Four Years of "MI5 Persecution" Posts on Internet Newsgroups


For approximately the first three years of the MI5 persecution, from June 1990 until late 1992, I kept as quiet as possible, in the hope that by not reacting, MI5’s interest in me would decrease and they would simply go away of their own accord. This is the sort of behaviour some people employ against bullies; if the bullies aren’t getting a reaction, then they might simply go away and victimize someone else.


Unfortunately, this tactic didn’t work. The quieter I became, the more shrill and hysterical the noise from the Security Service operatives. For about two years I didn’t watch TV news at all. Yet this only heightened their obsessed fixation; they continued to follow me wherever I went, they continued to induce harassment at work by managers and fellow workers, and they continued to encourage me to commit suicide. They seemed to regard my refusal to react as a crime which they would have to “put right” by ever more extreme forms of abuse.


Finally, in 1995, I changed tactics radically. Since late 1994 I had had accounts with internet providers in Ontario, Canada. I discovered the cornucopia of internet newsgroups, on every topic from consumer electronics, to politics and legal topics, and I discovered online services such as Compuserve and AOL. In May 1994, I made the first posting to the conspiracy newsgroup, on the subject of “BBC’s Hidden Shame”.


BBC's Hidden Shame

The internet newsgroup discussion, which has now reached its fourth anniversary, started with an article in alt.conspiracy, which I reproduce here.


Date: Thu May  4 18:27:24 1995

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy

Subject: BBC's Hidden Shame


Remember the two-way televisions in George Orwell's 1984? The ones which watched you

back? Which you could never get rid of, only the sound could be turned down?


Well the country which brought Orwell into the world has made his nightmare follow into

the world after him. Since 1990 the British have been waging war against one of their

own citizens using surveillance to invade privacy and a campaign of abuse in the

transmitted media in their efforts to humiliate their "victim".


And the most remarkable thing about it is that what they do is not even illegal - the

UK has no laws to protect the privacy of its citizens, nor does it proscribe harassment

or abuse except in the case of racial abuse.


A lot of people in England know this to be going on, yet so far they have maintained

perfect "omerta"; not a sound, not a squeak has escaped into the English press, and for

all the covert harassment absolutely nothing has come out into the public domain.


Have the British gone mad? I think we should be told



At this point, I did not name MI5 as my persecutors. I was still unsure that they were the ones responsible for the “psychological terrorism”. In followup posts however I did name them; and the persecutors have never denied the claim; so I think my guess is valid. (The Security Service Tribunal in 1997 have said “no determination in your favour was made”, but it is a well established fact that MI5 lies routinely to the Tribunal which has never found in favour of a plaintiff, so no conclusions can be drawn from this.)


This first post was made to alt.conspiracy, but further posts were made to the UK-local newsgroups, in particular uk.misc but also and uk.politics (which is now called uk.politics.misc). Some time ago I tried to take the battle to the Compuserve forums, UKPOLITICS (which is now called UKCURRENT - current affairs), but my articles were censored by the forum operators. Such censorship is impossible on the internet newsgroups.


Police Refuse to Act

I have complained several times to the Metropolitan Police, who have each time refused to help.


From: Green <>

Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british

Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing Their Job?


Date: Sun Apr  7 21:13:30 1996


In article <>

  "Mike Corley" writes:


> Last Easter (1995) I went into the local police station in London and spoke to

> an officer about the harassment against me. But I couldn't provide tangible

> evidence; what people said, in many cases years ago, is beyond proof, and

> without something to support my statements I cannot expect a police officer to

> take the complaint seriously.


This in itself dos not suggest that the police have it in for you. The old bill

operates on extremely tight spending limits forced on them by that pillock Michael

Howard, and without evidence, they often have higher priorities than chasing something

that cannot go to court.


I doubt that the police are actually being leant on, but they probably realise that if

they looked into this, they would be leant on hard. The met always stays away from

anything that looks like it has Defence, Security or secret service interest already,

because they realise that they are below these government agencies in the general

pecking order.


If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping on me, they would

show me the door without even looking at my evidence, because that bored desk seargant

with only five years to go before he retires doesn't want to start fucking about with

somebody who has incurred the wrath of Stella Rimington.  He would rather deal with the

lost dogs and driving licence producers, eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss

off home at the end of his shift than have some high ranking spook having a go at his

boss and getting him a bollocking.


In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise.  Just remember that saying

about the enemy of your enemies.



Most recently, I wrote in March 1999 to Charing Cross Police Station CID. They did not acknowledge or reply to my letter. When I phoned them up, the detective I’d written to treated me to a sadly not unusual display of police bigotry, with an uneducated rant about “your paranoid rubbish”.


It would be nice to think that such uneducated bigotry is  something other than wholly typical of police behaviour, but unfortunately that is an illusion that is rapidly dispelled.


Uncorruptible Jon Snow of Channel Four News

From previous articles the reader will know what I think Jon Snow has recently been watching me while he reads Channel Four News in the evening. Recently I digitized a few moments of one such broadcast, where his face twists into a smile, without there being anything in the news broadcast to cause merriment. Here is a usenet post from some time ago on MI5’s “bought and paid for” tools in the so-called “free” press.


Peter Harding ( wrote:

: I was at speakers' corner on Sunday. There was one chap who was bellowing

: about something or other, I don't know what, but one thing he said to

: someone caught my ear:


: "BBC, MI5, same thing."


Can't disagree with that sentiment.


Wasn't it documented that MI5 sometimes "bought" journalists and broadcasters?

I remember reading a report by some jouralist who had been offered an extra

tax-free income by MI5 to become their covert mouthpiece, and had refused.


> : >mouthpiece, and had refused.

> :

> : It was Jon Snow of Channel 4.

