Earthlinggb's Blog

Coronation Street: A vehicle to promote eugenics and societal change

Posted in Gross stupidity within society, Media, Uncategorized by earthlinggb on January 29, 2014

612057908_1372040743

What TV PROGRAMMING do you watch?

Isn’t it interesting that one of the longest running series on TV anywhere in the world, is a PROGRAMME entitled “Coronation Street”? Think of all the PROGRAMMES which have been broadcast on the BBC/ITV and other stations over the years. Many excellent dramas etc but only ONE remains and just keeps going. Yes it’s because it gets the audience. Of course. But there are others which got audiences just as big for the time they were broadcast. The establishment maintain Coronation Street because it does its job excellently. The writers for it keep churning out the stories and plot lines that keep so many watching and those watching will support the series as being “current” and full of plot lines which make you think. Yes indeed. That is precisely what they intend it to be. Through those story lines, they embed within your mind what subjects should be considered by you. They even make certain subjects taboo or not taboo just by the way they are presented. The sheer fact some ARE presented suggests to the mind of the observer that “this is acceptable”. Gay is acceptable, transsexualism is acceptable, SUICIDE is acceptable, wanting to die so as not to be a burden on your loved ones or society is acceptable and noble! Just keep feeding it all in and, eventually, that acceptance will be achieved.

But very few give any consideration to the agenda which is being promulgated in all of this. They just view it as “entertainment” while being a statement, at times, on present society. They cannot even fathom that it exists as a solid society changer within a far bigger picture. That’s just “crazy talk” and taking things too far.

No dearies, it’s not.

In the early 1900s Fabian Society members advocated the ideal of a scientifically planned society and supported eugenics by way of sterilization[citation needed]. This is said to have influenced the passage of the Half-Caste Act, and its subsequent implementation in Australia, where children were systematically and forcibly removed from their parents, so that the British colonial regime could “protect” the Aborigine children from their parents. In an article published in The Guardian on 14 February 2008 (following the apology offered by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to the “stolen generations“), Geoffrey Robertson criticised Fabian socialists for providing the intellectual justification for the eugenics policy that led to the stolen generations scandal.[31][32] Such views on socialism, inequality and eugenics in early 20th century Fabians were not limited to one individual, but were widely shared in the Fabian Society and throughout a broad political spectrum.

While living and working in Singapore for over 5 years, the following has been of no surprise to me whatsoever considering that Singapore is, effectively (and very definitely) a “Labour camp” which does not even recognise itself as such. If you are an outsider looking in however (and I don’t mean a hop-over for a few days on the way to Australia when all you appreciate is what is on show on the surface while you do not have a clue about the undercurrent of sheer misery) it is as close to communism for the masses who then work for Singapore PLC while the elite sit in their ivory castles and decide at what age and under what circumstances people are allowed a home for themselves to live in – it is what is coming in the west, slowly and gradually……

Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore, stated in his memoirs that his initial political philosophy was strongly influenced by the Fabian Society. However, he later altered his views, considering the Fabian ideal of socialism as impractical.[20] In 1993, Lee said:

“They [Fabian Socialists] were going to create a just society for the British workers – the beginning of a welfare state, cheap council housing, free medicine and dental treatment, free spectacles, generous unemployment benefits. Of course, for students from the colonies, like Singapore and Malaya, it was a great attraction as the alternative to communism. We did not see until the 1970s that that was the beginning of big problems contributing to the inevitable decline of the British economy.”

—Lee Kuan Yew interview with Lianhe Zaobao[20]
From the blog of Gopalan Nair

Singapore not a country one would want to live

Ladies and Gentlemen,Singapore is just one big fraud. And underneath all that glitter, it is really not a place someone who had a choice would want to live.

On the outside Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew paints a picture of a modern first class city. You have TV newsreaders who try to speak good English imitating someone from any other city like London, but with one difference. Those in London are free of government censorship while the Singaporean specimen reads out prepared texts vetted by government agencies. You have newspapers published in glossy paper just like in London, except in Singapore they are state owned and controlled, where journalists report to government ministers on what they have plan to write. You see lawyers all dressed in black dragging modern briefcases with books overflowing with wisdom, but in actual fact they are more afraid of the government than their clients ever were.

If you fall into hard times you starve unless you go to some government minister’s office and beg on all fours for a handout. In the west there are established procedures for welfare for the unfortunate in society to live with their heads up.

Singapore has no place for people who want to better society towards a more humane and compassionate one. The political philosophy is that of Lee Kuan Yew which is not very different perhaps from how the Chinese peasants lived under the Ming or Tang Dynasty many centuries ago. Which goes something like this. You wake up in the morning, go to work, be respectful towards your rulers and superiors, don’t think you know any better than your masters and work your way up the ladder through the recognition of your superiors. Of course above all your superiors there is the great master or leader who is better and wiser than all. In the case of the Chinese Dynasty, it was the Ming or Tang emperor. In the case of Singapore, it is Lee Kuan Yew and in his absence, his son.

I am sorry but this is not the way I like to live. And neither do I think anyone who has an understanding of the way things are going on in the island and has the means to live somewhere else.

So what is left of native Singaporeans are those who simply cannot leave because of lack of skills or an understanding of their plight or those who are not concerned about living as free men an women as long as they earn sufficiently large amounts of money. In this group are the Lee Kuan Yew minions who stay behind.

You have of course the foreign Western businessmen and professionals who do business in the island. For them it is only a case of making money. They are naturally not concerned about how they live their lives since it is not their country and they are there for short periods, when they will go hone to France, Germany or the USA. Most of them leave their families at home in the West and even if they bring them here, they study at foreign schools with their German, Italian or American teachers. As far as they are concerned, they despise Singaporeans for a cowardly people, willing to live as slaves in Lee Kuan Yew’s island, which they would not in America, Germany or France.

Then there are the middle level professionals, some from England, Australia, India and other places. For a variety of reasons, they spend some time in Singapore working as engineers, bank officers, and executives. They too are totally unconcerned about how Singaporeans have to live their lives since they are here temporarily. In 6 months, if they got a better job in Rangoon Burma, they would spend some time there if possible.

In the end, all you have in Singapore at the upper levels is the revolving door phenomenon. People come in for a time, and then leave, only to be replaced by other people who come in and who themselves leave too.

If there are going to be anyone left behind to run the place, it is the handful of sycophants and crawlers who willingly take orders from above as to what to do, regardless of right or wrong. And their numbers are shrinking too, as Singapore students leave for a foreign education and opt to remain where they are. Singapore is reaching a point where it cannot find sufficiently capable people to run the show and this is entirely because of what Singapore is today, a life of submission and obedience, which people with an education find unacceptable.

Unless the native Singaporeans who have a stake in the country take drastic real earth shattering action to demand a democratic system of government, literally taking Lee Kuan Yew to task, I don’t see him doing anything to arrest the decline into which Singapore is sliding.

Gopalan Nair
Attorney at Law
Disbarred from practicing law in Lee’s Singapore, imprisoned and refused entry to the island for criticizing Singapore’s judiciary in this blog (see blogpost May 29, 2008 Singapore. Judge Belinda Ang’s Kangaroo Court)
Actively practicing law in California and in good standing at the California Bar.
Member in good standing as a lawyer in England and Wales (Barrister).
39737 Paseo Padre Parkway, Suite A1
Fremont, CA 94538, USA
Tel: 510 657 6107
Fax: 510 657 6914
Email: nair.gopalan@yahoo.com
Blog: http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/

You see, you do not judge a man by his words but his actions. Le Kuan Yew can say whatever he wishes to his people and to the world but, just like Blair and Cameron and the rest, it’s all lies and bullshit and Kuan Yew is STILL a fabian, he may just have “improved” it a little for himself. While our own Tony Blair visited Kuan Yew in 1996 just before taking on the role of Premiership in 1997. Now, what do you think came of that visit and meeting(s)? Well, here’s a couple of things to ponder over because I hope you shall readily see the way things are now in this country hark back to Blair’s (a fabian) meeting with the entirely corrupt Kuan Yew (fabian)…..

This leaves us with a further problematic interpretation of the stakeholder concept – that related to the welfare state. No sooner had Mr Blair sat down in the Far East than maverick Labour MP Frank Field was claiming the speech heralded a root and branch reform of pensions and benefits. It is certainly true that the present welfare system does not protect workers from summary restriction of pension and unemployment insurance “rights” which they believed the state had bestowed. While it is unthinkable in a free society for the state to rescind individual property rights – indeed they are so deeply-rooted that they have often re-emerged in eastern Europe after 50 years of communism – the same is not true of the communal pension and benefit rights bestowed under a democratic welfare state.

One way of remedying this problem is to require individuals to build up their own “provident accounts” on the Singapore model of forced savings. These can be used for unemployment insurance, education, pensions and even housing. Since they are individually assigned accounts, and fully funded by supporting investments, they cannot be lightly cancelled by the state, and would certainly be compatible with a stakeholder economy. But would a generation which is already heavily taxed to pay for the unfunded pensions of its parents now vote for a second dose of forced savings to pay for their own pensions as well? It seems rather doubtful, to put it mildly. This may be another area where New Labour needs to proceed cautiously as it puts meat on the bones of the stakeholder idea.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/tony-blair-puts-meat-on-the-stakeholder-bones-1324167.html

Then we have the following from the book: ” Autobiography and Decolonization- Modernity, Masculinity, and the Nation-state”  By Philip Holden

Autobiography and Decolonization- Modernity, Masculinity, and the Nation-state By Philip Holden

Do you see it? I have been saying to people for some years now that the way the UK is going is precisely what I saw when I lived in Singapore. Gopalan Nair is precisely correct when he speaks about the expats having disdain for the slaves who make up the populace in Singapore. I did at the time but I was unaware and ignorant of what I know now about the world because I was just too busy making a living until what happened to Gopalan happened to me and the corruption, which lay underneath the squeaky clean pavements you thought you could eat your dinner off, hit you right between the eyes.

But then you also have this, from the CFR and Henry Kissinger re Lee Kuan Yew:

CFR Lee Kuan Yew CFR Lee Kuan Yew 2

So why diverge into all of this stuff about Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew and fabianism when the post is meant to be about Coronation Street for god’s sakes?

Well, it’s simple really. To achieve what Lee Kuan Yew achieved takes decades and it will take decades here too. What needs to be done is create, over time, and entirely multi-cultural society (that said, Singapore isn’t quite as multi-cultural as it likes to portray itself. It’s still 80% chinese and the rest (Indian and Malay in the main) are second and third class citizens. The expats are a little “oasis” of their own and Singapore does its best to make them feel “at home” and comfortable BUT, you hit any issue (as I did) and the vultures come out to tear you apart because you’re “making money” and they see a way of getting it back while why would a Singaporean lawyer and judiciary give a damn about what they did to you and your family? It’s just business and you’re primed to be stripped of whatever they can get their hands on – with no jurisdiction, it doesn’t matter, they’ll fuck you over and over.

Anyhow, there’s the multiculturalism to cause even more division in the populace – therefore there is no one voice shouting at our corrupt government – plus there is the total change of the benefits and pensions structure. You see most people are squealing at the conservatives for the austerity measures and the benefits issue but, in fact, it all started a very long time ago and, to give the creep his due (David Icke that is) it has been a totalitarian tiptoe to where we are now. Again, it doesn’t matter who’s in power – Labour, Tory or Libdem – because they don’t create the policy, they just implement it. It’s the Crown which dictates from the shadows and the Crown like Lee Kuan Yew because they see he’s created that slave driven powerhouse on an island no larger than Greater London.

Now, you have a massive proportion of the UK who regularly and faithfully tune into Coronation Street (Coronation? Crown? Indeed!) and that one long time serial drama has fed (but, in many respects, created) the morality of this nation while they now have another vehicle, long standing, which doubles that effort called “Eastenders”. Both drip feeding into the collective consciousness almost night after night. Most thinking they are just reflecting society as they go along. Wrong! They are, in many respects, creating society by colouring stories the way the establishment want them coloured. Have you also noticed another thing about these series? They tend to be pro monarchy all in all. Coincidence? Not at all. And just like the Queen’s celebrations and the Queen’s speech, Lee Kuan Yew has his “Singapore Days” where he has his media create a celebratory atmosphere of pride in the country tied into “democracy” (a joke) and all thing wonderful and historic. Precisely what we do here. And it works and always will.

So back to the eugenics message Coronation Street has just fed you.

Here is George Bernard Shaw, a fabian just like Kuan Yew and Blair (and quietly our entire establishments):

Got that? Now please don’t think or consider this is just one very “mad” man from many decades ago. If you do so then you’re just allowing yourself to be wilfully ignorant of everything going on around you. Shaw’s words reflect Singaporean (and soon British) society to a T. Singapore is an economic slave camp where anything but democracy exists and yet the British government treat Singapore as an exemplary example of democracy and success at work yet families have to stay together in small HDB flats because there is no welfare state (all tax receipts are for the top echelons) and they must support each other through their entire “lifecycle” and I use the term “lifecycle” because singaporeans are nothing more than products/resources to keep the machine running. There is no quality of life in Singapore (but they have been taught/conditioned to believe there is and be intensely proud of their achievements – which are all economic but not for them personally rather than simply for the singaporean elite to tell them “how lucky they are” and they believe it. Some don’t however but their lives can become very difficult (just as Gopalan’s did). The same thing is happening with those of us who speak out too loudly in the UK now too.

Corrie suicide

“Done very gently”…. i.e. humanely not cruel while Hesmondhalgh herself is a member of the Humanist society. A society which pitches itself as being pro human but is as much pro human as the World Wildlife Fund is pro wildlife.

Then we have to remember Newsweek and Time magazines in the last couple of years presenting us with these articles:

tcfkg 1101120611_600

So a little more on eugenics:

Eugenics2 blog-14-december-eugenics apsimg1480_slide-9f7e9c97590f19ee0f7ecee058898954e098e7fa-s6-c30

“Oh that’s about a century ago!” I hear you say. God! You just don’t get it do you?

What about this then….

eugenics and the left

Which all leaves the question……

2119618507_2e76fc5180

Answer: Well, for one thing, ask Lloyd……

Lloyd Blankfein God's work

Advertisements

Queen Elizabeth crowd sources on Indiegogo

Posted in Gross stupidity within society, Media, Uncategorized by earthlinggb on January 29, 2014

Queen down and out

Britain’s Queen Elizabeth has found herself down to her last £million while a palace insider stated she had approached David Icke for advice regarding donation funding. Mr Icke, a world renowned conspiracy  theorist, is reported as having pointed her majesty toward the Indiegogo website.

Next she’ll be down the local pawnbrokers with her diamonds and tiaras and selling her shares which are protected from the population’s general knowledge.

Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II, long thought to be one of the world’s richest women, is apparently down to her last million in savings, with palaces leaking and falling to pieces as MPs say she has been failed by her advisers and the Treasury.

The Queen’s courtiers have been advised to take money saving tips from the UK treasury, as her finances dip to an historic low with just £1 million left in reserve, the Telegraph reported.

A report by the Commons Public Accounts Committee found that her reserve fund had fallen from £35 million in 2001 to £1 million today. While the Royal household had made efficiency savings of just 5 percent over the past five years, government departments have made savings of up to a third.

MPs on the committee said that the Treasury must help to protect royal palaces from further damage and deterioration.

“We believe that the Treasury has a duty to be actively involved in reviewing the household’s financial planning and management – and it has failed to do so,” said Margaret Hodge, the Labour chairperson of the committee.

Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle are both in a terrible state of repair with staff required to catch rain in buckets to protect art and antiquities.

Meanwhile, in Buckingham Palace the 60-year-old boilers were running up bills of £774,000 a year and the wiring has not been replaced since 1949. More than a third of the royal estate has been found to be below “target condition.”

 

The committee compared Buckingham Palace, which has just 500,000 visitors a year, to the Tower of London, which has more than £2 million.

“If you look at the Tower of London and its visitor numbers it makes you think that there’s potential here. Have they done their darnedest to maximize value for money?” Hodge said.

The report also found that the royal household has not even attempted to cost up its huge backlog of repairs because it believed there was no point in doing so until it has new funding in place.

The Crown Estate gets 15 percent of its income from the Sovereign Grant, which replaced the old way of funding the Royal Family through the civil list in 2012.

While the Royal Household’s net expenditure was £33.3 million last year, £31 million of this came from the Sovereign Grant. To find the difference, it had to dip into its reserve fund.

A spokesman for Buckingham Palace insisted that the Sovereign Grant had made the Queen’s funding “more transparent and scrutinized” and was resulting in a “more efficient use of public funds.”

But the committee found that much more needs to be done if the Crown Estate and the Royal Household are to properly manage the Queen’s finances.

“We got the impression that they just haven’t tried to make greater savings. Here we are, we’re all in it together, but they are failing to eke out better value for the Queen. They are dipping into their reserves in a way that just isn’t sensible,” Hodge said.

Britain's Queen Elizabeth II unveils a plaque during an official visit to The Shard building in central London, on November 21, 2013. The Queen and her husband Prince Philip toured the viewing deck of the country's highest building Thursday.  AFP PHOTO / STEFAN ROUSSEAU/POOL

Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II unveils a plaque during an official visit to The Shard building in central London, on November 21, 2013. The Queen and her husband Prince Philip toured the viewing deck of the country’s highest building Thursday. AFP PHOTO / STEFAN ROUSSEAU/POOL

The report found that the Treasury was not doing its job properly. It is responsible for overseeing the Royal Household finances but is not doing enough and should draw on its extensive experience and “offer advice on key packages.”

“The Household needs to get better at planning and managing its budgets for the longer term – and the Treasury should be more actively involved in reviewing what the household is doing,” Hodge said.

Number crunching

A closer look at both the report and the figures in it reveals that the Queens finances may be healthier than the Committee found, and in areas where she has lost money it is not the fault of the Treasury but of her managers, the Guardian reports.

The report its self was compiled from a series of questions and answers with just two witness giving the answers, Sir Alan Reid, Keeper of the Privy Purse and Mike Stevens, Deputy Treasurer to the Queen.

When asked why they did not cut back their expenditure, Sir Alan Reid replies: “We really believed that it is not wise to cut back on the level of activity of the monarchy.”

The figure of 1 million pounds does not accurately reflect the value of assets held by the Royal Household, the Guardian says. Their total reserves stand at 14.2 million pounds, 11.8 million pounds of which comes from property, plant and other equipment.The biggest chunk of royal spending goes on payroll, and although staff numbers remained unchanged over the past year cost have risen considerably.

