somewhat how to use it, and need to be stopped. The use of covert psychological conditioning raises a lot of questions about the individuals behind behind this.


Funny, I came across another old movie once that was suggested on a Gangstalking websites called "Carnival of Souls", which is another very old Black and white film about a woman being followed across the country only to find out it was death that was pursuing her. Hmmm, does the love of using old films as a MO lead to that Hollywood connection I keep mentioning or simply something more personal about the perpetrators? I can only cover one thing at a time and today it is Gaslighting, for the second and last time. I still need to go over all the other fantastic allegations made by the stupid conspiracy sites concerning Gangstalking.


I want to discredit the stupidity of Gangstalking and all it's many forms of propaganda spread out across the Internet as best I can, while I'm around. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and I have no intentions of becoming one anytime soon. I just want to discredit the hoax's lies so that people can know the truth that the hoax is hiding what is true, so that anyone who participates in this sick crime can be charged for breaking state and federal laws.


On a side note I want to mention that college students are often recruited to participate in Gangstalking and Gaslighting. These students are recruited through different means including adds and word of mouth, and in rare cases by professors. In many cases, the students have no idea what the real reason is behind what they have being asked to do, but that is not always the case. I'll cover that later when I start naming names, as some college professors are notorious for using there students so that they can collect data that can be used professionally by themselves or colleagues.