Reposting : on the HAMPSTEAD CASE, AARON DOVER's mother, Tavistock and Christ Church Primary School (pizzagate)

submitted ago by letsdothis1

Here's the original post which was deleted (I highly recommend the comments section too) : Another look at the Hampstead children's case - Aaron Dover's mother and Christ Church Primary School

 

Adding the needed section to satisfy the rules according to the mods:

@dragonkiller

These two children gave the most bone chilling testimony of being ritually abused and sexually molested in pizzagate history. The two little blonde kids. You will remember their faces instantly probably. Its the Hampstead children. World famous case. Its so relevant he didn't bother with Rule 1.

https://deusnexus.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/hampstead_children.jpg

Hampstead Christ Church Satanic Ritual Child Abuse...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtAuWQHgUvo

Hampstead Christ Church Satanic Ritual Child Abuse...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSJI_qfI-es

Also, Rule 2; Proof that psychotherapist Jenny Dover is the mother :

(Aaron Dover may or may not have been a disinfo agent, I don't know enough about him to have an opinion on that but his mother definitely worked at Tavistock and there does seem to be a connection with the school.)

Rule 3: As I explained in my post, I thought the appointee of this person as the SEND governor a bit odd as he clearly has no background experience for that particular role. He does have a lot of connections to the contemporary art world and to networks that could potentially fit the description of the children's accounts.

I'm still trying to find out who the other governors of the school are.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Vindicator ago

I got over a dozen pings (Crimany @dragonkiller!) to this post and the previous one and tried to make sense of what went down and still am not quite clear where we ended up. The original thread looked legit to me, and it appeared that efforts were made to meet the submission rules (to me, whether it's disinfo or true, Hampstead is clearly pizzagate-related). It didn't jump out at me as being swiss cheese intentionally full of holes with a bunch of unsourced claims, especially when the second version went up with the additional links.

It's my understanding we don't remove such posts, even if we think they might be disinfo. We flair them as such and point out the problems. Removal really does nothing to fight shills. It just gives them ammo to claim censorship. (@letsdothis1, I am not implying you are shill...I'm speaking in general terms).

I personally would like someone to make a Hampstead megathread rounding up all the research that's been done and weighing it disinfo vs. real. The kids seemed coached to me and not traumatized when I watched their video. And there have definitely been suspicious accounts flogging this topic in the past (again, not you OP). I once thought it had been debunked. But I honestly couldn't say, now, because new research keeps turning up like this that make me wonder.

This is a great example of needing votes and comment discussion on a subject.

Millennial_Falcon ago

The original post clearly broke rules 2 and 3. I'm not going to repeat myself on that as my comment is in the original thread. The new post linked to the original deleted post, which is a bad precedent to allow as it sidesteps the rules, not to mention that he said he "highly recommend[s] the comments," which consisted almost wholly of complaints about the removal (dishonest complaints at that). He is fine to repost it as long as he doesn't link to the original removed post. He has no legitimate reason to do that. Ask yourself why he did it in the first place. Ask yourself why he hasn't already simply reposted without the link to the original thread. Shills (and that persistent shill/troll who loves the subjects of Hampstead, NASA, and aliens) would LOVE us to set the precedent that they can link to removed submissions.

@crensch @VictorSteinerDavion @kevdude

dragonkiller ago

He is fine to repost it as long as he doesn't link to the original removed post.

Which means you should have never deleted his post in the first place.

Ask yourself why he did it in the first place

You need to ask yourself why you deleted the man's post. Your reasons are bogus and its obvious.

Ask yourself why he hasn't already simply reposted without the link to the original thread.

He did.

Shills (and that persistent shill/troll who loves the subjects of Hampstead, NASA, and aliens) would LOVE us to set the precedent that they can link to removed submissions.

Pizzagate gets trolled every single day on a lot of different topics. Lets just ban all the topics they shill on, shall we?