THE STAGGERING PARALLELS AND SIMILARITIES !

BETWEEN

TWO BOOKS

" TRAVELS WITH LI PO "

Formerly called "SAM MULDOON and The Philosopher's Stone"

and

'HARRY POTTER and The Philosopher's Stone'

"The law of defamation is supposed to protect people's reputations from unfair attack. In practice, its main effect is to hinder free speech and protect powerful people from scrutiny."

(Prof. Brian Martin - Associate Professor in the School of Social Sciences, Media and Communication, University of Wollongong Australia.)

First of all there is nothing flash about this little site nor was it ever intended. No bells or whistles, no special effects or videos, nothing but the truth. William Kelly who is also one of us -The Bogside Artists -insisted on it; "I want the website to be discovered just as I wanted my book "Sam Muldoon and the Philosopher's Stone" to be discovered all those years ago. That's what I told Rowling and why they set about, after they stole my work, to have their Harry Potter 'discovered' and why they wove a theme of 'discovery' into the Rowling myth. I knew what I had. All that rubbish they put out about not knowing the power of the story and how doubtful they were about its ultimate success was got up purely to hoodwink the public. In terms of propaganda and mind manipulation the 'marketing' of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich by Joseph Goebbels takes a distant back seat to the marketing of Rowling and Potter."

Now that you have read this far, please take a moment to read why this website exists at all; especially if you are a Harry Potterite or a devotee of J.K. Rowling. The site itself and its contents had to be moved from another host that was hacked into. Given what is stated here you have to ask yourself only one question.

Why haven't we, The Bogside Artists, who published William's book now called "Travels with Li Po", been dragged into court for what we are declaring? You might try asking Rowling's lawyers Schillings. And if you do you might also ask them why they will not allow you to publish what they tell you. You might then even consider the possibility that whatever they tell you is lies. And before you do all that, you might want to read THIS just so that you know we are not making anything up about Schillings or anybody else here.

Who are they? Well, here is one of them. He is called the "silencer", a man for reasons best know to psychiatrists who takes upon himself a divine right to lord it over the democratic rights of others for money. Unless we have evidence to the contrary, if we may temporarily stoop to his own level of gamemanship, we will consider him a misanthrope. Or, what they call a "narcissist".

TO THE LEFT YOU WILL FIND THE DAMNING EVIDENCE AGAINST ROWLING, LITTLE, CUNNINGHAM AND WHOEVER ELSE IS BEHIND POTTER. AND IF YOU REALLY WANT IT BROKEN DOWN FOR YOU CHECK OUT OUR BLOG. (link above).

These pages concern the similiarities in essence and style between Harry Potter and the series built around him and another little book written for children that precedes it and which is the original source of the character and the series. "Similarity" scarcely does the case justice. Try "identical" or "indistinguishable from" if you want to get accurate. If you know nothing of Anglo-Irish relations yo will fail to understand why this story has not received the coverage it deserves. A story has 'merit' when it is cited a lot in the press. The more it is cited the more 'merit' it has. "Merit" becomes confused thus with truthful significance. Merit has nothing in fact to do with truth. And why should you be mystified by the lack of exposure this story has in the British press when the British Press are united against it to a man? And those that may be tempted to take it seriously are power-gripped into silence by Schillings? People figure...'well, if all this were really true Mr. Kelly would take Rowling and her accomplices to court'.

'Rationality' operating on misinformation is the enemy of truth. And a great deal of what swims around in the heads of Potterites is simply lies. The people who put those lies there are evil, for want of a better word. What Potter is about is MONEY and POWER. Until you grasp that simple fact you understand nothing. And the people behind it, like Schillings,Little, Neil Blair and Bloomsbury, are to democracy what Rowling is to the 'unconditional love' she exploits in her alleged 'work'.

How much of the stuff is actually hers is what this website is about. Very little is the answer. How many people are actually employed in the writing, and by writing we mean the structuring and plotting of the books? Do you think her editor Barry Cunningham who boasts to have been a friend of Roald Dahl had much to do with it? They won't be telling you because, in England as elsewhere, there are none so loyal as those whose loyalty has been bought. The top notches at Bloomsbury and three quarters of Bloomsbury's staff became rich thanks to Potter. All, except Barry Cunningham, Rowling's editor and Bloomsbury's commissioner of children's fiction. You believe that? That's what the British Press want you to believe. Why? Poor Barry. Poor Barry actually received an original jewel-encrusted edition of "The Tales of Beedle the Bard" worth two million quid. But that doesn't count. What else he may have got you are not to know. William recalls a letter he received from Cunningham about his book. "'Children really love fantasy and there doesn't seem to be enough of it in your work,'" said he, or words to that effect. This I understand now was nothing more than a self-serving diatribe; and in actual fact was an insultingly lying statement about my story. It was their way of justifying to themselves the premeditated riflement of my work." Now, at least, you know something of the secrecy around Potter; and the need for it. And why Rowling has not made any legal moves against us. Nor can she. Many have been hauled before the magistrates by Schillings for the tiniest fraction of what is candidly stated here and which, if maliciously false, would be considered as defamation. Any of you who know anything about Schillings who boast of acting solely on their client's wishes must be scratching their heads in wonderment. They needn't. The reason for not taking us to court should be blatantly obvious to you.

