Okay, here we go...
Guru has me on "ignore", so my comments in this particular posting are not directed at him (despite his ongoing attempts to insinuate that I may be - just maybe! - connected to a cult that rapes, kills, and eats babies), but rather are meant for anyone else who may be interested in this case, and who wishes to approach it with an open mind, in a good faith manner, dispassionately and rationally.
I put it to you, fair-minded observer, that there is nothing new in the above, somewhat lengthy missive by Guru. It consists of the same old True Believer tricks and balderdash - wild speculation presented as fact and Invasion of the Body Snatchers-style point-and-shriek accusations leveled against a) anyone who attempts to defend themselves or their community from the True Believers' "activism" (both online and, far more troubling, real-world) or b) anyone who publically sympathises with these people and expresses concern over the highly toxic witch's brew of New Age narcicism, very real mental illness, and self-actualization-via-mob-vigilantism that seems to be fueling many of the individuals at the forefront of this paradoxically ridiculous yet potentially deadly-dangerous movement.
I invite any interested party to check out the Hampstead Hoax True Believers' online home-base, at
http://www.hampsteadresearch.com/ to witness for themselves the level of research, argumentation, discourse and discussion in which these brave, self-sacrificing "activists" are engaged.
On a personal note, since I chose to write about the Hampstead Satanic Hoax case on my own blog (
http://www.dailydirtdiaspora.blogspot.com), HampsteadResearch.com has published no less three full articles attacking me personally in ways that should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the True Believers' tactics on this thread here at RigInt.
Now, as for Guru's latest posting, above, there is absolutely nothing of value in it. Most of the points he raises have been refuted and debunked again and again and again and again. As for the new stuff, well... let's take a look at it.
Guru: "Speaking to one of the researchers in the Hampstead case recently, I was curious about why the two children who made the original allegations were being held in a care home. Why, if Ricky Dearman has been ruled innocent, hadn't they been returned to his care?"
To which I have to ask: Why do you assume that you and your fellow True Believers - who have proven themselves to be dangerous scofflaws on numerous occasions - should have access to what is supposed to be privileged, PRIVATE Family Court information? It's none of your business, as a matter of fact.
Guru continues: "Three reasons have been offered that I know of: 1) The judge was concerned there would be a public outcry (this is privately, I don't think it's been publicly admitted). 2) Dearman claimed not to be "ready" (whether emotionally, financially, or in some other sense I don't know) to take care of them. 3) The children do not want to be put in Dearman's care because they are afraid."
Of course, by "reasons have been offered" Guru really means "speculation that we've pulled from our collective asses." Regardless, now that he (actually I'll refer to the True Believers as "they" from now on, because they basically parrot each other's talking points non-stop)... now that THEY have woven three speculative reasons from whole cloth as to why the children haven't been immediately released into their father's custody, they set about explaining how these reasons - which they, themselves, have only just created - are YET MORE evidence of the father's guilt.
Guru explains: "Does any of these reasons square with that of an innocent, loving father? Maybe the first one could, but I doubt it would be enough to prevent the reunion from happening."
Never mind that family court proceedings are supposed to be conducted in private, and involve no one but the family, itself. Never mind how incredibly complicated this case has become thanks in part to the mother and her boyfriend high-tailing it out of the country to avoid facing the music. Never mind the bizarre menagerie of freakish "activists" who've been involved in harassing and intimidating innocent people in churches and at schools and elsewhere, whose involvement leads to a real need to be very careful and deliberate in terms of how the court proceeds with the children's care. Never mind that these children are in desperate need of psychiatric care and counseling thanks to what Ella and Abraham have put them through (threatening to bury a 9 year old girl alive is bound to leave some scars)... never mind all that. The reason the children aren't yet with the father is because HE'S GUILTY AND THE CULT IS REAL CASE CLOSED!
Guru then brings into the mix what is probably currently the most popular True Believer mantra, this one about the distinguishing marks: "Another main point that AFAIK has not been raised at this thread (though those who are fighting to prove the children's first allegations were the correct ones have been raising it over & over again),"
Wow! Finally, a Hoaxstead True Believer who admits that the children recanted their original allegations before admitting that they were made to lie at the behest of the physically and mentally abusive Abraham Christie! Most just choose to ignore the inconvenient fact that THEY are the ones who "don't believe" the children.
Guru continues: "... is that none of the accused besides Dearman were questioned, and that even tho the children described easily identifiable marks on the bodies of the alleged abusers (such as piercings and tattoos), not one of them were asked to show their bodies, and none have volunteered to do so, even tho this would be a very direct and simple way to clear their names. (The main focus of this line of criticism seems to be on the priest, who the children claim has piercings down his back. (see here)"
Okay, first of all, it's simply not true that ONLY Ricky Dearman was investigated, or that there was "no investigation" as many True Believers claim. There WAS an investigation. It seems like, for the True Believers, the fact that the police failed to uncover evidence of the cult is not evidence that the “first allegations” were not true, but rather that the authorities are part of the cult, or that no investigation took place.
