I WANT TO HELP: What’s the Problem? #Secrecy #ChildSnatching #ForcedAdoptions #CSA #SRA

The Guibourg Mass by Henry de Malvost, in the ...
The Guibourg Mass by Henry de Malvost, in the book Le Satanisme et la Magie by Jules Bois, Paris, 1903. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A mother asked me: How many children are we talking about? How and where and since when has this been happening? Are they all being abused and used in satanic rituals? Or is that just one example? What do the Freemasons have to do with it?

1. that a child is taken every 20 minutes in the UK, as Channel IV publishes about their film on ‘forced adoptions’, i.e. children adopted without and against their parents’ will:

2. only 4% of all children taken into care get adopted:

  • the others are ‘processed’ by a system of Social Services, foster carers, foster homes, family courts, contact centres, local authorities, lawyers and ‘experts’;

3. every year some 20,000 children go missing and 50 die in care:

  • John Hemming, the only MP who has covered the issue consistently, has a lot of statistics, as he is Chairman of Justice for Families with over 2,000 parents on file who have asked for help. He says that Social Services get involved when they shouldn’t and they don’t get involved when they should. He also says that it’s policy and that there is no accountability. He tabled our Petition in the House of Commons in September 2013: Children Placed in Foster Care.
  • Ian Josephs, a former Councillor in Kent with a law degree from Oxford has watched for over 50 years how children were taken from their mothers, parents and grandparents; he has been advising between 6 and 10 people a day and publishes the website Forced Adoption.
  • As a ‘veteran McKenzie Friend‘ or lay legal advisor he said the only hope we have is exposure, exposure, exposure

4. of all the cases we have been assisting, the Musa case had been the worst:

  • first five children taken by Police, then the sixth child gets taken at birth, returned after a few months and then the parents get falsely criminalised and sent to prison; the seventh child was taken at birth in prison and the parents got deported to Nigeria;
  • the oldest child was molested by the son of the foster carers and the parents never heard from her since she reported it; another daughter reported that they were taken to dark places at night where there are only men; the little boy asked “Mummy, what is paedophilia?”
  • through the mother we met US Melissa Laird in HMP Holloway, whose 4-year-old boy was taken from her by Barnet Council, she was also falsely imprisoned and deported so that her son could be kept behind;
  • John Hemming MP reported in this Early Day Motion how a barrister had to take her two daughters to Israel, to avoid the abusive father being given custody, a pattern we have observed over and over again;
  • nobody knows how many children get abused, trafficked, mistreated in foster care. But we do know that too many are taken away for the wrong reasons and the ‘legitimisation’ by secret family courts is ‘institutionalised hypocrisy’.

5. The ‘Whistleblower Kids’ aka the Hampstead Scandal clearly tops the Musa case in terms of number of child victims (20), plus an unknown number of babies killed, number of abusers (some 70), and in terms of atrocity of crimes: rape, torture, sodomy, sacrificial murder and cannibalism:

  • it is the first that I have come across, involving not only Child Sexual Abuse (CSA), but also Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA);
  • SRA seems to be denied officially; but it also seems to be part of Filthy Britain and VIP child abuse;
  • Freemasonry may be one of the ‘glues that bind’ the ‘old boys networks’…

To make sense of it all as ‘one problem’, is virtually impossible. However, it seems correct to say that the problem is world-wide, but particularly bad in the UK, because of what’s unique in the UK:


3 thoughts on “I WANT TO HELP: What’s the Problem? #Secrecy #ChildSnatching #ForcedAdoptions #CSA #SRA

  1. I think we can add another point to the list of what makes UK unique, the colonial aspect. This has spread these practices around the globe. (I don’t mean to harp on something that is blamed for everything…but this was a part of the control/conquerors methods.) I am married to an indigenous person and have lived in colonies, believe me, the impact has been huge! So called ‘great’ britain, moving into lands and setting up their own, ‘better’ systems with all these sick practices embedded!

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Just sent this for the third time to senior Paedo-sadist sympathiser, Alison Saunders:

    To the public servant, Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions

    I sent you the following notice on 20th April and again on 27th April, 2015 and am still waiting for a response. This is a very serious matter involving fraud committed by a high court judge and two police officers. Incomparably more serious, however, is the EFFECT of the fraud committed by these public servants: the further risk of harm to many children and adults. Would you kindly respond.


    As one of the public, I inform you of that public’s interest in prosecuting, for perpetrating crimes of fraud, Judge Mrs Anna Pauffley and the Metropolitan Police officers Detective Inspector John Cannon and Detective Constable Rogers of Barnet Police Station. The three public servants committed fraud during the child rape and murder investigation in Hampstead, and the subsequent hearing and public Judgement in the Royal Courts of Justice over the period 5th September, 2014 to 19th March, 2015.


    Film clips showing the children naming their attackers individually, and giving detailed descriptions of distinguishing marks on and around each of their named attackers’ private parts were concealed from police throughout the entire investigation by DC Rogers of Barnet Police Station Child Abuse Unit, who sent them to a property store in Chingford.

    This concealment of evidence by DC Rogers was/is FRAUD.

