Earthlinggb's Blog

The People’s Voice & OFCOM.

Posted in Law, Media, The Corrupt SOB's by earthling on October 24, 2013

There you are.

It’s YOUR voice right? David keeps telling you that. It’s YOU funding it too right? David keeps telling you that too. It’s for the public’s interest isn’t it? That’s the whole idea of it isn’t it? To be in the public’s interest to expose these nasty people across the board isn’t it?

So, go for it. According to OFCOM, information as to whether “The People’s Voice” has applied or is being considered for a licence cannot be divulged (and this is the thing that gives you the power to put him on the spot) “is not, so long as that business continues to be carried on, to be disclosed without the consent of the person for the time being carrying on that business. ” (They quote the Communications Act 2003 and that Act expressly states that if you do not have consent from the business owner – that OBVIOUSLY not being you then! lol – then they will not reveal the information. So then ASK for David’s consent! He is transparent isn’t he? He wouldn’t be hiding anything would he? Why on EARTH would he do that? 🙂

But here is the sensational irony which shall be totally lost on all the Icke congregation:

British regulatory legislation is protecting David Icke from the need for transparency in his business dealings which are meant to be for the British (and world) public and funded by the British (and world) public!

While David Icke and TPV is about absolutely destroying the very establishment which has decided to provide him with that protection from transparency!

WHOOSH! Right over Icke followers heads!

To: Me
Subject: The Peoples Voice 1-245308060
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 14:25:23 +0000

Dear Mr

Please find attached a response to your request for information.

Kind regards


Ofcom 1

Dear Julia,

Thank you for your confirmation that you have not issued a licence to “The People’s Voice” as of today. Having originally contacted Ofcom about the need for such a CONTENT licence for internet based broadcasting, I was advised as below:

To: Me
Subject: RE: Content licensing
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 15:29:12 +0000


Services which are broadcast from the UK via the internet are licensable.   This is set out in the notes of guidance for applicants and reflects the requirement of the Audio Visual Media Services Directive.

Therefore, my follow up questions are as follows:

1. I must assume, therefore, that if such an organisation has not been issued with a licence by the time of commencing broadcasting, that they shall be in breach of the statutory requirements in such an instance? This is a general question relating to any and all broadcasters and potential broadcasters of internet content. If this assumption is incorrect, can you advise me of the specific situations in which a broadcaster need not apply for and be granted a licence by OFCOM (or ATVOD)?

2. Specifically, is it necessary that “The People’s Voice” DOES have a licence (content licence) to broadcast? According to the reply above, this is the case. Is the reply correct?

3. Further, I would wish to add this: “The People’s Voice” is, as can be clearly evidenced by the continuing requests for donations by the public and the continuing promotion of the station as being “The People’s” station, suggesting it is purely being set up and broadcast FOR the “public interest”. It is the public funding it (unless I am mistaken – which is very probable in my opinion although that is not what is being “sold” TO the public). If, then, it promotes its entire raison d’être as being “in the public interest” then it is not, at all, in the public interest that they do not know and have no way of knowing whether the public’ interest is being served by the station/company (a Private Limited Company suggesting it is non profit) complying with the statutory requirements. If the public is not allowed such information then it is a clear indication that the company is acting in a private and non transparent manner and that OFCOM and present legislation is enabling such.

How, then, can it be stated that it not require a “public interest test” to provide this information for a broadcast network funded by the public? Please answer this question for me very logically.

4. Having read section 393(1) of the Communications Act, it does occur to me that for, as you say, the information to be “classified” (for that is what this is – classified and not available to the public), the “business” must have been granted a provision to operate under that act for the protection of section 393(1) to come into force. Am I correct?

393 General restrictions on disclosure of information

(1)Subject to the following provisions of this section, information with respect to a particular business which has been obtained in exercise of a power conferred by—

(a)this Act,

(b)the enactments relating to the management of the radio spectrum (so far as not contained in this Act),

(c)the 1990 Act, or

(d)the 1996 Act,

is not, so long as that business continues to be carried on, to be disclosed without the consent of the person for the time being carrying on that business.

So, a legislative body related to government must have given approval for “The People’s Voice” (or ANY such broadcaster) to operate under the terms of the Communications Act 2003. Again, Am I correct?

