The anorak cult is now engaged in a sort of internal war which is anything but civil.

It began with a Forum that became concentrated upon featuring the tribute recording venture by its owner called 'Garry Stevens', and he caused a split to occur in the ranks of those who wanted to concentrate upon a tribute station called 'Radio Caroline'. So 'Garry Stevens', ejected his 'trouble-makers' and they created another Forum. Then the two factions began yelling at each other on their two forums.

Then along came Paul Rusling. He claimed many things about many things and most of those 'things' were 'things' that he latched on to to squeeze money out of. Rusling claimed to be a radio engineer while pulling pints behind the bar of a pub, or two. That led Rusling to think of a new way, an easier way of gaining money from others.

So, Rusling began straddling the fence of both anorak forums in order to push his own print-on-demand book about 'Radio Caroline'. The conclusion of his slapped-together book that he audaciously called a 'bible', claimed that in 1964 'Radio Caroline' was begun by a man named Ronan O'Rahilly. But Rusling did not stop there, he then claimed that this 1964 venture lives on under a UK government license awarded to Malcolm Smith who calls himself 'Peter Moore'.

That did it for the anoraks at war with Malcolm Smith who had also got hold of a hulk called 'Ross Revenge'.  It was a former fishing boat converted into the floating home of a station which borrowed the name of 'Radio Caroline' - even though it had no connection to the original 'Radio Caroline'.

But now add yet another wrinkle in this childish game played primarily by aging, grumpy men who spend their lives arguing about issues with no relevance to anything of concern to the average human being living life in the real world.

A person called 'Neil Gates' has created a worship site dedicated to his guru Ronan O'Rahilly, and Gates is claiming that because he played the last record on board the 'Ross Revenge' while it was at sea, then what Malcolm Smith has done with both the ship (now hulk) and the name of 'Radio Caroline' is akin to blasphemy in the 'Church of Caroline', as 'Garry Stevens' calls it.

Finally, it should be noted that the 'Ross Revenge' was bought and paid for with money stolen in the USA from investors who were conned into believing a lie. The con man involved was arrested in the USA and put on trial in Philadelphia. It was a court action euphemistically styled as the 'Radio Caroline Criminal Case'. Ronan O'Rahilly was a 'person of interest' to the USA legal authorities, so O'Rahilly stayed away from entry into the USA. The case reached its verdict and the man charged was sentenced to prison. Case closed, and the anoraks either forgot all about it, or they knew nothing about it because it took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Of course the original investors lost their investment and the fruits of this ill-gotten gain have now degraded from ship of value to floating hulk as a liability in the possession of Malcolm Smith. He probably wants rid of it in such a way that the blame for destroying this icon is not placed upon his shoulders. However, that hulk, being a liability serves no real purpose in the real business plans of Malcolm Smith.

This brings us to now.

'Garry Stevens' does not like the truth so he severed relations with us at an early stage, without ever telling us that he had done so. Now Malcolm Smith is revealing from documents in his possession that Ronan O'Rahilly was a fake and a fraud, a liar and a conman.

One set of anoraks are now livid at Malcolm Smith.

Paul Rusling has been exposed as the fool that he is, because his 'bible' that straddles the fence acclaims both O'Rahilly and Smith, while 'Neil Gates' is frothing at the mouth trying to gain attention to his ethereal worship center that is a web site singing the religious praises of Ronan O'Rahilly. In all probability Malcolm Smith not only wants the hulk to sink without trace, but he also wants mention of Ronan O'Rahilly in the context of 'Radio Caroline' to cease as fast as possible. So, Malcolm Smith is now exposing O'Rahilly as the fraud that he was.

Out of this sick bunch of yahoos, the only person making one kind of business sense is Malcolm Smith. The UK has officially endorsed what he is doing, and this grease-monkey is busy trying to create his own little broadcasting operation called 'Radio Caroline'. We have no problem with that, especially since Malcolm has now decided to tell the truth about Ronan O'Rahilly.

