Dzisiejsze wiadomości (Wyłączone)
| Wiadomości bez odpowiedzi (Włączone)
| Forum: slackware |
|---|
| Wątek: My Hot Friends Mum Hidden Web Cam getting undressed FUCKING SEXY |
|---|
| My Hot Friends Mum Hidden Web Cam getting undressed FUCKING SEXY [wiadomość #5873] |
sob, 01 marzec 2008 13:43 |
 yenc
Wiadomości: 4
Dołączył(a): marzec 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
|
PORNOLATION RELEASE
|
|
| | Wątek: blad przy kompilacji exima |
|---|
| blad przy kompilacji exima [wiadomość #5792] |
śro, 06 luty 2008 11:28 |
K
Wiadomości: 9
Dołączył(a): lipiec 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
witam,
probuje zainstalowac exima, ale przy make wywala blad:
awk '{ print ($1+1) }' cnumber.h > cnumber.temp
rm -f cnumber.h; mv cnumber.temp cnumber.h
gcc version.c
rm -f exim
gcc -o exim
rfc2047.o: In function `rfc2047_decode2':
rfc2047.c:(.text+0x361): undefined reference to `libiconv_open'
rfc2047.c:(.text+0x412): undefined reference to `libiconv'
rfc2047.c:(.text+0x4dc): undefined reference to `libiconv_close'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** Error 1
make: Leaving directory `/usr/src/exim-4.69/build-Linux-i386'
make: *** [go] Error 2
root@l:/usr/src/exim-4.69#
libiconv mialem z paczki z linuxpackages.net, teraz mam ze zrodek i jest
to samo. google nie naprowadza mnie na zaden trop :[
|
|
| | Wątek: Mysz na USB pod linuxmen. |
|---|
| Mysz na USB pod linuxmen. [wiadomość #5783] |
pią, 01 luty 2008 16:13 |
XWindowsMen
Wiadomości: 49
Dołączył(a): listopad 2005 |
Member |
|
|
Witam.
Myszka na USB (A4 Tech). Rolkę już włączyłem poprzez edycję xorg.conf. Jest
szansa aby pozostałe 5 zaprogramować jakoś do działania z moim widzimisie
pod Linuxem? System to Slackware 12. Pozdrawiam.
--
<!--
// "Nienawidzę bycia miłym, bo uwielbiam budzić niechęć
// Tak zostałem wychowany, a w zasadzie nie" Myslovitz
--!>
|
|
| | Wątek: Telenet nieuwsgroepen mededeling: nieuwsserver adres aanpassen/Attention: modification de l'adresse |
|---|
| Telenet nieuwsgroepen mededeling: nieuwsserver adres aanpassen/Attention: modification de l'adresse [wiadomość #5782] |
wto, 29 styczeń 2008 20:55 |
info
Wiadomości: 3
Dołączył(a): czerwiec 2006 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Beste klant,
Telenet heeft een migratie gedaan van haar nieuwsservers.
Wat betekent dit concreet voor jou als gebruiker?
Er verandert niets aan de service, maar om verder gebruik te maken van de
Telenet nieuwsgroepen service moet je bij de instellingen van je nieuwslezer
het adres van de nieuwsserver veranderen van news.telenet.be of
newsbin.telenet.be in newsgroups.telenet.be. Verder dien je de authenticatie
op deze nieuwsserver uit te schakelen.
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Het Telenet team
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Cher client,
Telenet a effectue une migration de ses serveurs de newsgroup.
Pour continuer a utiliser les newsgroups de Telenet, modifiez dans la
configuration de lecteur de nouvelles l'adresse du serveur de newsgroup:
newsgroups.telenet.be a la place de news.telenet.be ou newsbin.telenet.be.
Ceci ne necessite pas que vous vous identifiez pour acceder a ce serveur de
newsgroup.
Cordialement,
L'equipe Telenet
|
|
| | Wątek: M-I,5-Persecut ion . harassme nt at w ork |
|---|
| M-I,5-Persecut ion . harassme nt at w ork [wiadomość #5778] |
śro, 02 styczeń 2008 06:28 |
mimeivefm
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-= harassment. at work -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Once I stopped watching television and listening to the. radio at the end of
1990, "they" had to find. other ways of committing abuses. So they took what
must be for them a tried. and tested route; they get at you by subversion of
those around you. Since. they wouldn't be able to do that with my family or
friends, that meant getting at people. in the workplace to be their
mouthpieces and do their dirty work for. them.
They supplied my employers in Oxford with details from what. was going on in
my private life, and. what I and other people had said at my home and
accommodation in Oxford. So people at work. repeated verbatim words which
had. been said in my home, and repeated what I'd been doing recently. Often
the most trivial things, the. ones from your domestic life, are the ones
which hurt most. One manager in particular at Oxford. continuously abused me
for. ten months with verbal sexual abuse, swearing, and threats to terminate
my employment. After ten months I was forced to seek psychiatric help. and
start. taking medication, and was away from work for two months. I spoke
later with. a solicitor about what had happened at that company; he advised
it was only possible to take. action if you had left the company as a result
of harassment,. and such an action would have to be started very soon after
leaving.
Over a year later the same manager picked. on another new worker, with even
more serious results; that employee tried. to commit suicide with an
overdose as a result of the ill-treatment, and. was forced to leave his job.
But he didn't take action against the company,. either. Abuse at work is
comparable to that elsewhere in that tangible. evidence is difficult to
produce, and. the abusers will always have their denials ready when
challenged. And even if a court accepts. what you say happened, it still
remains to prove that abuse causes. the type of breakdown I had at the end
of 1992. In a recent case before a British court, a. former member of the
Army. brought a case against others who had maltreated him ten years
previously. Although the court. accepted that abuse had occurred, it did not
agree that depressive illness necessarily followed, and denied justice. to
the. plaintiff.
4700
|
|
| | Wątek: M`I,5`Persecuti on . w hy th e se curity services? |
|---|
| M`I,5`Persecuti on . w hy th e se curity services? [wiadomość #5777] |
śro, 02 styczeń 2008 05:27 |
evevf
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-= why. the security services? -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
You may ask, why do I. think the "they" referred to are the security
services? Is. there any evidence that there is a single source, as opposed
to a loosely based "whispering campaign" amongst many. people? Even if there
is a single source,. is there any evidence that "they" are professional
"buggers" as. opposed to amateurs, or perhaps people working for a privately
funded. organization?
a) As to the question of a. single source versus something more fragmented;
it is quite obvious. that there is a single source from the way the campaign
has been carried out. Since things have been repeated. verbatim which were
said in my home, there must. be one group which does the watching and
listening. Since on several occasions. (mainly during travel) people have
been planted in. close proximity and rehearsed in what they were to say, it
follows that someone must have. done the planning for that, and again a
single. source is indicated.
b) So why couldn't it be amateurs?. Why couldn't it be a private
organisation, for example a private detective agency paid to manage. the
campaign and undertake. the technical aspects? Some detective agencies are
unscrupulous as. has been proved on the occasions in the past when they've
been exposed or. caught; they too can have access to the bugging technology
deployed; and there are reported cases of MI5. paying private eyes to do
their dirty work (against peace campaigners and. similar enemies of the
state) on. the understanding that if they were caught then they could deny
all knowledge. Why couldn't. that be the case?
The main factor pointing. to direct security service involvement (as opposed
to amateurs or MI5 proxies) is the breadth of their access to the. media in
particular, and the. fact that the television companies are so involved in
the. campaign. The BBC would not directly invade someone's home themselves,
since it would not. be within their remit to allocate personnel or financial
resources. to do so. An organisation of their stature would not take part in
a campaign set up by private sources. The only people. they would take
material. from would be the security services, presumably on the assumption
that if the cat ever flew out of. the bag yowling it would be MI5 who would
take. the consequences.
State sponsorship for these acts of psychological terrorism. is also
indicated by duration; support for over six years for a. team of three or
four people would be beyond the means and will of most private. sources.
The viciousness of the slanders. and personal denigration also points to
MI5; they traditionally "protect" the British state from politicians of. the
wrong hue by character. assassination, and in this case are using their
tried and tested methods to murder with words. an enemy they have invented
for. themselves.
And there are precedents. Diana and Hewitt were alleged to. have been filmed
"at it" by. an Army intelligence team which had operated in Northern
Ireland, these allegations were made by. someone called Jones who had been
on the team. His statements were. denied by the defence establishment who
tried to character-assassinate by describing him as the "Jones. twins".
Funny how if you tell the truth, then you must be. ill, isn't it? Thought
only communists behaved like. that?
Hewitt later said that he'd been spoken to by someone in. the army who
revealed the existence of videotapes of. him and Diana, and that the tapes
would be published if any attempt was made by them to. resume their
association.
2279
|
|
| | Wątek: M-I 5`P ersecution ` thei r method s a nd t actics |
|---|
| M-I 5`P ersecution ` thei r method s a nd t actics [wiadomość #5776] |
śro, 02 styczeń 2008 03:33 |
memeivef
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-= MI5: methods. and tactics -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
They deliberately set out to. harass in a way that would resemble the
symptoms of schizophrenia, so that. any report of the harassment would be
taken as indicating mental illness and "treated" accordingly. They. never
show their own faces; they only work through. proxies, in the media, among
the public, and by manipulating. people in the workplace. Since they do not
declare their. identity there is no evidence to initiate legal action
against the security. services or anyone else. The only people you can
prosecute are the proxies and they will deny knowledge. of any conspiracy.
By. repeatedly humiliating and abusing the victim, they induced mental
illness. This is the worst form of human. rights violation: making any
statement of. the harassment appear to be symptomatic of the illness which
they cause through. the harassment. That this can happen, and people collude
by. silence, is absolutely horrifying.
From the beginning in June 1990 they set. a pattern of harassment which they
have followed without change for the last six years. They paint me. as a
"threat" to. which people must "react" (shades of Nazi persecution methods),
while simultaneously portraying their. hate campaign on which they have
spent over a million pounds of taxpayers money as a. "joke".
The MI5 that breaks the. law with the silent complicity of the police is the
same agency that is now. seeking a role in the fight against crime. Perhaps
the real joke is the. proposed involvement in the implementation of justice
of an. organisation which commits criminal acts with secrecy and disinterest
for the. legal process.
2279
|
|
| | Wątek: M`I 5`Persecu tion - my re sponse to the harass ment |
|---|
| M`I 5`Persecu tion - my re sponse to the harass ment [wiadomość #5775] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 10:59 |
mieme
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= my response to the. harassment -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My. first reaction in 1990/91 was to assume that if I broke contact then
they would not. be able to follow and would lose interest. So I did the
things that have. been suggested by other people; I sold my television,
stopped listening to the radio and tried to withdraw. away from the sources
of. abuse as much as possible. I reasoned that they must have more important
things to deal with and that normal people would simply. leave me alone if
it. were made difficult for them to continue their harassment.
I reckoned. without the sheer vindictiveness of the abusers. They did not
let up but instead "got to" people around me, mainly people at work, to. do
their dirty work for them. I went to see my GP,. who refused to believe what
he was being told, and refused to direct me on. to anyone who could be of
practical assistance. It was not until three years had. passed that the GP
admitted the matter was outside his competence and suggested going. to the
police.
In the. summer of 1994 we called in counter-surveillance experts from a
private detective agency to sweep our. house and telephone for bugging
devices. They conducted a thorough search and found nothing; but as. noted
above, since. the existence of surveillance was being forced in my face by
the harassers, you would expect them to. have taken the possibility of a
counter-surveillance sweep into account when. planning the type of devices
to. be employed.
In Easter 1995 I made a complaint to my local Police station in London,. but
the police have not expressed any intention to do anything. about the
continuing harassment ("we're not saying it's happening. and we're not
saying it isn't happening" were. the words used). I think the officer I
spoke to at Easter wasn't aware of it happening, although. other members of
the. police force obviously do know.
From April 1995. until the present time the matter has been discussed in a
lot of detail on the Usenet (Internet). "uk.misc" newsgroup. That discussion
has given birth to. the article which you are now reading. My hopes in
posting to Usenet were that wider publicizing would discourage. the security
services from. continuing their harassment, and "draw people out" into
concurring with the truth of what was being said.. Neither of those have
followed, but the discussion has served a purpose in allowing. this
structured report to. be created.
9577
|
|
| | Wątek: M I`5'Persecu tion pu rpose in public izing i t; censorship in u k.* news groups |
|---|
| M I`5'Persecu tion pu rpose in public izing i t; censorship in u k.* news groups [wiadomość #5774] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 10:32 |
ifmfv
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=
-= purpose in. publicizing it; censorship in uk.* newsgroups -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=
The postings to uk.misc newsgroup generated a very. defensive reaction from
Usenet readers in the UK.. So much so, that they tried strenuously to
suppress what was being said, both. by breaking the rules of netiquette in
their responses on the forum, and directly. by action to revoke the account
from. which the postings were issued.
Yet the postings were within. the normal boundaries of behaviour for
uk.misc, and other less partisan spectators did not see. justice in the
censorship which was. effected, as the following excerpt shows;
:Karen. Lofstrom (lofstrom@lava.net) wrote
:>It does seem that the frequency and the size. of his posts are
:>approaching net. abuse. However, IMHO, they aren't quite there yet. If
:>his postmaster were to act in this. instance, it would raise troubling
:>censorship. issues.
The inescapable conclusion of the censorship effected on. the uk.*
newsgroups is. that the British are intent on their wrongdoing remaining
concealed, and therefore seek to subvert and suppress freedom. of speech,
not only in their own country where the. media shows xenophobic bias and
bile against all. perceived enemies within and without, but also in other
countries which have their own statutes. to guarantee the basic human right
of. free speech.
It is absolutely necessary to bring their hate campaign out into the. open
where it. can be placed under scrutiny and the harassers seen for what they
are. That is the only way of making it impossible for the security. services
to carry. it out. There is a wider dimension, though. Xenophobia as
demonstrated by British people and institutions. over the last few years
belongs to the same stable as racial hatred. In one case, two youths. on a
Tube train made that racism explicit. by referring to their victim as a
"soft toy, not. up to British Standards". Doubtless others victimize partly
on the basis of race (isnt it odd that they. chose to torment someone who
is not ethnically English?) while expressing their. abuse in terms of
another genetic attribute, namely mental illness. All. xenophobia on a
genetic. basis is wrong, but while racial insults are illegal, abusing the
mentally ill is. neither against the law nor subject to similar condemnation
when. it is exposed.
7147
|
|
| | Wątek: M-I,5-Persecution . abus e in s et-up situatio ns a nd in public |
|---|
| M-I,5-Persecution . abus e in s et-up situatio ns a nd in public [wiadomość #5773] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 10:03 |
mieifmi
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= abuse in. set-up situations and in public -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Strangers in the street. have recognized me on sight many times, and shown
awareness of the current thread of abuse. To give you one example, in. 1992
I was. seriously ill, and a manager at work somewhat humorously said that
"it wasn't fair" that people were bullying me. A few days later,. I attended
for. the first time a clinic in London as an outpatient, and on my way out
was accosted by someone who asked if "they had paid. my fare", with emphasis
on the. word "fare". He repeated the word several times in this different
context; that they. should have paid my "fare", each time emphasizing the
word.
For two and a. half years from the time their harassment started until
November. 1992 I refused to see a psychiatrist, because I reasoned that I
was not ill of my own action or fault, but through the. stress caused by
harassment, and that a lessening of the illness would have to. be consequent
to a removal of its immediate cause, in other words a cessation. of
harassment. I also reasoned. that since they were taunting me with jokes
about mental illness, if I were to seek treatment then. the abusers would
think. that they had "won" and been proved "right". Remember, the constant
theme of any persecution. is, "we must destroy you because you're X",
whether X is a racial or other. attribute. In this case the X was "we
persecute you because you have brain disease".. The similarity of this logic
to Nazi attitudes to the mentally ill. is striking.
The same. manager who'd said "it wasn't fair" asked me in winter 1992 why I
didn't seek help from a. psychiatrist; was it, he asked, because "they would
think they had won" if I. sought treatment? That was something I'd never
said at. work... again, taken separately it proves nothing, but many such
things over a period of. months proves conclusively that people in the
company. knew what was going on, and in quite a lot of detail.
Usually harassment in public lacks the. level of finesse of "paying your
fare".. Most people's imagination does not go beyond moronic parroting of
the current term. of denigration. That is not surprising given the average
level of the abusers; if. they do not have the intelligence to distinguish
wrong from. right then neither will they have the capacity for anything
other. than mindless repetition of a monosyllabic term calculated to fit
into their. minds.
The first incidents of verbal assault in public were in again in the. summer
of 1990, although they increased in. frequency and venom with time. In July
1990 the first public incident occurred on. a tube train on the Northern
line. Two men and their girlfriends recognised me; the women sprang to. my
defence, saying "He looks perfectly. normal, he doesn't look ill". Their
boyfriends of. course knew better, and followed the party line; one of them
made reference to an "operation", apparently to work at. the tube station
but implicitly to a. visit that I had made to hospital a couple of weeks
previously.
In August 1990. going home from college, soon after getting on a tube train
at Gloucester Road I was followed. by a group of four youths, who started a
chant of abuse. That they were targeting me was confirmed by. other people
in the carriage, one of whom asked the other "who are they going on. at, is
it. the bloke who just got on?" to which the second replied "yes, I think
so". I. was tempted to reply, but as in every other instance the abusers are
enabled. in their cowardice by physically outnumbering the abused; any
confrontation would result in my being beaten up, followed by a. complaint
to the police that "he attacked us", and of course he's. ill, so he must
have been imagining that. we were getting at him. Shitty, aren't they?
But the shittiness of the four youths on the tube. train is as nothing
compared to the episode on the National Express. coach to Dover in the
summer of 1992. While going on. holiday to the Continent I was verbally set
upon by a couple travelling sitting a few rows behind.. The boy did the
talking,. his female companion contributing only a continuous empty giggling
noise. He spoke loudly to ensure other people. on the coach heard, always
about. "they" and "this bloke" but never naming either the abusers or the
person he was talking about. He. said "they" had "found somebody from his
school, and he. was always really stressed at school". They must have dug
deep to find enemies there; perhaps. someone who dropped out of school,
someone who didn't do too. well later, who was jealous and keen to get their
own back? The. boy also said "he was in a bed and breakfast for only one
night and they got him".. By a not unexpected coincidence I had been in a
B&B in Oxford a week previously, which had. been booked from work; other
things lead me to the. conclusion that the company's offices were bugged for
most of. the 2 1/2 years that I was there, so "they" would have known a room
in the. B&B had been booked. (But I'll bet "they" didn't tell the company's
managers their offices were. bugged, did they?).
After a few. minutes of this I went back to where they were sitting and
asked where they were travelling. The boy named a village. in France, and
the girl's giggling suddenly ceased; presumably it permeated to. her brain
cell what the purpose. of the boy's abuse was.
This and other. set-up situations are obviously calculated to provoke a
direct confrontation which would bring in the police, with the. abusers
claiming that. they were the ones attacked. Again in 1992, outside the
house where. I was living in Oxford I was physically attacked by someone -
not punched, just grabbed by the. coat, with some verbals thrown in for good
measure. That was something the people. at work shouldn't have known
about... but soon after a couple of people were talking. right in front of
me about, "I heard. he was attacked". The UK police have a responsibility
for. preventing assault occurring, but they do not seem to take any interest
in meeting that responsibility. I suppose. their attitude is that harassment
does. not come within their remit unless it involves physical assault, and
they will only become. involved once that happens. That is of course quite
the wrong attitude for them to take, but as I. now understand, the police
investigate only the crime they wish. to investigate; if they do not take
your complaints seriously then there is nothing. you can do to make them
take. action.
4717
|
|
| | Wątek: M I.5'Persecu tion w hy won 't the Brit ish pol ice do t heir jo b and pu t a stop to it ? |
|---|
| M I.5'Persecu tion w hy won 't the Brit ish pol ice do t heir jo b and pu t a stop to it ? [wiadomość #5772] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 09:31 |
ifemeieve
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-
-= why won't the British police do their job and put. a stop to it? -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-
The. British police obviously do know what is taking place. Besides my
interpretations of what individual officers have. said which forces that
conclusion, it would be. inconceivable for them to be unaware of something
on this. scale.
If. they know, then they will know that the abusers have broken laws in the
UK and. abroad. Recently the UK introduced laws against electronic spying
which carry a penalty of several years jail if caught. If the police. know
illegal harassment is taking place, and. do nothing about it, then they are
failing in. their responsibilities.
Last Easter. (1995) I went into the local police station in London and spoke
to an officer. about the harassment against me. But I couldn't provide
tangible evidence; what people said, in many cases years. ago, is beyond
proof, and without something. to support my statements I cannot expect a
police officer to take. the complaint seriously.
The current situation with regard to the police is not one. which allows a
breakthrough in dealing with the problem. On the one hand,. most individual
officers at a local police station may. not know about the ongoing assaults,
so a complaint at that level will not. yield results. Yet the police as an
organisation do know of the. harassment, and they must be aware that a
complaint has been made at a. police station. So it is clearly their duty to
take preventative action against the continuing molestation,. but because
the criminals are operating on behalf of. a state agency, the police are not
carrying. out their duty.
2287
|
|
| | Wątek: M'I.5'Persecution , Be rnard L evin express es his vie ws |
|---|
| M'I.5'Persecution , Be rnard L evin express es his vie ws [wiadomość #5771] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 08:25 |
vfvemfivf
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
The article of which part is. reproduced below was penned by Bernard Levin
for the Features section of the Times on 21. September 1991. To my mind, it
described the situation at. the time and in particular a recent meeting with
a friend, during which I for the first time. admitted to someone other than
my GP that I had been subjected to a conspiracy of. harassment over the
previous year and. a half.
>There is a madman running loose about London,. called David Campbell; I have
>no. reason to believe that he is violent, but he should certainly be
>approached with caution. You may know him by the curious. glitter in his
>eyes and a persistent trembling of his hands; if. that does not suffice, you
>will find him attempting to. thrust no fewer than 48 books into your arms,
>all hardbacks, with a promise. that, if you should return to the same
>meeting-place next year, he will heave another 80 at. you.
>
>If,. by now, the police have arrived and are keeping a close watch on him,
>you may feel. sufficiently emboldened to examine the books. The jackets are
>a model of uncluttered typography, elegantly and simply. laid out; there is
>an unobtrusive colophon of a rising. sun, probably not picked at random.
>Gaining confidence - the lunatic is smiling by now, and the. policemen, who
>know about. such things, have significantly removed their helmets - you
>could do worse than take the jacket off the first book. in the pile. The
>only word possible to describe the binding is sumptuous; real. cloth in a
>glorious shade of dark green, with the title and author in. black and gold
>on the. spine.
>
>Look at it. more closely; your eyes do not deceive you - it truly does have
>real top-bands. and tail-bands, in yellow, and, for good measure, a silk
>marker ribbon in a lighter green. The paper. is cream-wove and acid-free,
>and the. book is sewn, not glued.
>
>Throughout the encounter, I should have mentioned,. our loony has been
>chattering away, although what he is. trying to say is almost impossible to
>understand; after a time, however,. he becomes sufficiently coherent to make
>clear that he is trying to sell the books to you. Well, now, such. quality
>in bookmaking. today can only be for collectors' limited editions at a
>fearsome price -. #30, #40, #50?
>
>No, no, he says, the glitter more powerful than ever and the trembling. of
>his hands rapidly spreading throughout his entire body;. no, no - the books
>are priced variously at #7,. #8 or #9, with the top price #12.
>
>At this, the policemen understandably put their helmets. back on; one of
>them draws his truncheon and the other can be. heard summoning
>reinforcements on his walkie-talkie. The madman bursts. into tears, and
>swears. it is all true.
>
>And it. is.
>
>David Campbell has acquired the entire. rights to the whole of the
>Everyman's Library, which died. a lingering and shameful death a decade or
>so ago, and he proposes. to start it all over again - 48 volumes this
>September and 80 more next year, in editions I have. described, at the
>prices specified. He proposes to launch his amazing venture. simultaneously
>in Britain and the United. States, with the massive firepower of Random
>Century at his back in. this country, and the dashing cavalry of Knopf
>across the water, and no one who loves literature and. courage will forbear
>to. cheer.
At the time this article was written I had believed for some. time that
columnists in the Times and other journalists had. been making references to
my situation. Nothing. unusual about this you may think, plenty of people
have the same sort of ideas and. obviously the papers aren't writing about
them, so why should my beliefs. not be as false as those of others?
What makes this article so extraordinary is that three or four. days
immediately preceding its publication, I had a meeting. with a friend,
during the course of which we discussed. the media persecution, and in
particular that by Times columnists.. It seemed to me, reading the article
by Levin in Saturdays paper,. that he was describing in some detail his
"artists impression" of that meeting. Most telling are the. final
sentences, when he writes, "The madman bursts into tears, and swears. it is
all. true. And it is." Although I did not "burst into tears" (he seems to be
using a bit of poetic licence and. exaggerating) I did try hard to convince
my friend that it was. all true; and I am able to concur with Mr Levin,
because, of course,. it is.
