A line in the sand for Garry Stevens, et al ....

Garry Stevens and those who support you: Be advised that by your current actions you are crossing a line in the sand which has your own personal enrichment on one side, and theft of our intellectual property on the other side. Your chosen method is personal attack via anonymous writings, personally authorized by you, and for which you provide a public platform. The silencing of our investigation is obviously your target.

It is ironic that on the one side you pretend to support freedom of the airwaves, while in reality you are merely promoting various music streams that you brand as 'tribute' stations, such as 'Wonderful Radio London'. At the same time, you are also attacking Malcolm Smith's licensed 'tribute' station that he calls 'Radio Caroline'. For a time it seemed that these 'tribute' stations were harmless enough, but in reality they are merely following the lead of the British Broadcasting Corporation when it created 'BBC Radio One'.

While the BBC took its original lead from ideas generated by Don Pierson, of Eastland, Texas, the BBC never claimed that what they were creating was a continuation of Don Pierson's work. Indeed they have done their best to ignore him completely. On the other hand you are palming off your 'tribute' stations as reflections of the original offshore stations, sans attribution to Don Pierson, and therefore your streams are not 'tributes' at all, but merely the replaying of music without paying anyone for their work that you are supposedly acknowledging. In other words, you are preaching "what's yours is mine, and what's mine in mine." That is theft.

Malcolm Smith is doing far worse. He has a license to broadcast programs under various call signs relating to 'Radio Caroline' while pretending that there is a link between what he is doing and the offshore broadcasting stations operating under that name during the Nineteen Sixties. In the case of Malcolm Smith he is draping his own reputation around that of Ronan O'Rahilly while at the same time disavowing any connection between his current projects and Ronan O'Rahilly.

Both of you are promoting a form of censorship by intentionally obfuscating the true story of offshore broadcasting during the Nineteen Sixties, while at the same time, both of you appear to be denouncing each other. In reality, both of you are doing the bidding of the very same institution that has censored British communications since the birth of broadcasting, and before that, with the rebirth of the Post Office in England during the time of King Charles II.

You, Garry Stevens, obliterate the life and times of Don Pierson, while Malcolm Smith promotes the pseudo-life of Ronan O'Rahilly. Two approaches serving the same end: censorship via miseducation for personal gain. Therefore, what is happening on this Blog and on its companion Blog, is a stripping away of the lies and distortions, and it is being achieved at no cost to readers!

This genuine not-for-personal-profit underlying factor is now causing you, Garry Stevens, to authorize any means necessary to preserve your own fake 'history' of broadcasting, by attacking the authorship of our publications. Worse, you are willing to authorize personal attacks upon our authorship that is unrelated to the subject matter itself.

A line is being drawn in the sand that is establishing that what others have done by stealing our copyrighted researched and published works, is now becoming an issue where you are attempting to stop us from publication. On your Forum, Paul Rusling has stated that we cannot copyright facts, when in reality what Paul Rusling has stolen is our research and word product by claiming it as his own, and then he has co-mingled our facts with his fiction. That is both theft and intentional harm.

What you are engaging in Garry Stevens, is something far more sinister. While you try to hide behind the scene, you are in fact crossing the line from freedom of speech and expression, into the realm of a violation of human rights. You cloak your activities in the names of anonymous writers in an effort to disguise those words for what they really are: anti-social behavior intended to quash individual human rights.

Therefore, take notice: We are no longer bound to stay quiet about the kind of two-faced behavior that you and your cohort Paul Rusling have been and still are engaging in. Both of you are aware of what you have previously stated in emails written to us, and which to date, we have not shared with others. You are on notice to stop your hypocritical behavior before the world reads your own words that condemn your own actions that have no justification in law.