The Spotlight on Quinn ~ The BBC goes to town

(Videos have since been rmeoved)

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/category/tony-quinn/

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/tony-quinn-educo-protest-pictures/

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/09/29/the-ine-agm-and-the-movement-towards-insanity-and-company-dissolution/

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/wrestling-for-control-of-ine-agm-part-2-the-minus-quinn-effect/

*· Brian Hollywood

Brian Hollywood began his BBC career with Spotlight in 2002. As part of the Current Affairs team, he helped to investigate international people-trafficking, environmental crime, abuse scandals and corruption.
His subsequent work as a reporter for BBC Northern Ireland’s factual department gained him a broadcast award from the Institute of Public Relations.

In recent years he has reported for Spotlight on a wide range of topics, such as poverty, discrimination, violent sectarianism, fraud and theft.

For several years, Brian was a producer of the ‘Breakfast with Frost’ programme, before moving onto output-editing the flagship political programme, ‘The Andrew Marr Show’. During that time, he produced interviews with three former US presidents and all recent UK Prime Ministers, as well as many other heads of state and cultural icons.

Brian returned to Spotlight as a current affairs reporter in 2012.

33 Responses

  1. DI; I think that the programme clearly communicated the direct influence of Quinn over Morrice, I agree that it could have gone much further to show how Quinn had influence over so many more.

    We agree on this, but having worked with the BBC and discussed this with them for a month before broadcast, I feel they framed it as a cat fight rather than a cult fight.

    The BBC had been subjected to considerable legal challenge in relation to what went out so I believe they were influenced by this, it should be no surprise to anyone considering how much the company has spent already bullying people through legal threats and actions along with the millions spent on surveillance and security.

    I understand that point but feel it has been exaggerated. No I just believe they decided to frame it the way they did and not as a cult story, because they thought that was the best way to do it. I note that Brian Holliday worked with Panorama when they did a programme on Scientology. John Sweeney lost his cool and lost it. If he had taken advice from Scientology experts he might not have lost it. https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/promos-for-the-upcoming-panorama/

    They are now saying that their lives were threatened! Is this why they went to the Garda station in Santry?

    This is an old trick. In fact I was in the lobby and someone asked me to call the Gardai because of the abuse of the shareholders by Morrice and et al.
    However, on reflection having called them from Ballymum I talked to the General Manager. He told them to not come as order had been restored. In other words the hotel were the one’s to talk to as it was a civil matter. The hotel told the Gardai not to come!! Scientologists make up stories of all kind and report them to the Store St Gardai. They are briefed by us and they soon see through this nonsense.

    The BBC did air comments from one of the shareholders saying that he believed Quinn was controlling Morrice and Paul Cullen also told how much he believed this to be the case but you only have to look at the clip from Susan’s website to see all the evidence you need. This was BBC’s way of saying it.

    This was interesting in that they talked to two cult experts and as I wrote earlier asked this specific question. It was irrelevant that they did not use me, but John Butler a foremost expert in the field had his comments diluted and all that was used was in reference to hypnotism. Interesting Paul Cullen has evolved his view since I first met him. He did not believe in the mind control idea, but a visit to the BVI has cured him. It was clear that the BBC dropped the cult view for the simple influence view. http://dialogueireland.org/dicontent/resources/video/boxingclever.html

    30 minutes was never going to tell the whole story but hopefully last week was just the first episode. Maybe this is what your focus should be in your communications with them.

    30 minutes was plenty of time to tell the cult story look at TV 3 ten years ago:
    http://dialogueireland.org/dicontent/resources/video/tv3tqpiece.html
    My focus is not on another programme, as it is highly unlikely but on discussing why they shifted away from the original idea of the cult story rooted in the oil conflict of the two women at the heart of the debate.
    We had worked with them at the Helix and I believe when they saw our successful but very limited capture of Quinn, they set their face to get him on camera. However, as I wrote earlier I do not believe it adds to our understanding but it was sexy. Also they did a good job in capturing Morrice. I truly feel sorry for her and to see her nearly in a position of psychic collapse is not edifying. My main focus at this stage is to be allowed to have this documentary kept up. We are in discussions with them about that.

    The fact of the matter is that almost all shareholders including myself, were not opposed to Quinn being brought in to help the company in 2007, there had been a bitch fight going on even before that. We did however not expect him to be given shares that diluted our share value, it had been agreed at our 2006 AGM that no further share dilution would occur . I personally believed that the existing A class shareholders were giving him some of their shares, that would have been their decision but I would certainly not have agreed to him getting anything that devalued my investment. He had already got a lot of money from me for his seminars.
    I believe that most people who had gone to his educo seminars had not been exposed to the real Tony Quinn until he started pushing the Educogym at meetings, it became embarrassing at the Sunday meetings and a lot of people started to see the greed for the first time and stopped going.
    Up until that point I could see nothing but good and I had been relieved of quite a bit of money at that stage, I am one of the lucky ones to have gotten out then, too many have been left behind.