At the beginning of the piece Levin reveals a fear of being attacked by. the
"irrational". subject of his story, saying "I have no reason to believe that
he. is violent, but he should certainly be approached with caution". This
goes back to. the xenophobic propaganda of "defence" against a "threat"
which was seen at the very beginning of the harassment. The impression of. a
"madman running loose" who needs to be. controlled through an agency which
assigns to itself the mantle of the. "police" is also one which had been
expressed. elsewhere.
In the final paragraph of this extract, his reference. to Everymans Library
as having "died a lingering and shameful death a decade or so ago". shows
clearly what sort of conclusion they wish to their campaign.. They want a
permanent. solution, and as they are prevented from achieving that solution
directly, they waste significant resources on methods. which have been
repeatedly shown to be ineffective. for such a purpose.
2287
|
|
| | Wątek: M`I'5-Persecu tion ` wh o kno ws ab out it? |
|---|
| M`I'5-Persecu tion ` wh o kno ws ab out it? [wiadomość #5770] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 07:06 |
evmimefie
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= who knows about it?. =-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Many people know, both. in the establishment and media, and among the
general public. Despite an absence of its target. from the UK for more than
two years, the echoes of paranoia can still be. heard loud and clear from
across the water. When it started in 1990, the only people who knew. were
those in BBC television who were spying on my. home, and a few radio
broadcasters. There were a few. cases of public harassment, but very little
compared to the situation that developed a. couple of years later.
The list. today includes BBC TV staff (newsreaders such as Martyn Lewis,
Michael Buerk, Nicholas Witchell), people. from radio stations such as
Chris Tarrant. of Capital and Radio 1 DJs, people in the print media, but
also many people in the general public.. All united in a conspiracy which
breaks the laws. which the UK does have regarding harassment, and all
completely uncaring. for any semblance of decency or elementary respect
for individual. rights.
The British police. (obviously) do know the nature of the harassment and in
all probability the identity of those behind it. Some time ago I. made a
complaint to my local police station in. London, without positive result.
The UK police are failing in their duty to see the law enforced in. not
checking. the abuse.
4717
|
|
| | Wątek: M I`5,Pers ecution , how a nd w hy d id it start ? |
|---|
| M I`5,Pers ecution , how a nd w hy d id it start ? [wiadomość #5769] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 06:33 |
ievmef
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= how and. why did it start? -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The harassment didn't. start by itself, so someone must have been there at
the outset to give it a. firm push and set the "animals" after me. It looks
as if I was set up in. June 1990, and the timing indicates someone from
university was. responsible.
>One thing which has been missing from this discussion is. this simple
>prognosis: that. maybe he is right and that, despite his admitted
>mental condition, there really is. a campaign against him organised by
>now-influential ex-students. of his university.
In May or June 1990, Alan Freeman on Radio 1. read out a letter from someone
who had known me. for a few years, who wrote of the one who "wore out his
welcome with random. precision" (from the Pink Floyd song). Freeman went on
to say to the writer "that's a hell. of a letter you wrote there". The
indication is strongly that people I had parted from soon before. nursed a
grudge against. me and were trying to cause trouble for me.
The suggestion is that Freeman might have shown the. letter to other people,
and things could have snowballed from there. Right from the. start the real
source (security services. presumed) didn't announce themselves as the
origin, but let the "talkers", the radio DJs, believe that they were. the
originators. Think about it; if you announce, "we're MI5. and we have a
campaign against this. bloke" then people might not go along with it; but if
you say, "everyone else is getting at this bloke because he. 'deserves' it"
then people will join in. with fewer qualms.
>Why would "they" wish to. assassinate your character?
It's the classic case of hitting a cripple to prove. you're stronger. Why
would the security services. expend hundreds of thousands of pounds and more
than. six years of manpower to try to kill a British citizen? Because they
are motivated by people who. knew me at university and feel personal
animosity; because they knew me to be emotionally weak,. and it is in the
nature. of bullies to prey on those known to be weak; and because they can
rely on the complicity of the establishment, which. the security services
manipulate and derive funding from.. This is England's biggest humiliation
today, and. the British security services are intent on preventing their
humiliation becoming reality. by continuing their campaign of attempted
murder to suppress the truth from. becoming public.
2287
|
|
| | Wątek: M.I 5`Per secution - co st of th e operat ion |
|---|
| M.I 5`Per secution - co st of th e operat ion [wiadomość #5768] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 05:08 |
vmevevfm
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-= MI5: cost. of the operation -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Here's what. a couple of other people on Usenet (uk.misc) had to say
regarding the. cost of running such an operation...
PO: >Have some sense, grow up and smell. reality. What you are talking about
PO: >would take loads of planning, tens of thousands of. pounds and lots of
PO: >people involved in the planning, execution and maintenance of it.. You
PO: >must have a very high opinion of yourself to think you are. worth it.
PM:. >But why? And why you? Do you realize how much it would cost to keep
PM: >one person under continuous surveillance for. five years? Think about
PM: >all. the man/hours. Say they _just_ allocated a two man team and a
PM: >supervisor. OK., Supervisor's salary, say, #30,000 a year.. Two men,
PM: >#20,000 a year each. But they'd need to. work in shifts -- so it would
PM: >be six men at. #20,000 (which with on-costs would work out at more like
PM: >#30,000 to the employer.).
PM:. >
PM: >So, we're talking #30,000 x 6. #180,000.. plus say, #40,000 for the
PM: >supervisor. #220,000.. Then you've got the hardware involved. And
PM: >any transcription that needs doing. You don't think. the 'Big Boss'
PM: >would listen to hours and hours. of tapes, do you.
PM:. >
PM: >So, all in all, you couldn't actually do the job for much. less than
PM: >a quarter million a year. Over five years. What are you doing that. makes
PM: >it worth the while of. the state to spend over one and a quarter million
PM: >on. you?
Those are pretty much the. sort of calculations that went through my head
once I stopped. to consider what it must be costing them to run this
operation. The partial. answer is, there have been periods when the
intensity has been greater, and times. when little has happened. In fact,
for much of 1993 and the first half of 1994,. very little happened. Although
I don't think that was for reasons of money - if they can tap. into the
taxpayer they're not going to be short of resources,. are they?
The more complete answer. is in the enormity of what they're doing. Relative
to. the cost to British pride of seeing their country humiliated for the
persecution. of their own citizens, isn't is worth the cost of four or five
people to try to bring things to a close in the manner they would. wish? To
the government a million or two is quite. honestly nothing - if they can
convince. themselves of the necessity of what they're doing, resources will
not be. the limiting factor.
9577
|
|
| | Wątek: M,I.5'Persecuti on , Ca pital Rad io - Chris Tarran t |
|---|
| M,I.5'Persecuti on , Ca pital Rad io - Chris Tarran t [wiadomość #5767] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 04:40 |
ivimveimi
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
-= Capital Radio - Chris. Tarrant -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
Capital Radio DJs have been "in on it" from the. start. One of the first
things I heard in the. summer of 1990 was from a Capital DJ who said, "If
he listens to Capital then he can't be all. bad" (supportive, you see. We're
not bastards). Much of. what came over the radio in 1990 is now so far away
the precise details have been. obliterated by time. No diary was kept of the
details, and although archives if they exist. may give pointers, the
ambiguity of what broadcasters said would leave that open. to
re-interpretation.
In spring. 1994, Chris Tarrant on his Capital morning show made an aside to
someone else in the. studio, about a person he didn't identify. He said,
"You. know this bloke? He says we're trying to kill him. We should be done
for attempted. manslaughter".
That mirrored something I had said a day or two. before. What Tarrant said
was understood by the staff member in the studio he was saying. it to; they
said,. "Oh no, don't say that" to Tarrant. If any archives exist of the
morning show (probably unlikely) then it could be found there;. what he said
was so out of context that he would be very hard put to find an. explanation.
A couple. of days later, someone at the site where I was working repeated the
remark although. in a different way; they said there had been people in a
computer room. when automatic fire extinguishers went off and those people
were "thinking of. suing for attempted manslaughter".
Finally, this. isn't confined to the established radio stations. In 1990
after I had listened to a pirate radio station. in South London for about
half an hour, there was an. audible phone call in the background, followed
by total silence for a few moments,. then shrieks of laughter. "So what are
we supposed to say. now? Deadly torture? He's going to talk to us now, isn't
he?", which meant. that they could hear what I would say in my room.
7147
|
|
| | Wątek: M I-5'Persecuti on , bugg ing and counter-sur veillance |
|---|
| M I-5'Persecuti on , bugg ing and counter-sur veillance [wiadomość #5766] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 04:14 |
fmfmfe
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= MI5:. bugging and counter-surveillance -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
PO: >Did you ever look for. the bugs in your house ? If not, why not ? I mean if
PO: >I thought that was happening to me, I'd search the place. from top to bottom,
PO: >I mean I live there I would know if anything was. out of place. If I was
PO: >really. suspicious, I would call in one of those bug detection teams which
PO: >have those machines that pick up. the transmitted radio waves. This
PO: >reminds me of BUGS, that new programme on BBC1. on
That's exactly what we did. We went to. a competent, professional detective
agency in London, paid. them over 400 quid to debug our house. They used
scanner devices which go to over 1 GHz and would pick up any. nearby
transmitter in that range, they also. checked the phones and found
nothing... but if. the tap was at the exchange, then they wouldn't find
anything, would. they?
CS: >Doesn't this suggest to you that there are, in fact, no. bugs to be found?
You can assume that. they've done this sort of thing to other people in more
"serious". cases, where they would know the targets would suspect the
presence of electronic surveillance. So they will. have developed techniques
and devices. which are not readily detectable either by visual inspection or
by electronic means. What. those techniques might be, I couldn't guess.
In this case, the existence of. bugging devices was clear from the
beginning, and. they "rubbed it in" with what was said by the boy on the
coach. It was. almost as if they wanted counter-surveillance people to be
called in,. who they knew would fail to detect the bugging devices, causing
loss of credibility to the other things I would have to. say relating to the
harassment.
I did all the things someone in my situation. would do to try to find the
bugs. In addition to calling in. professional help using electronic
counter-surveillance, I made a close visual. inspection of electrical
equipment,. plus any points where audio or video surveillance devices might
have been concealed. Of course, I. found nothing. Normal surveillance
"mini-cameras" are. quite noticeable and require visible supporting
circuitry. It seems to me the best place to put a small. video surveillance
device would be. additional to a piece of electronic equipment such as a TV
or video. It would be necessary to physically. break in to a property to fit
such. a device.
4717
|
|
| | Wątek: M'I-5 Persec ution ' th e BBC, tel evision and ra dio |
|---|
| M'I-5 Persec ution ' th e BBC, tel evision and ra dio [wiadomość #5765] |
wto, 01 styczeń 2008 03:47 |
evmive
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): styczeń 2008 |
Junior Member |
|
|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
-= the BBC, television and radio. -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
The first incident. in June 1990 was when a BBC newsreader made what seemed
to be. a reaction to something which had happened in my home, and out of
context. of what they were reading. My first reaction was disbelief; nothing
of the sort had ever. happened before, the idea that such a thing could
occur had not crossed my mind, yet there was no doubt of what. had just
taken place. My disbelief eroded as this recurred. time after time. Besides
the. news, offenders included shows such as Crimewatch (!), Newsnight, and
"entertainment". shows. There seems to be very little moral understanding
among the people who make. these programmes; they just assume they will
never. be caught, so they carry on without a thought for the illegality or
amorality of what they do. The only. time I ever heard a word raised in
doubt was by Paxman being interviewed by someone else (I think by. Clive
Anderson) back. in 1990; referring to the "watching" he said it troubled
him, and when asked by the host what you could do about it, replied. "Well,
you could just switch it. off" (meaning the surveillance monitor in the
studio). He clearly didn't let his doubts stand. in the way of continued
surreptitious spying from. his own or other people's shows, though.
Now you're convinced this is a troll, aren't you? This story has. been the
subject of much debate on the uk.* Usenet newsgroups for over a. year, and
some readers believe it to be an invention (it has even been suggested. that
a group of psychology. students are responsible!), others think it
symptomatic of a derangement of the. author, and a few give it credence.
Quite a few. people do know part or all of the story already, so this text
will fill in the gaps in. their knowledge. For the rest, what may persuade
you of the third possibility. is that some of the incidents detailed are
checkable against any archives of radio and TV programmes that. exist; that
the incidents involve named people (even if. those hiding in the shadows
have not made their identity or affiliations evident),. and those people
may be persuaded to come out with the truth;. and that the campaign of
harassment. is continuing today both in the UK and on the American
continent, in a none-too-secret fashion; by its nature the. significant risk
of exposure increases with. time.
On several occasions people said to my face that harassment from the. TV was
happening. On the first day I worked in Oxford, I spent the. evening in the
local pub with the company's. technical director Ian, and Phil, another
employee. Ian made a. few references to me and said to Phil, as if in an
aside, "Is he the bloke who's been on TV?" to which Phil replied,. "Yes, I
think. so".
I made a number of efforts to find the bugs, without success; last. year we
employed professional counter-surveillance people. to scan for bugs (see
later) again without result. In autumn 1990 I disposed of my. TV and watched
virtually no television for the next three years.. But harassment from TV
stations has gone. on for over six years and continues to this day. This is
something that many people obviously know is happening;. yet the TV staff
have the morality of paedophiles, that. because they're getting away with it
they. feel no wrong.
Other people who. were involved in the abuse in 1990 were DJs on BBC radio
stations, notably disc jockeys. from Radio 1 and other stations (see the
following section). Again, since they don't have sense. in the first place
they can't be expect. to have the moral sense not to be part of criminal
harassment.
2287
|
|
| | Wątek: !!!!! Make Over $200 per day in Autopilot !!!!! pb=VlG\q,6 |
|---|
| !!!!! Make Over $200 per day in Autopilot !!!!! pb=VlG\q,6 [wiadomość #5764] |
pią, 28 grudzień 2007 12:51 |
Get Rich Today
Wiadomości: 4
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Insider Reveals Secret Traffic Arbitrage Tactics Making Over $9,547 a Day
Why Complain About Rising Adwords and Pay Per Click Costs When They Can Make
You Rich Instead? Discover the Astonishing traffic story That Has Been Kept
Secret Until Now...
http://www.mfawn.com/payloadrb.html
w1jY&DI^(d
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: MI5 Have Systematically Destroyed My Life (32558) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: MI5 Have Systematically Destroyed My Life (32558) [wiadomość #5760] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 13:22 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Have Systematically Destroyed My Life
This is getting depressing. From the feedback Ive received, the recipients
of these faxes are tired of hearing my complaints, and in truth I am tired
of sending them. The reason I havent yet ceased sending faxes is because I
cannot think of any other effective means of replying to MI5s actions
against me, and I feel I have to do something to try to defend
myself. Three/four years ago I got the MI5 harassment out of my system by
posting about it on Internet newsgroups, and for a few months this tactic
was quite effective - I received (and indeed still do today) support from
newsgroup regulars, and felt I could make my voice heard and break the MI5
monopoly on access to the British media. But that was years ago, and today
nobody gives a tinkers cuss about my internet posts - so I have sought to
escalate matters by communicating directly with the politicians who
allegedly say how this country is supposed to be run.
Of course, its quite expensive to keep up a campaign of fax messages for
many weeks. Each set of faxes takes approx 50 hours to send over the
weekend, and costs perhaps 35. My phone bill for the last quarter was
350. These figures are naturally insignificant compared to what MI5 have
been spending against me over a similar period. It also takes a lot of
time and energy to create a new article every week, and try and find new
and fresh aspects and viewpoints on MI5s persecution of me. I am beginning
to run out of both new topics and energy to write these articles.
So I have a suggestion to put before the MI5 persecutors who have been
wrecking my life since 1990. In a few days time I will be going on holiday
to Poland and Germany, for a couple of weeks. Previously, almost every
time I have travelled by plane, or gone anywhere on holiday, the MI5
"wreckers" have been most assiduous in destroying these trips. My
suggestion is; if MI5 leave me alone on this next trip, I will cease
transmitting these articles. If, however, there are any clear instances of
harassment (and I am very capable of recognising MI5 harassment when I see
it), then I will make public these instances and publish any recordings I
may make of them, and, unwillingly and unhappily, continue the articles.
Read about the MI5 Persecution on the Web
Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my elected representative, as ever
refuses to help.
MI5 Refuse to Allow me to have a Normal Life
Its kind of difficult to contemplate having a normal existence when you
know your entire house is bugged from top to bottom, for audio and, very
unpleasantly, video; when your employment is systematically destroyed,
over and over again; when every time you leave the country your travel is
disrupted by MI5 plants on the plane yelling abuse at you..... you get the
idea. I would like to have some semblance of a normal life, like my Polish
and English friends do. But MI5 have made this impossible, and they have
leached massive resources from the taxpayer to institute a life not worthy
of the name on me.
A few years ago MI5 were very open about their aims in persecuting
me. They were shouting "suicide" at me, both in Canada where I lived at
the time, and during my occasional visits to London. You cant get much
clearer than that. There have been instances as recently as a few weeks
ago of this intention being voiced by their side; on 15 April 1999, a
woman at the next ticket counter at the Royal Festival Hall said;
"it would kill it, you know, it would just be overkill... they can't stop
can they"
meaning that "they" were trying to "kill it" i.e. me and they "cant
stop". The audio file is at;
I wonder why they "cant stop". Nobody (who doesnt know already) believes
my claims - so what difference would it make, if they were to
"stop" persecuting me? Perhaps what this persons remarks indicates, is the
depth of the obsession MI5 have with this case. They have chosen at random
a person from the general population, and done their worst to ruin my
life. What is wrong with these people, that they persecute a national of
the country whose citizens they are supposed to protect?
No Chance of a Harassment-Free Job
Since the harassment started in 1990 I have had three jobs, the first near
Guildford, the second in Oxford, and the third overseas in Canada. All
three jobs have been systematically destroyed by MI5. It is so ironic that
MI5 employs a team of agents, each well compensated for their efforts, to
persecute just one person paid a mere fraction of what they get for their
"work". In fact, it is a joke that MI5 is allocated resources for this
sort of effort. If this area of government were run along commercial lines
then MI5 would be very rapidly closed down, they produce nothing of any
value, instead spending their time obsessed with the bugging and
surveillance of their former employees like Shayler, dangerous subversives
like Straw and Mandelson, and "threats to national security" like yours
truly.
Applying for my first post university job
When I was applying for my first post-university job in the closing months
of 1990, I found at two or three job interviews that MI5 had got there
ahead of me. Interviewers knew what words to repeat from what had been
said at my home recently; MI5 had supplied them with words to hurt me, and
the "British secret police" were trying to wreck my job search and
discourage me from joining the world of work. This and the continuing
harassment in the media and by the public meant that the search for a job
took very much longer than it would ordinarily be expected to take for a
person with my qualifications.
With my first job near Guildford came the knowledge that MI5 were doing
everything possible to make me lose the job. Despite their efforts I
managed to stay in work for ten unhappy months, during which they made
very clear to me that they were bugging my workplace, my accomodation in
Woking, my car, my home..... and they also made clear that they had "got
to" my employer in Guildford.
Employment with Oxford
I was able to find a new job, with Oxford Computer Training Services (now
ARIS/Oxford), quite quickly. But it became very clear, very quickly, that
MI5 were treating this job the same as the first; they tried to get the
other employees and in particular the managers to attack me. It was
plainly MI5s intention that I be sacked fro this job. But I was not
sacked; instead, after almost a year of abuse from OCTS managers, I was
forced to seek medical help, and had to take two months off for medical
leave. OCTS MD Hugh Simpson-Wells was motivated in keeping me on by the
fear that if he sacked me, then I would take him to court for the
treatment OCTS managers had meted out to me during 1992.
Emigration to Canada
When I emigrated to Canada in 1994, I did think that perhaps MI5 would
leave me alone, given that I had made the effort to leave the UK and try
to find a new life overseas. I could not see any reason why they would
continue to harass me over in Canada. But clearly the MI5 agents had their
salaries to think about, since continue to harass me they most certainly
did, at my home in Ottawa, and by getting fellow employees to speak
against me, as had happened with previous jobs in the UK.
MI5 are denying me a future in work
Former Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall John Alderson had this to say
regarding MI5's activities;
"MI5 is not under the same restraints as the police. They infiltrate
organisations, people's jobs and lives. They operate almost like a
cancer."
Currently I am on disability, and I can see that MI5 are denying me a
future in work. It would be an insult to logic for me to return to work
and find a job, in the knowledge that an entire team of MI5 agents, paid
in total many times what I would be earning, would have the objective of
seeing me "done down" in the employment, and ejected from the place of
work. This situation is completely wrong and nonsensical - I would very
much like to have a job, but MI5 are preventing me from even thinking
about returning to work. The culture of secrecy in MI5/MI6 means there is
no objective oversight of their expenditure, when external oversight and
greater transparency might lead to wasteful and illogical operations such
as that against me being shelved.
Watched and Harassed at my Home and Accommodation
As you will know if you have been reading these articles, MI5 have watched
and harassed me at my home, and at every accommodation Ive had since
1990. Theyve also watched me at neighbours houses in London, and at
short-term accommodation such as hotels and bed-and-breakfasts. They have
used the "words" gained from these watching activities against me, by
passing these words on to other people such as OCTS managers for them to
make clear that I am being watched where I live.
Harassed at rented rooms in Oxford in 1992
This was at its worst in 1992 in Oxford, where during the week I lived at
rented accommodation in Oxford, and at weekends returned to my parents
home in London. I was being severely harassed by managers at my place of
work, OCTS; and it was clear from the things they said that they were
being supplied by MI5 with details of my home life, that they were being
supplied with words to repeat at me.
In 1992 I moved house in Oxford many times, living at a total of five
rented accommodations in ten months. In January I started off living in a
rented room at Headington near the ring road / A40 intersection; then when
it became clear that house was being bugged, moved to a rented room in
Botley, some miles away. It was at the house in Botley that I had an
"interactive watching" experience with Martyn Lewis while he was reading
the news; I threw a term of abuse at him; he first flinched, then gave a
gsult of what I had just said, he was no longer "on my side".
So I moved house again. This time to a place in Cowley, near the Rover car
works, where I stayed for a few weeks. Because of continuing harassment at
work, I soon moved from this accommodation, to yet another rented room on
Iffley Road. By this time I was very ill and being abused continuously at
work. Again, MI5 followed me to the rented room on Iffley Road, and
created new instances of "newscaster watching". There was a television in
the room which I watched, and as you can guess the newscasters got at me
when I was watching the television. Also once I was assaulted, if thats
the word for what happened, on leaving the house; a youth grabbed me by
the coat lapels, roughed me up a bit with various terms of abuse. I did
not report this assault to the police, because what was happening to me at
work was very much worse, and nobody seemed to think that that was worthy
of being reported to the police. Later that day at work, Alex G, a fellow
employee, said "I heard he was assaulted".... I had not told anyone at
work about the incident that morning..... so once again it was made very
clear that MI5 were watching my rented accommodation and giving
information about what was going on there to managers at work.
So I moved house yet again in late autumn 1992, this time to a rented room
in a large house on Woodstock Road. I stayed there for several weeks as
the situation at work deteriorated due to OCTS managers abuse, until I was
forced to take sick leave from work for two months and attend hospital as
an outpatient; at which point I gave notice on the room, and returned to
London.
MI5 continued to harass me after the diagnosis of serious illness was
made. As reported previously, they harassed me on a flight to Spain in
December 1992; and in 1993, when I returned to live and work in Oxford,
they again bugged my rooms, as well as my workplace, although the
intensity of the harassment was very much less than in 1992.
Watched, followed and harassed in Canada
It dismayed me to find that MI5 would not leave me alone after I had
settled in Canada. In January 1995 I rented an apartment at the Bayshore
complex in Ottawas west end. For some weeks there was no sign of the
"buggers". But then it started all over again. They first bugged my car,
which had a car alarm installed - the alarm went off two or three times in
a single evening, and the following day gave a signal that the car had
been broken into. Then they bugged my apartment, and in particular they
installed bugs on the phone line in my apartment.
In September 1995 I moved to a new apartment in Ottawas Bytown Market
area, the restaurant and entertainment heart of Canadas capital. This
proved a serious mistake. In the west end I had been fairly distant from
the centre of town where MI5 concentrated their efforts at turning people
against me. In the Market area it was much easier for the persecutors to
motivate people to harass me, and over the next couple of years there were
frequent instances of harassment by the general public.
From 1995 I had some Polish friends in Ottawa, and as the reader can
guess, MI5 have spent much effort trying to break up this friendship. They
supplied various things about my home life to these friends, for example
where I was living in the Market, directly over the road were the studios
of a music radio station, which you had to "look up" to see; and MI5 told
these friends that I was "looking up" to see the radio station; so the
friends then replayed these words back to me, that I was "looking up". MI5
have also made various sexual slanders against me, and these friends also
unwittingly replayed some of the words they had been imprinted with by the
MI5 persecutors.
MI5 Will Never Allow Me to have a Normal Life
I have heard many excuses as to why MI5 continuously prevent me from
having a normal life. We are told that MI5 are defending the country
against a tere to zero.
