Road Cycling · Public discussion

MI5 Persecution: Truth or Troll? 13/5/95 (2872)

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 3 posts · 223 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
25 January 2007
Last activity
30 January 2007
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
223
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Date: Sat May 13 21:41:57 1995
    Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.uk
    Subject: Re: BBC's Hidden Shame

    Quoted message said:

    :some pirate radio station in London in 1991, started listening to

    Conclusive proof if ever I heard it.

    Of course you were the only person in the office in the whole of Britain

    Yeah, but this is the point. Each incident is easily and automatically
    deniable along the lines you're taking. But when this happens every
    time, and when you get independent corroboration from other people,
    then there's no escaping it. For example, immediately after I lost
    my job in 91 I went into the local garage to get some work done on the
    car, and one of the blokes there said to the other, "so what do you
    think of it then? it's getting killed on the radio isn't it"
    Now again, you look at that and no proff; you can ask them what they're
    referring to and they can say they're talking about something else.

    Quoted message said:

    I know you may be a little paranoid, but I suggest you sit down
    and work out rationally what possible reason anyone off television,
    or radio would have for listening to your conversations. After all
    it must be hard enough to present a show to millions of people
    without the added burden of watching and listening to a single
    person and slipping their phrases into the programme.

    These presenters are clever people. They wouldn't be presenters
    if they weren't - they're easily capable of reacting to an individual
    in this way.

    What possible reason? I guess because they think it's amusing to do
    so. They know that if you ever tell anybody, without being able to
    show any evidence, then the reaction you'll get from just about
    anybody will be the one you're showing now.

    I realize there are loads of people in England and elsewhere with
    the sort of thoughts I've described in these postings; and almost
    all impartial observers would say that nothing other than an
    go after their private conversations (if they did it to me then I can
    do it to them, it's a questions of technical competence and money).
    If you were lucky, you might be able to entrap them into admission.
    You could of course harass or threaten them back (any coppers reading
    this?) but that would be illegal and might get a result quite
    different to the one you're trying to achieve. Of course, it might
    come out of its own accord given time - if so many people know, if
    they have an escape valve in their "subtext" through the media,
    will it not cease to be at a covert level, given time? Surely it
    is in my interest for it to become overt, since the transgressions
    at this time are on their side and not on mine?

    Thoughts? There must be some way of breaking the secrecy. This
    isn't the first time in human history that a conspiracy has taken
    place on this scale, but the truth tends to out. The situation
    now is they think they';re "winning" hence have little stimulus
    to change the rules - if they started seeing themselves "losing"
    things could change drastically.

    =================================================================

    From: [email hidden] (Alan Hart)
    Newsgroups: uk.misc
    Subject: Re: BBC's Hidden Shame
    Date: Sun May 14 09:59:54 1995

    : Thoughts? There must be some way of breaking the secrecy. This
    : isn't the first time in human history that a conspiracy has taken
    : place on this scale, but the truth tends to out. The situation
    : now is they think they';re "winning" hence have little stimulus
    : to change the rules - if they started seeing themselves "losing"
    : things could change drastically.

    Mike, if that is your name,

    I'm going to try to rationalise what you're telling us. I can think of three
    possible explanations for what you are experiencing.

    One is that there _is_ a conspiracy against you. As a previous writer said,
    though, a lot of these programmes are taped, so it really isn't possible in
    some of the cases you've named. Further, why were no bugs found in your
    house? Finally, unless you are a political figure or someone else in the
    public eye, why would anyone bother? People like me (and I assume you) are
    small fry; our contribution to society is likely to be minor. Why would
    anyone spend so much money and effort on you?

    Another possibility is that you are developing some kind of paranoia. There's
    no stigma attached to this; we're all paranoid to some extent, although
    perhaps not to the extent that a doctor would call us paranoid. I think
    paranoia is quite a straightforward explanation here - you really do believe
    that all these things are aimed at you; you see people everywhere trying to
    get at you. Logic suggests that this cannot really be the case.

    The third possibility is that not even you really believe any of this, and
    that this is a "troll". I'm not sure I believe this possibility, but it's
    possible.

    Anyway, if you want to be sure that you're _not_ going mad, I'd go and see
    your G.P. if I were you. If you don't trust him/her, why not see someone
    recommended by a person you can trust? If you don't trust anyone any more,
    don't you think it's time you got help?

    Alan

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alan Hart - [email hidden] - Cambridge University, UK - +44 1223 515460
    "How many letters are there in the alphabet - is it 27?" - J.R. Histed
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: Ian Preece <[email hidden]>
    Newsgroups: uk.misc
    Subject: Re: BBC's Hidden Shame
    Reply-To: [email hidden]
    Date: Sun May 14 14:58:08 1995

    In article <[email hidden]>

    Alan Hart said:

    The third possibility is that not even you really believe any of this, and
    that this is a "troll". I'm not sure I believe this possibility, but it's
    possible.

    For a troll, the posts are remarkably well-informed on paranoid
    behaviour.. you'd need to be one, or be reasonably well-informed on the
    subject to sustain the tale... which lead me to my theory...*ahem*...:

    An extension to possibility 3 (Number 3.5, perhaps?) is that the original
    poster may be somehting like a psychology student writing a term paper
    on the net community's reactions to this tale. (Now, there's paranoia
    for you! Not only are they listening to/watching us, they're writing
    reports about us too...:-)

    More likely, though, is that the poster is genuinely in need of professional
    help (he has intimated as much, himself) and, as such, he should be encouraged
    to seek it.

    regards,
    IanP
    --
    -----------------------------------------------------
    Ian Preece [email hidden]

    IT Project Specialist Ideas for Hire
    -----------------------------------------------------

    2872

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

  2. Welcome to the party. Freak.

    http://www.rich-essence.com/TheHiddenEvil.pdf

  3. Responding to the subject line only:

    Troll, based on the only criterion needed: It was posted to a
    newsgroup in which the subject matter is absolutely, totally and
    completely off-topic, by someone who is not a participant otherwise,
    at the same time that it was posted to a large number of other equally
    inappropriate forums.

    Truth is irrelevant; it's a troll even if it's true...and if the idiot
    thought he was going to get any sympathy from me with his vandalism,
    he was wrong.

    --
    My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
    Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
    Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.