Discussion:
MI5 Accuse .... "he's a Russian spy"
Add Reply
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-01 20:39:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
This isn't a joke. MI5 really did accuse me of being a spy for the
Russians, in the first year or so of the persecution.

I remember I got on a Northern Line train, northbound, from Clapham
South tube station. Seated nearby was an English woman in (late?)
middle age, with an unhappy dog.

She used my name, and said "they say he's a spy for the Russians". I
very clearly heard that, and very clearly remember it.

I remember her dog looked unhappy.

The English woman may have had some mental health issues, which is
characteristic of MI5's agents.

Needless to say I am not a spy for the Russians. My parents left
Poland which was ruled by the Russian Communists. My family always
votes Conservative.

MI5 also made lots of other allegations about me, which are almost
always bunk.

I think MI5 alleged my being a Russian agent because they have to
pretend this case has national security issues, which it plainly does
not.
Keema's Nan
2019-12-01 21:47:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
This isn't a joke. MI5 really did accuse me of being a spy for the
Russians, in the first year or so of the persecution.
I remember I got on a Northern Line train, northbound, from Clapham
South tube station. Seated nearby was an English woman in (late?)
middle age, with an unhappy dog.
She used my name, and said "they say he's a spy for the Russians". I
very clearly heard that, and very clearly remember it.
I remember her dog looked unhappy.
The English woman may have had some mental health issues, which is
characteristic of MI5's agents.
That certainly explains why the Skripal episode was such a gigantic balls-up.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
Needless to say I am not a spy for the Russians. My parents left
Poland which was ruled by the Russian Communists. My family always
votes Conservative.
MI5 also made lots of other allegations about me, which are almost
always bunk.
I think MI5 alleged my being a Russian agent because they have to
pretend this case has national security issues, which it plainly does
not.
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-02 02:35:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 01 Dec 2019 14:19:40 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
The English woman may have had some mental health issues, which is
characteristic of MI5's agents.
Hardly. It's a very demanding job. Some of them may be 'gay' but
having mental health issues apart from that is a bit of a stretch.
Some years ago, Ray Faiers, who had encountered MI5's operatives, said
they were "sadistic weirdoes". I agree entirely with his view.

I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
Keema's Nan
2019-12-02 08:39:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sun, 01 Dec 2019 14:19:40 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
The English woman may have had some mental health issues, which is
characteristic of MI5's agents.
Hardly. It's a very demanding job. Some of them may be 'gay' but
having mental health issues apart from that is a bit of a stretch.
Some years ago, Ray Faiers, who had encountered MI5's operatives, said
they were "sadistic weirdoes". I agree entirely with his view.
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
Normal people do not dream up false flag events and then blame them on
muslims.
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-03 17:13:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 08:47:52 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
You'll never see their agents...what you will and do see is their
subcontractors, working on zero hour contracts.
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.

Best avoid that topic, eh?
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-03 19:40:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:53:52 -0800, Grikkbustard®?
Not even de Kwin is worth spending £260 miilion on.
Oh, I'm vastly more important than HRH Brenda. The sad thing about
this statement is that it's true. You risk national humiliation if the
MI5 stuff comes to light.

This should have been sorted in 2003, but my barrister Pitt Payne was
against me, and my solicitor Simanowitz had an obsession with
technicalities, so he thought the actual complaint was irrelevant and
must not be mentioned.
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-04 11:01:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
This should have been sorted in 2003, but my barrister Pitt Payne was
against me,
What fucking use is a barrister like that?
What is the term for such a barrister, a "bent brief" ?

Pitt Payne took very little money from me, whch makes his treachery
more palatable.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
and my solicitor Simanowitz had an obsession with
technicalities, so he thought the actual complaint was irrelevant and
must not be mentioned.
That's what you get for appointing a jew solicitor.
Yeah, I'm afraid you're right on that one. I had some sort of silly
idea that a Jewish lawyer would be appropriate to a civil rights case.
Instead he took over 30,000 pounds from me, and then told me I was
"prejudiced".

Cunt, eh.
Keema's Nan
2019-12-04 11:14:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
This should have been sorted in 2003, but my barrister Pitt Payne was
against me,
What fucking use is a barrister like that?
What is the term for such a barrister, a "bent brief" ?
Pitt Payne took very little money from me, whch makes his treachery
more palatable.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
and my solicitor Simanowitz had an obsession with
technicalities, so he thought the actual complaint was irrelevant and
must not be mentioned.
That's what you get for appointing a jew solicitor.
Yeah, I'm afraid you're right on that one. I had some sort of silly
idea that a Jewish lawyer would be appropriate to a civil rights case.
Instead he took over 30,000 pounds from me, and then told me I was
"prejudiced".
Cunt, eh.
And now he will probably sue you for being anti-semitic.

