Prev: M,I.5 Per secution ' pu rpose in publi cizing it ; censorsh ip in uk. * newsgr oups
Next: M`I'5.Per secution ` thei r m ethods a nd tac tics
From: fmvfm on 1 Jan 2008 10:36
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= my response to the. harassment -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

My first. reaction in 1990/91 was to assume that if I broke contact then
they would not be able to follow and would. lose interest. So I did the
things that. have been suggested by other people; I sold my television,
stopped listening to the radio and tried to withdraw away from. the sources
of. abuse as much as possible. I reasoned that they must have more important
things to deal with. and that normal people would simply leave me alone if
it were made. difficult for them to continue their harassment.

I reckoned without the. sheer vindictiveness of the abusers. They did not
let up but instead "got to" people around me, mainly people at. work, to do
their dirty work for them. I went to see my. GP, who refused to believe what
he was being. told, and refused to direct me on to anyone who could be of
practical assistance. It. was not until three years had passed that the GP
admitted the matter was outside his competence and suggested going to. the
police.

In the summer of 1994 we called in. counter-surveillance experts from a
private detective agency to. sweep our house and telephone for bugging
devices. They conducted a. thorough search and found nothing; but as noted
above, since the existence. of surveillance was being forced in my face by
the harassers, you would expect them to have taken. the possibility of a
counter-surveillance sweep into account. when planning the type of devices
to. be employed.

In Easter 1995 I made a complaint to. my local Police station in London, but
the police have not. expressed any intention to do anything about the
continuing. harassment ("we're not saying it's happening and we're not
saying it isn't. happening" were the words used). I think the officer I
spoke to at Easter wasn't aware of it happening, although other members. of
the police force obviously. do know.

From. April 1995 until the present time the matter has been discussed in a
lot of detail on the. Usenet (Internet) "uk.misc" newsgroup. That discussion
has given birth to the article which you are now reading. My hopes. in
posting to Usenet were that. wider publicizing would discourage the security
services from continuing their harassment, and "draw. people out" into
concurring with the truth of what was being said. Neither of. those have
followed, but the discussion has served a purpose. in allowing this
structured. report to be created.

7545

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: M,I.5 Per secution ' pu rpose in publi cizing it ; censorsh ip in uk. * newsgr oups
Next: M`I'5.Per secution ` thei r m ethods a nd tac tics