This website belongs to BIG Agent #2211694 (Build Freedom). Click here to download BIOS and join BIG.
Please ensure that "2211694" is specified as your Agent.
When you complete the BIOS New Player Application form, please check the top item to
ensure that "Introducing Agents Player Number" is entered as
"2211694." If it is all zeros (or anything else), please change it to
"2211694." Thank you.
Statement 2 From BIG International
Throughout the legal developments taken against 12 British Citizens, 6 of whom are
known and named to be defendants, we make the following statement:
All defendants named have never been directly associated within the structure of BIG
International or the security section of Courtney Agencies, and are unable to answer
questions related to either organisation.
They are like all Player agents who are given the opportunity to provide services to
Courtney, (Equal Opportunity Laws) which would assist their finances to develop their own
organisations which can be within any areas of development they wished to follow. For
example they may have wished to develop structures within the electronics industry,
entertainment industry, retailing or just used the finance from the service payments to
develop themselves from debt.
Whatever their reasons, they had to serve Courtney under strictly controlled guidelines
that would not break the internal development and progress of BIG International. By
structuring BIG International in this fashion we have been able to provide damage
limitation to our organisation and Players, by isolating the free lottery number range of
15000000 upwards, thereby continuing our services to all other number range Players.
When Player agents are in a position to reach a given level of service income from
Courtney, they are requested to open a Sole Traders Account, mandated by a British Bank in
the direction they wish for their future development. The reason for this is to show a
clear path of personal Player agents financial development provided by Courtney, which
taxation authorities can recognise within each Nation's taxation structures. Player agents
are never encouraged to hide their earnings, because this can destroy the moral aspect of
the Nation within which they live.
This method also provides international accounting structures to the organisation, and
enables Courtney to internationally and accurately audit in relation to weekly
expenditures, especially important when developing equally within all nations on Earth.
Their is NO legal aspect, even in British Law, related to the actions taken against BIG
International or Courtney within the United Kingdom. The British Government has not served
any orders upon either organisation, nor have they interviewed any director or manager of
either organisation. In fact, they haven't taken the correct course in Law against either
The action taken against the six Defendants within the United Kingdom is also illegal
and based upon the assumptions, lies, misrepresentation's and innuendoes of one man, PETER
GEOFFREY BOTT, of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). A man who hasn't even had
the honesty or common decency to correctly present evidence, taken from BIG International
publications supplied to him or the trouble to read the international information provided
by BIG International to him.
We can only state how disillusioned we feel when British Government Servant's take it
upon themselves to corrupt the very basis of British and Moral law and do so supported by
MARGARET BECKETT, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and The Treasury Solicitor
represented by CATHY KENNEDY, STEPHEN PARKINSON- Head of Company Chancery Group and ANDREW
LEITHCARD - Team Leader.
To compound this disgrace the following and well known Establishment controlled Crown
Court Judges, Mr Justice Neuberger and Mr Justice Rimer, assisted the above in that they
permitted a Winding-Up-Order and the provisional appointment of The Insolvency Service
(which is an Executive Agency within the Department of Trade and Industry), with
absolutely NO permitted defence at the hearing of the said order by the six defendants.
The Insolvency Service is represented by Mr C Flexman, Mr G C Campbell and David Peet.
It was suggested to us that we simply apply to the Crown Court for the receiver to be
removed, but removed from what? There is no case for BIG International or Courtney to
answer within the United Kingdom because there is no service of hearing or order against
We decided to research the cases of 49 other organisations closed down by the DTI since
1986. In all cases the same structures were used. The same media (Mail on Sunday) was
used, and all had one common feature; the cases were developed to stop the actions of
individuals fighting for United Kingdom Citizens established rights.
In our case it is the first defendant who has been researching the British Government
and its servants since 1964. He hit an extremely raw nerve of the British Establishment
when he developed the Defence Centre of Inner Sanctum and then had the audacity to assist
in the preparation of a European Case against the British Government, partly based on a
statement made by Mr Justice Blackburn.