When I have travelled abroad, they always put their people on the flights,
on the journeys I undertake, to continue the harassment, so that I am put
off further overseas travel, and chained to my home in London. Yet even
this is illogical, because when I lived in Canada, they would still put
people on flights back to the UK.... and what possible reason would they
have for doing that? Perhaps the truest words to describe the MI5
persecution is that reason has nothing to do with their activities - sane
people do not behave in the way the MI5 British Secret Police have been
doing.
Summer 1999 - more MI5 harassment?
In only a few days time I will be going to Europe again. This time I have
deliberately chosen to travel by a non-UK airline; so we will see if they
put their paid agents on this foreign carrier, we will see if they try to
harass me on this non-British flight.
If they do harass me on this trip to Europe, or if they resume the
harassment in London after I return home, then I will continue to report
their activities in these faxes. As I said at the beginning of this
article, I would very much like to not have to send these articles any
more, but that is not my decision to make - it is entirely up to MI5 to
cease their pointless persecution of me, once and for all.
32558
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: No Justice for the Victims of MI5 (30375) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: No Justice for the Victims of MI5 (30375) [wiadomość #5759] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 12:40 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 11 June, 1999
Harassment in a pub in Clapham, Tuesday lunchtime
Once a month, or once every other month, I meet a Polish friends of mine
who lives in Clapham North, and sometimes we go to a particular pub near
where he lives. The last time was some two months ago; I did not have my
minidisc-walkman with me, and consequently was seriously harassed by
people MI5 had instructed to harass me, in the pub.
This Tuesday, 8 June 1999, we again went to the same pub for a pre-meal
drink. This time I did have my minidisc-walkman with me. As you can guess,
we were followed into the pub by a couple of young people (Im getting
older and older - isnt it funny how the MI5 agents all look young these
days?). They started talking about my situation, in particular some travel
I had booked the previous day. Unfortunately, they were talking fairly
quietly, and my minidisc didnt pick up their speech.
MI5s schizophrenic reasoning is that simultaneously I am very important
and worthy of their acts of persecution, and I am also totally unimportant
and their abuse of me "doesnt matter". Perhaps they should test their
agents and managers for obsessive personalities or psychotic features in
the same way as employees are drug-tested. MI5 might lose their "worst
cases" employees if some psychological testing were applied to their
recruitment procedure.
Toothless Watchdogs. What a Surprise.
Recently I have been engaging in communications with two watchdogs, the
Security Service Tribunal which deals with complaints against the security
service (and always clears MI5 of any wrongdoing), and the Data Protection
Registrar, which is mandated to investigate misuse of personal data held
on computer.
In a letter to Nick Brooks, Security Service Tribunal secretary, dated 20
April, I asked him if the Tribunal, as an allegedly independent body, had
the means to investigate complaints against MI5 other than asking MI5 to
themselves investigate complaints. To my disappointment, his reply two
weeks later answered the question only indirectly, in the
negative. Whatever the reader might think of the merits of the case I have
been putting before you in faxed articles this last year and half, you
will surely recognise that it is a significant anomaly for the Tribunal to
have no independent means of investigating complaints, particularly given
the view expressed even by previous home secretaries that the security
services are untrustworthy.
MI5 Persecution: No Justice for the Victims of MI5
In a previous article I detailed the similarities between the current MI5
Persecution in England, and other historical instances of similar
persecution, notably that by the Nazi Germans in the thirties and
forties. The Germans persecuted first the mentally ill, the epileptics and
those suffering from schizophrenia, then moved on to racial groups; in
todays Britain the persecution is again directed at those with mental
illness, which the British in their cowardice find easier than taking on
racial groups as the Germans did. But just as in Thirties Germany there
was no recourse against a malign and omnipotent state, so the MI5 Secret
Police in the modern British Fascist State allow no justice for their
victims.
No Recourse Against the Security Services Illegal Harassment
It has become apparent to me over the last nine years just how loaded the
dice are in todays Britain, a fundamentally fascist country which
masquerades as a democracy. Britain is a democracy in name only; the
Establishment, the defence and MI5 secret police are always there,
regardless of which party has been voted into power most recently - and
from "New Labours" conduct in office one finds it difficult to tell them
apart from Old Tories, in their crackdowns on the sick and vulnerable in
society.
In thirties Germany the victims of the Nazi regime had no legal recourse
against their State oppressors; and in todays Fascist British state, the
victims of the Establishment and its MI5 Secret Police similarly have no
recourse against the illegal state-funded and organised oppression. There
is supposed to be a mechanism for dealing with MI5 crimes, in the shape of
the Security Service Tribunal and Commissioner; yet these have never found
favour of a plaintiff. One might as well ask the Nazi SS to investigate
crimes against epileptics or Jews as ask the Security Service Tribunal to
investigate MI5 crimes against British citizens; it is quite obvious what
the answer is going to be, regardless of what you say to them, and what
evidence you provide. The Tribunal and Commissioner are a mere formality,
a whitewashing body to give the Secret Services a veneer beneath which
they hide their shabby criminality.
"Institutional Racism" and Bigotry in the Metropolitan Police
The recent inquiry into the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence found clear
evidence of systematic and deliberate racism in the Metropolitan Police,
which cannot have surprised anyone. Commissioner Sir Paul Condon accepted
a somewhat lukewarm definition of institutional racism as being
"unconscious". In truth, and this truth must surely be obvious to anyone
who has any familiarity or encountered the great British police, the Met
has not just "unconscious" racism, but very clearly "conscious" and
deliberate racism, of the kind that would have done Thirties Germans
proud. And it is a bastion of such open racism - when many other parts of
society are learning to live in a multicultural environment, the Met is
still living in the past in its attitude to the minorities.
But in addition to the systematic racism confirmed by the Lawrence
inquiry, there is also something much more relevant to this case, which is
systematic police bigotry against the physically and mentally disabled,
which I personally have experienced in my dealings with the police over
the years. You cannot expect equal treatment if you are mentally
disabled. I tried to make a complaint to the police in 1995 about the
harassment I had been subjected to for several years. As soon as they
found out I had mental illness, they refused to even talk to me. I tried
again in March 1999; the police made various threats to me, while ranting
about "your paranoid rubbish" in reference to the complaints expressed to
them.
The police refusal to do the job they are employed and paid to do is
extremely serious, particularly as this case is highly important, indeed
key to the whole issue of British self-perception at the end of the 20th
century and the beginning of the 21st century. Britain has lost much in
the last fifty years - it has lost an empire, it has lost its self-respect
and its identity as a people. If the MI5 persecution finally makes it into
the light and the Security Services are seen for the rather cheap bullies
their behaviour indicates, it will have a massive and harmful effect on
British self-perception in the new century.
Security Service Tribunal - Blatant Whitewashing
A few weeks ago I spoke on the phone to Nick Brooks, the Secretary of the
Security Service Tribunal, which is supposed to deal with cases of MI5
transgression. I asked him if the Tribunal had ever found in favour of a
plaintiff and against the Security Service. He answered that as far as he
knew, it had not.
I also asked Mr Brooks if the Tribunal had any means of investigating
allegations of criminal activity by MI5, other than asking MI5 themselves
if they had engaged in such activity. His rather circuitous written reply
states that the 1989 Security Service Act provides that "it shall be the
duty of every member of the Service to disclose or give to the Tribunal
such documents or information as they may require for the purpose of
enabling them to carry out their functions under this Act". Which is a
very round-about way of saying - "No" - the Tribunal has no way of
investigating MI5 crimes - None At All.
Setting up the S.S. Tribunal, and creating a Security Service
Commissioner, was really an act of falsehood by the government. It is
generally recognised that MI5 are out of reach of the normal criminal
justice system - the police, as we have seen, have no intesot answer to
the government; in a previous article I quoted Roy Jenkins speaking of "a
secretive atmosphere.... secretive vis-a-vis the government as well as
[enemies]", and a "lack of frankness" from MI5.
If the government wanted to, it could reform the secret services and
ensure they acted in conformance with the laws which have been enacted for
them in the last ten years. But apparently the present government does not
see any need to ensure security service compliance with the law. As noted
above, the regulatory machinery for MI5 is deliberately weak; the Tribunal
has no independent means of investigation, and it is simply a waste of
time complaining to the Tribunal or Commissioner.
Every so often, fresh revelations come to light of secret service
transgressions. We have heard from Shayler that MI5 bugged Jack Straw and
Peter Mandelson; we have heard from Peter Wright that MI5 plotted to see
Wilson ejected from office; yet so closed is the system of government that
the law is never enforced against MI5 when they "bug and burgle" everyone
from politicians to ordinary citizens.
No Justice from the Legal System, either
Britain has a civil and criminal justice system which effectively limits
many complaints from being heard. For a civil complaint to be brought
before a court, you need a solicitor willing to act on your
behalf. Supposedly it is possible to represent yourself as a
Litigant-in-Pthe basis of being "frivolous and vexatious" or "disclosing
no cause for action in law". This is exactly what happened to me in 1997
when I twice tried to take the BBC to court for spying on me in my living
room at home; my case was twice struck out, and on the second occasion an
order was made against me that I could not bring further civil litigation
against the BBC without leave of the court.
As the reader can guess it is quite impossible for a person with
schizophrenia, who complains about the secret services and media
interfering in his life, to find a solicitor willing to represent him in
legal action against the persecutors. I have quite a lot of evidence of
the continuing persecution which I have posted on the website, even if the
evidence is quite tentative and perhaps open to varying
interpretations. But I have tried several firms of solicitors; some of
them have acted unprofessionally and abused me; all of them have refused
to represent me. My psychiatrist gave me the name of the firm of Bindman
and Partners in central London, and I have approached them twice. On each
occasion they refused to accept my instructions. Plainly the problem with
Bindmans, which they have admitted, is their bigotry against mentally
disabled people; yet this is not just something that is wrong with
Bindmans, it is something that is wrong with the legal system as a whole,
since the legal system necessitates finding a solicitor willing to
represent you in order to bring a case to court, but it does not have a
mechanism for providing a lawyer in the case where no solicitor is willing
to take on your case. So the British legal system is such as to prevent
cases such as mine from ever receiving an airing in a court.
So much for the civil courts. But the criminal justice system is no
better. Two years ago the Protection from Harassment Act came into
force. But again, while the Act is all very well on paper, in practice it
is unenforceable in my case, since it would require Police action to see
the law implemented, and if the police cannot even be trusted to conduct a
murder investigation competently (in the Lawrence case), then what chance
is there of their investigating complaints against the Security
Service? Of course, it would be possible for me to personally issue
proceedings through a private prosecution either against MI5 themselves,
or against one or more of their media tools; but here we see the same
problems as with the civil courts, because first of all I would have to
find a lawyer willing to act on my behalf. Litigants-in-person do exist in
the criminal courts, but the Attorney General can bring such a prosecution
to an end by taking it over and entering a plea of "nolle prossequi"; and
I suspect that if I were to bring a private prosecution against either MI5
or one of their media tools, then this is exactly what would happen.
So much for British justice. But if anything the wrongs that have been
perpetrated on me by the British justice system are quite mild to what
others have suffered. Others have been wrongly convicted based on police
evasions and lies, and spent many years in jail based on false charges. I
should count myself lucky that despite the best efforts of the MI5 secret
police, I have not acquired any criminal charges or convictions; which
shows that for all their resources and influence, and the clear
imperfections in the British legal system, there are still limits on how
much subversion MI5 can achieve.
The latest in a long line of injustices
A comment I heard during the recent scandal of the police mishandling of
the Lawrence murder investigation is that "its not as if the police
themselves murdered him". This is not a particularly wise statement to
make about the case, since it could be argued that the four alleged
murderers were aided in their crime by the expectation that the police
would deliberately botch the investigation - which of course is exactly
what the police did.
But in my case, this would be a completely inaccurate thing to say - since
the MI5 secret-police have expressly been trying to nine years now to see
an end put to my life, either by having me incarcerated and my liberty
ended, or by forcing self-termination on me. It is exactly as if the
secret police "themselves murdered [me]", since that is what their aim is
in their campaign against me.
The public has heard of instances of police mishandling of cases, of
police manufacturing evidence, lying in court, extracting false
confessions to clear up crimes, et cetera. Various instances of
extra-legal activity by the secret services have also come to light in the
last few years. The unhappy truth is that what MI5 have been doing to me
for the last nine years is really nothing out of the ordinary for them. To
me it seems unbelievable that this sort of systematic campaign of
harassment, which thousands and thousands of people in this country and
abroad are well aware of, could exist for such a long period of time with
the media maintaining "omerta". But my case is not the first such instance
of persecution by the "British secret police", and judging by the lack of
any real controls on MI5, I very much doubt it will be the last.
30375
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: MI5 are Afraid to Admit Theyre Behind the Persecution (28192) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: MI5 are Afraid to Admit Theyre Behind the Persecution (28192) [wiadomość #5758] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 12:07 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 are Afraid to Admit They're Behind the Persecution
MI5 have issued a formal denial of any involvement in my life to the
Security Service Tribunal, as you might expect them to; but, more
importantly, the persecutors have never denied that theyre from the
Security Service, despite several years of accusations from my corner on
usenet and in faxed articles. I am not surprised that the Security Service
Tribunal found "no determination in your favour". I am however a little
surprised that the persecutors have refused to confirm my identification
of them; by doing so, they implicitly admit that my guess was right.
"No determination in your favour" says the Security Service Tribunal
In 1997, I made a complaint to the Security Service Tribunal, giving only
the bare outlines of my case. I do not think it would have made very much
difference if Id made a much more detailed complaint, since the Tribunal
has no ability to perform investigatory functions. It can only ask MI5 if
they have an interest in a subject, to which MI5 are of course free to be
"economical with the truth". A couple of months after my complaint the
Tribunal replied that;
The Security Service Tribunal have now investigated your complaint and
have asked me to inform you that no determination in your favour has been
made on your complaint.
Needless to say this reply didnt surprise me in the slightest. It is a
well established fact that the secret service are a den of liars and the
Tribunal a toothless watchdog, so to see them conforming to these
stereotypes might be disappointing but unsurprising.
It is noteworthy that the Tribunal never gives the plaintiff information
on whether the "no determination in your favour" is because MI5 claims to
have no interest in him, or whether they claim their interest is
"justified". In the 1997 report of the Security Service Commissioner he
writes that "The ambiguity of the terms in which the notification of the
Tribunals decision is expressed is intentional", since a less ambiguous
answer would indicate to the plaintiff whether he were indeed under MI5
surveillance. But I note that the ambiguity also allows MI5 to get away
with lying to the question of their interest in me; they can claim to the
Tribunal that they have no interest, but at a future date, when it becomes
clear that they did indeed place me under surveillance and harassment,
they can claim their interest was "justified" - and the Tribunal will
presumably not admit that in their previous reply MI5 claimed to have no
interest.
"He doesnt know who we are"
In early January 1996 I flew on a British Airways jet from London to
Montreal; also present on the plane, about three or four rows behind me,
were two young men, one of them fat and voluble, the other silent. It was
quite clear that these two had been planted on the aircraft to "wind me
up". The fat youth described the town in Poland where I had spent
Christmas, and made some unpleasant personal slurs against me. Most
interestingly, he said the words, "he doesnt know who we are".
Now I find this particular form of words very interesting, because while
it is not a clear admission, it is only a half-hearted attempt at denial
of my guess that "they" = "MI5". Had my guess been wrong, the fat youth
would surely have said so more clearly. What he was trying to do was to
half-deny something he knew to be true, and he was limited to making
statements which he knew to be not false; so he made a lukewarm denial
which on the face of it means nothing, but in fact acts as a confirmation
of my guess of who "they" are.
On one of the other occasions when I saw the persecutors in person, on the
BA flight to Toronto in June 1993, one of the group of four men said, "if
he tries to run away well find him". But the other three stayed totally
quiet and avoided eye contact. They did so to avoid being apprehended and
identified - since if they were identified, their employers would have
been revealed, and it would become known that it was the secret services
who were behind the persecution.
Why are MI5 So Afraid to admit their involvement?
If you think about it, what has been going on in Britain for the last nine
years is simply beyond belief. The British declare themselves to be
"decent" by definition, so when they engage in indecent activities such as
the persecution of a mentally ill person, their decency "because were
British" is still in the forefront of their minds, and a process of mental
doublethink kicks in, where their antisocial and indecent activities are
blamed on the victim "because its his fault were persecuting him", and
their self-regard and self-image of decency remains untarnished. As
remarked in another article some time ago, this process is basically the
same as a large number of Germans employed fifty years ago against Slavic
"untermenschen" and the Jewish "threat" - the Germans declared, "Germans
are known to be decent and the minorities are at fault for what we do to
them" - so they were able to retain the view of themselves as being
"decent".
Now suppose this entire episode had happened in some other country. The
British have a poor view of the French, so lets say it had all happened in
France. Suppose there was a Frenchman, of non-French extraction, who was
targeted by the French internal security apparatus, for the dubious
amusement of French television newscasters, and tortured for 9 years with
various sexual and other verbal abuse and taunts of "suicide". Suppose
this all came out into the open. Naturally, the French authorities would
try hard to place the blame on their victim - and in their own country,
through the same state-controlled media which the authorities employ as
instruments of torture, their view might prevail - but what on earth would
people overseas make of their actions? Where would their "decency" be
then?
This is why MI5 are so afraid to admit theyre behind the
persecution. Because if they did admit responsibility, then they would be
admitting that there was an action against me - and if the truth came out,
then the walls would come tumbling down. And if the persecutors were to
admit they were from MI5, then you can be sure I would report the
fact; and the persecutors support would fall away, among the mass media as
well as among the general public. When I started identifying MI5 as the
persecutors in 1995 and 1996 there was a sharp reduction in media
harassment, since people read my internet newsgroup posts and knew I was
telling the truth. The persecutors cannot deny my claim that theyre MI5,
because then I would report their denial and they would be seen as liars -
but they cannot admit it either, as that would puncture their campaign
against me. So they are forced to maintain a ridiculous silence on the
issue of their identity, in the face of vociferous accusations on internet
newsgroups and faxed articles.
Have MI5 lied to the Home Secretary?
In order for the Security Services to bug my home, they would either have
needed a warrant from the Home Secretary, or they might have instituted
the bugging without a warrant. Personally I think it is more likely that
they didnt apply for a warrant - I cannot see any Home Secretary giving
MI5 authority to bug a residence to allow television newscasters to
satisfy their rather voyeuristic needs vis-a-vis one of their
audience. But it is possible that the Security Service presented a warrant
in some form before a home secretary at some point in the last nine years,
for telephone tapping or surveillance of my residence, or interception of
postal service.
So the possibility presents itself that a Home Secretary might have signed
a warrant presented to him based on MI5 lies. Just as MI5 lie to the
Security Service Tribunal, so they might have lied to a Home Secretray
himself. MI5 and MI6 are naturally secretive services former home
secretary Roy Jenkins said, they have a "secretive atmosphere
.... secretive vis-a-vis the government as well as [enemies]". Jenkins
also said he "did not form a very high regard for how they discharged
their duties".
It was only a few years ago that MI5 was brought into any sot the
extraordinary thing is that British media organisations like the state-
and taxpayer-funded BBC take such an active part in the MI5-inspired
campaign of harassment. We have after all heard of MI5 trying to bribe
broadcast journalists; but surely there must be a substantial number who
are not bought or blackmailed by the Security Services, and who take part
in the "abuse by newscasters" of their own volition? The BBC is supposed
to be independent of the government of the day as well as the
Establishment in general. While perhaps it is childish to think that the
BBC is anything other than effectively state-controlled, the degree of
collusion between the BBC and the British Secret Police MI5 is something
you would not find in many countries. Individual tele-journalists in other
countries would have enough self-esteem not to allow themselves to be
controlled by their secret police - seemingly, BBC broadcasters like
Martyn Lewis and Nicholas Witchell have such a low opinion of their
employing organisation that they see no wrong in dragging the BBCs
no-longer-good name through yet more mud, at the mere request (whether
supported by financial or other inducements) of the British secret Police,
MI5.
And when challenged, these broadcasters LIE about their involvement, with
just as little shame as MI5 themselves. The BBCs Information dept have
said that;
"I can assure you that the BBC would never engage in any form of
surveillance activity such as you describe"
which is an out-and-out lie. Buerk and Lewis have themselves lied to their
colleagues in the BBCs Information department over the "newscaster
watching", but unsurprisingly they refuse to put these denials in
writing. Doubtless if the "newscaster watching" ever comes to light, Buerk
and Lewis will then continue to lie by lying about these denials. So much
for the "impartial" BBC, a nest of liars bought and paid for by the
Security Services!
It is obvious that the persecution is at the instigation of MI5 themselves
- they have read my post, and only they have the surveillance technology
and media/political access. Yet they have lied outright to the Security
Service Tribunal. Similarly, BBC newscasters Michael Buerk and Martyn
Lewis have lied to members of their own organisation. The continuing
harassment indicates they are all petrified of this business coming out
into the open. I will continue to do everything possible to ensure that
their wrongdoing is exposed.
28192
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: Molestation during Travel (26009) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: Molestation during Travel (26009) [wiadomość #5757] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 11:40 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution: Molestation during Travel
MI5s persecution of me varies in intensity. Since 1990 it has been steady
for perhaps 80% of the time; there was a notable quiet period in 1993, and
another quiet period in Jan-Feb 1995, as well as a hiatus in the first two
months of 1999. It puzzles me that they cease and restart, seemingly
without any logic or reason. But one aspect of MI5s activities against me
which is relatively predictable is this weeks articles topic, which is
Molestation during Travel. Almost every time I cross the Atlantic, go to
the Continent or even try to enjoy a holiday in this country, you can bet
that MI5 will be there doing their utmost to wreck it all.
This aspect of the harassment is particularly relevant as I will be
travelling to Europe again in a months time, with naturally the Minidisc
recorder in tow; so it will be interesting to see if I can record the
abuse which will almost certainly take place, either on the Tube going to
the airport, at the airport, on the flight, in the terminal building - MI5
have previously instituted instances of abuse at each of these locations,
so well see how much taxpayers money they waste this time, and whether it
will prove possible to capture their abuse on minidisc.
Read about the MI5 Persecution on the Web
June 1992 in Polands mountain resort of Zakopane
The persecution started in June 1990, and for the first two years I stayed
in the UK apart from a couple of brief day trips to Calais. By the summer
of 1992 Id had enough of being cooped up in England with abusive fellow
employees egged on by an abusive secret police service, and decided to
spend 10 days in southern Poland, on what was intended to be a holiday at
the mountain resort town of Zakopane.
Unfortunately the psychopaths of the Security Service were not willing to
allow me to enjoy a holiday in peace and quiet. The journey to Zakopane
was by coach from the meeting point at Londons Victoria coach station
(National Express) followed by ferry followed by another coach across
Europe. As we left Victoria a youth and his girlfriend started a loud
tirade of abuse directed at "this bloke", where the "bloke" was never
named, but it was very clear that the "bloke" was myself. The youth said
"they" had "found somebody from his school, and he was always really
stressed at school, a real psycho". Again, the label "they" was not
elaborated on, but it was clear that "they" = the persecutors from
MI5. The boy also said, "he was in a bed and breakfast for only one night
and they got him". By a not unexpected coincidence I had been in a B&B in
Oxford a week previously, which had been booked from work; other things
lead me to the conclusion that the company's offices were bugged for most
of the 2 1/2 years that I was there, so "they" would have known a room in
the B&B had been booked. After a few minutes of this I went back to where
they were sitting and asked where they were travelling. The boy named a
village in France, and the girl's giggling suddenly ceased; presumably it
permeated to her brain cell what the purpose of the boy's abuse was.
It is now very clear to me that MI5 were trying to have me incarcerated,
assaulted or killed on this trip across Europe. The degree of verbal
violence inescapably leads to this conclusion. When we arrived at our
destination, it became clear that many people, both in our tour group and
its guide, and among the ordinary residents of the town, knew there was a
movement under way to "get" me. MI5 employed many people and significant
resources for an action which they knew would only take a maximum of ten
days. A commercial operation would never have felt able to waste such
resources on such an unproductive and temporary action; only a
state-sponsored, taxpayer-funded entity like the Security Service would be
able to be so wasteful.
To give some examples of what happened in those ten days; I was walking in
some woods outside the town, when a Polish woman, looking at me, said the
English "shit" in a strongly Polish-accented voice. For the first three
years 1990-92 MI5 had been trying to force this word on me. Another
example; I was walking near my "hotel" when a mother said laughing to her
child, "a wiesz ze to prawdziwy wariat" which means "you know hes a real
madman". And the "TV reacting" happened there too; on Polish TV, a bemused
looking journalist said to another, "to jest sprawa Anglikow", which means
"its the concern of the English", in other words, none of our business,
despite what the English are trying to force down our throats.
Just before we left for home, I went with some others from our group to a
nearby bar. There a man shouted at me the same sexual obscenity which MI5
have constantly thrown at me these last three years. I think MI5 try to
justify their various terms of abuse by repeating them at me until I say
them, either while conscious or while talking in my sleep; and then they
seize on my saying those words to "prove" that the obscenities are "my
fault", et cetera. This rather stupid reasoning of theirs can actually be
seen as indicative of the psychopathic condition attributed to them in a
previous article; blaming the victim for the crime you inflict on him is
how psychopaths think.
