Most of our incoming mail seems to be from people who want to prevent our investigation from being published in book format, but we now have received some very helpful input from David Cotter who directed our attention to finding the genealogical background of the person identified as Oonagh Leigh. She is mostly identified in connection with Radio Caroline (1964-1967) as Oonagh Leigh, and prior to that in association with the person of Ronan O'Rahilly.
We have been informed by David Cotter that she was born into a family named Huggard, and not Hubbard as a Kent Police report stated. However, she was born in Surrey, England, as the Police report stated. When she married for the first time her surname became Leigh, and later, she married again and acquired the surname of Karanjia. But for the purposes of this investigation her surname is now Huggard.
Oonagh Huggard had an older sister named Frances who also married and acquired the surname of van Staden. Frances also went to work at 6 Chesterfield Gardens during the time of its occupancy by entities related to Radio Caroline.
Therefore we have begun to make corrections to the text where we were in error, and we will be changing and building a revised BioFrag in order to identify the various family and business relationships of Oonagh Huggard - Leigh - Karanjia.
Again, we thank David Cotter for his assistance in this matter.
We have been asked (again) why we paid a private investigator to discover who is the father of Ian Cowper Ross? We thought that we had answered this question under a prior posting which began: What took you so long?
The answer is the same.
Right now there remains a vast body of work Online; in previous radio and television broadcast documentaries, and in previously published newspaper and magazine features that all identify C. E. Ross as 'Jimmy Ross', and who is then linked with MacFisheries; CarPhone Warehouse or a City of London merchant bank.
The son of C.E. Ross did his best to confuse everyone with a novel about a family called Shaw, which he then implied was really about his own family called Ross. So 'Jimmy Shaw' in Ian's novel was transposed as 'Jimmy Ross'.
We knew of one way to discover the truth and that was to obtain a copy of Ian's wedding certificate that listed his father's name and his mother's name. To obtain a copy we had to buy a copy and that is what we did. We paid a private investigator to locate the official repository from which to buy it, and then we paid him to buy a copy and send it to us.
Once we had that information we had a 'key' to opening many other doors.
If we had simply relied upon the press we would have run into challenges about the veracity of the information, because the press has carried the bogus story about 'Jimmy Ross'. So we paid for an authentic copy and all of that took time. But to get to that point we had to know just who was pumping out this fake story about 'Jimmy Ross', and why they were doing it. We answered that question as well by buying copies of books, as well as magazine and newspaper articles. We then had a vast and growing library of information (much of it was in error), but we then had to assemble it in chronological order. We also obtained copies of those old radio and television documentaries as well as airchecks from old broadcasts.
But because there is no existing single source of the true information about Ian Cowper Ross and his entanglement with Ronan O'Rahilly, we had to obtain official documents from Ireland about the involvement of Ronan O'Rahilly's father in the creation of Radio Caroline. That became a little more difficult and a little more expensive. Then there is that misleading book called 'Radio Man', and that took even more money and time to unravel, in order to find the truth.
What we began to learn from all this information is that the stories about CBC (Plays) Ltd; CNBC (offshore radio); Voice of Slough Ltd; GBOK; GBLN; Radio Atlanta and finally Radio Caroline, are not separate ventures, but one venture with many spin-offs. We also learned that Jocelyn Stevens did not appear at the end of the story in 1964, but at the beginning of the story as far back as 1959, or possibly earlier, and that there were other key players who have not been considered to date as part of a single story thread.
All of that has taken time and money, because before we knew the questions to ask, we first had to have access to some existing answers to reconsider.
This is how we set about uncovering the truth.
It began with a working hypothesis which we tested to see if it was true, or untrue. Sometimes it turned out to be true, but often it turned into a blind alley and we had to ask anew. This is how criminal detectives work on cold case crimes, and this is how we work.
Do we know the whole story as of now?
No, we don't.
Will we ever find all of the information?
Will we find enough of the real answers to publish a true account that will totally rubbish the fictitious nonsense that is already in circulation?
Absolutely we will - because we already have!
Right now we are 'tidying-up' our research by putting it into chronological order and writing it in such a way that it isn't presented as a boring academic paper, but in a book form that readers might enjoy and which will certainly enlightened them.
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.
Anoraks, stop believing and supporting the LIES being promoted by Paul Rusling, Mike Leonard and a host of others about the origins of Radio Caroline, because that is what you are doing by supporting them!
If you take away the 'Jimmy' LIE, then how do YOU explain the origin of Radio Caroline?
The 'Jimmy' LIE is just that: the 'Jimmy' LIE.
'Jimmy' never existed except in the minds of anoraks.