The first defendant explained to us what would happen if his name was associated with
BIG International. What he stated we found extremely hard to believe, because British
Justice has built a worldwide reputation based upon honesty and direction of law. But now
even we believe that THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION and given establishment
Judges are sweeping the reputation of honesty and direction of law under the carpet. They
are doing this to maintain the hidden corruption of given British Governments since the
last World War against British Citizens when dealing with their Rights to Freedom. In
other words, we have now experienced what others have experienced first hand. Currently we
are totally astonished.
Therefore we have attempted to research why? We have found within the evidence that in
basis the British Government's action against BIG International is an attempt by the
British Government to have the First Defendant committed to Prison. They are attempting to
do this under a closed structure, without any Jury and using appointed Establishment
Judge's Mr Justice Neuberger and Mr Justice Rimer to ensure that this actually happens.
Both Judges are closely associated with a group established in 1954. Other members
associated with this group currently are Henry Kissinger, billionaire chairman of the
Chase Manhattan Bank David Rockefeller, president of the World Bank James Wolfensohn, head
of the Fiat empire Giovanni Agnelli, secretary general of Nato Javier Solana, chairman of
Daimler Benz Jurgen Schrempp. Plus the chairmen or chief executives of the Xerox
Corporation, BP, Reuters and many big league banks and law firms. Also former head of the
CIA John Deutch, Tory leader William Hague, Kenneth Clarke, Leon Brittan; Defence
Secretary George Robertson, John Bruton of Fine Gael, Telegraph boss Conrad Black and even
the Chairman of the Board of the Hellenic Bottling Company. This years chairman is Lord
The first defendant handed to us his total database and research papers in relation to
this group, (which openly established itself in 1954) FOR CONTINUED SAFE KEEPING.
Documents, recording's, films and the database are currently being researched for accurate
release to the British Public. Documentation supplied from all around the world, back to
1932, in relation to this groups activities and desires to control your money and many
other aspects of your life are totally astonishing. We can certainly now understand the
current collapse of finance in the Far East which is directly related to this groups
global government structures of control.
When you read some of the documents, listen to some of the recordings taken at their
meetings and watch the films now structured into video form, you start to realise how
naive and trusting the worlds general public really is. All the names above are just a few
of who actually attended this groups last meeting, paid for with tax payers money. The
central family names of this group will be released and these names will help you
understand the action taken against the first defendant, or you can just ask Mr Justice
The first defendant has entrusted a life's work to our organisation. We certainly
understand why the British Government want him committed to prison or silenced. The
chances he has personally taken to protect the abuse of this information for so long, and
having placed his life and family's lives at risk, has made it hard for us to comprehend
such dedication to the service of humanity. The First Defendant Raymond Patrick Grant has
been sitting on a time bomb, in the naive hope that this group may be sincere within their
actions, but now we all know, they are not.
Within the paperwork are lists of names of individuals who have made statements against
the first defendant, along with statements made by the same which show British Government
intimidation of the first defendant. Some of these individuals attempted to infiltrate the
location of the information now in our care. We can now understand why it was so difficult
to gain the trust of the first defendant. However, this trust was finally given when he
was told not to expect to leave prison other than in a box, by a British investigation
official. (To be named in future statements of BIG International).
To end this first section of our statement we pay tribute to the nephew of the
Rothchilds family, who was being groomed to take over the family empire. He provided vital
documentation upon the aspirations of his own families actions within this group. Sadly it
was reported that he took his own life, when his actions were discovered. We hope his
service to humanity will be recognised by our Creator in his final Judgement.
We pay tribute to Mr Grant who's guiding hand over such information has provided
structures of community defence against those who wish to control our finances and the
future freedom of all generations. We pray that he will continue his fight and that now he
can take the rest, that his doctors have been advising since 1989.
We now come to another serious matter relating to the life of Financial Mail On Sunday
investigative reporter Mr Tony Hetherington, from information gained from the agents forum
for the 15000000 number range. It must be realised the amount of good work that Mr
Hetherington has done by notifying the British Public of the establishment's desire to
crush any humanitarian organisation which threatens their aims. Because we know he is an
establishment writer, it allows us to know when our organisation is coming under attack
from British Government Departments.