    Some people think we are being critical of Sheila. I would see myself looking at her through the lens Justice Bannister has provided. How do you view her role now? Is she compromised by her failure to acknowledge her conditioning and her attempt to exit as a solo operative? Can she be trusted as the leader of the B Shareholders as some shareholders suggested in the programme? I have no interest in this personally, but do not wish to see further delay for the these folks.
    Also what kind of role do you see for Sheila in the judgement?

    Like

  2. DI; I think that the programme clearly communicated the direct influence of Quinn over Morrice, I agree that it could have gone much further to show how Quinn had influence over so many more.
    The BBC had been subjected to considerable legal challenge in relation to what went out so I believe they were influenced by this, it should be no surprise to anyone considering how much the company has spent already bullying people through legal threats and actions along with the millions spent on surveillance and security. They are now saying that their lives were threatened! Is this why they went to the Garda station in Santry?
    The BBC did air comments from one of the shareholders saying that he believed Quinn was controlling Morrice and Paul Cullen also told how much he believed this to be the case but you only have to look at the clip from Susan’s website to see all the evidence you need. This was BBC’s way of saying it.
    30 minutes was never going to tell the whole story but hopefully last week was just the first episode. Maybe this is what your focus should be in your communications with them.

    The fact of the matter is that almost all shareholders including myself, were not opposed to Quinn being brought in to help the company in 2007, there had been a bitch fight going on even before that. We did however not expect him to be given shares that diluted our share value, it had been agreed at our 2006 AGM that no further share dilution would occur . I personally believed that the existing A class shareholders were giving him some of their shares, that would have been their decision but I would certainly not have agreed to him getting anything that devalued my investment. He had already got a lot of money from me for his seminars.
    I believe that most people who had gone to his educo seminars had not been exposed to the real Tony Quinn until he started pushing the educogym at meetings, it became embarrissing at the Sunday meetings and a lot of people started to see the greed for the first time and stopped going.
    Up until that point I could see nothing but good and I had been relieved of quite a bit of money at that stage, I am one of the lucky ones to have gotten out then, too many have been left behind.

    Like

  3. Susan Morrice contests all of SMcC’s allegations and has stated that every aspect of the company’s operation is totally transparent.
    While the two women have thanked Tony Quinn for the success of their prospecting he also lies at the heart of their dark feud.”

    That is correct, now explain the significance of the picture of Sheila signing a document in the presence of Quinn.
    1. Is that the picture which Susan Morrice was trying to show at the AGM?
    2. Why did the BBC use it towards the end of their programme? What do you think they were trying to point out?
    Susan Morrice contests all of SMcC’s allegations and has stated that every aspect of the company’s operation is totally transparent.
    The BBC should have referenced Justice Bannister at this point. He reached the opposite conclusion.
    While the two women have thanked Tony Quinn for the success of their prospecting

    The BBC again got this wrong. Sheila used to thank Quinn but clearly does not do so any more. We have given her the opportunity to state that clearly. Because she has not it appears to the media and a judge that she still believes this. I am convinced she does not. The BBC like Bannister did not understand from Sheila that she was not still under Quinn’s influence. It is not that she has done anything wrong. If you are scammed it is not a reflection on you in any way at all. You are clearly under influence. *

    …(TQ) he also lies at the heart of their dark feud.”
    The heart of darkness is not a feud between two women again the BBC has got it wrong. The issue which we sought to advise the BBC on was cultism. The cultist manipulation of both women up till at least four years ago in the case of Sheila and the continued manipulation of a lovely woman Susan. The BBC scored with the celebrity hit on Quinn caught in the lights like a rabbit in Teneriffe. How does it add to our understanding of him being the cult leader and the victims being the women? Also why call him DR Quinn? We are left with the view that these two Northern cats were fighting over the cream. Quinn a little discommoded goes onto take in more cash from the seminar.
    John Butler and myself were asked direct questions by the BBC. Do you regard this as a cult and do you believe Susan Morrice is under the direct influence of Quinn? This was asked about four different times and in about five different ways. So what do you conclude? The BBC decided to cut that out and ended with a dark feud.
    We suggest it is about influence not a cat fight.
    * https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/psych-sleuth-margaret-singer-has-made-history-delving-into-the-psychology-of-brainwashing/
    https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/the-relevance-of-dr-margaret-bridget-thaler-singer-for-cultism-in/

    Like

  4. The picture of Tony Quinn and Sheila McCaffrey gave the impression that Sheila was signing a document agreeing to shares for Quinn and being happy about it but wasn’t that letter signed anyway before the trouble started, as in, rules being changed relating to shares and Quinn taking over what B shareholders should know about what was going on? They both look younger in the picture so it was taken a good number of years ago. It was probably given my Morrice or Quinn to Spotlight to prove Sheila was happy to sign, however, it would have best suited the programme closer to the beginning than the end as it was signed before Sheila disagreed about changes. It is so like Quinn to cover his bases.

