UK Queen, amongst others named in HORRENDOUS peadophile ring account

originally posted by: and14263
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.

I'm with you on this it does need to come out.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The nonce's in parliament are to well connected.

You wont bring it down by starting at the top of the pyramid aim you're sights lower.

Get the people who covered up Rotherham.

The counsellors/police officers who knew and did nothing.

They will have names and conections but alas no one has heard of any arrests on the cover up, and how long has it been now 3months.

It was not just muslim grooming gangs it was elitists aswell.

a reply to: and14263

Ok...

A couple of poInts just to start off with:

1) This page full of allegations is extremely light on detail, timeline, and contextually specific information.

2) When the press, or any individual refers to someone as having been named in an account of events, that normally means that they have been named in direct connection to allegations being made in the account, not just that the persons name comes up as having been present, at some unspecified location, at an unspecified time. In short, saying that one has "Met the Queen" is not probative, or indicative of any malfeasance or evil doing on the part of Her Majesty. If ones intention is to accuse the Queen of criminal acts, then one must be strictly explicit in ones description of the crime she has committed, not just name drop maliciously, and in the vaguest possible terms. The Queen has hosted garden parties which have attracted more than a million attendees in total over the years, and she has therefore met a great many people.

Put another way, look at these two bits of information:

I once met a great many people who had played the role of The Doctor in Doctor Who, back in the day before Eccleston, Tennent, Smith, and Capaldi had taken the role.

When I was a child, I once got kicked in the knackers so hard that I had to have surgery to correct some damage caused by the impact.

These things have nothing to do with one another, save for the fact that I was present for both things, but they honestly have no connection what so ever. They do however, appear in the same post. However, the clear inference here in the case of the mention of the Queen in this article we are discussing, is that she was somehow involved with things, despite the fact that there is no stark suggestion of the sort, actually being made.

This editing method is surprisingly good at fooling some people into thinking one thing, when what is written is clearly another. Personally I find it a little transparent and sophomoric really.


3) This reference to some satanic religious element... Where is the source for that? Where is the link? Again, one cannot just spout these things into the ether, without qualifying statements to clarify ones position, to explain the exact link between two concepts. For example, if someone that the articles author, and their "sources" claim is part of this terrible plot, was clearly heard to be muttering prayers to the father of lies while molesting some poor persons rotting corpse, then what you have there, is a case for genuine satanic cult involvement in the events alleged. Until or unless that sort of thing is recorded as having happened however, what you have is a mob of bastards, being total bastards.

It has to be said, that human beings are quite capable of attaining some fairly abominable states of mind and action, without making a conscious decision to give their souls to satan.

a reply to: and14263

If the allegation is true that she met this person it tends to put her in the light of at least knowing what was going on. Perhaps she could not bring herself to the point of bringing down her government at the time.

Wouldn't be shocked at least some kind of connection cover-up connect to her. Someone letting these judges- see this thread www.abovetopsecret.com... , funding these judges to be lax on offenses and funding politicians, etc. to keep these things hushed up.

Guess it doesn't matter now if it's "Icke-ish" after this comes out, because after all was he wrong about what he discussed on a certain celebrity? Or see it as such, a grain of truth in the "crazy".

Please go to pie and mash film for lots of award winning film on this subject

pieandmashfilms.com...

originally posted by: Shamrock6

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?

Not necessarily. If this is a global problem, then they have found a fresh source without being noticed. If it's a conspiracy that is true, then we need to find those children. There were thousands.

a reply to: and14263 mmm i don't think the queen is involved in this disgusting crime but there is a scandal here somewhere.

originally posted by: MAC269
a reply to: and14263

If the allegation is true that she met this person it tends to put her in the light of at least knowing what was going on. Perhaps she could not bring herself to the point of bringing down her government at the time.

That is totally ridiculous

Are you suggesting that, for example, everyone who ever met Fred West knew what he was doing?

Have some commone sense!

a reply to: TrueBrit

I was thinking of putting this into the Gray Area forum, I thought it would get more publicity in here though.

You're right about mis-associating(is that even a word?) the Queen, there's clearly no proof in the article which suggests she was/is complicit in all this. However I will say through personal experience and opinion I think she knows what has been going on. This is clearly just my opinion and it did have bearing on my sensationalist title. Again, a title used to get more views - I think it's important to get as many people seeing this as possible.

I don't want to make excuses, I'm just giving you an insight into my thought process behind the thread.

As for the Satanism thing, I've mentioned in previous posts this could be something to throw us off the scent, however I've heard stuff from this Andrew guy before and for some reason I'm very inclined to believe he is not making things up.

IS it Satanism? You make a fair point, we are capable of abominable acts without attributing it to Satanism. Perhaps the urge we have as kids to pull the wings off flies can grow and grow if allowed?