Austin Mitchell, one of the members of the committee, asked: “It looks to me that you managed to survive and manage the finances by letting the buildings deteriorate, by freezing the staff costs and by digging into the reserves. Is that a fair summary of what has happened?”

To which Sir Alan replied, “I think that does summarize, to a degree, what happened last year.”

Indiegogo

However, the last minute intervention of Mr Icke may have just saved the Queen’s bacon. There are rumours within the establishment that, due to Mr Icke’s advice and enlightenment of the Queen on how to make vast sums of money out of people without going to the bank for a loan, the Queen had a quiet word with her cabinet and the secretary of state for media, to give Mr Icke a pass regarding the requirement, by OFCOM, that no politically motivated person can hold a British broadcasting licence. Mr Icke seems to have quietly apologised to the Queen for calling her a reptile all these years and she quietly pronounced him a Knight of St John of Jerusalem even though he has no royal lineage. He did much the same, quietly while telling poll tax protestors he wouldn’t pay his either but then quietly did so. The Queen likes the name David since it originates from King David as she believes she does. She’s very happy with David Cameron and David Dimbleby we hear also. David Beckham also got a kind word from the Queen although she quietly mentioned to him that she thought Posh was a bit of a slag.

Below, you can see the Queen in her Indiegogo campaign requesting donations to upgrade her property’s boilers. Seemingly, her majesty is not aware that the government runs a free boiler programme for the elderly and those on certain benefits. Perhaps if she were to let her £1million run down to less than £6,000 in the bank then she would qualify and wouldn’t have to come scrounging off the subjects she and her family have lived off their entire lives.

Queen's boiler indiegogo

Royal perks

 

 

MUSIC: Well it had to be The Flying Lizards right?

TPV: We’re transparent! (yes indeed you are!)

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 27, 2014

TPV book sales

 

THE MAN WHO HATES THE SYSTEM THEN PROMOTES THE SYSTEM AS HIS ASSURANCE TO HIS AUDIENCE THAT HE WILL BE TRANSPARENT. YOU CANNOT MAKE THIS SHIT UP AND GET AWAY WITH IT – UNLESS YOU’RE DAVID ICKE!

TPV have just issued a statement on transparency and this is it:

When we decided upon a legal structure through which to operate TPV we had to balance the need for transparency against cost and regulation. (No mention of this at all until they came under intense scrutiny. Further – and this is a very important point – re the regulation: David Icke and team stated that they chose the Private Limited Company vehicle because, to go down the road of a charity or foundation, they say they were advised that this would not allow them to criticise the state or government. So, there you have outright admission that TPV’s intention is to do that AND, therefore, TPV is POLITICAL. Now, consider the stance of OFCOM and the fact that no politically based organisation is allowed a licence. You CANNOT be non political for one purpose of regulation and then political on the other hand. So, once more – sorry David and sorry OFCOM – but you are red handed and checkmated regarding this fundamental question. Lastly, TPV could have been set up as a Private Limited Company by guarantee. It wasn’t. It was set up by shares. We’ll touch on this point later.)

After taking advice we decided to incorporate Peoples Voice Broadcasting Limited as a private limited company. Principally because we did not wish to burden TPV with the increased regulatory cost and operational restrictions that apply to Charities and Community Interest Companies (CIC). (Again, the operational restrictions are those of being political and Icke has already stated this is why he chose the Private Limited Company vehicle. Again, therefore, this clashes 180 degrees with OFCOM’s rules yet OFCOM are determined to ignore every evidence of TPV’s political nature and Icke’s involvement)

However, transparency is important to us and we are happy to give the following undertakings: (It never was before so why now? People asking for transparency all through late last year were thrown off the David Icke forum, called a whole number of cheap names by TPV staff and crew including Icke and family and were determined by the TPV team as “trouble-makers. I guess now that TPV have decided to acquiesce – they have no choice if they wish to keep and build any sort of following – these people who were vilified, are now vindicated?)

1) That no shareholder of TPV will ever take a dividend from the company.

The Two Ways You Make Money holding shares

  1. An increase in share price. Over the long-term, this is the result of the market valuing the increased profits as a result of expansion in the business or share repurchases, which make each share represent greater ownership in the business as a percentage of total equity. In other words, if a business with a £10 share price grew 20% for 10 years through a combination of expansion and share repurchases, it should be nearly £620 per share within a decade as a result of these forces assuming the market maintains the same price-to-earning ratio. What you also have to bear in mind re TPV is that

a) Re the balance sheet – It will, in time (if all goes to Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee’s plan) have a very strong asset to debt ratio simply because it will have no debt except short term (running costs). Its asset side is wonderful because it bought all its assets without any debt whatsoever – from YOUR money (this is what I have meant by “money out of nothing” and Icke has his own central bank and “quantitative easing” – you can’t lose when you work with other people’s money. It’s exactly what our government does!). It has ZERO long term debt! No bank loans or any loans!

b) P&L (Profit & Loss statement) – Again, wonderful. TPV gets its income for nothing, gets its content free AND, regarding the online shop, think about it: YOU are funding the marketing to you of the t-shirts and the caps etc. These will then be sold to you and you will pay even more. So, the reality is that you may have donated say £50 and then bought a t-shirt for £15 (funding the station once more to the extent of the profit in that £15). Altogether then, you have spent £65 for a t-shirt worth, perhaps, a tenner. So the profits in the station are going to be significant when there are, again very little costs except overhead (and volunteers are cheap as was the equipment). Where are the losses to be made? Effectively nowhere (unless these people are seriously incompetent).

TPV’s Price to earning ratio with a balance sheet and P&L like that can only be good and increase exponentially over the years. And THAT is where the value to Icke and Tabatabai lies. Not in dividends!! Icke saying that a shareholder (of which there are only one or two and by what OFCOM says it can only be one) will not take dividends is PURE RED HERRING! 

I’ve got news for you: BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY DOES NOT PROVIDE ITS SHAREHOLDERS WITH DIVIDENDS! Who’s Berkshire Hathaway? Warren Buffet! 

2. Dividends. When earnings are paid out to you, these funds are now your property in that you can either use them to buy more stock or go to Vegas and receive a few blow jobs while finding Jesus and Elvis at the Golden Nugget!

Occasionally, during market bubbles, you may have the opportunity to make a profit by selling to someone for more than the company is worth. In the long-run, however, the investor’s returns are inextricably bound to the underlying profits generated by the operations of the businesses which he or she owns.

2) We will voluntarily (not voluntary at all. You screamed like a castrated cat before acquiescence) publish quarterly management accounts on our website, these will be reviewed by our external Chartered Accountants. Our next quarter-end will be 31st January and we aim to publish figures within two months of each quarter end. (Would those be the same accountants for David Icke Books Ltd and Lion’s Epoch Limited? While are these management accounts going to be of the quality and quantity of the little spreadsheet table you launched at us a few weeks ago which meant absolutely diddly squat to anyone while your audience showed its ignorance once again saying “That should shut people up!”. It shows you the level of intelligence a lot of your audience has David. Sad but true.)

3) As a small company we are only required to file abbreviated accounts at Companies House, however we voluntarily file full statutory accounts. (No biggie David. Every corrupt company on the planet files full statutory accounts and gets away with it. You’re swimming in the same sea Dave. You’re just trying to say you’re a dolphin rather than a shark!)

4) As a small company we are not required by law to have our accounts audited and this is helpful because it reduces our costs, an annual audit would cost in the region of £12,000 plus VAT. However, our statutory accounts will be prepared by our external Chartered Accountants and as such will carry an Accountant’s report in the standard ICAEW format. (No audit eh? Well, you see, it’s like this Dave. You could do whatever you wished and no-one would bat an eyelid at it IF you and your little chum Combataboy had dug into your own pockets with your total of £260K cash at the bank. But you didn’t. Suggesting accountant’s reports are your way of proving your “all above board” is like saying you come with a government guarantee (which, in fact, you do now I come to think about it). It’s like Richie saying no-one in the BBC or MTV would stoop to any malfeasance AND, considering what you yourself preach about the system in its entirety, you’re then using “Accountants” to suggest you’re all pukka? Geez a pie David! No, not P.I.E., just a mince pie will do!)

5) Our first statutory period-end is 31st October 2014 and then annually thereafter. We will publish our full statutory accounts on our website by 31st January each year, just four months after each year-end. This is much sooner than the statutory filing requirement of nine months following each year-end. (Whoopee bloody doo!)

6) We will voluntarily hold an annual “stakeholders” meeting, in London, within five months of our statutory period end, where we will be happy to answer questions from our sponsors, employees, volunteers and donors. We will ask a representative from our external Chartered Accountants to attend that meeting. We envisage that attendance at the meeting will be via a pre-booked ticket, sold at a small charge to cover costs, such as room hire. The precise format of the meeting will depend upon the number wanting to attend. (Note to volunteers and employees: Don’t even THINK of being a whistleblower! lol Have you noticed the sheer scale of people being banned from the David Icke Forum and anywhere else run by him and the “mob”?)

7) Our statutory accounts will voluntarily disclose details of any remuneration paid to any shareholder or director, or to any family member of a shareholder or director. (But you’re not a shareholder according to OFCOM David. Only Combataboy! Does he have a family? While, if there will ever only be ONE shareholder, i.e. him then why not just state “remuneration paid to Sean ADL Tabatabai as sole shareholder and Director”? or are there quiet interests for the moment Dave?)

8) Our statutory accounts will voluntarily include a note showing the number of employees and sub-contractors paid in £10,000 (annualised) bands. We will not be disclosing individual names as we consider that would be an invasion of personal privacy. (Agreed. It would be.)

 

Finally. Anyone notice anything? TPV and Icke are screaming from the rooftops that, if they don’t hit the £400K donations they need, TPV is going to go off air. Yet, here they are telling you that this is how they are going to proceed going forward. It fits with Richie Allen saying he didn’t believe they would go off air and die. Funny how on one hand you get told one thing and on another it’s all business as usual isn’t it? 😉 

TPV: Place your bets!

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 27, 2014

TPV 7 days

Only 7 days to gogo so place your bets now:

TPV meets its £400K target – 10/1

TPV doesn’t meet £400K target – Can you get worse than “Evens”? I’ve never betted so I don’t know. Ignorant eh? 😉

TPV remains on air ongoing based on us now being told that there were sufficiently large donations coming in all the time since the telethon etc – 5/1

TPV goes off air for good – 5/1

TPV crosses the £100k mark – 2/1

TPV crosses the £200K mark – 7/1

TPV state they are staying on air because Icke and Tabatabai have invested their own companies’ total of about £260K at the bank or a portion thereof – 4/1 (if so, the reality of that – 100/1)

TPV stay on air because, all of a sudden, there are sponsors and advertisers coming in and/or they took a loan to get them over the hump – 10/1

I’m sure there are a myriad of other stories which they can think up of course.

Now, you may not believe this but I’m sort of sad that there is the possibility of such a potentially excellent vehicle for truth going off the air but I am. I’m just not sad that it would be David Icke’s and Sean Tabatabai’s et al. Why? Because its goal is not for that purpose. I only wish it had been.

Anyhow, place your bets or, if you can think of other little excuses for them, lay them on me! 🙂

Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. I still wonder what that little boy has on the "great guru of truth". Indeed there is a smell of fish on that bus you were on Sean. Emanating from you bud! Extremely fishy!

Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. I still wonder what that little boy has on the “great guru of truth”. Indeed there is a smell of fish on that bus you were on Sean. Emanating from you bud! Extremely fishy!

 

Pure guess on my part but I’d say illegitimate son (assuming nothing more sinister). Total assumption with no basis on my part though. However, in this day and age, I can’t see the need to keep something like that secret, so then possibly not. There’s something though, right?

Dear Tom’s “perception deception”

Posted in Uncategorized by earthlinggb on January 26, 2014

Dear Tom,

Is Tom you’re real legal fiction name? It may well be but the point is, one would never know unless one knew you. I don’t. If I decided to call this blog “John Stewart’s blog”, people would automatically assume that to be my name. Yet would the content within it hold any additional credibility? Who would know it wasn’t my name if I so chose to present myself in that way and never give any indication otherwise?

But Tom, don’t let this post go to your head man because it really isn’t about you and your perceptions of me so much as I, finding it personally interesting how people can conjure up entire versions of an unknown person’s character based upon nothing but their own assumptions and their sensitivity to how one writes and the words one uses. It’s fascinating.

Additionally, it may act as a form of clarification of my motives to all who may hold similar perceptions as you. It’s of no consequence to me personally what people read into what I say – I’m way passed caring about people’s perceptions. However, there is a guy who just published a book called “The Perception deception” and I’ll give him this: It is a wonderfully titled book while I’m sure it was never meant to turn that title on its author. The perception of a man who is doing what he is doing for the “love of humanity” is the deception. The thing is, perceptions are, more often than not, what people take as their truth even if those perceptions are simply generated from their own mind reading into things that which they wish to read.

So Tom, I thank you for the following contributions to my blog. They have enabled me to take your input and analyse it while then providing the simple answers to your assumptions and illustrating how you have simply assumed all you have written and projected a character of me which is built upon no experience of me in any way, shape or form.

I’ll comment on your comments as we go along……

 

t.walker said, on January 25, 2014 at 7:29 pm

hello… earthlinggob… (hello Tom)

yes i’m sure your various rants about icke and his ‘public’ owned self profit broadcasting company (well icke pretends,or should i say his ridiculous wanna be gangster rent boy sean pretends its a ‘public’ non profit enterprise) hold genuine food for thought. (Thanks Tom, that’s all that was intended)

all well and good that you expose what you believe to be wrongdoings with such brave passion. (Brave? That’s what Icke said. Brave doesn’t even come into it. Passion, yes.)

but how’s about you openly tell those you now preach to and champion who you really are and where you are from? anyone can mouth off hiding behind silly names like earthlinggob, even if those you rant about know who you are. (Why is that necessary Tom? While I chose the name “Earthlinggb” simply because I don’t view myself as a nationality – I see it as decisive which it is. Plus, it’s not fear of using my legal fiction name when having something to say about this entire truth movement and anything else I write about, it’s just I have another life also and I wish to keep the two separate. I’m sure you understand that holding certain beliefs and discussing all of these things can impact one’s career right? Or don’t you understand that?)

you scream about ickes rent boy sean not being transparent with donations yet hide like a wimp and make yourself invisible? if you are going to reveal things to the public then can i suggest you start with revealing yourself? if you are going to join the anonymous gobshites then what are you ever going to reveal. (Again, nothing to do with being a “wimp” Tom. Just being smart operating within what is becoming a very dangerous world buddy. Further, information is information. Isn’t that what Icke himself states? Correctly I may add. That information is the star – which, in his case is absolute tripe but nevermind).

i have no doubts your claims may hold credence… but icke and his rent boy at least do not hide their identities on their websites. and as long as you want to gob off in anonimity i’ll say that tells us more about you than those you claim are in the wrong. (No it doesn’t Tom. You see, the two people you mention want the kudos and the fans of their “work”. Icke, of course, needs to use his name because he is a brand. I’m not looking for anyone’s hugs and kisses Tom. While I acknowledge that you have stated twice now that you have no doubt that the info/claims may hold credence. Thanks Tom however, I hate to repeat myself, but that’s all down to your perception isn’t it? You seem to like the info but despise the author. That’s cool coz I’m not important. :-))

i hope your campaign is a success.

best wishes tom

 

My “campaign”? There is no “campaign” Tom. I just write/blog like any other blogger about subjects that interest me. But, finally, do you see a “DONATE” button on my site anywhere? No. I think that speaks a few volumes Tom.

 

Reply
  • earthlinggb said, on January 25, 2014 at 9:30 pm

    Tom, this blog has been called “Earthlinggb” since the beginning of 2009 way before I ever stumbled upon David Icke. No-one has complained about “anonymity” until I started blogging about Icke. Sorry but I have my reasons for sticking with “earthlinggb” and it has nothing to do with David Icke. After all, he knows my legal fictional name already. As for your assumptions about “hiding” you are welcome to them but I don’t just jump for any TOM, Dick or Harry. Best wishes,
    Earthlinggb.

    • t.walker said, on January 26, 2014 at 11:51 am

      2009? You have been anonymous since 2009 earthlinggob? Surely you are mere novice then .. a bandwagon jumper. (Blog started in 2009 so yes, I guess anonymous since then AND a “novice”. My humble apologies Tiger!) Surely you realise I couldn’t mention your anonymity before i knew about it, which i didn’t until 2013? (ermm.. yep that would be logical but you’re assuming it’s all about you Tom. I didn’t say YOU hadn’t complained, I said NO-ONE had complained. See the subtle – yet gigantic difference Tom? No?) How could i have pointed it out then? Let’s face it, It is only by giving icke publicity that you have a few temporary visitors and your anonymity is seen. (Bud, for one thing, I’m only interested in visitors if they take something away from it. If no-one visited then big deal. You see, I’ll repeat again: DO YOU SEE A “DONATE” BUTTON ON THIS BLOG? That said, I’m happy to report that the blog is approaching half a million visitors – not a lot in 4 years but still people who may then discuss with others and that is what it is all about isn’t it? Awareness of what we face? The Icke blogs have, perhaps accounted for 20k or a little more of that total figure of viewing and I have stated time and again how it pisses me off that they get more views in total than what I consider far more important posts – even if you don’t consider them such. Icke is nothing to me Tom. He’s just another subject which needed a lot to be said about it)

      That said, you are a bright young man (oh thanks your majesty!)so you should realise already that ‘when’ your rants about TPV are over, that the posse of looping haters you feed, those that live off ‘your’ frustration and crusade now, will go off and chase another ‘bright’ young man seeking the same thing especially so after you have ‘spent up’ on ickes attraction value and you have nothing left of any interest. (And that is entirely up to them. I don’t OWN anyone Tom. Readers come and readers go. I don’t cry myself to sleep about it. I sometimes get bored with doing the blog myself) I say that because your other information is basically useless and not attractive in anyway. Therefore, on second thoughts, i can’t blame you for remaining ‘anonymous’ when providing such things. I’d stay anonymous. (Well I won’t try to persuade you otherwise. Again, you take what you wish or don’t.)