What is attributable to Rowling is well within the reach of any idle, fantasizing sixth former. One of the reasons indeed why it is so protected by them, nourishing as it does the sick delusion that all they need is a "great idea" and they are off and running. Does in matter a damn whether Snape is called "Snape" or Snoop, "Hagrid", Groucho or "Dumbledore", Bumbledore? Everything else was stolen and the crime has since been covered over and smothered by an argument of 'precedents'. Your car that was stolen is a Ford; and there are thousands of them. In other words, it should be perfectly clear to you that your car was never stolen in the first place. Even as an argument, leaving aside its brutal intent to cover up an obvious crime, it is, in this case, unacceptable and inapplicable. Were it either, it would have been argued out in the best place for it, London's High Court. But, it never got there. Because Rowling, whose three-headed protectors promoted the argument in the first place, would have been terrified of the prospect. Frankly, Rowling would rather have faced being burnt at the stake than stand in the dock before the REAL evidence that is weighted against her.

Thus, as the Adrian Jacobs case proves, pitted against Rowling's wealth and the cunning of her lawyers, justice is an impossibility, even if you could afford it. We know perfectly well the Adrian Jacobs people, who are suing Rowling for plagiarism, have more than enough evidence to prove their case hands down. We know because we have given them some of that evidence. But eight years on, and having spent millions pursuing their democratic right to a 'fair hearing' they have been met with the complete denigration and denial of that right that their forefathers like ours fought and died for. And that is simply because the judiciary in England and the officials who run it, with few exceptions, are corrupt all the way through. What possible hope would we, The Bogside Artists have... in an English court! Read our history if you want to know the chances of a political muralist from the Catholic nationalist area of Derry, Northern Ireland, might reasonably expect by way of justice in London's High Court against their literary icon. Especially when victory for us would mean utter, global humiliation for England and her monarchy! Universal condemnation indeed, and rightly so. If you think post-Reformation anti-Catholicism and anti-Irish racism have disappeared from England's green and pleasant land, you need to starting learning about the real world you live in.

What chance did the family of Adrian Jacobs' have? What they faced, without knowing it, were the might, power and belligerence of elites such as the Freemasons and their political associates in all sections of the British administration. Nothing about Harry Potter, we can assure you with absolute certainty, is what it seems. It is not a product of artistic vision but a product of theft and Machiavellian cunning. It is not an authentic book series for kids. Only the enlightened can enlighten. Enlightenment per se you can read about until you are blue in the face and write about it too, just as you can write about China without ever leaving your room; but it matters nothing. Potter is a highly lucrative enterprise and investment opportunity second to none for the many, powerful business shrewdies who have invested in it and the people churning it out who are about as 'enlightened' as Nelson's column. It is fake, a piece of glass masquerading as a diamond with just about enough sparkle to fool the gullible young. It is no more the product of an honest mind or conscientious artist than Wall Street is the temple of Christ. Rowling, like the book she pilfered, is passed off as the geunine article. Neither are authentic. Rowling, who never had a thing published before Potter, passes herself off as the visionary originator as her editor Cunningham used to pass himself off as a Puffin when he was flogging books to schoolkids around London for his paymaster Penguin. It is all there in our blog, if you dare to find out about it.

Potter makes money not only in England but in America and elsewhere. It, and its alleged 'author' are protected by the media, lawyers and judges; by Rowling's morally redundant PR teams and professional bloggers, by incumbents in a profiteering charity racket called Common Purpose ,(trustee of which is Richard Charkin of Bloomsbury!) and by high ranking politicians many of whom are Freemasons. Men like Gordon Brown, Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair. The people who buy the Potter books or go to the movies know nothing of this of course. And thanks to the clandestine manipulations and lies of Rowling's notorious law firm called Schillings, they never will.

The book is now called Travels with Li Po. When Rowling read it;

it was called simply..."Sam Muldoon and The Philosopher's Stone"

When the Derry News, a small local newspaper, ran an article on the similarities between the two, J.K Rowling's legal reps ("Schillings") sprang into action. They jumped all over the Derry News. Why would they bother? For a number of reasons. To set a precedent, to establish a deterrent against those contemplating taking a swipe at their lucrative client Rowling and to permanently damage the credibility of those responsible for the article. 'Common practice' let it be said. You can read all about this state sanctioned thuggery HERE. Ironic, don't you think, that lawyers are empowered to do onto others with impunity what you and I would get put in jail for... by the same lawyers?

Ironic too that Rowling's supporters rally to her choice of legal hounds on the basis that if they were in her shoes, and just about all of them imagine how wonderful that would be, then they would surely pay for the best lawyers around to protect their 'copyright'. Not quite, if you are an honest person who has rightful claim to your own work, you really do not need Schillings. What you need Schillings for is to protect your reputation from the people whose work you have stolen and for stopping them from making your crime public. Hence the manic determination to kill off the Willy the Wizard case. If Rowling was innocent of all wrong-doing do you think she would need to go to all that bother? The truth is, you need Schillings and their ilk to PROTECT YOU FROM SCRUTINY. That's the difference. And Schillings use and abuse with impunity the Defamation Act of 1996 and the Human Rights Act of 1998 to do just that. People on Schillings' books need secrecy, some of them desperately. But, as US president Woodrow Wilson once remarked... "where there is secrecy there is impropriety". In this case, "skullduggery".