Feline health and behavior

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.

14546

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

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.

16729

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

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.

18912

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

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 <Gr…@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: Gr…@guidion.demon.co.uk
Date: Sun Apr  7 21:13:30 1996

In article <DpIE0r.736.0.bl…@torfree.net>
           bu…@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 (hard…@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.4248.3258F…@fs1.mcc.ac.uk>
<53eeev$…@axalotl.demon.co.uk>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
Distribution:

i…@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.

21095

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

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.

23278

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

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.

25461

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

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.

27644

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

South Korean scientists have cloned cats that glow red under
ultraviolet light, as part of research aimed at developing treatments
for human genetic diseases, say officials.

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.

29827

–
Posted via NewsDemon.com – Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
      ——->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<——
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access