Caution: Debs Mahmoudieh can cause permanent hearing damage

So there we were, listening along to Deborah Mahmoudieh’s latest rant (using headphones to protect our loved ones from her spittle-spraying rage), when it happened again: she was chatting away, the usual lies and distorted half-truths about Hoaxtead, blah blah blah….and then KAPOW!! Her harpy-like shriek propels us halfway out of our chairs.

If we were paranoid people, we might think she does this on purpose, to inflict maximum hearing damage on those who oppose the Hampstead hoax.

Well, never mind. We’re sure our eardrums will heal eventually.

As for the video…oh, dear. Bit of a mess, really.

It starts with some slagging of Keir Starmer, who Debs blames for having changed the laws on child abuse in 2012 so that in 2014, Ella Gareeva Draper was not able to frame her ex-partner for alleged ‘Satanic ritual abuse’. Because obviously, when the laws were changed it was because someone at the top knew that two psychopaths would be trying to use RD’s children in a callous and blatant SRA hoax. Sure, Debs.

Some blathering about ‘abominations of joostice’, and her belief that Ella is a wonderful woman because she is an artist, vegan, and advocate of healthy living (hint: so was Hitler).

Then she throws in a reference to a document called Satanist Abuse of Children, which she claims was authored by the UK Children’s Commissioner, but which turns out to have been the same nonsense Sabine was pumping up about a week ago. Truth: the woman who wrote the document was not ‘advising Parliament’, but wrote the paper as part of a public (oh, sorry, ‘pooblic’) response to a parliamentary report. Oh, and it was prepared on behalf of the evangelical Christian “Maranatha Community”, which believes that Satan walks the earth, and that Satanic Ritual Abuse is totally a thing. Not exactly neutral, then.

Debs rambles on some more about how hard-done-by Abrella were: Ella had to flee the country to avoid seven years in prison (really? seven years?), while Abe, who Debs describes as a ‘very emotional, passionate person’, was perfectly justified in beating, kicking, suffocating, threatening, and torturing the children to ‘get the truth out of them’ because…well, because Debs says so, that’s why. Oddly, she thinks it’s okay to torture the truth out of children who have allegedly just disclosed the most horrendous sexual abuse…but the way the police conducted their interviews, with kindness, respect, and thoughtfulness, was ‘disgoosting, just disgoosting!’

Strange that a woman who claims to have been the victim of a ‘schizophrenic psychopath’ in her own childhood should stand up for Abe, but Debs has never been one for consistency.

We all agreed that the best part of this video starts at about 57:20, when Debs goes apeshit about the plight of her mate, Sabine:

Sabine is still on bail, she’s had to flee the country at one point, she’s had her home broken into in the middle of the night by police, she’s had her computers and phones stolen (shades of Neelu!), she’s been charged with witness intimidation and harassment, and it’s all because of him and his fooking new guidelines!

Him? Oh yes, Mr Starmer. And back round we come, full circle.

If you can stand to listen to this one, please take our advice, and leave the headphones off—your ears will thank you.


52 thoughts on “Caution: Debs Mahmoudieh can cause permanent hearing damage

  1. Aww, poor old ‘Deirdre’. Will she ever be happy?

    By the way, I think this is where the trouble started for her:

    Liked by 1 person

  2. That wasn’t quite the crescendo I expect from Debs. I do find her entertaining. Almost most as much as the famous Irish comedian Patrick Culinane of “you can stick your ambulance up your arse ” fame

    Liked by 1 person

    • In her defence, though, there are a few other crescendoes earlier in the video (and yes, I listened to the whole hour+ and am now in therapy). Seriously, it’s a veritable symphony, littered with peaks and troughs (and toe-curling slurps). She’s “up and down like a whore’s drawers”, to quote Rowan Atkinson.