      Please don’t get me wrong. I agree with most of the things you say in your Icke/ Sean the rent boy information, but i also very strongly suspect (ah you suspect do you? Based upon what Tom?) that if you’d been given the green-light to take expenses and a wage packet from TPV yourself that your website rants would never have appeared (£45 of expenses Tom. So later you mention stealing from the public – eh no. £45 of expenses I would have spent from my own pocket and simply asked for reimbursement, therefore, gaining a big ZERO buddy.) and Icke would still be your wonderful leader (sorry, another presumption by you. I never considered David Icke as any kind of leader, nevermind wonderful. Another assumption Tom. To wish to work on something he happened to be responsible for does not result in me thinking of him as some great leader. Your quickness to throw these statements as if based on knowledge is part of the twisting you do Tom. Again, you enjoy though and knock yourself out with it all. Just allow me to smile at it) that you previously pretended (Pretended? Where do you get this from Tom? I never once suggested to anyone I would or could continue working for nothing. I was happy to work as long as possible for nothing BUT I wanted expenses paid – for everyone who was out of pocket) you’d work for nothing for, when kissing backsides (kissing who’s backside Tom? Tell me? Who are you getting this shit from Tom? Or re you just making it up as you go along? If I ever kissed a backside in my life then god send me to hypocrites hell. Sometimes I wish I COULD have kissed backsides in my career but, unfortunately, I just don’t have that gene) get your foot in the door. In fact I’d say there was a real possibility that you’d have had Sean worrying about his position if you’d have got in on the icke clique yourself and you’d probably (my opinion) (Your “opinion’ – read assumption) eventually have taken his place as chief rent boy given the opportunity, (where do you get all the presumptuous garbage you presume Tom? You’re suggesting I’m a “political animal” who wants to just make money and knock people like ADL off his perch so I can suck Icke dick? Where does it all come from Tom?)  hence you bragging about your slick job history (slick eh? Well I’m glad you think so. To me it’s just a history and well and truly history now. But you see, I don’t think in those terms or words – “slick”. It’s just what it is. Does it impress you? Is that the issue mate? I wouldn’t be too impressed. It’s all just luck and a bit of drive and tenacity. Perhaps you don’t possess those qualities though. You may have others. I don’t know.) and using a fake personality (fake personality? You mean “Earthlinggb”? That’s not a personality, it’s just a name mate) to sell it (sell what? Do you see a donate button anywhere?). In fact I’ve found people don’t describe a CV like that (I’ve described my CV? I don’t think so. I have pointed to relevant business experience, that’s all. Tell me? What do you or anyone else look for when wanting to consider someone speaking about a subject authoritative on it? Do you like the idea our Chancellor’s job before entering the Tory party was as a towel folder in Selfridges?) without being on a par with sean the rent boy. But obviously that’s only my opinion (Yes, indeed it is. Once more, your totally perceived, assumed opinion) and of course you were only ever seen and then taken on to be an unpaid muppet by TPV anyway. Obviously when you went to TPV you were put in the ‘muppet line’ to be exploited. (Certainly would appear so although, at the time, that never entered my head) Appearances and first impressions say everything to prospective employers don’t they? (Yeah they do Tom. Perhaps why Icke stated he wanted me full-time)

      So your attempts to wriggle (wriggle? Again an assumption that I was joining for not the best of reasons, for which you have no basis) on board TPV not only showed you what they thought you were and saw you as (The muppet list)… it also showed you that you couldn’t ever join the gravy train and actually fleece the sad PV donors yourself. (Fleece TPV donors? Again, where do you get this stuff from? Are you speaking about yourself Tom? I had no intention of fleecing anyone and neither have I ever given one iota of a thought to doing so. You projecting that on me is just out of the ether mate and entirely your construct and disingenuous) Indeed being played by Icke and his rent boy should show you the level of your awareness, (Played? What by giving them the benefit of the doubt for no more than two meetings with them? While I see you offer me such with never having met me nor know anything about me in any shape or form except what you PERCEIVE from words on a page) but of course you don’t think that way do you? You obviously thought your fake charm could lead you into ickes clique. (Fake charm? Sheesh! i have to thank you for that because I don’t even try to be charming so if achieved what a bonus eh? lol)

      Yes of course the money coming in was all icke’s and only he and his rent boy decided who got some and which silly muppets like you got nothing. Which obviously (my opinion) (there goes your overheated opinion and assumption again Tom. You really ought to try and temper it before shooting off. Do you have premature ejaculation problems too?) is the main reason you really wrote your blogs about Icke and TPV situation. But isn’t is easy to see that If you’d have got a share of the spoils you’d probably be playing jack the lad on your anonymous website now and more than that you’d have more icke adverts and icke begging letters on your website than TPV itself. It stands to reason if your attempts to get in the clique and on the gravy train would have been successful doesn’t it? (No it doesn’t Tom because I had the opportunity of staying on the “Icke team” and TPV if i had so wished. The entire reason I didn’t and left was because I saw the characters they were – I may add long before anyone else did including Poulton who, at the time I was blogging about the shit and she was still there, then she was firing at me and doing much the same that you are now)

      It’s clear as crystal if only from where i’m standing anyway. (breathe in Tom. How does it smell in your environment?)

      But i’m sure you’ll disagree and what else could you do? We are suppose to see you as an anonymous warrior of truth when in reality you are as fake as any other fake on TPV and your passion is down to your own ego and your own failures over your own greed and comforts. The only thing that has really upset you about the sick things going on at TPV is that you didn’t get to join in. (Every word of that is, once more, your assumed “opinion” based upon absolutely sod all but your twisted little mind Tom)

      I wish you well earthling gob. (Aye and you too Tom. I sometimes think the entire world is populated by fakes and bullshit artists too but I STILL want to give people the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately it was doing that which led to this. I STILL wish to however. It’s clear you certainly don’t. Enjoy your cynicism Tom)

      Good luck in your quest.

      regards

      TOM

      • earthlinggb said, on January 26, 2014 at 3:20 pm

        Tom, this all started with my “anonymity” right? So one has to assume that you don’t know me from Adam right? Your diatribe is filled with (“my opinion”) and you are quite welcome to it but, let’s be clear, that is all it is. It is “opinion” formed out of nothing but your own assumptions. As for your disinterest in anything other than he Icke stuff, that’s entirely up to you too. Re slick job history – your perception and your use of the word “slick”. What I’ve presented re that is simply a fact. If facts are now considered fake so be it mate. Enjoy your opinion of an anonymous, unknown to you person which you create your own version of a character for.
        I like to actually meet and get 1st hand input from someone before I judge them. That’s why I decided to cast my concerns to one side and apply to TPV. You’re right on one thing: Had I got paid the expenses (AND, to add, I continued to see people who I recognised truly were in this for the right reasons and that everyone was being treated how they should have been), then yes, I would have stayed – and would have been right to do so. But I can already see you being willing to twist whatever I say to make a negative of it. Knock yourself out Tom.

        • t.walker said, on January 26, 2014 at 5:32 pm

          hello earthlinggob…

          Nothing started with my simply comment on your decision to write in anonymity. It started because of your obvious hypocrisy, your ego and your anger (Point to examples of the hypocrisy, ego and anger and we’ll take it from there Tom) over being rejected by TPV (not rejected Tom. I left of my own freewill). I just mentioned that its easy to slag folk of in anonymity than not. I’m sure i know who you are but i’ll respect your wish and right to write as you do. (Well thanks for that Tom. You still have a modicum of consideration and fair play in you then? Well you might not be totally lost then.) My opinions were based entirely on your own continuous rants about icke and TPV, nothing else.(No, your opinions were and are based upon your perceptions as to WHY I wrote them, not the content of them as you so clearly state may well have credence to it) I think rejection from TPV (again, wrong, I left) and your inability to get cash (twisting again Tom. I wanted reimbursed – BIG BIG difference from “getting cash from the pot” yet you choose to overlook that) from the pot inspired the rants and your comments in reply only confirm things as far as i am concerned. I thank you for confirming you would have stayed at TPV if they’d have paid you expenses (and wages of course?) (and wages of course? I see another assumed question? Yes bud, had I worked there full-time, 5 days a week ongoing, where the hell else would I get an income from? BUT I would have continued without pay for as long as I could AS LONG AS MY EXPENSES WERE COVERED! Is this really that difficult for you?). I take you would have not exposed what was going on to those actually still being used as muppets by TPV, just as long as you were in the clique yourself of course (nope. I despise cliques and that is precisely why I left. I saw it was. It was not just about me as you would have seen in my conversations with Aaron Calland. I said EVERYONE who volunteered and were out of pocket should be reimbursed. It was then the lies which I experienced and the attitude of Deanna and Sean and Icke which had me say “Fuck you!” to TPV while Deanna was stating she wanted to transfer me to the creative side – which is EXACTLY what I wanted to do in the first place so you have your whole argument arse for tit Tom. I didn’t even wish to be a part of the sponsorship/advertising group at first until I recognised I could help out because they were desperate for people in that group)… which to you, would be the right thing to do as you say. (Yes, if I saw that, overall, TPV were doing things properly and for the right reasons then OF COURSE it would be the right thing to do!)

          As far as twisting things i think you do that very well yourself, especially with company accounts,(Where have I twisted company accounts? I have posted the detail of the company accounts and they speak for themselves – there’s no rocket science in pointing out the bloody obvious! Sorry but am I speaking to a retard here?) and as far as i’m aware there is no negativity in simply asking anonymous people why they are anonymous, well is there? And there is no negativity pointing out you are only ranting because you were not allowed in to grab the money of donating punters yourself (But you’re pointing out a completely assumed piece of crap!). How is that negative.. its negative if you want to pretend you are a righteous warrior when you are simply a bitter ego boost seeker that couldn’t get to the money? (Christ this gets repetitive doesn’t it?)

          Please tell us all what your real motives actually are? What do you want your ranting and being angry? Is you motive simply caused through being rejected and not wanting icke and his rent boy to profit from donors… …. simply because you couldn’t?… Seems so to me. But you claim i twist things… What have i twisted? (Everything mate. Incredible the audacity of some people, it really is)

          Yes I stick with the thought that the rest of your blog is merely regurgitated internet fodder or you tube songs.. you have no unique info on display at all, but of course that’s why you went to TPV in the first place isn’t it? You may see that as me being negative again… But i can’t see anything negative in making a genuine truthful comment based on the facts i see. (There’s some regurgitation I grant you that but I do that when I think it’s important. The youtube songs are all mine and take a lot of work and time (whether you appreciate that or not) in the writing, recording etc. But most of my blogs are my own work/research. I see nothing wrong in using sources from wherever they may come from to then comment and debate on. All information is such – in books, blogs, whatever. That is why you have such things as bibliographies. However, a lot of my stuff is researched from parliament archives also. If you don’t appreciate it then mate, bugger off. I don’t really care. I think you think I do care. Sorry to burst your bubble.)

          And of course Icke is a godsend to you as far as your blog hits are concerned (no he’s not)… but again the Icke PV situation will blow over and you will be left with only the other (peoples) fodder you post. It is fact, not twisting anything. You are going to awaken the world by saying icke and his rent boy are con-merchants? Wow. (I am beginning to think you are a little handicapped)

          Thanks for showing me your true motives and your true self. Because i nearly wasted more precious time here. thanks fer that. Again good luck with your icke rants because you have absolutely nothing else.. And yes… if you can’t steal the TPV donations yourself… then why the hell should he get away with it eh? Go for it! (Has he gone? Can someone shut and lock the door and remember to put the lights out?)

          I’m sure it will be you that knocks yourself out whether most know who you are or not…. and sooner than you think!

          But you’ll never believe that.

          i’m gone… good luck and i wish your crusade well.

          …. bye. (Phew! 🙂 )

           

          Tom, all wrong bud. But you keep believing.

          Some mothers do ‘ave em huh?

David Icke: Geez a job!

Posted in Media, Uncategorized by earthlinggb on January 22, 2014

I just intercepted (hacked) an email from a headhunter to David Icke. You see, I’ve become an “ethical hacker” since I applied for the job:

ethical hack 2

Dear David,

I am acting as headhunter on behalf of a medical charity who are searching for specialists in the area of solicitation. Your name has come up on a database of very successful opportunists in this area who seem capable of soliciting vast sums of money from people at  the drop of a hat. Generally, we find it is prostitutes of one form or another, politicians and media people – such as actors and actresses – who particularly excel in this field and, it is with your recent fundraising extravaganza being brought to our attention, we decided to contact you for this wonderful, international role which may give you the opportunity of adding a few more countries to that list of yours which you say you’ve visited.

What we need from you, however, is a copy of your passport – as is the law in the UK today – to prove you are a British citizen. Granted you live on the isle of wight but, as I’m sure you’re aware, there have been a number of individuals on that island which are already known to the authorities and it is also a “soft landing” for illegal immigrants of one type or the other. Additionally, that business partner of yours has a strange name – Tabata what? I’m sure you understand we cannot be too careful in this age of terrorism David.

If you take a look at this position, you may appreciate that there are parallels with what you have done with TPV. Our client is TPP and also “not for profit” – well in a way, a sense or, at least that’s what we promote – you know the score on that David don’t you?

You’d be managing philanthropy donors David! These are high net worth individuals! We’re not talking about people with just a pot to piss in here David! You never know, you may even, as a side note, get them to invest in your TV network (but don’t tell us about it because we don’t appreciate “moonlighters” – you’d be working for us and if you got more donations for TPV than TPP we’d be seriously pissed as I’m sure you’ll understand?

As you can see, we call them “gifts”- yes, people really do just give away gifts of 6 and 7 figures (that’s £million to £tens of millions to you and me). David, imagine tapping into these people? One donation could run TPV for a year or more. Now WHY do you think that a philanthropist (aka: good guy who cares for the world) wouldn’t wish to donate to someone who is seriously trying to help the world and change it for the better? The only possible reason could be that he doesn’t wish to have the world changed for the better so what kind of real philanthropist is he/she? So then, if he/she doesn’t give their money to good causes which are REALLY good causes, then what are they donating to and what do they really expect from it? Nothing? No, don’t be so naive. They expect a return.

So David, what we would like you to do in the job is develop long term relationships with philanthropic individuals (David Rockefeller?), Foundations (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation?) and Corporations (Nestle, Coca Cola, Halliburton, Carlyle Group?) – you know them all David. We’ve read your books!

Skills and experience:

We like good actors David. We like emotional blackmailers who can tap into their target’s deepest fears, wants and needs. You’re PERFECT for that!

Ok you don’t have experience of solicitation at a 6 and 7 figure level so you’re a bit of an amateur in that department but we see your potential David. The arthritis helps too!

Are you committed to going above and beyond the remit of the role to achieve and exceed targets? What’s “above and beyond the remit”? Well, think about casting couches David. You know? Be ready to bend over, give oral, sleep with the CEO’s missus, that sort of thing. Do whatever it takes. You’re a “do whatever it takes man” aren’t you? After all, you signed up with OFCOM to get TPV launched so you did whatever it takes there didn’t you? You sold your soul down the river with that one! If Jimmy Saville had wanted a piece of ass, you would have bent over wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t you have? I’m pretty sure you would if he had offered the top “Grandstand” position at the BBC. I don’t know for sure though it’s just a hunch you know?

Intellectual curiosity to understand complex areas of research… etc. Now you’ve got that in spades haven’t you David? The curiosity that is, not the capability.

And the remuneration for this role would be between £45 and 50K David! You make us £millions and we pay you £50K. Sounds a good deal right? After all, it’s like you paying your volunteers sod all and yet you’re building (or trying to) a tv network which would end up with a share value of £millions. At least we’re paying you David. Peanuts, I admit but peanuts are better than a kick in the nuts aren’t they?

Solicitation job.

Ethical hacking eh? What’s next?

I guess Gary McKinnon was classed unethical.

Law = SHITE

 

Addendum:

It just occurred to me (don’t know why) but it could even turn out that you, David, got “bummed” by Jimmy Saville in his dressing room and that has still yet to come out.

Icke victim of savile

 

But then, it seems the Icke family have a thing for sticking objects up their ass. Gareth, case in point: There’s an old adage – “Like father like son” so perhaps it isn’t all far from the truth?

But it may even come out that the straws were code for Jack Straw but since Jack’s still alive well, you know how it is!

Jack Straw Icke

 

Amazing what media whores will do for 15 minutes of fame eh? Plaster their arse all over the web showing another guy helping them to stick bundles of straws up their anus.

Now that you’ve covered Saturn David, what’s next? The rings around Uranus?

OFCOM FOLLOW UP

Posted in Law, Media by earthlinggb on January 22, 2014

This is a follow up to the following blogs:

https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2014/01/15/this-is-not-a-love-song-alternative-title-somethings-johnny-rotten-in-denmark/

and

https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2014/01/14/david-icke-ofcom-reply-2/

Ofcom-hq-400px

Now, excuse me, but I despise being treated like an idiot. Particularly by people who are obviously mentally impaired and/or are evading issues put to them which may just be giving them a small headache. It’s kinda like a dog with a bone – some may call it tenacity (something you need a lot of in Business Development and Sales). I don’t like dropping the bone. If I had done that anytime previously within the legal issues I had, I would be “dead” by now. I don’t propose dropping it here either BUT, as you will clearly see, these people hide behind shit and feel safe and comfortable doing so because it is known as “the law”. This is about as far as I can take it myself (unless there were many others who wished to contact Kathleen and complain about the way she is handling these communications that is).

Excuse my french but : FUCK the law! It is a corrupt construct of legal persons/fiction which is screwing you, me and everyone on this planet and it is run by people who enjoy doing so and remain in their positions of enormous wealth (all corruptly attained while committing serious crimes on humanity) who then dictate to their little minions in so called positions of political power (who are then well taken care of for their services to the Crown, to the UN, to the Vatican, to the US establishment and to all other establishments which support this insane and inhuman network of law and money).

So, here is the up to date communications with one “Kathleen Stewart” – a mouthpiece (i.e she opens it and spouts whatever the system tells her to – in fact, a repeater in Icke’s language. A repeater which protects Icke – how FCUKING ironic is that?) for OFCOM and the Secretary of State and government which legislated OFCOM in the first place.

Please read from bottom up. If you wish to read the prior communications, you may find them on the blogposts above and, prior to them, there are others.

