#BBC CoversUp #Pauffley who covers-up #BarnetCouncil and #Police and #Dearman protected by #Establishment

15 04 16 christ church school“Why does Dearman have so much clout?”, a friend of mine wondered the other day. Well, his children called him the ‘boss’ of this cult that used schools for sex rather than education.

The list of 70 odd abusers that was published by Veterans Today included a lot of professionals. An expert spotted MI5 marks on the file and another internet sleuth realised in his own way that MI5 was the source, so that the mother and I could be incriminated – which Barnet Police promptly did: harassment on behalf of the alleged abusers.

But we are not only up against the Police who cover the criminals through brute force and a police raid at the mother’s house without a warrant.

15 04 25 judgeWe are up against the Council who keep the children with the aid of the secrecy of the family courts – even though Mrs Anna Justice Pauffley published her judgement not only for the courts but also as a press release. But the hearing was not only in secrecy, but also without the mother or any legal representation. How can that be High Court ‘Justice’!?…

Thanks to her press release, Daily Mail reported ‘Satanic cult’ dismissed by judge. I was sent this picture as a ‘Sunday best’ for her…

Since then the marvellous people at and around Hampstead Research have been highlighting major connections between the networks of alleged abusers online. That includes letter one and letter two to the BBC.

For the BBC had

1. broadcast an interview with the father by Victoria Derbyshire whose producer Eleanor Plowden wanted to address these 33 points that I responded to;

2. broadcast the Radio 4 program The Satanic Cult that wasn’t. I was very angry after interview, as it was not only biased, but I had also been completely misled.

Hence I withdrew my ‘implied consent’, but the Producer Joe Kent overrode it ‘in the greatest public interest’. Happy Brewer of Sorted Productions wrote to him as follows: 

Dear Joe

My name is Happy Brewer, but it does not make me happy to write this mail.
My apologies in advance for the length of this mail, but there is a lot to say.
I have worked in TV for more than 20 years I have worked for the BBC and have also been commissioned as an indi to create content for the BBC one of which was in excess of £1m. I only point this out so you have a feeling of the type of person I am.
I feel morally forced to write to your regarding the badly researched and shamelessly named radio documentary “The Satanic Cult that Wasn’t”.
As a licence payer, television professional and more importantly parent and human I have to speak on behalf of people who I firmly feel have not been given a fair and balanced chance to have a real voice.
Before I talk about the show I’d love you to think hard about the cover-up’s we know about that the BBC has been completely complicit in.
1. Jimmy Savile “the radio paedophile that wasn’t”
2. Cyril Smith “the mp/mayor/national hero that wasn’t”
3. Leon Brittan “the Paedophile home security that wasn’t”
and sadly the list goes on and on including the recent sham by the palace in simply denying that Prince Andrew should in anyway answer to some serious allegations, and the evident ring within Westminster.
I must state that I do not believe that the overwhelming majority of staff are good and honest decent people and I have to assume you are one of those people.
I have no idea what “real” research you have done personally but I suggest you do some more.
I would 1st like to draw you to the fact that Sabine McNeill. Would it not have been appropriate to introduce her as a McKenzie Friend? because that’s what she does and that is why she is involved.
In your program it was worded to suggested that somehow she knew or was a friend of Ella Draper in advance of the case because “She is a fellow yoga lover” (very poor or cleaver use of language) I’m sure they both eat food and use the toilet this does not make them accomplices as was the not very loose suggestion.
Was this purposely done?
The fact is that it’s simply not true, with very little research it’s clear that Sabine was called in to act as a McKenzie friend after the horror had been revealed by the children. Sabine at that point in her life had stopped taking on single cases and has been campaigning for all child victims of state abduction and there often jail parents. If you have not seen her talking in Brussels I STRONGLY recommend you stop reading now and take 5 minutes to see what she stands for, this is Sabine in March last year before any of us including Sabine had heard of the Hampstead case.
Sabine was called by Ella in November last year as a McKenzie friend, and only then did she have any involvement.. please research this..
I have had the privileged of talking to Sabine and I am humbled to now know the single most selfless person I have had the honour to talk to.
Again before going into the detail of my issues I would love you to watch a clip from Newsnight broadcast on March 16 this year
So it’s not a debate that Parliament and HM Secret service are not complicit in the covering up of serious systemic child abuse. If this is not evident by seeing the BBC’s own content last month I have to wonder what it will take to show an obvious pattern.
I now copy you a final link. This is Gabriel’s police interview recordings by the police.
Joe I have no idea if you have children or not, but I have 3 my youngest being 10yo.
By default I know many many children due to family friends and my children’s friends.
To get children to lie at an unbelievable level with detail as acute as you will now witness is beyond even the best mind control expert, speak to one of the many paediatric psychologist that the BBC has used on many hours of content over many years and get their opinion,
Over the 1st 2 very badly conducted interviews by an evidently under qualified officer the allegations and testament are consistent and honest. Any psychologist will tell you that from the eye movement alone that children are scrolling through real memory banks to retrieve real memory.
Also the confusion over numbers of alleged adult abusers to an innocent 8yo boy is absolutely normal in my humble opinion as a father of 3 healthy well balanced bright children.
If you haven’t actually taken the 2hrs it takes to witness this then please do so now.
As you will see from the time stamp, this is late for a very young and one way or another abused child.
I could write forever about this but need to stop now so that you can ask the questions that all good humans should ask…why are we not making sure that as there is without any doubt smoke, is there actually a fire?
The official police investigation was closed as soon as the children retracted. This happened after they were taken into car and who knows what mental abuse and threats they went through during those 6 days. We only need to refer to the Newsnight clip about Smith to know that just because a “Judge” who talks behind closed doors says something is so, it does not mean it is.
It must be pointed out that (do some real research) there is no on going custody battle, so why are you supporting that there is? what evidence do you have to support this claim?
This program combined with the shameful interview with the accused on the Victoria show, is scarier that the BBC pulling the doco about Jimmy Savile’s paedophilia  and screening a celebration of his life instead? What is going on????
 