Nor did the persecutors let up during the return trip. Returning on the
ferry over the channel, a rather insalubrious-looking guy talked to his
mates about "and you know this bloke, hes really mad you know, hes really
mad". On the National Express return coach to London, a group of five or
six young people started shouting at me. I slumped in my seat and tried to
avoid presenting a target, so they got ever more strident - "whats the
matter with you, cant you hear us?" One of the other people who had been
on the trip to Poland asked them why they were shouting at me, and they
said, "hes been to Cambridge", to which the co-holidayer asked them, "have
you been to Cambridge?" presumably thinking they were aggrieved fellow
students, but they answered "no". Even after I left the coach at Elephant
and Castle abuse continued; in the tube station, two kids started throwing
abuse at me; one of them said to the other, "and you know he works?" to
which the other answered "yes".
Immediate Aftermath of November 1992
As you will know from previous articles, my manager at OCG - ARIS/Oxford,
Mr Mitchell, induced a mental breakdown in me in the months leading up to
Nov/92. The diagnosis was regarded by the persecutors as a victory for
them, because few if any people give credence to allegations of harassment
when they are made by somebody suffering from schizophrenia. There is also
a bias against the mentally ill, an "institutionalised bigotry" in society
comparable to the institutionalised racism against blacks.
However, MI5 did not let up on persecuting me following Nov/92. In
December 1992 I flew by charter jet to Alicante in Spain for two weeks
recuperation. MI5 planted one of their people on the flight, a youth who
tried to start some noises that "hes a nutter". One of the other
passengers replied, "oh hes a nutter is he? oh well!" and the youth shut
up and said nothing for the rest of the flight. I think it would be fair
to say that the youth on the flight was embarrassed by what he had been
asked to do in making the flight "uncomfortable" for me; he sounded
defensive rather than aggressive.
My first trip to Canada in June 1993
Ive already covered this in a previous article so Ill just give a brief
summary here. On 10 June 1993 I flew British Airways from Heathrow to
Torontos Pearson Airport. On de-planing from the aircraft, one of a group
of four fellow passengers looked at me and said, laughing, "if he tries to
run away well find him". It was quite obvious that these four men were the
ones who had been harassing me since 1990.
I did nothing to apprehend them or bring this incident to the attention of
the airport authorities, mostly because this was my very first visit to
Canada, and the last thing I wanted was to get into a dispute before I had
even finished disembarking. In retrospect, I can see this was a terrible
mistake; I should have made every effort to detain and identify these
people.
Subsequently I have made numerous attempts to obtain the names of these
people from British Airways passenger lists, by talking to BA, through a
lawyer in Ontario, through a solicitor in England, through the UK police,
and also through private detectives in the UK. But all my efforts have
come to nothing. BA have told me they keep passenger lists for a period of
seven years, so they will still have the list for this 1993 flight. I did
not see or hear anything during the rest of my visit to Ontario in 1993
which would have lead me to believe that I was being watched or followed.
Journey across Canada in summer 1994
As I think Ive already said in previous articles I emigrated to Canada in
late May 1994. For six weeks between late May 1994 and early July 1994 I
travelled across Canada from coast to coast, starting in Toronto, visiting
various cities and ending up in British Columbia. I saw this both as
something of a holiday, and the chance to get to know a little better my
adopted country.
As you can guess, MI5 followed me everywhere I went during these six
weeks. In Toronto, where I started this trip in late May, I was spoken
about by one youth to another with the words "hes an idiot", to which the
other replied, laughing sympathetically, "good luck to him".
A couple of days later I went to Montreal and stayed at the YMCA
downtown. As you can guess (this is all so predictable, isnt it?) MI5
followed me there and bugged my room at the YMCA. Not only that, but they
managed to set-up an instance of "newscaster reaction" from a local
television station; while I was watching a Vermont TV news programme on
the set in my room, the woman reporter said, "well theyre just tired and
they want to go home", which sounds like a pretty unprofessional thing to
say until you realise she was trying to say of me that I was the one that
was supposed to be tired, and they (ie MI5) wanted me to go home to the
UK.
On the bus journey across the North American continent, it was quite clear
that MI5 were following me every step on the way. For the first part of
the journey they actually put someone on the bus with me, a youth who said
at me "that guys paranoid" and tried to incite other passengers to attack
me. I stopped for a couple of days in Winnipeg in central Canada, and on
leaving the town heard on the radio a female presenter ranting about
"insanity! insanity!". It is very tiring travelling such a long distance
by bus; I took the journey in two steps, each of about 36 hours; and it is
especially tiring when you know MI5 are watching you and harassing you
every step of the way.
When I finally got to Vancouver, MI5 instituted the usual harassment, in
very short order. I was surprised how quickly they were able to induce
hatred towards me in elements of the general populace; the Security
Service must have employed a number of agents and serious resources in a
very short period of time; and for no real gain, because I havent been
back to BC for almost five years, so all their "work" appears to be for
nothing. In downtown Vancouver a street person said in front of me,
"theyre all talking about him". For a few days I was staying at Pauls
Guest House (345 W.14th Ave); on the day I left, the owner Paul shouted at
no-one in particular, "hes going to Victoria" - which was quite accurate,
I was indeed going to the provincial capital Victoria on Vancouver
Island. But I had not told anyone at the guest house where I was going; I
had only mentioned to my parents back in England on the phone that I was
going away from Vancouver for a few days. Which leads me to suppose that
MI5s bugging of the phone in my parents house yielded the
"intelligence" that I intended to visit Victoria, and they had passed the
information on to Paul.
When I got to Victoria it was again obvious that the persecutors were
"doing their stuff" there as well. On the street I was identified as being
English, although I had not said anything so my accent hadnt given me
away; and returning by ferry to the mainland, I was abused by a Canadian
woman who said, "hes a nutter! you can run but you cant hide". During my
years in Canada I have never heard the word "nutter" on any other
occasion; I do not think it is part of Canadians vocabulary; so the
Canadian woman on the ferry, who was obviously talking about me, must have
been supplied with this word by the English persecutors. And once I got
back to Vancouver, staying at the Austin Hotel on Granville St, I listened
to a conversation in the apartment block directly opposite, and a man
saying, "hes paranoid, so thats as bad as it can be, so why are they doing
this to him?".
Holiday in the States, August 1995
By 1995 I was living in Canada, and in August I went down the eastern
seaboard to Florida and as far as Key West by car. As you can guess (this
is all so boring and predictable, isnt it?) MI5 followed me every step of
the way. I can see in retrospect that this must have been quite easy for
them as they had my car bugged, both on the inside to listen to anything
that was said and what radio station I was listening to, as well as what
must have been a tracker device installed to track it across long
distances.
The first city I visited was Philadelphia. In the old Congress Hall where
the first US Congress assembled, the woman guide started referring to my
situation, saying that "all these people in Europe were watching it", and
they were "a little paranoid" at this 18th-century experiment in
democracy. Also I had recently written a newsgroup post where Id described
a (female) poster as "wet-nosed" (implying "canine"), and a young girl in
Philadelphia remarked, "so he thinks were dogs?" There were two or three
more incidents during this holiday in the eastern States, including a
radio station down near Miami, showing "they" had tracked me all the way
there, and were bugging the inside of my car; but I didnt record the
details and Ive forgotten some of it now. Also down in Miami Beach a
French tourist in a lift expressed support for me with the words, "cest
incroyable" ie. its incredible, meaning that MI5s well-known actions
against me were beyond belief.
To go back a bit, in about May/June 1995 Id visited New York, again by
car, and was insulted several times by people using the same words that
had been used against me in England. In Central Park, and elderly
Englishman (not a real gentleman - but then the Engish view of themselves
as "gentlemen" etc is quite laughable) looked at me and said "idiot". And
while I was eating in a streetside restaurant a New York youth started
laughing and said something like, "I cant believe it, hes actually here" -
I think that was because I had had an expressed wish to visit New York for
some years before this, although after this visit I wont be going there
again for a very long time.
Visit to Poland December 1995/January 1996
In December 1995 I flew (BA again, unfortunately - every time Ive flown BA
one of these incidents has happened, presumably MI5 is happier setting up
harassment on British-domiciled carrier) from Montreal to Berlin and
travelled on to Poland to visit family. MI5 naturally harassed me in
Poland during my brief stay. They followed me around and got Polish people
to take part in the harassment. In one case two Polish youths talked in
front of me saying in English (with marked Polish accents), "fucked up
men, fuck you". There were also other incidents which I dont remember too
clearly since it was some time ago.
The return flight connected through Heathrow, and in the transit lounge
MI5 again set-up harassment against me. In Poland they were talking their
abuse in English, and in London they set Polish people after me to speak
in Polish; they heard me on the phone to my father, and said "a wiesz ze
to Polski wariat", in an almost sympathetic, inclusive fashion
(translation. "you know hes a Polish nutter"). Once on the flight to
Montreal I was again set upon by two English youths, one of whom spoke and
the other listened. The aggressive "fat bastard" youth said, "if he wants
to be a wanker" (its my fault theyre harassing me, you see),
self-justification that "hes a nutter" (so we have to keep on abusing him,
because hes ill), as well as talking about the town in Poland where I had
been staying. He also said, "he doesnt know who we are", but as already
remarked in a previous article, that was at best a half-denial of my guess
expressed in internet newsgroups that the people after me were MI5 - if
anything its a half-confirmation rather than a half-denial.
These incidents are still going on. You can hear digitised audio files of
abuse on a BA flight to Berlin in 1998 on the Web at address
On this flight they were again attacking my mental health; "paranoid, hes
paranoid" and "nutter" are discernable. The last "during travel" contact
was at Ottawa Airport on 21 July 1998, when "Alan Holdsworth" the
psychopath MI5 agent, dressed as a vagrant, was pacing aggressively in the
departure area. In three weeks I will again be travelling to Europe; we
will see what fresh acts of molestation MI5 perpetrate during this trip.
26009
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: BBC Newscasters Lie & Deny Theyre Watching Me (23826) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: BBC Newscasters Lie & Deny Theyre Watching Me (23826) [wiadomość #5756] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 11:08 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution: BBC Newscasters Lie & Deny They're Watching Me
Central to the persecution campaign waged against me for some nine years
now by the Security Service is their use of the media, and in particular
the broadcast media, to make clear to me that I am under surveillance and
being watched within my own home, even by BBC newscasters while they read
the news. This is really an act of arrogance; MI5 and their tools in the
television and radio are so sure that they can never be caught, that they
have many times made explicity clear on broadcast programmes that they are
as capable of seeing me as I am of seeing the broadcast pictures. Even
when they have known I am taping the programmes they still carry on this
practice; for examples of TVand radio presenters caught "in action", see
the Evidence area of my website.
If you wish to reply to this article......
then please include your name and fax number! I provide the means for
recipients to send me their thoughts on the topics discussed, but ask that
you provide me with your fax number or email address if you require a
response. Also would you please send not more than one or two pages, if by
fax. Thank-you!
It started with a Newscaster, and it continues with Newscasters today
The very first incident in the story started with a reaction by an ITN
newscaster, Sue Carpenter, in June of 1990, almost nine years ago now. She
reacted to what she saw in my living room at home as she read the news. My
mother had brought an apple for me into the room, whereupon the newsreader
smirked and giggled, apparently finding this funny. I couldn't believe
what I was seeing. I carried on watching news and other television
programmes to see if presenters would show signs of "interactive
watching"; to my surprise, this happened again and again. Unfortunately, I
did not have my wits sufficiently about me to videotape these programmes,
and it is now almost impossible to obtain recordings dating back to 1990.
However, I have been busy recording everything Ive watched the last couple
of years, and the taping has yielded some nuggets, which you will find if
you point your Web browser at the "evidence" area of my website, whose URL
address is given above. Strangely it is not particularly the BBC who are
"after me" at the moment (with the exception of occasional fire from
Nicholas Witchell), but that supposed paragon of virtue and decency Jon
Snow of Channel Four TV News (he actually works for ITN), who once claimed
hed turned down MI5s offer of a tax-free salary. I will cover Snows recent
actions in a future article.
BBCs Hidden Shame
The first ever Usenet post (internet newsgroup article) on the subject of
the MI5 bugging / BBC watching occurred, as stated in a previous article,
in early May 1995. It is reproduced here;
Date: Thu May 4 18:27:24 1995
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: BBC's Hidden Shame
Remember the two-way televisions in George Orwell's 1984? The ones which
watched you back? Which you could never get rid of, only the sound could
be turned down?
Well the country which brought Orwell into the world has made his
nightmare follow into the world after him. Since 1990 the British have
been waging war against one of their own citizens using surveillance to
invade privacy and a campaign of abuse in the transmitted media in their
efforts to humiliate their "victim".
I suppose "BBCs Hidden Shame" is more of a wish than a fact. It may be
hidden, but the BBC and other media and security organisations seem to
have no shame whatever in their anti-social, not to say criminal,
actions. Nor do the general public, who seem quite happy to parrot the
vilest obscenities without much hesitation or apparently thought.
Martyn Lewis, Nicholas Witchell and the rest
Most of the harassment occurred in 1990-92, when I wasnt making any
recordings, and the BBC wont release copies of current affairs programmes
from that period.... so although I can remember there were many incidents
in that time, even many specifics, I cant dig up the actual programmes to
flesh out the bones.
This year, there has been at least one incident with Nicholas Witchell as
newsreader, which I have successfully recorded and digitized,
i.e. converted into a computer Quicktime movie file. This has not yet
found its way onto my website (Im a busy man, dontcha know) but you can be
sure I will let the readership of these articles know when that clip makes
it onto the web. The Witchell clip was recorded on Saturday 10 April 1999
at 7pm, and shows Witchell trying to restrain his features from collapsing
into a smirk. First his upper lip quivers for several minutes, then with
the non-excuse of a non-joke his entire face twists into a grin. It looks
as if he finds me so funny, that he allows himself to submerge any
pretence at professionalism in a sea of MI5-inspired sarcasm and
harassment.
The two BBC newscasters whose reactions to me I can remember most vividly
over the years are Martyn Lewis and Nicholas Witchell. I can remember
thinking years ago that Michael Buerk was also seeing me at home; and if
the other two are watching then there would be no reason why he wouldnt be
doing the same; but in all honesty I cannot remember a single clear
instance of his reacting through facial or verbal expression to me.
I can remember several instances of Martyn Lewis reacting to what he saw
of me, however. In early 1992 I was watching the BBC news with Lewis on a
small black-and-white portable TV at my then home in Oxford. I threw a
term of abuse at Lewis; he flinched, then gave a grin and made a comment
from which I understood that he had been on my side, but might have
changed his mind as a result of what Id just said to him.
And in spring 1991 I remember Martyn Lewis clearly reacting to what he saw
of me at my then accommodation in Woking, Surrey, by continuing to stare
at some fixed point near the camera after the news had finished -
presumably this is where the monitor interactively showing pictures of my
room was located.
Why would BBC and other Newscasters Watch and Harass Me, Watching Them?
This is a very difficult question, and I dont actually know the answer. It
is a matter of record that the Secret Services are very much part of the
Establishment. The recent exposure of the "MI6 Agent List" on the
internet, and its coverage in the newspapers, reveals how much MI5 and MI6
are recruited from the ranks of the Establishment. Obviously the
relationship is bi-directional; the Establishment influences MI5/MI6, but
the secret services (well, perhaps not so secret now we know who works for
MI6!!!) also influence the machinery of power and information
dissemination i.e. media in this country. So they must have a lot of
covert leverage with the BBC and ITN.
Some of this leverage is obviously through bribery. It is a matter of
record that MI5 tried some years ago to "buy" Jon Snow of Channel Four
TV. He turned them down - obviously they must have approached other media
people as well, and from the lack of other reports of people turning them
down, it may be presumed that some other journalists will have accepted
the sugared carrots put before them. Ironically, Jon Snow has been taking
part in the recent "watching" actions against me - but why he has allowed
himself to be used by the secret services is something which I do not
know.
Perhaps the Security Service uses blackmail to twist arms of journalists
into co-operating with them? I have always thought there was something
slightly odd about Martyn Lewiss demeanour. At the time of the Ron Davies
"rough trade" scandal it was reported that MI5 had known all about Davies
predilections and the sham of his pretence to be a happily married
man. Perhaps MI5 have been able to dig something up from Martyn Lewiss
private life to blackmail him into acting on their behalf? And if there
wasnt anything before the "newscaster watching" started then there most
certainly is something now.... once theyve started watching, the
newscasters will surely wish their activities to remain covered-up, and
co-operate with the security service.
"Newscaster Watching" Deliberately Constructed to Mimic Schizophrenia
Presumably this is the first case in history of television journalists
actually taking part in acts of real-time, live spying and reacting
against one of their viewers. What you have to understand, though, is that
I was quite mentally healthy in June 1990, certainly relative to November
1992, when after two and a half years of harassment I was finally admitted
to hospital as an out-patient. MI5 decided from the outset that they would
make me mad; they constructed the media harassment to resemble what would
be reported by a person with mental illness; and then they carried on
years of abuse to inflict on me the condition which they wished to use as
an excuse to cover up their abuses.
I sold my portable TV in autumn 1990 and stopped watching television
regularly. I realise now that this may have been a mistake. What I should
have done was to watch TV and listen to the radio, but tape-record
everything and make a note of what each excerpt meant to me. I would then
be in a much stronger position as regards to evidence that I am now. That
is what I am trying to do now, but unsurprisingly the TV/radio presenters
have stopped getting at me, now they know they are being recorded.
When I started publicising my case on internet newsgroups in 1995, I was
met with the disbelief one might expect to be accorded to a mentally ill
person who talks about "newscaster watching" and media persecution. Some
newsgroup participants thought I had started a "troll", an invention made
to obtain a reaction; one bright spark even suggested a group of
psychology students were behind the articles. But most people thought the
articles were symptomatic of derangement - and that is exactly what MI5
want people to think. MI5 chose me as a target because I was mildly
mentally ill at the outset in 1990, although I stress my illness then was
very mild in comparison with November 1992, and because they knew that
enough abuse would (a) make me much more seriously ill, and (b) once I was
more ill, they would "get away" with a harassment deliberately constructed
to look like the symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.
Martyn Lewis Denies & Lies, But Wont in Writing
In February 1997 I wrote to BBC Viewer & Listener Correspondence and asked
them to investigate the claim that their newscasters had engaged in
"real-time spying" on me. They replied that they had asked Martyn Lewis
and Michael Buerk whether they had engaged in such practices, and that
they had both made verbal denials to VLC, but were refusing to put their
denials in writing.
To me it looks as if Lewis and Buerk are happy to lie verbally but not in
writing, because written falsehoods would place them unambiguously in the
wrong, whereas they can try to talk their way out of verbal lies if they
are ever caught, or perhaps even deny the verbal lies completely? If they
lie without shame, then why would they have any shame about future lies
about lying?
BBC-VLC also said that the BBC "would never engage in any form of
surveillance activity" such as that described. Clearly Martyn Lewis and
the rest have lied to their own organisations personnel about their
criminal actions. So much for the "objective", "truthful" BBC, a nest of
shabby liars.
Summons against the BBC, for Nuisance caused by Newscaster Spying
In March 1997 I issued a civil summons against the BBC, seeking injunction
against further "newscaster spying", and token damages for what the BBC
had done to me until that date. The purpose of the summons was to try to
"smoke out" the BBC, since obviously I did not have good evidence which
would be necessary for either a civil or criminal case to be made against
them. My summons was worded as follows;
1. The plaintiff is and was at all material times residing at [home
address]. At some time prior to or during June 1990, persons of unknown
identity entered Plaintiff's premises and installed concealed television
equipment in said premises.
2. A campaign of harassment was launched against the Plaintiff by the
persons of unknown identity, which in part took the form of instigating
harassment by BBC TV newscasters (including specifically Michael Buerk and
Martyn Lewis) as they read news bulletins, by making direct and personal
comments to Plaintiff.
3. The campaigns purpose was to subject Plaintiff to great mental stress
and induce mental breakdown. As a result of it Plaintiff did indeed suffer
from severe mental strain in 1990-97.
4. In order to avoid the mental strain being caused to him the Plaintiff
has been compelled to stop watching BBC TV news. Defendant therefore
committed the tort of private nuisance, since normal use of home was
interfered with.
5. Plaintiff claims a permanent injunction prohibiting further nuisance,
and damages for nuisance suffered limited to 5,000.
Naturally, my attempt to smoke-out the BBC and its lying newscasters
failed. The BBCs litigation department sought to have my summons struck
out; and they succeeded in doing so, on the grounds of my action
"disclosing no reasonable cause of action". I was also prevented from
issuing further civil claims against the BBC without leave of the
Court. Apparently litigants-in-person frequently / usually have their
claims struck out with this wording, regardless of the merit of their
claims.
BBC Suppresses my Claims of "Watching by Newscasters"
BBCs staff magazine Ariel ran my advert "BBC Newsreaders Spying on my
home" for one issue in the Personal category on 8/July/1997 before it was
spotted and axed by editor Robin Reynolds; please see
webpage; http://www.pair.com/spook/evidence/plaint/ariel.htm
Clearly the BBC will not allow claims of its wrongdoing to be made public
in the media channels it controls.
On several occasions people said to my face that harassment from the TV
was happening. On the first day I worked in Oxford, I spent the evening in
the local pub the Rose and Crown with the company's technical director
Ian, and Phil, another employee. Ian made a few references to me and said
to Phil, as if in an aside, "Is he the bloke who's been on TV?" to which
Phil replied, "Yes, I think so".
The reader might think that mere "watching" by newscasters etc might be a
relatively benign happening. But it is not; it is part of MI5s framework
of harassment and lies. On many occasions the reactions of the BBCs
newscasters to me has been in the nature of sarcasm, implicit contempt and
abuse. This is visible in Witchells news programme mentioned above, where
he engages in abuse by laughing at me during his newsreading. It was
particularly visible in the early period of 1990-92, and as late as Autumn
1993, when during a Newsnight broadcast Jeremy Paxman interviewed a
football person about soccer hooliganism, and the interviewee gave vent to
an unsubtle rant about "theyre idiots, theyre just idiots, keep up the
surveillance". Paxman started grinning, showing he understood and was
taking part in the abuse being perpetrated on that programme.
Conclusion
The MI5 Persecution started with harassment by television newscasters, and
today harassment by TV and radio presenters still forms a key part of MI5s
activities against me. When this business started in June 1990 I was in
relatively good health of mind. Years of persecution by the secret police
and their mouthpieces in the state-run BBC and other media eroded my
health until MI5 achieved their aim of seeing me rendered mentally ill in
November 1992. The diagnosis which was forced on me unfortunately and
ironically meant that my reports of the harassment are disregarded,
because the mentally ill are second-class citizens in todays Britain.
Yet TV and radio harassment continues, albeit in a reduced form, despite
my taping all the programmes I watch, resulting in my being able to obtain
and demonstrate objectively on the website instances of media presenters
attacking me. Unfortunately these recorded instances are quite tenuous; I
might understand them, the presenters understand what it is theyre doing,
but despite many thousands of people knowing the truth of the "newscaster
watching", the omerta continues and they continue to refuse to admit the
truth of the matter. It is a terrible indictment of British society that
there is not even one decent person willing to speak out. I look forward
to the day when the truth does finally emerge, and the mass corruption
which has allowed the MI5 persecution to take place is finally purged and
the Establishment criminals caught and appropriately punished.
23826
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: Four Years of MI5 Persecution Posts on Internet Newsgroups (21643) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: Four Years of MI5 Persecution Posts on Internet Newsgroups (21643) [wiadomość #5755] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 10:38 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Four Years of "MI5 Persecution" Posts on Internet Newsgroups
For approximately the first three years of the MI5 persecution, from June
1990 until late 1992, I kept as quiet as possible, in the hope that by not
reacting, MI5s interest in me would decrease and they would simply go away
of their own accord. This is the sort of behaviour some people employ
against bullies; if the bullies arent getting a reaction, then they might
simply go away and victimize someone else.
Unfortunately, this tactic didnt work. The quieter I became, the more
shrill and hysterical the noise from the Security Service operatives. For
about two years I didnt watch TV news at all. Yet this only heightened
their obsessed fixation; they continued to follow me wherever I went, they
continued to induce harassment at work by managers and fellow workers, and
they continued to encourage me to commit suicide. They seemed to regard my
refusal to react as a crime which they would have to "put right" by ever
more extreme forms of abuse.
Finally, in 1995, I changed tactics radically. Since late 1994 I had had
accounts with internet providers in Ontario, Canada. I discovered the
cornucopia of internet newsgroups, on every topic from consumer
electronics, to politics and legal topics, and I discovered online
services such as Compuserve and AOL. In May 1995, I made the first posting
to the conspiracy newsgroup, on the subject of "BBCs Hidden Shame".
BBC's Hidden Shame
The internet newsgroup discussion, which has now reached its fourth
anniversary, started with an article in alt.conspiracy, which I reproduce
here.
Date: Thu May 4 18:27:24 1995
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: BBC's Hidden Shame
Remember the two-way televisions in George Orwell's 1984? The ones which watched you
back? Which you could never get rid of, only the sound could be turned down?