5. To be given such approval and be protected from the need to divulge such information relating to whether or not the business has a licence to operate under OFCOM, obviously then suggests that the British government are entirely approving of the expected content from such a broadcaster. Am I correct?
Please note, the above questions (4 and 5) are logical and can be answered in a general form. There is absolutely no justification for not replying to these questions in a general form then.
6. Inasmuch as you, personally, will have the knowledge of whether the station is abiding by the statutory requirements then, in your capacity as an OFCOM employee (and one, therefore, who must abide by statutory legislation as you are doing now by not divulging what is written within the Acts) please state/confirm that you, in your capacity, would, and will, flag the noncompliance of any and all broadcasters who require a licence from you (or ATVOD). This may be treated as a freedom of information act request questioning a Freedom of Information Act officer. My guess is that, as such, such an officer would have to be transparent and factual in their reply (unless the FOI Act also gives some form of “pass” for that also?).
Thank you and regards,

So here’s how the conversation went between David Icke and those who granted him the benefit of conducting his business under the Communications Act 2003:

“Hello Mr Icke, what can we do for you?”

“Well I’d like to set up a business in broadcasting over the internet please”

“Indeed Mr Icke. What exactly is it you intend to broadcast?”

“Oh just a lot of the REAL news that the BBC etc don’t broadcast and show everyone the truth of the corruption and paedophilia etc etc which goes on among our legislators, the Police, Government, Parliament, the Queen and generally do whatever is possible to expose the scum for what they are.”

“Hmmm. Do you realise that it is all of those institutions and the people within them and who you speak of who create the laws and legislation of this country Mr Icke? It’s highly unlikely then that you shall be granted such a business under the Communications Act 2003 which will, effectively, protect you from having to give information out to those who fund you and those who you say the tv network is for and on behalf of. Generally speaking in the real world Mr Icke, one’s enemies being in such a powerful position, do not tend to provide the legal vehicle for one to attack them. Are there any extenuating circumstances as to why you think it would be different in your case?”


“Oh I see! How would you like to pay?”

“American Express?”

“That’ll do nicely sir, thank you!”

GET REAL ICKEANS! Actually use your newly found “enlightenment” to THINK assholes!

Icke comms act 2003

David, if I had an audience like yours I’d be grinning like a cheshire cat too!


While this guy who wanks off strangers in public toilets (and you find out Tony Blair or any other politician does the same and what do you do?) gets a prime slot on BBC television to make the call for “Revolution” while neither he nor Icke have ANY form of solution (they do not have the intellect to propose a solution!!).

What is it you do not understand about the very thing Icke and co talk about? “Ordo Ab Chao”. This is PRECISELY what you are seeing these same people creating – CHAOS. Because, without a solution, a “revolution” WILL simply create that chaos! JOB DONE!

To all of you who consider yourself “awakened” WAKE THE FUCK UP! And no, I shall not apologise for the language. You deserve the sheer condescension thrown at you!

“Do you have a solution Earthling? If not shut up!” – Well in fact I do. I have solutions but I would need people to listen and support them as much as these guys have their audience otherwise I am pissing in the wind. There are two main elements: The monetary system and the legal system. There is also the religious aspect but that can wait. With numbers supporting what I would have planned (and it is very easy and takes nothing but sheer numbers to support WORDS. Yes WORDS. That is ALL it takes.) not “I” but WE could literally destroy this system BUT (and this is the big thing) BUT we would destroy it with a solution NOT just “We want a revolution”. Give him his due (and I hate to) Paxman was right to say “Yes but what do you replace it with?”

Why are these people getting to raise their profiles on the BBC etc? While they have no solution? It is because they are the perfect, well known (loved) celebrities that the vast majority of plonkers out there will listen to in abject ignorance! It is PERFECT for the establishment. If you do not understand this then you do not deserve the description of “Awakened”.



Don’t get me wrong. I recognise what I believe to be sincere (although I have been proven wrong with Icke and that is a certainty) and correct points being made by Brand. He delivers the points well also BUT, without a solution, the people who we are working against utilise every side to create the hegelian “synergy” that they need to create the change that THEY wish to impose. They do it subtly and they do it well. You KNOW that. And until such times as a solution is put forward and listened to and supported, all you are doing by “rah rah”ing Russell Brand and co is creating the chaos that these people want. That is why he is on the BBC. IF he had a solution (a real one) the BBC would not got near him with a ten foot pole.

