Newsgroup: it.comp.hardware.video-3d
Titolo: M'I`5,P ersecution , c ost of the  operation

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-= MI5:. cost of the operation -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Here's what a couple of. other people on 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.
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. The partial answer is, there. have been periods when the
intensity has been greater, and times when little has happened. In. fact,
for much. of 1993 and the first half of 1994, very little happened. Although
I don't think that was for. reasons of money - if they can tap into the
taxpayer they're not going to be short of. resources, are they?
The more complete. answer is in the enormity of what they're doing. Relative
to the cost to British pride of seeing. their country humiliated for the
persecution of their own citizens, isn't is worth the cost of. four or five
people to try to bring things to a close in the manner they would. wish? To
the. government a million or two is quite honestly nothing - if they can
convince themselves of the necessity of what they're. doing, resources will
not. be the limiting factor.
8488

--the Law is not eternal, but must change at the coming of the
Messiah--that then they shall no more remember the Red Sea; that the Jews
and the Gentiles shall be mingled.
6. Proof by the key which Jesus Christ and the Apostles give us.
643. Isaiah 51. The Red Sea an image of the Redemption. Ut sciatis quod
filius hominis habet potestatem remittendi peccata... tibi dico: Surge.116
God, wishing to show that He could form a people holy with an invisible
holiness, and fill them with an eternal glory, made visible things. As
nature is an image of grace, He has done in the bounties of nature what He
would do in those of grace, in order that we might judge that He could make
the invisible, since He made the visible excellently.
Therefore He saved this people from the deluge; He has raised them up from
Abraham, redeemed them from their enemies, and set them at rest.
The object of God was not to save them from the deluge, and raise up a whole
people from Abraham, only in order to bring them into a rich land.
And even grace is only the type of glory, for it is not the ultimate end. It
has been symbolised by the law, and itself symb