Whatever the truth, I hope these people get what they deserve.

a reply to: boymonkey74

I think the queen is implicated due to knowing about this and not doing anything about it to protect the children of her realm. After all orderary people if implicated in a crime pay for thgeir implication - so should she! She is a disgrace along with all those she has protected. Never mind if its a so-called religion its self gratification upon a child which is disgusting, criminal behaviour.

Its time the law applied to every one on this land and not just the ordinary people and excluded the elite and certain pop stars and celebrities and heads of useful businesses.

One point I would like to ask members, if they care to think about it. So many powerful men also seem to have a huge sex-drives. They seem to think they can use their power any way they wish without consequence but allied to this mind set, is the fact they think they can literally screw any one any time they wish. Marriage is for the blood line and pure 'respectability'.

I feel for Margaret Thatcher who also certainly knew about the sexual activities of some of her MP's and I read somewhere she had to warn one of them to clean up his act - can't remember which one. No wonder those men wanted rid of her - now we know the real reason. Those women who are linked to these men, like baroness schloss, protect their fathers, husbands, sons and brothers because to not do so would break ranks and kick them out of their high kicking lifestyles and status. Their ex friends would close ranks on them and they don't relate to Pamela Ordinary.

The earlier list reported with the names of kitty, an mp from worthing and various heads of institutions showed a link to royalty so this new revelation should not be disregarded. We know its going on, its how much we complain that will be the only way to get this dealt with. If we all simply ignore it and don't complain, then they will carry on regardless.

We cannot agree to having one law for the ordinary person and no law for the elite and their partners in crime. Only last night the boy scouts apologised for abuse within their camps and I have to be thankful that we now hear this problem goes around the world's governments and obviously people linked to their circles.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Show me the evidence she knows anything.
The article doesn't say nothing.
All just rumours...no substance what so ever.

a reply to: and14263

This links into the Elm Grove investigation which seems to have stalled also. Its the reason for the stall and T May's excuses for not finding someone fit to deal with the enquiry. If this was about something not so high reaching, don't you think she would have found someone 'non-establishment' to have headed up this enquiry. The fact she tried it on with schlosh and her family links to paedophelia is enough to sound alarm bells.

If you think our queenie is stupid coss the duke likes to call her cabbage, then I think you underestimate her. We have having royaty thrust down our throats as well as the poor americans with our latest pretty family royals everywhere even from free calendars - have you ever know the royals to give free calendars before? its never happened. They are selling themselves because they knew it was only a matter of time before this squelched out into the public arena and it would link to buck house plus people were going to get mad and, even heaven forbid stop the financial support for their lavishness and gambling. The main media is their weapon of silence and hasn't it been silent and aren't we being bombarded with lots of pretty family royals, yet nothing about the abuse enquiry which they are hoping will get reflected onto the asian men taking advantage of our young kids rather than our own establishment.

Sorry we have to disagree on this matter but I honestly think she would do anything to protect her family's position and I cannot think she doesn't have her ear to the pulse and her informants. Hows the cat by the way - mine is thriving?

a reply to: Shiloh7

I agree with what you are saying here.

Cat?

a reply to: Shamrock6

did I miss where they said the queen was involved? All I saw was that the alleged victim met her.

I missed that bit as well. But then nothing about those anti human Royals would surpise me

You know what I can't deal with, we all know the Paedophile ring goes very far up the chain and as someone said every parent should be going crazy over this. Our very own government is involved in child abuse but you know what .. Anyone I mentiom it too do not seemed bothered and I blame this partly because the majority of the UK pick up all the crap tabloid papers for example the sun the daily star etc and they are so wrapped up in reading about some celeb scandle

It makes me furious that there have been two failed inquests into the abuse, Jimmy saville and Rolf Harris who have had all the connectiona with the higher up people and yet people believe it was only saville and Rolf who were abusing boys. It makes me sick that this country (the UK) are really not concerned or the REAL news is never reported in the crap papers they read

I'm not a parent but I'm fuming that all this gets covered up

a reply to: and14263
Hi 14263,

I am sorry I had meant my reply for boymonkey and that cat I worry about.

I am glad you posted this because it is a topic that I suspect goes back to Ted heath and his yacht era. My mother was a great fan and knew Ted Heath through charity work she did. She thought him a great man, but only once she remarked he had 'something about the night about him' that she couldn't pinpoint. Would never be drawn on it again but I know if it had been paedophelia she would have said.

I hope this gets the people moving a bit because we know its going on and justice shouldn't be only mediated onto the public. These men need to be brought to justice and any women involved also.