Kathleen,

You are now, obviously, purposefully evading all the points I am bringing solidly to your attention!
OFCOM have a policy which states that no-one who is political in their agenda is granted a broadcasting licence. David Icke dropped his Directorship of the Private Limited company known as “The People’s Voice Broadcasting Ltd”, yet it is PATENTLY clear that the man (and his entire family and core team) are political and have a VERY clear agenda. You CANNOT choose to ignore (blatantly I may add) the fact that David Icke runs this “network” and company whether listed as a Director, a shareholder or not. You are CLEARLY choosing to ignore this. While Mr Icke’s work (20 years of it and ongoing) is unambiguously built upon the ideology of destroying the very fabric of the society and state which you and OFCOM exist within and upon which you depend.
Now, I ask you, please do not treat either me or the public (or would you prefer: individual private citizens?) as the incompetents of mind which OFCOM, in this instance from your replies, are demonstrating themselves to be.
You are PURPOSEFULLY obscuring (and protecting in fact) what is actually going on with this network. To protect such a venture whose goals are to attack you and your organisation and the structure which supports it – even though it has abided by the statutory law requiring it to register with you (something it promotes it did not and would not wished to have done) – is absolutely ridiculous.
IF you are suggesting to me and the public that “well, it has abided by our regulations, therefore it is no threat to us” then I suggest OFCOM make a statement to such effect. Why do I ask this? Because then, while TPV are promoting themselves to their audience as “the great white hope” for destroying our corrupt system of government and the establishment institutions (of which you are a part, in case that has not be made clear enough to you already) and demanding and, as I see it, emotionally blackmailing people to donate for that very purpose, then OFCOM, at this very moment in time, are supporting a private venture which is using false advertising to its audience.
It is not possible for such a network to provide such programming and attacks on the existing establishment structure while it abides by that structure’s regulations!
That being the case, you and OFCOM are supporting what is FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION of a Private Limited Company and, as such, you are a party to that fraud!
How dare you treat the public with such contempt!
M
Kathleen Stewart


From: Kathleen.Stewart@ofcom.org.uk
To: m@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: The People’s Voice
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 10:43:00 +0000

Dear Mr ……

In response to your email of 17 January 2014, I refer to the response to your Freedom of Information request, dated 21 November 2013, which gives details regarding the regulation of appeals for funds by television channels.   Additionally I refer to my letter of 14 January 2014, which details the definition of general control of a channel.

As previously stated, the Licensee is obliged to comply with all the relevant licence conditions and will be responsible for putting in adequate compliance arrangements, including retaining recordings of programmes, and for ensuring that the service as broadcast complies with all the relevant Ofcom codes and requirements.  If you have concerns about a specific programme shown, you can complain via the following link;    http://consumers.ofcom.org.uk/tell-us/tv-and-radio/

:: Kathleen Stewart
Manager, Television Broadcast Licensing

Content, Standards, Licensing & Enforcement
Content, Consumer, and External Affairs Group
020 7783 4293

kathleen.stewart@ofcom.org.uk


:: Ofcom
Riverside House
2a Southwark Bridge Road
London SE1 9HA
020 7981 3000
www.ofcom.org.uk

From: M [mailto:m@hotmail.com]
Sent: 17 January 2014 19:44
To: Kathleen Stewart
Subject: RE: The People’s Voice

Hi Kathleen,

Update:

Nothing to do with The People’s Voice? Has no control over it or its content? It is not political in nature yet his entire spiel here (just yesterday by the way) is all about HIS audience not being able to bring the British monarchy, government and all its corruption to heel if more don’t “pays your money”?

It’s a picture of an awfully upset man (who, by the way, received donations for TPV via his David Icke Books Ltd vehicle) regarding a venture that really only he fronts and continuously demands the public’s money for wouldn’t you say?

Ah! But I guess it’s not the “public’s money” but “private individuals’ money” right? After all, all our money is not public money unless it is siphoned through the government right? And we’re not “the public”, we’re private individuals right? So then, if that is so, and I am not “the public” (therefore I am not an individual who comprises “the public”) then why am I paying tax? Another thing, why do our politicians refer to “members of the public”? And our police and judiciary do the same. Who IS this “public” that, when an assumed member of it (i.e. me) suggests that because The People’s Voice is promoted as a voice of the people, it must be in the public interest to know exactly where their money is going and exactly how it is spent. But no, because TPV is a PRIVATE Limited Company, you and OFCOM allow it to promote itself misleadingly to the pub…. sorry to PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS… and then protect it from those private individuals’ scrutiny because, according to you (when it suits) we are not “The Public”.

It’s a little like Bilderberg and the government and parliamentary attendees of that “Private meeting”. They are invited to attend purely due to their public function and capabilities BUT, to attend without being held to account, they simply state they attend in a PRIVATE capacity. That’s them off the hook entirely.

Are you telling me you seriously do not understand this total fraud on YOU as well as me and everyone else? Just answer yes or no. That’ll do fine.

Regards,

M

To: m@hotmail.com
Subject: The People’s Voice
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:28:14 +0000

Please refer to the attached.

Remember, this woman gets paid a fairly handsome salary for this kind of evasive, wilfully evasive tripe!

And it’s entirely acceptable because the people who make the laws wish it to be. If you expose the tripe you become a form of “terrorist”. Why? Because you terrorise them by exposing them and having people appreciate just what a bunch of jacked up garbage they promote as law and “right”. If you make the law corrupt then you are breaking the law by being non corrupt. This is what people (or a lot of people) can’t seem to inject into their sub species craniums!

David Icke: HELP! HELP! The Reigstad’s on fire!!

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 18, 2014

Communists have a new name: “Mongs”, “Idiots”, “anti-Icke activists”, or simply jet people who might even watch TPV but don’t donate to it.

A quick aside Davey: How many people watch BBC but won’t pay their TV licence? You’d support that wouldn’t you? Ah but you can’t state that otherwise OFCOM and the establishment would attack you and TPV. Oh but, wait a minute, no they wouldn’t because you have absolutely nothing to do with TPV according to OFCOM! So yeah, you can say it. Ah but then, it wouldn’t be politically incorrect and could get you into trouble somehow. I bet you pay your BBC licence though eh Dave? Can’t miss Grandstand! Or can you stand to watch it considering they wouldn’t give you the prime slot on it but just gave you a table and a few coloured balls to whisper your comments about. I guess that’s the closest thing you’ve ever got to having balls Dave but, today, you’re just a bit “snookered” eh? How the hell do you continue TPV IF you don’t reach that magical figure, and continue to, without giving the game away that there are other backers? Hmmm… conundrum! Or will they undisclosed sums just keep coming in? There is no way you’re going to get anywhere near the sponsorship and advertising you were hoping for and you and the gang just haven’t go the foggiest of how to generate income from licensing do you? And you just wouldn’t listen would you? The potential is all there just waiting on you tapping into it but it’s just too difficult for you when you think you can just click your fingers and get money for nothing and the content for free.

Anyhow, back to the point: I love this post Davey. It puts me in tears of laughter…

False flag Icke

 

Corporations? Hmmm…. isn’t TPV a Private corporation? I do believe it is! Now, in the land of Private corporations, as you well know Davey, they tend to create “scarcity” as well as use other tactics to win business and to stop “churn” or lose customers. If income isn’t coming in to the level required, they will do just about anything to find it. The thing is Davey, they tend, generally, to have various sources of income or, at least, they develop a market based upon the 80/20 rule if they possibly can. A company with only one customer relies on that customer 100% otherwise it goes out of business. That’s why most companies try to build that varied and substantial customer base (different income generating sources in effect). Whereas you have had a “business plan” (none at all actually – just a wish and belief and I’ve seen companies do precisely the same and it’s pathetic) that was “We’ll just keep asking the public for donations”. You’ve said it all along in your videos and even when I was there in TPV for that very short spell – the public’s donations will be the key (and yet it did not and does not have to be).

If anyone had asked you at the time last year: “What happens if they don’t donate enough Davey?” you would ignore them. But if you had given an answer, I wonder if it would have been “then I’ll get on Skype and, with sheer disdain, talk to my audience and tell them they are idiots and stupid/dumb, selfish, uncaring, will scream crying when the boots come to their door and every other fear tactic I can use to get the working class scum to donate”. No, I doubt you would have said you’d do that Davey but, strangely, it is exactly what you have done. “I’ll also have my son, Gareth, call a mass of people “mongs” and any other descriptive word to try and make them feel inferior (because that is what anyone is who doest do as the great one demands of them – this is evangelism 101). Man, I tip my hat to you once again because you certainly do realise and know what your audience is composed of because it’s working for you.

What else did you have planned if it didn’t work out donations wise? Ahh! the “IFF”: The Icke False Flag. Brilliant Davey, exceptional. How could ANYONE even consider that you, yourself would instigate such (something you have studied for the decades you have) when you point the finger at every other person or organisation who have used the strategy? No-one would possibly believe it would they Davey? They believe the “evil people” are attacking you and yet your entire station has not broadcast one iota of information which is not already out there in internet land via youtube, blogs or even mainstream. But the “evil empire” will attack “David Icke” while that same evil empire hands you and TPV a “licence to shill” on a plate. Aye Davey, you’re a real threat to the powers that be and your audience are only too happy to swallow that absolute shit! 🙂

TPV hacked

 

You know what else the IFF does for you though? It allows you to cloak the fact that the incompetence in the entire organisation is outstanding while you all try to fix the myriad of failures and problems that you have.

While I’m sure there will be those volunteers in TPV who, while they would wish to give their all and do a good job doing whatever it is they are doing, Sean and Deanna etc will just not like them personally or think that they are hopeless or, perhaps, they may just feel they are not getting treated like “gods” by them, so they’ll want, at this point, to get rid of some people. That was always going to happen but there was no way your volunteers would have ever listened if one had told them that.

“Cognitive dissonance” is actually, ironically, what keeps you and TPV alive Davey. Your entire audience has it. Right down to them donating their money to you through BARCLAY’s BANK! It is bloody incredible what you get away with Davey. One can only stand in awe. Not at you but at the sheer incapacity of your audience. I can say whatever I wish about your audience or anyone. I’m not looking for them to donate money to me. But YOU. You’re an idiot, you really are. You just don’t recognise it due to your arrogance and narcissism.

Donate TPV Barclays

 

There’s a guy by the “name” of Jonb on another forum, which I apologise but the name of the forum escapes me for now, who does great GIFs. I leave you with this one because it really does sum some things up so well.

CarCrash_zps6fd90b6c

 

David Icke: Dear god almighty!

Posted in Finance, Media by earthlinggb on January 17, 2014

So much absolute crap in all of this I wouldn’t know where to start.

I might get around to it at some point though. Just right at this minute, I’ve got better things to do and this guy’s crap is too much to take. Who’s going to play him in Hollywood’s “David Icke: Life and times of a charlatan”? – an autobiographical movie directed by George Lucas with masses of special effects otherwise it would bore you to tears! Because it’s gonna need one hell of an actor to beat what you see on these vids.

The elite will recognise that we’re not willing to DO anything but talk David? What the HELL is TPV? You slag off people for talking about it but DOING nothing? That is exactly what TPV is doing! TALKING! As for the action of getting off their arses and separating their arse from their sofa. That’s not what you want at all. You just want them to separate their money from their bank account (that’s the ONLY action you want) and then sit on their sofa watching TPV. You’re full of it man. Full of it and transparent as hell.

The elite will recognise we’re not willing to DO anything to resist? Yeah sure they will. The VERY MAN SAYING THIS didn’t even resist OFCOM! It just amazes me the shit you get away with emanating from that hole in your head mate!

“My health – I’m dying” – emotional blackmail

“If you don’t gimme your money then you don’t want (or deserve) freedom” – emotional blackmail

And you have the audacity to come across as if YOU are the only shepherd to lead the flock. Incredible arrogance man. You couldn’t lead a coup David! You couldn’t lead a coo oot of a shed!

While not one of your numbskulls noticed the massive contradiction between your statements and Richie Allen’s. You going on about TPV imminently going off air – IMMINENTLY mind! And what does Richie say right afterward? “I’m pretty certain that the People’s Voice will endure and we will survive and carry on….”

Yes Richie and so am I and always have been – look back at the blogs and you will see it stated. While I also mentioned (in text over a week ago) to a number of people, that TPV’s donations would start ramping up due to “anonymous” contributions coming in suddenly of significant amounts. Et voila! That’s precisely what is happening. 😉

Some people aren’t that stupid guys. We really aren’t. But then that’s what you hate isn’t it? To paraphrase George Carlin: “They want you ‘awake’ enough to see how you’re getting shafted but still dumb enough to not see how you’re getting shafted by others.”

Oh yes folks, TPV will endure. You can be certain of that and Davey Dyke can take it to the bank! But let me tell you this: Even IF they went off air for a while (or for good) it wouldn’t be because of a lack of funding even if you all stopped. What am I saying? They’re off the air nearly everyday anyhow with all that fantastic equipment they bought with your money.

By the way David, Ian Kelly wants to know where the £10K went which was paid to David Icke Books Ltd for TPV rather than sent through the Indiegogo site? Is THAT the money you don’t account for in the “financial report” you provided your followers (there’s no accounting showing ANY donations in that table Davey) and is it then the money you say you put into TPV “out of my own pocket”? I’d guess it probably is!

Jesus what a circus. What a joke. But there will always be those who want to pay for their enslavement thinking they are going to be given their freedom.

Just like the tray which is passed around in church and just like the televangelists offering you heaven. Some people just never learn.

Sad. Very very sad.

This is not a love song (alternative title: Something’s Johnny Rotten in Denmark!)

Posted in Law, Media by earthlinggb on January 15, 2014

This is NOT, I repeat, NOT a David Icke/TPV post! 🙂

It is an OFCOM post! OFCOM is the far bigger fish to fry here and it just happens to be illustrated by the TPV fiasco.

I just realised I cannot possibly let this person (is that the “Corporate person” known as OFCOM or the legal person known as Kathleen Spokesperson?) get away with absolute total bullshit. God almighty the bullshit artists are everywhere aren’t they? Every bloody corner you turn, there they are waiting in the shadows to spout their objectionable, transparent CRAP – yet it’s all so incompetent. Pathetically transparent to a half brained twit like me. I guess I should now criticise myself for calling me such? Nah, I won’t bother.

So here is the letter back to OFCOM in reply to their communication of yesterday. Hey! SOMEONE’S gotta do it! And I just ain’t taking this shit from no-one – is that ok by you? If not, too bad.

To: Kathleen Stewart
2 attachments (total 131.5 KB)
View TPV two campaigns.jpg in slide show
Download
View Icke creator.jpg in slide show
Kathleen,

Let me start by simply saying that your letter’s contents are entirely disingenuous. I am sure you are quite aware of this. If you truly stand by your commentary on the status of “The People’s Voice” and your/OFCOM’s belief that David Icke has no controlling interest, either directly or by proxy, then let me state to you, that OFCOM are a joke. That is no flippant remark, it is a fact and a serious comment regarding the work your organisation is MEANT to do.
The letter from you is transparently evading the reality and I, for one, would like to know why you, as an organisation, are doing so.
Let me illustrate this “non controlling interest” of David Icke over “The People’s Voice” broadcasting network and Limited Liability Company:
1. The original Indiegogo campaign for £300K of donations.
The first video produced by David Icke to raise funds – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMkWf78lGHs
Two campaigns now launched, both by David Icke (see attached photo “Two campaigns”)
Please note on the Indiegogo campaign notes, the following:
‘I am excited by David’s new venture. We all complain about media bias and now we will have an outlet beholden only to the people. I think it will be crazy and fun and I hope to be on it.’ – Russell Brand

We’re a small team of people … but we have already achieved so much against all the odds …

Here are some of the things we have done recently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khmoOuO7uOQ

David Icke Live at Wembley Arena – recorded 27th October 2012 (Produced by Sean Adl-Tabatabai, Directed by Simon Morris, Edited by Mathew Kennedy)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99nvx3m2fbQ

David Icke’s “ad lib documentary” at Occupy Wall Street – recorded November 2011 (Produced and Directed by Sean Adl-Tabatabai, Edited by Miki Zoric)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWRDhtYMOKY

Music video for Gareth Icke “Remember Who You Are” (Produced by Sean Adl-Tabatabai, Directed and Edited by Miki Zoric)

We have access to and work regularly with very talented filmmakers, broadcasters and engineers who we will secure to work full-time with us once we reach our goal.

Please note that David Icke was (and is) the Creator of the entire venture (see attached photo: “Icke creator”).

Please view the list of “perks” down the right hand side of the Indiegogo campaign page:

1. £10: Q&A with David

2. £25: Signed poster by David Icke plus Q&A with David Icke.

3. The “Q&A”‘s continue with David Icke all the way up to £200

4. £200: An exclusive online preview in September of one of our prime-time shows with David before we broadcast! Plus a chance to submit feedback afterwards to the shows Producers // Plus ‘SIGNED POSTER’, ‘Q+A WITH DAVID’, and ‘BEHIND THE SCENES DIARY’

5. £500: A personalised video from David Icke thanking you for your contribution.
6. £500: Win a VIP ticket to David Icke’s Wembley Arena show in October 2014.
7. £2,500: Visit studio and meet David Icke.
8. £3000: Attend launch show and meet David Icke with HIS very special guests.
9. £3000: One of edition of David Icke’s new book “The Perception Deception” with hand-written personal message from – you guessed it – David Icke!
 
Now, that covers just the original campaign. Let’s move on shall we?
 
Here are a few of the video updates about “The People’s Voice” before launch. Every single one of them by David Icke explaining the entire ethos of the network and structure and needs of the network (without a mention of the Private Limited Company which controlled it up until YOU – OFCOM – contacted him/TPV to demand your licence be applied for:
 
Now, you have a little watch of them Kathleen and then tell me how much it is not in your personal interest to acknowledge the reality which OFCOM do not wish to have acknowledged? The acknowledgement of which is obviously FAR more than your job’s worth right?
2. Now Let’s turn, for a moment, to “The People’s Voice Broadcasting Network” Private Limited Company by share capital. While David Icke proposed and kept promoting that the company was a “Not for profit” station. That was an EXTREMELY misleading statement to make as you and OFCOM well know. Yet, again, you ignore this? So my question is of you, once more, what is the relationship between you/OFCOM and David Icke? It may not be direct but someone is protecting this guy and supporting him and his aims. If you do not have the clarity of mind to see that then, sincerely, I do feel for you.
Please consider the information on this blog. As you will see (and be fully aware of already), David Icke WAS a Director of “The People’s Voice” Private Limited Company – while may I also bring it to your attention that he is on record visually in his videos (and live on TPV itself) stating that he has spent his own money investing in equipment in the station! How much do you seriously think you can get away with ignoring Kathleen before people who read this (and it will be made public) recognise you for what your letter assumes I am? Seriously, I would like you to answer that question.
David Icke was a Director from the initial incorporation of the company up until late October 2013 – precisely the time that I had contacted OFCOM and they acknowledged my contact than they contacted TPV. Mr Icke then making the statement (Mr Icke remember, not any other person in the company or network) that HE and TPV spoke with THEIR lawyers who advised them they had to get a licence. Now, once more, you tell me how, again, it is David Icke acting not only as spokesman but also making the decisions and debating/negotiating these points with TPV’s lawyers?
PLEASE DO NOT TREAT ME OR THE PUBLIC AS IDIOTS KATHLEEN. I TRUST I CAN SPEAK FOR MOST AND SAY WE REALLY DO NOT APPRECIATE IT!
Now, since then, David Icke has resigned his Directorship (funny old coincidental kinda world we live in isn’t it Kathleen?) BUT the new campaign for donations on Indiegogo, launched on 3rd January 2014 (after the fact that he is “no longer associated with the company” but still drives it?) has been created by? Well would you believe it? None other than…… DAVID ICKE!
Let’s have a look at that campaign shall we Kathleen?
The TEAM on this campaign just happens to have added a second “Icke”: David Icke’s son Jaymie! How weird is that Kathleen? It just so happens that in the original campaign, David Icke, in the first video, goes through the core team running TPV and it is him and his entire family including Sean ADL Tabatabai but also including his son Jaymie. Also, his son Gareth is one of the main presenters on the station. ISN’T THAT STRANGE? Ah but because there is no mention of the name “Icke” on TPV Limited’s documentation anymore, then you decide to accept that there is now no involvement? Ah the “legal person”, isn’t it a wonderful creation Kathleen?
Now, take a look down the perks of this campaign and what do you find? David Icke perks splashed all over it once more including the BIG £10,000 perk which is? “The Ultimate David Icke collection”.
 