I also need to highlight a common denominator. In the so called public enquiry about historic child abuse in parliament with the late Leon Brittan somehow forgetting and then remembering then misplacing 141 dossiers on paedophilia within parliament going all the way to No10 and the 2 initial appointments of heads of said enquiry who both had ties with Brittan and the “establishment”. Due to public outrage and honest protest at this they had to find someone from far away to oversea this farcical event which is built to be a cover-up and could take 5 years to complete! 
It seems it’s easier to hide things in the BBC, but it took me only 2 minutes to establish that the producer of the “Vicoria” interview is Eleanor Plowden who is the daughter of Hon. William Julius Lowthian Plowden in turn the son of Edwin Noel August PlowdenBaron Plowden who was K.C.B and G.C.B. Now I’m not a betting man but what are the Odd’s in the whole of the BBC the producer of a show that includes possibly the single biggest paedophile ring that could lead all the way to the top of the tree? A cover-up of this scale is not possible without big strings being pulled from the very to, just like the 3 cases the BBC has already been proved to assist in the cover-up????  Just saying?
This will take time, and I have plenty of that. How much do you have? Not enough to do a real job of investigation, that seems obvious. When the truth comes out we all need to know which side we were on.
Joe where do you stand after witnessing the clips I have shared?
I have no idea if you are a parent of not, but assume you have family/friends with young children, how would you feel/react to people who refused to listen and actually took the side of the alleged abusers?
The BBC will have more to answer on this than all of the scandals mentioned above, if only 10% of what has been said is true, and like it or not you may have been put in a very bad position by your seniors.
I look forward to your concise reply and REAL thoughts on this matter as soon as possible.
Yours
Not very
Happy

Mr Happy Brewer
Sorted Productions Ltd
happy@sortedproductions.tv

New site on its way date TBA but watch out for the launch !

Advertisements

70 thoughts on “#BBC CoversUp #Pauffley who covers-up #BarnetCouncil and #Police and #Dearman protected by #Establishment

  1. Well done ‘Happy Brewer’. Be sure to share the reply with us if and when you get it. 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.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Hey Tim

      Points well made. but I have to point out as a TV professional that the vast number of BBC staff are good souls and I feel we need to be targeting them, your local BBC office heads of news/current affairs journalist etc all BBC staff have a christianname.surname@bbc.co.uk address we need to get writing and be clear as unemotional as possible and demanding a real investigation they have the resources the staff and more importantly the air waves…we only have to find the right ones. I think that the team that did Dearman and the radio doc are the only ones we need to ignore (he says having written to the) but with hindsight this could be our best route

      Liked by 3 people

      • Happy Brewer
        @Tim Veater

        Is it really a matter of “good souls” or is it rather about CONTROL of the media by secret services? The BBC should do a proper job in impartial and accurate reporting to the public. However, it’s all about (mind)CONTROL… (BBC – British Brainwashing Corporation)

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thanks for this reply ‘Happy’ and I quite take your point. I am sure, as in every walk of life, the majority are good decent sorts. However when it comes to national sensitive top posts, it appears that somehow or other the hierarchy make sure ‘their’ people are in place. This ensures that decisions always conforms with what is considered to be what is good for maintaining the hierarchy. As we have seen in multiple cases, investigations started in good faith are subsequently sabotaged in a variety of ways. As in the Hampstead case (and in Elm House) there has apparently been direct threats. As seems likely in the Dando case and others – murder! These are extremes and are avoided as far as possible. Much more likely is the clean-up as in the Gareth Williams case. Confusion and apparent incompetence and absence of ‘tracks’ as in the Chevaline case. Or the evidence is never collected properly as in Hampstead, or when collected an presented miraculously goes missing as in the Leon Brittan case and with the passage of time cannot even be remembered. Or are locked away for seventy years on the spurious and paradoxical grounds of personal privacy as is the case with several children’s homes. Or the activity though known, is condoned and ignored as in Savile. Or even where the papers get to the DPP, an excuse can be found not to proceed as in the case of Janner, even if the symptoms have a suspiciously sudden onset and even if Janner is on record as saying regarding holocaust criminals, time or age should be no bar to prosecution. Have I included superior officers instructing junior ones to drop the case that happened in Hampstead and virtually all the earlier investigations. Then we should drop into the mix the huge effort put into prosecuting journalists for listening in to conversations. Do you really think that was because privacy is so high on the list of government priorities when GCHQ has got carte blanc? No, I believe it was a timely warning to stop leaks and to warn Editors not to step out of line. That was also what the huge ‘sexing up’ – accurately described by the way – showdown was about that forced a Director General to leave and the Corporation to toe the line. So returning to the ‘good’ BBC staff you refer to, how far do you think they will get if they set out to do a genuinely impartial report if their masters or betters deem it ‘inappropriate’. As UK Column reported in the case of Chirwell College, not very far I would suggest. The fact that the Derbyshire interview could be broadcast given all that has happened and all that is known, is nothing short of an outrage and absolute confirmation that the deep dark issue that Savile revealed is as powerful an influence as ever. If the BBC cannot be trusted on this one, it cannot be trusted on ANYTHING! Local newspapers, very few of whom are genuinely independent, are hardly any better as anyone who reads or writes to them has probably discovered. As far as this case is concerned, we need look no further than the ‘Ham and High’ need we?