    I don’t think anyone can be in any doubt about Quinn’s influence being detrimental to INE and I have no doubt about his role in getting rid of Sheila McCaffrey even if he does deny it. Susan Morrice’s reluctance to talk about and then denying spending B shareholders money does not look good for her as this is already public knowledge in the findings of Judge Bannister.

    I would have preferred more information on the cult issues and the effects in relation to what is going on in INE and his centres. These centres are were they recruit for Quinn’s seminars. There is a great need for a programme about Tony Quinn’s use of hypnosis and his total lack of moral and ethical standards. The government cannot get away with pretending they have not heard about this issue and we need to hear their explanation as to why they do nothing about it. They cannot argue religious freedom as a reason for not shutting Quinn’s centres down. In the latter years of educo there is no spiritual content only a focus on making money!

    Like

  5. At the end of the BBC program the reporter said:

    “Susan Morrice contests all of SMcC’s allegations and has stated that every aspect of the company’s operation is totally transparent.
    While the two women have thanked Tony Quinn for the success of their prospecting he also lies at the heart of their dark feud.”

    That was what the BBC said!

    Like

  6. We welcome the Judgement from the British Virgin Islands High Court which gives the judgements of Judge Edward Bannister on the mass of evidence presented to him.

    http://www.eccourts.org/judgments/decisions/2012/HC/stkitts/SMLifeVenturesvSusanMorriceetal.pdf

    While our concern is not with the commercial matters of the oil company, we are committed as we have been since our inception to assisting those affected by Tony Quinn and his Educo organisation. We consider the judgements which have been given on many points in the case will be helpful for those affected, giving an impartial and informed view from an experienced judge of the performance of Tony Quinn and some of his Educo colleagues in running an actual commercial enterprise in the real world.

    We believe that this judgement vindicates the position taken by Dialogue Ireland which argued that cultism is at the heart of this case. We believe that undue influence has been exercised over people which has led them to be influenced by Quinn.

    We have no interest in the competing claims of the directors of the oil company, but as our recent articles on Boylesports have shown there is a cultist thread which runs through this narrative.

    We have great empathy for Sheila McCaffrey, Susan Morrice and John Boyle who we regard as having been the victims of this influence.
    https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/court-judgement-vindicates-the-position-of-dialogue-ireland-on-cultism/
    We ask people who believe we have diverged from cultism as our mission to reread Justice Bannister and let us know if would suggest Sheila has a role in progresing the company. We have no interest in the oil but we note the great anger that this commenter exhibits. It is likely that they are still allied to this failed strategy and have not yet completely understood the control of the mind that leaves them not getting it. We welcome robust commentary as for the past three years the level of comment has been Tony iis a bollocks and he will soon be gone. We feel that a greater awareness and taking control of people’s lives is in train. I received a number of calls after the AGM which confirmed this. People can disagree with me but could you spell out what you think the BBC was saying at the end of the programme?

    Like

  7. We will not comment on the view that we are vilifying Sheila. We are happy to provoke debate and suggest
    you read Justice Bannister’s view and also look at the end of the BBC documentary again to see what they were proposing. We have no interest in hitting on the woman, we actually felt that the programme only touched at a surface level on the cult issue. Their two star witnesses, both proposed Sheila as giving the lead. It is entirely up to you folks which way to go we have no interest in oil. Having been involved in the making of the documentary we have a deep appreciation for the lack of focus on the cult issue. https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/07/30/judge-bannisters-judgement-read-it-for-yourself/ You tell me what he suggests concerning Sheila?
    Best Wishes

    Like

  8. Sheila McCaffrey is not on trial on this blog. That’s your take on it. It’s interesting you think that Sheila McCaffrey is not under the control of Quinn. I’m inclined to agree with you on the basis of what I saw on Spotlight. What I am saying is she WAS under the control of Quinn when she handed over shares and made him a director. Her actions, AT THAT TIME, showed her state of mind as she was NOT thinking about the B shareholders losses. If you had read my posts while the court case was being held it would be very clear that I was sympathetic towards Sheila as I could see, like many others, that leaving out Quinn’s control over her, AT THAT TIME, was not doing her any favours.

    Nobody is disputing what she is saying. I can see for myself that she is a sensitive caring person who has been through a terrible ordeal. Quinn set out to destroy her and the last thing I want to see is him getting away with it. I have not seen a post that is unsympathetic towards her.

    Why not channel your anger into actually doing something about it?