And lastly what do we have on the TPV website shop?
Have a look Kathleen. Go on, I know you want to. A whole range of David Icke promotional material from caps, to t-shirts, promoting his name and his books and shows.
So Kathleen, while you, in your letter on behalf of that so called “regulator” you work for, side step, swerve and evade the fundamental reality of this venture by Icke and buddies/family, OFCOM are simply a party to fraud in my opinion. However, that fraud (by wilful misrepresentation) is supported by the legal framework which is supported itself by the fraud which is the “legal person” and treatment of a corporation (corpse – oration – the talking dead: I do hope you appreciate that) as like a human being with “rights”, which makes everything in your world “hunky dory” and not fraudulent at all. So I withdraw the comment about it being fraud Kathleen because, according to the law and the way it is implemented, fraud is perfectly acceptable and isn’t fraud at all. When everything is built upon fraud and corruption, it is impossible for everything built upon it not to be fraudulent in nature.
Imagine a cheesecake Kathleen. Do you like cheesecake? I do. A cup of coffee and a slice of cheesecake on a sunny afternoon sitting outside at a cafeteria just watching the world go by. It’s great isn’t it? But you can get all kinds of cheesecake Kathleen – Blueberry, lemon, chocolate even! Lots and lots of different toppings you can get. But guess what? The base is still cheesecake. What you’re doing here is just adding the topping! Nice topping, shame about the crumbling base though. While, if the people who have created and maintain that system say something is not fraudulent (even if it clearly is) then it’s not. Black is white and night is day. Perhaps it’s that “sponginess” in the centre of the cheesecake Kathleen – sponges can absorb a lot of moisture. Hot air and bullshit is moisture Kathleen! 😉
I do hope you enjoy your career Kathleen.
Regards,
Perhaps this is a good time (although I never wished to publish this as it is a private communications between both, myself and Sonia Poulton but, unfortunately, it was misrepresented by the other party and has led to online blogs referring to a single statement made by the latter which is patently untrue) to add this since, just as above, in speaking of (and in this case naming of course) TPV and David Icke, my INTENTION in the above is to point the finger at OFCOM. My intention in the following is stated quite clearly to Ms Poulton BUT, for the purpose of explaining to her how it all came about, I mentioned elements which included my ex wife. I had ZERO intention of naming any names to the press (except perhaps my own) because the names did not matter – what mattered was the evidence of wrong doing and corruption I have against a Singapore court system, a judge in a small claims case in Surrey, a lawyer and judge in Singapore, a barrister who ignored the obvious in the High court in London, another barrister who admitted I had a case (while a company admitted they breached contract) and a Foreign & Commonwealth office that did nothing to protect me and my “human rights” abroad.
And if you ever have the “opportunity” to spend time in a Singapore jail because you were a “threat” to their perceived “justice system” then you will recognise that THIS photograph reflects just a part of how you are treated in such a prison.
guantanamo-11-january-2002

When looking at that photo, all you need do os change the Army uniforms for Prison warden uniforms and it is exactly the same picture of Queenstown prison, Singapore (which now does not exist). You are lined up in a courtyard, told to strip naked, hosed down, told to stand between two lines of fence just 12 or 18 inches apart, your genitals and anus then sniffed by a sniffer dog, brought back out and put in a cell with no furniture of any kind, sleep on a stone floor with 3 other people, one of whom is coming down from some sort of drug induced high, a transexual and one other. A single blanket to cover you as you sleep and an open latrine in the corner where you piss and shit in front of the other three. Outside the cell you do not walk, you crouch and if you stand you are birched. Ok? Does that explain the picture fully?

And you endured that due to a contempt of court. A contempt of court because you pointed to the fact that the court was acting corruptly. You put the evidence before them and they acknowledged it and ignored it and simply demanded your acquiescence. You didn’t give it.

So, anyhow, here is the entire communication between me and Sonia Poulton. Unedited.

“The one where he wanted to sell his ex-wife down the river.”

Ms Poulton has taken something completely out of context and “packaged it” to make such a statement designed to colour me as a bitter, twisted individual looking to hurt my ex wife. Thereby having anyone read it consider me of “questionable morals” and that, I am sure, any woman (in particular) who may read it would obviously take the meaning she meant to project. There are women who I do know and have for some time and I have discussed such issues with them who know full well that I have NEVER wished, nor considered, some form of “retribution” toward my ex wife. For may reasons, a major one being I have two children and such a “war” would hurt them immeasurably and they have been hurt quite enough thank you.

I have never attempted to character assassinate Ms Poulton in any way shape or form yet she has chosen to do so toward me. For what? For asking questions of David Icke and TPV and the financing?

So, with that, let me share with you (because, unfortunately such is necessary to clear my “name”) the entire discussion which Ms Poulton refers to. The ONLY changes are that I have omitted my name (people know it but I need not publish it on here and that is my prerogative to do so).

What may also be of interest is Ms Poulton’s own words saying full time people will be paid on TPV.

  • Conversation started July 22
  • M

    Hi Sonia,

    I was wondering if there may be any paid positions going at the People’s Voice? I have a 30 year career in sales and marketing (telecommunications), a physics degree and Business Studies. I’m also a blogger (although haven’t been too professional about it thus far) and I create youtube videos and record a little. I have also got “experience” let’s say with the law – I just thought: That gives the impression I have been locked up! lol No but let’s say my outspokenness has gotten me into trouble a little plus I also whipped a barrister’s ass in court due to my understanding and research which then led me onto all of this.

    Anyhow, just thought I’d inquire.

    Regards, M (friend of S L’s)

  • July 24
  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Hi Mark, yes there will be paid positions for people who are full-time at People’s Voice. I would recommend you contact the admin/personnel team. Here’s a link, it will be one of these e-mails: http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/85612-important-update-about-our-peoples-voice-campaign

  • July 26
  • M

    Thanks Sonia.

  • August 4
  • M

    Sonia, another question if I may? Do you still write for the Daily Mail/Mainstream?

  • August 5
  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Sure M. At the moment I primarily write for the Sunday Express because of the subject matter I have been working on recently – institutional child abuse – and I much prefer SE’s approach to the subject matter than DM’s…but I still write for both and will continue to do so even when at People’s Voice. I believe both roles will complement each other.

  • August 5
  • M

    Well Sonia, it’s just I really would have a superb story for you (complex but very telling) re how our legal system does not work and how human rights do not exist and I could refer all of it to personal experience from a number of legal issues I have contended with over the past few years. It has nothing to do with child abuse of course BUT the “expose” of the legal person would help those whose children have been fraudulently and corruptly taken from them. Anyhow, if you were interested to discuss. I can assure you I think your eyebrows would raise even if you are ware of the legal person issue and positive discrimination by our courts which I’m sure you are. It proves, however, that our justice system and courts literally break the human rights act themselves while ANY public organisation which does (and the courts are such) are potential targets for being sued. Give that some thought.

  • M

    NB: I even have a barrister recorded (audio) stating “You don’t stand a chance in court because you are neither a pregnant woman, a homosexual or an ethnic minority”. How about that for explosive?

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Hi M, the problem is, at the moment, that I don’t have the time or head space to take on anything else. I am currently working on a tv report, a documentary and two newspaper investigations as well as planning for the People’s Voice.

    I suspect from the sound of your outline (the clue was complex) that your story is going to require a fair amount of time to research and pull together. What is the main thread of your experience? Something that I could feed – as a one liner or short para – to an editor?

  • M

    Yes I understand Sonia. Ok, one liner: “You think you would have had to have committed a crime for the law to destroy you? Think again!” Ok perhaps rather dramatic but true.

    Paragraph? Man gets divorced in Singapore (so he thought). Wife steals £35,000 and perjures herself in court. Court doesn’t care and jails man for contempt of court. Man contacts UK Foreign and commonwealth office re Human Rights once he finds out Singapore court never had jurisdiction from the start. Singapore doesn’t like he found out – threatens him with jail again. Man jumps on plane back to UK in fear of being jailed again for longer leaving wife and children. Wife tells children their father is a criminal. Back in UK wife comes to Royal Courts of justice with a singapore court order giving her 100%. Man fights it and wins with no representation. Barrister is “educated”. Later wife remarries and man realises that she is, in fact, a bigamist because the Singapore court order was void due to lack of jurisdiction.

    Then man finds himself in battle re his home in Guildford Surrey. It was let out while abroad. Wife speaks with lettings agent and tells them man should not be given access. Man goes to court once more and wins. However court then charges man the other side’s court costs because man wanted justice not just money.

    Man then goes back to Edinburgh (home town) and man is then “visited” by Police for having an argument online with a jew. Police remove £2000 of equipment from man’s home and charges him with nothing. (This is 2011 and man still has heard nothing from police – effectively, then, legalised robbery).

    On to 2012: Man is terminated from a job he took in February and termination in August. Barrister respects it is breach of contract but does nothing once he sent one letter to opposing lawyers who just dismissed it. Barrister tells man that he had little chance of winning due to him not being pregnant female, gay or ethnic minority.

    Man has meeting with MP Damian Green who simply refuses to do anything for him while Damian Green freaks out at man daring to take a video camera to the MP’s surgery. The termination resulted in man having, in good faith, invested in a house in Kent on the word of the Managing Director that he had an ongoing job.

    Man is now about broke.

    And I can support everything I have said with documentation proof.

    Plus here’s a quick video of my “meeting” with Damian Green MP who then tried to suggest he felt threatened (not by me but by a camera as you will see).

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKp36vJan28

    Finally however Sonia, I would like you to understand that I am quite well academically qualified in physics and business and I have had a global career in Business Management with 6 figure salaries. Just to ensure you understand I’m no idiot.

    Anyhow, thanks for the ear. If you ever do have the time and the inclination, I’d be happy to hear from you. You see, I can also work all of this into my studies of the legal person according to the UN and Parliament as well as Human Rights plus I can also explain the monetary con we are all under (fully and logically). This “story” wouldn’t be just for me, it would be to open many eyes I would hope. To get such a story in mainstream would be significant and, although it concerns me to do so (re my future), I have lost so much already.

    M

    British MP freezes on confrontation!

    http://www.youtube.com

    What is the Legal Person? What is a legal fiction? Is the government discriminatory? Is the judiciary discriminatory? Do I have to be a black, pregnant, gay …
  • M

    Sonia, on last thing: I just watched the video of you and another woman (on £50K a year) on Morning breakfast from last year. Believe me when I say, I do have a solution to the entire thing. It is not my solution in fact but that of a man named Mike Montagne. All I can say is that I have studied the whole monetary issue for approx 5 years. I have hit what i have thought to be solutions (understanding the fractional reserve issue etc) and I have trawled congressional and parliamentary websites but I have now firmly found the only solution (only because it is the one logical and evidenced/proven). Your issue with those at the top getting their tax breaks and then you have the middle class (who are being attacked now) and the lower class (who are always attacked) is entirely sorted by this solution Sonia. It turns things on their head and creates abundance. Ot is called “Mathematically Perfected Economy” and please do not let the name put you off. All it means is a 1:1:1 relationship between all assets, money in circulation to represent those assets and the money retired out of the system in paying down those assets. It is so simple, logical and factual. To get it media time would be an incredible feat Sonia and it would shake the entire system.

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    OK M, cool. I’ll send your outline to some editors and see what they say, OK? Will let you know.

  • M

    Well ok but do you see it even of interest to yourself if you had had the time?

    You won’t have to mention my name will you?

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Ah. It would almost certainly require full identification including a picture M. My editors will only run anonymous pieces if they involve whistleblowers who are still in the job or people who are involved in sex abuse. We get heavily criticised for anonymous pieces and they are avoided. people say they are made up and it also makes it much harder for people to relate to them. So, in answer to your question, if you wanted this considered for coverage it would require full ID. I will leave it with you to think about.

  • M

    That’s not so much of the problem Sonia. I just meant for now – you wouldn’t have to give them my name just to give them a summary would you? If they wanted more detail I could then speak to them but I would want to ensure that the story would be told absolutely correctly before I put my name to it

  • August 6
  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    no I wouldn’t need to give them your name now, M. Although I can tell you this, none of my editors would give you final proof read of an article. I understand your need to be cautious but there are a lot of conditions that you have which may prove to be an obstacle.

  • M

    Sonia, we know how the press can “spin” things. Any chance of having a quick 5 min/10 min chat about this rather than text it? If so, my number is 11111 111111 or, alternatively, if you’d rather I call you or Skype?

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    we can have a word later in the week possibly but I am in a studio at the moment and typing in between takes.

  • M

    Ok. I don’t really have a lot of conditions but I simply can’t understand that, if someone wished, with the right intention, to publish this, why they would not wish to be sure it was correct? Anyhow, later in the week then. Enjoy the day.

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Enjoy your day too. It’s not about not getting it correct M, no-one wants that, but it is not practice for people to have final say over their copy. It simply isn’t and my editors would laugh me out of the room for suggesting it. I can’t promise we will speak this week, I have a load on as I told you and I am quite happy to pass what you have said to me on but I doubt I have time to tackle it right now. My plate floweth over. I’ll do what I can though.

  • M

    Sure. Pass it on and see if anyone bites. The paragraphs I wrote do not really create the full picture and the power of the story to really hit hard at government and legislation and their ultimate corruption but if someone can sense there’s more to this and value in it then I’d like to discuss with them. Thanks and catch you sometime.

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    I think that is the best way to go on this because if they bite then you may be able to negotiate it all to your satisfaction. Let’s give it a shot.

  • M

    I know YOU wish to hit hard Sonia ( I believe anyhow) but do these editors really understand things and wish to too? Ok cool.

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    no seldom they don’t but that’s why I am frustrated in the mainstream. Your story is complex, very few editors are even prepared to take on complex stories these days much less if these involve going off into areas of Govt and legislation. The amount of stories I have to abandon – in a similar vein to yours – is heartbreaking. Anyway must go.

  • M

    Sorry,,, (I know I can go on! lol) but there’s one other thing. IF this were to get attention and it hit hard (as I know it can) then I also know that the establishment would target me based upon particlerly what they would insinuate from my writing as “anti semitism” plus other issues. They would attack my character. I’m willing to stand for that if I can be sure of having the “voice” to hit back. Ok.. later.

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    hmmm, some of the things you just said are troubling. Why would you be called anti semitic? I will respond to this later when I have a mo.

  • M

    Well I guess that’s what the “People’s Voice” is all about. But be careful on that Sonia because you know you will be “coloured” by being involved with David Icke.

  • M

    Because I write about the realities of history (much of which is backed up in parliamentary archives) and the Khazar root of the “jewish” Israelis who are not truly semitic people. Sonia, David Icke writes about the same things so if you’re troubled by me you should be troubled by him.

  • August 7
  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    I’m not troubled by David, I just don’t know you M. That’s all. Simple stuff. I will send your outline to editors.

  • M

    Neither do i know you Sonia. While I even have questions about the integrity of David Icke. But this is the whole problem we have in this world isn’t it? Distrust. And why do you think that is? Could it be because we have a system which, due to it’s entire set up means that to pay off our debts we MUST compete with each other? It’s dog eat dog and we have no way of remedying that unless we change that system to something better – which can so easily be done. The reprehensible Ms Katie is a product of that system and she is entirely bought into it because she doesn’t have the vision to imagine anything but the present system. So who am I? Well, on one hand, I’m a guy whose mother once used a saying when he was very young and which, for some reason, stuck with him: “A stranger is just a friend you do not know” and then he went out into the wider world of business and recognised that while that COULD be true, in the present, many times it wasn’t. So yes simple stuff. If you’re saying you have no basis upon which to trust that I am someone of integrity and honesty then I can say I am in the same position with you. Further, you suggest I ask too much (conditions). Well I know neither you nor your editors and you have just stated you’re troubled by simple stuff. So you can readily appreciate then that I will be too and that is my concern over handing this to people I don’t know either. I guess it’s a leap of faith?

  • August 14
  • M

    No feedback Sonia? By the way, I sent you a request to connect.

  • August 14
  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    still waiting M. Mind you my editors are almost all on holiday and their posts are being covered by people I don’t know…bear with me….what request? let me go look. I haven’t done my friend requests for about a week. Hold on.

  • M

    The strangest thing has happened. The company I worked for and who terminated me (breaching contract) replaced me with a guy that used to work for them for 4 years and now, within the 6 month period – just as with me – they have terminated him too. Hard to explain how that is of any importance but, in my legal case against them (if I had one) it is VERY telling. I’m shocked. They knew this guy well. They knew his capability and work style. He had absolute proven experience of the job (having worked for them for 4 years previously) and worked in power electronics most of his career – and it seems they have done much the same to him! Corporations are getting away with whatever they wish with impunity.

  • August 30
  • M

    What do you think of the song Sonia? I’d like to know….

    Global Revolution

    http://www.youtube.com

    Have you ever seriously looked at the system? And worked out how they’ve created the lie Do you ever wonder if you’re a person? A legal replicant of a human …
  • September 14
  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Did you tell me you did this M? It’s very powerful. Funny thing is it reminds me a bit of Talking Heads. The video is extraordinary. Really captures so much of our struggle. A great package. It’s a People’s Voice vid and song if ever I saw one!