We are still investigating the lives of Ian Cowper Ross and Oonagh Leigh, although we now have enough to totally demolish the LIES published by Rusling; Mike Leonard and others. But we are self-financing and having to both investigate and then assemble the details in such an in-your-face manner, that anoraks have nowhere to run, and no place to hide.
What the publishers of the 'real story' etc., etc., about Radio Caroline have published so far is absolute rubbish. It supports the Establishment, meaning the BBC and its step-children.
Now that's an insulting laugh isn't it?
You thought you were supporting the cause of 'free radio', but that is a big joke in itself - instead of investigating the joke as we are, and we will continue to unmask the nonsense to the satisfaction of court room standards! But isn't it funny how the anoraks will read these lines and spot what they think is a typo, instead of a deliberate bait, and then comment of the typo but never upon the fact that the story about 'Jimmy Ross' is a lie. So okay, the anoraks are reading these words and our viewing statistics are climbing! What a pity that the penny isn't dropping in their minds that Paul Rusling et al have all defrauded them with a pack of lies which they had to purchase to read, while you get the true story here, for free!
By the way, we want to thank the anorak who has now posted a link to these words on of all places: The Garry Stevens' Forum! What dummies the anoraks really are - they will believe anything and never check out the facts. (Now go and read our companion Blog - it has different content today.)
If there never was a 'Jimmy Ross', and there wasn't, then where did the money come from to start Radio Caroline?
Not Ronan O'Rahilly!
You want to know about Ronan O'Rahilly?
He worked for his father's family business but told everyone that he had escaped that business and struck out on his own. More to the point is that he arrived in London to find additional funding for the family business, and then he drifted off track and his parents cut him loose.
We have the proof!
We are assembling the stories of Ronan O'Rahilly; Ian Cowper Ross; Oonagh Leigh and others involved in the fake narrative - promoted by Jocelyn Stevens!
Jocelyn Stevens was 'there' at the beginning - meaning that Jocelyn Stevens was getting involved with the commercial radio scene in Britain back in 1959-1960 when a lot of others were getting involved. But Jocelyn Stevens was not 'Mister Big' (who really did exist! We know who he was and what 'glued' all of these people together, even though their interests varied.)
Jocelyn Stevens got involved with Ronan O'Rahilly via the ship 'Fredericia', and Ronan O'Rahilly got involved with the 'Fredericia' because of his father!
Jocelyn Stevens needed Ian Cowper Ross because he was not Irish, but would-be English aristocracy - like Jocelyn Stevens himself. One big difference: at that at the time, Ian Cowper Ross was just a kid without a lot of common sense. The reason why Jocelyn Stevens needed Ian Cowper Ross was to misdirect attention away from 'Mister Big'. Ronan O'Rahilly could not do that with his silly stories about Georgie Fame. The EMI catalogue made a joke out of that story.
So what about Oonagh Leigh?
Well she was a Ronan O'Rahilly hanger-on, although she had far more wisdom and understanding about the situation than Ronan O'Rahilly. Unfortunately for her, she was an outsider who was not welcomed into the inner sanctum of the British aristocracy like Ian Cowper Ross. However, he only gained entrance via the backdoor, and not in his own right. He was sort of inside, but not really, not like Jocelyn Stevens.
What we want to know is this:
At what point will the anorak publishers admit that they have been following the unresearched lies of each other, instead of actually doing some work to find the true story?
Right now the British Crown Establishment thinks that anoraks are the biggest collection of dummies to have shuffled on to the stage since the Flat Earth Society.
The British Broadcasting Corporation transmits a constant stream of rubbish to the world, and yesterday they were at it again with another 40 minutes about a station they called 'Radio Caroline', except that it wasn't. This is the reason why we are drawing a line under August 14, 1967 when the original and real Radio Caroline died - forever.
But what the BBC is doing is promoting this totally false narrative that a station called 'Radio Caroline' is still on the air - now with a UK broadcasting licence. This is the fake history that is being taught to students today, and it is that same mythology that the BBC is once again endorsing and broadcasting to the general public.
Why are we so concerned?
Because BBC programs such as this one, have been built upon deception under the pretense of actuality, and that is the main fare of the authorized story about the past that is constantly promoted by the UK Establishment. This BBC program is typical of a form of presentation about the past that was 'perfected' in WWII using a mandate by Winston Churchill, but placed under the direction of Sefton Delmer.
