‘Hard evidence’ in Hoaxtead and Pizzagate

The other day, one of our team members came across this interesting bit of internet lore concerning “Pizzagate”. It reads, “You can say…”Aliens exist”, “Chemtrails are real”, “9/11 was an inside job”, “Elvis is alive”, “Obama is a shape-shifting lizard person”. But if you discover HARD EVIDENCE of a child trafficking ring operated by the government and the elite…pizzagate-hard-evidence

  • Obama says it’s fake news
  • Hillary condemns it
  • The Pope calls your research a sin
  • Mainstream media calls it “fake news”
  • Google hides it
  • Facebook deletes it
  • Twitter erases it
  • Wikipedia removes it
  • Reddit bans it
  • Journalists are killed for investigating it…and so on.

Leaving aside the gibberish about alien lizard people, the part that interests us most is right there in bright red all-caps: “HARD EVIDENCE“.

This is a term the Hoaxtead mob has hauled out from time to time as well. We thought that today, as we wait for news about Rupert Quaintance’s court appearance, it might be a good idea to have a look at what “hard evidence” really means, and how that relates in the context of both Hoaxtead and “Pizzagate”.

No physical evidence

Hoaxtead: When we say there is absolutely no hard evidence that, for example, a “Satanic death cult” is systematically raping children, killing babies, drinking their blood, and snacking on them for lunch, we mean that no one has ever discovered even the slightest trace of blood or semen at the alleged scene(s) of the crime.

No one has found fingerprints, bits of skin, or hairs…despite the fact that babies by the hundred were meant to have been slaughtered, skinned, scalped, cooked, and turned into slippers.

If that had actually happened, it would be reasonable to expect that at least some traces would be left behind. (And for those who naïvely claim that the alleged perpetrators “cleaned up after themselves”, we’ll simply note that it’s not as easy as one might think to remove all traces of a murder, let alone mass murders followed by wholesale desecration of bodies. Even in cases where criminals have washed murder scenes down with bleach, police have been able to find evidence they missed.

Pizzagate: No blood, semen, fingerprints, hair, skin, saliva…in fact, no crime scene has been identified.

Medical evidence

Hoaxtead: As most of our readers will know, much as been made by the Hoaxtead mob of Dr Hodes’ physical examinations of the children, and the various conclusions she drew from them. Ultimately, the most that can be said about Dr Hodes’ examinations is that they were inconclusive. Given the alleged scope of the crimes against the children, it would be reasonable to expect that any medical evidence would be glaringly obvious—but in fact, Dr Hodes had to perform two examinations and use a discredited method to elicit the results she expected to find.

Pizzagate: Since no victims have ever been identified, no medical evidence has been found.

No corroborating witnesses/victims

Hoaxtead: Despite the original Hoaxtead allegations that many other children had been involved in the crimes describe, no other victims have ever been found. Some of the named children were interviewed during the police investigation, but none suggested that anything untoward was happening.

Pizzagate: No victims have been identified. No witnesses have come forward. No named individuals have been named as potential victims.

No written material

Hoaxtead: Another form of “hard evidence” would be written documents. Some criminals write in dairies, journals, letters or emails, outlining their plans or confessing their guilt. Variants on this could include receipts or way bills (from the courier companies that allegedly transported the babies, for example), or other forensic documentation that might outline the scope of the allegations. Nothing of this sort has ever been found in relation to Hoaxtead.

Pizzagate: Fans of Pizzagate claim that there is ample written material about it, in the form of a series of hacked emails. However, none of these emails ever mentions anything even remotely related to child sexual abuse…unless one invents a “secret code” in which one substitutes certain sexually loaded words for other, completely neutral terms. While entertaining, this is not hard evidence, and certainly doesn’t offer anything that could be used in a court of law.

No recordings

Hoaxtead: While many people think of the recordings that Abe and Ella made of RD’s children as “evidence”, they would not stand up in a court of law, for the simple reason that the children could have been (in fact were) coached. However, the children did allege that the crimes they described were video-recorded by one or more of the participants. If something of this sort were to turn up, it would constitute the much-longed-for “hard evidence”. However, nothing ever has.

Pizzagate: No recordings of any criminal activity have been discovered.

All in all, we wonder: exactly what “hard evidence” are the Hoaxtead/Pizzagate pushers talking about? Because frankly, we’re just not seeing it.

forensic-evidence-crime-scene

Advertisements

99 thoughts on “‘Hard evidence’ in Hoaxtead and Pizzagate

  1. Pingback: ‘Hard evidence’ in Hoaxtead and Pizzagate | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  2. Of course there is no evidence… Hard or otherwise. Only a dirty story generated by a pervert that ‘turns on’ a certain kind of self-loathing deviant. And the only place any threat to life and limb – or for that matter peaceful normal family life – emerges from is their ranks.