Meanwhile, those primarily aging old men and a handful of duped women who seem to be in love with the nondescript fantasies of the old men, are now engaged in a growing war of words about .... nothing.

In the real world Malcolm is trying to emerge as just an ordinary small businessman promoting an ordinary small radio station, while we now look on at the quagmire that Paul Rusling is now sinking into after having stolen from us and supporting a cause that is ripping itself apart. That means both Rusling and his rants are tributes to tears that Rusling is now dispensing on living a life which is not of any sympathetic interest to anyone.

In the end Malcolm will survive, and O'Rahilly will become an insignificant footnote. All of the waring old men will just die off and be forgotten (unlike old soldiers.)

What a sad state of affairs when all that energy and wasted money could have been put to use uncovering the real story about the original and real 'Radio Caroline'.

Of all the Head Cooks and Bottle Washers who have an authentic anorak base, only one person can fill those shoes today. That person is Malcolm Smith (who has falsely identified himself as Peter Moore on UK government documents).

Malcolm has at least two Ofcom licenses in the name of a 2022 venture known by the name 'Caroline'. He also has a once-sea-going ship that is now a floating hulk which goes by the name of 'Ross Revenge'. He obtained his hulk after a series of swindles by the original owners, and the legal kick-back by criminal investigators had caused them to vanish from the scene, leaving their hulk behind. So Malcolm grabbed it, and he is now peddling it to the public as a charity in order to solicit financial donations under false pretenses.

But it is the first of his two Ofcom licenses granted for a venture that he calls 'Radio Caroline' that has become the cause of frothing anger at us by the anoraks. They hold the deceased Ronan O'Rahilly in such high esteem that his holy name cannot be blasphemed by telling the truth about him.

Ronan O'Rahilly is still their hero, even though he is now dead.

When this investigation began to reveal that Ronan O'Rahilly was a fraud, a fake, a liar, and a scheming con-man, the anorak community frothed at their mouths in unison, while denouncing this investigation. Then something rather strange began to happen.

Not once, but several times and with increasing frequency, Malcolm Smith began to admit the very same character analysis of Ronan O'Rahilly that we have been publishing. He confirmed that what we were publishing about the character of Ronan O'Rahilly, is true.

In other words, Malcolm Smith has also confirmed that Paul Rusling's so called 'bible', which Rusling has been self-publishing, is nothing less than a book of lies intended to gain money from anoraks under false pretenses of being a true story. In other words, Rusling is a thief on many levels since he also stole our own bought and paid for research, and then after twisting it to fit his fiction, he self-published it under his own name.

What is now unclear is the future of the anorak community who have begun to split into two factions.

One faction is now denouncing Malcolm Smith for admitting the cold hard truth about Ronan O'Rahilly, and the other faction is doing what all religious cults do: it is glossing over the demolished status of it founder, while still clinging on to their original belief. They explain their bizarre reaction to Malcolm Smith's 'Book of Revelation' this way: If Ronan O'Rahilly did these awful things that Malcolm is telling us that he did, well, Ronan O'Rahilly must have had some sort of deep and sacred reason for doing so.

Of course the problem is that the original source of money for the original 1964 'Radio Caroline' was never revealed, and it was not until 1990 when a novel appeared and the idea of a bogeyman named 'Jimmy Ross' suddenly became the source. The trouble is that 'Jimmy Ross' did not exist, and the anorak myth was not fleshed out until 1990, and even then it was in a novel.

However, there was a real 'Jimmy' behind the original 'Radio Caroline', but he was not 'Jimmy Ross' who others then claimed was Charles Edward Ross. That man was in the dry-cleaning franchise business, and he neither fit the description nor the shoes of the fictitious 'Jimmy Ross'.

On the other hand, the true identity of the real 'Jimmy' has been known for decades, and he was merely the conduit to another person who had the money and the same area of business interests to finance the original 1964 'Radio Caroline'. But the anoraks seem to gloss over this link because its timeline does not fit in with their own bogus narrative.

