M I.5'Persec ution wh y th e securit y services ?
mive...@gmail.com
-= why the security services?. -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
You may ask, why do. I think the "they" referred to are the security
services? Is there any evidence that there is a single source,. as opposed
to a loosely based "whispering campaign" amongst. many people? Even if there
is a single source, is. there any evidence that "they" are professional
"buggers". as opposed to amateurs, or perhaps people working for a privately
funded. organization?
a) As to the question of a single. source versus something more fragmented;
it is quite obvious that. there is a single source from the way the campaign
has been. carried out. Since things have been repeated verbatim which were
said in my home, there must be one group which. does the watching and
listening.. Since on several occasions (mainly during travel) people have
been planted in close proximity and rehearsed in what. they were to say, it
follows that someone must have done the planning for that,. and again a
single. source is indicated.
b) So why couldn't it be amateurs? Why couldn't it be a. private
organisation, for example a private detective agency. paid to manage the
campaign and. undertake the technical aspects? Some detective agencies are
unscrupulous as has been proved on the occasions in the past. when they've
been exposed or caught; they too can have access to the bugging. technology
deployed;. and there are reported cases of MI5 paying private eyes to do
their dirty work (against peace campaigners and similar enemies of. the
state) on the understanding that if they were caught then they. could deny
all knowledge. Why couldn't that be the. case?
The main factor pointing to. direct security service involvement (as opposed
to amateurs. or MI5 proxies) is the breadth of their access to the media in
particular, and the fact that. the television companies are so involved in
the campaign. The BBC would not. directly invade someone's home themselves,
since. it would not be within their remit to allocate personnel or financial
resources to do so. An organisation. of their stature would not take part in
a campaign set up by private sources.. The only people they would take
material from would be the security. services, presumably on the assumption
that if the cat ever. flew out of the bag yowling it would be MI5 who would
take the. consequences.
State sponsorship for these acts of psychological terrorism is. also
indicated by duration; support for over. six years for a team of three or
four. people would be beyond the means and will of most private sources.
The viciousness of the slanders and personal denigration. also points to
MI5; they traditionally "protect" the British state from politicians. of the
wrong hue by character assassination,. and in this case are using their
tried and tested methods to murder with words an. enemy they have invented
for. themselves.
And there are precedents. Diana and Hewitt. were alleged to have been filmed
"at it" by. an Army intelligence team which had operated in Northern
Ireland, these allegations were made by someone. called Jones who had been
on the team. His statements were denied by the. defence establishment who
tried to. character-assassinate by describing him as the "Jones twins".
Funny how if you. tell the truth, then you must be ill, isn't it? Thought
only. communists behaved like that?
Hewitt later said that he'd been spoken to by someone in. the army who
revealed the existence of videotapes of him. and Diana, and that the tapes
would be published if. any attempt was made by them to resume their
association.
1058
mive...@gmail.com
Can we think seriously of the importance of this subject without being
horrified at conduct so extravagant?
This resting in ignorance is a monstrous thing, and they who pass their life
in it must be made to feel its extravagance and stupidity, by having it
shown to them, so that they may be confounded by the sight of their folly.
For this is how men reason, when they choose to live in such ignorance of
what they are and without seeking enlightenment. "I know not," they say...
196. Men lack heart; they would not make a friend of it.
197. To be insensible to the extent of despising interesting things, and to
become insensible to the point which interests us most.
198. The sensibility of man to trifles, and his insensibility to great
things, indicates a strange inversion.
199. Let us imagine a number of men in chains and all condemned to death,
where some are killed each day in the sight of the others, and those who
remain see their own fate in that of their fellows and wait their turn,
looking at each other sorrowfully and without hope. It is an image of the
condition of men.
200. A man in a dungeon, ignorant whether his sentence be pronounced and
having only one hour to learn it, but this hour enough, if he knew that it
is pronounced, to obtain its repeal, would act unnaturally in spending that
hour, not in ascertaining his sentence, but in playing piquet. So it is
against nature that man, etc. It is making heavy the hand of God.
Thus not only the zeal of those who seek Him proves God, but also the
blindness of thos