    Like

  9. The spotlight programme was actually very well made and Brian Hollywood did a reasonable job given the complexity of the issues they were dealing with. Regional BBC programmes concentrate their input in the region that it was why it is NI based.
    DI seems to be a little out of joint that it was recognised for the work that it has done. That is a BBC decision and should be taken up with them.
    What the programme highlighted was how the antics of Quinn and Morrice continue to destroy lives and try and blacken and tarnish people’s name the same pattern as has been used from the 1970’s to this day. The only difference is that now there are millions, hundred of millions of US dollars of Oil fund revenue being diverted off.
    So lets examine the role of Sheila McCaffrey, she recounted her questions in calm coherent manner, she is knowledgeable extremely articulate and knows her information and position exquisitely. There is absolute no question of Sheila been under the influence of Tony Quinn. She is her own woman and that was at the core of why he sought to “hang her out to dry” a phrase used in Tortola.
    People unwittingly are making comments on subjects, Company law, shareholder disputes and minority positions without the proper information and are reaching half baked theories. There are no theories here just a bunch of factual information that is crystal clear demonstrating the EVIL deeds of Tony Quinn and the people that he gets to do his nasty work. He is just a bully who gets others to do his work. He lacked any real credibility when he slunk behind Mary Power to get Hotel security in Tenerife to ‘get the media off me!!’ Not so bullish when it was put up to him. Likewise he lacked the backbone to answer Paul Cullen’s questions in Tortola.

    INE, Susan Morrice, Josh Stewart and Tony Quinn were given Multiple opportunities to give interviews for this programme – that is from a very reliable source. THEY CHOSE NOT to. They chose one again to use INE funds to put a range of bullying lawyers out there to shield Morrice, Quinn and Stewart and chose only to give written answers (not the questions asked I am also reliably informed.) The only things they produced are one undated photograph and a video. Items they have bandied around for months / years trying to link it to their conspiracy theories.

    These items were dealt with through the two week Tortola trial, they continue to not want to accept the Judgment and what it said. They would like to use every opportunity to mud sling and continue their own selective trial in their bullying way.

    On Sheila McCaffrey, she has always had the interests of the Company and the Shareholders are the core of her life. It has cost her dearly, it would have been easy for her to be sold out Like Cornec or slunk into a secret deal, but she did not, she exposed what needed to be exposed about how corrupt people – darken people’s lives, run a company that is clearly ‘out of control’ and sooner or later everything that Sheila McCaffrey has said will be seen for what it is. The TRUTH.

    In my experience Sheila McCaffrey calls a spade a spade, she is straight talking. If you have questions DI for her instead of you having a “trial over your word press / blog” ask Sheila McCaffrey.
    It is so easy for everyone on the side-lines to throw stones. Have any of you thought just for one second what this week has been like for her? This is added to the five years of ‘living hell’ that she spoke about when she was cross examined in Tortola.

    Like

  10. Anon; I apologise for that mistake. I meant Josh Steward. I got Hollywood’s first name wrong.
    You are clearly upset and angry about the whole issue as I am and also angry about what I feel about B shareholders reticence about doing something to rectify their position. They have known about how Quinn controlled INE since the court case and how it affected their lives. I understand how long it takes to get over Quinn’s influence but if such an offer was made by a Judge to sort things out and get justice for what I went through I would have taken him up on it.

    I don’t think I said anything about how Sheila McCaffrey felt when she gave shares to Tony Quinn and made him a director. What I did say is that she finds it difficult to admit that she was under his influence. She was badly advised because if she had made it part of her case it would have clarified to Judge Bannister what he was dealing with; Tony Quinn was controlling her decisions at that time. It’s possible that the issue of cult influence would have been gained prominence and it was a great disappointment when this was not part of and so not raised during the case. The outcome Sheila McCaffrey was looking for was INE buying back her shares or the closure of INE. She was in a difficult position because, on the face of it, it looked like she was in total agreement about Quinn’s shares etc., How could she argue her position when she did not admit his hypnotic control? She lost the case because of it.

    As far as I’m concerned the oil issue presented itself as the first real opportunity to disclose cult issues in EDUCO. I have already disclosed as much as I can on Dialogue about what happened to me and encouraged others to do the same. What is happening in INE gives an insight into how Quinn operates. No-one is being side-lined. As long as it has something to do with Quinn they will find plenty to relate to. There are at least three blogs on Dialogue that are specifically about the experiences of educoists and ex-educoists and I don’t think there is anything about oil mentioned on them.