But with BIG he actually provided us with our defence. He warned the British Public not
to join BIG and remove all their loans to BIG. This means that within national circulation
there was a Public Warning about BIG, which in turn means that each Player showed their
own personal preference, when joining BIG via Courtney directly in line with Mr Justice
Blackburn's statement. Therefore, all defendants served the personal preference of all
Players, who then decided to take advantage of the BIG INTERNATIONAL FREE LOTTERY. What
happened after, when a Player by personal preference decided to take advantage of other
services provided by BIG, is private between BIG and each individual. That is known as
Mr Hetherington is in fact the best tool in understanding what the establishment is
going to try next, because he reports as instructed. Don't throw this strange advantage
away. He has actually helped all of you within the United Kingdom to defend the six
defendants. But do take a moment to look at the actual owners of the paper that Mr
Hetherington writes for, then things will become clearer.
We take this opportunity to answer Mr Hetherington's article in the Financial Mail on
Sunday dated 21st June 1998.
THE ARTICLE: Questions Of Cash By Tony Hetherington Financial Mail On Sunday, June 21,
A Big leap in the dark is risky with no safety net
BIG International, the unauthorised lottery and investment company, has launched
attacks on the Department of Trade and Industry over moves to close it, and on Financial
Mail for having blown the whistle on it activities. Though the High Court has appointed
the Official Receiver to safeguard assets for the investors and creditors, the company has
announced that it has 'removed all equipment assets which have been paid for by Big
International to a safe location outside the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom.' Almost
unbelievably, the company added: 'We have sold or exchanged all UK currency held (2
billion). We have removed over 7 billion from shares of companies incorporated
within the UK.' Big says it plans to bring private prosecutions against Board of Trade
President Margaret Beckett and DTI officials for allegedly lying to the High Court. It
also claims its lawyers have 'prepared documents' to freeze The Mail on Sunday's assets
until this newspaper compensates it for alleged inaccuracies. Last Wednesday, a Mail on
Sunday photographer went to Romford, Essex, to take a picture of a house said in court
documents to be a base for Big. He said 'The house is one of 10 in a cul-de-sac. As I was
preparing to leave, a red BMW pulled across the road, blocking my exit.' Two men then
forced him to hand over his film, though new pictures were taken later without difficulty.
And Tony Hetherington was told by people linked to the company: 'If you're smart, you'll
back off Big,' and: 'I think your article against Big was one of your last.' Not quite . .
A.M. writes: You and consumer affairs minister Nigel Griffiths are in a minority of two
in believing Big International to be a scam (Financial Mail report, May 31). Until the
Department of Trade and Industry was aked by Financial Mail to close Big's agent, Courtney
Agencies, the system worked and no money had been lost. Now money has been lost to the DTI
YOURS is one of the more reasonable letters I have received from people who clearly
want to believe that everything in the Big International lottery and investment charade is
hunky-dory. But all I can say to the idea that the DTI wants the High Court to close Big
and its Courtney Agencies associate because I requested this, is that I wish it were true.
Big International, which the DTI's court documents say is run by pyramid scam veterans
Raymond Grant, from Romford Essex, and Paul Hesling from Kingston upon Thames, Surrey, has
been operating a lottery and soliciting investments. It is not authorised to do this, its
lottery is unsupervised, and its investors are not protected by any City watchdog body or
compensation scheme. Nevertheless, I understand your anger. As you see it, you were
receiving the 300% return Big promised on every 60 you invested, or the 4.25%
monthly interest from its banking scheme, so why the fuss? Well, this is like leaping off
a skyscraper and saying 'so far, so good' until the moment you hit the pavement. Big may
well have financed your returns by dipping into cash from new recruits. It may well be
unable to repay your capital. We should know more on July 8, when the DTI application to
wind up Big is heard in the High Court. However, Big's finances and its claims to have
liquidated billions of pounds of investments in retaliation for the DTI's action have the
hallmarks of a Big fantasy.
Bizarre It is worth knowing that five years ago Raymond Grant sent a fax to the
international mining company RTZ, launching a 7 billion takeover bid and claiming to
have shares worth 280 million under his belt already. RTZ rightly decided that the
whole episode was bizarre. One final explanation. Perceptive supporters of Big have asked
me how it can possibly be a scam when they paid to join by credit card. Surely the card
companies vetted Big? The answer is that at least some, if not all, credit card payments
were laundered through a Sheffield firm called Global Innovations. Card companies believed
Global was selling computer equipment, not fronting for Big. So again, Big's investors
have been left unprotected.