        Liked by 3 people

      • Tim
        I hear all you say my friend and agree with everything, I am no support of an enforced state broadcaster that I pay for (I have made all my fee’s back though in work) and of course the top is tainted as hell.
        I only bark on because just like the way we grow in numbers they can too, it might seem a bit straw clutching but a better route than the legal/judicial/political system as the real people are more accessible.
        We all need to write to everyone we can.
        We are all putting ourselves at risk just being here etc, so lets keep at it and to hell with the consequences and with them…we all know what side we are on !!!

        Liked by 1 person

    • Tim you said “Although in practice I like to think it probably back-fired and people weren’t taken in by it…”

      I scoured every comment made on Vicoria Derbyshire’s Facebook page, following the Dweebman report, and the vast majority were certainly not fooled by the croc of sh** they were being fed. A few trolls also came out the woodwork and were quickly identified. Later that day they deleted the entire thing off her Facebook!

      The BBC’s attempt to cover up this story has truly backfired. They’ve been rumbled!

      Like

  2. Keep in mind, for the individuals who are dismissing this case, they are in some way entangled.

    Whether or not they have children is irrelevant, look at Dearman, he has children and a team of wild horses couldn’t prevent him from offering them up on a daily basis.

    This is not about convincing the very sick people that they are wrong and to let the children go free, they ARE the RING LEADERS!

    Alternate avenues need to be sought if these children are to be free, not complaining about a deranged human who things that she is above others by saying a few words in a stone building where she sits on a wood bench hitting the table with a wooden hammer.

    Best now to come up with alternate means!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kurt I so so hear you, it’s so easy to assume that a parent will understand and as you point out it’s not always the case. Sabine has no kids and is one of the single biggest empathetic souls I have had the joy to meet..so it works both ways, so very good point !
      Cheers
      we are, as my daughter pointed out in a Wizards Vs Death-eaters scenario Harry Potter world here and as she says, we all of us are, the order of the phoenix
      The battle has begun

      Like

  3. Outstanding letter by Happy Brewer. I have to say that I agree with Kurt– that the cover-up is far-reaching and that a different approach is basically necessary. While trying every avenue, a new one needs to be adopted. This Hampstead case has the potential of blowing the lid on the vast multi-generational satanic criminal empire that is Britain.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Dear all

    I really don’t think that any legal/judicial etc attack can work as the people who created the laws are the very people who are protecting this huge, huge lie that effects all of our lives and the lives of every good person in every corner of the globe, because that’s the reach of this problem. People who don’t care start wars own banks and utilities…same gang Dearman et al are the bottom of the pyramid.

    I suggest we hit the BBC they did recently put the Smith expose on air and there are many many good people there.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Happy, unfortunately I believe that you’re right about the legal path being closed to us in this, however, I don’t think the ‘good’ people at the BBC will be able to do much to help either, for the very same reasons.

      The BBC is run by the ‘enemy’, and subsequently the organisation cannot provide a solution because it is, in fact, a massive part of the problem.

      I don’t think a few good people at the BBC can make any impact to be honest.

      I don’t know how this ‘battle’ will be executed, but I do feel certain that this case will prove to be the catalyst for massive public awakening. And the revulsion and disgust that most people feel about what is being done by these bastards, on such a staggering, industrial scale, will, I believe lead to the rise of public rebellion.

      I just hope that the rebellion will be organised, focussed, and non-violent. We don;t want to finish up becoming that which we hate.

      Liked by 2 people

    • You’re right that dearman and his cult are at the bottom of the pyramid.

      As for the BBC, I don’t know much about them; I do know that they aren’t all ‘bad people’. Again, I also know that even the good people have to take orders from the higher-ups or else their careers could potentially come into the cross-hairs. That said, I believe that alternative news sources rarely have enough funding and resources to get news out to the general public. I agree with focusing on the BBC until they are forced, if that’s the right term, to air the real facts on Hampstead.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. The BBC is an embarrassment to the UK. Out of touch, irrelevant and completely outdated. The whole organisation turns my stomach and should be shut down for good.

    Liked by 1 person

    • The BBC is not out of touch, irrelevant, nor remotely outdated.

      It is a very efficient, very powerful, and very dangerous propaganda machine, make no mistake about it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • This was my opinion and I am entitled to express it surely? I resent paying the licence fee for something I never watch just because a tv sits in my lounge! To me it is most definitely out of touch and irrelevant and I know for a fact that I am by no means alone in feeling this to be the case.

        Like

      • Imogen, I meant no offence in my comment love, I was just trying to emphasize how very powerful and dangerous the BBC is as a tool of the elite.

        Peace.

        Like

    • As far as reporting news that needs to be reported from whatever corner of society, the BBC is out of touch with honesty and transparency along with all the mainstream channels in the U.S. I studied journalism in college as I wanted to become an investigative journalist and reporter. However, when I learned that what you report as a journalist does not necessarily make it to actual reported news, I dropped that idea. In my opinion, when a news outlet doesn’t report news or reports news with bias, that outlet is irrelevant. This would apply, in my opinion, to most mainstream media outlets in the U.S. and the UK.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Arendale,
        I agree with you that all the mainstream media outlets suffer a serious lack of honesty, integrity and transparency, but they are excellent at their propaganda and behavioural nudging tasks.

        I don’t believe that they ever were, or were ever even meant to be, ‘news’ outlets. They play a very serious game in controlling and directing public opinion. However, due to the free flow of information available on the internet their influence is thankfully in decline.

        Perhaps I didn’t make my point clearly which was to say, though the influence of the BBC and all the mainstream media is declining, we should not brush off concerns about the power and influence that they are still able wield at this time. It was in that sense that I considered that they are far from irrelevant. I think that they are very dangerous.

        I haven’t followed mainstream media for well over a decade, I can see right through it. If I want any information, I research it myself via the ‘net.

        Sorry if I didn’t make myself clear.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. I wanted to jump up and cheer when I read your letter Happy! If Joe is a decent human being (we can only hope) your words will have cut through his conscience, and so they should. Everyone at the BBC who was involved in bringing those 2 disgraceful interviews to the general public needs to take responsibility for their actions. They will bear the blood on their hands of not only Alisa & Gabriel, but of the other many thousands of children who suffer at the hands of these monsters.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Thanks, Happy. I watched this. Is it possible for Sabine and the Whistleblowers team to reach out to people like Detective Chief Inspector Clive Driscoll and Simon Danczuk MP and author who were in this video? It seems that the BBC reports scandals like these when the main person or people are dead and gone but not while they are alive as in the case of Greville Janner. As soon as Janner dies, the BBC might suddenly cover his story. I would like to see the BBC carry one of these reports with a currently living perpetrator like ricky dearman. I find especially in the original allegations witnessed by Ella (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/22/anonymous-leaks-satanic-cult-member-names-places-phone-s/) that the children’s testimony is so complete that it is almost better than actually catching the alleged abusers on video. Those kids are brilliant to recall so many details. Most adults even (except for the very few people with the anomalous photographic recall ability) don’t have the ability to recall so many details. Anyway, I hope it’s possible to get the support of people like the two mentioned above. I also wonder what has become of former Detective Ray Savage.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I wish I had your faith in the ability of the ‘good’ people at the BBC to be able to make an impact, but, sadly, I feel that any investigative work that is undertaken by decent journalists is limited, controlled, and disseminated strategically by those in authority to further manipulate public opinions and attitudes.

      It puts me in mind of Herbert Marcuse Theory of Repressive Tolerance, in which the elite extend their reach of control by allowing people the freedom to be vocal and criticize, but not the power to do anything about it.

      That is why the Newsnight programme the BBC has made on the issue of child abuse refers to past abuse, and never touches anything that might affect current centres of power. They can safely acknowledge that this has happened, and express all kinds of shock, horror and disgust, but they will still continue to avoid investigation of anything that might damage current centres of power.

      Sadly, I think that it is nothing more than damage limitation.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Perhaps the Barnett police and the producers of those BBC programmes should watch the following to see how to do an investigation and an interview? Perhaps it’s also worth noting that the ‘customers’ were in Britain, Germany and USA.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I think you’re missing the point here mate, the Barnett police know full well how to do an investigation and they didn’t want one.

      Their intention was to do EXACTLY what they did and now instead of thousands of men surrounding KENT (where the children may now be’ held’) they have thousands of people typing on their computers about how stupid the police are and how they need to pray more!

      If everyone continues to play by the rules and gather for picnics on Hampstead Heath to commiserate, what good does that do for the two children and millions of others who are standing in line for the slaughter house.

      We are talking about young human beings whose lives are now hanging in the balance because NO ONE is willing to BRAKE the RULES!

      WHOSE RULES?!?!

      Britain is a business and the police are hired to protect the corporation! It’s not about ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, we know what is right and that doesn’t matter in Britain, that’s the point, maybe it’s time to live by your own rules all the decent folks of Britain.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kurt, I am inclined to agree to a large extent.

        I tend to think that the only way to get these children to a place of safety, to enforce the public will, is by the use of organised massive disruption. For example, co-operation from the trade unions might enable us to use ‘strikes’ as a weapon for justice. (Assuming the unions are not also infested with and run by paedophiles).

        People might consider that such an action, even if it were possible, would be inappropriate, because unions are political organisations, and this is a private matter. But in fact this IS a political issue, because organised elite paedophilia has corrupted the legal and political institutions of this country and subsequently undermined democratic processes.

        So is it appropriate to break the rules, absolutely it is when those rules damage good people and attack the general well being of the majority of the population.

        The whole system has become infested with malignant parasites, and it needs a good worming.

        Like

  8. Just sent this to the Directorate of Professional Services, the Met. Police Legal barrier which blocks any attempt at bringing corrupt officers to trial(note the DPS address):

    To Wendy Newell-Gosling
    22nd Floor
    Empress State Building
    Empress Approach
    Lillie Road

    I reported the crime of fraud directly to the Commissioner’s private office. However, this was just passed down to your office dealing with internal police disciplinary matters (behind closed doors), with Mrs Pauffley and her part in the fraud, omitted. I note that “reporting a crime” has been transposed to the legal term “complaint”, and “law” to legal “Acts” and “Statutes” (written legislation). This is something I do not consent to at any time, and said as much in my witness statement. Citing “Acts of Law” to justify why the “complaint” is not valid, is a just a “legal” attempt to avoid carrying out the lawful obligation to investigate a reported crime.

    However, the reluctance to investigate the FRAUD committed by two police officers and a High Court judge is easy to appreciate.
    The FACT that DC Rogers concealed video clips and drawings containing PROOF that the children had – and have – detailed knowledge of distinguishing marks on and around their named attackers’ private parts, blows the whole cover-up wide open. For example: The police not requiring the named attackers to undergo medical examinations to disprove the children’s claims as this would have shown the children were telling the truth. And Mrs Anna Pauffley’s Judgement continuing to conceal this information by attacking everything else, but not mentioning one word about the damning “Distinguishing Marks”, “Drawings” and “Tatoos” video clips in her Judgement. All done under orders to protect the named attackers.
    Who ordered that DC Rogers, DI Cannon and Judge Pauffley protect the named attackers and conceal the truth? Figures in high places who are afraid of the truth being revealed.

    The plan not to “take any further official action” in the investigation of this crime of fraud was, from the outset, THE PLAN. Presenting legal excuses as “reasons” not to pursue the “complaint” is the method employed to block any challenge to that plan. Whether you are aware or not, that that was the purpose of your LEGAL review of my witness statement reporting fraud, is something you know – I don’t.

    As regards your comment: “I understand that this may come as a disappointment to you.” On the contrary – I totally expected it. Evidently your understanding of your ability to anticipate a response from someone you do not know, still needs some work.

    But something you cannot fail to understand is the FACT that the children are telling the TRUTH, and the official version first spouted by Mrs Pauffley, and faithfully reported by the press and BBC, is a LIE. Of course, the enormity of that lie extends far beyond the Satanic child rape and murder in Hampstead. And the prevalence of ritual abuse and murder in the so-called upper echelons of power is rapidly becoming common knowledge. A major step forward takes place when those assisting in maintaining this colossal lie begin to PEACEFULLY assist in its dismantling.

    from a conscious living being,

    Drifloud 27th April, 2015 contact address email drifloud

    Liked by 2 people

    • Good one Drifloud. I’m sure you speak for all of us. Even if unreported by the media I think it’s important people in critical posts are aware of the dissatisfaction at the way this case has been illegally and unethically manipulated. There should be a massive co-ordinated letter writing campaign to prospective MP’s to bring the message home. Who and how could this be organised?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Tim, sorry taking ages to reply – very limited access to internet.
        I think this case is revealing to us a world-controlling filthy network that is everywhere, and has been in existence since Babylon & beyond. It’s a sacrificial death cult that seems to obtain energy/food from human blood and inflicting suffering. Parliament/Government seems to be their Authoritarian pose of a right to power. I think that just the act of writing to them somehow concedes to this illusion.

        Like

  9. This is a piece I posted elsewhere that people here might not have seen.

    “I think it’s fair to say there is no direct corroborative evidence (other than medical, see below). If the events as described happened, it is possible that other reports will emerge with time. If they don’t, it is not confirmatory of the judge’s take on events, nevertheless it is undoubtedly a weakness in the case. However we should appreciate that secrecy is a proven element of any abuse, particularly if they are as extreme as those described. It would be naive to expect those adults named or those potentially involved to rush to confirm the story wouldn’t it? Small children are it appears, automatically disbelieved and anyway if under the influence of adults, by either fear or reward, simply do not know how to complain to independent authorities. Multiple accounts of child abuse prove this to be true. So the issue turns on the voracity of the children’s claims themselves. Without it there would be no case to answer. That is why their treatment is so critical. Nor would we have known had those videos not reached the internet. To see and hear them, is I think, to be utterly convinced, in large part their accounts are true. It is significant that all the rage of the authorities only evidences itself when the videos go viral. Why was this? The authorities argue it was to protect the children. Others might think it was more to do with protecting and covering up a flawed police/court process. I will leave you to decide. Certainly the one-sided judgement and media campaign indicates a co-ordinated effort to demonize the mother and representatives, whilst air-brushing the father’s past behaviour, whilst effectively keeping the children under arrest. All the indicators are that they intend to return the children to the deeply questionable father. Having stated there is no hard evidence supporting the claims – other than the medical that the judge unwisely sought to discredit – it must be accepted this is no fault of the children’s but of the inadequate response by the police. There were enough claims of a specific nature that could have been tested, and ruled out once and for all if they had proved fallacious. That they did not do so, or that the named individuals failed to voluntarily come forward and rule themselves out is highly suspicious to any fair minded observer. It is one of the many CIRCUMSTANTIAL aspects that support the children’s version of events, so ruthlessly and recklessly dismissed by the judge.

    Liked by 2 people

    • The case needs another approach combined with its present approach. The criminals who are committing these crimes are also covering up their crimes. A and G reported several other children from the cult parents of Christchurch Primary children who are WILLING to come forward with the truth; but who has asked any of the children? There’s just so much secrecy, and what is up with the family courts? Britain seems totally poisoned beyond repair by multi-generational satanism. Secret family courts? No one is asking the right questions or doing any investigating. And I thought the U.S. was bad. In the U.S., people tend to end up missing, dead, or chased out of town or work for pursuing these kinds of allegations. In the UK, they have laws and courts that protect satanists and pedophiles. Incredible.

      Like

  10. The only way to make an impact is to effect the financial stream.

    It all comes down to money in the end, these countries are ‘corporations’ and feeling are irrelevant! If you want to effect change you’d have to stop paying into the system on a mass scale.

    Complaining about the fees paid to BBC is pointless, complaining period, is pointless.

    Action with financial consequences is all that will change the corruption in Britain.

    Like

  11. Unfortunately, I can’t reply to comments that are already replies, so I will reply to several people in this comment:

    Sabine, I am in the U.S. and am limited when it comes to contacting the kinds of people I mentioned in my comment to partake in the Hampstead case. What kinds of men’s groups is Ray working with in the U.S.?

