Newsgroup: it.diritto.condominio
Titolo: M`I 5-Pe rsecution - th e B BC, te levision a nd r adio

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
-= the BBC, television and. radio -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
The first incident in June 1990. was when a BBC newsreader made what seemed
to be a reaction to something which. had happened in my home, and out of
context of what they were reading.. My first reaction was disbelief; nothing
of the sort had ever happened before, the idea that such a thing. could
occur had not crossed. my mind, yet there was no doubt of what had just
taken place. My disbelief eroded as this recurred. time after time. Besides
the news, offenders included shows such as Crimewatch (!), Newsnight,. and
"entertainment" shows.. There seems to be very little moral understanding
among the people who make. these programmes; they just assume they will
never be caught,. so they carry on without a thought for the illegality or
amorality of what they do. The only time I ever. heard a word raised in
doubt. was by Paxman being interviewed by someone else (I think by Clive
Anderson) back in 1990; referring. to the "watching" he said it troubled
him, and when asked by the host what you could do about it,. replied "Well,
you could just. switch it off" (meaning the surveillance monitor in the
studio). He clearly didn't let his doubts stand in. the way of continued
surreptitious spying from his own or other. people's shows, though.
Now you're convinced this is a troll, aren't you? This. story has been the
subject of much debate. on the uk.* Usenet newsgroups for over a year, and
some readers believe it to. be an invention (it has even been suggested that
a group of psychology students are responsible!),. others think it
symptomatic of a derangement of the author, and a few give. it credence.
Quite a few people do know part or all of the story already, so this. text
will fill in the gaps in their knowledge. For the rest, what. may persuade
you of the third possibility is. that some of the incidents detailed are
checkable against any archives of radio and. TV programmes that exist; that
the incidents involve named people (even if those hiding. in the shadows
have. not made their identity or affiliations evident), and those people
may be persuaded to. come out with the truth; and that the campaign of
harassment is continuing today both in the UK and on. the American
continent, in a none-too-secret fashion; by its nature the significant. risk
of. exposure increases with time.
On. several occasions people said to my face that harassment from the TV was
happening. On the first day. I worked in Oxford, I spent the evening in the
local pub with the. company's technical director Ian, and Phil, another
employee. Ian made a few references to me. and said to Phil, as if in an
aside, "Is he the bloke who's. been on TV?" to which Phil replied, "Yes, I
think. so".
I made. a number of efforts to find the bugs, without success; last year we
employed professional counter-surveillance people to. scan for bugs (see
later) again without result. In. autumn 1990 I disposed of my TV and watched
virtually no television for the next. three years. But harassment from TV
stations has gone on for over six years. and continues to this day. This is
something that. many people obviously know is happening; yet the TV staff
have the morality of paedophiles, that because. they're getting away with it
they feel no. wrong.
Other people who were involved in the abuse in 1990 were DJs on BBC. radio
stations, notably disc. jockeys from Radio 1 and other stations (see the
following section). Again, since they don't have sense in. the first place
they can't be. expect to have the moral sense not to be part of criminal
harassment.
1518

are happy only in proportion as we
draw near it; and that, as there are no more woes for those who have
complete assurance of eternity, so there is no more happiness for those who
have no insight into it.
Surely then it is a great evil thus to be in doubt, but it is at least an
indispensable duty to seek when we are in such doubt; and thus the doubter
who does not seek is altogether completely unhappy and completely wrong. And
if besides this he is easy and content, professes to be so, and indeed
boasts of it; if it is this state itself which is the subject of his joy and
vanity, I have no words to describe so silly a creature.
How can people hold these opinions? What joy can we find in the expectation
of nothing but hopeless misery? What reason for boasting that we are in
impenetrable darkness? And how can it happen that the following argument
occurs to a reasonable man?
"I know not who put me into the world, nor what the world is, nor what I
myself am. I am in terrible ignorance of everything. I know not what my body
is, nor my senses, nor my soul, not even that part of me which thinks what I
say, which reflects on all and on itself, and knows itself no more than the
rest. I see those frightful spaces of the universe which surround me, and I
find myself tied to one corner of this vast expanse, without knowing why I
am put in this place rather than in another, nor why the short time which is
given me to live is assigned to me at th