M I-5,Persecutio n my res ponse to th e h arassment

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= 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.

9692

Come on old chap, stop the excessive posting, you're safe here.


"imvev@yahoo.com" wrote:

> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> -= 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.
>
> 9692
>
>