    I can’t speak for Dialogue, however, it has helped me enormously to post about my experience and the treatment I received from ‘top brass’ in Eccles Street and psychotherapy to force me into going on a seminar and indoctrinate me with Quinn’s sick cult mind-sets. It took me a long time to get over it. I do have an insight, although not on an individual basis, of what you’ are going through. I was stunned after watching Spotlight and then angry when I found out that B shareholders were not doing anything about heavy losses because of Quinn’s actions. Anger is a great motivator but I can’t do anything in regards to INE. I am not a shareholder. I did not go on the expensive seminars. I had attended Eccles Street etc., but I came to realise that what Quinn and his ‘top brass’ were doing was taking advantage of people and making as much money as they could out of them. Why should they be allowed to continue? The delay has given Quinn more time to manipulate and get what he wants out of people who attended his seminars through their shares. When I hear on Spotlight that some have not received a share and are financially desperate because of it and all because of Quinn’s warped reasoning I’m wondering what the hell is going on and why is nothing being done about it? Everything that has happened in INE is an infringement of your rights.

    I don’t know how many of you have contacted Dialogue or taken them up on their offer with counselling. As far as I know it is free. I was in counselling for a number of years before I knew about Dialogue. What happened was detrimental to practically all aspects of my life. I took advice on how to deal with practical issues and received emotional support until I was strong enough to get my life back together. It’s not easy but all of us have to make a personal decision to do what we can to stop Quinn’s cult operating as the results can be devastating.

    Like

  11. OMG Angie, what did I do to deserve a lecture from you?
    Thank you Anon for your thoughts, you are certainly much better informed than our “friend” Angie. I think Angie would serve the interests of us shareholders much better if she could control her ego enough when tempted to reply to something she is obviously not qualified to talk about. My previous reply was not about Sheila, I made a comment in reply to another shareholder thinking we might get something moving. Has this blog been put up to help shareholders take action or just to give Angie another opportunity to give a long winded answer on how to save the world or something?

    As far as this comment from you is concerned; He has divided B shareholders but has he conquered you? DO SOMETHING! – I would be more than happy to debate this point with you in person, maybe after that you would decide to have a look at where you are yourself in relation to all this, are you really the right person to judge Sheila after all?

    No offence intended Angie but more consideration for vulnerable shareholders wouldn’t go amiss.

    Like

  12. Anon: Please get your friends to share their stories I for 1 would be delighted to read them as would many others like me. It would certainly help me to validate what happened to me.

    Like

  13. Regarding the photo of Sheila with Quinn, it looks fairly authentic however how do we know that this is the photo Sheila signing to give Quinn shares and a directorship? I just don’t know it does pack a powerful punch though.

    As we know Judge Banister showed during the court case that Sheila did go along with the idea of Quinn being given shares & becoming a director but she wasn’t expecting to be ousted as a Director and sidelined the way she was.

    If it wasn’t for Sheila the court case would not have gone ahead even if her motives were to get her dividends and shares and have the company closed down. To be fair to Sheila she is going only to fight her own corner but fortunately Judge Bannister saw the illegalities towards the B shareholders.

    Even if Sheila still remains influenced by Quinn it isn’t as much as she had been before. What have her lawyers advised her to do regarding Quinn? In this I mean they may have advised her not to speak publicly against him?????

    To give Sheila credit she really believed in Quinn and his message and it must of been a huge shock to her the very man she placed so much faith in has treated her the way he has. Not forgetting the hypnotic affect he has had upon her it is easy for others to be critical of her behavior in not denouncing Quinn. I imagine a part of her believes that he just couldn’t have done these things to her even though she knows he did. The question is just how much of an influence did Quinn manage to have over her throughout the years? The fact that she was a party to the illegal act of making Quinn a shareholder and giving him so many shares in the company is a testament to how much of a hold he had over her. I doubt very much if she had not been influenced by Quinn she would have considered doing such a thing. Anyone who might not agree with this only needs to read Maire Lalor’s account of her experience to understand the devastating hold this man can have over people.

    Perhaps she is feeling as many people who have come out of a cult situation feel and she is focusing on INE and ignoring the issue of Educo. It is what I did for many years. I just focused on my work and worked 60-70 hrs a week rather than actually face up to what had gone on. When I finally stopped everything starting crashing down and is still unravelling.

    I hope that Sheila will come to realisation one day of just how much Quinn has affected her and she can deal with that but at this time it appears that INE is her agenda.

    I sympathise with the B shareholders over taking INE to court. If you are a small shareholder who may not have the money to pay for lawyers to sort out this situation, this is a problem. Perhaps the costs should be worked out as a percentage the people who own the most shares pay more this seem fair. However getting everyone to agree well that is another thing.

    Like

  14. “It is shocking to know that B shareholders are taking this long to do something about it”

    What an insensitive remark to make. How many of these shareholders do you know personally? How much do you know of their plight and their personal struggles? How long did it take you to realize you were involved in a cult Angie? What do you know about what Ms Mc Caffrey did or did not feel when she voted Quinn onto the board? How can you judge her by saying she appears to be only interested in herself? You make many assumptions.