Such is the life of those whose only goal in life, is to make money.
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-04 10:39:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 08:47:52 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
You'll never see their agents...what you will and do see is their
subcontractors, working on zero hour contracts.
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.
Best avoid that topic, eh?
I can't see you being worth that much money. You're not a spy.
You don't have any special information. You're simply a man like any
other. There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-04 11:04:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 04 Dec 2019 02:39:33 -0800, KWills Shill #2
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.
Best avoid that topic, eh?
I can't see you being worth that much money. You're not a spy.
You don't have any special information. You're simply a man like any
other. There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
Sad, but true.
Keema's Nan
2019-12-04 11:12:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 08:47:52 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
You'll never see their agents...what you will and do see is their
subcontractors, working on zero hour contracts.
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.
Best avoid that topic, eh?
I can't see you being worth that much money. You're not a spy.
You don't have any special information.
How do you know this? Are you spying on him?
Post by KWills Shill #2
You're simply a man like any
other.
How do you know this? Are you keeping him under surveillance?
Post by KWills Shill #2
There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
Are you also the MI5 chief accountant?
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-05 10:55:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 04 Dec 2019 11:12:57 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 08:47:52 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
You'll never see their agents...what you will and do see is their
subcontractors, working on zero hour contracts.
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.
Best avoid that topic, eh?
I can't see you being worth that much money. You're not a spy.
You don't have any special information.
How do you know this? Are you spying on him?
If he were a spy, it would have been proved a long time ago.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
You're simply a man like any
other.
How do you know this? Are you keeping him under surveillance?
No need. He's not important enough to warrant the spending of
£260 million, or more.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
Are you also the MI5 chief accountant?
No. But you are free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
MI5 has spent such an amount on him.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Keema's Nan
2019-12-05 11:36:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Wed, 04 Dec 2019 11:12:57 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 08:47:52 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
You'll never see their agents...what you will and do see is their
subcontractors, working on zero hour contracts.
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.
Best avoid that topic, eh?
I can't see you being worth that much money. You're not a spy.
You don't have any special information.
How do you know this? Are you spying on him?
If he were a spy, it would have been proved a long time ago.
So you don’t actually know, but are using probability as fact.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
You're simply a man like any
other.
How do you know this? Are you keeping him under surveillance?
No need. He's not important enough to warrant the spending of
£260 million, or more.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
Are you also the MI5 chief accountant?
No. But you are free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
MI5 has spent such an amount on him.
And you could do the same to prove they have not, but you prefer to rely on
guesswork and patronising comments.
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-06 10:27:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 05 Dec 2019 11:36:57 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Wed, 04 Dec 2019 11:12:57 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 08:47:52 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I've seen their agents, particularly the Alan H weirdo. They are
personality disordered. Normal people do not behave in this way.
You'll never see their agents...what you will and do see is their
subcontractors, working on zero hour contracts.
You're very sensitive on the subject of costs, aren't you? If you do
the numbers, 35 agents for 29.5 years, you get a figure of around 260
million pounds.
Best avoid that topic, eh?
I can't see you being worth that much money. You're not a spy.
You don't have any special information.
How do you know this? Are you spying on him?
If he were a spy, it would have been proved a long time ago.
So you don’t actually know, but are using probability as fact.
It's a reasonable conclusion.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
You're simply a man like any
other.
How do you know this? Are you keeping him under surveillance?
No need. He's not important enough to warrant the spending of
£260 million, or more.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
Are you also the MI5 chief accountant?
No. But you are free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
MI5 has spent such an amount on him.
And you could do the same to prove they have not, but you prefer to rely on
guesswork and patronising comments.
Your lack of evidence, and default admission I was correct, is
noted and accepted. Feel free to whine about this if you wish.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-07 20:45:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 06 Dec 2019 02:27:00 -0800, KWills Shill #2
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
You're simply a man like any
other.
How do you know this? Are you keeping him under surveillance?
No need. He's not important enough to warrant the spending of
£260 million, or more.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
There's no way MI5 spent anything like £260 million on you.
Are you also the MI5 chief accountant?
No. But you are free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
MI5 has spent such an amount on him.
And you could do the same to prove they have not, but you prefer to rely on
guesswork and patronising comments.
Your lack of evidence, and default admission I was correct, is
noted and accepted. Feel free to whine about this if you wish.
So, should I write to MI5's accounting department, and ask them how
many hundreds of milliions they have spent on me?