Brand mentions support of a solution if one comes forward, then, while I have blogged about them incessantly over the last year or so (having concentrated on the problems beforehand), it is now time to support solutions. The destruction of the present monetary system and replacement with MPE (or equivalent) is one aspect. The other is the recognition of the legal person and how it is implemented to all our detriment then, not so much replacing it but recognising the con in it and adjustment of such to create a TRUE “everyone is equal before the law” system. Both of these elements go hand in hand – they MUST do because they feed off one another.

How to achieve it? Simple (it really is): I can write to 10 Downing street and copy to all media outlets (tv and press) and provide absolute fact and evidence coupled with total logic which YOU would support) and, with your support (but it would have to be hundreds of thousands of people – that’s it, it needs NUMBERS. Numbers which Icke and co have but do not utilise for the purpose of lobbying) we could shake the UK government and parliament to its very core based upon pure intellect. NOT chaotic, on the streets revolution (it never achieved anything).

But then who am I right? Well, who are you?

And that is the underlying problem: You look to celebrity to sort it or be your “spiritual” leader. This NEVER works. What DOES work is understanding the solution (and even if there are certain areas of it you do not understand or even disagree with – we are NEVER all going to agree on every detail, that’s what makes us individuals – you still recognise the fundamentals being 100% accurate and beneficial to you and us all) and then taking the view that the best interests of the 99% are served in such a case. You do not achieve “nirvana” for all in one single step but the first step will be catastrophic for the 1% and create the basis for progressing toward that “nirvana”.

One small step…….


The question remains: How do we gather hundreds of thousands? THAT is the issue.

15 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Gazz said, on October 24, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    Heheh too fuckin much 🙂 lol

    • earthlinggb said, on October 24, 2013 at 10:27 pm

      Yeah I’ll give Icke a break for a while. Not much else to say anyhow. It’s all there. Only Jesus can make the blind see however so I’ll leave the faithful to their messiah.

      • Gazz said, on October 24, 2013 at 10:49 pm

        Nanoo – Nanoo lol

  2. Gazz said, on October 24, 2013 at 10:47 pm

    I think You’ve done well enough earthlinggb. And very well spotted and put together – “33” 🙂

  3. redditchfluoride said, on October 25, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    Good call earthlinggb its the numbers Icke attracts that we need as you point out he has no solutions and a chaotic Egypt style popular revoulution will be hijacked with a ready made elitist solution. The scum that rule over us already have the civil contingencies act in place. Sisi the new glorious Egyptian leader is an Israeli agent. So much for the Islamic spring.

    Brand whilst appearing genuine enough calls for a “socialist” solution … straight back into the trap of being led by false dogma then.

    Ridding ourselves of the burden of Admiralty law and the EU’s poisonous aquis communitaire would serve us better.

    PS there appears to have been a sea change in the outlook of the US military.

    • redditchfluoride said, on October 25, 2013 at 7:07 pm

      PS I concur with the author I believe we had a narrow escape recently see this vid I knocked up for the mindset.

    • earthlinggb said, on October 25, 2013 at 7:57 pm

      Agreed Redditch. I’ve still to look at the veterans today article however (and I have issues with them also lol). I’ll watch the vid at some point. Promise. You “knocked it up”? Listen man, the thing is there are hundreds of thousands of people out there all listening all talking and yet doing nothing but putting false hopes in people with no solutions. If even just a few committed souls would put their resources together (I’m talking time and effort not money) I am sure we could get people of a particular size and mass to actually take intellectual action once we get that mass.
      If I could get good solid people to say “ok what’s the plan? And let’s work it” and be POSITIVE in the approach and stick with it, I’m sure among that small group a large group could be grown. There’d be no protesting, no marching there would just be well targeted strategy to run rings around these bastards with such a mass behind us they could not ignore. We’d then show up people like Icke etc for what they are: DO NOTHINGS with NO solutions. But hey, I dream. (No leaders per se). Pure democratic one man one vote in the organisation bur the fundamentals would be so clear that we’d have 100% “for” votes anyhow. We’d have to look closely at someone who did not vote an “aye”. The people involved would simply have to understand two things: 1. The legal person issue and 2. That money is NOT created by banks but by us. Two VERY simple facts.