Well the country which brought Orwell into the world has made his nightmare follow into
the world after him. Since 1990 the British have been waging war against one of their
own citizens using surveillance to invade privacy and a campaign of abuse in the
transmitted media in their efforts to humiliate their "victim".
And the most remarkable thing about it is that what they do is not even illegal - the
UK has no laws to protect the privacy of its citizens, nor does it proscribe harassment
or abuse except in the case of racial abuse.
A lot of people in England know this to be going on, yet so far they have maintained
perfect "omerta"; not a sound, not a squeak has escaped into the English press, and for
all the covert harassment absolutely nothing has come out into the public domain.
Have the British gone mad? I think we should be told
At this point, I did not name MI5 as my persecutors. I was still unsure
that they were the ones responsible for the "psychological terrorism". In
followup posts however I did name them; and the persecutors have never
denied the claim; so I think my guess is valid. (The Security Service
Tribunal in 1997 have said "no determination in your favour was made", but
it is a well established fact that MI5 lies routinely to the Tribunal
which has never found in favour of a plaintiff, so no conclusions can be
drawn from this.)
This first post was made to alt.conspiracy, but further posts were made to
the UK-local newsgroups, in particular uk.misc but also uk.legal and
uk.politics (which is now called uk.politics.misc). Some time ago I tried
to take the battle to the Compuserve forums, UKPOLITICS (which is now
called UKCURRENT - current affairs), but my articles were censored by the
forum operators. Such censorship is impossible on the internet newsgroups.
Police Refuse to Act
I have complained several times to the Metropolitan Police, who have each
time refused to help.
From: Green <Green@guidion.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing Their
Job?
Reply-To: Green@guidion.demon.co.uk
Date: Sun Apr 7 21:13:30 1996
In article <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@torfree.net>
bu765@torfree.net "Mike Corley" writes:
>Last Easter (1995) I went into the local police station in London and spoke to
>an officer about the harassment against me. But I couldn't provide tangible
>evidence; what people said, in many cases years ago, is beyond proof, and
>without something to support my statements I cannot expect a police officer to
>take the complaint seriously.
This in itself dos not suggest that the police have it in for you. The old bill
operates on extremely tight spending limits forced on them by that pillock Michael
Howard, and without evidence, they often have higher priorities than chasing something
that cannot go to court.
I doubt that the police are actually being leant on, but they probably realise that if
they looked into this, they would be leant on hard. The met always stays away from
anything that looks like it has Defence, Security or secret service interest already,
because they realise that they are below these government agencies in the general
pecking order.
If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping on me, they would
show me the door without even looking at my evidence, because that bored desk seargant
with only five years to go before he retires doesn't want to start fucking about with
somebody who has incurred the wrath of Stella Rimington. He would rather deal with the
lost dogs and driving licence producers, eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss
off home at the end of his shift than have some high ranking spook having a go at his
boss and getting him a bollocking.
In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. Just remember that saying
about the enemy of your enemies.
Most recently, I wrote in March 1999 to Charing Cross Police Station
CID. They did not acknowledge or reply to my letter. When I phoned them
up, the detective Id written to treated me to a sadly not unusual display
of police bigotry, with an uneducated rant about "your paranoid rubbish".
It would be nice to think that such uneducated bigotry is something other
than wholly typical of police behaviour, but unfortunately that is an
illusion that is rapidly dispelled.
Uncorruptible Jon Snow of Channel Four News
From previous articles the reader will know what I think Jon Snow has
recently been watching me while he reads Channel Four News in the
evening. Recently I digitized a few moments of one such broadcast, where
his face twists into a smile, without there being anything in the news
broadcast to cause merriment. Here is a usenet post from some time ago on
MI5s "bought and paid for" tools in the so-called "free" press.
Peter Harding (harding@ermine.ox.ac.uk) wrote:
: I was at speakers' corner on Sunday. There was one chap who was bellowing
: about something or other, I don't know what, but one thing he said to
: someone caught my ear:
: "BBC, MI5, same thing."
Can't disagree with that sentiment.
Wasn't it documented that MI5 sometimes "bought" journalists and broadcasters?
I remember reading a report by some jouralist who had been offered an extra
tax-free income by MI5 to become their covert mouthpiece, and had refused.
............................................................ ..................
> : >mouthpiece, and had refused.
> :
> : It was Jon Snow of Channel 4.
>
> Was it reported in any of the papers?
It has been reported several times. The most recent was in Private Eye,
a few months back. As I recall they also wanted information from him;
journalists would be a natural choice for members of the Security Service
and the Secret Intelligence Service for information sources.
> It might be interesting to see what he had to say regarding their
> attempt to recruit him.
He was most concerned that many others would have accepted such an
offer. However, we can probably make an educated guess as to some of
those who accepted: Nigel West (Rupert Allason, MP) and Chapman Pincher
would come near to the top of the list.
--
\/ David Boothroyd. Socialist and election analyst. Omne ignotum pro
magnifico.
British Elections and Politics at
http://www.qmw.ac.uk/~laws/election/home.html
I wish I was in North Dakota. Next General Election must be before 22nd May '97
The House of Commons now : C 324, Lab 272, L Dem 25, UU 9, PC 4, SDLP 4, SNP 4,
UDUP 3, Ind 1, Ind UU 1, Spkrs 4. Government majority = 1. Telephone Tate 6125.
Corrupt Security Service agents steal millions from taxpayers
Money is of course a factor in the grand equation which is the MI5
persecution. It costs money for the Security Service to "buy" people in
the media etc. But that is only a small part of their expenditure of
taxpayers resources. Most of the expenditure is directly on the salaries
if the agents involved; and in this post I put forward the theory that MI5
are trying to draw out their involvement for as long as possible, very
cynically, to maximise their income and line their own pockets.
At each stage they have tried to pretend that I am something out of the ordinary.
Either I was very stupid ("he's an idiot") or very clever ("he's like a genius").
Either I was a threat to Western civilization (Levin once referred to me as the next
Hitler) or I was completely defenceless ("a soft toy").
Now, it should be obvious to any person with common-sense that I am not out of the
ordinary in any way. I have an IQ which is average for the Web, I am racially white
European, and there are plenty of other people with schizophrenia or epilepsy out there
who haven't been targeted for MI5 attention, so why me?
I think the answer is that the MI5 agents who harass me have cynically exploited the
situation by painting me as extraordinary in order to assure themselves of well-paid
employment funded by the ordinary British taxpayer. To put it bluntly, they are
stealing millions of pounds from the taxpayer to feed their own pockets.
This assertion is supported by the observation that it's the same agents who are doing
the harassment. Six months ago in a local hospital I was harassed by someone whose face
I had seen (he had stared straight at me aggressively, at the time I just thought it
was some nutter but it turns out he was one of "them") aboard a KLM flight a couple of
years ago. It's presumably been the same people most of the time. I've seen the way
contractors act when they don't want their positions terminated. Would these agents
really want to lose their well-paid employment harassing me? Presumably they are
promising their bosses a "breakthrough" (ie my demise) real-soon-now and have been for
the last seven years, while all the while these MI5 agents skim millions
off the taxpayer.
I wouldn't mind a job like that. Perhaps if I persecute myself a little bit, like
standing in front of a mirror and shouting mindless obscenities, do you reckon I'd get
a slice of the caky Service Tribunal. This year Nick Brooks, current
Tribunal Secretary, confirmed to me that he could not think of a single
case where the Tribunal had found in favour of a complainant. Here is my
usenet post from two years ago.
Subject: MI5: "It wasn't us"
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.legal
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
"The Security Service Tribunal have now investigated your complaint and have
asked me to inform you that no determination in your favour has been made on
your complaint."
Signed ER Wilson, Tribunal Secretary
Well that's a relief then. All that spamming for nothing eh. Gaw blimey, if
they say they're not doing it then it can't be them, can it?
In a recent letter to Mr Brooks I expressed the opinion that the Tribunal
were unable to fulfil their responsibilities in the face of MI5
falsehoods. Nevertheless, I do intend to make another complaint to the
Tribunal in the near future, despite the Tribunal appearing to be a
toothless watchdog.
Discrimination against a Unit Minority
MI5 have been very clear in their instructions as to what I should
do. They have openly shouted at me the word "suicide", and also from the
other abuse it is clear that they want my existence terminated.
This point is covered in more detail in a previous article. The following
post describes the xenophobic nature of MI5s campaign against me. They
have refined their bigotry down to a unit minority, yet they make use of
the discrimination against the mentally ill which is a feature of current
British society.
Subject: Re: MI5 says "Kill Yourself"
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.legal,uk.politics.misc,uk.media
References: <zlsiida.4248.3258FE24@fs1.mcc.ac.uk>
<53eeev$cmg@axalotl.demon.co.uk>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
Distribution:
iain@hotch.demon.co.uk (Iain L M Hotchkies) wrote:
>Indeed. If you've ever had a 'conversation' with someone suffering
>from florid schizophrenia, you'll know how difficult it can be to
>'argue' with them.
I don't have florid symptoms. But I'm in a difficult situation, because those
people who don't know, aren't going to believe, and those who do, they just go
along with the crowd. It's never a good idea to go against the grain, and the
grain here is defined by interests in the establishment and the media. Even
people who could say out loud what was happening won't, because then there's a
risk that they'll be seen as traitors and ostracised.
Usually this type of 'hidden abuse' is racial and targetted at a racial
minority within a country. You keep the minorities out of the good jobs, but
you don't admit discrimination exists. It happens everywhere, not just in
Britain. The persecution that is going on now is in reality a refined form of
racism. Instead of "nigger" it's "nutter", and abusing the mentally ill is
still socially acceptable today. In 50 years it might not be, but today there
isn't any social or legal sanction against it.
So really they've refined racial harassment down to a minority of one. The
words may be different, but the methods are the same.
21643
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: MI5 Waste Taxpayer Millions on Pointless Hate-Campaign (19460) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: MI5 Waste Taxpayer Millions on Pointless Hate-Campaign (19460) [wiadomość #5754] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 10:08 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 30 April, 1999
If You Intend To Reply, Please Read This
Please.... keep your response to one page!. Faxes over a page or two will
be deleted without being read.
Somewhere between 0 and 100%
The last few days there have been no clear recordable instances of
abuse. However, while travelling on the Underground, while walking around
near my home and going to friends homes, I am constantly troubled by
thoughts that those people over there might be about to get at me; that
the couple sitting in the opposite seats laughing are in fact laughing at
me; et cetera, et cetera.
A comment by a scientist to the BSE inquiry sticks in my mind. He
described the possible scale of the epidemic as "between 0% and 100%". It
might not be happening, it might not happen at all, to any discernable
degree.... or it might be total. Without clear recording, which seems to
have become impossible the last couple of weeks, there is no way of
knowing whether the harassment really is continuing, whether we have
entered a temporary hiatus, or whether perhaps it has perhaps stopped for
now.
But for the time being I think there arent any reasons to dicontinue these
faxes. I only re-started them six weeks ago in response to a resumption of
MI5 harassment; and I think I will need to be more convinced of absence of
persecution before I discontinue my complaints.
The Newscasters are still watching
In the last few weeks there have been at least a couple of fairly overt
instances of "interactive watching" by newscasters. I reported this in a
previous "MI5 Persecution Update".
These instances are really very rare compared to 1990-91, when there were
many dozens of such occurrences. Undoubtedly the reduction is due to my
practice of videotaping everything I see. Recently I had the opportunity
of showing this years "happenings" (Jon Snow/Nicholas Witchell) to my
psychiatrist, and he agreed that in both cases the newscasters were
expressing merriment without visible cause, and that objectively it might
be possible for my claims to be true - although of course other people
reported similar thoughts to him, and this thinking is usually a symptom
of illness.
Read About the MI5 Persecution on the World Wide Web
The March 1998 issue (number 42) of .net Magazine reviews the website
describing it as an "excellent site". Since August 11, 1996 over 50,000
people have browsed this website.
You are encouraged to read the web pages which include
a FAQ (frequently asked questions) section outlining the nature of the
persecutors, their methods of harassment through the media, people at work
and among the general public
an evidence section, which carries audio and video clips of media and
workplace harassment, rated according to how directly I think they refer to me
objective descriptions of the state security agencies involved
scanned texts of the complaints I have made to media and state security
agencies involved
posts which have been made to netnews over the last four years on this topic
Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my elected representative, as ever
refuses to help.
MI5 Waste Taxpayer Millions on Pointless Hate-Campaign
Recently I was talking to an independent observer about the nature and
purpose of the perceived campaign of persecution against me. The person I
spoke to, a highly intelligent man, said he was struck by the utter
pointlessness of the perceived campaign against me. He also said that, if
my theories were in fact true, many people would have to be involved, in
the surveillance itself, and in the technical side of the delivery of
information from my home to TV studios for example, if the "interactive
watching" were happening as described. He voiced these thoughts without
any prompting from me; but both I and other observers had arrived at
pretty much the same conclusions, some years ago.
I saw a team of four men at Toronto Airport in 1993
To carry out the surveillance alone, full-time, would employ four or five
men, or their equivalent in terms of man-hours. Each man would "work" an
eight-hour shift, so you would need at least three men doing the
surveillance, plus a connecting link / manager. An indicator that this
estimate is correct arrived in 1993, when I was accosted by one of a group
of four men at Toronto Airport; he said, laughing, "if he tries to run
away well find him". Plainly these were the men who had been involved in
the intrusive surveillance of me for the preceding three years.
On other occasions, I have seen the same man on two or three occasions. On
one such occasion, at Ottawas Civic Hospital in November 1996; he gave his
name to the doctor as "Alan Holdsworth" or some such; my hearing is not
very good sometimes and I am not sure of the surname, although I am sure
"Alan" was his first name. I saw exactly the same man again in Ottawa, at
the airport, in July 1998. Obviously, other people must be "working" with
this person; he would not be the sole agent employed in this case.
Usenet readers views on the Cost to MI5 of Running the Campaign
Here's what a couple of other people on internet newsgroups / Usenet
(uk.misc) had to say regarding the cost of running such an operation...
PO: >Have some sense, grow up and smell reality. What you are talking about
PO: >would take loads of planning, tens of thousands of pounds and lots of
PO: >people involved in the planning, execution and maintenance of it. You
PO: >must have a very high opinion of yourself to think you are worth it.
and......
PM: >But why? And why you? Do you realize how much it would cost to keep
PM: >one person under continuous surveillance for five years? Think about
PM: >all the man/hours. Say they _just_ allocated a two man team and a
PM: >supervisor. OK., Supervisor's salary, say, #30,000 a year. Two men,
PM: >#20,000 a year each. But they'd need to work in shifts -- so it would
PM: >be six men at #20,000 (which with on-costs would work out at more
like
PM: >#30,000 to the employer.)
PM: >
PM: >So, we're talking #30,000 x 6. #180,000. plus say, #40,000 for the
PM: >supervisor. #220,000. Then you've got the hardware involved. And
PM: >any transcription that needs doing. You don't think the 'Big Boss'
PM: >would listen to hours and hours of tapes, do you.
PM: >
PM: >So, all in all, you couldn't actually do the job for much less than
PM: >a quarter million a year. Over five years. What are you doing that makes
PM: >it worth the while of the state to spend over one and a quarter million
PM: >on you?
Those are pretty much the sort of calculations that went through my head
once I stopped to consider what it must be costing them to run this
operation. At the very least, a quarter million a year - and probably much
more, given the intrusive and human-resource-intensive methods
employed. Times nine years. Equals well over two million pounds - and
probably much, much more.
Its wasteful for someone with my skills to be unemployed
The wastefulness of the MI5 campaign against me is not just that of futile
expenditure on their side. It is also extremely wasteful for someone with
my talents to be unemployed and on a disability pension. I am highly
qualified in numerate disciplines, yet am unable to work, specifically
because of the MI5 hate-campaign against me. It is a terrible waste of
resources for a supposedly efficient economy like that of the UK to be
squandering the talents of a skilled and capable worker.
I made every effort to remain in employment for as long as I could, but
ultimately I was defeated by MI5s employment of massive resources
specifically targeted on my workplaces with the sole aim of seeing me
evicted from those workplaces. You might expect this sort of behaviour
from the Stasi or some other secret police force in a communist country
where labour is cheap, and the governments aim on seeing its citizens
confined; but for a supposedly free and efficient economy like Britains,
the wastefulness resulting both directly and indirectly from the Security
Services activities is simply criminal, and should never be allowed.
The international dimension means the costs are multiplied many times
overoer had any sense, then they have surely taken leave of them over the
last nine years.
Four years of persecution in Canada
The persecution re-started within less than five minutes of my arrival in
Canada, as documented above, and in the "frequently asked
questions" article on the website. The words, "if he tries to run away
well find him" spoken by one of the harassers at Toronto Airport are now
imprinted on my mind.
A year later I emigrated to Canada, intending to find a job and settle
there, hoping that MI5s interest in me might dim with time. I did manage
to find work there, but my hopes of avoiding Security Service interest
were ground into dust. As detailed above, I saw the same man in November
1996 and July 1998, both times in Ottawa. Apart from these encounters,
there were numerous incidents between 1994 and 1998 of harassment, of an
identical nature and in most cases using identical words to what had
occurred in the UK. It became quite clear to me that the permanent
surveillance and harassment operation which MI5 had subjected me to in
England was being continued.
For a team of four or five men to be employed overseas must cost a lot
more than if they operate in their home country. And for MI5 to continue
the operation for a period of over four years, continuously, must cost
many hundreds of thousands of pounds. This confirms my belief that the
state is funding the campaign against mehat the Security Service receives
current annual funding of #160M. Divided by 1850 staff, works out at
#86,000. But the unit annual cost of each "watcher" must be much higher
than this, especially given the frequently mobile and overseas nature of
their actions of the last few years. A very conservative figure might be a
little over #100,000 pa for each of a team of five people, or half a
million pounds per year. For nine years, so far. So the most conservative
estimate of the surveillance element alone is perhaps four or five million
pounds since 1990.
This guesstimate is of course theoretical - I am not privy to inside
details of how MI5 split their funding. But to take some other examples,
the cost of a US counter-surveillance specialist per day is USD
5,000. Even if the agents permanently assigned to me are not of this
calibre - even if they employ specialists when difficult work planting
bugs etc is encountered - their salary and support costs must still be
very high. The individual agents are doing well for themselves as they are
well-paid to exercise psychopathic instincts which in any sane society
would see them in prison; but the taxpayers who must fund this terribly
wasteful exercise are being "done" out of hundreds of thousands of pounds
each year.
It must be emphasised that the above estimates are highly
conservative. Besides the surveillance operation, it must carry a high
cost in man-hours to propagate covert slanders through the population; to
setup and maintain the "interactive watching" links to TV and radio
stations, which these organisations continue desparately to "lie and
deny"; and to induce antipathy in co-workers which would not otherwise
exist.
Why they are wasting Millions of Pounds on a "Nobody from South London"
As remarked in the prologue to this article, it is really most
extraordinary that the Security Service spends a chunk of its budget,
every year for nine years so far, on a meaningless campaign against a
"nobody from South London". That they are spending such a large amount of
money has been confirmed to me on several occasions, usually by oblique
references to "its costing this country millions". The supposed
"logic" behind the persecution is that MI5 wish to avoid their harassment
of me, and the involvement of the UK media, to be made public; yet as the
reader will appreciate that is a circular argument, "theyre doing it
because they want to keep it secret and avoid humiliation for themselves
and their country" begs the question, "why did they start doing it in the
first place?", to which in truth I myself do not know the answer.
Plainly MI5 with its rich budget can afford half a million pounds a year
to waste on a "nobody from South London". Some time ago I was talking to a
British surveillance professional on Compuserve who told me "this work
costs a lot of money and is usally because the person I am following has
done something (usually criminal) to warrant all this money and time being
spent." Yet in this particular case it is plainly not the "victims
fault" that the harassment is taking place. The hate-campaign against me
is completely the creation of the obsessive psychologies of the MI5 agents
who have made themselves my persecutors; it is obviously a
"personal" campaign for them, and for years they misuse taxpayer funding
to feed their insane, unnatural and fixated fantasies.
19460
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: Comparing the MI5 Persecution with German Final Solution (17277) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: Comparing the MI5 Persecution with German Final Solution (17277) [wiadomość #5753] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 09:41 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 16 April, 1999
If You Intend To Reply, Please Read This
Please.... keep your response to one page!. Faxes over a page or two will
be deleted without being read.
BBC newscaster Nicholas Witchell cant stop himself laughing
During 1990-91 there were very many instances of "interactive
television" where newscasters and other TV presenters saw on a screen
before them what was happening in my home, and reacted, frequently by
laughing at me. During this period I unfortunately did not record these
programmes. For the last year or two, I have been recording everything I
watch, and there has been a drastic decrease in such incidents.
However, on occasion, television presenters do still engage in
"interactive watching" and react to what they see. This has been evident
with Jon Snow of Channel Four News recently - a particularly interesting
case, since it has been established that he cannot be corrupted by money
(it is well-documented that MI5 offered him a tax-free salary and he
turned them down). I wonder what device MI5 are using to encourage him to
do the "interactive watching"?
On Saturday 10 April 1999 at 7pm, Nicholas Witchell on BBC2 News reacted
when he saw that I was watching the programme, and I have his reactions
stored safely on videotape. I have watched this tape several times and I
am entirely confident that my evaluation of his reactions is correct. For
several minutes his upper lip quivered in mirth as he attempted to keep a
straight face. Then finally his self-control evaporated through the excuse
of a weak joke and his face collapsed into a grin.
The strange thing is that I dont know why he was laughing at me, what I
had done recently to "deserve" to be laughed at. The MI5 persecutors
usually manage to invent some justification as to why people should laugh
at and/or abuse me ("hes an X", "it was so funny" etc), so Mr Witchell
could have been laughing for any number of reasons. Perhaps he found the
views I have been expressing in these articles amusing? I suppose if youre
paid enough money and ordered to laugh then even the most innocuous thing
becomes funny.
Jon Snow of Channel Four News cant stop himself smirking, either.
On 12 February 1999 I was watching Channel Four News presented by Jon
Snow. As usual, I was recording the programme, so that if anything out of
the ordinary happened, Id be able to go back and watch it again.
Now, Jon Snow, by his own claim, is uncorruptible. He says he turned down
an offer of a substantial tax-free salary from MI5 - they wanted to make
him their mouthpiece, and he told them where to get off.
So you will be most surprised to learn that Jon Snow "interactively
watched" me that evening, and on many other evenings. Approximately
fifteen minutes into the programme, he announced that the US President
would be making a live appearance at about 7.30pm; I looked at the clock
on the mantelpiece; and Snow saw me looking at the clock, and visibly
tried to suppress a smirk.
Uncorruptible, are you, Mister Snow? If not money, then why are you
watching me, Mister Snow? Are they forcing you to watch me? Cant you turn
the monitor off, Mister Snow?
Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my elected representative, as ever
refuses to help.
Comparing the MI5 Persecution with German "Final Solution"
It might seem offensive to compare the mass murder of millions of
civilians in wartime with the peacetime persecution of merely one
person. Yet the comparison has been coursing through my mind for several
years now, because the brutality of German intent to "sub-humans" is very
much comparable to the brutality of British intent to someone they
vituperate and term "not up to British standards". The methods may differ,
but the persecutors mindset is the same.
The Germans first targeted the mentally disabled, too
During WW2 millions of ethnic Russians, Poles, Jews, mentally ill, gypsies
and other minorities were rounded up and murdered in purpose-built camps
by the German regime, in the name of "racial superiority". Fifty years on,
the British Secret Police, MI5, instituted a campaign of mass
hysteria; but in their cowardice, limited their activities to one single
victim.
It is instructive to note that the early German "cleansing" effort was
directed primarily not at Jews, but at the mentally ill. The Nazis set up
the T4 project in the thirties to "cleanse" away 70,000 mentally disabled
people, including schizophrenics and epileptics. After WW2 the Jews with
their media influence used the reaction from the holocaust to roll back
anti-semitism in the Western countries; however, the mentally ill are
today still a persecuted group in the modern Western world as they were
under the Nazis (the current Jewish home secretary in the UK intends to
bring in laws for incarceration without any criminal charge for some
mentally ill people - he protects his own minority, but does nothing for
the other minorities in todays society), and this continuing bias forms a
central cause for the current acts of persecution in the UK.
Widespread knowledge of what is happening to the "un-British" minority
In both the German persecution of the thirties and early forties, and the
current British persecution, many, many people are well aware of whats
happening. There is widespread complicity through inaction of
populace; and in a substantial proportion of the mainstread population,
the persecution had/has widespread enthusiastic support; yet in both the
German case in the 1940s and the British today, the existence of
persecution is a mass secret which must be never admitted out loud. In the
recent Lawrence case this "secret bigotry" has been termed
"institutionalised racism", and that is a very good word for what the
British are doing today The persecutory attitudes and omerta regarding
them are so deeply ingrained in the national psyche that they define the
national mood
During WW2 many Germans knew minorities were disappearing, and through
inaction quietly condoned their government's mass murder of
"un-German" minorities and inferior "foreigners"; and in the 1990s,
similarly, many English people know what the MI5 British Secret Police
have been doing, and not only condone it, but actively take part, because
of xenophobia against the "un-British" unit minority that is the target of
"British" actions. This attitude by the British persecutors has been made
explicit through the words "he's not up to British standards"; the British
seem to have found their very own "untermenschen" to victimise.