I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.

Apparently it is "proportionate in a democracy" for MI5 to give out no
information whatsoever to people who take whatever form of legal
action against them.
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-07 21:54:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intelligence_Account

"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"

I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.

According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#

"Employees 4,053"

If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.

This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.

DC Whittle told me surveillance of a target trained in
counter-surveillance requires around 35 people.

250,000 * 35 = 8,750,000

8,750,000 * 29.5 years = roughly 258 million

If you want to have an intelligent conversation about the daft
quantities of money they spent on me, I'm all ears.

Just don't tell me it's all done by zero hours workers previously
employed by McDonald's.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
Apparently it is "proportionate in a democracy" for MI5 to give out no
information whatsoever to people who take whatever form of legal
action against them.
For security reasons.
Cos their agents would go to jail f the legal system was working
properly.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal is supposed to keep MI5 in check. I
don't know if they've found against MI5 even in one single case.
Keema's Nan
2019-12-08 16:27:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intellige
nce_Account
"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"
I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.
According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#
"Employees 4,053"
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.
There are other costs as well. Electricity. Water.
Transportation. Etc.
Yes, but that was implicit in the answer - to anyone with intelligence.

However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year, is rather more
than parcel delivery drivers get.

And yet, there seems to be no limit to the money tree that funds the spooks;
but nothing for the dregs of society - i.e. ordinary workers.