The funny part is that Ronan O'Rahilly never trumpeted any of this.

Ronan O'Rahilly was merely a low-level crook who his adoring fans have elevated into the stratosphere to become worthy of deification as the 'Saint-in-Chief' of their crazy cult religion.

That being the case, then how does Malcolm fit in? He must be a kind of 'Anti-Christ' or the anorak equivalent of Satan, although the anoraks seem to have  awarded that definition to us.

Therefore we watch in mild amusement as these two anorak cult religious denominations now fight it out, while 'Saint Malcolm' actually has control of their two icons: the new 'Radio Caroline' and their floating hulk.

The words in the title above, minus the question mark, are from lyrics penned and released in 1973 called 'Time'. It was performed by Pink Floyd.

Back in 1973, our 'Trio' was over a decade away from meeting for the very first time, and the only "half page of scribbled lines" had already appeared in 1966 as a feature article published by the 'Wolverhampton Express and Star' newspaper. It had the title: 'Birth or Death of a Broadcasting Era'?

In 1966, its author, who was to become a member of 'The Trio', was not at the end of his investigation, but at the beginning. Now, in 2022, as a 'Trio' we are coming to the end of our investigation as a unit. It may be that for some, as Pink Floyd's lyrics tell listeners: "Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way", but we three we are a transatlantic breed, and only one of us was born in England. We are full of calm hope, and not desperation, we are certainly not trying to be quiet. It is our hope that our work will become part of a much larger body of work that seeks to bring peace and understanding to this very confused world.

Unfortunately there is a larger body of brainwashed humanity that seems to believe in one of Orwell's mantras that his legendary 'Big Brother' government preached, whereby 'War is peace', 'Freedom is slavery', and 'Ignorance is strength'. In this way, the loss of one child due to an act of domestic violence and proclaimed on a domestic newscast, blots out all of the many dead children killed by acts of violence when tax money financed bombs and shells are dropped with financing by tax money, upon young inhabitants who die on 'foreign' soil.

To overcome the psychological 'difficulty' of this dilemma, the USA and UK have imposed upon themselves the kind of censorship that Orwell described in his novel 'Nineteen Eighty-Four', whereby 'Ignorance is strength'. Ignorance can be created by 'spin', so that what you see and hear you interpret in such a way that the connecting dots between your tax money and those bombs and shells killing 'foreign' children has nothing to do with you.

As a 'Trio' we first met in the Dallas and Fort Worth Metroplex of Texas during the Nineteen Eighties. We were not influenced by a common theological or political thread, but by the insight of Eric Blair who wrote under the name of George Orwell. To get an idea of how Orwell inspired this project, we set down in print both a chronology of past events and a published monograph about its application to the present. After all, Orwell's novel 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' which was published in 1949, is actually all about a future event to take place in the year 2050, although that dateline seems to be something that most readers skim over and fail to understand.

Orwell's book is more about the use of 'Newspeak' censorship in this year of 2022, than it ever was in 1949!

Back in 2015 we set down and wrote about our endeavors in relation to George Orwell and his own views of the past: http://yesterversity.com

Prior to that we even began make our own documentary broadcasts, and one of them that was made on May 12, 1987, is about this very topic and it is still available to listen to at: https://www.mixcloud.com/mervyn-hagger/4fws-may-12-1987-big-brother-part-one/

It was originally recorded on cassette tape in Texas for broadcast by land-based unlicensed stations in Europe; the UK, and one station in New Zealand. (We even created that station's Kiwi logo!)

Part One ends with instrumental music, which after a short break, the usually unmonitored cassette began to play in reverse as Part Two, and its output was fed into an unattended transmitter. Part One was intended to establish the broadcast, and Part Two delivered the documentary: https://www.mixcloud.com/mervyn-hagger/4fws-may-12-1987-big-brother-part-two/

Since the overseas  transmitters were illegal, the tapes were made to play the second side after a very short break and so linking instrumental music was played up to the moment of silence, and then automatically resumed by the cassette player. Meanwhile, in Texas, these broadcasts were also heard over licensed stations.