When you read this article you are made aware of the fact that Mr Hetherington has
received a copy of Mr Bott's statement against the six Defendants. We ask Mr Hetherington
who provided him with this document? Did Mr Hetherington research Mr Bott's statement for
accuracy? Did Mr Hetherington request information from the Defendants to assist with the
accuracy of his investigative article? How many names does Mr Hetherington use in his
quest to become seen as a serious investigative writer? These are just some of the
questions we would wish to ask Mr Hetherington.
Now lets turn to the accuracy of his investigative article. Firstly we have noticed and
reported as accurate some of the lies and deceptions in Mr Bott's statement (who is
supposed to be an investigative Civil Servant protecting Public Interest).
1) BIG International isn't an unauthorised Lottery and investment company within the
United Kingdom and never has been.
2) BIG International have never launched an attack on any British Government or media
structure, we have simply replied to attacks made by both upon BIG International, by
providing our answers to their attacks upon the Player's organisation.
3) BIG International has never taken investments from the Public. We manage a free
lottery system only, which has never failed to provide what our information package
4) BIG International certainly did remove all assets belonging to the Players
organisation from the grips of the Official Receiver. We hold a legal obligation to our
Players to protect the assets of our organisation. But more important is the fact that no
legal action has been taken against BIG International or Courtney within the United
Kingdom because neither organisation is structured within the United Kingdom and never has
What BIG International certainly provides, is open access to all within the United
Kingdom to the Free Lottery system and nothing else.
5) The following words used by Mr Hetherington in paragraph two of his opening comments
are 'Almost unbelievably'. For the first time we have Mr Hetherington showing doubt. He
normally rams his own beliefs into the minds of his readers. Maybe some legal mind is now
directing Mr Hetherington's hand more closely. We wonder who?
6) We stated that we intend an attempt to freeze the personal assets of the owners of
the Mail on Sunday, for deliberately using a public media organisation to deliberately
distort the reputation of their competitors. This is a totally new aspect of law in some
respects, especially when the named owners of a public media machine use that media
machine to distort or damage the reputation of a humanitarian organisation.
7) Last Wednesday, a Mail on Sunday photographer went to the area of the elderly
mother's home of one of the defendants, under the pretence that the address was within
Court Documents. The document in question is Mr Bott's statement (of the DTI), and the use
of this address within Mr Botts statement clearly indicates the lies/deceptions made by Mr
Bott within his statement to the High Court. This house is the private dwelling of Mr
Grant's mother and has never been used as any form of Headquarters for BIG International.
Mr Grant holds two reasons for being in residence at that address, which are as
follows: It is his duty to care for his Mother in ill health and old age in accordance to
his beliefs. Secondly, a Court ruling forces him to be resident there, because Mr Grant
took a vow of poverty in 1986 in support of his beliefs. He therefore relinquished
ownership of everything and has never owned his mother's house.
This was known to Mr Bott and all British investigative agencies.
Naturally, in an area with so many small children and elderly people, individuals care
for each other when suspicious people enter their area taking photographs. The
photographer was asked for his film and paid ten pounds for the cost of that film. He
wasn't forced to hand over the film. It was made perfectly clear to the photographer
should the film contain no pornography or infringe the privacy of elderly people within
the area that he could claim his film back, but it did and now the film which was
developed is with our own legal team to be used in future evidence against the owners of
the Mail on Sunday. What is the purpose of Neighbourhood Watch otherwise? Is it just
considered a tool for neighbours to spy on each other for Government control purposes? Did
the reporter notify the local police of his intended actions? Could the police respond
quick enough to intercept the photographer and his film? Did the photographer call the
police? Mr Hetherington confirms the evidence within his article against the owners of the
Mail on Sunday. Therefore this article will be used in our evidence against the owners of
the Mail on Sunday. Remember, the photographer received payment for his film from
concerned citizens working within the remits of Neighbourhood Watch. And also remember
that this address is an actual 'LIE' in Mr Bott's statement.
