| poprzedni wątek | następny wątek | pl.biznes |
| 2006-11-28 15:29 | MI5 Persecution: bugging and counter-surveillance | MI5-Victim |
| -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= 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. 139 -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
||
| nowsze | 1 | starsze |
| Tytuł | Autor | Data |
|---|---|---|
MI5 Persecution: cost of the operation |
MI5-Victim | 2006-11-28 15:47 |
MI5 Persecution: how and why did it start? |
MI5-Victim | 2006-11-28 15:55 |
MI5 Persecution: my response to the harassment |
MI5-Victim | 2006-11-28 16:40 |
MI5 Persecution: Observer article |
MI5-Victim | 2006-11-28 22:04 |
MI5 Persecution: how and why did it start? |
MI5Victim | 2006-12-26 21:20 |
MI5 Persecution: Bernard Levin expresses his views |
MI5Victim | 2006-12-26 22:40 |
MI5 Persecution: purpose in publicizing it; censorship in uk.* newsgroups |
MI5Victim | 2006-12-27 06:25 |
MI5 Persecution: their methods and tactics |
MI5Victim | 2006-12-27 07:10 |
MI5 Persecution: why the security services? |
MI5Victim | 2006-12-27 07:33 |
MI5 Persecution: Flight or fight 7/1/96 (8736) |
MI5Victim | 2007-06-23 04:45 |