Most of our response came from countries behind the so-called 'Iron Curtain', and we received very detailed letters from listeners about the program content. Unfortunately the idea of questioning the political system that created the problem in the first place was not generally speaking, of the same pressing importance to British listeners.

Much later, after we stopped making both radio and then television programs. The latter were for U.S. cable systems, and we then began to devote our attention to academia. In 2015 we wrote a monograph which deals with underlying core issues surrounding the quest for Scottish independence. You can read that published work at: http://foundthreads.com/03.html

It has taken decades to finally begin to answer the question 'Birth or Death of a Broadcasting Era?' - because as Eric Blair wrote: "... history has in a sense ceased to exist, ie. there is no such thing as a history of our own times which could be universally accepted."

But the absence of a universal understanding about past events is no accident, it is by design, and although the peoples of the United Kingdom and the United States of America like to believe that they are the bastions of freedom of speech and expression, they are in fact just as guilty of lying about past events as any other nation on this Planet. But more than that, within the lifetime of at least one member of 'The Trio', the vaunted statesman Sir Winston Churchill deliberately set out to mislead and deceive his enemies, but in so doing he could never tell the truth to his own nation about what he was doing, because he was also manipulating them and the citizens of the United States of America.

Over the decades drips and drops of information have surfaced from the classified secret vaults of the UK to reveal this charade of lying about the past. But the primary medium used to promote Churchill's lies and deception was broadcasting, and so the wheel has turned full circle.

As much as the 'hip' and supposedly 'swinging' generation of the Nineteen Sixties likes to believe that off south-east England a radio station called 'Caroline' smacked the previous generation in the face by at last throwing off their shackles of censorship, they were in fact merely being used to promote that same censorship in a different way. That is what 'The Trio' have now uncovered through constant research, and it is what they are now about to document in a series of books, rather than individual monographs.

However, frustration arises when the brainwashed generation of the Sixties refuse to even consider that they merely continued the geopolitical past into the geopolitical present. But then, that generation and the children they spawned do not seem to grasp the fact that they are now fulfilling the lifestyle that Orwell predicted would reach is dystopian climax in the year 2050. 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' is not about the past, it is about the age yet to come by 2050!

So there is still some time left to wake up and smell the roses, the coffee, and everything else, while taking a fresh look with an open mind about what we are now revealing for you to read free of charge and paid for at our own expense.

Maybe, at some point in the near future, our small group will finally succeed in establishing an Online YesterVersity that will have no hidden political or theological agenda in mind, just a quest to uncover that which should never have been hidden.

This investigation is the result of documenting the life experiences of several people, each one individually born to different parents. (For an in-depth explanation please read this academic monograph.)

If you can't be bothered to read that monograph, then nothing you will read here will make sense to you because you have already been programmed to see and hear and interpret your own life according to the information that is already installed in your brain. In other words: "garbage in and garbage out." You should now move on to something else that will not trouble your defaulted mindset.

For everyone else, this is the key to understanding what we are doing and why we are doing it: Education and learning is an ongoing process that involves critical thinking.

We are constantly analyzing the information that we are receiving, but we are still receiving it and analyzing it as individuals, three distinct individuals from three distinct and separate backgrounds. Yet the subject matter of our analysis is not uniquely individual in its preparation and receipt. It is common to all three. It is the individual interpretation that is different.

So, we, as three individuals, have asked: "How can we, individually and simultaneously come to understand as a collective unit what we are learning, if we have individually been programmed with three different lives?"

This is where the analogy of the pebble being thrown into a body of water comes into play.

There is not one pebble being thrown, but three separate pebbles and thus the individual resulting ripples are also different, and yet, these three individual pebbles are creating ripples within the same time and space.