    Will, in a way, trauma can create photographic recall, but hardly by itself. Extreme trauma tends to do the opposite, forcing memories into the subconscious and unconscious. These are called ‘repressed memories’. Organized abusive satanism and abusive mind control groups create so much trauma in victims that the victims ‘split’ and create different personality states (once called MPD or multiple personality disorder but now called DID or dissociative identity disorder). These are called alter(nate) personalities or alters. The cult or group then trains each alter in some skill that will benefit the cult: how to sexually satisfy adults; how to kill in various ways; how to speak different languages; how to read documents upside down (espionage); how to hear conversations from a long distance off (espionage); etc. In the case of Cathy O’Brien reporting details to her handlers, she had alters who were trained for photographic recall. The Jason Bourne movies highlight a programmed person who has DID. The movie is one of many cult, covert movies where they tell us what they are doing but don’t broadcast the details. ‘The Bourne Identity’ means ‘the created (born, birthed, brought forth) identity’ and is talking about cult-produced DID, because cultists and programmers believe they ‘create’ alters through abuse. Bourne’s different alters could speak languages he didn’t know himself or recall learning; his alters also had different fighting skills he didn’t recall learning (he actually switched between alters while fighting at times in the movie which you only notice if you know what the movie is about); etc. It is these ‘bourne identities’ (alters) in programmed people that are trained to have photographic recall in order to report to their handlers. In the case of A and G, I don’t believe that it was cult training nor extreme trauma that gave them this recall, however (if it was from the cult, they would only report to the cult and to no one else). I believe they are just smart children.

    Like

    • Arendale – I understand what you are saying, whether they are able to remember due to the heightened state of the circumstances or otherwise is not so important, we both agree with the rest of the British people, the kids were telling the truth.

      We are all able to recognize Truth, we don’t require an intermediary i.e. someone who is well versed in legalese and now thinks themselves a great psychologist.

      Hopefully others all explore the examples that provides ample proof that satanic rings have infiltrated all levels of society and thus far done so with direction and assistance from the highest levels of society.

      Thankfully, that will no longer be the case, the curtain has been lifted and no one is willing to allow this sort of sickness to rule them, their world, this planet any longer.

      Like

      • Am I now a person “who is versed in legalese and now [think myself] a great psychologist”? In your book, what does it take to make a person “a great psychologist”? You seem to be of the mindset that works in favor of the cults in western nations– that you need a degree or ‘credentials’ before you can be acceptable as ‘someone who knows’.

        You said, “The curtain has been lifted and no one is willing to allow this sort of sickness to rule them, their world, this planet any longer.” Is that right? Here’s something you seem to be unaware of: the ‘cult’ has been in power for a very long time; ‘we the people’ are not going to overthrow them. The good news is that to the extent that people are willing to join the cause against the cults and the whole NWO agenda, the cults can be restricted and prevented from operating. The bad news is that they are here to stay; the very way that we, especially in western societies, reason and think gives the cult the upper hand. Yes. OUR mindsets and worldviews empower the cult. The cult is not at all all-powerful; but they do understand human psychology in a way that many people either don’t understand or simply don’t want to acknowledge. This gives the cult the upper hand by a very incredible stretch.

        It will take divine intervention to put an end to this global cult; ‘we the people’ aren’t going to do though we should certainly keep fighting. And even if it was possible and we stopped the cult, another global cult would simply arise from the innate desire in ‘men’ to control and surpass others. This need to control and surpass others is the root of racism. So, you can say that as long as we have racism around (‘the belief that one’s race is superior to others’; racism has little to do with hatred), the cult will always be in power. The racist mindset and the cult mindset are one and the same (as you probably at least somewhat know). I know most people would rather not admit it, but that’s just the way it is. It’s better to fight with the knowledge of your enemies without AND within than to just fight outward enemies and leave inner enemies still intact to rise to power once outward enemies have been vanquished.

        Like

    • Arendale, I too am in the U.S. in the SE. Are you anywhere in that vicinity to perhaps join forces? I feel pretty useless as all I can effectively do is sign petitions, keep myself informed, and write whatever I think might be supportive or helpful.

      On a different note, I have a concern regarding Ray Savage working with ‘men’s groups’ over here. These groups tend to be bonkers, far out, right-wing Christian Fundamentalists, and very disturbing in my opinion.

      It is worth noting that Christine Sands (an infiltrator in my view) proceeded to video Ray Savage and the group outside the church holding hands in a circle of prayer, despite his serious request that it should not be filmed and it should be kept private. There’s a good reason for his request I think, and it is because a public viewing of this would undermine the credibility of the group who would be considered a bit weird in the eyes of most Brits.

      Nonetheless, and no doubt knowing this, the Sands woman GLEEFULLY filmed the prayer group and put the video on line.

      Anyway, the image of Ray Savage as a solid, sensible, credible, highly experienced ex-DS in the police was, in my opinion, damaged by what most Brits would perceive to be, a flaky religious gathering.

      The fact that he is working with ‘men’s groups’ in the US is something that I consider to be a bit disturbing.

      Like

      • I don’t trust Christine Sands. I can’t say that she’s an infiltrator as I haven’t met her face to face; but the way she carries on, loud and obnoxious, supposedly casting out demons from the church, is not commendable. That’s a shortcut to making people think that you and your group are strange and cultish yourselves. And yes, Christians who are a close part of the Hampstead or other similar case(s) should keep their Christianity as private as possible– not hidden but private. Most people don’t trust Christians to begin with; no need to advertise.

