XPost: comp.sys.super, comp.sys.tandem, comp.sys.unisys   
   XPost: comp.terminals   
      
   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   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)