This new program follows Sefton Delmer's style of presentation:
It contains a certain amount of true reporting about the sinking of the Mi Amigo in 1980, but it mixed-it with a totally fictitious story about broadcasting after August 14, 1967 by a station using the name of 'Radio Caroline'. This only reinforces the falsehood that back in 1964, Ronan O'Rahilly was the originator of the authentic station called Radio Caroline. He was not, and neither is there any continuity that is alleged to stretch from Radio Caroline of 1964-1967, to the event that Nick Richards is now relating on the BBC World Service.
Until 2015 we thought that the true story about the origins of Radio Caroline was known. We had already begun to publish our work with a precursory introduction under a two-part title called 'UK Offshore Radio' (which is still available Online.) Then the fog of confusion descended and everything ground to a halt.
As we have previously revealed in our two Blogs, as well as in an article published in the magazine of the Communications Museum at Burntisland in Scotland, we were confronted with a conundrum. That mystery began with a book called 'Radio Man'.
The initial problem began when the authors of 'Radio Man' claimed a very different heritage to the existing and accepted story, because their version was at variance with the one stated in books; magazine articles; newspaper features and broadcasts.
It took us over two years to root out the true story, and one reason for the delay is that the person who had commissioned the publication of 'Radio Man' had spent almost £100,000 in the process. The net effect was to deceive by obfuscation, and therefore mislead readers. While the story in 'Radio Man' is at variance to the 'pop' version, its harm is compounded by the careful substitution of words used in print, in order to change the meaning of the original research text prior to publication.
We do not believe that this was an accident.
We eventually discovered that the twisting of facts to partially deceive, was nothing more that a process put into play by Winston Churchill during World War II. This Churchillian strategy was deliberately invented to confuse and misinform the Nazi German leaders. It even confused President Roosevelt who was not told at first about the Churchillian plan of intentional deception. So the USA began to spend money and manpower to investigate what was perceived to be information coming from Nazi Germany, when it was really coming from Churchill's autocratic and secretive United Kingdom.
But in the Nineteen Sixties, that same methodology was being employed by British entrepreneurs to deceive the British electorate. Back in WWII it wasn't just one group of men and women who were engaged in a single operation, and nor was it simply passive propaganda. In WWII this was an operation outside the realm of standard warfare.
Winston Churchill commissioned several bodies on a 'need-to-know' basis to engage in an over-arching plan of action. In some instances its operatives acted like terrorists. Some were pornographers; some were engaged in polemics wrapped around religion, and others in musical entertainment to attract potential victims. Back in WWII it all fell under the umbrella of the UK Official Secrets Act, and while the true story has been dribbling out since the end of WWII, not all of it is known to this day.
But decades later, it is not as if just the same WWII methodology had been employed to conceal the real story of offshore radio, because in some instances the very same people had been recruited - because of their wartime know-how.
That is what we ran into when trying to research this story.
Most of the offshore radio fans did not, and still do not, have a clue.
Don Pierson, the Texan who created Radio London, Britain Radio and Radio England, was also deceived. He reacted to the fantasy and not to the facts, and it led to his downfall with regards to his financial involvement in those stations. In the instances of Britain Radio and Radio England, it also led to those stations becoming financial disasters.
So we are now getting ready to begin a new series of part-publications, and each one will consist of a two-sided approach. One section will debunk the myths, while another one will spell out the real story.
After several of these part-publications have been released, they will then be edited to conform to a single volume, with more part-publications to follow. They will likewise be grouped together as another volume that will eventually become a continuing series of volumes, as we originally promised prior to 2015. In this way, if we need to correct any part of a part-volume with additions or deletions or amendments, we can do so relatively quickly and at low cost.
We will keep you informed as to our publishing progress.
In the 1960s, while Marshall McLuhan was busy explaining to Canadian students why "the medium is the message", in England, it was Beatrix Miller who was inventing a fantasy message about a girl named Caroline. By the 1980s, it was Tanith Lee who aptly but coincidentally extrapolated a true picture of that phantasmic girl: "The final shreds of her identity and her role seemed to discard her. She was left, a pebble spun through chaos, no firm ground anywhere for sanity to take a stand."* Back in 1965, investigators for the UK Board of Trade were coming to the conclusion that no matter how diligent they were, they would never find the parents of Caroline, because her parents did not exist. Caroline was an audible illusion. She was merely a false perception of a real sound that had been intentionally stimulated in the minds of listeners to deceive them: Caroline is the girl who never was. *Lee, Tanith. Day by Night. ISBN 10: 0879975768
Due to the amount of material already published on this Blog, and on our companion Blog, we are in the process of merging both timelines and placing our previously published research work into the order in which it should appear. As soon as this process is completed we will begin adding newly researched information. This will enable us to speed-up the first print date for our continuing part work and make it available before the end of this year.