Why these obsessive "holy wars" happen
This type of aggression occurs when the majority is threatened or
humiliated in some way, economically, militarily or culturally. In pre-WW2
Germany the threat was primarily economic and military, following
Germany's humiliating defeat in the first world war and the reparations it
was forced to pay. In modern Britain, one might guess that the majority
English who are behind the persecution feel pressured by the swiftly
diminishing status of Britain in the world, and the rapidly increasing
coloured colonisation of their country, which in time will see the ethnic
English a minority in their own land, and their more antisocial elements,
unable to reply to the obvious threat, instead project their aggression
onto another, weaker, unit minority
In both cases there is a whiff of "holy war" or irrational obsession with
the persecution. Certainly the German behaviour fifty years ago bordered
on the not-quite-sane, and the current British behaviour towards their
chosen victim is strongly tinged with a leave-taking of reason. And the
choices open to the victims are the same, since MI5 will never allow me to
escape them, "if he tries to run away we'll find him", just like the
commandant of Auschwitz telling the new arrivals, "the only escape is
through the chimney".
The Victim Will Destroy Us if We Dont Destroy Him First
The persecutors propaganda is the same. Fifty years ago the Germans said,
"if we don't do it to the Jews then the Jews will do it to us"; and MI5's
propaganda in the early nineties concentrated on their victim as a
"monster" aesome "untermenschen" minority.
"We are decent fellows" say the Brutal Persecutors
During the course of researching this article I read part of the very
interesting book, "Hitler - A Study in Tyranny", by Alan Bullock. This
volume contains a quote from Himmler on the "Final Solution";
"Most of you know what it means when a hundred corpses are lying side by
side, or five hundred or one thousand. To have stuck it out, and at the
same time .... to have remained decent fellows, that is what has made us
hard. This is a page of glory in our history which has never been written
and is never to be written."
In the MI5 persecution, too, there is a thread of deliberate brutality to
the sick and vulnerable, while the persecutors maintain that "we are
decent fellows". There is almost a conscious schizophrenia in the
self-attitudes of the Security Service operatives and those in the public
who they employ against me, which reflects the contradiction evident in
the German attitude above. On the one hand, they stoop to the lowest and
most base behaviour; yet at the same time, the MI5 operatives tell
themselves that since they are civilised British people, then surely they
must by definition be "decent fellows". Any indecency is made the fault of
the victim; "hes making us persecute him, so we need feel no guilt".
Yet the conduct is atypical of the way these peoples see their normal
modes of behaviour. Befslaughter was not typical of normal German
behaviour up to that point. Similarly, the current MI5 abuse goes against
the grain of British self-image as being "reserved" and "decent", since
they are using terms of abuse which are common among blacks and other
supposedly less-developed races, but not among the English.
Conclusion
The ultimate aim of both persecutions is the humiliation and physical
extinction of the persecuted group. The Germans did this in a very direct
way; the British Secret Police MI5 are acting indirectly and relying on
self-extinction of their target, because in peacetime and in the current
somewhat false climate of "political correctness" more direct methods are
impossible. If MI5 undertook more direct action the mass "omerta" would be
broken.
I have written this article with sincerity to show how a historically
recent persecution in another country parallels what is being done in this
country today. In both cases, the evil-doers are of their countries
establishments, and rely on widespread tacit support to maintain the
persecution and omerta around it. While the holocaust was undoubtedly the
greater evil, it is important to be aware of the fact that had the Germans
not been defeated fifty years ago, their plans would have gone through to
total completion. In Britain today no force threatens the "permanent
government" of which the Security Service forms a part; and it looks very
unlikely that the wrongs perpetrated by the MI5 secret police will ever be
revealed to public view, and the British secret state brought to justice
for its evil actions.
17277
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: Browse the Website (15094) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: Browse the Website (15094) [wiadomość #5752] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 09:12 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 25 March, 1999
If You Intend To Reply, Please Read This
Please.... keep your response to one page if you can!. Faxes over a page
or two will be deleted without being read.
The Usual Words
The persecutors-who-wont-admit-theyre-MI5 have been active again this
week. On Saturday 20/3/99 I visited Ravenscourt Park in west London, and
was verbally assaulted with the usual words, "something wrong with
him". This audio file is on the web at URL;
This afternoon (Friday 26/March) I was again verbally assaulted while
travelling by bus. The same sexual obscenity was thrown at me, and the
incident was recorded on my minidisc-walkman. Because of the deeply
offensive nature of the slander, I will not be posting this on the
website.
Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my elected representative, as ever
refuses to help.
MI5 Persecution : Browse Website
The March 1998 issue (number 42) of .net Magazine reviews the website
describing it as an "excellent site". Since August 11, 1996 over 50,000
people have browsed this website.
You are encouraged to read the web pages which include
a FAQ (frequently asked questions) section outlining the nature of the
persecutors, their methods of harassment through the media, people at work
and among the general public
an evidence section, which carries audio and video clips of media and
workplace harassment, rated according to how directly I think they refer to me
objective descriptions of the state security agencies involved
scanned texts of the complaints I have made to media and state security agencies involved
posts which have been made to netnews over the last four years on this topic
This article outlines what is to be found on the webpages, which you are
encouraged to browse for the complete story.
Frequently Asked Questions
Your excursion through the website starts with the "FAQ - Frequently Asked
Questions" portion. MI5s campaign of harassment against me has been going
on for almost 9 years, and its longevity and breadth is reflected in the
FAQ. Many thousands of people in Britain and abroad, including some
recipients of this fax, have known for many years of MI5s activities
against me. The FAQ describes the mass "Omerta suppressing its
publication"; we pretend Britain is part of the "Free World", yet the
British Secret Police, which is what MI5 are, carry on for many years a
campaign which politicians and the media know about, and rely on the
silent complicity of so many thousands of people.
The FAQs introductory article names those who are "in the know"; media
figures like Martyn Lewis, Michael Buerk, entertainment figures like Chris
Tarrant, politicians and many in the general public, "all united in a
conspiracy which breaks the laws which the UK does have regarding
harassment, and all completely uncaring for any semblance of decency or
elementary respect for individual rights.
Broadcast media play a key role in the harassment. The very first incident
in June 1990 was when a television newsreader reacted to what she saw
happen in my living room at home; such incidents of "interactive
television" are still happening in 1999. The same goes for radio stations
such as Capital FM. In spring 1994, Chris Tarrant on his Capital morning
show made an aside to someone else in the studio, about a person he didn't
identify. He said, "You know this bloke? He says we're trying to kill
him. We should be done for attempted manslaughter". Tarrant and Capital
have made strenuous efforts to avoid answering this charge.
Perhaps worst of all, MI5 have deliberately set-up many incidents in
public places such as tube stations, shops, cinemas, where they have paid
people to throw abuse at me. Since MI5 obtains funds to the tune of 160
million a year to fund its criminal activities, it has funds both to pay
its operatives and to "buy" media figures and members of the public to
take part in its campaign of persecution.
The Security Service are professional liars. They throw slanderous abuse,
yet they refuse to admit out loud that they are doing so. When challenged
about their activities through the Security Service Tribunal they lie and
deny their activities. They induce other workers and managers at places of
employment to take part in their campaign of abuse, presumably by buying
them in the same way they buy media figures.
Complaints, and Press Coverage (BBC Lies, MI5 Lies)
As you might expect I have challenged both the Security Service, through
the Security Service Tribunal, and offending broadcasters, to own up to
what they have been doing. And as you might also expect, all of these
people have lied through their teeth. Still worse, they have refused to
commit unambiguous lies on paper; they have couched their lies in
bureaucratic language, and allowed others to make false assurances and
tell lies on their behalf. So when their lies are exposed, they will then
tell further Clintonesque lies about how they werent really telling lies
in the first place!
On 6/Feb/1997 the BBC told me they would "never engage in any form of
surveillance activity such as you describe". The BBC told me Buerk and
Lewis had refused to put their lies in writing, but had stated verbal
falsehoods denying my accusations of "interactive watching" during news
broadcasts. Clearly Buerk and Lewis fear being caught and exposed, so they
hide behind their Viewer Correspondence department.
In March 1997 I issued a summons against the BBC to try to "smoke them
out". This summons was struck out as "disclosing no reasonable cause of
action", because I had acted as a Litigant-in-Person and most LiP summons
are treated thus. My case was arguable in law, so the striking out was
unjust.
In June 1997 the Security Service Tribunal wrote to me regarding the
complaint I had brought against MI5 in February. They say, "The Security
Service Tribunal have now investigated your complaint and have asked me to
inform you that no determination in your favour has been made on your
complaint." I think you can guess the contempt which I feel for the
Security Service Tribunal, who have never made a determination against
MI5, and act as merely a whitewashing body for the Security
Service. Unsurprisingly in May 1997 the Interception of Communications
Tribunal gave the same result.
The last few items of "Press Coverage" give details of mentions of the MI5
Persecution in various magazines and newspapers such as BBCs Ariel, the
Observer and .net magazine.
Evidence
Some audio and video clips of evidence have been recorded. My weakness in
this area is because most of the really unambiguous evidence would have
been obtainable in 1990-92, but I wasnt taping anything at the time, and
its very difficult to now obtain recordings from that period.
The audio clip "Life is so Hard" relates to harassment at my workplace in
Canada. In the latter half of 1996, I was sitting near to co-worker Mark
Lee, who kept coming out with words and phrases which showed MI5 were
supplying him with data from my home life. For example, I would say
something on the telephone at home, and the following day he would repeat
verbatim what I had said. When Mark Lee saw I was recording what he was
saying, he started to make his remarks more ambiguous, or make the obvious
ones out of earshot of the recorder.
However, during the evening of 12 November 1996, at home in my apartment
(flat to you UK-ers), I said "life is so hard, and then you die". A
nihilistic, negative thing to say, but quite distinctive. The following
day, 13 November, Mark said loudly, "life is so hard eh, and then you
die" followed by loud laughter. I captured this on my tape-walkman and the
computer-audio file is posted on the website.
There are a number of other audio files in the websites "Evidence" area
demonstrating the abuse to which MI5 subject me to through their paid
agents.
Also in this section is a very interesting article by journalist Bernard
Levin, which followed a meeting I had with a friend in 1991, and to my
mind describes in some details Levins "artists impression" of the
meeting. He talks about a "madman" who "bursts into tears, and swears it
is all true. And it is."
Internet Newsgroup (Usenet) archive
From May 1995 until the present day, this matter has been discussed
exhaustively on internet newsgroups. The most interesting articles from
the first two years of posts are documented here. This area is worth
reading since most of the questions which the reader would ask, have been
asked at some time or another by someone on usenet. Perhaps the very first
article posted sums it all up so succinctly;
Date: Thu May 4 18:27:24 1995
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: BBC's Hidden Shame
Remember the two-way televisions in George Orwell's 1984? The ones which
watched you back? Which you could never get rid of, only the sound could
be turned down?
Well the country which brought Orwell into the world has made his
nightmare follow into the world after him. Since 1990 the British have
been waging war against one of their own citizens using surveillance to
invade privacy and a campaign of abuse in the transmitted media in their
efforts to humiliate their victim.
And the most remarkable thing about it is that what they do is not even
illegal - the UK has no laws to protect the privacy of its citizens, nor
does it proscribe harassment or abuse except in the case of racial abuse.
A lot of people in England know this to be going on, yet so far they have
maintained perfect "omerta"; not a sound, not a squeak has escaped into
the English press, and for all the covert harassment absolutely nothing
has come out into the public domain.
Have the British gone mad? I think we should be told.
So how much deeper will the persecutors-who-wont-admit-theyre-MI5 sink in
their campaign of lies and intimidation? Each time I thought they could
sink no lower, they have managed to surprise me. You thought it could
never happen here? When the MI5 British Secret Police make their smears
against me, it is the corruption of the Establishment, which they are part
of, that is demonstrated.
15094
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: How to Identify the Persecutors (12911) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: How to Identify the Persecutors (12911) [wiadomość #5751] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 08:45 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 19 March, 1999
If You Intend To Reply, Please Read This
Please.... keep your response to one page if you can! I have had several
people faxing my article back to me, including one MP faxing back twenty
pages. Faxes over a page or two will be deleted without being read.
Theyve started again. Why? I have no idea.
Unhappily, the persecutors, whoever they might be, have started their
activities again over the last two weeks. Usually they try to blame their
activities on their victim, but this time they have stopped even
pretending that the persecution is my fault. Their verbal abuse appears as
gratuitous as it is vicious.
Last Sunday 14 March, I went for a meal in Londons Chinatown with some
friends. As we were walking down Gerrard St, a man shouted loudly, twice,
the obscenity which has been directed at me for some three years now. This
followed previous incidents where the same words had been used. It is very
upsetting to be verbally abused in this way and to know that the cowardly
abusers are guaranteed to "get away with it" because if you report it then
it will be assumed to be part of your illness.
Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my elected representative, as ever
refuses to help.
MI5 Persecution : How to Identify the Persecutors
Usually delusional thinking does not allow the perpetrators to be
identified, or the alleged persecution to be proved. My so-called
"delusions" are different, because I have several times over a period of
some nine years seen the same people, in widely varying places. Most
importantly, their names have been recorded, on aircraft passenger lists
and hospital register; and if only the police would do their job
conscientiously then the persecutors could be identified and this unhappy
story brought to a final conclusion.
BA93 Heathrow->Toronto, 10 June 1993
In 1993 I flew to Toronto for a holiday. On disembarking from the
aircraft, a group of four men who travelled together looked in my
direction, and one of them said, laughing, "If he tries to run away well
find him".
I was absolutely stunned when I heard this. I wasnt surprised that they
had followed me to Canada, but it shocked me that they had been on the
same flight, and that one of them had foolishly given their group
away. Unfortunately I was so stunned that I made no attempt to stop them
as they got off the flight and proceeded into the terminal. I did not see
these people again during my visit to Toronto. I do not know whether they
followed me, or whether they were only part of a larger group, some of
whom may have already been on the ground and awaiting my arrival.
Over the next few years I made a number of attempts, all unsuccessful, to
obtain the passenger list for this flight. British Airways keeps passenger
flight coupons for each flight; so if only the police would do the job
that is being asked if them, then these four persecutors could be
identified, and thus their employing organisation, which is very likely to
be the Security Service, determined.
These four men were, apart from the joker who looked the odd man out in
the pack, very serious individuals. They appeared to be in their forties
or fifties, and my impression on seeing them was that they might have been
former soldiers. Their campaign against me concentrates on how
"funny" their abuse is; but in this they are plainly lying, because they
realise how awful will be the damage to the establishment of which they
form part, if the truth about the persecution ever sees the light of day.
The riddle of "Alan Holdsworth"
During Oct/Nov 1996 I saw a doctor several times about an infection, and
on 2 Nov 1996 I went to Emergency at the Ottawa Civic Hospital and saw Dr
Worthington, who was then Chief of Emergency Medicine. I had to wait
several hours before being seen, and several people jumped ahead of me in
the queue. One of these was a grey-haired man in his forties or
fifties. This may have been one of the men on the BA flight in 1993; I
cannot be sure. When Dr Worthington asked his name, he loudly said, "Tad",
which is the common abbreviation of my name. Dr Worthington looked
puzzled, glanced at the sheet in front of him, and said, "but your name is
Alan Holdsworth isnt it?". (I am pretty sure his Christian name was
Alan; I cannot be sure of the surname). The man looked put out, and said
quietly, "yes".
Unfortunately, I did not follow up this incident immediately. Some time
later, I wrote to Dr Worthington to ask the name of this patient, but he
refused to give the name out.
I saw this person again two and a half years later, at Ottawa Airport,
just as I was about to leave for England. In the warm weather, he was
wearing a coat and woolly cap, and pacing up and down in a menacing and
aggressive manner. Presumably he thought he was pretending to be a
"nutter" and in this way was getting at me; my impression is that he
doesnt need to pretend, Holdsworth or whatever his name is is clearly a
psychopath and in a healthy society such a person would be locked up,
instead of being paid public money to exercise his psychopathic
instincts. But todays Britain, a country where the MI5 secret police are
given free rein and nobody dares raise a voice in protest, is not a
healthy society.
"He doesnt know who we are"
For some reason, whenever I take a British Airways flight, I get hassled
by the "persecutors who wont admit theyre MI5". Since this business
started, I have travelled BA three times; once in June 1993 BA93 (see
above), once to/from Europe during Dec 95/Jan 96, and once in June 1998
with my mother to visit her family. The last journey, I was abused by two
"plants" who kept repeating, loudly, "paranoid" (I have this recorded on
minidisc). Presumably British Airways gives MI5 the seating plans for
their flights, which allows MI5 to position their agents of abuse three
rows behind me, so I cant face them, and they are throwing abuse at the
back of my head. I have travelled BA as infrequently as possible; to
Canada, I usually travel Air Canada.
Anyway, lets return to the second of the three BA trips, and in particular
to the flight on 2 January 1996 from Berlin Tegel, to Heathrow, and
onwards to Montreal Mirabel. Id waited all night at Tegel for the flight,
and was very tired on reaching Heathrow. On the plane to Montreal, two
youths sat about three/four rows behind me and to the right, in the window
seats. One of them, a rather fat "asshole" to use the Americanism (it
fits), kept on going on about "this bloke", saying among many other
things, "he doesnt know who we are".
Now that form of words is particularly interesting, because from May 1995,
some 8 months previously, I had been vigorously denouncing the "MI5
Persecution" on Usenet. So if Id guessed wrong, then you might expect the
harassers to crow about it; which they have not done. If I had guessed
right, and the persecutors have been silent before and since this flight,
then they could either admit they were MI5, which would be a very serious
thing for them to own up to, or they could brazenly lie, in which case I
would report their lie, and since many people must surely know who they
are, they would lose all credibility. So they have remained silent; apart
from this one phrase on the BA flight, where one of their agents said, "he
doesnt know who we are". Note carefully that this phrase is NOT a denial,
it only appears to be a denial; since it does not say that my guess was
wrong; it only states the objective fact that I do not know the identity
of the persecutors, without giving any information as to the validity of
my guess. Which leads me to posit that my guess was correct.
12911
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: BBC Newscasters Spying on my Home (10728) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: BBC Newscasters Spying on my Home (10728) [wiadomość #5750] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 08:20 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 13 November, 1998
If You Intend To Reply, Please Read This
If you have any questions or observations you would like to share with me,
then you are very welcome to reply to my fax number 0171-681-1190. But
please.... keep your response to one page if you can! I have had several
people faxing my article back to me, including one MP faxing back twenty
pages. I do not know if he had anything intelligent to say in his 20-page
fax because I applied judicious use of the "Delete" key on my
computer. Faxes over a page or two will be deleted without being read.
MI5 Resume Hostilities in Response to these Faxes
When I wrote last weeks "MI5 Persecution Update" I remarked how quiet my
life had become. No longer! MI5 have restarted hostilities with a
vengeance the past week, in response I believe to the faxes I have been
sending to members of the House of Commons.
On Saturday 7 November I went to Clapham Picture House cinema to see the
film "Antz" (a very enjoyable film). At the cinema, I was verbally
assaulted by a group of teenagers with the words "still crazy", repeated
about ten times. There was a film with that name showing at the cinema,
but it was clear their abuse was directed at me. I do not look ill, so why
would they pick on me? answer, the incident was set-up by the
persecutors. One of the teenagers also said to another, "I don't know what
we're laughing at".
The following day, Sunday 8/11/98, I was on my way to play squash when I
was verbally assaulted by a youth who said "it was so funny", without the
slightest trace of humour. What he meant by this phrase was that was
funny, and they were trying to humiliate me. I have heard this phrase "it
was so funny" used at me before many, many times over the last eight and
half years.
Please Encourage Keith Hill MP to Help Me
I live in a bugged house, bugged both for audio and video. My movements
are monitored by MI5. The Security Service have followed me to Canada, to
Poland and the Continent, to the States. I cannot work anywhere, not in
England, not in Canada, because MI5 will destroy whatever employment I am
able to obtain. I have asked Keith Hill MP to help me, and he has refused.
The situation is intolerable. It is Mr Hills job to help me out of this
mess. So, please, as I said in the last fax a week ago: Do not waste your
time returning multiple copies of my faxes to my fax mailbox, as some of
you have done. Instead;
Please encourage Keith Hill M.P. to help me.
I am sorry to be using this device to encourage Mr Hill to help, but I
think eight and half years are quite enough and it is time something was
done to bring this matter to a close.
MI5 Persecution : BBC Newscasters Spying on my Home
This week's topic is the quite extraordinary claim that BBC newscasters
such as Martyn Lewis and Michael Buerk have spied on my living room while
they read the news. I currently have an advert running for the next six
months in Private Eye's "Eye Say" column (at a cost of over #200) which
says,"MI5 Persecution - BBC Newscasters Spying on my Home"; the story of
my campaign in the Eye is on my Website
at; http://www.pair.com/spook/evidence/plaint/priveye.htm
BBCs staff magazine Ariel also ran my advert "BBC Newsreaders Spying on my
home" for one issue in the Personal category on 8/July/1997 before it was
spotted and axed by editor Robin Reynolds; please see
webpage; http://www.pair.com/spook/evidence/plaint/ariel.htm
Beginnings
The very first incident in the "MI5/BBC Persecution" occurred in June of
1990, when a newsreader reacted to what she saw in my living room at home
as she read the news. My mother had brought an apple for me into the room,
whereupon the newsreader smirked and giggled, apparently finding this
funny. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I carried on watching news
and other television programmes to see if presenters would show signs of
"interactive watching"; to my surprise, this happened again and
again. Unfortunately, I did not have my wits sufficiently about me to
videotape these programmes, and it is now almost impossible to obtain
recordings dating back to 1990.
Most of the "TV watching" has occurred on the news, and most of it in
summer 1990, although some as late as autumn 1993. My website has a few
extracts of what might be politicians "getting at" me, in particular John
Major and interviewer Dimbleby sharing a joke about the "Knutsford
Guardian" which is almost certainly about me.
I sold my portable TV in autumn 1990 and stopped watching television
regularly. I realise now that this may have been a mistake. What I should
have done was to watch TV and listen to the radio, but tape-record
everything and make a note of what each excerpt meant to me. I would then
be in a much stronger position as regards to evidence that I am now. That
is what I am trying to do now, but unsurprisingly the TV/radio presenters
have stopped getting at me, now they know they are being recorded.
Examples of Media Harassment
Here are a few examples which I can still remember of media harassment;
In early 1992 I was watching the BBC news with Martyn Lewis on a small
black-and-white portable television at my then home in Oxford. I threw a
term of abuse at Lewis; he flinched, then gave a grin and made a comment
from which I understood that he had been on my side, but might have
changed his mind as a result of what Id just said to him.
Victor Lewis Smith in his TV (BBC2?) program at the end of 1993, had a
taxi-driver saying, "theyre all out to get me", to which VLS replied, "but
you're quite intelligent aren't you?" (what a nice chap VLS is,
compliments no less!)
Paul Daniels the TV magician, sometime in 1990-92 (sorry I can't be more
precise but it was so long ago), made a "crying face" and put his face in
his hands, which was his way of expressing that I was frequently crying in
1990-92, and that he and other media people found my crying funny.
Kenny Everett (deceased) on some talk show, compared me to a "huge
ape" who "scratches himself"; he made some other remarks about what the
"ape" got up to which unfortunately I cant remember. (I remember that
Everetts comments were quite sympathetic and human, but were obviously
about me.)
Stephen Fry on another talkshow (Wogan I think) talking about
"masturbatory fantasies", he then referred to me with the words "you
prat"; I wonder if the studio audience knew what he was talking about and
to whom his comments were directed?
Griff Rhys Jones on Clive James' TV show, made a "lunatic face" (wide
fixed grin) to which I said to the TV that he had a "face like a horse's
arse", to which Clive James said to GRJ "did you hear that?"
Crimestoppers summer 1990, remarks by a Midlands police officer on the
programme, while Nick Ross was presenter (as far as I can remember). The
officer talked about "in car entertainment". Nick Ross said to officer,
"why don't you stop doing it?" to which he replied, "we can't while he's
like this".
BBC2 Newsnight in autumn 1993 had a piece on football hooliganism. A black
interviewee said apparently of the hooligans, but in fact of me; "they're
just idiots, carry on with the surveillance".
There was an incident with Jonathan Ross which I remember clearly; he was
on both BBC and ITV television at the same time, one (ITV I think) was
recorded, the other channel was live. Ross has a speech impediment which
causes him to pronounce his "r"s as "w". I sarcastically said something
about "Mr Woss" to the recorded channel, then turned over to where he was
live, and he repeated "Woss" with heavy emphasis and sarcasm.