> Was it reported in any of the papers?


It has been reported several times. The most recent was in Private Eye,

a few months back. As I recall they also wanted information from him;

journalists would be a natural choice for members of the Security Service

and the Secret Intelligence Service for information sources.


> It might be interesting to see what he had to say regarding their

> attempt to recruit him.


He was most concerned that many others would have accepted such an

offer. However, we can probably make an educated guess as to some of

those who accepted: Nigel West (Rupert Allason, MP) and Chapman Pincher

would come near to the top of the list.



\/ David Boothroyd. Socialist and election analyst. Omne ignotum pro magnifico.

British Elections and Politics at

I wish I was in North Dakota. Next General Election must be before 22nd May '97

The House of Commons now : C 324, Lab 272, L Dem 25, UU 9, PC 4, SDLP 4, SNP 4,

UDUP 3, Ind 1, Ind UU 1, Spkrs 4. Government majority = 1. Telephone Tate 6125.


Corrupt Security Service agents steal millions from taxpayers

Money is of course a factor in the grand equation which is the MI5 persecution. It costs money for the Security Service to “buy” people in the media etc. But that is only a small part of their expenditure of taxpayers’ resources. Most of the expenditure is directly on the salaries if the agents involved; and in this post I put forward the theory that MI5 are trying to draw out their involvement for as long as possible, very cynically, to maximise their income and line their own pockets.


At each stage they have tried to pretend that I am something out of the ordinary.

Either I was very stupid ("he's an idiot") or very clever ("he's like a genius").

Either I was a threat to Western civilization (Levin once referred to me as the next

Hitler) or I was completely defenceless ("a soft toy").


Now, it should be obvious to any person with common-sense that I am not out of the

ordinary in any way. I have an IQ which is average for the Web, I am racially white

European, and there are plenty of other people with schizophrenia or epilepsy out there

who haven't been targeted for MI5 attention, so why me?


I think the answer is that the MI5 agents who harass me have cynically exploited the

situation by painting me as extraordinary in order to assure themselves of well-paid

employment funded by the ordinary British taxpayer. To put it bluntly, they are

stealing millions of pounds from the taxpayer to feed their own pockets.


This assertion is supported by the observation that it's the same agents who are doing

the harassment. Six months ago in a local hospital I was harassed by someone whose face

I had seen (he had stared straight at me aggressively, at the time I just thought it

was some nutter but it turns out he was one of "them") aboard a KLM flight a couple of

years ago. It's presumably been the same people most of the time. I've seen the way

contractors act when they don't want their positions terminated. Would these agents

really want to lose their well-paid employment harassing me? Presumably they are

promising their bosses a "breakthrough" (ie my demise) real-soon-now and have been for

the last seven years, while all the while these MI5 agents skim millions off the



I wouldn't mind a job like that. Perhaps if I persecute myself a little bit, like

standing in front of a mirror and shouting mindless obscenities, do you reckon I'd get

a slice of the cake? I mean, I'd be lowering my morale wouldn't I, so wouldn't that

qualify for some of that lovely taxpayer's loot?


MI5 Lie and Deny Harassing me

In 1997 I complained to the Security Service Tribunal. This year Nick Brooks, current Tribunal Secretary, confirmed to me that he could not think of a single case where the Tribunal had found in favour of a complainant. Here is my usenet post from two years ago.


Subject: MI5: "It wasn't us"

Newsgroups: uk.misc,

Organization: Toronto Free-Net


"The Security Service Tribunal have now investigated your complaint and have

asked me to inform you that no determination in your favour has been made on

your complaint."


Signed ER Wilson, Tribunal Secretary


Well that's a relief then. All that spamming for nothing eh. Gaw blimey, if

they say they're not doing it then it can't be them, can it?


In a recent letter to Mr Brooks I expressed the opinion that the Tribunal were unable to fulfil their responsibilities in the face of MI5 falsehoods. Nevertheless, I do intend to make another complaint to the Tribunal in the near future, despite the Tribunal appearing to be a toothless watchdog.


Discrimination against a Unit Minority

MI5 have been very clear in their instructions as to what I should do. They have openly shouted at me the word “suicide”, and also from the other abuse it is clear that they want my existence terminated.


This point is covered in more detail in a previous article. The following post describes the xenophobic nature of MI5’s campaign against me. They have refined their bigotry down to a unit minority, yet they make use of the discrimination against the mentally ill which is a feature of current British society.



Subject: Re: MI5 says "Kill Yourself"

Newsgroups: uk.misc,,uk.politics.misc,

References: <> <53eeev$> <5$

Organization: Toronto Free-Net

Distribution: (Iain L M Hotchkies) wrote:

>Indeed. If you've ever had a 'conversation' with someone suffering

>from florid schizophrenia, you'll know how difficult it can be to

>'argue' with them.


I don't have florid symptoms. But I'm in a difficult situation, because those

people who don't know, aren't going to believe, and those who do, they just go

along with the crowd. It's never a good idea to go against the grain, and the

grain here is defined by interests in the establishment and the media. Even

people who could say out loud what was happening won't, because then there's a

risk that they'll be seen as traitors and ostracised.


Usually this type of 'hidden abuse' is racial and targetted at a racial

minority within a country. You keep the minorities out of the good jobs, but

you don't admit discrimination exists. It happens everywhere, not just in

Britain. The persecution that is going on now is in reality a refined form of

racism. Instead of "nigger" it's "nutter", and abusing the mentally ill is

still socially acceptable today. In 50 years it might not be, but today there

isn't any social or legal sanction against it.


So really they've refined racial harassment down to a minority of one. The

words may be different, but the methods are the same.



Reply to this artice by fax to   0171-681-1190             by email to