XPost: alt.astrology.scam, alt.astronomy, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.atheism.holysmoke   
      
   Eye Say, and Lord Gnome Answers   
      
   My interactions with Private Eye started in May 1995, shortly after I'd   
   started bleating on usenet. I tried to get the Eye   
   interested in my case, as I thought they more than anyone have their finger on   
   the pulse, and would surely already know   
   something about my case. In my first email to them, entitled "pas de   
   bouteille?" (wot no bottle?), I asked if they had the   
   nerve to publish what was known to many thousands of people. Their email   
   flunky answered;   
      
   Date: Thu, 11 May 95 13:40 BST-1   
   From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye)   
   Subject: Re: pas de bouteille?   
      
   In-Reply-To: <199505102232.SAA19988@freenet.carleton.ca>   
   Bottle? Dunno really - but I've passed your mail on to the Ed for his   
   consideration.   
      
   Steve Mann   
   (strobes)   
   ==========================================================   
   Date: Mon, 15 May 95 12:51 BST-1   
   From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye)   
   Subject: Re: hello again   
      
   In-Reply-To: <199505122236.SAA02574@freenet.carleton.ca>   
   Hello yourself...   
      
   Thanks for the email. Unfortunately, I can't say whether or not the Eye   
   will do anything with this... I'm only the messenger. As the only   
   computer-literate peron in the Gnome organisation, I get to read all the   
   email and then pass it on to the Editor.   
      
   Sorry -- not very helpful, I know.   
      
   Steve Mann   
   (strobes)   
      
   The following year I gave PE another little prod, which yielded the following;   
      
   Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 11:38 GMT   
   From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye Magazine)   
   Subject: Re: Previous communication   
      
   In-Reply-To: <199602102320.SAA26182@[snip]>   
   Sorry not to reply sooner... we've been swamped with email and I have   
   very little time to answer it.   
      
   However, the editor sees all the email received here and I'm afraid he   
   hasn't expressed an interest in your story so I can only assume that he   
   feels it isn't for us.   
      
   Sorry.   
   strobes   
      
   Given that I couldn't provide the evidence to persuade the Eye of the   
   credibility of my claims, I did the next best thing,   
   which was to take out classified adverts in their "Eye Say" and "Eye Tech"   
   columns. My motivation for doing so is obvious;   
   the Eye is read both by many thousands of ordinary folk, but also makes its   
   way into the homes and consciousness of the UK's   
   political and media elite. It is also a known favourite with "Five". What   
   better way of taking the fight to the enemy?   
      
   The first small ad appeared on 10 Jan 1997 in issue 915 in "Eye Say". It ran   
   in that column on 24/1/97 and 7/2/97. On 21/2/97   
   it ran in "Eye Tech", and on 7/3/97 and 21/3/97 again in "Eye Say".   
      
   I then changed the ad's wording to read "BBC Newsreaders Conspiracy", and the   
   new wording ran in "Eye Say" from 4/4/97 issue 921,   
   18/4/97 to 2/5/97. The word "xenophobic" in the first advert had been intended   
   to convey the sense of exclusion through the bigotry   
   of my enemies, both on the basis of race and mental condition, but it seemed a   
   bit too non-specific. "BBC Newscasters Conspiracy" was   
   a little more immediate, although readers had to actually wade through the   
   website to find out what it was that the newscasters were   
   conspiring to do.   
      
   My next effort tried to spice up the text. "MI5/BBC Conspiracy" ran for six   
   issues in "Eye Say", from 5/9/97 issue 931 until 31/10/97.   
   I suppose there is something a little sad about somebody who knows he has   
   mental illness, placing adverts about a conspiracy in which   
   MI5's watchers enable BBC newscasters to personally and directly communicate   
   with him while reading the news. It is pretty sad, but   
   unfortunately it is also true, both in the objective reality we all inhabit,   
   as well as in my own mind.   
      
   There followed a hiatus of about a year until I resumed advertising on 2   
   October 1998. I paid over £200 for six months advertising   
   of the new improved text "MI5 Persecution, BBC Newscasters Spying on my Home".   
   This text ran from issue 960 until issue 972 (19 March   
   1999) in "Eye Say".   
      
   Private Eye's editor Ian Hislop denies knowing anything about my case, as the   
   following email illustrates.   
      
   Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 14:10 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)   
   From: strobes@private-eye.co.uk (Private Eye)   
   Subject: Re: PLEASE ANSWER - THANK YOU   
   CC: strobes@private-eye.co.uk   
   Reply-To: strobes@private-eye.co.uk   
      
   Sorry to take so long to answer. As soon as the editor   
   returned from holiday Steve went away. Steve is still away   
   and so I am answering your letter.   
      
   I have asked the editor and he knows nothing about any   
   conspiracy between M15 and the BBC.   
      
   Hope this helps.   
      
   Mary Aylmer   
   Private Eye   
      
   I must say I'm quite surprised he knows nothing; the "Eye" is usually well   
   clued up on what's going on.   
      
   1195   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)