  • September 15
  • M

    Hey! I’m glad you say it reminds you of Talking Heads because I love that band and they were in my mind when I wrote it. Really pleased you liked it Sonia! Yeah I mentioned it last sunday if you remember?

  • September 16
  • M

    Sonia, would you mind asking Sean to contact me or a number I can get him on? Or David even?

  • September 16
  • M

    Sonia, how do I get in touch with the guys?

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    I’d leave a message on the TPV facebook page M. David is out of the country and I don’t have a number to give out for Gareth. Reckon that’s the best way to do it but be patient, it’s hectic!

  • M

    Ok. Just wanted to discuss availability and also sponsorship/advertising. If you see Sean ask him to give me a bell?

  • Sonia Poulton
    Sonia Poulton

    Have you contacted Sean, M? I reckon you will get a quicker answer if you post an inbox addressed to him to the TPV page.

  • M

    I’ve left him a message on LinkedIn and we chatted quite a bit on sunday. Will drop a line on TPV FB page too at some point.

You cannot reply to this conversation. Either the recipient’s account was disabled or its privacy settings don’t allow replies.
Now, as I hope you shall see quite clearly from that, the “story” was about a number of issues I have experienced (INCLUDING my “divorce” which was international and it was fraudulent due to no jurisdiction by the Singapore court) and the story I wanted to present to the press was one about the sheer corruption within the law and the fundamentals of that corruption. I could do this because I had first hand experience across a number of issues and I could relate the “legal person” to it. The reason I would want to first check it before it was published (if that was ever to be the case) was because I wanted the story about the divorce to be generic more than specific. I had no intention of releasing the name of my spouse and create WW3 out of that. That was not the intention of the story. The intention was to cover 3 or 4 issues (particularly the corporation one) and demonstrate with factual, 1st hand evidence, how the court system, worldwide, is corrupt. At NO TIME did I ever even infer I wanted to attack my ex wife.
“Sonia, we know how the press can “spin” things”  – Ah the sheer irony. Yes Sonia, indeed we do know! 
A last few points on this Corporate, legal person issue wrt OFCOM.
Now, I read “OFCOM’s” reply and I simply say to myself “OFCOM must be a mental incompetent”. Now, to state someone (another legal person) as mentally incompetent is a form of slander is it not? I think it is. But, you see, Kathleen is replying on BEHALF OF OFCOM, as can clearly be seen from her letter. Therefore, it must be the legal person of OFCOM who is mentally retarded. Now, if OFCOM wish to pursue me for defamation then go ahead. I would just wish to ask of OFCOM: “If you are saying you are not mentally retarded, then please show the court your mind.” You see, when I was terminated from my job, I took the “resins” for such as being absolutely, unqualified, slander by the person who wrote the release letter. However, I was advised that I could not state slander in any way because the person who effectively wrote the release was the company and that any other person (legal person in their own right) within the company who read it (and there were a few) were all within the company and, therefore, the statement was not made to a third party – just me and the legal corporate person of the company.
So, in the same way, no single individual within OFCOM can state that I have stated they are personally mentally retarded because it is the legal corporate person known as OFCOM who is replying to me. That Corporate person has no brain therefore, to call it mentally retarded is no slander at all. It does not physically exist except as a piece of paper residing at Companies House.
Further, it is mentally retarded and incompetent when it suggests it will not accept a person whose intent is political. Here’s why. It’s very simple.
Who is PRESS.TV?

Mohammad Sarafraz (Press TV CEO) said in a June 2007 press conference that, “Since September 11, Western bias has divided the media into two camps: those that favour their policies make up one group and the rest of the media are attached to radical Islamic groups like Al-Qaeda. We want to show that there is a different view. Iran, and the Shi’as in particular, have become a focal point of world propaganda. From the media point of view, we are trying to give a second eye to Western audiences.”[3]

The network’s official vision is “to heed the voices and perspectives of the people of the world; build bridges of cultural understanding; encourage human beings of different nationalities, races and creeds to identify with one another; bring to light untold and overlooked stories of individuals who have experienced political and cultural divides firsthand.”[4]Sarafraz explained that “our experience tells us that pictorial reflection of news and the use of images are more effective than discussion and analysis.”[5]

Press TV is state-funded[11] and is a division of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB).

On 20 January 2012, Press TV’s licence to broadcast in the UK was revoked by Ofcom. NEVER!???

Question: Why did OFCOM provide a licence to Press TV in the first instance?

OFCOM: MENTALLY RETARDED (BUT NOT THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY MAKE THE DECISIONS OR THEIR SPOKESPERSONS, JUST THE PIECE OF PAPER WHICH RESIDES IN COMPANIES HOUSE YOU UNDERSTAND).

Tagged with:

David Icke: OFCOM REPLY 2

Posted in Law, Media, Politics by earthlinggb on January 14, 2014

Ok folks, i sincerely do hope this is my last post on the Icke saga. It’s all clear to see.

A good way of rounding it off is what I just received today.

I said previously, that the reason David gave up his Directorship in TPV  – at precisely the same time that OFCOM contacted TPV to sort out the licence issue, was because David Icke would not be considered a “fit and proper person” (he could not possibly be) and that his entire writings were political in nature.

Further, I stated to OFCOM that TPV’s modus operandi was to attack the existing establishment (which, if you believe what you wish to believe of TPV – that it truly is attacking the existing establishment, then it is POLITICAL) but, as you can see, OFCOM have replied that they do not view TPV as political. This is obviously a “joke” and OFCOM know it. OFCOM also state that Icke is not in control. Puleeeze! How many of you believe that crap? While, all the Ickeans donated it BECAUSE it was “David Icke”. Imagine taking David Icke out of the equation last June and it was Sean Tabatabai and Deanna and, perhaps even Sonia and Ritchie, asking for £300K and giving you all those video updates, be honest with yourself, would you have donated, and if so, as much? Would they have reached that goal? While, remember, according to this new request for donations, it is STILL David Icke at the helm. Still he who is asking for the money and expecting it to be his name that creates that money (“out of thin air”). Don’t you think OFCOM know that? Don’t you think they see the Indiegogo site and who is at the helm? Don’t you think they see David Icke promoting the shows, promoting the presenters, PROMOTING HIS BOOKS AND HIS T-SHIRTS AND CAPS ETC?

So, you ask yourself (coz I’ve now said enough – if you don’t get it you don’t get it): WHY would OFCOM decide to ignore the absolute obvious? Because Icke withdrew his name from a piece of paper as a Director? DO YOU REALLY, SERIOUSLY BELIEVE THAT?

 

Good luck folks. As much as I can be terse (and I freely admit that) I am on your side and just don’t wish any of you to be duped. That has been my only goal in this. And contrary to what you have read from certain quarters regarding a communication I had with Sonia Poulton last year regarding a story I proposed for the Daily Mail, I can tell you 100% honestly: She took what I said entirely out of context and did so for a purpose. End. Period. Full stop. Purely your prerogative to believe me or not. I have nothing to gain and nothing to lose. I don’t know you and you don’t know me. Plus the ones who wrote it do not KNOW me either.

I wish you all well and I hope, somehow, we have better days ahead.

If you ever do visit the site again, please take the time to read the more important topics. I just felt compelled to give you a heads up on this subject and got “carried away” but there was so much to comment on. Perhaps there will be in future but I sincerely hope not. I don’t know about you but I’m sick and tired of it. While it is part “celebrity scandal” and, i suppose, provides a bit of “Coronation Street” for you, it is not the most important thing. It is just one small element of what we’re fighting. It will be one hell of a struggle and never be achieved unless we come together and concentrate on the real heavy issues and deal with them.

With that, ciao David. You may not provide transparency but you ARE transparent. It’s been fun. Be good now! (or am I hoping for too much?)

TPV OFCOM 3

 

TPV OFCOM 2

 

 

David Icke: Accepts donations from “cancer causing” company

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 11, 2014

“We shall NEVER accept sponsorship or advertising from companies we are likely to investigate or which are negative towards the health and well-being of people” – David Icke

This is a fact which ALL at TPV know. We were ALL told that and the man was very firm (rightly) on the point.

He also states it on his videos when asking for donations and sponsorship/advertising.

I wrote about this in my first blog on the subject: “David Icke: The turd in the punchbowl”.

I have also given absolute factual evidence (OFCOM, Handicapped kids, Poll tax issue) that David Icke does not walk his talk and he never will when it does not suit him.

Now, I wish to bring your attention to the following – the list of sponsors who contributed £1000 to the original £300K donation drive:

TPV £1K sponsors

No cancer there right? Yup, that’s absolutely right. Nothing in that list which, as I’m aware anyhow, could lead to cancer.

David Icke and TPV would not wish to list a donator/sponsor which was highly questionable would he? Of COURSE not! But would he still accept money from them but just quietly, without listing them and thanking them?

Yes, he would and while one cannot determine for sure that this company following, has donated that sum of money or not, I ask you to consider that, with the sum being undisclosed, yes it could be an undisclosed sum of £1 but please, don’t make a fool of yourself and really believe that. Undisclosed sums are, most frequently, undisclosed because they are large. Sure, it could still be only £500 or even £250 or £100 – I do not dispute that could be the case – but you and I and “the people” will never know shall we? A private limited company being funded by another private limited company gives you no right to that information (and that is the way our “law” is and every single one of you – Icke believer, skeptic or whatever – despise that very fact because you know as well as I do that the legal ideology of the “Corporate person” is a huge part of what is oppressing us AND it allows for as much “occult” dealings as Freemasonry or any other secret society. These are facts and ALL of you – no matter what side of the fence you’re sitting on – know it.

So here we have TotalEliquid.co.uk (Electronic cigarettes) funding “The People’s Voice” and Mr Icke, desperate on funds remember – has been accepting donations from them. Not just once but FIVE (correction: THREE) times. He cannot then say that this donator has not come to his attention. IF he does, by saying “Oh FFS I don’t look at all donators and check them out!” then his entire statement above is bullshit because, in the short time I was there (you can read it), we had to be VERY sure (i.e. due diligence and consideration) of who we approached asking for donations/sponsorship from. IF he even thinks of turning round and saying he doesn’t look at the list and no-one in his team does, then it may as well be Pepsi or Coke donating. That said, do you think for one second that if Pepsi or Coke DID show up as a donator, and let’s say it was for £10K, that TPV would turn around at this point and say “No thanks”? IF you do, you’re naive as hell and yet, they’d have to because that would just be too obvious wouldn’t it? So, with this one, it’s a case of them thinking “No-one is going to pick up on that and cause an issue for us”. Well David, too bad son. I just have and I always intend to hold your feet to the fire and call you out for every hypocritical, bullshitting statement you make.Eliquid

Totaleliquid

But hey, they’re calling him a legend. You massage that ego and he’s gonna love you. He’s never gonna turn round and say “You won’t think I’m a legend when I tell you I’m not accepting your donations”.

One other thing, “Come on people, please dig deep!!” Does this sound like a company that has just donated a quid or two? 😉

FIVE (correction: THREE) times they’ve donated. So let’s even say it’s 3 x £100. Let’s say it’s 3 x£1. It doesn’t matter. It could be 3 x £1000 or more. You will NEVER know and how would Mr Icke show and prove he had returned the donations even if he told you he had? And why am I saying Icke? Icke isn’t TPV’s director it’s Sean “THE GUARDIAN OF THE GATES OF THE ETHOS”. Well Ickey, here’s your ethos being tested BIG STYLE! You really don’t like me do you? And yet all I do is hold you to your word Icke. That is ALL I ever do. And every time I do, your face becomes more purple!

Eliquid cigs

And please remember people, this is just one which stuck out like a sore thumb. There will be many more in those lists of donations I can assure you and you shall never know.

Now, we come to David’s retort. He really has no leg to stand on (legend or not) but the spin will now go into overdrive (just like Obama: “This will be the most transparent administration ever” my ass!).

David, you’re on thin ice mate to anyone who listens to you with half a brain nevermind all synapses sparking. Your comment (at the head of this post) went on to say that even if the company, technology/product or service is questionable in it being positive or negative, it is safer for the good name and ethos of TPV to not engage with them.

So, here we have just ONE report (in the Daily Mail of all places) providing a scientifically studied result about E cigarettes. There are more but, for the sake of brevity, I though the Daily Mail (you know? Sonia’s newspaper and one, from which you quote and post on your site very very frequently to support your own vision of the world):

E cigs

Full article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2402108/E-cigarettes-harmful-cigarettes-cause-cancer-claims-study.html

The question AND the challenge to your “sincerely held” ethos is this:

How much have they donated? With proof please. Not a statement like your financial table of crap.

And when are you going to return ALL of their donations David? With proof of when you do it.

The “People” thank you for your integrity!

Damn! That £27,000 today doesn’t look so sure now does it? But you can bet it will be because what’s more important to David? YOUR opinion of him? HIS “ethos” OR THE MONEY?

This is going to show not just how David Icke and TPV will throw their stated ethos and ideology in the bin but how their followers will do the same, make every excuse under the sun and prove the hypocrisy of messiah and his flock.

Final point: This whole ethos of his is a crock of shit anyhow and YOU as the “people” can NEVER have the transparency you demand either. So let’s say Icke and TPV even cared enough to respond to this issue and come up with the feeble excuse that “oh we didn’t notice”, and the donations were to be shown as returned to the donator, so what? Icke gets on the phone and says “Here mate, send them back through via paypal will you? Donations don’t need to be through Indiegogo” or “Send them back through to Davidickebooks Ltd or Lion’s Epoch Limited”. He even admitted having had donations for TPV via HIS website! There are a myriad of ways he can take ANY money from ANYONE. And he fucking will! Cheap talking POS.

ADDENDUM: ALERT! COGNITIVE DISSONANCE RULES OK!

Oh yes, it is that old, worn and well loved phrase of the alternative media and “two of movement” again: “Cognitive dissonance”. I think there are many who use it (not all) because it’s probably the largest piece of vocabulary they have ever learned and think it makes them sound intelligent but, anyhow, that’s an aside.

There are many people (including the poster of this post to TPV called San) who have given me flak and criticised me for my language at times but also for referring to (never specified but sometimes grouped) people as “thick as shit” or “dumb”, “stupid” etc etc. Some people have stated it makes me no better than Icke and it turns people away from the site, the information and the message. If that is the case, so be it. You see, I do not make a cent out of this. I do not require your “love” or your “respect”. I ask for nothing from you. There is no “DONATE” button on my blog. You really CAN take the information or leave it from my perspective because I win nothing and lose nothing whatever you choose. The ONE IMMENSE DIFFERENCE between me and David Icke (or any other “alternative media/”truth movement guru” out there) is that HE (and they) ALL (almost all I know of anyhow), ask for donations and, as such, if you do not take their information (imagine no-one was to listen to David Icke) they will have ZERO income. It is their livelihood! So, for ANY ONE OF THEM to say “I don’t care if you believe it or not” (as long as you buy the book) is BULL! Because if no-one listened and believed his info, he would stop selling books because he’d have no market! How DIFFICULT is this for people to understand? So that is a BOLD FACED LIE in of itself. And it is FUN-DA-MENTAL!

So I “win” or “lose” nothing. I say what I think and time and time again over years, i have encountered sheer fricking stupidity from human beings. REAL DUMBASSES! Real ignorant, thick, numb-brained fricking morons. So no, I don’t apologise for stating how thick some are occasionally because it is simply true. Today, for instance, there was a tent up in the town centre. I’d seen it before last year and went and spoke to the guys manning it. Guess what it was? A FREEMASON’S tent promoting the craft! Bang in the town centre.

Now this guy i spoke to today, I spoke to last year also. He actually remembered me which was surprising and he welcomed me stopping by once more (to begin with) because we had had an open (to a point), interesting and friendly discussion. This guy is a nice guy on the face of things. he really is. But BOY (and I apologise to him if he ever reads it – apologise simply because he is such a “nice” guy) is he naive and simple – to the point of being thick but he’s not thick. i believe he simply doesn’t care but it is that lack of care which is dangerous (and thick) but it’s a “thick” in inserted commas. Anyhow that is another story for another time. It is this “fabled” COGNITIVE DISSONANCE.

And here it is displayed once more exactly as I assumed above:

Thick as shit

Now, my point here is, to NOT call this person “thick as shit” is to simply try and be “nice” and politically correct. I don’t know this character or what his character is like. He might be a real nice guy this “Mr King”. He might even be a PhD for all I know. He may well not be thick at all. But ANYONE reading these comments from him (ok so let’s not call him thick as shit, let’s say the words he presents read “thick as shit”. Is that more acceptable and politically correct for you?) would recognise this is a sign of synapses having been doused by something! Coz they ain’t firing!

In response to this entire blogpost of mine posted by San, Mr king has stated “Anyone can contribute via Indiegogo, even someone trying to discredit TPV so this story isn’t proof of anything really”. Yes TAS (I’ll call you TAS – I just think it’s fitting) anyone CAN donate that’s true. And this company HAS donated. And if this company is trying to discredit, then David icke and TPV would know and pick up on it AND WOULD SEND THE FUCKING DONATIONS BACK AND USE IT AS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THEIR “INTEGRITY” AS PROMOTION YOU PRAT!

But have they? No! Jesus H F’ING Christ man! Use that brain god gave you!

TPV: Seriously?

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 11, 2014

Would it be proper I wonder, to say it is now pretty much official: David Icke and the TPV core team (I almost referred to them as the TPV management but that would be hilarious, no really it would be.) have lost the plot.

Whether it is just they don’t care (which then speaks absolute volumes) or whether they are just desperate to shut the door, bolt it, move on and hope that this entire episode between them and Sonia Poulton just drifts into a historical “Twilight Zone”, they have “lost it”.

The previous time David Icke was ever under this much scrutiny was when he was on Wogan. He got past that because people took pity on him for being “attacked” by Wogan. They don’t seem to understand that this is VERY different. This is, in a freak sort of sense, Icke BECOMING “Wogan” if you see what I mean? Or becoming the very thing, the very mentality, of the people he is renowned for speaking out against. My blog stats these last few days have went “on fire” with people reading about this I don’t know about other blogs but I’m, talking about over 10,000 page views. It is unknown in 4 or 5 years of blogging to have hit numbers like that and it is a LOT of people. Even if that traffic is split 50/50, what it means is that, of 100%  of people who may have taken Icke’s honesty seriously, it’s cut to 50% (assuming an even split of course as I said. It could be worse for him or better but, either way, he and TPV have lost a lot of respect and potential viewers over this and probably will continue to do so and yet, from this post – and it is easily understood even for a child – they are laughing it off as if “Who gives a crap?”