    What “Journalists” are supposed to have been killed?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Good question about the journalist—I believe they’re referring to Monica Peterson, who was allegedly working for the Human Trafficking Center, investigating human trafficking in Haiti. I only say “allegedly” because I can find no evidence of anyone by that name at the Human Trafficking Center. It’s possible she was working on a short-term contract, of course. http://humantraffickingcenter.org/who-we-are/

      Like

        • TBH Spiny I was thinking more along the lines of people who might have some legitimate claim to the title, however ‘loose’. The Petersen woman – a quick Google search reveals – was supposedly an ‘assistant director at the Human Trafficking Center’. The crackpots you refer to were just crackpots… A ‘Journalist’ to my mind is someone who works (professionally) in the media to investigate and report on various issues of public interest.

          I am slightly aware of people with a genuine link to the media who have and do investigate these matters. But they’re not part of the ‘conspirasphere’ and are often vilified by it. – For the simple reason that quite often they can be linked to actual results, may well have played a part in achieving convictions, and what they discover will be at odds with the ‘official’ conspiracy narrative.

          The point has been made many times of course – but too many of the conspiracy set, particularly the ones linked to Belinda McKenzie and her crowd and what I call the ‘London circle’, do have very dodgy backgrounds. Too many of their associates are actual perverts with a background in child abuse. Others are drug dealers, forgers… I’ve heard it said (by credible people) that there are links to the trade in obscene publications – including child abuse images. And I am convinced of that.

          “Hard evidence” they say… I’d say their own backgrounds and involvement in criminally insane activities are pretty hard evidence of dishonesty. What they claim as evidence never is that – it’s a fabricated distraction.

          On one level they’re quite comical and pathetic… Worth goading. On another? My fear and suspicion is that it’s all about keeping ‘eyes off the ball’.

          Liked by 3 people

    • Quality work exposing these peculiarly obsessive and odd delusionalists who feed off the vulnerable and ill.Thankyou El and Coyotehort team for persistant wielding the blade of reason to slash open their tacky webs of deception.

      All done with style,humour and always of course in the best possible taste.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Spot on. ‘Hard evidence’ to those obsessed with pedophilia means landing on a website published by another fruitloop who found their ‘hard evidence’ on another site etc etc ad infinitum. It’s a bit like a circle jerk of like-mided perverts who use the cover of ‘child protection advocacy’ to indulge in their fantasies about sex with children.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Exactly what i think of some of these people GOS. Perverts pretending to care but in actual fact getting a sick kick from relating the stories to each other.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Nicely analysed as always, EC.

    The words ‘hard evidence’ and ‘proof’ are kryptonite to the hoaxer crowd. Cannibalism, infanticide and paedophilia are extremely serious allegations to be making about dozens of named individuals in public and personally, I wouldn’t dream of doing so unless I had hard, irrefutable proof (I’d also take my proof to the cops but let’s save that argument for another day). But here’s the thing – you can ask these people for proof until you’re blue in the face and all you’ll get out of them is (words to the effect of) one or more of the following:

    1. “Where’s YOUR proof that they’re NOT guilty?”

    I have a stock answer to this one, which you’re all welcome to use/tweak/adapt when dealing with members of the fruitcake brigade:

    “If you’d like proof of the wrongly accused people’s innocence, you can start by reading a whole host of evidence on the Hoaxtead Research site. There are over two thousand articles, as well as medical reports, police reports, the children’s own admissions, Abe’s confessions, court reports, press articles, screenshots, links… There are also a number of videos about it on various channels. (Oh and there’s also the fact that several of the allegations are logistically impossible, not to mention the fact that the children themselves have admitted that they’d made it all up and there is video evidence of them being coached by Abraham.)

    Alternatively, you could try to get your head around a basic principle of ethics and law, if you can: you’ve made the accusations. Ergo, the burden of proof lies with you (both legally and ethically). It’s commonly known as “innocent until proven guilty” and it’s been rather fashionable in civilised nations since the end of the Middle Ages. You’d also be breaking several laws by making such serious allegations against so many named members of the community without strong evidence upon which to base your accusations. So, when you’re ready, let’s hear YOUR ‘proof’…”

    2. “Why should I do your job for you? Go find your own proof.”

    Why? Because ethics dictates that it is in fact YOUR job to back up your accusations, as does the law.

    By the way, I always take the opportunity to direct these people to this fine blog and the wealth of research that has in fact been carried out by the likes of El Coyote and all the regulars.

    3. “I don’t need proof. Any idiot can see this is real.

    Well, colour me idiotic. I’m afraid I can’t see this as real, so please do enlighten me!

    4. “Ricky looked so evil in that interview. He must have been acting.”

    Good luck with that one in court, fruitcakes. Don’t forget to also report that his eyes are too close together and that Victoria Derbyshire was wearing the wrong kind of jewellery, meaning that she too was in on it. You won’t be laughed out of court – I promise. As everyone knows, “looking shifty” is highly illegal round these parts and I’m sure you’ll walk all over the defence team with that one.

    Oh and lest we forget that “looking up and to the right is proof that someone is lying”. Just don’t forget to include the innumerable photos and videos of Sabine, Belinda, Angela, Neelu et al doing exactly that in their insufferable rants.

    5. “All you have to do is show us your tattoos and we’ll go away.”

    No, you won’t. Putting aside that your request is an outrageous invasion of people’s privacy, frankly they could strip naked in the streets for you and allow you to get photos/videos/sketches/lithographs/engravings/Warholian silkscreen prints from every conceivable angle; but one thing is beyond doubt – you would NOT believe them. There are three certainties in life: death, taxes and the stubbornness of troofers.

    6. “The medical report proves their guilt.”

    No, it does not. Not in any way, shape or form. Check it out:

    https://hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com/hampstead-hoax-faq/frequently-asked-questions-the-medical-evidence

    7. “Children don’t lie with that level of detail and if they’re acting, they deserve Oscars.”

    …Say the people who shout from the rooftops that every tragic news event is orchestrated by crisis actors, many of them children.

    And as Abe himself has demonstrated via his own video uploads, it’s funny how convincingly children can lie when their two primary carers use beatings, torture, death threats and forced rehearsals to get them to perfect their act.

    8. “The only reason for you ask that is if you’re in on the cover-up.”

    Really? The only possible reason that anyone could ever ask someone for evidence to support a serious allegation is if they themselves are in on the dastardly deed?! Again, maybe it’s just me being stupid but if there are any passing fruitloops who could walk me through the “logic” of that one, I’d be much obliged.

    9. “We’re going to track you down and burn you in the streets, you evil paedo witches.”

    Oh, well I’m convinced. That’s completely changed my mind on everything (LOL). Just bear it in mind that you said that the next time you whine about how the (NON-EXISTENT) death threats from us to you are proof of our guilt. Go on, fruitloops – treat yourselves – turn the mirror on yourselves for a change.

    10. “Any idiot can see that the children weren’t lying.”

    Interesting. They said it was real….Then they said it was made up. Sooo, they were telling the truth both times, were they? Er…how does that work exactly?

    But hey – what would I know? These people are expert investigators whose honesty and motives are beyond question and whose integrity and credibility are beyond reproach. These are people who believe the Earth is flat, Obama is a lizard, Sandy Hook was fake, 9/11 was a false flag, the Holocaust didn’t happen, the Jesuits run the CIA, the Moon is hollow, Pluto is made of cheese and that the World will end last Tuesday, so how dare we question their credibility?

    Besides, they’ve proved that the Hampstead SRA allegations are true via a combination of “forensic linguistics”, water dowsing, astrology, numerology, communications from Lord Ashtar /Jesus / Roger the 8-foot butterfly (delete as applicable) and unsubstantiated internet gossip. So, just one question remains…

    Who the hell are we to argue?

    Liked by 3 people

    • Can someone help me solve a conundrum? Why is evidence so important when people are accusing Arthur of paedophilia but not when he’s accusing us? Anyone?

      Liked by 1 person

    • @Spiny lol you terrible man! I’ve never seen such Pigs online until the hoaxer crowd! Crimony! So, what’s up with this site the last two days, I can’t see any comment news feed, ect. Are we having a press “blackout” for Agony Rupert’s day in court and choosing not to “poison the well”? Very grown-up and correct but I’m still SO curious. Thanks Everyone for shutting these scum bags down! I hope you all have a Good Holiday!

      Like

  5. If any of you know Angela and Nick, can you tell them from me to go fuck themselves? Thanks.
    (Sorry but I just can’t cope with this level of idiocy.)

    Liked by 2 people

    • Folk will complain about censorship, especially of the alt.media, but it will be thanks to idiots such as Angela Power Disney and others like her who brought this about. Liberty comes with responsibility, abuse it, lose it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The lack of blood is HIGHLY suspicious.

      The allahu akbar yelling is comical.

      The crapping in pants, I’m not sure.

      The other “evidence” I can’t see clearly enough to say that.

      Liked by 1 person

      • With all due respect, I’m not with you on the lack of blood. Bleeding can take time to appear and may be predominantly internal or contained by Karlov’s clothes or he may be leaking profusely underneath his body. But more significantly, if this really were a fake shooting staged by a TV crew, the first thing they would do would be to pour on buckets of fake blood. In other words, the lack of blood, if anything, is a sign of authenticity!

