@BBCRadio4 #betrayal #mis-representation #PublicInterest: The #Satanic cult that wasn’t, 8pm

Channel IV reported about Satanic Ritual Abuse already in 1990, calling their program LISTEN TO THE CHILDREN. But the BBC knows better: they promote the ‘next generation Savile’ in the Victoria Derbyshire show and deny the allegations of the ‘whistleblower kids’ in their program The Satanic Cult that Wasn’t. Here I asked the Producer to withdraw my implied consent:

15 04 23 BBC Radio 4Dear Joe [Kent]

I let you know in no uncertain terms that I was far from happy with Melanie’s interview last week. [I had in fact refused to make the connection with the mother. IF ONLY I had seen the announcement for tonight at 8pm! But Joe led me to believe that it would be a half hour programme called ‘The Report’. Only later did I discover that two other activists had been interviewed. He phoned one of them asking her to change her mind about withdrawing her consent. But he did NOT phone me!]

This is therefore to let you know that I am withdrawing my implicit consent to the interview I gave on Monday 13th April 2015.

No matter how you’ll cut, I do not want any of my words to be part of “The Report” for I KNOW that my words will be used for mis-representation, since all questions were biased in the first place.

Melanie even went as far as saying “there is no evidence”. That is neither reporting nor investigating.

It was only after taking legal advice that I realised I have this option that I am now making use of.

Thanks for respecting it.

With regards to Melanie,

Sabine K McNeill

RESPONSE at 10:58 today:

Thank you for your email Sabine.

We are extremely disappointed by your criticism of Melanie’s interview with you because we are confident not only that she was polite and professional, but that she was entitled and right to ask you the questions she did.

The seriousness of  this case and the issues it raises are self-evident. The fact that, having heard and weighed the evidence over a lengthy period, a senior member of the Judiciary has felt it important enough to publish her Judgment as she has, strongly supports the conclusion that the circumstances surrounding this case are of the greatest public interest.

In these circumstances, despite your email, we continue to believe it is right to include you in our programme this evening.

Regards,

Joe

MY REPLY:

You are wrong, Joe!

 It is in the Public Interest to spread TRUTH!
You did not even tell me the TITLE of the program!
You MIS-REPRESENTED your invitation by participating in ‘The Report’!
You DECEIVED me and everybody else you interviewed who is on the CHILDREN’s side!
I repeat the questions that UK Column has asked Victoria Derbyshire:

“Did your research include speaking

1. to the mother or other adults close to the children who believe their claims?
2. to the children?
3. to charities and survivor groups familiar with effects of satanic ritual abuse on the victim, particularly when that individual is still a child?
4. to the police officers who were threatened and told to stop investigating the case or else their careers or their family?
5. did you ask the police how many of the accused were formally questioned?
6. how many premises were forensically examined?
7. how many computers were seized and examined for child abuse images and video content?

Only if you can answer YES to all these questions can you legitimately claim some understanding of the damaged mental state of SRA (Satanic Ritual Abuse) survivors and the tendency for them to retract accusations when isolated and confronted by authority figures and show that you have considered all the relevant facts to the case, could your current editorial line be seen as a mistake, rather than feeble support for a corrupt Establishment narrative.

The bottom line is this: the accusations were made by the children, a point not made obvious in the short clip on your website. This cannot be described as ‘baseless’, for it is based on victim testimony, which I’m sure you realise is most compelling. Whatever the qualification of the judge, she cannot make ‘black’ into ‘white’ and the allegations as ‘baseless’.

She cannot convince the public awakened by 2 years of ‘truth’ regarding the Establishment cover-up of child rape and sodomy and that it is time to go asleep once again.

Neither can you.”

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “@BBCRadio4 #betrayal #mis-representation #PublicInterest: The #Satanic cult that wasn’t, 8pm

  1. Oh dear, it looks like you need someone with media experience on your team, there are ways of dealing with journalists, getting cross and flouncing off is not it.

    You must be prepared for challenging points, stick to your guns.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Well, I’m sure it’s pushing you into the realm of madness, dealing with sociopaths on top of psychopaths, and I’m so sorry you had read such a patronizing, immature and bullying reply from Mr. Kent. I’m scratching my head, thinking up ways to help, that won’t make things worse. Feeling for you! Are we pursuing him with legal action for including your responses? I can’t access the broadcast from where I am, but I’m assuming he made good on his threat?

    Liked by 3 people

      • Pretty much what I think, but wanted to ask — he’s digging his own hole! …and I’m happy watching him fall into it. I AM sorting out how to become a stronger ally to you guys…but you should get some sleep right now, no!?