Mr Hetherington is then quick to report so called threats against him, but fails to
report that such claimed threats against Mr Hetherington have been made by individuals
unknown to the organisation, and are certainly not linked to the organisation of BIG
International. BIG International would take their own legal action against any person
pretending to represent the actions of BIG International. Mr Hetherington, provides no
proof of such threats and should he take notes from the 15000000 number range agents
forum, then he would see that even Courtney Agents have clearly dealt with this matter.
Apparently, these so called threats against Mr Hetherington stem from a phone call that Mr
Hetherington claims he had.
We would hate the thought of this being Mr Hetherington's last story, because Mr
Hetherington is providing the very evidence we need of collusion between the owners of the
Mail on Sunday, and the DTI.
Mr Hetherington, now publishes a letter from A.M. Who is A.M? BIG International have
never accused Mr Hetherington of directing or making a complaint about our organisation to
the DTI. What we have openly accused Mr Hetherington of is deliberately reporting his
beliefs as actual facts when related to BIG International. The other area where we have
openly accused Mr Hetherington, is related to his deliberate collusion with the owners of
the Mail on Sunday to damage the financial standing of BIG International. Fortunately, the
Free Lottery is Free, and doesn't depend upon any public financing, investment or public
In paragraph eight of Mr Hetherington's article he finally confirms that he holds
copies of Mr Bott's statement, which he refers to as court documents. These documents are
the DTI's statement to court, totally different to actual court documents. Mr Hetherington
then goes on to state that "Big International, which the DTI's court documents say is
run by pyramid scam veterans Raymond Grant, from Romford, Essex, and Paul Hesling, from
Kingston upon Thames, Surrey, has been operating a lottery and soliciting
investments." Neither of the two defendants have ever been involved within any
pyramid scam. Neither of the two defendants have ever been arrested in relation to any
pyramid scam. Neither of the two defendants have been in any court in relation to a
pyramid scam and finally, the DTI's statement doesn't make this statement within their
We would recommend that the British Public obtain the names of the individuals making
the rules which the CITY Watchdog work by. We challenge all to find one name who isn't
protecting and/or representing self-interest or the interest of financial institutions
and, in our belief, are certainly working by rules which are detrimental to Public
Mr Hetherington certainly attempts to play down the returns which BIG makes to Players
who financially assist the development of BIG's Humanitarian structure. We would recommend
to Mr Hetherington that he checks the actual percentage of interest payments made to
Mortgage Companies from individuals purchasing their homes. He will find that most pay far
more than 300% over the period of their Mortgage Loan. The only difference between BIG and
such organisations is that we don't take, we give.
If you wish to use Mr Hetherington's skyscraper example and apply it to national
pensions paid for in the United Kingdom by United Kingdom Citizens, then you can certainly
use the skyscraper example. Because if the British Government had found themselves in the
same position as the Maxwell Brothers on the end of the SFO's hit list, the British
Government would have certainly been found guilty for using funds for other purposes.
Hence the reason why the British Government is trying to off-load the pension structure to
BIG International doesn't make you wait for your retirement so you can then find out
that your Players account loans have been misused. BIG doesn't stop you withdrawing your
loan at any time from the Humanitarian Development structure. Compare this to what the
British Government and financial institutions do to United Kingdom Citizens, then tell us
where we have failed.
BIG International isn't an organisation of retaliation against the DTI's actions as
reported by Mr Hetherington. We moved to protect our organisation's assets from the
corruptive and deceptive actions made by the DTI, who based their action on untruthful
statements made by one of their inspectors/investigators.
Mr Hetherington, then goes on to a totally unrelated subject relating to Mr Grant and
RTZ. But if Mr Hetherington really wishes to relate Mr Grant's actions regarding RTZ, then
we hold all the papers relating to this take over of RTZ. We can confirm that we have
constantly developed the original idea, which was to turn the vote into a value, which
certainly works during the development of bids to take over an organisation for all to
But should you look at what actually happened, you will find that the Board of RTZ
failed to notify their share holders of the BID. The Board of RTZ transferred assets to a
Canadian operation. The Board of RTZ arranged for Mr Grant's home to be raided with
warrants to remove all paperwork including personal paperwork. The paperwork removed has
never been returned. Fortunately, we were able to obtain copies of all paperwork
confirming the holdings of Mr Grant and shares available to Mr Grant.