The only way to see these three sets of ripples in context, is to also see all of the ripples created by all of the individual human beings who have ever lived on this Planet, and without getting into theological definitions, the only entity that could do that is the Entity that human beings have tried to define and understand ever since human beings first appeared on this Planet. Not being a party to that knowledge means that we three individuals have to then look anew at what we are seeing, hearing and learning by attempting to switch-off our own biased pre-programming.

In lay terms it means having an "open mind".

"Switching-off" is not easy to do, and it probably can never be achieved with total success. So if the pebble analogy refers to our own individual lives, then the only way to try to achieve an unbiased understanding of what we three are learning is to compare notes.

In academia this process results in footnoting all sources of information received so that other human beings can read them. In the legal process, it means laying down foundational evidence upon which more evidence can be laid. Clearly that process is not perfect, because innocent people are convicted by false evidence.

As detectives looking at the past record of human events, we have to be aware that some 'evidence' may have been falsely created in the past, and when 'historians' come along and selectively assemble new conclusory works based upon that false 'evidence', they can only create a false account of the past.

So, as 'YesterTecs', not as 'historians', we are treating the entire accepted record of the collective past as a 'cold case' where prior conclusions (verdicts), have resulted in the creation of new documentation that does not make logical sense.

Now, apply all of this to the subject of broadcasting.

We began with the topic of 'Radio Caroline' which lasted from 1964 to 1967.

It was a 'ripple'.

The documented account of that 'ripple' claims that it was financed by a person named 'Jimmy Ross', but after a thorough investigation into this person who has been alleged to exist, we failed to find any supporting evidence to show that such a person did exist. Therefore, if 'Jimmy Ross' did not exist, then the source of funding alleged to have been supplied by 'Jimmy Ross' did not exist, and yet, 'Radio Caroline' did exist from 1964 to 1967, and that fact can be documented by numerous supporting sources of evidence.

Some individuals have been programmed to the point that their entire being is fixated upon the idea that 'Jimmy Ross' did exist, and therefore their entire being is centered upon trying to prove a negative, which is that 'Jimmy Ross' who did not exist, did exist simply because their preprogrammed mind will not accept the fact that 'Jimmy Ross' did not exist.

This 'Jimmy Ross' factor then results in defending the idea that 'Jimmy Ross' who did not exist, did finance the creation in 1964 of 'Radio Caroline'. Entering into such an illogical discussion about a phantom, other than for purposes of a mind game, it ludicrous because each human life has such a short time span that to waste it, is to defeat the opportunities involved with living life itself.

You might as well be dead, or never born in the first instance.

But if 'Jimmy Ross' did not exist, and 'Radio Caroline' did exist in 1964, then the questions must be asked: "Who financed 'Radio Caroline', and why did they finance it, and why was the true account of that financing deliberately concealed?" Those are the questions that we have addressed and found the answers to. But like ripples in a body of water, those answers collided with more ripples.

While we are constantly aware of the false interpretations that have been conjured-up to divert attention away from the real stories about the past, we have been successful in stripping away some of those falsehoods and revealing a different account, and we are now at the point of mind-mapping a new set of focal points (pebbles) that can unlock the past. It is now a matter of time and available resources, and both are limited: One by the individual lifespans of the three core human beings involved in this project, and two: by the limited amount of funding available.

Because outside funding has neither been solicited nor accepted, the three core individuals who we refer to as 'The Trio', are only able to progress as fast as time and circumstances permit. The good news is that we now have enough material to begin to present in lay terms an explanation about the past as it relates to broadcasting. However, that past does not begin in 1964, it begins at a point in time during the Nineteenth Century.

But if all of this is too much for you to comprehend, then you should have complied with our advice at the beginning of this post and moved on to something else. For those individuals who are interested, we have now reactivated our 'Comments' board with terms of access clearly stated and enforced.

Origins of this Forum are to be found in an unlikely chain of human events that began in Orwell’s year of 1984, for that is when news coverage of pirate radio engineers and broadcasters of the Twentieth Century briefly collided with the history of pirate printers and publishers of the Seventeenth Century.