That may well be how they think. If it is, good luck with that. But it only serves as a confirmation that this group of people don’t give a damn about bringing the world/population together. They cannot possibly. This is purely about viewing figures (in the long run), and building that shareholder value because let’s say 2 years from now (if they’re still around which I am positive they will be ;-)) they have a sizeable audience, it doesn’t matter because that audience will be the “us” and the ones who experienced this and saw TPV for what it is will be the “them”. That is all you are going to be left with. These people are showing their audience absolutely no care or interest in bringing people together at a point that any right minded organisation, who promote their very existence as based upon that goal and ethos, would wish to do.

It’s absolutely stunning!

TPV Indore

This is literally

fuck-off

to those of you (and there are many many of you) who have simply wanted transparency. Not LEGAL transparency as in those accounts they have to provide to Companies House (that’s all tosh anyhow) but REAL transparency which you would expect morally from this self promoted “truth” outfit which just so happens to be a Private Limited Company complying with (and acting as you would expect of such a for profit organisation – how Sonia thinks she can go for an FOI is so very naive of her – FOI’s only apply to public companies and organisations not private companies) all the compliancy rules the very group of people it is feigning to be attacking demand of it.

TPV: “We’re going to attack you and bring your system crashing down”

The Establishment: “Okaydokey but first, here’s the rules! Got that?”

TPV: “Okaydokey. Eh, wait a minute, we can’t do this or this and we must do that and we can’t say this and we can’t say that?”

The Establishment: “Yeah that about sums it up. Now do you want to play or not? If you do, sign here…. and here…. oh and here too….. date of birth please… oops! Can’t have a director who is political. David you have to resign your directorship ok?”

David Icke: “Why?!”

The Establishment: “Because to play this game you have to abide by the Communications Act and TPV doesn’t if you’re a Director!”

David Icke: “Yes sir, yes sir” tipping his hat.

The Establishment: “Ok.. ok… now we can play. Who has the dice?”

David Icke/TPV: “Hey! Why can’t we be Banker?”

The Establishment: “Because it’s our board and it’s our money!”

David Icke/TPV: “Shit!”

The Establishment: “Hey you have sheep right?”

David Icke?TPV: “Yeah we’ve tons of sheep. Can we trade?”

The Establishment: “No!We’ve no interest in your bloody sheep! But you can fleece them! In this time of austerity it will leave them with even less in their bank accounts! :-)”

Sean ADL Tabatabai?David Icke: “Hey sh… I mean people! We need your donations! We’re gonna play this board game and we’re gonna win with your help even though the game’s rigged! Honest! Look at our COOL board piece! Devil

And you can all buy one on our new TPV shop online! For your mantelpiece. Only £10.99 and it will add additional funding to your donations! We’re gonna bring the New World Order to its knees working in total compliance with their legal system and monetary system!

What? You don’t believe it? Don’t give us those negative waves man! You’re a troll and an undercover agent for the government!”

Meanwhile, all you believers: Here’s more trinkets for you to buy. I know it’s all about the information. The People’s Voice and I’ve nothing to do with it but we thought you might like our range of t-shits and hats:

david icke-blue_3214_800x600 I-Like-Icke_3026_800x600 I-Love-Icke-White_3029_800x600 PD-Purple_3078_800x600 Thumbs-up-white_3099_800x600 remember-who-you-are-purple_3198_800x600 lion-sleeps-no-more-cap-red_3412_800x600 Thumbs-up-cap-navy_3191_800x600 I-Like-Icke-Cap_3187_800x600

No really, it has absolutely nothing to do with promoting me or my books (ignore the fact I will own the copyright etc also). It really isn’t about that. I know, I know, it is EXACTLY what that mad Earthling bloke said it was going to be but he’s just a hater and if any of you make the slightest comparison to what he said last year and this, then YOU are haters too and you can fuck off like Sonia!

How much do TPV charge David Icke books for such brazen advertising? Well umm…umm…erm…..

Hey, if I see you walking down the street with one anytime I’ll smile at you and call you by your first name if you add a £5 donation in with the cost of the item. And when I smile, I’ll be thinking “Who’s the plonker now? One day they laugh at you, the next they’re wearing your t-shirt while the world laughs at them!”

Unbelievable! That “diamond” I spoke of in my previous blog to this one is buried deep and it might just be uranium!

 

 

David Icke: Portrait of an emotional blackmailer

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 10, 2014

Read and ye shall recognise. Ye with the eyes to see and the mind to interpret.

We don’t need no perception deception! We don’t need no thought control.

No dark sarcasm in the studio. Preacher, leave them folks alone!

“If you don’t donate to christ you will not be raptured”

“If you don’t donate to TPV, then it’s your fault when your children or grandchildren turn to you and say “What were you doing Dad/Mum? You mean you didn’t donate to Sean ADL Tabatabi? Why not?” Reply: “Well calling women slags and smelling like fish, bitches and christians counts, I didn’t think he was too enlightened myself and as for David Icke, I felt emotionally blackmailed like I did when the elite told us climate change was real and we needed to pay our taxes to save the planet.”

“You SELFISH BASTARD!” says Icke.

“You negative vibed git”

“You are ensuring your children and children’s children to a life of hell”

“This is our last chance and if you don’t send that money then you don’t want the chance and you’re part of the problem”

“I WANNA BE THE MESSIAH!”

Before I go on with this cut and paste from a site on Emotional blackmail, I have a word for David Icke and his cronies: You haven’t got a fricking clue who you’re dealing with mate. An amateur actor like you would have the impact of a gnat or mosquito. We all have egos Icke but some of us know how to handle them. We know who and what is important and your perception of me, my friend, is about as important or influential on me as your pathetic KFM groupies, who can’t afford a fricking breakfast without checking the horse racing results, are on Barack Obama. You’re a second hand car salesman Icke. A frightened, cowardly, nothing of a man with one HUGE chip on his shoulder who’s attempting to intimidate a guy who could run fricking rings round you intellectually. If that sounds up my own ass (as I’m sure it will to your little clique) then so be it. You’re a seething little shit of a man desperately trying to be “somebody” and that’s the irony. You still feel like Charlie Smith (or is it Ethel Jones). You KNOW in your own self that that is what you are. You get out in front of your audiences and you suck their energy and that’s your high but still, deep inside, you’re an incompetent little man. Your non comply dance indeed. You’re a compliant, impotent little weed! The sad thing is that you don’t have to be but your ego is desperate for approval.

Emotional Blackmail

What is Emotional Blackmail?

Emotional blackmail is a powerful form of manipulation in which people close to us threaten (either directly or indirectly) to punish us if we don’t do what they want. At the heart of any kind of blackmail is one basic threat, which can be expressed in many different ways: If you don’t behave the way I want you to, you will suffer.

A criminal blackmailer might threaten to use knowledge about a person’s past to ruin her reputation, or ask to be paid off in cash to hide a secret. Emotional blackmail hits closer to home. Emotional blackmailers know how much we value our relationship with them. They know our vulnerabilities. Often they know our deepest secrets. And no matter how much they care about us, when they fear they won’t go their way, they use this intimate knowledge to shape the threats that give them the payoff they want: our compliance.

Knowing that we want love or approval, our blackmailers threaten to withhold it or take it away altogether, or make feel we must earn it. For example, if you pride yourself being generous and caring, the blackmailer might label you selfish or inconsiderate if you don’t accede to his wishes. If you value money and security, the blackmailer might attach conditions to providing them or threaten to take them away. And if you believe the blackmailer, you could fall into a pattern of letting him control your decisions and behavior. We get locked into a dance with blackmail, a dance with myriad steps, shapes and partners.

Emotional blackmailers hate to lose. They take the old adage “It doesn’t matter if you win or lose, its how you play the game”, and turn it on its head to read “It doesn’t matter how you play the game as long as you do not lose.” To an emotional blackmailer, keeping your trust doesn’t count, respecting your feelings doesn’t count, being fair doesn’t count. The ground rules that allow for healthy give-and-take go out the window. In the midst of what we thought was a solid relationship it’s as though someone yelled “Everyone for himself!” and the other person lumped to take advantage of us while our guard was down. Why is winning so important to blackmailers, we ask ourselves. Why are they doing this to us? Why do they need to get their way so badly that they’ll punish us if they don’t?

Blackmail takes two: it is a transaction. Following clarity comes change. It’s easy to focus on other people’s behavior and to think that if they change things will be fine. The change has to begin with the blackmail target. Our compliance rewards the blackmailer, and every time we reward someone for a particular action, whether we realize it or not, we’re letting them know in the strongest possible terms that they can do it again. The price we pay when we repeatedly give in to emotional blackmail is enormous. It eats away at us and escalates until it puts our most important relationships and our whole sense of self-respect in jeopardy.

Part 1: Understanding the Blackmail Transaction What Emotional Blackmailers Do

page1image26736
  •   Threaten to make things difficult if you don’t do what they want.
  •   Constantly threaten to end the relationship if you don’t give in.
  •   Regularly ignore or discount your feelings and wants.
  •   Tell you or imply that they will neglect, hurt themselves, or become depressed if you don’t do what they want.
  •   Shower you with approval when you give into them and take it away when you don’t.
  •   Use money as a weapon to get their own way.Components of Emotional BlackmailThe issues may differ, but the tactics and actions will be the same, and clearly recognizable.
  1. Demand–someone wants something
  2. Resistance–the other does not feel comfortable with the demand
  3. Pressure –used to make the resistant one give in
  4. Threat –to turn up the pressure
  5. Compliance–on the part of the resistant one
  6. Repetition–this pattern reoccurs in at least other situations (just with a different name)

Examples of Emotional Blackmail

  •   “If I ever see another man look at you I will kill him.”
  •   “If you ever stop loving me I will kill myself.”
  •   “I’ve already discussed this with our pastor/therapist/friends/family and they agree that you are being unreasonable.”
  •   “I’m taking this vacation – with or without you.”
  •   “Your family hates me. How can you say you love me and still be friends with them?”
  •   “You’ve ruined my life and now you are trying to stop me from spending money to take care of myself.”
  •   “I took the money because you always put yourself first and don’t seem to care about my needs.”

The Four Types of Blackmailers
1. Punishers (“If you go back to work, I will leave you”) let us know exactly what they want, and the consequences we’ll face if we don’t give it to them, are the most glaring. They may express themselves aggressively or they may smolder in silence, but either way, the anger is always aimed directly at us. The closer the relationship, the higher the stakes and the more vulnerable we are to punishers. When blackmail escalates, the threatened consequences of not acceding to a punisher can be alarming: abandonment, emotional cutoff, withdrawal of money or other resources. Explosive anger directed at us. And, at the most terrifying extreme, threats of physical harm.

  1. Self-punishers (“Don’t argue with me or I will get sick or depressed”) turn the threats inward threatening what they will do to themselves if they don’t get their way. High drama, hysteria and an air of crisis (precipitated by you, of course) surround self-punishers, who are often excessively needy and dependent. They often enmesh themselves with those around them and struggle with taking responsibility with their own lives. The ultimate threat self-punishers can make is frightening in the extreme: It’s a suggestion that they will kill themselves.
  2. Sufferers are talented blamers and guilt-peddlers who make us figure out what they want, and always conclude that it is up to us to ensure they get it. Sufferers take the position that if they feel miserable, sick, unhappy, or are just plain unlucky, there’s only one solution: our giving them what they want ‘ even if they haven’t told us what it is. They let us know, in no uncertain terms, that if you don’t do what they want, they will suffer and it will be your fault. Sufferers are pre-occupied with how awful they feel, and often they interpret your inability to read their mind as proof that you don’t care enough about them.
  3. Tantalizers put us through a series of test and hold out a promise of something wonderful if we’ll just give them their way. They are the subtlest blackmailers. They encourage us and promise love or money or career advancement, and then make it clear that unless we behave, as they want us to, we don’t get the prize. Every seductively wrapped package has a web of strings attached. Many tantalizers traffic in emotional payoffs, castles in the air full of love, acceptance, family closeness and healed wounds. Admission to this rich, unblemished fantasy requires only one thing: giving in to what the tantalizer wants.

Each type of blackmailer operates with a different vocabulary, and each gives a different spin to the demands, pressure, threats and negative judgments that go into blackmail. There are no firm boundaries between the styles of blackmail, as they can be combined.

Emotions Felt by Victims of Emotional Blackmail

 They feel insecure, unimportant, unworthy and generally bad about themselves.

 They doubt their ideas and needs.

 They feel isolated.
 They may have consistent physical ailments as a result of the stress.

Characteristics of the Victim and Emotional Blackmailer

Victim:

• Constantly seeks approval
• Does their best to avoid anger and keep peace
• Takes the blame for anything that happens to others • Has compassion and empathy
• Tends to feel pity or obligation

• Believes they need to give in because it is the “right thing to do”

• Has self-doubt with no sense of their worth, intelligence or abilities

Emotional Blackmailer:

  • Has great fear of abandonment and deprivation or of being hurt.
  • Feels desperate.
  • Needs to be in control of things.
  • Experiences frequent frustration.
  • Has thought distortions regarding the reasonableness of their demands.

• Has had someone emotionally blackmail them and sees that it works to get them what they want.

A Blinding FOG

Blackmailers create a thick ‘FOG ‘ that obscures their actions. FOG is a shorthand way of referring to Fear, Obligation and Guilt. Blackmailers pump up an engulfing FOG into their relationships, ensuring that we feel afraid to cross them, obligated to give them their way and terribly guilty if we don’t.

Fear, the Real F-Word

Blackmailers build their conscious and unconscious strategies on the information we give them about what we fear. The blackmailers fear of not getting what they want becomes so intense that they become tightly focused, able to see the outcome they want in exquisite detail but unable to take their eyes off the goal long enough to see how their actions are affecting us. At that point, the information they’ve gathered about us in the course of the relationship becomes ammunition for driving home a deal that’s fed on both sides by fear. One of the most painful parts of emotional blackmail is that it violates the trust that has allowed us to reveal ourselves.

Obligation

Often our ideas about duty and obligation are reasonable, and they form an ethical and moral foundation for our lives. Sometimes these are out of balance. Blackmailers never hesitate to put our sense of obligation to the test. Reluctance to break up a family keeps many people in relationships that have gone sour. Most of us have a terrible time defining our boundaries when our sense of obligation is stronger than our sense of self-respect and self-caring; blackmailers quickly learn to take advantage.

Guilt

Guilt is an essential part of being a feeling, responsible person. It’s a tool of conscience, in its distorted form, registers discomfort and self-reproach if we’ve done something to violate our personal or social code of ethics. One of the fastest ways for blackmailers to create undeserved guilt is to use blame, actively attributing whatever upset or problems they’re having to their targets. Once blackmailers see that their target’s guilt can serve them, time becomes irrelevant. There is no statute of limitations. Guilt is the blackmailer’s neutron bomb. It can leave relationships standing, but it wears away the trust and intimacy that makes us want to be with them.

Tools the Emotional Blackmailer Uses to Create FOG

  • Making demands seem reasonable.
  • Making the victim feel selfish.
  • Labeling with negative qualities and connotations.
  • Pathologizing or crazy making.
  • Making a demand that needs an immediate response.
  • Allying themselves with someone of authority or influence i.e. parents, children, mental health professionals, religious leaders etc.
  • Comparing the victim to a person that the victim does not like or is in competition with. Learning the victim’s “triggers”.
  • Assess how much pressure to apply before the victim will give in. Tools of the TradeThe tools are a constant that runs through the endlessly varied scenarios of emotional blackmail, and all blackmailers, no matter what their style, use one or more of them:The SpinBlackmailers see our conflicts with them as reflections of how misguided and off base we are, while they describe themselves as wise and well intentioned. They let us know that they ought to win because the outcome they want is more loving, more open, more mature. Any resistance on our parts is transformed from an indication of our needs to evidence of our flaws. In addition to discrediting the perceptions of their targets, many blackmailers turn up the pressure by challenging or character, motives, and worth. We may be labeled heartless, worthless or selfish in any relationship with a blackmailer, but those labels are especially difficult to withstand when they’re coming from a parent who can wipe out our confidence faster than anyone else.

    Pathologizing

    Some blackmailers tell us that we’re resisting them only because we’re ill or crazy. This is called pathologizing. The experience of being pathologized can be a devastating blow to our confidence and sense of self and is therefore an especially toxic and effective tool.

    Pathologizing often arises in love relationships when there’s an imbalance of desires more love, more time, more attention, more commitment when it’s not forthcoming, he/she questions our ability to love. Like the spin, pathologizing makes us unsure about our memories, our judgments, our intelligence, and our character. With pathologizing the stakes are higher, and can make us doubt our sanity.

Enlisting Allies

When single-handed attempts at blackmail are ineffective, black-mailers call in reinforcements (parents, children, mental health professionals, religious leaders etc.), to make their case for them and to prove that they are right. They may turn to a higher authority such as the bible.

Negative comparisons

Blackmailers often hold up another person as a model, a flawless ideal against which we fall short. Negative comparisons make us feel suddenly deficient. We react competitively.

The Inner World of the Blackmailer

Emotional blackmailers hate to lose. Blackmailers can’t tolerate frustration. To the blackmailer, frustration is connected to deep, resonant fears of loss and deprivation, and they experience it as a warning that unless they take immediate action they’ll face intolerable consequences. These convictions may be rooted in a lengthy history of feeling anxious and insecure. Complementing and reinforcing possible genetic factors are powerful messages from our caretakers and society about whom we are and how we are supposed to behave. Blackmailers believe that they can compensate for some of the frustrations of the past by changing the current reality.

The potential for blackmail rises dramatically during such crises as a separation or divorce, loss of a job, illness and retirement, which undermine blackmailers’ sense of themselves as valuable people. Often people who have had everything and have been overprotected and indulged have had little opportunity to develop confidence in their ability to handle any kind of loss. At the first hint that they might be deprived, they panic, and shore themselves up with blackmail.

Usually blackmailers focus totally on their needs, their desires; they don’t seem to be the least bit interested in our needs or how their pressure is affecting us. They often behave as though each disagreement is the make-or-break factor in the relationship.

Blackmailers frequently win with tactics that create an insurmountable rift in the relationship. Yet the short-term victory often appears to be enough of a triumph ‘ as if there were no future to consider. Most blackmailers operate from an I-want-what-I want-when-I-want it mind-set. Any logic or ability to see the consequences of their actions is obscured by the urgency blackmailers feel to hold on to what they have.