Are you happy with this situation?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
DC Whittle told me surveillance of a target trained in
counter-surveillance requires around 35 people.
250,000 * 35 = 8,750,000
8,750,000 * 29.5 years = roughly 258 million
If you want to have an intelligent conversation about the daft
quantities of money they spent on me, I'm all ears.
But that amount isn't spent on you.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
Just don't tell me it's all done by zero hours workers previously
employed by McDonald's.
That claim is from a very evil creature who only wishes to cause
you harm.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
Apparently it is "proportionate in a democracy" for MI5 to give out no
information whatsoever to people who take whatever form of legal
action against them.
For security reasons.
Cos their agents would go to jail f the legal system was working
properly.
It's not impossible that some agents have committed acts that
could result in jail time. But there's been no evidence of it
presented here.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
The Investigatory Powers Tribunal is supposed to keep MI5 in check. I
don't know if they've found against MI5 even in one single case.
I wouldn't know where to begin looking for such information.
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-09 10:03:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:27:18 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intellige
nce_Account
"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"
I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.
According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#
"Employees 4,053"
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.
There are other costs as well. Electricity. Water.
Transportation. Etc.
Yes, but that was implicit in the answer - to anyone with intelligence.
So, not you. Glad we got that worked out.
Post by Keema's Nan
However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year, is rather more
than parcel delivery drivers get.
But the employee doesn't get that much. On average or not.
You are certainly free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
they do.
Post by Keema's Nan
And yet, there seems to be no limit to the money tree that funds the spooks;
but nothing for the dregs of society - i.e. ordinary workers.
Are you happy with this situation?
How the government of England spends its tax revenue is of so
little importance to me, I experience neither joy nor sorrow. Outside
of the discussions on Usenet, I am unable to care any less than I do.
If it bothers you, do something about it.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Keema's Nan
2019-12-09 10:46:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:27:18 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intelli
ge
nce_Account
"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"
I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.
According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#
"Employees 4,053"
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.
There are other costs as well. Electricity. Water.
Transportation. Etc.
Yes, but that was implicit in the answer - to anyone with intelligence.
So, not you. Glad we got that worked out.
This was sarcasm.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year, is rather more
than parcel delivery drivers get.
But the employee doesn't get that much.
No. That was my point. But I see that you are incapable of recognising
sarcasm, irony and now satire; which renders any kind of discussion almost
impossible.
Post by KWills Shill #2
On average or not.
You are certainly free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
they do.
I didn’t say they did. MI5. Victim said that - do keep up.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
And yet, there seems to be no limit to the money tree that funds the spooks;
but nothing for the dregs of society - i.e. ordinary workers.
Are you happy with this situation?
How the government of England spends its tax revenue is of so
little importance to me,
Aha, so you must be a right winger. They also have no interesting in
anything/anyone which does not affect themselves directly.
Post by KWills Shill #2
I experience neither joy nor sorrow. Outside
of the discussions on Usenet, I am unable to care any less than I do.
If it bothers you, do something about it.
Don’t worry. I already have.
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-10 10:41:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Dec 2019 10:46:44 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:27:18 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intelli
ge
nce_Account
"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"
I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.
According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#
"Employees 4,053"
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.
There are other costs as well. Electricity. Water.
Transportation. Etc.
Yes, but that was implicit in the answer - to anyone with intelligence.
So, not you. Glad we got that worked out.
This was sarcasm.
I'm glad you noticed. I was worried it didn't come across.
Sarcasm doesn't always work in a text medium like Usenet.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year, is rather
more than parcel delivery drivers get.
But the employee doesn't get that much.
No. That was my point. But I see that you are incapable of recognising
sarcasm, irony and now satire; which renders any kind of discussion almost
impossible.
You weren't using any of those.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On average or not.
You are certainly free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
they do.
I didn’t say they did. MI5. Victim said that - do keep up.
"However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year..."
-- You, as seen above.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
And yet, there seems to be no limit to the money tree that funds the spooks;
but nothing for the dregs of society - i.e. ordinary workers.
Are you happy with this situation?
How the government of England spends its tax revenue is of so
little importance to me,
Aha, so you must be a right winger.
Nope.
Post by Keema's Nan
They also have no interesting in
anything/anyone which does not affect themselves directly.
Or, as is the truth, I do not live in England. Because of this,
how the government in England spends money is of very little interest
to me.
If you live in England, I would expect you wouldn't care how the
government of the United States spends its tax revenue.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
I experience neither joy nor sorrow. Outside
of the discussions on Usenet, I am unable to care any less than I do.
If it bothers you, do something about it.
Don’t worry. I already have.
Great.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Keema's Nan
2019-12-10 13:37:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Mon, 09 Dec 2019 10:46:44 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:27:18 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intel
li
ge
nce_Account
"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"
I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.
According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#
"Employees 4,053"
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.
There are other costs as well. Electricity. Water.
Transportation. Etc.
Yes, but that was implicit in the answer - to anyone with intelligence.
So, not you. Glad we got that worked out.
This was sarcasm.
I'm glad you noticed. I was worried it didn't come across.
Sarcasm doesn't always work in a text medium like Usenet.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year, is rather
more than parcel delivery drivers get.
But the employee doesn't get that much.
No. That was my point. But I see that you are incapable of recognising
sarcasm, irony and now satire; which renders any kind of discussion almost
impossible.
You weren't using any of those.
You would say that if you don’t recognise them.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On average or not.
You are certainly free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
they do.
I didn’t say they did. MI5. Victim said that - do keep up.
"However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year..."
-- You, as seen above.
It is ok, it would seem, for you to quote out of context. I was not stating
that as a fact, I was just reiterating the previous statement in a sentence
which was about the lack of money spent on manual workers without whom the
security services would not be able to operate.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
And yet, there seems to be no limit to the money tree that funds the spooks;
but nothing for the dregs of society - i.e. ordinary workers.
Are you happy with this situation?
How the government of England spends its tax revenue is of so
little importance to me,
Aha, so you must be a right winger.
Nope.
Post by Keema's Nan
They also have no interesting in
anything/anyone which does not affect themselves directly.
Or, as is the truth, I do not live in England.
Well, Duh.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Because of this,
how the government in England spends money is of very little interest
to me.
If you live in England, I would expect you wouldn't care how the
government of the United States spends its tax revenue.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
I experience neither joy nor sorrow. Outside
of the discussions on Usenet, I am unable to care any less than I do.
If it bothers you, do something about it.
Don’t worry. I already have.
Great.
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-11 09:49:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 13:37:42 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Mon, 09 Dec 2019 10:46:44 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:27:18 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 13:09:07 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I can't see any other way of finding out the cost of their activities.
There isn't one.
What really gets me is, their income is from the Single Intelligence
Account, shared with MI6 and GCHQ. It seems these agencies ae
reluctant to individually admit how much they get, because then we
could argue about the waste of money they individually represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intel
ligence_Account
"The current spending on the SIA is £3.2 billion in financial year
2017/18"
I reckon MI5 get around a billion pounds a year from the SIA.
According to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI5#
"Employees 4,053"
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
This is across *all* employees, not just surveillance.
There are other costs as well. Electricity. Water.
Transportation. Etc.
Yes, but that was implicit in the answer - to anyone with intelligence.
So, not you. Glad we got that worked out.
This was sarcasm.
I'm glad you noticed. I was worried it didn't come across.
Sarcasm doesn't always work in a text medium like Usenet.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year, is rather
more than parcel delivery drivers get.
But the employee doesn't get that much.
No. That was my point. But I see that you are incapable of recognising
sarcasm, irony and now satire; which renders any kind of discussion almost
impossible.
You weren't using any of those.
You would say that if you don’t recognise them.
You may think your deception benefits you, but it does not.
Post by KWills Shill #2
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by KWills Shill #2
On average or not.
You are certainly free to provide valid, verifiable evidence that
they do.
I didn’t say they did. MI5. Victim said that - do keep up.
"However, £250k spent on every employee (on average) per year..."
-- You, as seen above.
It is ok, it would seem, for you to quote out of context.
It would not. Which is why I did not.
I was not stating
that as a fact, I was just reiterating the previous statement in a sentence
which was about the lack of money spent on manual workers without whom the
security services would not be able to operate.
Your attempt at deception fails. Try again, if you feel you need
to.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-08 20:24:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 14:23:34 -0800, Grrikkbustard®?
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_intelligence_agencies#Single_Intelligence_Account
Money spent on national security is never wasted.
I suppose instead of spending it on the security services, you could
set fire to it, generating warmth. That way there would be a small
amount of benefit.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
If you divide one billion by 4,053 you get roughly 250,000 pounds per
employee per year.
Fully loaded average costs per employee are a meaningless number. The
marginal cost of each additional employee is a small fraction of that.
Yes, that's true. The marginal cost should be less than 250,000.