    Who is John Hollywood? Ed note should be Brian When did “Usher” make very little sense and appear hypnotized when he talks about going on a seminar? Mike Usher is dead for many years God rest him. Do you even know what you are talking about here? DI edit should be Patti who was filmed with Susan Morrice trying to escape!.

    In my opinion all this talk of oil companies and business distracts everyone from the issue at hand. CULTS Tony Quinn has robbed people in many ways for many decades. He must be delighted with the way DI is making a meal of this oil thing instead of putting further focus onto the many ways in which he invaded people. I met some friends the other day and they were talking about how they don’t go on this site any more because they are not shareholders and therefore it doesn’t seem relevant. All of them have stories to share about their experiences but they feel sidelined and I don’t blame them. Don’t give me the line that says they need to understand the affect that Quinn’s influence has had on the oil company – they know that. It’s just that this is not the only story to be heard.

    When I first approached DI the emphasis was on understanding cults, feeling free to express on the blog etc etc. It was educational and encouraging. It was multi dimensional. Now I hear:- “DI says shareholders need to do what the judge says”. And now you criticize them further by saying your shocked that they are taking so long to do something about it. As an ex long time member of Quinn’s group and as a shareholder I find this kind of talk, unhelpful, discouraging, unemphathetic, ill informed, condescending and I sincerely hope that Di gets back to the job it states in it’s mission statement which did not include business advice to shareholders.

    Like

  15. Another B shareholder:

    From my reading of the case brought by Sheila McCaffrey and also stated on Spotlight by Brian Hollywood, all she was interested in was selling her shares back to INE and leaving the company or having it closed down. There was nothing said that gave the impression that she was concerned about anyone else but herself. Judge Bannister was the only one who showed concern about B shareholders.

    What made a huge difference to the outcome was Sheila never admitted, nor was it part of her case, to being influenced by Tony Quinn. She was unwilling to accept that Quinn controlled her mind and her actions. She was, and probably still is, unwilling to admit that he hypnotised her to such a degree he coerced her into making him a director and giving him shares. The reality that Judge Bannister was confronted with was proof that Sheila McCaffrey AGREED to taking him on as a director and GAVE him shares and in doing so was breaking the original rules pertaining to B shareholders. She was part of the set-up in INE and Bannister’s opinion was she was as bad as the other two. It is not easy for her to accept this particularly when Quinn’s foolies attempted to display the evidence of this at the AGM meeting.

    It is as clear as day to most of us, whether she admits it or not, that she was just as influenced by Quinn as Susan Morrice is now. My understanding of the transcript in this case is that Sheila did not agree to Tony Quinn’s business plans for INE. Whether she agreed or not, this was a deliberate move on Quinn’s part to gain total power in INE and get rid of B shareholders who were not Educoists. He wanted to run the company as lord and master and have everyone agreeing with whatever he said just as he did with anyone who worked for him in the past including the ‘top brass’. This is the REAL Tony Quinn. If you disagree with him, like Sheila McCaffrey did, you are rejected. He used every dirty trick in the book to destroy her. Part of the hypnotic process is to confuse and increase the stress levels of a person to such a degree they cannot adequately verbalise what exactly took place and appear distraught when attempting to explain the ‘unexplainable’. It can get to a point where they are incoherent and appear to have some kind of mental disorder. The more they try to explain the more stressful it becomes.

    Anybody who stood up to Quinn, particularly when he feared his dirty deeds being made public, were treated in this way by himself and his ‘top brass’. Morrice appears totally stressed out and slightly demented when explaining the EDUCO system and Usher makes very little sense and appears hypnotised when he talks about his reason for going on a seminar. They will free themselves from Quinn’s abuse when they realise what happened/is still happening and admit it.

    It is shocking to know that B shareholders are taking this long to do something about it. There is still a chance to rectify the situation or would you prefer to be part of Quinn’s foolie brigade, as in, doing nothing about it and losing everything in the end? He has divided B shareholders but has he conquered you? DO SOMETHING!

    Like

  16. The B shareholders need to get together and be prepared to put their hands in their pockets, I guess that the top 10 shareholders account for more than half of the total B shares. They would only need to commit a small part of their recent dividend to hire the lawyers that would bring a case in front of Judge Bannister. It looks like Sheila has already done most of the work for this to happen so it may not cost too much.

    It would seem that the Judge is certainly aware of the corruption that has been going on under the stewardship of Morrice so it would look like a no-brainer to me. Money is the issue though and the big boys have the most to gain, they need to take action.

    I don’t think that DI’s stance on Sheila is helpful here though, I agree that she should take responsibility for her part in Quinn invading the company but she is not the problem here, she could help provide the solution if she got the proper chance. DI is doing a great job exposing the Quinn influence but I don’t think that it helps us when they vilify Sheila.
    This plays right into Quinn’s hands with his divide and conquer policy.