  4. Gazz said, on October 25, 2013 at 7:57 pm

    Most certainly is a numbers game earthlinggb – Given we live in a Christian country and I would imagine the bulk of Folks still associate themselves with the Church of England. I think it is essential to get on board the truly faithful – I’ve no wish to elaborate on ‘truly’ – I’m sure You will understand this. Let’s just say those who follow the teachings of Jesus the Christ . . . . I can’t help but think this is likely the route to take given the numbers.

    I agree with Your views regarding Brand – best he stick to being a joker !

    • earthlinggb said, on October 25, 2013 at 8:07 pm

      Most of the people in the truth movement seem to want to destroy religions mate and I can understand this and even agree (to an extent). Christians (the fundamentalist kind just as with any fundamentalist) can be dangerous in themselves since they need a “doctrine” and are easily brainwashed. Christ’s teachings I can essentially agree with whether a deity or not. It is a very fine line we tread between it all. We know nationalist tendencies breed racism – now what the world needs. And yet it is nationalism which is opposing the one world government. Yes having a one world is how it should be with no barriers between people. It is the same thing with religion. The christians keep the NWO one world religion at bay (as do the muslims etc) but, truthfully, the world doesn’t need religion in that sense either because it breeds division and hate/racism too. So what I’m saying is every step the world should be taking (an a greater number are agreeing t should) is walking right into the hands of these people. Why? Because people are refusing to see the issues like the legal person and money and the fact these elite want us to think in terms of “no borders” between people in any way because then they create their world government. As I say, a very fine line which can only be cut by bringing to the fore the fundamental lies and ways in which they control things. A mass of people behind an organisation pointing these things out very strongly and intelligently is the only way this shit is going to be brought down and something good replacing it. Anything else is chaos.

      • Gazz said, on October 25, 2013 at 8:18 pm

        Yes I know earthlinggb, my point being the numbers. In the world a third or so follow the Christian dogma and rightly or wrongly – that is a huge number to attempt to get on board. As You say – religion issues can wait – I’ve no doubt You are aware of the difference between faith and religion . . . .
        I’m just thinking numbers . . . . It is a problem that needs great focus – numbers !

  5. Steve said, on November 3, 2013 at 5:26 pm

    Someone is eating well as Sean tweets about paying £1000 to have one of his friends cook him dinner!!

    Sean Adl-Tabatabai ‏@seanshhh

    Yum! Just had lunch cooked for me by @misterhsk … Totally worth buying the pledge on #spoilt

    “Cast member and Celebrity MasterChef runner-up Hardeep Singh Kohli has offered to cook a meal in your home or a location of your choice! So if you have a special event coming up – a birthday, an anniversary or even just a Friday night in, why not have Hardeep do the cooking? This Kickstarter reward costs £1,000 per person”

  6. The Equalizer said, on November 6, 2013 at 8:25 pm

    How about a campaign to uncover all the British charlatans on the internet. We can start with Icke, then go from there. COME ON LETS EXPOSE THEM ALL.

    • earthlinggb said, on November 6, 2013 at 8:38 pm

      The best way to expose them would be to actually do (and achieve) what THEY should be doing. Problem is, they have the audiences. And that’s where all these people called “truthers” go wrong. They STILL look for the celebrity to follow.

  7. Joan Northam said, on July 27, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    You are so right – we look for a leader to follow. Did you know that the late Dorothy L Sayers, an author and speaker and a Christian who died in 1957 (think that was the year) wrote during the final months of the Second World War: “It is no good looking for a leader. There are not going to BE any more leaders. The people must learn to lead themselves.” I entirely agree with her, and it seems also with you! She had seen the death, chaos and disruption caused by two world wars in her lifetime, and she realised that following “leaders” was no longer a viable option. It is as we now know, the leaders who CAUSE the wars, who manipulate them into being – but it’s the poor bloody infantry that has to fight and die in them. I am contributing to this because I have learned a great deal from David Icke. He has a talent which few if any of our clergy, politicians or public speakers have today – he can take what is essentially a spiritual subject, and make it interesting to his audiences. I shall always be glad that I both read and listened to his message. But the time has come to realise that David is not a leader either – take that of his message that is useful, and be glad of it. Ditch the rest, and pray for David, that he will see the wrong turn he has taken, learn humility, start treating others with courtesy and consideration, stop thinking he knows it all, and get back on track again. Thank you for giving me space to post here. Cassandra

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: