Wednesday, 18 March 2015



  1. The Evidence – Documents & Audio:

    Controlled Disinfo:


    1. Thank you Anon at 12:12:

      Regarding the "Controlled Disinfo" @ "wideshut":

      Watched the first 5 mins and was appalled at the complete lack of substance to justify the narrators case:

      He begins with words such as "people are loosing their minds", "and all these absurd stories" and "delusions of their mother and partner".

      My reply:

      1. If individuals, starting with lay legal advisor Sabine, are alarmed by the testimony of the children then according to this source that means she and all of us are "loosing our minds".

      2. The children's detailed accounts of abuse (consistent with medical reports) = "absurd stories".

      3. Testimony of both children given on camera in a natural, flowing context = "delusions of their mother and partner".

      Wideshut - Go back to trolling school!


    2. I read the article but skipped the video. The author makes some very valid points, surely ? Here's a question - who is Satan and why is "he" being worshipped via abuse of children ? What is the purpose, is it sacrificial ? I do believe in, lets say, another dimension and indeed that sacrifices (for example the Glencoe massacre) have happened historically, but generally they seem to be carried out by the very top "elite" of our world, the one's that perhaps consider themselves to be "chosen ones" and are more than aware of magick and forces beyond our ken. Thus I am perplexed as to why, for example, the parents involved in the alleged Orkney abuse case would be making sacrifices to Satan - what would be the purpose; the reason; what do they gain. Not trying to fall out, just curious. cheers

    3. That stinky site even reports AANG. blog as an example of excessive Activism.

    4. Orkney thing was not true ,I know people in Orkney
      social workers took children away ,later children returned.
      social workers looking for organized child abuse should start looking closer to home .systematic abuse is from the system when people make dessisions like automatons and now with computer tool to procure commodity for business in ss case its children.In south Carolina the policy's for taking children rely on computer aided decision making inputting high risk when medium risk , taking out any human element on whats best for children ,its not about looking after children its business the corrupt business of "child protection" .
      who will bite the hand that feeds them?its fear that makes people conform ,its getting so "out of hand" that child care organizations any one who works with children is so afraid to loose their jobs so much paper work and irrational neurotic behavier,the slightest "incident" of any "risk" to child evidently manifesting as a whole range of "symptoms" creates SO much pressure foreveryone it is stressfull, any idea of normal gone.its all appearance, as long as everything looks alright it is?,meanwhile normalizing children being away from their parents having state intervention ,having bonuses paid to schools and nurserys for each child with intervention it created a reward monetarily for all the pressure of looking for signs of child abuse ,any mark on child with intervention in place = trip to hospital and call the police,so much hype so much disempowering of familys ,best intrests of child? privacy ? proffesinals so buzy so stressed out,how easy is it to have ones remarks at one time used against a childs best intrests and separate the child from the family,what criteria is justifiable to take so so so many children away from their familys in UK and adopt them forever secretly,

  2. The full police interview of G dated 17/09/14 seems to have disappeared.

    Can anyone upload or provide a link as the so called retraction video which is in my opinion the smoking gun and shows there is not a retraction but a coaching of G by police which can not stand up as a retraction of the original allegations of 05 and 11 September.

  3. AAN you have a very analytical mind and you definitely have wisdom.

    I would like you to look at this

    And consider the implications.

    Thank you.



    https://archive.4plebs. org/pol/thread/41349159/


  8. Thank you Aangirfan Hampstead Research and CCPS

  9. I meant thanks to the Video maker obviously and did not twig that CCPS was an acronym for the school. Kind of a dolt apparently!

  10. Videos not available anymore

    1. Thank you. We are re-uploading to Zeekly as we speak. We did not realise that Zeekly had been infiltrated. We will consider hosting these vids on our UK ISP but that is not an ideal situation.

      Please download and share the vids while you can.

      We will update our website with the new urls.

      Thanks again


      VIDEOS AND MORE TO BE PUT ON HERE (some videos up)

  11. Simply shocking cover-up, by the Ham &High.


      omg OMG!!!!


  13. Beaten to it. Was going to report this:

    "Bitter ex-wife tortured kids by forcing them to claim they were involved in McDonalds satanic paedophile cult"
    She[The judge] said filmed interviews of the children had been uploaded onto the internet with more than four million people worldwide viewing online material about the case.

    She added: “It is inevitable that a large proportion of those have a sexual interest in children..."


    1. So another four million people concerned about child abuse go on the 'authorities' list of suspected paedophiles? No tactic will be too low or devious for an Establishment feeling under siege.

  14. About the Ham and High article above:

    'Simply shocking' is an understatement. The article in and of itself is unrelentingly scathing in true Brit fashion and true to form for the UK Establishment. I am unbelievably appalled and ashamed to hear of such a pointed ruling being meted out by a public official such as this one. It is completely off the mark out of scope for the entire matter so much so that it screams cover-up. This 'judge' squarely rested ALL blame on the Mother and her partner AC, as well as the entire 'online community' that followed the matter in it's entirety. All in all it does appear as though Ham and High was granted the ultimate scoop in helping disseminate Ms. Pauffley's ruling as just the sort of high-brow PR tactic we should come to expect.

    The article and Ms. Pauffley's ruling look to be similar to the rants provided by a one "Ricky Dearman" profile on Youtube when the original "321 Papa Kills Babies" video emerged, replete with threats of "Just wait and see" prophecies of his innocence and AC's guilt, almost as though he already knew what Ms. Pauffley's ruling was going to be from the beginning.

    Not a single mention of RD domestic abuse issues and logged police complaints against him.

    Not one mention of the First Degree Sodomy charges Mr. Christie would be facing if he were guilty of the anal scarring in Victim P.

    Not a single mention of police misconduct in trying to apprehend the mother illegally.

    No mention of how the police videos left the possession of the police, no mention of the validity of the retractions and the ominous police approach to these retractions, nay their whole approach to this entire investigation.

    This off-the-cuff ruling from justice Pauffley seems more a poor attempt at quelling public dissent than protecting any children from abuse.

    I think this is a declaration of a cyber-war.


  15. Why didn't Ham & High carry out their own investigations? Seems they just waited for the court decision to be delivered. Most odd.