I am MI5 and I am still watching YOU!
We have a list of secret agents, we are all watching you
BitterAnklo = Japan agent in Osaka
lt Lee - CCP PLA type from China and North Carolina
BaldEagle - Hawaii office to Singa****e
Supertech= Korea to Texas field office
Abian Chen= Taiwan to NY
L. Alpert = Jewish plant/ in CT.
Susan Cohen our head UK MI5 office head.
YES we are all watching YOU!
<ivmivm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message news:bi0711260852244700@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 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 tem****ary 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 re****ted 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
op****tunity
> 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
> re****ted 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. Air****t 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 ****ft, 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 Air****t; 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 air****t, 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 ****fts -- 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 do***ented 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 Air****t 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 sup****t 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.
>
> 2767
>
|
