Disrupting Australia and Disturbing Netherlands

Stop me if I’m suffering from pareidolia or apophenia, but i think these tidbits somehow are related to the point of interest. Interesting use of euphemism ”strategy of 1000 cuts” as it’s how sometimes organized stalking is described. So before police used to investigate once they have a tip, now they just go and disrupt since it’s easier than collecting evidence. At least Netherlands cops don’t hide their psychological harassment tactics behind sanitizing descriptions.

The tactics advocated by al-Qaeda and other extremist groups has changed from one of ”big, bad bombs” and violent attacks by terrorists working together in a cell to a ”strategy of 1000 cuts”, in which individuals take short, sharp ”potentially high-impact” action, says Assistant Commissioner Steve Lancaster, the national manager of counterterrorism for the Australian Federal Police.

Secretive types can ”self-radicalise” without communicating with anyone else, making their plans difficult to detect, he says.

”The [traditional] philosophy of police is that people are suspected of committing a crime, you do an investigation and you get enough evidence and you then arrest or summons them and put them through the courts,” he says.

”The idea is to get them when they’re still in the thinking stage. They are starting to give the community clues that they are [becoming] extreme in their views and the most ideal situation is to stop them from taking that quantum leap on doing something … It does rely on information from the community and their participation in trying to identify who these people are.”

http://www.smh.com.au/national/police-use-disruption-to-keep-lone-wolves… (archive.org)

Under investigative procedures recently put in place, investigators and the police have begun to do what they call ”disturbing” people to deter them from joining radical groups. It is a kind of harassment that involves following people at close range, calling them by telephone, parking police cars in front of their homes and approaching them on the street to inform them that they are being watched.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/… (archive.org)


3 thoughts on “Disrupting Australia and Disturbing Netherlands

  1. This is the Dutch strategy also known as “persoonsgericht verstoren”. I wrote a little piece about it earlier here: http://policestalking.wordpress.com/2012/07/15/police-stalking-in-the-netherlands-persoonsgericht-verstoren-and-other-disturbance-methods/
    The Dutch (and to some extent the Norwegians) are the ones I have found to go the furthest in officially describing the dirty stuff they are doing, even if what they put on paper is comparatively mild to what goes on in the real world. Have you found examples from other countries where they spell out the nasty stuff they are doing? I firmly believe the best option for victims of these operations is to try to bring forward a prosecution of police officers who officially promote human rights crimes through their writings about these methods. The Netherlands doesn’t have anti-torture legislation but in countries which have this, like Norway, it should be possible to work through the courts.

  2. I couldn’t find anything in my own language, it’s extremely well sanitized and language is never about descriptiveness, but rather describing vague direction, by using already existing language and terms. It is extremely protective of it’s operational methods – the law right from the bat says anyone who is neutralizing operative methods (neutralization could be interpreted differently, depending on the point of view) becomes object of operative investigation. I guess Lithuania being very homogeneous and conservative country the changes are never easy to make and stimulus for change is usually adherence towards international practices (everyone is doing so should we). I found on vsd (national security police) website news article also describing the threat of lone wolf just like australian newspaper did and using pretty much the same language. I did however find one professor article (from 2002) that explores information warfare like rumors, disinformation, etc in undercover police work, where he is providing literature sources of US military doctrines.

    There was one strange case that was mentioned in major our media, that echoes gangstalking and em phenomena:
    Information is scarce, so it’s easy to translate: 56 year old small town resident went to regional police headquarters and asked to see the chief of police. He wrote a complain that he is said he is being followed or under surveillance (hard to translate without context could be either one or both), he hears strange voices and there is a chip implanted. Man was calm/reserved, but police called the medics since they weren’t convinced of his sanity. In hospital it was decided to send him to psychiatric hospital. After preparation of documents police and man was waiting in the hospital hallway. Knife was already taken from him, but nobody even thought that he might have a gun too. He asked to go to the bathroom. After he entered the bathroom there was a gunshot. After police entered the bathroom they saw man laying on the floor with a gun shot wound in his temple. They found unlicensed revolver next to him. Man was known as one who wrote many unsubstantiated complains and frequent visitor to police headquarters.
    It’s hard to tell if he was frisked and police missed the gun or surrendered knife voluntarily and police didn’t think about frisking him or something else.

  3. […] Netherlands police already admitted to using tactics that would be very similar to gangstalking to prevent suspects from adopting radical and extremist views – they call it “disturbing”. Another attempt to put gangstalking in perspective as to how it would be used in broader context as to war on terror,  radicalization and AL-queda. From the bat I just want to put on the record that these ideas are foreign to me and don’t pass any legitimacy test described as a threat to our way of life. And I’m not trying to be oppositional and anti-authority, rather strictly speaking from “evidence based” logic. I’m no expert in geopolitics or military matters and do not try to push any agenda, simply try to look at it critically. Up to this point there is struggle to even prove existence of so called vast terrorism network called “AL-queda”. Of course legitimacy of the claim got achieved over time throughout extensive propaganda by constantly ingraining the belief into public mind by reinforcing it through hysteria and effects on terrorism incidents. It’s pretty much a label or brand, with little to back it up. Yes you can point to some acts of terrorism and claim it as a evidence, but it just as well could be isolated incidents and not related to each other. So my counter argument is similar to what gangstalking victims experience when pointing towards evidence of organized harassment. Terrorism purely as ideology just doesn’t pass any test of cognitive motivation or psyche. Even most insane psychopaths kill with some sort of motivation, not just for joy of killing. Terrorism is just one of the military tools to achieve some sort of goal in destructive fashion and used on both sides of conflict, except in this case another side is undefinable in conventional sense. So am I ignorant about a threat and should investigate more into it as media can’t deliver complex issues without reducing it to digestible content that loses much of the sense. One could say that it appears that western world is experiencing organized stalking of geopolitical proportions where stressors(terrorism) are used to achieve some sort of goal to transform society through incremental steps (if we assume that Al-queda exists and doing it with some sort of logic). If looking from terrorist point of view I have trouble understanding what they achieved and how it’s could be useful for them and what are long term goals. As far as I can tell the only benefactor (profit wise) is military industrial complex. Western society just kept going on apart of being shocked from time to time, the only changes to the way of our lives came from above in a form of protective and restrictive measures. Being killed in terrorism attack statistically is so low that in comparison with other threats (like traffic accident) it’s clearly hyped for political purposes. […]

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s