Beginning in that fabled year of “Big Brother,” a series of international news stories about plans to revive a floating commercial offshore (“pirate”) station slated to broadcast from a ship anchored off the coast of southern England called “Wonderful Radio London International” (WRLI), appeared in both broadcast and print media. These reports appeared over numerous dates following March 1984 (e.g., on the Media Network program of Radio Netherlands’ World Service; in Broadcast magazine on 23 March and in Hörzu’s radio section on 3 August in 1984, as well as on the front page of the Dallas Times Herald on 8 July, 1985).

The original demise of Wonderful Radio London took place on August 14, 1967. “On that day millions tuned in to the last few hours of broadcasting …”. That station died as a result of a drought in advertising revenue that had been brought about by a new draconian censorship law which made it a criminal offense for British citizens to work for, or to supply an offshore broadcasting station in any form or manner, whatsoever.

The station’s second coming had been heralded as though it was a new shoot from an old root attempting to break through the same parched soil that had killed the original venture. In the following years, however, that drought had only intensified and by 1985 it raised a basic WRLI question: “Why can you play rock and roll all day on the radio in America, but not in the United Kingdom?”

To read the original, full and unredacted published version of the core text reproduced above, click here.

Since 1967 the broadcasting laws of the United Kingdom have changed several times, and yet the underlying premise of those laws has not. Over the decades since this project began, it has now uncovered the hard and documented legal evidence to reveal an underlying premise in both U.S. and U.K. legislation that created a means to censoring the airwaves in both the United States and the United Kingdom.

One of the earliest attempts to circumvent restrictions placed upon the U.S. airwaves involved the contracting of time on radio stations located south of the U.S. border in Mexico. A similar attempt was made in France to circumvent restrictions placed upon the U.K. airwaves. Those two events are connected, and we now have the details.

For the very first time the real story of British and American broadcasting can now be told as one story.

In August 2022, our own investigation reached a breakthrough by refocusing our attention back on those so-called "border-blaster" stations. That is where our own story began with a question about 'rock and roll' on the airwaves of the USA and UK. That question arose after August 13, 1984, which is when we made our own first broadcast over XERF in Mexico.

The account of those stations with call letters that begin with the letter 'X', has been poorly reported to date, and yet, it is in Tarrant County, Texas where we recorded our first program which was aired on August 13, 1984 over XERF, where this story really does begin. Our radio studio was located next door to a Tarrant County radio station whose legacy is indirectly tied to the radio station at Ciudad Acuña. Those two locations, one in Texas and one in Mexico provide the combination that unlocks this entire broadcasting saga.

It is a story which spans the Atlantic Ocean.

It is one story.

It is not two separate stories.

To date, no book; no newspaper or magazine, has ever reported this story in context. It is a unique story because in part, it is also the life story of the authors!

This is the story behind the story of both American and British broadcasting.

But the story of British broadcasting cannot be understood without first knowing about both precursory and sequential events that took place in North American broadcasting. Those events explain the corresponding foundational events that subsequently took place in the United Kingdom. However, the ultimate foundation of this story is to be found in events that led up to the creation of the United Kingdom itself, long before the first advent of the United States of America!
 
That is the story that we have now uncovered and which is now being published as a part-work.

It has taken us decades to put together, and this research has been self-financed by the authors.

For a long time we accumulated several major storylines that appeared to be unconnected. Now, at last, we know that they are not, because we know that this is one story, and it is the real story about the advent of broadcasting in both the United States and the United Kingdom.

To hear recordings of the first two WRLI broadcasts heard on XERF in Ciudad Acuña, click here. 

[The authors retain all rights under law to international copyright control regarding this work in progress.]

Welcome to our new forum. It is intended to provide a platform which links together all of our many themes that began with initial research into the origins of government censorship and broadcasting in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Our research led to a foundational discovery regarding the family interconnectivity within the lives of John Liburne with Thomas Jefferson, and several key Opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the subject of freeborn rights and politically guaranteed individual liberties.