Now, regarding the question as to why none of the "alleged abusers with distinguishing marks" has "come forward" to prove their innocence, I have to answer with a question of my own... TO WHOM?! If every police officer, physician, and government official in England is a member of the True Believers’ precious fantasy cult, exactly who is it that they propose should be performing these extremely intimate exams?
By the way, I find it ridiculous that I have to point this out, but even if some of the people involved end up having piercings or tattoos that are in any way similar to those described by the children in their “first allegations”, that in and of itself is NOT evidence that they are baby-eating, baby-fucking baby-killers. It just isn’t. They (the tattoos) could have been seen during public swim time at a pool, for instance, and even more intimate ones could be seen in the changing room at said pool. Also, keep in mind that tattoos are created by tattoo artists, many of whom like to talk about their craft and handywork. Furthermore, if the people in question had even a moderately active sex life, then that means there would be at least a handful of people who knew about said body art, and may have shared that information through gossip... Gossip that might have found its way to Ella and Abraham, who them wove it into their fantasy narrative that they fed to the children.
Guru continues: “(snip) Nevertheless, what research I have done has convinced me, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there is an ongoing effort to discredit, harass, and intimate anyone seriously looking into the Hamsptead case, as we have seen in a relatively mild form at this thread (and even at my own blog, where I only mentioned my interest and opinion and linked to this forum).”
Kindly name one individual who is “seriously looking into the Hampstead case”, and describe the “harassment and intimidation” that they have suffered. Specific cases, please.
Guru continues: “The sort of trolling (what tapitsbo called gangstalking) that researchers are being subjected to around this is relentless, consistent, malicious, and organized.”
This is hilarious. Let me ask you all a serious question: would you rather suffer the kind of “gangstalking” that Guru describes above, or the relentless, consistent, malicious and organized REAL STALKING of innocent Hampstead citizens as detailed in these harrowing witness statement affidavits?
https://whistleblowerkids.files.wordpre ... rry-ai.pdfGuru continues: “It's not simply angry readers expressing opinions thuggishly (like someone I could mention),”
Now I’m a “thug”. Unlike the fine, upstanding citizen activists who attempted to batter down a church door chanting vile accusations of pedophilia and child murder while the congregation cowered inside, fearing for their lives. THAT’s heroic, in Guru’s twisted worldview.
Guru: “...it's people creating YouTube & other accounts to deliberately mislead and confuse, hurling slanderous accusations at the researchers, accusing them of pedophilia, drunkenness, you name it, as well as creating accounts in the names of the researchers and posting AS them. See comments at this vid for an example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pprL7NqCASc There are trolls (or a single troll?) who have created accounts posing as Ella Gareeva with a picture of Ella Draper the mother and a bunch of ED videos at their account. There is a fake account for Charlotte Ward, one for Hampstead Research using the same icon as the legitimate account ("HRTube"), and so on. This is an organized campaign and the most likely explanation is that it's being done by Dearman and the others who were identified by the children.”
You have zero evidence for your accusation. There is zero evidence of “an organized campaign”. What you’ve described is fairly par for the course Internet trolling, and in a case that has attracted as much attention as this one has - and which has been led by the goofy likes of Belinda, Neelu, Charlotte, etc - it is quite frankly to be expected. The idea that “the most likely explanation” is that it’s being done by Dearman is laughable.
Guru: “It's understandable that, if these people were truly innocent, they would be angry about it and want to defend themselves.”
No shit.
Guru: “But in this way? The comments by these trolls are vicious and ugly, not simply indignant.
That’s because it’s probably not being done by any of the people Christie and Draper got Draper’s children to accuse of being in the cult in question, but rather by people who came across the story and can’t believe how ridiculous some of the True Believers are, and are getting their LULZ by trolling some of the main players online.
Guru: “And if the the dot-joining of
https://dearmandoeshampstead.files.wordpress.com is right...”
A mighty big IF there. The fact that some of the participants at a discussion board use some of the same slang and jargon is hardly proof that they are all the same person. Besides which, I have now personally communicated with two of the regular contributors at HoaxteadResearch.wordpress.com, offline, and I can report that despite being listed as Dearman sock puppets on your linked page, I seriously doubt that they’re both Dearman because 1. they aren’t the same person, and 2. they aren’t the same sex.
Guru: “...then these same IDs are also responsible for some pretty vile avocations of child abuse, murder, and other stuff. So this is hardly your innocent band of citizens standing up for their rights to privacy.”
Again, you have no proof that it’s “them”, so your ongoing elaboration of these points is moot.
Guru: “Bottom line for me so far is pretty simple: those who have taken the children's initial allegations seriously and are trying to bring to light what they see as the truth about them seem to be serious, concerned, intelligent people...”
Oh my. Oh dear. Oh wow. That’s a mind-blower. Again, I urge any interested parties to head on over to Hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com and check out the collection of information on all the movers and shakers in the Hoax-pushing community, those who form the mushy core of this motley crew. I think you’ll find that they are the very opposite of “serious, concerned, intelligent” people. Even their latest white knight - “retired police detective” Ray Savage, who said that he’d conducted hours of interviews with Draper (itself doubtful) and was able to conclude “110 percent” that she was telling the truth - turned out to be yet another in a long line of New Age goofs who believes that he can use DOWSING RODS on paper documents to determine whether the information contained on those pages is truth or fiction. And he is literally the BEST they have to offer.