The Queen and Prince Philip have been accused of something similar in the past so I wouldn't at all be surprised if she is involved with this one. Especially given that a lot of High Profile Pedo's like Jimmy Savile are on first name terms with her and her family!

This is William Combes.

He said he witnessed "the abduction of ten fellow residential school children by the Queen of England and her husband in October, 1964 at the Catholic school in Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada."

According to Anonymous:

In Canada, "government and church run 'residential' schools were used to systematically break down native communities over decades.

"Sexual abuse was normal, and murders also happened.

"Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip have been directly accused of being present at such a school when 10 kids went missing...

"An official inquiry was due to hear testimony in a few months from the last surviving witness to see the Queen with those kids.

"That last witness died this week in mysterious circumstances."

Basically the Queen was accused along with her in-bred family of having taken these kids back to England. These kids have never been seen alive again.

And their accuser William Combes has since died mysteriously after getting the go ahead to take the Queen to court. Also all his evidence has disappeared. No surprise there!

March 2011.

The man who claimed to witness "the abduction of ten fellow residential school children by the Queen of England and her husband in October, 1964 at the Catholic school in Kamloops, B.C. has died suddenly...

"William Combes, age 59 and in good health, was scheduled to be a primary witness at the opening session of the International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS) on September 12 in London...

"William was the sole survivor of a group of three aboriginal boys who claim to have witnessed the abduction of ten children during a royal visit to the Kamloops residential school in mid October, 1964, when both the Queen and Prince Philip were in Canada.

"'They took away those ten kids and nobody ever saw them again' described William...

Look under Sandringham!!

It's absolutely sickening how people in Power can get away with the most barbaric and disgusting acts of horror on kids and others turn a blind eye!

As a Father it makes my blood boil to think and hear what these depraved excuses for Humans get up to! What in the hell is wrong with this world?

The Queen and the Missing Kids

originally posted by: crazyewok

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!

Whilst I agree with your sentiments, unfortunately the Judge's hands were tied by a little thing called Law. Because the sickening acts were carried out before 2005, the law states that he could not be held indefinitely ( that was the original sentence). Therefore he had to be released, which no doubt will result in this sick sub human re-offending.

As for the Queen being involved in paedophillia or child murder this is not beyond the realms of feasibility imo. It may sound all 'David Icke' but then didn't he warn about Jimmy Saville? Many shrugged it off as just Saville's eccentricity, but that was just a cover for his depraved intentions as has subsequently been proved. Saville had large connections with the Royals and particularly the next King. They spent weeks together at Saville's little retreat in Scotland, who knows what went on there.

I haven't read the article as someone suggested that it could be an unsecure site, but the dragging out of getting the inquiry set up and underway, certainly suggests a desperation on the elites part. If we don't continue to strive for this inquiry to get underway, it could possibly be swept under the carpet or at the very least protect certain individuals from ever being exposed for what they truly are.

This is what is running the world and is in every power position in every community in every country on earth. Your Pediatricians, well............chances of them being uninvolved is miniscule. Position of authority = THIS! I'm not sure everyone of them abuses small children, but SATANIC, or the ancient egyptian, sumerian form of that, YES!

a reply to: and14263


This is a bit off topic but I thought I’d throw it into the paedophile mix...

I have had a depressing morning searching the internet for that picture of Lord Brittan in Elm guest house. Back when the Saville scandal hit the headlines, I spent some time, probably like everyone else, reading stuff on the internet and watching Youtube videos etc, It never struck me at the time that the picture of Brittan although obnoxious and disquieting might be important. I think it might have been on a Youtube video that I saw it but it is proving elusive. I could kick myself as someone like Bill Maloney could perhaps give it the exposure it needs.

It is a black and white photograph somewhat dated. Brittan is sitting facing the camera slightly to the right off centre on what looks like a bench or a couch which is against the wall, a dozen or so feet from the camera. He is wearing a maid’s outfit consisting of a bib and apron and a little sort of half a maids hat. It is white and looks grubby more like a well worn prop or costume. He appears to be naked but there is nothing exposed if you know what I mean. On his lap and in profile, facing to our right, his left is a naked boy. He looks about ten or eleven years old. He doesn’t appear distressed or unhappy and looks well cared for. He has tousled hair and full cheeks; he is a handsome little boy. The room they are in seems more like an ante room or short hallway. I think Brittan is looking at the camera.

I mention all that as perhaps it might verify that I saw this photograph but who knows in this current climate it may disappear. That photograph might be evidence against Brittan. Whilst searching this morning I see that it is mentioned a lot but no real description. Anyway sorry about the off topic rant but I wanted to get that off my chest.

The media is noticeably silent about Brittan’s sordid past preferring to talk about the missing dossier as if that is the issue.