        Like

      • I recall a line from “War Games” near to 1983 I think. The lesson of the computer learning to play tic tac toe and Thermo Nuclear War : “The only way to win, is not to play.” That is, not to play their game. Some tricksters are better left alone, perhaps. Some suggest you needed help or preparation, but honestly, the game was rigged before it was started. The devil loves to jerk us around and screw our heads over. I did not get to hear it but I assume it will get posted. But I know in advance that you did fine and were still not going to get anywhere. This battle is a long term one fought on another battle field, internet wars. I’ll send a little something for you.

        Liked by 1 person

    • You’re so right, Kristen. I recall a line from Pink Floyd’s The Wall, To the effect that you can’t win, “trying to bang you’re heart up against some mad bugger’s wall.” It hurts too much!
      truth1.org/divine.htm

      Liked by 1 person

      • My father is a sociopath, and so is my son’s father; I have 36 years’ experience with the first, and 16 years’ experience with the second, and with my mother’s death before my 13th birthday, and being an only child, I’ve handled their abuse all by myself — extended family has proven to be anything but family to me. I have learned the hard way to avoid engaging in “discussion” with sociopaths (not easy during lawsuits, nor while living under one’s roof) as they are not capable of discussion; they are capable only of argument, and they are aiming only to bait and badger us until we give up the fight. If argument is not enough, they switch to threats and fear-mongering. You have to train yourself to out-psycho the psychos. And unfortunately, the sociopaths are only puppets of the more powerful psychopaths, so even my skills are inadequate — though I have out-manoeuvred heartless judges.
        But I do understand why Sabine gave the interview a try in the first place — hoping against hope.

        Like

  3. BBC are an utter disgrace.. It goes to show Sabine, you are making an effect and “they” don’t like it..!!
    “They” are out in force to discredit you.. Carry on Sabine more people are behind you than you think.. Lot’s of love and strength x

    Liked by 3 people

    • Yes Sabine is having a powerful effect on the peddlers of deception and insanity.
      Everytime the opposers of truth make an attack against Sabine or any Truthtellers, they keep on exposing themselves by ommiting the whole truth. The individual opposers of simple facts are the suckerfish desperately hanging on to the corrupt system for their livelyhoods.
      These people are gutless morons and the ones described by King Solomon as the stupid ones, or foolish ones.
      Solomon also said “look to the bees for wisdom” and the good worker bees are like Sabine and all people publishing truth for the good of all humanity. The system suckerfish are the drones, appointed by the corrupt satancally motivated Elite whom have no heart, no God given soul and their jobs are too coverup the monstrous crimes of the Elite but this is actually causing the total ruination of the world as prophecised by Zechariah.
      God said to Jesus “sit at my right hand side whilst i bring too ruin this system of thing!”
      This is what is happening quickly in our current time, therefore the drones [current suckerfish] are actually destroying the “system” counterfitly put in place by their masters.
      The drones act out of reckless selfihness, greed,pompous pride but are too stupid to understand they are destroyng the hive [the system they suckerfish onto for personal gain] and the loving truthtellers [the worker bees are incremently building a new hive, where the drones will be banished from.
      All loving truthtellers are actually fighting shoulder to shoulder in spirit with Jesus Christ, even if not all are fully aware of it yet.
      We are drawing near the end of mankinds final battle of “good versus evil” and Satan is “the Prince of lies, deception, confusion and death” whereas Jesus is the “Prince of LOVE and PEACE”

      It is very easy too see that Sabine and co are acting out of unselfish LOVE which will soon prevail as promised by God long ago!
      If we all stick with LOVE we cannot possibly fail and all the liars, cowards and thieves wiil be left outside the Gates.
      Samuel wrote “I shall laugh last when what they dread most comes upon then”
      The current enormous pressure of LOVE with truth is causing severe dread amongst the global elite and their drones and this will force them too carry out their final great deception ,bringing the ultimate DREAD upon themselves!

      Liked by 1 person

  4. “Oh come on you crazy conspiritards! The story the children told is just SO unbelievable!”

    Yet we’re expected to believe that Ella and Abraham would indoctrinate the children with such an ‘unbelievable’ story, AND take them to the police to tell that story, just to get back at the childrens’ father?

    “In this BBC radio programme, Ella and Abraham sound like a couple of stoned, neglectful, loonies!”

    Yet we’re expected to believe they were also sufficiently skilled, and so highly competent that they managed to pull off such a precise, detailed and thorough brainwashing job on the children?

    Hmmm . . . .