You seem confused in your argument. First you say that it's done on
zero hours contracts, which it plainly isn't. Then you say it's done
by MI5 operatives, but they cost much less than 250k pa.

You'd better figure out what story you want to present, because they
can't both be right.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
8,750,000 * 29.5 years = roughly 258 million
If you want to have an intelligent conversation about the daft
quantities of money they spent on me, I'm all ears.
£258 million is certainly a daft estimate.
It's worrying because the actual figure would be in that area.

MI5 waste money like it's going out of fashion.
Why would they unless MI5 had done something wrong?
So, are you a shill for the UK authorities? What do they pay you? Are
you paid per post, or time spent?
Vidcapper
2019-12-02 07:00:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
This isn't a joke. MI5 really did accuse me of being a spy for the
Russians, in the first year or so of the persecution.
I remember I got on a Northern Line train, northbound, from Clapham
South tube station. Seated nearby was an English woman in (late?)
middle age, with an unhappy dog.
She used my name, and said "they say he's a spy for the Russians". I
very clearly heard that, and very clearly remember it.
Newsflash - every time you *think* you hear something like this - it is
all *in your head*!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
KWills Shill #2
2019-12-02 10:25:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
This isn't a joke. MI5 really did accuse me of being a spy for the
Russians, in the first year or so of the persecution.
I remember I got on a Northern Line train, northbound, from Clapham
South tube station. Seated nearby was an English woman in (late?)
middle age, with an unhappy dog.
She used my name, and said "they say he's a spy for the Russians". I
very clearly heard that, and very clearly remember it.
The problem is that for most, memory isn't terribly accurate.
You've been claiming MI5's been harassing you for at least 20 years.
It's well within the realm of possibility that you're not remembering
correctly. There is no way to know, of course.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I remember her dog looked unhappy.
The English woman may have had some mental health issues, which is
characteristic of MI5's agents.
Needless to say I am not a spy for the Russians.
If you were, it would have been proved long ago. We can all be
assured you are not now, nor have you ever been, a spy for Russia. Or
any other country.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
My parents left
Poland which was ruled by the Russian Communists.
When did Russia rule Poland? They were political allies, but
Poland was never under Russia's (or the Soviet Union's) leadership.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
My family always
votes Conservative.
MI5 also made lots of other allegations about me, which are almost
always bunk.
Odds are they've never made any allegations about you.
Post by M***@closed.gov.uk
I think MI5 alleged my being a Russian agent because they have to
pretend this case has national security issues, which it plainly does
not.
Wouldn't MI6 be put in charge of a matter of a foreign spy? I
admit my knowledge of British intelligence is wanting, so I could be
thinking wrong.
--
Shill #2 (recently promoted).
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
Loading Image...
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
M***@closed.gov.uk
2019-12-11 14:18:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 04:38:47 -0800, Grikbasturd®?
'Ed' did nothing of the kind and you are running away from the thread
as well as the truth, lying COWARD!
"Greek Bastard" ?

What have you got against the Greeks? They pose no threat to the UK?

I'm totally neutral regarding them. I neither particularly like, nor
partcularly dislike, them.

Loading...