The most important thing to take away from the tour of a blackmailer’s psyche is that emotional blackmailer sounds like it’s all about you and feels like it’s all about you, but for the most part it’s not about you at all. Instead it flows from and tries to stabilize some fairly insecure places inside the blackmailer. Many times it has more to do with the past than the present, and it’s more concerned with filling the blackmailer’s needs than with anything the blackmailer says we did or didn’t do.

It Takes Two

Blackmail cannot work without the target’s active participation. The target gives it permission to occur. You may be aware of the blackmail but feel as though you can’t resist it, because the blackmailer’s pressure sets off almost programmed responses in you, and you’re reacting automatically or impulsively.

Blackmailers may be aware of your hot buttons. Faced with resistance, blackmailers’ fear of deprivation kicks in and they use every bit of information to ensure that they prevail. The protective qualities that we have that open us up to emotional blackmail are:

  • An excessive need for approval.
  • An intense fear of anger.
  • A need for peace at any price.
  • A tendency to take too much responsibility for other people’s lives.
  • A high level of self-doubtWhen kept in balance and alternated with other behavior, none of these styles dooms you to the status of ‘preferred target’ of an emotional blackmailer. Emotional blackmailing takes training and practice. Emotional blackmailers take their cues from our responses to their testing, and they learn from both what we do and what we don’t do.The Impact of BlackmailEmotional blackmail may not be life threatening but it robs us of our integrity. Integrity is that place inside where our values and our moral compass reside, clarifying what right and wrong for us.
  • We let ourselves down.
  • A vicious cycle ensues.
  • Rationalizing and justifying.
  • We may betray others to placate the blackmailer.
  • It sucks the safety out of the relationship.
  • We may shut down and constrict emotional generosity.The impact on our well-being:
  • Mental health
  • Physical pain as a warningPart 2: Turning Understanding into ActionTo change, we need to know what we have to do and then we have to act. If you’re willing to take action now and let your feelings of confidence and competence catch up with you, you can end emotional blackmail.What is Necessary to Stop Emotional Blackmail

    • The victim must begin to look at the situation in a new way.

    • They must detach from their emotions.

    • They must realize that they are being blackmailed and that it is not appropriate for the blackmailer to be treating them in that manner.

page7image20136

page7image20296

  • They must make a commitment to themselves that they will take care of themselves and no longer allow this abusive treatment.
  • They need to see that a demand is being made on them and that it makes them uncomfortable.
  • They must determine why the demand feels uncomfortable.
  • They must not give into the pressure for an immediate decision.
  • They must set boundaries to be able to take time to consider the situation and to look at all of the alternatives to make the decision.
  • Finally, they must consider their own needs first for a change, in this process. How to Respond to Emotional BlackmailersBelow are some specific ways to answer the most common types of responses. It can’t be emphasized too strongly how important it is to practice saying these statements until they feel natural to you; how to respond to the other person’s catastrophic predictions and threats. Punishers and self-punishers may try pressuring you to change your decision by bombarding you with visions of the extreme negative consequences of doing what you’ve decided to do. It’s never easy to resist the fear that their bleak vision will come to pass, especially when the theme they’re pounding home is “Bad things will happen – and it’ll be your fault.” But hold your ground.
page8image14648

page8image15344

When they say:

page8image17496 page8image17920

page8image18952 page8image19880

page8image20752 page8image21848

Then you say:

page8image22912

page8image23880 page8image24640

page8image26336

  •   If you don’t take care of me, I’ll wind up in the hospital/on the street/unable to work.
  •   You’ll never see your kids again.
  •   You’ll destroy this family.
  •   You’re not my child anymore.
  •   I’m cutting you out of my will.
  •   I’ll get sick.
  •   I can’t make it without you.
  •   I’ll make you suffer.
  •   You’ll be sorry.

page8image31672 page8image33272

page8image34808

page8image35384

  •   That’s your choice.
  •   I hope you won’t do that, but I’ve made mydecision.
  •   I know you’re very angry right now. When you’ve had a chance to think about this, maybe you’ll change your mind.
  •   Why don’t we talk about this again when you’re less upset? Threats/suffering/tears aren’t going to work anymore.
  •   I’m sorry you’re upset.

page8image40536

page8image42408

page8image43152 page8image44248

When they say:

page8image47744 page8image48168 page8image49264 page8image50024

page8image50896

page8image52264

Then you say:

page8image53328

page8image54024

page9image680 page9image1776

  •   I can’t believe you’re being so selfish. This isn’t like you. You’re only thinking of yourself. You never think about my feelings.
  •   I really thought you were different from the other women/men I’ve been with. I guess I was wrong.
  •   That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.
  •   Everyone knows that children are supposedto respect their parents.
  •   How can you be so disloyal?
  •   You’re just being an idiot.

page9image8736 page9image10336

page9image12864

  •   You’re entitled to your opinion.
  •   I’m sure that’s how it looks to you.
  •   That could be.
  •   You may be right.
  •   I need to think about this more.
  •   We’ll never get anywhere if you keep insulting me.
  •   I’m sorry you’re upset.

page9image18304

page9image21040 page9image22136

When they say:

page9image24288 page9image25048

page9image25968 page9image26728 page9image27824

page9image28792

Then you say:

page9image30128 page9image30552

page9image31248 page9image32176 page9image32600

  •   How could you do this to me (after all I’ve done for you)?
  •   Why are you ruining my life?
  •   Why are you being sostubborn/obstinate/selfish?
  •   What’s come over you?
  •   Why are you acting like this?
  •   Why do you want to hurt me?
  •   Why are you making such a big deal out of this?

page9image39248

page9image41120

page9image41992 page9image42416

  •   I knew you wouldn’t be happy about this, but that’s the way it has to be.
  •   There are no villains here. We just want different things.
  •   I’m not willing to take more than 50 percent of the responsibility.
  •   I know how upset/angry/disappointed you are, but it’s not negotiable.
  •   We see things differently.
  •   I’m sure you see it that way.
  •   I’m sorry you’re upset.

page9image48144 page9image49408

page9image51280

Handling Silence

But what about the person who blackmails through anger that is expressed covertly through sulks and suffering? When they say nothing, what can you say or do? For many targets, this silent anger is far more maddening and crazy than an overt attack. Sometimes it seems as if nothing works with this kind of blackmailer, and sometimes nothing does. But you’ll have the most success if you stick to the principles of non-defensive communication and stay conscious of the following do’s and don’ts.

page10image744

page10image4736

In dealing with silent blackmailers, DON’T:

page10image6192

page10image7224

page10image9160

page10image10800

DO use the following techniques:

page10image12488

page10image14840

  •   Expect them to make the first step toward resolving the conflict.
  •   Plead with them to tell you what’s wrong.
  •   Keep after them for a response (which willonly make them withdraw more).
  •   Criticize, analyze or interpret their motives, character or inability to be direct.
  •   Willingly accept blame for whatever they’re upset about to get them into a better mood.
  •   Allow them to change the Subject.
  •   Get intimidated by the tension and angerin the air.
  •   Let your frustration cause you to make threats you really don’t mean (e.g., “If you don’t tell me what’s wrong, I’ll never speak to you again”).
  •   Assume that if they ultimately apologize, it will be followed by any significant change in their behavior.
  •   Expect major personality changes, even if they recognize what they’re doing and are willing to work on it. Remember: Behavior can change. Personality styles usually don’t.

page10image27472

page10image28840 page10image29600

page10image30200

  •   Remember that you are dealing with people who feel inadequate and powerless and who are afraid of your ability to hurt or abandon them.
  •   Confront them when they’re more able to hear what you have to say. Consider writing a letter. It may feel less threatening to them.
  •   Reassure them that they can tell you what they’re angry about and you will hear them out without retaliating.
  •   Use tact and diplomacy. This will reassure them that you won’t exploit their vulnerabilities and bludgeon them with recriminations.
  •   Say reassuring things like “I know you’re angry right now, and I’ll be willing to discuss this with you as soon as you’re ready to talk about it,” Then leave them alone. You’ll only make them withdraw more if you don’t.
  •   Don’t be afraid to tell them that their behavior is upsetting to you, but begin by expressing appreciation. For example: “Dad, I really care about you, and I think you’re one of the smartest people I know, but it really bothers me when you clam up every time we disagree about something and just walk away is hurting our relationship, and I wonder if you would talk to me about that.”
  •   Stay focused on the issue you’re upset about.
  •   Expect to be attacked when you express a grievance, because they experience your assertion as an attack on them as an attack on them.
  •   Let them know that you know they’re angry

 

page11image728 page11image2096 page11image4720 page11image5416 page11image6784 page11image8552

and what you’re willing to do about it. For example: “I’m sorry you ‘re upset because I don’t want your folks to stay with us when they’re in town, but I’m certainly willing to take the time to find a nice hotel for them and maybe pay for part of their vacation.”

  •   Accept the fact that you will have to make the first move most, if not all, of the time.
  •   Let some things slide

page11image14848 page11image15816These techniques are the only ones that have a chance to interrupt the pattern that’s so typical of a silent, angry blackmailer, the cycle that goes “Look how upset I am, and it’s all your fault. Now figure out what you did wrong and how you’re going to make it up to me.” I know how infuriating it is to have to be the rational one when you feel like strangling the other person, but it’s the only way I know to create an atmosphere that will allow change to take place. Your hardest job will be to stay non defensive and to convince the quietly angry person that it’s OK for them to be angry when they’ve spent a lifetime believing just the opposite.

(This review is based on the book: “Emotional Blackmail” by Susan Forward, Ph.D. The author is an internationally acclaimed therapist, lecturer, and author.)

goyourownway.org Emotional Blackmail

TPV liquidation: Sean the “businessman” (UPDATE)

Posted in Media by earthlinggb on January 9, 2014

I really am not one to say “I told you so” but……

TPV insolvency

 

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2167468

 

I told you so!

 

The following is a blog I wrote 9th January 2014. Over the course of writing these blogs re TPV, Icke and Tabatabai, I’ve received a lot of shit from TPV lovers. People who just didn’t want to know. People who “believed”. And they will STILL exist! Even if a certain person from TPV ended up shagging their 5 year old daughter, they’ll STILL “believe”. There’s nothing you can do about people like this (except feel sorry for them). The Kent Freedom Movement (hahaha) despised what I wrote about TPV and Icke (it’s a personal thing! They’d despise anything I wrote because they didn’t get a free lunch. Bed and board yes plus a taxi service but oops! Forgot to feed them too! Thank god for a £20 win on the geegee’s eh? Otherwise they’d never have eaten at all! ;-)) because they “believed” (or perhaps wanted the KFM to bask in the glory of TPV and get their mugs on telly?) but just wouldn’t listen because of a grudge. Let’s hope it wasn’t a Scots/English thing! Love and light and no borders and we’re all one consciousness and all that you know?

Anyhow, the “twoof movement” now firmly left behind (thank fcuk!) and I’ll leave it all to the amateurs – of which there are a few – because trying to bring to the attention of those who believe in reptilians and nibiru etc at 40 and 50 year old, some of the REAL issues and their real solutions is like pulling teeth. Believing in fairy tales at that age. Must be a midlife crisis! Stupid bastards!

As for Sonia Poultry: Well darlin’ you didn’t like it when you were still part of it but you got there in the end huh?

You see, when people are so desperate to believe a lie because they desperately want to believe someone’s doing the right thing and they wish to be part of it, someone like me pointing at the Emperor with no clothes gets ridiculed, slated, despised etc. But then isn’t that one of Icke’s lines? “At first they laugh at you….” etc. Well Dave sometimes it ends up that they laugh at you too!

Lucky thing I have broad shoulders eh? It comes from not giving a toss about the views of incompetents. Sorry if that sounds arrogant but I suppose it is. Too bad! You’d rather be told shit from people who smile at you than be given the bold, bare faced truth. Just shows that mentality doesn’t just affect the “sheep” but the so called “awakened”. You just think you’re “awake” but you’re really sleepwalking. I used to care. I tried to shout “stop swallowing shit” but did you listen? Well some of you did for sure but many more – nah. You still like your “heroes” in the media. The “big” personalities. You’re just as prone to that shit as anyone else and, as long as you are, there’ll be wolves out there who will carry on fleecing you.

So, liquidation for TPV (I’m sure there’ll be a story for it) and their creditors will perhaps get some of their money back. The strange thing is, YOU were meant to have been the ONLY “creditors” BUT it was all freely given donations wasn’t it? Another thing I shouted at you was this: DO NOT DONATE BUT DEMAND THAT YOU GET A SHARE IN A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY! But you never listened there either did you?

So where’s the money gone? Hahaha. How many companies has Sean dissolved now? 😉

Take care y’all and one last thing…. GET SMART! Is that asking for too much?

Enlightened? My ass!

THIS IS THE ENLIGHTENED ONE YOU ARE SENDING YOUR MONEY TO. BY ALL MEANS CONTINUE TO DO SO IF THIS IS WHAT YOU ASSUME TO BE ENLIGHTENMENT AND LOVE AND INFINITE CONSCIOUSNESS SPEAKING.

Sean's quotes

Yet, you wonder why I have the “audacity” to call you stupid if you do?

Ask yourself: Would you buy Double glazing or a second hand car from a company about to go bust?

Ask yourself: If, on one hand, the company was about to be dissolved due to negligence regarding filing their annual return or, on the other hand, the sole shareholder himself was dissolving the company so he did not have to pay his creditors and then could walk away with over £80K in the bank account and the company was about to be struck off the Company Register, would you do business with them? Would you donate any money to another business they had just started and were sole director of?

If you answered “Yes” to either one of these questions then, be my guest and adopt the “in the corner with the ‘D’ cap on your skull!”

It’s entirely up to you. Again, I’m just giving you information.

Sean ADL Tabatabai: Sole Director of TPV Limited, “Guardian of the ethos” and “exceptionally gifted businessman” and David Icke’s right hand man.

MAGUS MEDIA

Sean Magus

The above simply illustrates that £1 of share capital in a company does not mean the equity figure is £1 and that is all the company shareholding is worth. As a company grows, that shareholding can become ENORMOUS! That is what Icke and Tabatabai are looking for out of TPV using YOUR money to achieve it! THAT is why they are getting hot under the collar when you’re not donating!

Next: Look at this –

Magus figures

NO tangible or intangible assets of any kind in this business.

CASH at bank is £81,192

Debtors (People who own Magus money): £15,317

Add cash and debtors and you get Total current assets of ££96,509

However, Sean has creditors of £90,540. NOT A GOOD POSITION TO BE IN. WHO the creditors may be is another story. A Bank? An individual? Another “Corporate person”? Who knows? But who cares?

IF it is not a bank however and it is trade creditors of one form or another, then what can Sean do? Here is what he can do (and, certainly on paper, it would appear IS doing):

Magus strike off

He last submitted his annual return for Magus Media in August 2012. He has lapsed in 2013. So now he has a “First notification of strike off….”

If a company persistently fails to submit its statutory returns (the Annual Return or the Annual Accounts), Companies House MAY decide that the company is dead and will start the process of having the company struck off the Company Register.

A company has to have been quite negligent to have allowed the situation to have got to that position.
The decision to have the company struck off is always published in the London Gazette and an outside interested party – such as a creditor – can apply to have the striking off procedure suspended. However, you have a time window of six months within which to file your objection to the striking off.

In many cases, striking off is initiated by the directors of a company when they have decided that they no longer want the company.

Had he submitted a return in 2013, it would have been plausible to consider that something had gone wrong in the business and at least he was attempting to fix it. But that is not what is happening here. What has happened is that he has not made a return at all for 2013. It is then, without much doubt, his intention to dissolve the company. If he achieves that without paying back his creditors (again we do not know anything about who these creditors may be) then he walks away with £81,000 in cash.

Now FINAL thing is this: David Icke and Sean ADL Tabatabai have pleaded with you for donations of £300K to set up their venture when, between them with their own companies, they have cash at the bank of approx £268,000. They had it then and they have it now and yet, now, they are asking you for an additional £400,000.

I’m sorry folks but what I am telling you are just facts. Pure unadulterated facts. Do and think as you wish.

You know what though? Call me crazy but I just have a sneaking suspicion that Icke, Sean and Sonia might all just kiss and make up. Then who do you think they would ALL turn on? It’s just a plausible hunch of course! 😉 Just not outwith the bounds of possibility that is all. Imagine the avalanche of support TPV would get if they pulled that off though eh? Think about it.

ADDENDUM:

DEAR GOD! It just occurred to me what COULD very plausibly be happening here. I AM NOT SAYING IT IS BUT IT COULD BE, TOTALLY PLAUSIBLE AND NOTHING STOPPING IT.

The CREDITOR of MAGUS MEDIA ‘could” easily be TPV Limited or it could be “David Icke Books Ltd” or “Lion’s Epoch Ltd”. Sean then folds THIS particular company and walks away with the £80K cash and TPV are not going to say a word (or Icke) because that COULD exactly be what Icke wants and/or Tabatabai has simply transferred funds as a loan to Magus media from TPV. I am NOT saying that has happened but I AM saying it could so very simply be done. Why is it he did not submit an annual report this very year? Why is he now closing it down? All after the donation drive. 

Studio equipment was first £20K now it’s £142K??? There is NO clarity in this table whatsoever (and there was never meant to be). Office rent for 7 months (or even 4 months) £1200? More like £1200 PER month but I was told while I was AT TPV it was £1000 per month! £75K for direct wages when everyone you ever hear of says they don’t get paid. Except Richie recently but, trust me, that is a whole other story I can assure you. While I am positive I read somewhere that Sonia Poulton said she was getting £300 a month. I’m positive I saw that somewhere but perhaps I am wrong. If it were so though, how come Sonia £300 and Richie at least £1200 (at least).

Anyhow back to this bullshit in this table. The one thing that stands out like a giant sore thumb for now is the cost of studio equipment. I stated in a blog before TPV admitted it that they got the WHOLE LOT for £20K. They then admitted that. So where the HELL has another £120K gone? Let me now ask you this: Does £81,192 fit into £120K? Yes I do believe it does. Would the costs of a very expensive trip for a couple or handful of TPV people to California cost as much as £40K? Probably not (but you NEVER know) but even if not, the rest could be made up by “sundry items” of spend.

This STINKS! The stench is overwhelming now.

TPV financials

 

CORRECTION: The £81K cash in the bank for Magus was in there at end of August 2012. So the last comments above re transferring that figure do not apply. What STILL potentially applies however is that TPV Limited could act as a creditor to Magus. We will never know because he is closing shop. There COULD have been all sorts of transfers between Aug 2012 and now but there are NO ANNUAL RETURNS for 2013 to give us a view of that. Isn’t it good timing?