    Like

  17. What exactly as a class B share holder do we need to do to take up judge Bannisters offer.How exactly do we go about it. I agree with what you have said but don’t know what to do next.

    Like

  18. Look at the BBC doc and see what they did. The photo of Sheila with Quinn. It is unlikely the BBC would have put it up if it was not genuine.
    So what is that saying? The ex Educoists are still not addressing their cult experience and from the perspective of their shares they are following Sheila who Justice Bannister said was not the best example to follow. Two victims seem to rely on her, whereas the judge invited them all to come to him as B shareholders. Can you give us some insight into that from your experience? A business man friend said this of the programme, It was more about two women fighting. After the initial thrill of cornering the elder rabbit with Mary the emailer with him, who appeals to the porter to relieve him of this noisy one, it will soon be forgotten, why because it does not get to the heart of the problem namely cultism. Sheila is not saying she did not give Q shares, all she is doing is not acknowledging that she was under his influence when she did it.
    So in rejecting the picture she is trying to distance herself from the facts. So it is not just about women attributing the oil to Quinn, but the
    real story is that they were both under his cultist conditioning. Sheila by being ejected and not examined her situation. Susan is on a high from the influence. She looks she is on cocaine.The ending from my perspective shifts the issue from Quinn. They did have the material to make the connection but they CHOOSE to not use it.
    It is not a cat fight and I assume the reason the picture which was shown was so controversial was because it was true. Those present please enlighten me if I have got this wrong. Also help me join the dots…………………………., why are you delaying in taking up Justice Bannister’s offer?

    Like

  19. 10 signs for spotting a sociopath

    #1) Sociopaths are charming. Sociopaths have high charisma and tend to attract a following just because people want to be around them. They have a “glow” about them that attracts people who typically seek guidance or direction. They often appear to be sexy or have a strong sexual attraction. Not all sexy people are sociopaths, obviously, but watch out for over-the-top sexual appetites and weird fetishes.

    #2) Sociopaths are more spontaneous and intense than other people. They tend to do bizarre, sometimes erratic things that most regular people wouldn’t do. They are unbound by normal social contracts. Their behavior often seems irrational or extremely risky.

    #3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others.

    #4) Sociopaths invent outrageous lies about their experiences. They wildly exaggerate things to the point of absurdity, but when they describe it to you in a storytelling format, for some reason it sounds believable at the time.

    #5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and “win” at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.

    #6) Sociopaths tend to be highly intelligent, but they use their brainpower to deceive others rather than empower them. Their high IQs often makes them dangerous. This is why many of the best-known serial killers who successfully evaded law enforcement were sociopaths.

    #7) Sociopaths are incapable of love and are entirely self-serving. They may feign love or compassion in order to get what they want, but they don’t actually FEEL love in the way that you or I do.

    #8) Sociopaths speak poetically. They are master wordsmiths, able to deliver a running “stream of consciousness” monologue that is both intriguing and hypnotic. They are expert storytellers and even poets. As a great example of this in action, watch this interview of Charles Manson:

    #9) Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.

    #10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it!

    Like

  20. The good life club is a load of cods wallop. Quinn and his disciples are a load of hoods

    Like

  21. I have been thinking about the Spotlight documentary since I saw it on Tuesday. I am glad that the BBC has covered a little bit about the INE scandal however I hope they are now going to consider doing another episode to followup regarding the seminars, the tactics used to get the public to go and the behavior of some of the insiders.

    This will make interesting viewing. I would have liked to have seen something of Mike’s interview and I was surprised there wasn’t a shot of the people who turned out to protest.

    Still well done to Spotlight and the BBC for starting a process into the world of Tony Quinn & Educo.

    Like

  22. The Goodlife Club; Very nice. I like a bit of humour to lift my spirit. I can’t wait to see the sequel. On a more serious note, is anyone covering theTenerife seminar?

    Like

  23. Joe Public; I totally agree. The programme was too short and I would have expected a follow-up. RTE would have no problem putting a programme together and it would also be very helpful to have an explanation of EDUCO’s hallmarks of a cult with Mike Garde and John Butler expanding on the effects of Quinn’s use of hypnosis, particularly in the case of Morrice and Usher, as it is essential to get this information into the public arena.The sooner his recruiters are put out of action the better for all of us!

    More coverage of Sheila McCaffrey is needed about WHY and HOW she was ousted and it will uncover how Tony Quinn treated her and other B shareholders when he had no further need of them. He is accountable for his actions. As mentioned in the programme, there are still a lot of questions that need answering. I would also like to hear from the citizens of Belize and how they feel about Tony Quinn’s influence.