Within the last few weeks several news events have converged into one issue that for decades we have defined as being: "Fragile Rights And Guaranteed Individual Liberties Everywhere". But until now, those issues appeared to be unrelated subjects, and the only analogy we have been able to use to describe this phenomenon is that of a pebble cast into a body of water causing ripples to radiate in all directions.

Years ago this project began with a question about freedom of the airwaves. We memorialized that 1985 event in a 2008 academic monograph which you can read here.

Our continuing and relentless research into the subject of freedom of the airwaves took us into many different areas of study, and they all came to converge around the life of one man: John Lilburne. 

Now, due an interesting turn of current news events, questions are being raised by other people that could soon lead to a new study of 'Freeborn John' (as he became known.) Regardless of how soon renewed legal interest into the constitutional legacy of John Lilburne takes place - it could be within hours of you reading this latest post, or it could be weeks or even months away - we don't know - we are certain of one thing: At some point in our future, attention will be drawn to a serious study of existing U.S. Supreme Court published Opinions, and some of those Opinions dating back to the Nineteen Forties and continuing into the Nineteen Sixties, all began to footnote aspects of the life of John Lilburne that became foundations for America's 'Bill of Rights'.

As our colleague Genie Baskir is fond of saying: "Everything old becomes new again", and with regards to  ongoing events reflecting upon the U.S. Constitution, Genie may well be right, once again. The news may yet bring the world of today to confront world of John Lilburne once again, just as it did within living memories several decades ago.

It began with one U.S. Supreme Court Justice who was soon joined by two more, and one of them was Chief Justic of the U.S. Supreme Court. They in turn referred to several U.S. Constitutional academics to for supporting documentation regarding the life of 'Freeborn John'. This when Lilburne was rediscovered and acclaimed as the foundation of America's enshrined basic freedoms.

So what happened?

An official backlash from the United Kingdom was coupled to a major sponsored promotion by 'American Express' of the various versions of 'Magna Carta' which bypassed Lilburne, and 'Magna Carta' was then falsely attached as the foundation of America's Bill of Rights. Those were the days of the Texas maverick Ross Perot and the original 'Braniff International Airways'.

​We (our 'Trio') protested this blatant and false geopolitical propaganda machine. School textbooks in the USA began proclaiming the same false message. We made the news, but no one listened. The British Crown made sure that we were drowned out, and our complaint that their yesterday never happened, was never heard by the majority of people.

But 'might' does not make 'right', even though might can muzzle the truth.

Since then, others have stolen our work. They have even twisted it into false narratives as a form of self-aggrandizement and then self-published it under their own names. Others copied those fakes and then the abuse began when we complained about their deceitful plagiarism. But now, in August 2022, world events have taken an interesting turn that may yet bring John Lilburne into world focus.

Therefore, the time has now come for us to focus all of our research upon our core issue that began with our original research linking John Lilburne to Thomas Jefferson and the U.S. Bill of Rights. We can now do this by coordinating our work into a central theme, rather than leaving it as scattered topics akin to radiated ripples in a vast body of water.

The new name for this site will be announced very shortly, and it will become part of a central hub in which all of our research will now begin to appear within contextual relationships.

It is the 'day after' the day that the Marine Offices Act' came into force on August 14, 1967, and a lot of very sad people, sick people really, the kind who support 'tributes' to this, that, and the other, while missing out on what made the originals unique.

You can't reproduce an original work of art. There is only one.

Radio London only began to get cranked-up on January 1, 1965 and by August 14, 1967 at 3PM it had come and gone - forever.

So, those sad and sick djs, and those sad and sick kids who were not even around in 1967, now 'commemorate' the coming and going of that radio station - the one that shook up the BBC, by championing 'Radio Caroline', which was a flip-flop farce.

But to the nitty-gritty.

Who paid for all that?

Herbert W. Armstrong.

​Not Wrigley's Chewing Gum.