On the radio, in spring 1994, Chris Tarrant made a sarcastic remark in his
morning show, saying "he says were trying to kill him, we should be done
for attempted manslaughter", to which another of the studio staff said,
"oh no, dont say that". His comment was in reply to a comparison Id made
the previous evening between my persecutors and the Polish secret police
who murdered dissidents.
Martyn Lewis Denies & Lies, But Wont in Writing
In February 1997 I wrote to BBC Viewer & Listener Correspondence and asked
them to investigate the claim that their newscasters had engaged in
"interactive watching". They replied that they had asked Martyn Lewis and
Michael Buerk whether they had engaged in such practices, and that they
had both made verbal denials to VLC, but were refusing to put their
denials in writing.
I can understand that they might think that if they were to make written
denials to me, then many other people with my condition might write to
them with similar questions. But Ive asked a couple of journalists if
theyve been writing about me, theyve made written denials, Ive believed
them, and I have not put their denials on my website because, since I
believe their denials, it would not be relevant to publish them.
To me it looks as if Lewis and Buerk are happy to lie verbally but not in
writing, because written falsehoods would place them unambiguously in the
wrong, whereas they can try to talk their way out of verbal lies if they
are ever caught, or perhaps even deny the verbal lies completely? If they
lie without shame, then why would they have any shame about future lies
about lying?
One of the strangest aspects of "TV watching" is that Buerk and Lewis have
convinced themselves that their "interactive spying" is reasonable
behaviour. Martyn Lewis thinks of himself as a "gentleman". He expressed
in 1992 that he was "on my side". If this matter ever comes out into the
open, I wonder what these newscasters will have to say for themselves, and
what the British public will make of their behaviour?
Media Persecution Evidence on my Website
You may directly access the Evidence section on my website at URL;
The category currently contains four video segments, a number of audio
files and three published articles. The first video of ITN's John Suchet
is unfortunately a mistake - after looking at it again it is obviously not
about me. The two Ken Clarke excerpts may or may not be about me; it is
funny that he should keep on harping about "paranoia" and "madness", but I
have given these ratings of only 30% certainty, as it is more likely that
they are not about me in particular, and Clarke is simply displaying the
normal prejudices against the mentally ill found in much of society.
The piece I find most interesting is the Dimbleby/John Major interview
from April 1997. I have assigned this a 90% rating. Dimbleby starts by
emphasising a report from the "Knutsford Guardian". Major recognizes
what's going on and joins in with a falsely apologetic "heaven
forfend". The emphasis is on the first syllable pronounced "nuts" in
"Knutsford", which is repeated three times. Of course this is hardly
anywhere near convincing evidence; the really clear items were all in
1990-92, and they are basically unobtainable now.
If you're reading the website, have a look at the two files from David
Hepworth's programme on GLR radio. The first one from 21/Feb/1997 has him
talking about an "embarassment" of prizes and "absolute obscene", in
reference I believe to the verbal sexual abuse that was being used against
me at the time (and which unfortunately is still current). In the second
file dated 9/May/1997 he again talks about "absolute embarrassment" of
prizes, followed by laughter. To my mind he knows I am listening to his
programme, and deliberately makes these remarks for my benefit, with very
little attempt to disguise their purpose.
Bernard Levin - "Fanatic's Fare for the Common Man"
On 21 September 1991 this article by Bernard Levin appeared in The
Times. It is reproduced in the Evidence section of the website, or may be
accessed directly at URL;
To my mind, Levin's article described the situation at the time and in
particular a recent meeting with a friend, during which I for the first
time admitted to someone other than my GP that I had been subjected to a
conspiracy of harassment over the previous year and a half.
Levin writes about a "madman running loose about London" who "bursts into
tears, and swears it is all true. And it is." I am pleased to agree with
his assertion that "it is all true" because the truth is what I presented
to my friend in September 1991 and it is what is being presented to the
readership of these articles now.
Conclusion
The harassment, in particular media persecution, was at its strongest in
1990-92. Today, I am recording everything I watch, read and listen, and
the media have pretty much given up. It is now incidents "in public" which
make up what there is of MI5s persecution. But much of the material from
1990-92 still exists in archives, although the organisations which have
those archives generally wont make the material available to the public,
for copyright and other reasons.
MI5 can no longer employ the media to persecute me, partly because
journalists now know who is behind the persecution, and also because I
would publish any instances. My mistake during 1990-92 was to not record
instances as they happened; Ive learned from that mistake, and know better
now.
10728
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: .net Magazine Applauds my Website (8545) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: .net Magazine Applauds my Website (8545) [wiadomość #5749] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 07:56 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution: .net Magazine Applauds my Website
The March 1998 issue (number 42) of .net Magazine reviews the MI5
Persecution website describing it as an "excellent site". The webpages
describe in detail the nature of my persecution since 1990 by what are
believed to be elements of the UK security service.
(snip image)
You are encouraged to read the web pages which include
o a FAQ section outlining the nature of the persecutors, their methods
of harassment through the media, people at work and among the general public
o an evidence section, which carries audio and video clips of media and
workplace harassment, rated according to how directly I think they refer to me
o factual descriptions of the state security agencies involved
o scanned texts of the complaints I have made to media and state security agencies involved
o posts which have been made to netnews over the last three years on this topic
8545
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: Why would they be doing this to you, sir? (6362) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: Why would they be doing this to you, sir? (6362) [wiadomość #5748] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 07:31 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 15 May, 1998
The persecution has been quite severe for the last week. It appears that
my enemies are reacting to the steady stream of faxes making their way
over the Atlantic to the fax machines of Westminster politicians and the
media. Here is whats happened in the last few days;
The week started off with an incident in the cafeteria at a local shopping
centre where I habitually drink my morning coffee. My enemies have
concentrated since winter 1995/96 on throwing a particularly horrible
sexual slander against me. They "put people up" to repeat this slander
against me, and this is what happened again here.
On Thursday morning (yesterday), instead of going to the usual cafeteria I
went to a nearby convenience store for coffee. The same horrible sexual
slander was shouted at me very loudly by a member of staff as I walked
into the store. This was the first time I had ever bought morning coffee
in that shop. The other staff obviously knew what was going on, one of
them said, "they screwed up my life".
The fax gateway I use to send these faxes to the UK has been working hard
these last few days to shut down my access by barring the accounts I use
to send these faxes.
I have received an anonymous threat from fax number 0171-219-6101 (the
machine gave its name as "ETRA-HoC") which said, "Stop sending to this fax
no 0171-219-6101 or else" (the consequences of continued transmission were
unspecified). I invited the sender to apologise for his threat, but
received no response.
This all adds up to quite a severe reaction to my faxes of the last few
weeks. I actually find this quite heartening since it shows that my faxes
are finding the mark and there may yet be a breakthrough in my efforts to
expose the Security Service conpiracy of abuse against me which has now
been going on for eight years.
MI5 Persecution: "Why would they be doing this to you, sir?"
This article will concentrate on the difficult question of "Why". The
question which forms the title of this piece was asked of me by the police
officer I spoke to in Easter 1995, when I went to make my complaint.
There are really two sides to this question. Firstly, why should MI5 be
harassing anybody in this fashion? Secondly, if they choose to behave in
this way, why should they have selected me in particular, and not somebody
else? Alternatively, why did the persecution start, and why is it
continuing?
I do not have definite answers to either side of this question, since my
persecutors have usually kept themselves hidden and only acted through
other parties. To know "why", one would have to know who the persecutors
are, and something of their personalities, since their abuse is almost
certainly symptomatic of a personality disorder of the abusers. Certain
things however can be deduced about the abusers from the nature of their
behaviour, and I will talk about this later in the article.
Why did it start?
It is clear that the persecution must have been initiated by someone who
knew me personally, either at school, or at university, or socially, and
knew that I was borderline mentally ill, since this is what makes me a
target for the persecutors. Unfortunately, the originators have never been
identified, and there are several possible candidates. Neither has the
link from the originators of the persecution, to the persecutors
themselves, ever been made clear. So who are the originators?
University Staff
The identity of the originators may lie in the timing of the
persecution. It started in June 1990, while I was finishing a course at
Imperial College in London, and a year after I graduated from Cambridge,
where I received a degree in computer science. At Cambridge I had achieved
some notoriety in the computer lab from various nefarious exploits. Roger
Needham attacked me by saying that "there were great hopes for it, but it
failed terribly". When I started at Imperial I found that my reputation
had preceded me; Cambridge computer lab had spoken to I.C. lecturers about
me. I.C. lecturer Frank McCabe summed up commenting about "setting up a
straw man so you can tear him down". (Despite being "torn down" by the
Cambridge computer labs lecturers, I still achieved a good first degree
and a Masters degree at Imperial.)
Other students at university
So, the originators may have been university staff who knew me from my
student days. But there are other possibilities. I had other enemies at
university, including some fellow students. At my Cambridge college it was
common knowledge that my mental health was dubious, and it was known that
I talked to myself in my sleep - the floor and walls were quite permeable
to noise, so other students heard. I was given the nickname
"gibber" because of this habit. Sometime later, I managed to catch myself
talking in my sleep when I woke up in the middle of the night.
Here is a quote from a participant in the internet newsgroup where I have
been posting for the last three years;
>One thing which has been missing from this discussion is this simple
>prognosis: that maybe he is right and that, despite his admitted
>mental condition, there really is a campaign against him organised by
>now-influential ex-students of his university.
People I knew socially
I had yet other enemies in 1990 (I am a man of many enemies!). In January
1990 I broke up with some people I had been going out with socially. One
of them, by the name of Andy Turner, wrote a letter to Alan Freeman, who
at the time was a Radio 1 DJ. Freeman read part of the letter out on his
Rock Show, about the "one who wore out his welcome with random precision",
saying "thats a hell of a letter you wrote there Andy", and "with a
schizophrenic youre never alone".
It is my belief that Andy Turner and his friends were trying to make
trouble for me, and Turner wrote to Freeman with this in mind. Freeman may
have discussed the letter with others, and things may have snowballed from
there. This is, of course, pure supposition. The fact is that I do not
know who the originators are, and can only guess.
Once it started, why is it continuing?
The answer to this question is obvious. It is unacceptable to the "powers
that be" in the UK to have somebody running around who knows he has been
targeted by the Security Service and media organizations, and who is in a
position to embarrass British institutions. This has become particularly
evident in the last week; as I send more faxes to UK politicians and
media, so the pressure on me grows, and the volume of abuse increases.
Part of the reason the persecution continues is in the personalities of
the abusers, and it is this subject to which I will turn to next, since
the key to understanding the persecution lies in understanding those who
carry it out, as much as we can.
The Security Service operatives, the persecutors, are they psychopaths?
Let us first examine the definition of the term "psychopath". DSM-IV
defines "anti-social personality disorder" as a "pattern of disregard for
and violation of the rights of others ... deceitfulness, irritability and
aggressiveness ... consistent irresponsibility and lack of remorse". The
Harvard Mental Health Letter of Sept 1995 describes these people as using
"charm, manipulation, intimidation and violence to control others and
satisfy their own needs. Lacking in conscience and in feelings for others,
they cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please", having "no
guilt or regret".
I must say, reading this description of the condition, that it fits the
persecutors perfectly. The persecutors have never shown the slightest
remorse or guilt. Even when I was severely ill, they continued to abuse
me. They have repeatedly blamed their actions on me, which is another
trait common amongst psychopaths. They have no respect for my legal or
personal rights, and they use intimidation and verbal violence.
If the MI5 operatives are psychopaths then it would explain both why the
persecution started, and the degree of verbal violence. Psychopaths by
definition damage other people; here, the MI5 operatives find an outlet
for their personality disorder, through "cripple-kicking".
Xenophobia on the basis of mental illness, and race
My enemies have made clear many times that one of the reasons they are
persecuting me is because of my admitted mental illness. However, it is my
belief that they are also persecuting me because I am not of ethnic
English origin, and the fact that there have been several incidents of an
overtly racist nature reinforces this view.
In one case, two youths on a tube train in London made openly racist
references to me as a "soft toy, not up to British Standards". Another
person near my home made remarks about "Polish people". In yet another
incident in Croydon, a youth made comments about "foreigners".
But the main thrust of their xenophobia is because of my mental illness. I
should make clear that I do not look ill; if you met me, you would not
know that I had the illness. I take a relatively low dose of medication,
and feel quite well. But the persecutors have repeatedly harped on about
my supposed serious mental illness; they have called me a "nutter", a
"schizophrenic", etc. They have also persuaded other people to use these
terms of abuse. They are able to get away with this because abusing the
mentally ill is still something which is mostly acceptable in Britain; the
media do it, "nutter" is not taboo in the way that "nigger" is.
Conclusion
There are several groups of people who might have wished to cause me
trouble, and I still do not know who originated the persecution. Nor do I
know how the originators came to be in contact with the
(presumed) Security Service operatives who have been carrying out the
campaign. To know conclusively why it started, we would have to know who
started it, and this information is not available.
However, we can infer some things about the personalities of the
persecutors from their methods, and from the degree of verbal violence
they employ. It is clear that a main reason for the continuing harassment
is the psychopathic disorder of the MI5 agents who carry it out. That they
have never been "brought to book" for their misdeeds reinforces their
belief that they do no wrong; and, unhappily, until they are brought to
book, their persecution campaign looks set to continue.
6362
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: Why do you think MI5 are responsible? (4179) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: Why do you think MI5 are responsible? (4179) [wiadomość #5747] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 07:03 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Why do you think MI5 are responsible?
The question of who is ultimately responsible for this eight-year
harassment is one which is very difficult to answer, as the persecutors
have never clearly made their identities known to the persecutee. However,
I believe I am correct in attributing the continuing victimisation to
elements of the British Security Service MI5, and in this article, I will
try to explain the reasons for this belief.
The British internet magazine ".net" featured my website on page 17 of
their March 1998 issue (number 42). Their review kindly describes it as an
"excellent site" and gives some details of what the net surfer will find
there. Should you wish to reply to this article you can do so;
"When did you first suspect MI5 were responsible?"
Over Easter 1995 I went to see a local solicitor in London with a view to
talking to the police about the harassment. Soon afterwards I did go to my
local police station in Clapham and spoke to an officer there. The
solicitor made a comment which suggested to me that the persecution I had
been experiencing may have been organised by an intelligence service.
Up to this point, I did not have any clear idea as to who was behind the
harassment. Only their agents were visible, in the media, on television
news programmes, and on the radio; in the workplace, where things said at
my home were repeated verbatim; and in some cases abuse in public and
during travel, for example on the trip to Poland in June 1992 which I have
already described.
Both from the fact that widely disparate individuals and organisations
were employed as agents in the campaign against me, and from the fact that
an entity would be required to marshal their resources in the areas of
spying on my home and giving gathered information to their agents, it was
clear to me that a single entity was responsible for carrying out the
campaign. Yet from June 1990 until Easter 1995 I did not have a clear idea
of who might be responsible. I guessed that perhaps some private
individual or group of persons who saw themselves as my enemies had
perhaps paid private detectives to organise the harassment. Alternatively,
since the campaign had started in the media, I made a far-fetched
supposition that perhaps it was an ad-hoc group of media people who had
set themselves up in opposition to me. After Easter 1995 I saw that these
guesses were wrong, and I made an I believe much more accurate estimate as
to who my enemies really are.
"Why couldn't a private group be behind the persecution?"
There are several reasons why a private individual or group would not be
behind this campaign.
Quantity of resources / Money. Here is what one Usenet (internet
newsgroup) participant had to say (several years ago) on the topic of how
much money it would cost just to keep the surveillance going.
PM: >But why? And why you? Do you realize how much it would cost to keep
PM: >one person under continuous surveillance for five years? Think about
PM: >all the man/hours. Say they _just_ allocated a two man team and a
PM: >supervisor. OK., Supervisor's salary, say, #30,000 a year. Two men,
PM: >#20,000 a year each. But they'd need to work in shifts -- so it would
PM: >be six men at #20,000 (which with on-costs would work out at more
like
PM: >#30,000 to the employer.)
PM: >
PM: >So, we're talking #30,000 x 6. #180,000. plus say, #40,000 for the
PM: >supervisor. #220,000. Then you've got the hardware involved. And
PM: >any transcription that needs doing. You don't think the 'Big Boss'
PM: >would listen to hours and hours of tapes, do you.
PM: >
PM: >So, all in all, you couldn't actually do the job for much less than
PM: >a quarter million a year. Over five years. What are you doing that
makes
PM: >it worth the while of the state to spend over one and a quarter
million
PM: >on you?
A private individual or group would not spend over a million pounds to
verbally torture a victim without some financial motive or gain. Private
industry is driven by the profit motive, and there is no financial profit
to be had from carrying out a campaign in this way. If a private
enterprise were behind it then they would have taken direct physical
action a long time ago.
State enterprises, on the other hand, can afford to be wasteful, since
they are funded by the taxpayer. They do not have to show a money
profit. The employees or contractors employed by a state organisation such
as MI5 are driven by their own personal profit motives, to make the most
money out of their employers for the longest period of time. MI5 is funded
to the tune of #150M p.a.; even a few hundred thousand a year would to
them be affordable if their managers could convince themselves of the
necessity of what they were doing.
Quality of resources / Technical resources - electronic and other
surveillance. In summer 1994 a reputable and competent private detective
agency was employed to conduct a counter-surveillance sweep of my home in
London. They charged us over #400 for this, conducted a thorough search
for radio transmitting devices, hard-wired "probe" microphones and also
tested the telephone line. They found nothing. This was not altogether
surprising, since it had been made very clear to me that there were bugs
in my home; the "buggers" would not have made this clear unless they had
felt their bugs were of sufficient sophistication as to be safe from
detection.
But there is another lesson to be gained from the failure of the private
detectives to find anything. The agency employed was one of the most
reputable in London. They were employed on the principle of "setting a
thief to catch a thief", for if the harassment were being carried out by
private detectives, as I then believed, then surely another set of private
detectives would be able to find the bugs that they had planted. That
these "private eyes" were unable to find anything, and that the harassers
were confident that they would not be able to find any bugs, points to the
harassers being an order of sophistication above a private agency, and
leads me again to believe that a state intelligence service is responsible
for the surveillance and harassment.
Quality of resources / Technical resources - Interception of Postal
service. In summer 1994 when I emigrated to Canada to try to escape the
harassment, I wrote letters home to my family and friends in London. Quite
soon after my arrival in Canada, the harassers were able to find precisely
where I was staying. The only way I can see of "their" being able to find
out my new address was by interception of my letters to the UK.
Later in 1994, I conducted an experiment to see if my letters home were
indeed being read. In a letter home I wrote of being depressed and talked
in vague terms of suicide. I deliberately chose this topic, since I
believed it was the outcome my harassers were trying to achieve, and that
if they read the letter, they would "echo" its contents. Sure enough, soon
afterwards there were two incidents of people shouting "suicide" at me in
public places in Canada.
It is inconceivable for a private agency to have the ability to intercept
postal mail. The state security service on the other hand is well known to
engage in these activities.
Quality of resources / Access to Media. One of the strangest aspects of
this case is the access "they" have to the broadcast and print media. I
still do not understand what could persuade newscasters such as Martyn
Lewis and Michael Buerk, who consider themselves "gentlemen", to behave in
an almost voyeuristic way by "peeking" into the living room of one of
their viewers. A year ago I wrote to the BBC asking if these newscasters
would confirm or deny the accusations made against them. The BBC replied
that their newscasters had denied the accusations, but refused to do so in
writing.
It is well known that MI5 have the ability to plant stories in certain
newspapers, but convincing television newscasters to "watch" a viewer
while they read the news would surely be very difficult for them to
accomplish, unless they presented themselves to these journalists as
being, for example, a group in the media who were seeing to it that I got
my "deserved" treatment. MI5 has a history of manipulating the media, so
it might not be too difficult for them to accomplish such a trick, whereas
a private group would not have this ability.
"Have they ever denied that they are the Security Service?"
No. Never. This is in fact the main reason why I believe "they" are MI5
and not a privately funded group. If my guess had been wrong then I am
sure that "they" would have crowed over my mistake, but they have never
admitted nor denied that they are employees of MI5.
In early January 1996 I flew on a British Airways jet from London to
Montreal; also present on the plane, about three or four rows behind me,
were two young men, one of them fat and voluble, the other silent. It was
quite clear that these two had been planted on the aircraft to "wind me
up". The fat youth described the town in Poland where I had spent
Christmas, and made some unpleasant personal slurs against me. Most
interestingly, he said the words, "he doesnt know who we are".
Now I find this particular form of words very interesting, because while
it is not a clear admission, it is only a half-hearted attempt at denial
of my guess that "they" = "MI5". Had my guess been wrong, the fat youth
would surely have said so more clearly.
"If MI5 were behind it, why would they wish to mask their involvement?"
I have heard a number of times a belief from people in the media that it
is they, the media people, who are behind the abuse. In spring 1994 Chris
Tarrant the Capital Radio D.J. said sarcastically on his breakfast show,
"You know this bloke? he says were trying to kill him. We should be done
for attempted manslaughter". We, we, we. Tarrant thought it was a media
conspiracy.
Returning to the question of "interactive watching" by television
newscasters, it would again be much easier for them to take part in that
sort of activity if they convinced themselves that the surveillance and
abuse were organised by "their own", by media people. It must be second
nature to MI5 to mask their involvement in the matters they deal with; in
this case, they pretend the campaign is organised by a group in the media,
and any journalists who suspect otherwise keep their silence.
Conclusion
Over the last three years I have stated with some force my belief that MI5
are responsible for my misfortunes. I have done so on Internet newsgroups,
in letters and faxes to people in politics and the media in the UK, and in
1997 I made a formal complaint to MI5 regarding their activities; the
Security Service Tribunal replied in June 1997 that "no determination in
your favour has been made on your complaint". (I believe the statement by
the Security Service Tribunal can be disregarded, as they have never, ever
made a ruling in favour of a complainant.) In three years of naming MI5 as
my oppressor "they" have never denied the charge. To me, their silence on
this point indicates that my guess was accurate. I believe my persecutors
stand identified. The question of why they should carry out this campaign
is one I will try to answer in a future article.
4179
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5-Persecution: How Could It Be True? (1996) |
|---|
| MI5-Persecution: How Could It Be True? (1996) [wiadomość #5746] |
nie, 16 grudzień 2007 06:24 |
MI5-Victim
Wiadomości: 15
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution: How Could It Be True?
If you have the patience to read these articles you will be struck by how
apparently fantastic the claims being put forward are. You may ask
yourself why such seemingly nonsensical assertions are made. This matter
has been discussed on the Internets UK-local newsgroups for three years
now, and the denizens of the uk.misc newsgroup (the so-called
"miscreants") have come up with a number of theories to explain these
posts; it has been variously suggested that they are a troll (an
artificial creation for the amusement of its author), that they are made
by MI5 themselves with the purpose of discrediting other conspiracy
theories, and that the poster is mentally ill and the articles are
symptomatic of the illness (the view held by most miscreants).
Are these claims the product of mental illness, or is that just a cover?
The most obvious explanation, that the claims made result from the
admitted mental illness of the author, is the one which the persecutors
intend be the one accepted without consideration being given to the
possibility of the claims being true. The persecutors have actually been
very clever about this, both in selecting as their target someone who was
known from school or university as being borderline schizophrenic, and in
ensuring the nature of their persecution corresponds to what often
features in the delusions of a schizophrenic.
The very first incident of the persecution occurred in June 1990, when I
was still a student at university in London. It consisted of a reaction
(giggling) from the newsreader, Sue Carpenter of ITN, to what she saw
happening in my living-room at my parents home where I was living. Before
your imagination gets the better of you I should make clear that what the
newsreader was reacting to was not too embarrassing in nature; my mother
had brought an apple for me into the the room, and Sue Carpenter found
this amusing.
I recognized that Carpenter had reacted to what she had seen in my
living-room, yet this idea still seemed completely fantastic to me. My
reaction was to continue watching television, particularly the news, to
see if this incident would be repeated. It was, many times, both on BBC
and ITV. An intelligent person would have thought to obtain a video
recorder and capture some of these incidents in order to try to explain to
an observer what he saw in these broadcasts. Unfortunately, I failed this
test of intelligence, since I did not record these programmes. I have
recently attempted to obtain from ITN tapes of their news programmes
dating back to summer 1990, but, unhappily, they have advised me that they
do not have complete programmes including newsreaders comments dating back
to that period.
From the outset, the persecutors structured their actions to ensure that
any complaint would be met with disbelief, and dismissed as
delusional. This is why they chose as their target someone who was known
at school and university to be borderline mentally ill; and it is why they
fired the first shots of their campaign through the broadcast
media. Schizophrenics commonly believe the media harass them; it would be
exceptional for "full-duplex television" to exist in reality. Those with
schizophrenia also commonly believe people are talking about them; again,
the persecutors have shown themselves very rarely, but act through
intermediaries, both in the workplace, and in public and during travel.
Mental illness is not the cause of these claims, but the simulation of its
symptoms is a cover used by the persecutors to deny their victim the
ability to have his compaints believed.
What evidence exists to support these claims of "interactive
television/radio";?
