UK Queen, amongst others named in HORRENDOUS peadophile ring account

This is quite possibly the worst account of the UK elite peadophile rings which are slowly surfacing both on here and in the MSM.

I can only apologise for subjecting you the reader to such a horrific account of what I believe is the truth.

This can not and should not be kept silent any longer.

“We have an international paedophile ring operating in every democratic government on our planet!” These words, and revelations about systematic paedophila within the UK government, from Bill Maloney of Pie and Mash Films (a survivor of child abuse himself), are enough to worry every parent on the planet, but more shocking is the revelation that HM Queen Elizabeth II has been named in connection to this Parliamentary paedophile ring should have every parent in the UK demanding that the police investigate fully, and publically, these allegations.

Andrew, a victim of child-abuse under the protection of Bill Maloney, has testified to the Daily Express newspaper that he was forced to film a snuff movie under the direction of Sydney Cooke.

We are talking about disabled children being ferried between all the Channel Islands, especially the Isle of Sark, the Isle of Wight, Jersey and Guernsey.

And it is from here this conspiracy gets almost unreadable. But please, read on, I honestly think there is truth in all of this.

Article

a reply to: and14263

Two things: one - did I miss where they said the queen was involved? All I saw was that the alleged victim met her. Two - given that cpr works somewhat less than 20% of the time, the statement that the alleged perpetrator was killing people and then resuscitating them over and over and over again seems a bit suspicious to me.

a reply to: and14263

All it says about the queen is that she has been named....nothing more.
While I agree we have to look into the allegations into a pedo ring in government I highly doubt the Queen is involved.
So what did the Queen do eh?.
That article has no evidence to be honest.

I only got part way into the article before the link changed to a completely different website on its own...


It's not a very secure site.


Or it's being monitored very closely.





With that said I'd like to know what proof they have against the Queen.

Sounds like Catholic propaganda.
All sorts of Catholic propaganda about the Queen in the Satanic realm.


I don't buy it though.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: and14263

Two things: one - did I miss where they said the queen was involved? All I saw was that the alleged victim met her. Two - given that cpr works somewhat less than 20% of the time, the statement that the alleged perpetrator was killing people and then resuscitating them over and over and over again seems a bit suspicious to me.

Although there is a big pedo conspiracy going on here I do have to queation this source.

It was prettt badly written and as you point out some of the claims seem medicaly unlikely.


Now if you want shocking look at the judge yesterday that let a pedo who raped a 9 year old walk after only 3 years even though it was its secound offence and even his oen lawyer thought him a danger!

Good job the queen never sues for slander also.

a reply to: crazyewok

Yeah that was bad...can judges be struck off?.

a reply to: and14263

Now we know what may have happened to the children crossing the boarder from Mexico.

a reply to: and14263

Horrific.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: crazyewok

Yeah that was bad...can judges be struck off?.

I think they can be.

That judge had to be insane or a nounce himself. Any sane person although they had to end the indeffinate sentace would have still kept in jail.

Plus researching the site I will not take them seriously.

commonsenseconspiracy.com...

originally posted by: AlephBet
a reply to: and14263

Now we know what may have happened to the children crossing the boarder from Mexico.

The children crossing the mexican border ended up in a snuff film on the Isle of Wight?

a reply to: Shamrock6

I am sure he was not killing and resuscitating them over and over again. But choking them unconcious (unconcious would look dead to a kid) and repeating over and over would be very doable and very thrilling for a sub human of this type..

This # is downright discusting. Not even pedo's - but sick, torturous, killing monsters.

a reply to: lightedhype

Okay well that's not what he said. He seemed pretty clear about what he meant to me.

"Sidney Cooke would choke children in their beds (or where-ever the film is being shot) and as Andy said to me, “He’ll choke him Bill until he went blue and then he would blow into his mouth again.” Sidney Cooke used to strangle and choke the kids and then resuscitate them. So if you like, kill them, bring them back to life, kill them, bring them back to life. One went on for over three weeks.”

Doesn't sound to me like he meant anything other than what he said. But, accepting your comment as is, if somebody is willing to exaggerate between unconscious and dead makes me question what else is exaggerated.

Not that the source itself doesn't make me question it on its own.

a reply to: Shamrock6

One thing I will say to you my American friend is that Sydney Cooke was a well known child killer who got sent down eventually...


So for him to do something as heinous as choking a child into unconsciousness and then resuscitating them isn't that farfetched.


Sydney Coole was a sick mother f***er.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I understand that. And perhaps he did. But given that cpr fails far more often than it works, and the quote is "killed" repeatedly, it seems a bit far fetched that he was able to do what was actually stated, and not a "well he probably meant this" as often as the claim makes it sound.

No doubt he did horrific things, many of which are likely still unknown. But this particular quote is an eyebrow raiser, and that's unfortunate because if it's false or an exaggeration, it destroys any credibility other claims may have. That's my point, and my only point. Inflations and exaggerations get headlines, but in the end they do more damage than good.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I agree pal, this isn't the subject to bring false accusations to.

Sorry if you guys think I've provided a bad source, poor title and false allegations. Honestly thought I was publicising stuff which needed publicising.

a reply to: and14263

I'm not knocking you mate I think this is important and I'd feel certain some of its true...


But when they say the Queen is part of a Satanic paedo ring it all comes across a bit David Icke...

Again that's not to knock him either but some of the stuff he endorses is just a bit too much for me.

a reply to: and14263

Yep, what Charlie said. You posted what they posted. Not your fault. I think there might be some truth hidden in there somewhere, but it's suspect. That's also sort of why we're here. Fact finding