Therefore, if Mr Grant's thinking was bizarre then (in other words workable, but not to
the advantage of the financial institutions), we can confirm that it certainly works
Turning to the two photographs of private dwellings and Global Innovations we first
confirm that we have had absolutely no dealings with either dwelling and are totally
bemused at the idea that either building is the headquarters of BIG International.
Secondly, Global Innovations were provided with the opportunity of handling requested
orders via Courtney. This would enable Global Innovations additional finance to develop
its business, which eventually would serve all Players.
If you look into Mr Hetherington's article you will see it is not an attack on BIG
International. This article is designed to discredit Mr Grant's efforts in the eyes of the
British Public, by isolating Mr Grant from his supporters. This would enable British
Government Departments to silence his future efforts against them, within the European
Court case currently being developed against many prominent figures within financial
circles and British Government Departments.
We have received thousands of letters from the United Kingdom and other parts of the
world from players and individuals asking if they can do anything to assist.
There are a number of ways Players can assist, many of which have been placed upon the
Agents Forum and via email. But first you must ask yourself "Should I assist?"
There is a unique situation within the United Kingdom, because the UK doesn't really have
a Citizens Bill of Rights, related to the area's within which you are truly free to act.
The base of Citizens Rights within the United Kingdom seem to leave all the doors open
to be closed by British Government Departments, when a Citizen's line of action is not in
accordance to the way the financial institutions wish things to go.
The whole area of individual's rights appear to be totally controlled by financial
institutions. These institutions can breach client confidentiality on a whim. They have
their own investigative agencies who check and report on their clients to British
Government Departments. They check, via computer, on all purchases entering any household
and report back to British Government Departments. They use exactly the same methods of
reporting when dealing with credit card orders. Yet most of the finances gathered in by
these institutions are never invested within the development of the United Kingdom.
The financial gains made by these financial institutions from British Citizens savings
over and above the miserable interest they pay to their clients are rarely seen back in
the United Kingdom. When these gains do return to the United Kingdom they return as loans
to British Citizens and companies, who are then forced to pay high interest upon loans
which really should have been their money in the first place. Now lets ask the question
again, "Can I do anything to assist?"
You could write to your MP, but what good would that really do? The Party your MP
belongs to is more than likely in debt to the financial institutions. The MP could also be
in debt to the financial institutions. Who can tell, with all of you writing to your MP's
we may just find one who will see your point.
Let's say we do find one MP. Then that MP is up against one of the most powerful
lobbies in the House of Commons, the one that represents the financial institutions. So is
this really a good use of energy?
Some have suggested using the Media. Well, who do you think owns the majority of the
media within the United Kingdom? - the same owners who are behind some of the financial
institutions. Media companies that are not owned by such individuals are certainly in debt
to the financial institutions. So is it really worth their while to rock the comfort zone
they enjoy with the financial institutions? The independent media companies normal
attitude is "There'll be a story just as good tomorrow, and I will still be around to
print it. If I tell the truth now of what's happening within the financial institutions,
then maybe I won't."
Well surely Britain has Government Departments or Law Courts? There must be something
or someone that the British Citizen can turn to? Yes, well, umm.
The financial institutions make the rules behind closed doors (basically to protect
their markets) which government then ratifies; after all they are the experts. And how
often do British Citizens really check to see if their rights have been taken away, or
their privacy infringed? - only when they want to use them.
So what you're saying is we need a Bill of Rights? Yes, well, umm.
Who will write them? Who will vote for them? We already know that British Governments
only hold referendums when it's on a subject that may affect the popularity of any
particular party in any particular region of the United Kingdom. Or the British Government
will appoint a committee to investigate that normally takes up to five years and costs a
few million. By that time most of the original support has drifted away and the government
is off the hook, especially when you consider that the face of each government changes
every five years.
Law must be the answer? Yes, well, umm, you would think so.