Quite frankly, I have very little evidence to support my claims. You may
examine the "Evidence" area of my website to see such evidence as I have
been able to gather. None of it is remotely conclusive. The "smoking
guns" all date back to 1990/91, and it is really rather late now to start
trying to look for material dating back seven or eight years. In 1997 I
started tape-recording every programme I watched or listened to. I also
started carrying with me a high-fidelity minidisc-recorder with good
quality microphone to catch incidents of public harassment, but this also
has not been as successful or conclusive as I had hoped.
Perhaps the best item in the "Evidence" section is the audio file "Life is
so hard" (it is labelled with Garfield the cartoon character on the site),
which I have given a certainty level of 100%. This item relates to
harassment at my workplace in Canada in 1996. A co-worker called Mark was
coming up with phrases and expressions which were repeating things being
said at my Canadian residence, consequently leading me to believe that my
apartment and home phone were bugged, and that the persecutors were
passing their gathered information on to Mark. On one particular evening I
said in my apartment, "life is so hard, and then you die". The following
day I was able to record Mark saying exactly the same phrase at work.
Unfortunately when "they" know you are recording them, they simply dont
say things which would unambiguously show harassment. When Mark the
co-worker knew he was being recorded, he only made his remarks out of
range of the recorder, for example outside the building. When the TV
newscasters or radio disc jockeys know they are being taped, they limit
themselves to saying things which are ambiguous, which even in my mind may
or may not be personally directed against me.
Who knows about this persecution?
Surprisingly many people know. People in the media, such as BBC and ITN
newscasters including Martyn Lewis and Michael Buerk, and radio disc
jockeys such as Chris Tarrant of Capital Radio, know what is going on, and
take part in it. Some co-workers at my former workplaces in England and
Canada have known about the harassment. Quite a few people in the general
public are also included. I believe the police are aware of the
persecution, but, unfortunately, have chosen not to take any action to
stop it. I have complained at my local police station in London several
years ago, and I have stated on the internet newsgroups that I have done
so, hence the police will be well aware of my wish to see the matter
resolved. I believe their inaction denotes a dereliction of duty, but
without good evidence, I am powerless to compel them to take steps to
prevent further harassment, or deal with what has already taken place.
What is the purpose of sending these faxes?
These faxes are being sent to three distinct groups of people, namely
Members of Parliament, the media, and diplomats & legal people. As you
will have observed I am making use of the email-to-fax gateway at Demon
Internet to send these faxes. I am forced to use this gateway since I
currently live in North America, and cannot afford the high cost of direct
phone calls to the UK.
My purpose in publicising my claims is firstly to discourage the
persecutors from continuing their campaign, and also to attempt to bring
their campaign out into the open, and thus perhaps identify the
persecutors. Neither aim has been achieved yet, but I hope that with
sufficient stimulation these aims may yet be accomplished.
The problem with the second aim is that those who read this article will
fall into two groups, those who dont know anything about the persecution
and consequently will disbelieve my claims as delusional, and those who do
know about the harassment and may have some idea of who is behind it, but
realise that if the harassers are exposed and the truth brought out into
the open, then powerful British institutions will substantially lose
prestige, and be exposed to ridicule.
It would give me hope to believe that these faxes will create a third
group of people, those who find out that I am telling the truth, and who
follow their consciences in standing up and seeing justice done. Only time
will tell if this hope will be realized.
1996
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: LDAP? |
|---|
| LDAP? [wiadomość #5745] |
pon, 10 grudzień 2007 18:30 |
berkamp
Wiadomości: 2
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Witam,
W najbliższym czasie mam zamiar zainstalować w pracy nowy serwer.
Obecnie sytuacja wygląda tak:
1. Serwer Novell - udostępnia pliki i niektóre aplikacje
2. Serwer Windows 2003 R2 - SMTP, Oracle
3. Serwer Linux Slackware - samba, postfiks
Chcę aby nowy serwer przejął funkcję 1 i 2 a 3 chcę przystosować na
serwer ftp i poczty. Potrzebuję rozwiązania na linux, które zapewni mi
udostępnianie usług katalogowych. Chodzi mi o przypisanie praw
użytkownikom do zasobów (dobrze jeśli dałoby sie do aplikacji). Myślałem
o OpenLDAP. Nie korzystałem z tego typu rozwiązań do tej pory.
Chciałbym, żeby rozwiązanie to dawało możliwość tworzenia mobilnych
profili, tak, żeby user logując sie na siebie miał ładowane z serwera
ustawienia Windows tak jak sobie wcześniej ustawił. Może podzielicie sie
rozwiązaniami jakie sami stosujecie.
Pozdrawiam
BERKAMP
|
|
| | Wątek: Linux |
|---|
| Linux [wiadomość #5744] |
pon, 10 grudzień 2007 05:56 |
berkamp
Wiadomości: 2
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Witam,
W najbliższym czasie mam zamiar zainstalować w pracy nowy serwer.
Obecnie sytuacja wygląda tak:
1. Serwer Novell - udostępnia pliki i niektóre aplikacje
2. Serwer Windows 2003 R2 - SMTP, Oracle
3. Serwer Linux Slackware - samba, postfiks
Chcę aby nowy serwer przejął funkcję 1 i 2 a 3 chcę przystosować na
serwer ftp i poczty. Potrzebuję rozwiązania na linux, które zapewni mi
udostępnianie usług katalogowych. Chodzi mi o przypisanie praw
użytkownikom do zasobów (dobrze jeśli dałoby sie do aplikacji). Myślałem
o OpenLDAP. Nie korzystałem z tego typu rozwiązań do tej pory.
Chciałbym, żeby rozwiązanie to dawało możliwość tworzenia mobilnych
profili, tak, żeby user logując sie na siebie miał ładowane z serwera
ustawienia Windows tak jak sobie wcześniej ustawił. Może podzielicie sie
rozwiązaniami jakie sami stosujecie.
Pozdrawiam
BERKAMP
|
|
| | Wątek: error:kernel-source cannot be found! |
|---|
| error:kernel-source cannot be found! [wiadomość #5739] |
sob, 01 grudzień 2007 17:28 |
Kuba
Wiadomości: 1
Dołączył(a): grudzień 2007 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Proboje zaistalowac sterowniki eagle-usb-2.1.1 i po samy ./configure
dostaje taki komounikat jak w temacie.
ls -l /lib/modules/2.6.21.5/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 2007-11-30 16:33 build ->
/usr/src/linux-2.6.21.5/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 2007-11-30 16:32 source ->
/usr/src/linux-2.6.21.5/
Dowiazania sa poprawne.
ls -l /usr/src/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 2007-11-30 16:44 linux -> linux-2.6.21.5/
drwxr-xr-x 19 root root 4096 2007-12-01 18:25 linux-2.6.21.5/
Zrodla sa. Gdzie jest blad?
Z gory dzieki za odpowiedz.
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5 Persecution: .net Magazine Applauds my Website (12866) |
|---|
| MI5 Persecution: .net Magazine Applauds my Website (12866) [wiadomość #5738] |
sob, 24 listopad 2007 04:45 |
MI5Victim
Wiadomości: 54
Dołączył(a): luty 2007 |
Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution: .net Magazine Applauds my Website
The March 1998 issue (number 42) of .net Magazine reviews the MI5
Persecution website describing it as an "excellent site". The webpages
describe in detail the nature of my persecution since 1990 by what are
believed to be elements of the UK security service.
(snip image)
You are encouraged to read the web pages which include
o a FAQ section outlining the nature of the persecutors, their methods
of harassment through the media, people at work and among the general public
o an evidence section, which carries audio and video clips of media and
workplace harassment, rated according to how directly I think they refer to me
o factual descriptions of the state security agencies involved
o scanned texts of the complaints I have made to media and state security agencies involved
o posts which have been made to netnews over the last three years on this topic
12866
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5 Persecution: Why would they be doing this to you, sir? (10691) |
|---|
| MI5 Persecution: Why would they be doing this to you, sir? (10691) [wiadomość #5737] |
sob, 24 listopad 2007 03:58 |
MI5Victim
Wiadomości: 54
Dołączył(a): luty 2007 |
Member |
|
|
MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 15 May, 1998
The persecution has been quite severe for the last week. It appears that
my enemies are reacting to the steady stream of faxes making their way
over the Atlantic to the fax machines of Westminster politicians and the
media. Here is whats happened in the last few days;
The week started off with an incident in the cafeteria at a local shopping
centre where I habitually drink my morning coffee. My enemies have
concentrated since winter 1995/96 on throwing a particularly horrible
sexual slander against me. They "put people up" to repeat this slander
against me, and this is what happened again here.
On Thursday morning (yesterday), instead of going to the usual cafeteria I
went to a nearby convenience store for coffee. The same horrible sexual
slander was shouted at me very loudly by a member of staff as I walked
into the store. This was the first time I had ever bought morning coffee
in that shop. The other staff obviously knew what was going on, one of
them said, "they screwed up my life".
The fax gateway I use to send these faxes to the UK has been working hard
these last few days to shut down my access by barring the accounts I use
to send these faxes.
I have received an anonymous threat from fax number 0171-219-6101 (the
machine gave its name as "ETRA-HoC") which said, "Stop sending to this fax
no 0171-219-6101 or else" (the consequences of continued transmission were
unspecified). I invited the sender to apologise for his threat, but
received no response.
This all adds up to quite a severe reaction to my faxes of the last few
weeks. I actually find this quite heartening since it shows that my faxes
are finding the mark and there may yet be a breakthrough in my efforts to
expose the Security Service conpiracy of abuse against me which has now
been going on for eight years.
MI5 Persecution: "Why would they be doing this to you, sir?"
This article will concentrate on the difficult question of "Why". The
question which forms the title of this piece was asked of me by the police
officer I spoke to in Easter 1995, when I went to make my complaint.
There are really two sides to this question. Firstly, why should MI5 be
harassing anybody in this fashion? Secondly, if they choose to behave in
this way, why should they have selected me in particular, and not somebody
else? Alternatively, why did the persecution start, and why is it
continuing?
I do not have definite answers to either side of this question, since my
persecutors have usually kept themselves hidden and only acted through
other parties. To know "why", one would have to know who the persecutors
are, and something of their personalities, since their abuse is almost
certainly symptomatic of a personality disorder of the abusers. Certain
things however can be deduced about the abusers from the nature of their
behaviour, and I will talk about this later in the article.
Why did it start?
It is clear that the persecution must have been initiated by someone who
knew me personally, either at school, or at university, or socially, and
knew that I was borderline mentally ill, since this is what makes me a
target for the persecutors. Unfortunately, the originators have never been
identified, and there are several possible candidates. Neither has the
link from the originators of the persecution, to the persecutors
themselves, ever been made clear. So who are the originators?
University Staff
The identity of the originators may lie in the timing of the
persecution. It started in June 1990, while I was finishing a course at
Imperial College in London, and a year after I graduated from Cambridge,
where I received a degree in computer science. At Cambridge I had achieved
some notoriety in the computer lab from various nefarious exploits. Roger
Needham attacked me by saying that "there were great hopes for it, but it
failed terribly". When I started at Imperial I found that my reputation
had preceded me; Cambridge computer lab had spoken to I.C. lecturers about
me. I.C. lecturer Frank McCabe summed up commenting about "setting up a
straw man so you can tear him down". (Despite being "torn down" by the
Cambridge computer labs lecturers, I still achieved a good first degree
and a Masters degree at Imperial.)
Other students at university
So, the originators may have been university staff who knew me from my
student days. But there are other possibilities. I had other enemies at
university, including some fellow students. At my Cambridge college it was
common knowledge that my mental health was dubious, and it was known that
I talked to myself in my sleep - the floor and walls were quite permeable
to noise, so other students heard. I was given the nickname
"gibber" because of this habit. Sometime later, I managed to catch myself
talking in my sleep when I woke up in the middle of the night.
Here is a quote from a participant in the internet newsgroup where I have
been posting for the last three years;
>One thing which has been missing from this discussion is this simple
>prognosis: that maybe he is right and that, despite his admitted
>mental condition, there really is a campaign against him organised by
>now-influential ex-students of his university.
People I knew socially
I had yet other enemies in 1990 (I am a man of many enemies!). In January
1990 I broke up with some people I had been going out with socially. One
of them, by the name of Andy Turner, wrote a letter to Alan Freeman, who
at the time was a Radio 1 DJ. Freeman read part of the letter out on his
Rock Show, about the "one who wore out his welcome with random precision",
saying "thats a hell of a letter you wrote there Andy", and "with a
schizophrenic youre never alone".
It is my belief that Andy Turner and his friends were trying to make
trouble for me, and Turner wrote to Freeman with this in mind. Freeman may
have discussed the letter with others, and things may have snowballed from
there. This is, of course, pure supposition. The fact is that I do not
know who the originators are, and can only guess.
Once it started, why is it continuing?
The answer to this question is obvious. It is unacceptable to the "powers
that be" in the UK to have somebody running around who knows he has been
targeted by the Security Service and media organizations, and who is in a
position to embarrass British institutions. This has become particularly
evident in the last week; as I send more faxes to UK politicians and
media, so the pressure on me grows, and the volume of abuse increases.
Part of the reason the persecution continues is in the personalities of
the abusers, and it is this subject to which I will turn to next, since
the key to understanding the persecution lies in understanding those who
carry it out, as much as we can.
The Security Service operatives, the persecutors, are they psychopaths?
Let us first examine the definition of the term "psychopath". DSM-IV
defines "anti-social personality disorder" as a "pattern of disregard for
and violation of the rights of others ... deceitfulness, irritability and
aggressiveness ... consistent irresponsibility and lack of remorse". The
Harvard Mental Health Letter of Sept 1995 describes these people as using
"charm, manipulation, intimidation and violence to control others and
satisfy their own needs. Lacking in conscience and in feelings for others,
they cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please", having "no
guilt or regret".
I must say, reading this description of the condition, that it fits the
persecutors perfectly. The persecutors have never shown the slightest
remorse or guilt. Even when I was severely ill, they continued to abuse
me. They have repeatedly blamed their actions on me, which is another
trait common amongst psychopaths. They have no respect for my legal or
personal rights, and they use intimidation and verbal violence.
If the MI5 operatives are psychopaths then it would explain both why the
persecution started, and the degree of verbal violence. Psychopaths by
definition damage other people; here, the MI5 operatives find an outlet
for their personality disorder, through "cripple-kicking".
Xenophobia on the basis of mental illness, and race
My enemies have made clear many times that one of the reasons they are
persecuting me is because of my admitted mental illness. However, it is my
belief that they are also persecuting me because I am not of ethnic
English origin, and the fact that there have been several incidents of an
overtly racist nature reinforces this view.
In one case, two youths on a tube train in London made openly racist
references to me as a "soft toy, not up to British Standards". Another
person near my home made remarks about "Polish people". In yet another
incident in Croydon, a youth made comments about "foreigners".
But the main thrust of their xenophobia is because of my mental illness. I
should make clear that I do not look ill; if you met me, you would not
know that I had the illness. I take a relatively low dose of medication,
and feel quite well. But the persecutors have repeatedly harped on about
my supposed serious mental illness; they have called me a "nutter", a
"schizophrenic", etc. They have also persuaded other people to use these
terms of abuse. They are able to get away with this because abusing the
mentally ill is still something which is mostly acceptable in Britain; the
media do it, "nutter" is not taboo in the way that "nigger" is.
Conclusion
There are several groups of people who might have wished to cause me
trouble, and I still do not know who originated the persecution. Nor do I
know how the originators came to be in contact with the
(presumed) Security Service operatives who have been carrying out the
campaign. To know conclusively why it started, we would have to know who
started it, and this information is not available.
However, we can infer some things about the personalities of the
persecutors from their methods, and from the degree of verbal violence
they employ. It is clear that a main reason for the continuing harassment
is the psychopathic disorder of the MI5 agents who carry it out. That they
have never been "brought to book" for their misdeeds reinforces their
belief that they do no wrong; and, unhappily, until they are brought to
book, their persecution campaign looks set to continue.
10691
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
| | Wątek: MI5 Persecution: Why do you think MI5 are responsible? (8516) |
|---|
| MI5 Persecution: Why do you think MI5 are responsible? (8516) [wiadomość #5736] |
sob, 24 listopad 2007 03:28 |
MI5Victim
Wiadomości: 54
Dołączył(a): luty 2007 |
Member |
|
|
Why do you think MI5 are responsible?
The question of who is ultimately responsible for this eight-year
harassment is one which is very difficult to answer, as the persecutors
have never clearly made their identities known to the persecutee. However,
I believe I am correct in attributing the continuing victimisation to
elements of the British Security Service MI5, and in this article, I will
try to explain the reasons for this belief.
The British internet magazine ".net" featured my website on page 17 of
their March 1998 issue (number 42). Their review kindly describes it as an
"excellent site" and gives some details of what the net surfer will find
there. Should you wish to reply to this article you can do so;
"When did you first suspect MI5 were responsible?"
Over Easter 1995 I went to see a local solicitor in London with a view to
talking to the police about the harassment. Soon afterwards I did go to my
local police station in Clapham and spoke to an officer there. The
solicitor made a comment which suggested to me that the persecution I had
been experiencing may have been organised by an intelligence service.
Up to this point, I did not have any clear idea as to who was behind the
harassment. Only their agents were visible, in the media, on television
news programmes, and on the radio; in the workplace, where things said at
my home were repeated verbatim; and in some cases abuse in public and
during travel, for example on the trip to Poland in June 1992 which I have
already described.
Both from the fact that widely disparate individuals and organisations
were employed as agents in the campaign against me, and from the fact that
an entity would be required to marshal their resources in the areas of
spying on my home and giving gathered information to their agents, it was
clear to me that a single entity was responsible for carrying out the
campaign. Yet from June 1990 until Easter 1995 I did not have a clear idea
of who might be responsible. I guessed that perhaps some private
individual or group of persons who saw themselves as my enemies had
perhaps paid private detectives to organise the harassment. Alternatively,
since the campaign had started in the media, I made a far-fetched
supposition that perhaps it was an ad-hoc group of media people who had
set themselves up in opposition to me. After Easter 1995 I saw that these
guesses were wrong, and I made an I believe much more accurate estimate as
to who my enemies really are.
"Why couldn't a private group be behind the persecution?"
There are several reasons why a private individual or group would not be
behind this campaign.
Quantity of resources / Money. Here is what one Usenet (internet
newsgroup) participant had to say (several years ago) on the topic of how
much money it would cost just to keep the surveillance going.
PM: >But why? And why you? Do you realize how much it would cost to keep
PM: >one person under continuous surveillance for five years? Think about
PM: >all the man/hours. Say they _just_ allocated a two man team and a
PM: >supervisor. OK., Supervisor's salary, say, #30,000 a year. Two men,
PM: >#20,000 a year each. But they'd need to work in shifts -- so it would
PM: >be six men at #20,000 (which with on-costs would work out at more
like
PM: >#30,000 to the employer.)
PM: >
PM: >So, we're talking #30,000 x 6. #180,000. plus say, #40,000 for the
PM: >supervisor. #220,000. Then you've got the hardware involved. And
PM: >any transcription that needs doing. You don't think the 'Big Boss'
PM: >would listen to hours and hours of tapes, do you.
PM: >
PM: >So, all in all, you couldn't actually do the job for much less than
PM: >a quarter million a year. Over five years. What are you doing that
makes
PM: >it worth the while of the state to spend over one and a quarter
million
PM: >on you?
A private individual or group would not spend over a million pounds to
verbally torture a victim without some financial motive or gain. Private
industry is driven by the profit motive, and there is no financial profit
to be had from carrying out a campaign in this way. If a private
enterprise were behind it then they would have taken direct physical
action a long time ago.
State enterprises, on the other hand, can afford to be wasteful, since
they are funded by the taxpayer. They do not have to show a money
profit. The employees or contractors employed by a state organisation such
as MI5 are driven by their own personal profit motives, to make the most
money out of their employers for the longest period of time. MI5 is funded
to the tune of #150M p.a.; even a few hundred thousand a year would to
them be affordable if their managers could convince themselves of the
necessity of what they were doing.
Quality of resources / Technical resources - electronic and other
surveillance. In summer 1994 a reputable and competent private detective
agency was employed to conduct a counter-surveillance sweep of my home in
London. They charged us over #400 for this, conducted a thorough search
for radio transmitting devices, hard-wired "probe" microphones and also
tested the telephone line. They found nothing. This was not altogether
surprising, since it had been made very clear to me that there were bugs
in my home; the "buggers" would not have made this clear unless they had
felt their bugs were of sufficient sophistication as to be safe from
detection.
But there is another lesson to be gained from the failure of the private
detectives to find anything. The agency employed was one of the most
reputable in London. They were employed on the principle of "setting a
thief to catch a thief", for if the harassment were being carried out by
private detectives, as I then believed, then surely another set of private
detectives would be able to find the bugs that they had planted. That
these "private eyes" were unable to find anything, and that the harassers
were confident that they would not be able to find any bugs, points to the
harassers being an order of sophistication above a private agency, and
leads me again to believe that a state intelligence service is responsible
for the surveillance and harassment.
Quality of resources / Technical resources - Interception of Postal
service. In summer 1994 when I emigrated to Canada to try to escape the
harassment, I wrote letters home to my family and friends in London. Quite
soon after my arrival in Canada, the harassers were able to find precisely
where I was staying. The only way I can see of "their" being able to find
out my new address was by interception of my letters to the UK.
Later in 1994, I conducted an experiment to see if my letters home were
indeed being read. In a letter home I wrote of being depressed and talked
in vague terms of suicide. I deliberately chose this topic, since I
believed it was the outcome my harassers were trying to achieve, and that
if they read the letter, they would "echo" its contents. Sure enough, soon
afterwards there were two incidents of people shouting "suicide" at me in
public places in Canada.
It is inconceivable for a private agency to have the ability to intercept
postal mail. The state security service on the other hand is well known to
engage in these activities.
Quality of resources / Access to Media. One of the strangest aspects of
this case is the access "they" have to the broadcast and print media. I
still do not understand what could persuade newscasters such as Martyn
Lewis and Michael Buerk, who consider themselves "gentlemen", to behave in
an almost voyeuristic way by "peeking" into the living room of one of
their viewers. A year ago I wrote to the BBC asking if these newscasters
would confirm or deny the accusations made against them. The BBC replied
that their newscasters had denied the accusations, but refused to do so in
writing.
It is well known that MI5 have the ability to plant stories in certain
newspapers, but convincing television newscasters to "watch" a viewer
while they read the news would surely be very difficult for them to
accomplish, unless they presented themselves to these journalists as
being, for example, a group in the media who were seeing to it that I got
my "deserved" treatment. MI5 has a history of manipulating the media, so
it might not be too difficult for them to accomplish such a trick, whereas
a private group would not have this ability.
"Have they ever denied that they are the Security Service?"
No. Never. This is in fact the main reason why I believe "they" are MI5
and not a privately funded group. If my guess had been wrong then I am
sure that "they" would have crowed over my mistake, but they have never
admitted nor denied that they are employees of MI5.
In early January 1996 I flew on a British Airways jet from London to
Montreal; also present on the plane, about three or four rows behind me,
were two young men, one of them fat and voluble, the other silent. It was
quite clear that these two had been planted on the aircraft to "wind me
up". The fat youth described the town in Poland where I had spent
Christmas, and made some unpleasant personal slurs against me. Most
interestingly, he said the words, "he doesnt know who we are".
Now I find this particular form of words very interesting, because while
it is not a clear admission, it is only a half-hearted attempt at denial
of my guess that "they" = "MI5". Had my guess been wrong, the fat youth
would surely have said so more clearly.
"If MI5 were behind it, why would they wish to mask their involvement?"
I have heard a number of times a belief from people in the media that it
is they, the media people, who are behind the abuse. In spring 1994 Chris
Tarrant the Capital Radio D.J. said sarcastically on his breakfast show,
"You know this bloke? he says were trying to kill him. We should be done
for attempted manslaughter". We, we, we. Tarrant thought it was a media
conspiracy.
Returning to the question of "interactive watching" by television
newscasters, it would again be much easier for them to take part in that
sort of activity if they convinced themselves that the surveillance and
abuse were organised by "their own", by media people. It must be second
nature to MI5 to mask their involvement in the matters they deal with; in
this case, they pretend the campaign is organised by a group in the media,
and any journalists who suspect otherwise keep their silence.
Conclusion
Over the last three years I have stated with some force my belief that MI5
are responsible for my misfortunes. I have done so on Internet newsgroups,
in letters and faxes to people in politics and the media in the UK, and in
1997 I made a formal complaint to MI5 regarding their activities; the
Security Service Tribunal replied in June 1997 that "no determination in
your favour has been made on your complaint". (I believe the statement by
the Security Service Tribunal can be disregarded, as they have never, ever
made a ruling in favour of a complainant.) In three years of naming MI5 as
my oppressor "they" have never denied the charge. To me, their silence on
this point indicates that my guess was accurate. I believe my persecutors
stand identified. The question of why they should carry out this campaign
is one I will try to answer in a future article.
8516
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
|
|
Stron (10): [1 ]
Aktualna data: śro lut 8 23:46:24 EST 2012
Łączny czas generowania strony wyniósł 0,08668 sekund. |
Użytkownicy
Szukaj
Pomoc
Zarejestruj się
Zaloguj się
Strona główna