    Detective Inspector Cannon, who led the team investigating the child rape and murder case, never required the adults named by the children as their attackers to undergo medical inspection in order to be eliminated from the inquiry, despite the children’s detailed knowledge of distinguishing marks on and around their attackers’ private parts. It appears the police never even questioned these adults! This shows the intention of DI Cannon, i.e. to AVOID requiring those people NAMED and intimately identified by the children to undergo a medical examination to clear themselves. The only possible objectors to such a medical examination are those people named by the children as their attackers who also have distinguishing marks on or around their privates MATCHING the descriptions given by the children.

    DI Cannon’s effective blocking of the necessary medical examinations and interviews of these suspects, and then claiming the investigation was “wide ranging” (see para 38. Judge Pauffley’s Judgement) is clearly FRAUD.

    The children were interviewed by police on 5th September and again on 11th September 2014, and in both interviews their accounts were very consistent. Obviously not satisfied, The Authorities ordered the children to be detained, and six days later a third set of interviews were produced. Despite the many leading questions from their interrogator, the children reaffirmed many parts of their stories. The interviewer clearly uses suggestion and leads the children throughout these interviews, which is not only gross professional misconduct, but is also psychological abuse of the children. He should also be prosecuted.

    The police investigation was closed before the police had received the medical report from University College Hospital’s Consultant Paediatrician Dr Deborah Hodes. The report CONFIRMED anal injury, which was consistent with both children’s allegations of sexual abuse. The case could not LAWFULLY be closed without first receiving the results from the medical examinations – which the police themselves had requested! The closing of the investigation was, and is, UNLAWFUL.


    The hearing was conducted in secret, and was completely one-sided. Ella draper and her legal representative, Sabine McNeill, had been hounded out of the country following threats and actual attempts to imprison them by criminals posing as police officers.

    The entire hearing was, in short, a convening of parties hostile to ella draper and her children. So, what was there to HEAR actually? It was just a show-hearing from start to finish, totally devoid of anything lawful.


    Judge Pauffley reveals, in paras 107 and 108 of her judgement, her knowledge concerning the concealment of crucially important evidence by DC Rogers during the investigation, which prevented investigating police officers access to this crucial evidence. Despite her knowledge of this “curious fact” (the Judge’s own words), Judge Pauffley CONTINUED with the hearing, when her only lawful option was to call a halt as the hearing was evidently incomplete and seriously compromised. The continuation of the hearing was/ is WILFUL CONTEMPT of the law. The Judge then went on to describe the police investigation as “wide-ranging”(para 9. of judgement) – a claim which is clearly FRAUDULENT.

    Unlike the police officers and social services during the investigation, Judge Pauffley WAS able to view “a dozen or so short film clips of the children being questioned by Ms Draper and Mr Christie and listened to the very lengthy audio recording.” (para 21. of judgement). However, it seems the Judge did NOT view the video clips containing the children’s detailed descriptions and drawings of the distinguishing marks on and around the private parts of the adults named by the children as their attackers, as she makes no mention of these anywhere in her twenty-page “fact-finding” judgement. This was a deliberately selective review of the video clip evidence with the intention to continue to conceal the fact the children were able to describe – and had described – distinguishing marks on and around their named attacker’s genitals. Again, FRAUD.

    Consultant Paediatrician Dr Deborah Hodes’ report CONFIRMED the children’s allegations of inflicted anal injury from insertion of a blunt instrument of penetrative force, which were consistent with both children’s allegations of sexual abuse. Judge Pauffley’s response to this concrete evidence was a disgraceful attempt to rubbish Dr Hode’s report and to launch a vile ad hominem attack, stating: “The court must always be on guard against the over-dogmatic expert…” Such tactics are beneath contempt.

    Judge Pauffley’s judgement was/is designed to deceive and mislead the public, and is nothing more than a sham. It is fraud at such a loathsome level that it is sickening to all decent human beings.

    These crimes of fraud by these three public servants have put at risk of harm not only ella draper’s two young children, but children everywhere, and therefore all human beings.

    Their crimes are also a betrayal of public trust. As one of the public, I inform you, Director of Public Prosecutions, of the public interest in prosecuting Judge Mrs Anna Pauffley, Detective Inspector Cannon and Detective Constable Rogers for perpetrating the very serious crime of fraud, without delay.

    from one of the public, and a conscious living being,

    Drifloud 20th April, 2015 contact address: email: drifloud@hushmail.com

    EVIDENCE: The mobile phone film recordings showing the children naming their attackers, and giving detailed knowledge of distinguishing marks on and around each of their named attackers’ private parts can be delivered to your office, along with the medical reports and police interviews of the children.

    All the other evidence incriminating Judge Pauffley, DC Rogers and DI Cannon can be found in the Judge’s own words taken from her “Care Proceedings: Fact Finding” judgement made public, 19th day of March, year 2015 – in particular the following two paragraphs:

    107.”It is a curious fact that prior to the launch of these proceedings, no police officer had listened to the audio recording made by Jean Clement Yaohirou or watched the film clips of the children. DI Cannon made inquiries at my request to discover that DC Rogers, the member of his team who received the film clips and the audio recording from Mr Yaohirou, had sent them to a property store in Chingford. The focus would appear to have been upon arranging almost immediate ABE interviews.”

    108. “I say no more at this stage than that the police and social services inquiry could have taken an entirely different course if attention had been given to those recordings. At the very least, the questions asked of P and Q at interview would have been directed towards other areas of interest.”

    Liked by 1 person

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