        When you say that Savage is working with Christian men’s groups, are you talking about like Promise Keepers and the like? I haven’t found a Christian organization in the U.S. yet that is not flaky or fake in some way. The bulk of them are as lazy as turtles sunning on a log on a cool fall day and would rather seem important than DO something important.

        I’m in the Northeast but might be moving back to Atlanta in the near future. I don’t know yet. You’re doing great. All I can do right now is basically the same thing: sign petitions, write comments, and stay informed. I find myself surrounded by incredible ‘unbelief’ and just a major lack of natural affection from the Christians I know. Western Christians are the laziest people in the world! The rich ones (the preachers) had to beg for the money; they don’t believe in hard work! Ravi Zacharias’ ministry, he says, is for the purpose of “helping the thinker believe. Helping the believer think.” Thinkers think they’re too smart to believe, and believe are too smart to think. Both of them are a shame. Secular psychologists and authors James Randall Noblitt and Pamela Perskin-Noblitt wrote an article titled ‘When Good People Do Nothing’ in which they summarize the frustration that I feel in regards to this:

        “We are writing as secular individuals, and are puzzled by the reluctance of the Christian fellowship to come to the aid of individuals alleging ritual abuse. Too often, we hear of cases where survivors feel abandoned and alienated from the clergy and the religious community. Instead of embracing survivors, supporting them emotionally and spiritually, and acting as their advocates, the Christian community and its leadership have often turned their backs on victims, even to the extent of supporting individuals alleged to be perpetrators of such abuse. In the case of the Nazi Holocaust, six million Jews as well as many other innocent victims were killed while the world looked on apathetically. Few important church leaders challenged this atrocity. Are we witnessing a similar shameful silence?

        We are hopeful that the Christian community will not only become active in confronting ritual abuse, but that they will take a leadership role in eliminating such practices. Consider how much could be accomplished if the clergy would adopt an advocacy role in promoting public awareness and in assisting in the desperately needed fund raising which would support research, treatment and legal assistance for those victimized by ritual abuse.” (http://fromtheinsideout.tripod.com/articles/ra/when-good-people-do-nothing.htm.)

        Now, that’s sensible. Lots of praying and church gathering (and shaking and faking) but basically no action. The churches have sold common sense and hard work for religion and leisure. What a shame.

        Like

  12. Drifloud, good letter.

    Tim Veater, I agree with a mass, coordinated letter-writing effort to MPs. The problem here is that the cults are very organized and networked. One thing about them is that they are always ‘at work’; they are always seeking to promote their agenda, commit crimes, and hide their crimes. Not many people in my opinion have been as committed as they are, and it will be a challenge to beat them without at least equal commitment.

    Like

  13. I received some news that Angela Power-d’Isigny was contacted by the producer of the below Newsnight report who wants to collaborate with her on a documentary about the Hampstead case. The producer is a freelance who won’t necessarily be doing the documentary under the BBC/Newsnight banner. He is outraged about the Hampstead cover-up and lives in the Hampstead area, I heard. I don’t know if I’ve seen Angela post here before and don’t know who she’s told yet. Check it out:

    Like

  14. Arendale – the one who is, “who is versed in legalese and now thinks themselves a great psychologist”?, that would be the judge, the one person who we do not need to interpret whether or not the children were telling the truth.

    We are all able to recognize Truth quite well.

    The judge can now go home.

    Like

    • Unfortunately, the judge and the rest are doing their job as cultists and cult-connected people. It’s left to the good people who acknowledge that the children are telling the truth to blow the cover off Hampstead’s (and maybe Britain’s) satanic underworld.

      Like

  15. This is a copy of the email I just sent to the private offices of some police chiefs and newspapers throughout the land. I got “failed to deliver” notices on seven of the police emails. The original email to police has all names in full.

    To All Police Officers Who Have Sworn to Uphold The Law of the Land

    In the attachment is one of the video clips DC Rogers concealed from the police team investigating the child rape and murder case in Hampstead, September 2014. It contains PROOF that the children had – and have – detailed knowledge of distinguishing marks on and around their named attackers’ private parts. You can hear g(eight years old at the time) describing distinguishing marks such as birthmarks, pierce rings, tattoos, etc. on and around the genitals of two women, and see two very detailed drawings of these distinguishing marks – all things he could not possibly have intimate knowledge of unless what he is saying is true. The two women are named as K, headmistress of Christ Church Primary School Hampstead, and V, one of the parents of another child at the school. g, and his ten-year-old sister a, have stated that these two women are members of a large gang of child rapists who they have also named and intimately described. g explains in the video how the woman known as K, sodomised him using a strapped on “plastic willy”, brutally kicked him in the privates and performed other sex acts on him.
    These crimes are against the law of the land, and the people of the land. You, as police officers, are entrusted with the responsibility of upholding the law of the land. The evidence contained in the attached video, describing distinguishing marks on and around the genitalia of the adults the children have named as their attackers, is sufficient to require those same adults undergo medical examinations. This is the ONLY LAWFUL WAY to prove or disprove what a and g say.
    The people of the land insist that you, as police officers and public servants, carry out your lawful duty, which is to require those people named and intimately identified as the children’s attackers to undergo medical examinations in order to clear their names.

    from a conscious living being

    Drifloud 29th April, 2015 contact address email: drifloud@

    Liked by 2 people

  16. For Tim Veater and Drifloud

    The work you both do is phenomenal, the letters you write are spot on and I reckon that you are stirring feathers in high places. Good. They need to be stirred.