We have already seen law in action. We have seen evidence suppressed. We have seen
government representatives lie on sworn statements. We have seen government
representatives threaten and intimidate. We have seen a judge permit a winding up order
without any opportunity of defence; except to be told that we can come back on the 8th
July 1998 to defend our organisation that a British Government has discredited. Oh and by
the way, it will take British Government departments a considerable amount of time to pass
back documents, moneys etc., because another government department will certainly wish to
"So what you are saying is what I have been thinking all along?"
"That they will close the opportunity of BIG International regardless of my
individual rights, and I will lose all."
Well that is exactly what has happened in the past and the only ones who profit are the
solicitors and receivers, leaving the financial institutions in control, and in control of
your rights to Freedom. But don't feel too bad. The British Government Departments will
present someone for you to hate and place into prison. That should make you feel better
and I'm sure British Government Departments will say that they have acted in your interest
and take the credit.
You see the answer is really in your hands. Only you can close down your section of BIG
International in the United Kingdom by not supporting BIG with continued development. BIG
is not within the United Kingdom, and now you may understand why.
BIG's assets are controlled by many organisations owned by Players, which enables us to
move them when the assets become the target of attack. For example, the recent illegal
attacks upon individuals wishing to provide services to United Kingdom Citizens.
"But surely if BIG International understood all this why haven't you protected us
Well we have.
One of the problems was that the winding up order ensures that all of your assets go to
the receiver, which means any payment to you made by BIG International must go to the
"Yes! Yes! I understand all this but surely BIG International can do
We have and it was called BIG International 97.
In August of 1997 we officially opened BIG International 97. It wasn't a very noisy
affair, quite reserved in fact. Each time a Player obtained a free ticket or purchased a
PR, BIG International sold the asset of the Player to BIG International 97, who legally
meet the payments to the Player. BIG International 97 hasn't been placed into an illegal
winding up order, therefore money, cheques, letters, which the British Government
Departments have illegally taken, are in fact the property of those individuals until they
are delivered and have never been receipted via free lottery number allocation by BIG
BIG International 97 isn't running a free lottery. BIG International 97 isn't running
any form of investment. (Neither, was BIG International but in British law, if the
financial institutions say that it is a financial investment, the law agrees). BIG
International 97 is a publishing house that was used to publish information for BIG
International and many other organisations worldwide. Because BIG International 97 wants
all Players of the 15000000 number range to continue reading their publications, they will
continue to meet your commitments and maintain your asset base for continued growth. This
directly in line with Mr Justice Blackburn's statement that all British Citizens hold the
right to subscribe to any international publication.
Your new subscription packs will be sent to you and gains from the organisation will
continually be shared equally by all and in line with MORAL LAW.
The question we ask is, "How can the defendants obtain a lawful trial when the
total base of the Plaintiffs case is based upon lie's, deception and collusion between
British Government Departments?"
If British Citizens are truly concerned about the erosion of their human rights when
related to their personal freedom, they could attend the court on the 8th July 1998 in
support of the six defendants, but this attendance must be shown with peace of action. For
example, hold a religious document from your faith, which will show the unification of all
faiths, when law doesn't or isn't respectful of Moral Law.
Within British History we have seen that change was only brought about via violence
which was basically due to the intolerance of the British Government to allow the
development of its own Citizens. Some examples were votes for woman, education for all,
health care for all, equal opportunity for all, relationships of equal development between
the regions of the United Kingdom. Even the Mother of all Parliaments was developed from
British Citizens have been very loyal to their Parliament, which has made them one of
the most highly taxed nations in the world. But their own Parliamentary system has sold
them out to the financial institutions. This is the fact of today's fight, which is
currently being lost by the hour. We are told that many World Citizens will be travelling
to the United Kingdom to see British Justice first hand and that certain international
journalists also intend to attend.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT OUR BILL OF RIGHTS, WITHIN ALL FAITHS, HAS BEEN HANDED
DOWN BY OUR CREATOR. ONE EXAMPLE OF THIS IS THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. WITH THE CORRECT USE OF
THESE COMMANDMENTS NO HUMAN COULD BE ACCUSED OF WRITING A DOCUMENT RELATING TO A BILL OF
RIGHTS FOR SELF INTEREST.
BIG International's Humanitarian Development Centre