      And re. quotable lines, “Get your head out of the clouds and out of the shit” (52:18) has to be a contender 😀

      Liked by 1 person

      • OK i found one rising moment but as she was hyperventilating about anal scarring it sort of put me off. This is not the Deb I know & love. Too mild. I reckon she’s on the hemp & you may have heard she credits Abe with prolonging life with his hemp smoothies.


  3. 3:04
    “According to EU child protection protocols, it doesn’t matter if a victim makes a good witness or not. If they’ve made an allegation, then it has to be investigated, because the onus of proof is reversed when it comes to child abuse and child witness victims. And that’s the power imbalance, as I explained before, ok.”

    “EU law expert” Deirdre Mahmoudieh there, once again referring to that mythical EU directive to which – after nearly a year of asking – she still hasn’t provided a link.

    When did this alleged reversal of human rights occur, Deidre? When did the onus of proof get swapped around just for one specific crime (because hey, why should trifling matters like murder and arson be given priority?)? When did it become “guilty until proven innocent” exclusively for child abuse allegations? Do enlighten us, Professor.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. LOL, check out the address bar at 43:13. This allegedly thorough “journalist” and “researcher” has run a Google picture search for “Savile paedo pals”, then presented the results as proof that the people in the pictures are paedophiles! You couldn’t make her up, could you?


  5. I say, chaps – have any of you noticed the frenzied manner in which this young “Deborah” lassie shakes her cursor about (and no, Angie’s Fag, that is not a euphemism, you cheeky young scamp)? It starts off slowly and as she grows angrier and angrier, it starts to go wildly out of control. Reminds me of a chap down at my rather exclusive golf club who has “the yips”. I’ve long surmised that this is the result of years of sexual frustration. Well, I say send old Slurper Mahmoudieh over to my quarters and I’ll teach the cheeky minx some relaxation techniques and some more productive things she can do with her hands. Woof woof! Ooh behave. Honestly, chaps – your minds!


  6. Deborah talks a load of old waffle.

    What does she bring to the table??

    Anyway, I see that Alan Alanson and Angela Power Disney on fb are putting up this judgement or whatever it is and clearly display the 2 children’s faces.

    They just don’t care…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Babs, have you seen Margaret Sneddon’s comment on Angie’s Everard post?

      I don’t know what’s more shocking – the sentiment or the grammar.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. I think you are too tough on Deb. She asks a perfectly legitimate question : “who wants to work for a baby trafficking cannibal peedofile monster ?”. Not me that’s for sure.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mizz Disneyland is asking for advice on self publishing a book but not ‘vanity publishing’ although one may think they are one & the same thing.

      Never fear, the famous Steven George has come to her aid. George recently had a sex change on the NHS and left her past behind. That past included a ten year stint in the Broodmore Secure Unit (something to do with arson) and is an expert on self publishing including her own book about 10 years ago where she detailed what a lovely chap Sir Jimmy Savile was when he visited Broodmore and brought joy to the patients.

      Alas by 2014 Mr George discovered he had been abused by Mr Savile several times at Broadmoor (although the official inquiry into Savile’s exploits there concluded Steven was the only complainant) and he reluctantly accepted compensation.

      An expert then on publishing and he & Angie Disneyland should get on famously.


  8. It would appear that all Keir Starmer was suggesting is that a case should focus on the evidence rather than how well a witness recalls their story. Surely that is a good thing, because if a witness is terrible at recalling events, the perpetrator can still be punished if the evidence is strong enough.

    The Maranatha Community essay seems to be an opinion piece rather than a thoroughly researched study. For instance, DID is hotly debated as being a symptom of abuse. There is no detailed description of studies into the ‘mind control’, or even a good definition as to what it is. It also uses the Missing Persons charity figures to describe that 200,000 people go missing, while clearly trying to imply that they are victims of Satanic rituals, never to be seen again. Yet, those charities explain that over 70% of the people chose to missing. They are not missing in real sense, they have just been reported missing at some point. Many return home, others stay away for a whole multitude of reasons. Others have been taken abroad by a parent…etc.
    What is interesting is that the Stalley essay was posted on HR, so it is likely Abraham seen it some time ago. Perhaps he used it’s claims as a template for the idea of DID and mind control, or just read the same material that Stalley used to write her essay.
    Apparently the Maranatha Community have been criticised for equating homosexuality with paedophilia In their attempts to oppose same sex marriage. To me, that speaks volumes about their mind set.

    Seven years in prison?…lol. Unless the crime is murder, rape or armed robbery, it would be unusual for a first offender to get jail time at all, let alone for a harassment charge.


  9. So now most of Ella and Abraham’s supporters are flat earthers and/or people who idiotically repost easily debunked fake news stories? They have been scraping the bottom of the barrel lately.

    One thing that strikes me, is that they have been playing a very odd game. Most campaigns against perceived injustices in the justice or legal system retain some focus on the legal issues. Campaigners will keep supporters updated on the legal process, court dates, options, their prognosis of their chances of success, next step, things supporters can do. These campaigners can even become real experts in their own case, all the case law, legislation, processes, they can even put some qualified lawyers to shame.

    Instead, with Ella, she does none of that. Never mentioned which piece of legislation has been used to keep the children in care that I can remember. After she lost the leave to appeal hearing, nothing much mentioned again about the legal process or progress of her case. They don’t even release the anonymised authorised judgement of the leave to appeal hearing which they would be perfectly within their right to do.

    They are deliberately cherry picking bits of the transcript of the fact finding hearing. What could they say if the police officer spoke to staff at the school, that were NOT named by the children, and these staff members say that there is no sneaking off on “fun sex Wednesday”. There is a hint of this in the bit of the transcript they did release.

    But what does Ella do, produce nutrition videos, and puts them on a campaigning website about her children. She has legal aid to appoint a solicitor of her choice, so what is she raising money for? Why has she got Abraham’s live forever on hemp stuff on there? Who wants a mug with a picture of her injured daughter, injured at the hands of her boyfriend?

    What is their game? It’s the oddest campaign I’ve ever seen, certainly where there is contact with your own children at stake.

    I think they know there’s no hope and are now just milking the attention, and potential donators, by keeping people in the dark.

    And one for Sabine and Belinda, here is a useful blog, edited by a very well respected expert in his field, all about immigration law. They might want to read the articles about costs in judicial reviews of immigration decisions. This one’s a summary.

    He’s not a government mouthpiece either.

    As far I can gather from reading what they say about the costs issue, they haven’t been able to show to the satisfaction of the court that Melissa Laird herself applied for a judicial review, or that they did it on her behalf (is that even allowed). The JR lost, Melissa Laird might have been expected to pay costs, but because of the way Sabine and Belinda involved themselves, they have been told they have to pay. Awards of costs are NORMAL in JR cases. Sometimes, shock horror, the government has to pay the other side’s costs. Drag someone to court, when this isn’t a statutory right of appeal, expect to pay costs if you lose. This costs award was when Sabine and Belinda tried to renew the JR. There is also no automatic right to an oral hearing, the courts are well used to people trying to get an oral hearing on a JR, a merit less JR, just to stop getting deported or to get out of detention. A JR done when people have exhausted all their appeal rights. The flipside of that is it an important safeguard of course and people do win, stop their removal, get out of detention, safeguard their rights.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It frightens me to think all these nutcases were out there for 100s of years but could never really combine (although the rise of Nazism was a good effort at it). The best they could do was send Green Ink letters to the editor.

      Now they can all met on the internet and we are seeing just how many there are. Scary !

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Well, well, well! Looks like Debs has removed the video! Perhaps she was worried about the potential lawsuits from people sustaining permanent hearing loss. Fascinating….


  11. Pingback: 2012 Satanist Abuse of Children report wasn’t ‘covered up’! | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  12. Pingback: Debs Mahmoudieh just lurves the NSPCC…now | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.