    Arendale
    Thanks for your reply. I have concerns about these proclaimed ‘christians’ who oftentimes are the least Christian people you could ever meet. Gandhi was spot on when he said “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ, “.

    I tend to feel that to follow Christ means to try to live one’s life according to his teachings, to love each other, and to forgive etc. I don’t always manage to do that but I do try. As for the highly visible ‘christians’ here, they don’t seem to realise that it’s not very Christ-like to go off to church every Sunday, then come out and start harassing women who are driven to abortions, or scream for the death penalty, or rabidly support Israel’s genocidal actions in Palestine, which is what they do. Absolutely vile behaviour.

    Gandhi said that Jesus’ submission to the crucifixion was the greatest act of non-violent resistance in history and I agree. I wear a crucifix, never take it off. It reminds me of the sacrifice that this man made in order to lead us into a better way of living, to create a world of love instead of hatred. But I hide it under my clothes, not because I am ashamed to be a follower of Christ, but because I don’t want people to think that I am a nasty, right-wing, hypocritical, bible-bashing nut-job like numerous “christians” here in the bible-belt.

    I don’t know much about these christian men’s groups, but I have seen the odd video of meetings in which hundreds of men gather and are almost hysterical in their passions. I will set about doing some digging to see what I can find out, but my gut gut feeling is that this movement is quite dangerous.

    You commented that these churchgoers do “lots of praying and church gathering (and shaking and faking) but basically no action. The churches have sold common sense and hard work for religion and leisure”, and that is true to an extent, but I think that though claiming to be religious Christians, these people actually have political aspirations, and dangerous aspirations at that.

    Will let you know what I find.

    Liked by 1 person

    • A lot of Christian ministers and especially bigger churches and ministries do have political aspirations. If not political, they certainly have aspirations. For them, Christianity is not a lifestyle but a means of gain, fame, and recognition. Together with the leaders and more fanatic Christians, the overall Christian mindset, at least in America, is “I am saved, therefore, I am good. I am good, therefore, I’m no longer obligated to do good.” How many lazy, apathetic, and comfortable people want to get up and get their hands dirty? Not many. This is America. Jesus told the religious leaders of His day that they made their converts twice the sons of hell that the leaders themselves were. I find today that maybe around 90% of people who become Christians become at least twice worse (sometimes thee times worse) as people than they were before they became Christians. Before Christianity, they were free to be good or bad; once Christian, whether they do good (e.g. feed the homeless) or bad (e.g. attack abortion and homosexuality and promote the death penalty, etc.), ‘it’s all good’ because “once saved (once God declares you good), always saved (you are always good).” Their ‘worseness’ is in their hypocrisy– not in the acts they do, necessarily, but in those they don’t do. I know that bad people certainly exercise their evil desires; but ‘good’ people find it hard to exercise their supposed goodness. How can they then be good people if they don’t do good?

      Gandhi was right, but basically everyone knows it by now. People are leaving churches in droves; many stay but their hearts aren’t in it; and others are using Christianity as a means of money, prestige, and recognition. (This is why satanists so easily have infiltrated Christian churches and Christianity itself. In Rochester, NY, in 2006, I was attending a church that had a ministry to victims of ritual abuse. In this church, I exposed six satanist plants– who’d deceived the church fifteen years into thinking they were Christians. A seventh plant was exposed. They were found, and it was confirmed, to be ritually and sexually abusing people right there in the church basement. When I encouraged the pastors to do something about this, they responded by meeting with some of the satanists, who were part of the church board, and deciding to evict me from the church. I was bad business, but the satanists had lots of money for the pastors (another story), and their presence made the pastors feel special and important.) However, a very small number of Christians are sincerely and selflessly wanting to live righteously instead of rationalizing that since they are already ‘made righteous in Christ’, they can live as unrighteous as they want and be a-okay. I lived in Nashville, TN, the “Bible Belt Buckle” of America. They shouldn’t brag; the atmosphere there is heavy with spiritual oppression and injustice. In America, there is no integrity and little honesty in Christianity: “Everything is fine!” = people are dying everywhere. From what version of mathematics can we get such a conclusion? As far as Christianity has fallen, I don’t like to associate with it and prefer to just say, “I believe in God.”

      Like

  17. Sabine,
    I have just received this e-mail from a total stranger. Do you have any idea how this person might have got the e-mail address. Could you let me know if this is someone known to you?

    thanks

    Sickened:

    I am located in San Diego, CA and wanted to verify that you are also located in the United States. If so, just wanted to say hello and say I too am disgusted with the pedophilia behavior that is affecting so many children in the states. There has to be a way of combating this problem, it’s out of control.

    That’s It For Now – Mary

    Like

    • Mary is a great ally. Not a total stranger to me at all. I may have said that before. But I need to clean up the comments by these lovely trolls who have nothing better to do than to copy someone’s username… Thus I have just come across this comment.

      Like

  18. Sabine,
    when I questioned this person as to how she obtained my email address, she stated that it was listed at the end of a post I had made in response to Arendale, which it obviously was not.

    When I challenged her on this she then wrote back to me with a different story, stating that she

    “had spoke with Sabine recently and expressed an interest in working with people in the U.S. – she had forwarded your post to let me know that there was interest here in the states and again, your email was at located at the bottom. I understand your concern and feel very reluctant to reach out to anyone myself. Mary”

    Please could you let me know if this is genuine. It seems so very odd to me.

    Like

  19. My wife pays the licence fee and I can’t convince her not too.Would be great if people stopped paying the fee,they could do Fxxx all about it.BBC-British buggery clowns

    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