Who put Radio London on the air?

Don Pierson.

Who?

Don Pierson.

"Never mind about him", say the anoraks, we worship the lying swindler (now dead), named Ronan O'Rahilly who couldn't even tell the truth to the world about his dad - who was a successful businessman.

That's why we washed our hands of the idiot anoraks and began delving deeper and deeper into the real story behind those offshore stations, and by not wasting more time on the anoraks, we have made some amazing discoveries: Nothing you think you know about the legacy of British broadcasting is true. We mean nothing. Not even the stories about Captain Plugge and Radio Normandie!

This investigation began sometime during 1966 when we read a book by Gleason Archer called 'The History of Radio' in the Public Library at Birmingham - in England. Its author is Gleason Archer and you can read it free of charge because it is available Online. Click here.

The section in this book that attracted our attention concerned a lawsuit centered upon New York. It was brought by AT&T against radio station WHN. The book was published in 1938, but its history only goes to the year 1926, and why we found that section to be of interest, is because it involved a major 1924 case built upon claims of 'outlaw' or 'pirate' broadcasting.

​But that was not all.

While AT&T won their case, which claimed that WHN was violating its copyrights and patents under the terms and conditions of a transmitter sale, the person responsible for policing US broadcasting use of the airwaves also had something to say. His name is Herbert Hoover and he became President of the United States just as the Great Depression began.

The word 'FRAGILE' as used in the heading refers to "Freeborn Rights And Guaranteed Individual Liberties Everywhere". For something organic like a birthright to be claimed, it refers to an entitlement not granted by a human government, but by a Higher Power. However, it is within the powers of temporal governments to prevent the exercise of basic human rights, just as it is within their powers to guarantee their access.

It was in the discovery of John Lilburne's quest to enshrine basic liberties within a written constitution that we then began to couple our knowledge of Gleason Archer's work with the work of Lilburne as highlighted by the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black. A third factor was the work of Don Pierson of Eastland, Texas. He is the person who forced a change in British broadcasting.

It was Don Pierson's intervention in British broadcasting that caused the UK government in power to lean upon the British Broadcasting Corporation to both revamp its existing networks, and to create a new addition called 'Radio One'. The two offshore stations called 'Radio Caroline' were not influential factors at all, but the people who created the original and authentic 'Radio Caroline', did attempt to mislead and obfuscate the history of British broadcasting by creating a fictious yesterday - which events prove quite clearly and profoundly - that it never happened.

Because we are about 95% into uncovering the true story of British broadcasting as it relates to that period of time from 1964 to 1967 when 'Radio Caroline' came and went from the world stage never to return we are also at the point where we can now begin to explain what we now know, and begin to quash the bogus and often very silly and childish fake storylines that anorak supporters of bogus operations called 'Radio Caroline', have continued to push into the public media.

Unfortunately, these anoraks have a number of thieves among their number and they have repeatedly stolen our research, and then they have twisted it to support their own fake narratives. For this reason we have been careful to publish what we know in such a way that these anoraks either have no knowledge of its existence, or they find the parts that they are aware of too difficult to relate to their own fake messages.

The reason for the reprehensible actions of these 'quasi-Luddite' people is to obtain money by false pretenses from a public that is unaware of their fraudulent motivations. To date, everything shared by us with the public has been offered free of charge. However, we are now approaching the time for us to commercially exploit our work which we have paid for.

​Details will be published on this Blog.

We can now claim that we have completed about 95% of this investigation. What makes it different from other accounts covering the same time period, is that we are not following 'things' but people in their relationship to 'things'. That is how we have been able to debunk people like Ronan O'Rahilly by discovering who he really was and what he was really doing and why he was doing it. In addition to the now aging offshore radio fans who have worshiped 'things' like transmitters and ships, is another segment who have turned ordinary human beings into phantoms that have no resemblance to the lives they once lived. Both of these groups miss the real story which is a lot more compact and related than they could possibly imagine, and the problem is due to their own self-deception.