Jim McMenamin admonishes Neelu…for stretching the truth!

/ 11/01/2016

In an astonishing turnabout, yesterday Jim McMenamin donned his best hip-waders, screwed his courage to the sticking-place, and ventured into the boggy wasteland that is Neelu Berry’s Facebook page. (She goes by Ved Chaudhari on Facebook, for reasons that probably make sense to her and no one else.)

Jim’s mission: to advise Neelu to stop claiming that her bestie, Christine Ann Sands, had witnessed the murders of three infants while she was a guest in Christ Church, Hampstead, last spring.

McMenamin-Neelu-2016-01-10

Apparently Jim feels absolutely no compunction about railing away on Twitter and elsewhere that a ‘Satanic cult’ and/or ‘state-sponsored trauma-based mind control’ group are running rampant in a North London community, where they not only spend their days raping small children, murdering and roasting babies which they import via DHL, and feasting on the gory remains while wearing shoes made of baby skin.

All of that is perfectly believable in Jim’s book.

But really, Neelu. Knock it off about the whole ‘murdering babies in full view of witnesses in a church’ thing, would you? That’s just a step too far, and it might make people laugh at the Hoaxtead pushers.

Jim is nothing if not sensible. After all, one must draw the line somewhere, mustn’t one?

hypocrisy

 

Related posts

21 thoughts on “Jim McMenamin admonishes Neelu…for stretching the truth!”

    • They usually do go off to the pub or for a coffee.

      On Friday 8th January, after Neelu’s latest court case, Neelu, Belinda, Dolly and 2 male friends went off for a coffee…

      It’s what it’s all about.

      Re Jim, i reckon he is coming to his senses…

      Liked by 1 person

  3. On Mar 22 2015 the landlord of the Duke of Hamilton threw the gang out of the pub because they were so noisy and disruptive.

    Oh yes, Mrs Sands had sat in the 3rd pew from the back, near the main church door that does bang and is the way to the loo.

    There were more than 30 children in church and Sunday school that day, as usual on Sunday mornings, and some were very scared. A queue for the loo after the police had cleared the gang from the porch and yard was pretty natural.

    Thanks for all the support and successful investigations: hopefully more legal cases will follow on.

    Liked by 2 people

    • You’re welcome, Anon–we hope our small contribution helps.

      It’s my understanding that the children were frightened, and who can blame them? I’m sure many of the adults were, as well.

      Like

  4. Yes, after a long afternoon witch hunting, scaring children and shouting unfounded murder accusations at people going to church, there is nothing better than a pint of beer, Sambuca shots and a Bloody Araya cocktail (limited availability). Sandwiches supplied by Charlotte of course. As long as they don’t let Sabine know, because she disapproves of treating a sombre vigil like a hen party.

    Yesterdays write up spoke of the emotional investment and why it is difficult for people to give up that investment. This write up details a different form of emotional investment. The investment in friends and socialising. To give up their ‘beliefs’ is to give up all of that.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, I think it’s important for many of these people to congregate with others who believe the same. The sense of community and shared purpose is probably very important in their lives.

      Like

    • The social or group aspect you refer to is a strong pull. At a primitive level, it is risky to leave the group you belong to. These dynamics seem to be present even in the virtual world. Other factors also come into play. I think many of the protesters at the church only came together due to the internet’s social networking capabilities that are available to everyone with a mobile phone. Keelan Balderson explains here the dangers of not being challenged, or exposed to the full spectrum of opinions present in real life when in a closed single focus (secret?) group online: The dangers and rewards of ‘having your opinion massaged’ in such environmets need to be considered:

      The question of ‘turning’ on one’s beliefs, or walking away from an emotional investment is a very interesting one. For someone who believes in the conspiracies and cover ups that are supposedly operating and controlling our world, it would be difficult to come to the realisation that the evidence in the one case being looked at in depth showed that in fact their beliefs are wrong. That person might then have to completely question their entire worldview, indeed their whole IDENTITY might be at stake. Hard work psychologically, emotionally, and it would be avoided by any defensive type of individual.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. So let’s not storm the church and search for children locked in secret rooms, we’ll go for a pint instead, my throat is parched from screaming paedo at little old ladies.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Well really, given a choice between going down to the pub, or searching an old church for babies you only half-believe exist, the answer seems clear. 🙂

      Like

  6. What you have come to grips with is that a bunch of people who believe there’s a powerful, elite, wealthy group of Satanic serial killers in North London are willing to go down to said Satanic gaff and hang around outside, where they video themselves. Then they go to the pub and have a laugh. And they’re not frightened by the people they’re supposedly ‘outing’?

    Sounds like they don’t really believe it themselves.

    Tin foil hats all round….not just the ears!

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I support the welfare state but this is one of the downsides : malicious & mad people who have the money and time to harass others.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.