-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=
-= 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.

719

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= who knows about it?. =-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Many people know, both in the establishment and. media, and among the
general public. Despite an. absence of its target from the UK for more than
two years,. the echoes of paranoia can still be heard loud and clear from
across the water. When it started in 1990, the only people who knew. were
those in BBC television who were spying on my home, and. a few radio
broadcasters.. There were a few cases of public harassment, but very little
compared to the. situation that developed a couple of years later.

The list today includes BBC TV staff (newsreaders. such as Martyn Lewis,
Michael Buerk, Nicholas Witchell), people from radio. stations such as
Chris Tarrant of Capital and Radio. 1 DJs, people in the print media, but
also many people. in the general public. All united in a conspiracy which
breaks. the laws which the UK does have regarding harassment, and all
completely uncaring for any semblance of decency. or elementary respect
for individual. rights.

The British police. (obviously) do know the nature of the harassment and in
all probability the identity of those. behind it. Some time ago I made a
complaint. to my local police station in London, without positive result.
The UK police are. failing in their duty to see the law enforced in not
checking. the abuse.

3149

The article of which part is reproduced below. was penned by Bernard Levin
for the Features section of the Times on 21 September 1991. To my. mind, it
described the. situation at the time and in particular a recent meeting with
a friend, during which I for. the first time admitted to someone other than
my GP that I had been subjected to a conspiracy of harassment. over the
previous. year and a half.

>There is a madman running loose about London, called David. Campbell; I have
>no reason to believe that he is violent, but he should. certainly be
>approached with caution. You may know him by the curious glitter in. his
>eyes and a persistent trembling of his hands; if that. does not suffice, you
>will. find him attempting to thrust no fewer than 48 books into your arms,
>all hardbacks, with a promise that, if you should return to. the same
>meeting-place next year,. he will heave another 80 at you.
>
>If, by now, the police have arrived and are keeping a close watch. on him,
>you may feel sufficiently emboldened to examine the. books. The jackets are
>a model of. uncluttered typography, elegantly and simply laid out; there is
>an unobtrusive colophon of a rising sun, probably not picked at. random.
>Gaining confidence - the lunatic is smiling by now,. and the policemen, who
>know about such things,. have significantly removed their helmets - you
>could. do worse than take the jacket off the first book in the pile. The
>only word possible to. describe the binding is sumptuous; real cloth in a
>glorious shade. of dark green, with the title and author in black and gold
>on the. spine.
>
>Look at it more closely;. your eyes do not deceive you - it truly does have
>real top-bands and. tail-bands, in yellow, and, for good measure, a silk
>marker ribbon in a lighter green. The paper is cream-wove. and acid-free,
>and the. book is sewn, not glued.
>
>Throughout the encounter,. I should have mentioned, our loony has been
>chattering away, although what he is trying to say is almost impossible. to
>understand; after a. time, however, he becomes sufficiently coherent to make
>clear that he is trying to sell the books to. you. Well, now, such quality
>in bookmaking today can only be for collectors' limited editions at. a
>fearsome price. - #30, #40, #50?
>
>No, no, he says, the glitter more powerful than. ever and the trembling of
>his hands rapidly spreading throughout his. entire body; no, no - the books
>are priced variously. at #7, #8 or #9, with the top price #12.
>
>At this, the policemen understandably put their. helmets back on; one of
>them draws his truncheon and. the other can be heard summoning
>reinforcements on his walkie-talkie.. The madman bursts into tears, and
>swears it is. all true.
>
>And it. is.
>
>David Campbell has acquired the. entire rights to the whole of the
>Everyman's Library, which died a lingering. and shameful death a decade or
>so ago, and he proposes to start. it all over again - 48 volumes this
>September and 80 more. next year, in editions I have described, at the
>prices specified. He proposes to launch his. amazing venture simultaneously
>in Britain and. the United States, with the massive firepower of Random
>Century at his back in this country, and the dashing cavalry. of Knopf
>across the water, and no one who loves literature and courage will. forbear
>to. cheer.

At the time this article was. written I had believed for some time that
columnists. in the Times and other journalists had been making references to
my situation. Nothing unusual about this you may think, plenty of. people
have the same sort of. ideas and obviously the papers aren't writing about
them, so why should. my beliefs not be as false as those of others?

What. makes this article so extraordinary is that three or four days
immediately preceding its publication, I had. a meeting with a friend,
during the course of which we discussed. the media persecution, and in
particular that by Times columnists.. It seemed to me, reading the article
by Levin in Saturday’s paper, that he was describing in some. detail his
"artist’s impression" of. that meeting. Most telling are the final
sentences,. when he writes, "The madman bursts into tears, and swears it is
all true. And it is." Although I did not "burst into tears" (he seems. to be
using a bit. of poetic licence and exaggerating) I did try hard to convince
my friend that. it was all true; and I am able to concur with Mr Levin,
because,. of course, it is.

At the. beginning of the piece Levin reveals a fear of being attacked by the
"irrational" subject of his story, saying "I. have no reason to believe that
he is violent, but he should. certainly be approached with caution". This
goes back to the xenophobic. propaganda of "defence" against a "threat"
which was seen at the very beginning of the harassment. The. impression of a
"madman running loose" who needs to be controlled through. an agency which
assigns to itself the mantle of the "police" is. also one which had been
expressed. elsewhere.

In the final paragraph. of this extract, his reference to Everyman’s Library
as having "died a lingering and shameful death a decade or so. ago" shows
clearly what sort of conclusion they wish to. their campaign. They want a
permanent solution, and as they are prevented from achieving. that solution
directly, they waste significant resources on methods which have. been
repeatedly shown to be ineffective for such. a purpose.

5579