-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-= MI5:. bugging and counter-surveillance -=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

PO: >Did. you ever look for the bugs in your house ? If not, why not ? I mean if
PO: >I thought that was happening to me, I'd search the place from. top to bottom,
PO: >I mean I live there I would know if anything was. out of place. If I was
PO: >really suspicious, I would call in one of those. bug detection teams which
PO: >have those machines. that pick up the transmitted radio waves. This
PO: >reminds me of BUGS, that new programme on BBC1. on

That's exactly what we did. We went to. a competent, professional detective
agency in London, paid. them over 400 quid to debug our house. They used
scanner. devices which go to over 1 GHz and would pick up any nearby
transmitter in that range, they also. checked the phones and found
nothing.... but if the tap was at the exchange, then they wouldn't find
anything, would. they?

CS: >Doesn't this suggest to you that there are, in fact, no bugs to be. found?

You can assume that they've done this sort of thing to other people in. more
"serious" cases, where they would. know the targets would suspect the
presence of electronic. surveillance. So they will have developed techniques
and devices. which are not readily detectable either by visual inspection or
by electronic means. What those techniques might be, I couldn't. guess.

In this case, the existence of bugging devices was. clear from the
beginning, and. they "rubbed it in" with what was said by the boy on the
coach. It was almost as. if they wanted counter-surveillance people to be
called in, who they knew would fail to detect the bugging devices,. causing
loss of credibility to the. other things I would have to say relating to the
harassment.

I did all the things someone in my. situation would do to try to find the
bugs. In addition to calling in professional. help using electronic
counter-surveillance, I made a close visual inspection of. electrical
equipment, plus any. points where audio or video surveillance devices might
have been concealed. Of course, I. found nothing. Normal surveillance
"mini-cameras" are quite noticeable and require visible. supporting
circuitry. It seems to me the best place. to put a small video surveillance
device would be additional to a piece of electronic equipment such. as a TV
or video. It would be necessary to physically. break in to a property to fit
such. a device.

3151

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

3151