    Was the footage of the hypnotic trance session taken a few years ago? Does anyone else think he apes Martin Forde or is it the other way around? He uses the same tone and phraseology, the same expression in the eyes and the same gestures. His ‘designer life’ seminars are a huge change from the ‘spiritual’ seminars of the 90’s when he wanted us to believe he was Jesus. It used to be about polishing the diamond inside you blah blah blah and when you make your money don’t forget about me. It was no surprise to see he uses Forde’s daughter and Cowman’s son in the video. They were born into the Quinn cult.

    Another BIG FAT LIE when he says he “takes it all out of them to have a look at it” and “they choose how far they want to go”. I don’t think anyone attending his seminars has much of a choice as to how they direct their own life unless there is a promise of money in there somewhere for him. It’s more the case that they lose direction after he drains them. Quinn uses ‘the power of the energy’ and one of his favourite quotes is, ‘the energy always comes back to the source’ which, of course, is himself. His business practices are based on this ‘positive’ thought. He takes a big fat dollop of your energy and money for his own use.

    The coward Quinn’s delusional world is tumbling down and there is nothing he can do about it. More shocking revelations will destroy the foundations of his cult. It is inevitable!

    Like

  24. Currently BBC iPlayer TV programmes are available to play in the UK only, but all BBC iPlayer Radio programmes are available to you. Why?

    If you are in the UK and see this message please read this advice.

    Go to the BBC iPlayer Radio homepage

    Like

  25. Dear Educoist,

    We very much look forward to our next meeting and sharing more of the great material from the Tenerife seminar. You can see from the video above that Tony finally got to appear in a Hollywood blockbuster about himself, something he had forecast a long time ago. He had been so in awe of his dream coming true he was actually speechless when asked to speak, god bless him he, is maybe human after all.

    Love

    Tom & Colette,

    Love also from Mary

    Love also from the Messiah himself (aka Dr Spin)

    ps. We will inform you of the venue later, something much smaller will do now, we know how Tony doesnt like the spotlight.

    Like

  26. …and the beat goes on. We are still waiting for our dividend payment. Are we the only ones?

    Like

  27. Spotlight although it put together a coherent account of what went on between Tony Quinn and the oil company and did go some distance in stating his mind control techniques / undue influence but due to the half hour time slot many of the more damning evidence was just omitted as they might say left on the cutting room floor such as the 3 damning court outings in the BVI, Denver and Dublin you can’t help but feel that the programme was just too short and that a part two was required to really tell the tale of a Cult Guru Hope the BBC and maybe Rte can apply its Public Service remit and drills down further into this whole rotten Cultist scam for the sake of all his victims Oil shareholders and Educoists alike

    Like

  28. For those that did not see programme it is on BBC2 NI tonight and it is on iplayer
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01ndxjt/Spotlight_16_10_2012/

    Like

  29. Well good on you spot light and on all the share holders who took part in the program. TQ is now exposed to the world GUILTY AS HELL. The people who were running the company Susan Morris ,.Josh Stewart etc look real idiots especially in the light of tonight’s spot light,surely if they stand back and have a GOOD LOOK EVEN THEY CAN SEE TQs motive IS MONEY AND POWER. Where is TQ going to hide now I believe his time has run out,

    Like

  30. I remember that too alright, and then he told us all how much of the directors time was being taken up communicating with shareholders and this was no way to run a company. He told us he intended to change all that and we stopped getting relevant information from the company. He tried to convince us in a recent communication that the communication channel was his idea. LIAR once again.
    The channel ended up as a conduit for communicating lies so I guess he did take that over too.

    Like

  31. Of course he invited educoists to the AGM. The big announcement that he was a director was to be made so in true Q fashion he had to make an entrance. So how does he do that? He personally invites all Educoists whether shareholders or not to come to the company AGM the next day in the Red Cow Hotel. As anyone knows this is most irregular. He waited outside the meeting until the room was full with his rent a crowd, the announcement was made and he walked up through the room to a standing ovation. I personally heard one guy sitting behind me ask who the hell he was and how come he’s a director cos he was never asked to vote. Quinn then had the now standard “good news” for shareholders i.e. shares are worth $400 – well actually, he said, they are worth $1000 and if anyone does not believe him then let him buy their shares. Such was his confidence. Many people since then have asked Quinn to buy their shares at $400 but guess how many got them sold?

    Like

  32. Susan Morrice Angie!

    I think most of the B shareholders that he influences are those who bought in after the oil was struck. Most of the original shareholders know he wasn’t involved so hadn’t listened to him when he advised his followers not to invest originally.
    The foolies all bought in after Quinn’s sales pitch at the 2007 AGM in the Red Cow, having invited non members to the AGM the day before. Bizzare but true!

    Like

  33. I hope this programme focuses on Quinn’s use of hypnosis to influence Sheila Morrice and B shareholders and their attempts to get rid of some B shareholders who do not agree with Tony Quinn’s misuse of their money. Will the findings of Judge Bannister be part of this programme? We can only wait and see.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: