On Jan 1, 12:52=A0am, fe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=
=3D-=3D-=3D-
> -=3D MI5:. bugging and counter-surveillance -=3D
>
-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=
=3D-=3D-=3D-
>
> PO: >Did you ever look for the bugs in. your house ? If not, why not ? I
m=
ean 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
detectiv=
e
> 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
f=
ound?
>
> You can assume that they've done. this sort of thing to other people in
mo=
re
> "serious" cases, where they would. know the targets would suspect the
> presence of electronic surveillance. So they will. have developed
techniqu=
es
> 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,
causin=
g
> loss of credibility. to the other things I would have to say relating to
t=
he
> 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
migh=
t
> 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
surveillanc=
e
> device would be additional to. a piece of electronic equipment such as a
T=
V
> or video. It would be necessary to physically break in. to a property to
f=
it
> such. a device.
>
> 2702
ping
|
