Why we dot our 'I's and cross our 'T's ....

There are a lot of wild conspiracy stories floating around today, which leads some to brand anything that attempts to connect one person or event, to another person or event, as a conspiracy, and therefore the work of loony-tunes.

No, we don't agree with 'political correctness', only truth and accuracy in reporting!

The reason why we brand some as loony-tunes is because they try to link A to D or 1 to 5 while bypassing the missing letters or numbers. These are indeed the promoters of crazy conspiracy theories.

Yet the Government of the United States of America regularly prosecutes people for engaging in conspiratorial activities, and although the Government of the United Kingdom does the same thing, it buries use of that word under the heading of "Inchoate offences". See:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/inchoate-offences#:~:text=A%20conspiracy%20may%20involve%20the,the%20Criminal%20Law%20Act%201977

The UK definition of conspiracy (see citation above), is: ".... an agreement where two or more people agree to carry their criminal scheme into effect, the very agreement is the criminal act itself." 

It may come as a surprise to some who think that the word 'conspiracy' belongs to the world of 'extremist groups', and whatever that catch-all expression really means is unclear. But the British definition is not unclear at all. In fact, it may come as a shock to some when they learn that in the UK, its:

".... Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutes criminal cases that have been investigated by the police and other investigative organisations in England and Wales. The CPS is independent, and we make our decisions independently of the police and government."

The CPS 'boss' is that mysterious entity known as the British Crown - which by legal definition is the corporation sole that dominates all activities under its jurisdiction. Because there is no written constitution under the jurisdiction of the British Crown, it itself forms a part of that mysterious composition often referred to as a so-called "unwritten constitution". But it is not unwritten, because it is made-up of texts derived from its legislature, which as time progresses, is composed of more-and-more edicts - including those that appear on the site listed above:

"Nothing need be done in pursuit of the agreement."

"Repentance, lack of opportunity and failure are all immaterial."

"It is the course of conduct agreed upon which is critical; if that course involves some act by an innocent party, the fact that he does not perform it and thus prevents the commission of the substantive offence, does not absolve the parties to the agreement from liability."

"The agreement cannot be a mere mental operation; it must involve spoken or written words or other overt acts. If the defendant repents and withdraws immediately after the agreement has been concluded, they are still guilty of the offence. Withdrawal from it goes to mitigation only."

"There must be an agreement to commit the criminal offence, but the motives of the conspirators are irrelevant."

This is basically what we are using as our own definition of the word 'conspiracy', however, the fact that the British Crown has been, and still is guilty by its own definition of conspiracy to commit "crimes against humanity", gets shuffled under the carpets of Whitehall and other UK government offices. They believe in: "don't do as we do, do as we say!"

This becomes very confusing to the average person.

If the loony-tunes have their definitions of 'conspiracy', and they do, so do the people in power who are supposed to be representing 'The People' as individual human beings who have individually been born born the same way, and who will all die individually. Please see our definition at:
http://foundthreads.com/

Leaving aside the hypocrisy of governments which apply rules unfairly, we do not engage in the kind of storytelling that Paul Alexander Rusling has engaged in. He is engaging in a form of guilt by association - where the association does not exist to begin with, and therefore there is no guilt! Nothing could be clearer and more well-defined in the fraud perpetrated by Paul Alexander Rusling than his perpetuation of the myth concerning a 'Jimmy Ross' - who in reality - never existed!

But without the lie about 'Jimmy Ross', Paul Alexander Rusling is revealed as a bag of wind who is holding out his hands begging for money from gullible anoraks.

Paul Alexander Rusling has engaged in a conspiracy to defraud, because he has performed his act (according to his own published words), with the assistance and for the benefit of a licensed UK station that is calling itself 'Radio Caroline', and pretending to be a continuation of a station that first came on the air in March 1964.

That is why this investigation is different and why what you read here is the truth to the best of our knowledge. If we are proved to be in error we will immediately admit our error and make corrections where necessary.

We do not charge our readers for this service which we offer in the public interest.