Guru continues: “...albeit upset and yeah, sometimes overly reactive and jumping to conclusions...”
Understatement of the year, that.
Guru: “...but that in itself is understandable ~ a lot more understandable than the outrage of the supposedly personally uninvested debunkers, IMO, who ~ and I include someone I previously had a decent enough relationship with ~ seem to favor brutal, bullying, intolerant, and derisive responses.”
See, personally, I find the frustrated outrage of the uninvested debunkers in the face of the frequently rock-like density and immunity to facts or reason of the True Believers to be a LOT more understandable than the magical thinking, zero-evidence hook-line-and-sinker-swallowing of the True Believers.
Guru: “Their two best "arguments" against the case (not counting calling anyone who disagrees stupid & gullible) seem to be: 1) No evidence; 2) Character assassination (ie; "Anyone can see Ella & Abraham are crazy evil liars!!" That's pretty much it.”
That Ella and Abraham are evil liars is now a matter of public record. They are also children torturers and REAL attempted character assassins. As for there being no evidence... for fuck’s sake, just stop and think... how is that NOT a good argument against the case being legit?!
Guru: “There's something about this case and how it's being so fiercely discredited, suppressed, and avoided, that stands out from every other similar case I've looked into.”
The thing that makes this one stand out for me is how some otherwise sane individuals have made a conscious decision to ignore and denigrate any and all information that negates the conclusions that they came to THE MOMENT THEY FIRST HEARD THE CHILDREN’S ALLEGATIONS. I’ve seen people on RigInt turn against researchers that they previously enjoyed, simply because they looked into this case and saw it for the fraud that it is (Corbett Report, for one).
Guru: “Anyone notice that David Icke isn't talking about it? I mean, when was Icke ever put off by something that looked flaky and lurid? Or by a heavy smear of hoax?”
If even Icke knows this one is gonna be a loser in the long-run, maybe it’s time you and others like you figured out which way the wind is blowing, yes?
Guru: “I think there's a lot invested in this particular case, for whatever reason.”
Truer words, Guru... Truer words.
I leave you all with these 21 questions. If you’re a True Believer (or even just agnostic), please consider these questions carefully:
1. Why does Ella never mention her eldest son, child number three who according to her is also in the clutches of the cult?
2. Why were the children’s drawings never handed to the police?
3. Why do you think no witnesses have gone public despite national and local media coverage?
4. Do you think it is plausible that a school is able to devote some of the teaching day to killing babies with no one noticing? The same for the church, which has a nursery used by the Japanese community, services, the local community—but no one has noticed a thing.
5. Do you think it is plausible that Ella has a child who says that they were made to bleed, but she never noticed?
6. Why have Abraham’s preexisting interests been woven in to this story? For example, the cannabis for blood thing.
7. Why were the children not taken straight to a doctor rather than the adults looking up alternative media people?
8. Why, if the initial medical reports are to be treated as gospel, is the evidence of injuries attributed to Abraham ignored? And why did Ella try to blame Ricky Dearman for these?
9. What do you think about the concerns about Ella’s neglect of the children? Them being hungry and eating food from the bin?
10. What do you think of evidence of cannabis consumption being found in their hair, but NO evidence of cocaine?
11. Do you think it’s appropriate to hit child rape victims, or throw water at them, which according to the CRIS report Abraham admits? The children allege more of course, and right from the start.
12. What do you think of Abraham’s convictions for assaults on his own children (CRIS report) and his recent caution for assault on his adolescent son?
13. Why did Ella and/or Abraham send the home recordings to Brian Gerrish, but not the police? And why get annoyed if they were forwarded?
14. Do you think it was a good thing for Ella and Abraham to do a drive round to identify addresses prior to the police doing this, despite being asked not to?
15. I say the home recordings and drawings are good evidence of coaching, what do you think?
16. Why do people not believe the children when they say Abraham made them say the initial allegations, despite the physical evidence of his violent treatment backing them up?
17. Why don’t Ella and Abraham come back to clear their name? Double standards much?
18. What is all this nonsense about a sedation kit when the police came to the house? Do they not know police have first aid stuff on their belt kit as a matter of course? Did whoever it who claims to have seen this see a big bag with ABE AND ELLA’S SEDATION KIT written on it, or perhaps they had X-ray vision?
19. What do you think of their paranoia and accusations towards former allies? I think it shows how they take anything and use it to call people derogatory stuff, how about you?
20. Is a cannabis smoothie a suitable meal for a child?
21. Despite international freight and air passengers being subject to heightened scrutiny, do you think it is possible to smuggle 8000 plus babies in to the UK without being discovered? And them being alive on arrival? Even getting special boxes kitted out to carry a baby would be a task and a half. Evidence of something found somewhere else isn’t evidence that 8000 babies were shipped to the UK, now is it?