    Liked by 1 person

    • I think everyone is showing signs of battle fatigue. The sadness is seeing the truly good people judged so harshly without any merit. And you all went up against people who had no intention of being decent or fair. I’d seriously recommend avoid such ones in the future, if you discern they are like the BBC. We don’t need them or their kind. Not all publicity is good publicity, Like food, we pick and choose. Take heart and take some rest and just recover a little. I know everyone here is behind those of you facing the unfair and cruel assault. You know, 911 eventually became s huge conspiracy topic with multiple documentaries and lots of coverage, But, it was slow to get going and slowly gathered steam. The interview was probably more like a rape. don’t let such people do that again. There’s no point to that. Love to all!

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I’m confused, the BBC did exactly what the BBC do, they tow the party line.

    Expecting anything different would be like the old adage, if you pick up a snake, don’t be surprised when you get bitten.

    It’s a waste of time to even consider that anyone or any corporation is going to back the innocent, that’s not what they do.

    Once you recognize that the world is ‘upside down’ it’s a waste of time to try to even look at, let alone talk to and carry on a conversation with anyone who is clearly self serving.

    Forget about the main street media, forget about the crazies who call hold silly titles of great ‘import’ and get on with attending to the children who are stashed away somewhere where they continue to be abused, and don’t forget about all the infants.

    Cameras and phones sure come in handy when paople want evidence to expose the dirty deeds.

    Like

  6. The Derbyshire interview was transparently an unethical attempt to present a one-sided and thereby an inaccurate account. !t was designed to exculpate a principal suspect of alleged criminal activity and generate sympathy for him, by devoting a large proportion of the ‘trailer’ to what appears to be feigned distress and tears and other techniques such as sympathetic questioning and active editing to presumably remove incriminating elements and heighten emotional impact. Although in practice I like to think it probably back-fired and people weren’t taken in by it, the sample of e-mails read out the end that were uniformly in support of ‘the man’. Was this a true reflection of how the programme was received or just another example of manipulation and bias?
    Of course the BBC has got, as was pointed out in the letter of complaint quite a track record of failure to report both inside and outside the organisation, circumstances of child abuse over a long period. Some have argued this could only happen if the management actively facilitated the abuse by its employees and those contracted to it, on and off its premises. However the issue of manipulation goes much wider and deeper over a much longer period. If in the matter of child abuse, and what is now known, it became evident that the BBC was still actively engaged in misrepresentation and cover-up of serious crimes, it would have profound and lasting damage to its reputation. BBC you are on NOTICE. You can no longer claim ignorance of the issue or of the facts of this particular case. As TRUST is claimed to central to your management and mission, shouldn’t someone be taking this issue seriously? The way it is handled will have far-reaching consequences.
    For a good review of examples that cast doubt on the BBC’s impartiality and honesty in relation to some of the most important issues of our day and particulary the events of 9/11 see here:https://sites.google.com/site/censorshipbythebbc/bbc-censors-bbc
    From, http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-and-the-collapse-of-wtc-building-7-the-bbcs-role-in-distorting-the-evidence-and-misleading-the-public/5359036 this excerpt will suffice:
    “The BBC is a long standing bastion of truth, honesty, and integrity of British society. Unlike other mainstream corporate media networks, the BBC is funded by the British public through the TV licensing fees, and is accountable to the British public through its unique Royal Charter, which requires it to be impartial and accurate in its reporting. If it does happen to make an accidental error in its reporting, then it is required to publicly correct that error. As such, it is seen by the public as a much loved and trusted part of British society, so much so that the public have given it the nickname of ‘Auntie’.”
    “How can it be then, that on the vital issue of the on-going global war on terror, and the event that sparked this war, namely 9/11, the BBC is guilty beyond question of deliberately and actively supporting the cover up of irrefutable evidence which would help bring the true perpetrators of 9/11 to justice and most likely bring an immediate end to the global war on terror as we know it.”
    “So overwhelming is the evidence against the BBC on this issue that it has recently been challenged in a British court of law. It lost, and yet the vast majority of the public would have absolutely no idea about this. It has also been demonstrated conclusively and repeatedly all around the world that if the BBC would simply show the public the damning evidence that it is deliberately withholding, the vast majority of the public would instantly understand and believe that they have been lied to about 9/11 on a truly grand scale and that what really happened on that day is in fact very different to what we have been told, as the judge in the courtroom in Sussex, South-East England, quickly realised when he saw this evidence in February 2013.”
    Sadly, the BBC has ceased to be a credible journalistic investigative organisation. The Derbyshire interview is proof of that. I for one can no longer watch the news on the BBC without questioning its voracity and purpose and I am sure I cannot be alone in that regard.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s