Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > General Chat

Thread Tools
Old 13-05-2011, 08:50 PM   #1
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 8 (4 Posts)
Default Hollie Grieg; Who is Susanne Nundy?

I havent been keeping up with the developments with the Hollie Grieg case but can someone elaborate on the case of Susanne Nundy who uses the pen name Anna Racoon? Supposedly she had access to legal documentation that she used to right lies about Robert Green and the Griegs. This would only be possible with the help of MI5.

Heres the link;


Susanne Nundy is just as baffling a proposition. For those unfamiliar with the story, Susanne Nundy is the name used by British Libertarian blogger, Anna Raccoon, more popularly known for her posts about the Madeleine McCann and Hollie Greig stories and a favourite of the Nbrado-run, Chaos Raptors website (who seem to have blocked my IP this week, from what I can gather).

Nundy and Greg Watkins are alleged to have co-managed a disinformation campaign around the Hollie Greig case by an equally dubious set of Greig supporters (the kind that give Andrew Marr all the amunition he needs to make sweeping generalisations)

Why did ‘Susanne Nundy’ or whoever she is – use the email address courtofprotection.co.uk?

The Court of Protection as it exists now, was set up by Jack Straw and New Labour in 2005 (created under the Mental Capacity Act 2005). In the Inexorable choices‘ post Nundy says she was in office in 2003 (just as Blair ditched the office of Lord Chancellor) and yet in an email she sent me yesterday, Raccoon insists she had resigned the office in 2000 (which I’m happy to forward to anyone who requests it). But even Chris Carter, her replacement in 2004, insists she was working at this time.

Interestingly the email address alleged to have ‘outed’ Anna Raccoon (and I use the term cautiously) was left on a website for Old Scholars at St Christopher’s School in Letchworth, Hertfordshire – an old and respected boarding school set up by Beatrice Ensor – a close friend of Fabian Socialist and Freemason, Annie Besant and sponsored by Helena Blavtasky’s Theosophical Society – a weird and slightly extreme religious group influenced by new age and Aryan mysticism (imagine David Icke with some serious political backers and a decent night’s sleep).

But all this sounds a bit too good to be true in my opinion: leaving a breadcrumb trail to some weird theosophical preparatory school with links to Freemasons and Fabian Socialism? Throw in a few references to the Lord Chancellor and working for the Court of Protection? No, something just doesn’t sit right with me. It’s all too neat. Like my Christmasses have all come early. Things like this don’t just fall into your lap so easily, do they?

On the otherhand, its seems unlikely that the email address was left deliberately (as breadcrumbs) as it appears as far back in the wayback records as January 2004 so she must have been using it around the time.

Why Nundy was using an email address that alluded to a governmental role but which clearly hadn’t been registered through any formal government department remains unclear (the domain name doesn’t have the expected TLD .gov.uk - like that of the Supreme Court, for instance).

A parking page for the courtofprotection.co.uk website from March 2003 suggests the original courtofprotection.co.uk site was set up and maintained in France.

The domain makes one appearance in 2003 and then disappears – so make what you will of the credibility of the site ro her claims.

I’m also finding it difficult to reconcile Susanne Nundy’s celebrated ‘Libertarian’ ideals with the idea of her working with such a crudely draconian, insidious and cheerfully Orwellian institution as the Court of Protection. I’ve seen her attempts to address this fairly awkward little paradox in her blog. She says it wasn’t an invention of ‘Nu Labour’ and Jack Straw – but that’s just being pedantic.

It had existed in one form or another for years, but New Labour extended its powers and its reach exponentially in 2005 (whilst simultaneously incapacitating the power of carers and relatives). It was rebranded, relaunched. According to a Daily Telegraph report, the Court of Protection’s expansion had been controversial’ not only for its extensive powers but also for the fact that almost all of its hearings take place in private‘.

My guess, is that like Shrimpton and Bennett the character going by the name of Nundy doesn’t know whether she’s extremely right or extremely left. However, I suppose the distribution of any ideal can be skewed and uneven on occasion. Just look at the blogs she claims to read – they don’t get more skewed than that. If I was being pedantic (now heaven forbid) I’d say the miscellaneous nature of it made it look more like a webring or a linkfarm of sorts.

But what better way to manage opinion than by managing both sides?
yamayama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2011, 11:51 PM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: It's a dodie
Posts: 2,434
Likes: 16 (11 Posts)

I'm pretty unsure about all of this, if you question anything to do with the hollie case you seem to get a torrent of abuse, I know it's an emotive subject, but I have my doubts about things.

I want to believe it, and see it brought to court as it would be better for everyone else, but there are some things that don't add up.

I would hate to think we are being deceived when so many other potential cases hang on this one!
A truth that's told with bad intent
Beats all the lies you can invent
babybumasylum is offline   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:33 AM.

Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.