Four years of a lying poster on the internet.
<fvfmieim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message news:dm0711260909322142@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 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 censor****p is impossible. on the internet
> newsgroups.
>
> Police Refuse to. Act
>
> I have complained several. times to the Metropolitan Police, who have
each
> time refused to. help.
>
> From:. Green <Green@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Newsgroups:.
uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
> Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why. Aren't the British Police Doing Their
> Job?
> Reply-To:. Green@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Sun Apr 7. 21:13:30 1996
>
> In article. <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> . bu765@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"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 sup****t 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
> ****ing 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 ****ft than have some high ranking spook
having.
> a go at his
> boss and. getting him a bollocking.
>
> In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. . Just
> remember that saying
> about the enemy of. your enemies.
>
> Most recently, I wrote in March 1999 to Charing Cross. Police Station
> CID. They did not acknowledge or reply to my letter. When. I phoned them
> up, the detective Id written to treated me to. a sadly not unusual
display
> of police. bigotry, with an uneducated rant about "your paranoid
rubbish".
>
> It would be nice to think that such. uneducated bigotry is something
> other
> than wholly. typical of police behaviour, but unfortunately that is an
> illusion. that is rapidly dispelled.
>
> Uncorruptible Jon Snow of Channel Four. News
>
> From previous articles the reader will know. what I think Jon Snow has
> recently been watching me while he reads Channel Four News. in the
> evening. Recently I. digitized a few moments of one such broadcast,
where
> his face. twists into a smile, without there being anything in the news
> broadcast to cause. merriment. Here is a usenet post from some time ago
on
> MI5s "bought and paid for" tools. in the so-called "free" press.
>
>
> Peter Harding. (harding@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
) 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. do***ented that MI5 sometimes "bought" journalists and
> broadcasters?
> I remember reading a re****t 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 re****ted in any of the papers?
>
> It has been re****ted 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 sup****ted by the observation that it's the same
agents
> who are doing
> the harassment. Six months ago in a local hospital I was. harassed by
> someone whose face
> I had seen (he had stared straight at me aggressively, at. the time I
just
> thought it
> was some nutter but. it turns out he was one of "them") aboard a KLM
> flight a couple of
> years ago. It's. presumably been the same people most of the time. I've
> seen the way
> contractors act when they don't want their. positions terminated. Would
> these agents
> really want to lose their. well-paid employment harassing me? Presumably
> they are
> promising their bosses a "breakthrough" (ie my demise) real-soon-now and
> have been. for
> the last seven years, while all the while these. MI5 agents skim
millions
> off the. taxpayer.
>
> I wouldn't mind a job like that. Perhaps if I persecute myself a little
> bit,. like
> standing in front of a mirror. and shouting mindless obscenities, do you
> reckon I'd get
> a slice. of the caky Service Tribunal. This year Nick Brooks, current
> Tribunal Secretary, confirmed to me that. he could not think of a single
> case where the Tribunal had. found in favour of a complainant. Here is
my
> usenet post from. two years ago.
>
> Subject:. MI5: "It wasn't us"
> Newsgroups:. uk.misc,uk.legal
> Organization:. Toronto Free-Net
>
> "The Security Service Tribunal have now investigated your complaint and.
> have
> asked me to inform you that no. determination in your favour has been
made
> on
> your. complaint."
>
> Signed ER Wilson,. Tribunal Secretary
>
> Well that's a relief then. All that spamming for nothing eh. Gaw
blimey,.
> if
> they say they're not doing. it then it can't be them, can it?
>
> In a recent letter to Mr Brooks I expressed the opinion. that the
Tribunal
> were unable to fulfil their responsibilities in. the face of MI5
> falsehoods. Nevertheless, I do. intend to make another complaint to the
> Tribunal in the near future, despite the Tribunal appearing to be. a
> toothless. watchdog.
>
> Discrimination against a. Unit Minority
>
> MI5 have been very clear in their instructions as to what I. should
> do. They have openly shouted at me. the word "suicide", and also from
the
> other abuse it is clear that they want. my existence terminated.
>
> This point is covered in more detail in a previous article.. The
following
> post describes the xenophobic nature of MI5s campaign against me.. They
> have refined their bigotry down to. a unit minority, yet they make use
of
> the discrimination against the mentally ill which is a feature. of
current
> British. society.
>
> Subject: Re: MI5 says "Kill. Yourself"
> Newsgroups:. uk.misc,uk.legal,uk.politics.misc,uk.media
> References:. <zlsiida.4248.3258FE24@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <53eeev$cmg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Organization:. Toronto Free-Net
> Distribution:
>
> iain@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(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.
>
> 4124
>
|
