This is not a work about a past that everyone knows about, but a past that negates the past that everyone knows about.

It is about people you have probably never heard of, but people that everyone should know about.

Up until now in the forums about broadcasting, the same-old tales have been reshuffled and retold until they have been drummed into the minds of the anorak world at large.

But what if all of that was mere fake propaganda?

What if what you think you know for a fact, is not a fact at all but obfuscated fiction?

What if the same people who have been getting you to pay money to read their oft-repeated fake version of the past, have now been exposed to inconvenient information that does not fit in with their own mantra that they have been thumping out for decades?

What if they have been offered the chance to join an investigation into finding the real story, and have shunned that as well?

But, what if some of these people have actually provided parts of the information for us to investigate and they have been sitting back waiting for the real story to be played out, providing we paid for the research in both time and money?

Well, as the New Year of 2023 begins to unfold, so will the true story, or at least as much of it that we have been able to uncover so far, without financial help from others, and without assistance in this very time-consuming enterprise.

How the jeerers and sneerers will react we can only guess. It will probably be like all cult members who see their beliefs exploded. They will have invested so much time and money in hurling abuse at this research that they will never say 'sorry' and admit that they were wrong.

Of course, we could be wrong about that, because even the man who stole our work for a fake bible sent us an olive branch in the form of a 2022 self-designed and personalized Christmas Card, specifically addressed to us!

​You never know what might happen in 2023 if the critics will only admit that they were wrong.

Malcolm Smith posted this Online this under the name of "Peter Moore" on 2/12/2022, at 12:54:14. Why he posted it under a fake name we have no idea. He wrote:

"It has already been discussed that there is no great revelation in stating that Ronan O'Rahilly told fibs and was generally a cad and a bounder, trickster or worse."

Malcolm it seems is itching to know what we know, and for good reason!

His entire business operation, outside of his mechanic's income, is under threat of exposure, and that means that his money could dry up, and worse still for him, his government licences could be withdrawn.

Why?

Because Malcolm Smith is the man who puts his fake name on official government documents to make it look like he (Malcolm) and "Peter" are two different people, instead of being just one person using two names.

Malcolm, that is fraud, but that is the beginning of the trail that got you your government licences.

Malcolm writes "What pains me though is that ..... you can't libel the dead and while the story of Ronan being inspired by Caroline Kennedy may have been a convenient bit of PR ...."

"Convenient bit of PR"?

How about a BIG con job to get money by false pretenses?

Malcolm Smith also states "that Ronan had an unhealthy interest in a five years old age little girl named Caroline Kennedy, (along with) Jimmy Saville who had similar interests in the behaviour of underage girls."

Then Malcolm adds: "If that inference was not clear enough (he then claims that we mention) without names other DJ's who may be in prison for linked offences."

Malcolm Smith adds that we are saying that "O'Rahilly was a paedophile."

No, we are not saying that!


However, using the same evidence in play, YOU are saying that.

We are saying that it would have been impossible to accuse Ronan O'Rahilly of that, unless O'Rahilly was telling the truth, but he was not.

He was lying.

A conundrum!

Malcolm Smith is the one who is in love with the 5 or 6 years old little girl story - the PROOF is on his own web site written by Malcolm Smith.

It is a conundrum!

If the 'Caroline Kennedy' story is a myth, when did it first appear?

From what we have uncovered to date, that story first appeared in New York City during 1965 when it was spun by Robin Leach, a British subject from London.

Then Christopher Moore was conned into putting his name to that idea in 1965 when it was included within the text of a large feature article that was distributed from coast-to-coast in the Sunday editions of U.S. newspapers. Because of the lead-in time necessary, the article was probably written around the same time that Robin Leach first made the claim that Ronan O'Rahilly named a radio station and ship after the daughter of the murdered President John F. Kennedy. Leach did this to con John's brother Robert into making a recorded broadcast. We have a copy of that recording!

Until the end of Spring 1965, we do not believe that Ronan O'Rahilly made claims about being inspired by a 5 or 6 years old little girl named Caroline. If you have information that proves an earlier date, please let us know since this is an ongoing investigation.

But, if that is the case and the myth began in 1965, we would never claim that Ronan O'Rahilly was obsessed by acts involving paedophilia. That is the invention of Malcolm Smith!

However, Malcolm now finding himself in hot water, then wrote this: "I think that .... persecution of a dead man has long since gone beyond any semblance of investigative journalism and is now the deranged obsession of a very sick mind."

That "very sick mind"  belongs to Malcolm Smith by his own admission: just look at his own web site.

Whose young picture is in the top right-hand corner?

Wow! It's Ronan O'Rahilly!

Beneath that picture on Malcolm Smith's own web site under: 'Our History - 2. Don't Get Mad, Get Even', we read these words written by Malcolm Smith:

"On a fund raising trip to the USA he was captivated by a photograph in Life magazine showing president John F. Kennedy's daughter Caroline playing in the Oval Office of the White House and disrupting the serious business of government. This was exactly the image he wanted for his station. The name had to be Radio Caroline."  - https://www.radiocaroline.co.uk/#history/history_part_2.html

• ​

Come on Malcolm Smith, it is YOU that is dubbing Ronan O'Rahilly as the paedophile and then dumping him in with disc jockeys like Jimmy Saville who engaged in underage sex, and who were then sent to prison.

In other words, Malcolm Smith your own lies are trapping you into a lose-lose situation.

O'Rahilly never made those claims at the beginning of 1964, but they have become embellished lies since Robin Leach began the chain in 1965 and then attributed them to Ronan O'Rahilly. If you have an earlier date and source, let us know!

It is just like the Ian Cowper Ross tales that first emerged in 1990 as fiction. That nonsense was picked up by BBC-TV and spun into a documentary.

Then we arrive at Ray Clark who interviewed Ian Cowper Ross and he convinced Clark that what he wrote in 1990 as fiction, was really true.

By the time Paul Alexander Rusling waddles along with his pudding-basin haircut, well the anoraks are all bowing to the great wonder called Smithland that is based on board of a rusting hulk and tidly little radio service - named of course after the Smith lie about a 5 or 6 years old little girl.

Malcolm Smith needs to get rid of the O'Rahilly attachments, and then immediately own up to the fact that what he is managing is a hulk in service to 'Radio Smith'.

Malcolm, you are coming across as stupid as your mentor Mr Rusling by tying yourself in knots in support of a pack of lies.

Finally an added note for 'Neptune' who writes in support of the O'Rahilly-Smith claims about a 5 or 6 years old girl. This character is apparently scared to put a real name to his comments about us not finding "Mister Big". Oh, we found him long ago, the fact that we don't want more research stolen, is why we have not as yet published our findings.