        Incidentally, I very much doubt that if two World powers had got together to stage a fake assassination, they would have allowed the film crew to be on full display for passing paparazzi.

        Sorry but this false flag stuff really bugs me. There’s enough real shit going down in the World – there simply isn’t a motive for staging fake shit on top of it. And if the photo above is the best the troofers can come up with in terms of evidence, then I’m happy to stick with that view.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes, a bullet can act as a kind of plug, keeping the blood from spurting out. It really depends upon where the bullet hits.

          As for the crapping of pants—sometimes when people die they do that, and sometimes they don’t. I’ve been with three people when they died, and none of their bowels loosened at the time of death.

          Like

      • From an objective point of view, you make a good point on the blood, you would have thought a number of shots is going produce some visible blood in the photos. I am however no expert on forensics and there might be a good reason for this such as the footage was so immediate, when blood was yet to leak from the body. I am sure 4chan or the gore website will be enlightening on this subject in time.

        Like

        • Thanks, Spiny!

          Unfortunately, some persons of Jewish heritage have also been responsible for horrific Jew-bashing.
          The full story of young scholar Gershom Scholem’s mind-boggling betrayal of the Jewish People, when he caused the first draft of his fake academic essay “Redemption Through Sin” to be published in German in 1936, has still not been told (and probably never will be – I’m too chicken to publish an expose of it myself, even though the man is dead now).

          Like

          • I’ll give you a taste, however…

            In “Redemption Through Sin”, after asserting the scholars must “tell the truth” about the recent history of European Jews, Scholem states that at least 50,000 European Jews had been agents of the Illuminati and genuine Nicodemites – albeit a couple of generations before.
            “A nicodemite, usually a term of disparagement, is a person who is suspected of public misrepresentation of their actual religious beliefs by exhibiting false appearance and concealing true beliefsThe term was apparently introduced by John Calvin (1509–1564) in 1544 in his Excuse à messieurs les Nicodemites.[5] Since the French monarchy had increased its prosecution of heresy with the Edict of Fontainebleau (1540), it had become increasingly dangerous to profess dissident belief publicly, and refuge was being sought in emulating Nicodemus.
            In the Gospel of John John 3:1-2 there appears the character Nicodemus, a Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin. Although outwardly remaining a pious Jew, he comes to Jesus secretly by night to receive instruction. Although he was eventually made a saint, his dual allegiance was somewhat suspect” – Wikipedia.

            The copy of “A Collection of the words of the Lord”, attributed to Jacob Frank, that Scholem based this fake academia on was as much a fraud as The Protocols of The Elders of Zion, (and surfaced around the same time), and in fact was very similar as you can see from this comparison:

            http://www.rense.com/general66/sabb.htm

            WARNING – Jeff Rense is a bigot and rense.com is a hate site

            Like

  6. It’s simple for me.

    The young girl in question has been medically examined and is a virgin.

    If a huge group of people were raping the boy and the girl, then logically that would not be the case.

    It’s a hoax.

    Simple as.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Any reason for the adjournment Liza?

      Or is it that he has pleaded not guilty and it’s the next stage in the procedure?

      Like

        • The address he was staying at already was public? Unless he’s now holed up at Belinda McKenzie’s ‘conspiracy central’? Were the charges read out?

          Like

          • He’s wasting his time there too… As I understand it, he has a lawsuit waiting for him when he gets home. Does he seriously imagine he can evade that simply by hiding his address? Or has he forgotten ‘mommy dearest’ is also named with him? – I suspect it’s more likely he doesn’t want to embarrass himself in public any more than he has already. He can always give his address as C/O the Police can he not?

            Unlike the good people of Hampstead – and a few other places – he’s free to go about his business without harassment.

            Liked by 1 person

          • @ D D’Coy.
            I am glad there is plans for a civil action against Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV and his mum. I really really hate that guy. If there is a fighting fund for a legal action, I would be happy to contribute.

            Considering the publicity Rupert gave to RD and various other victims of this hoax, why in hell would he be honored with privacy of his court case? Like for like I say, this is a matter of public interest that people like me want to know that our legal system is acting to protect victims from cowards like Rupert by showing criminal cases in public.

            Like

    • You know when you are reading a good book or watching a dramatic film, you are on the edge of your seat waiting for what is going to happen? That is me on the Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV soap opera. Here is an American who came all the way to Britain to make a name for himself whilst making various intimidating statements at RD and the Hampstead community, then he got arrested and allegedly charged. The thug that was going to fight British policemen and break down doors reduced to a cowardly cringing sheep when his activities that I warned would backfire on ended in his awkward involvement with the UK legal system. My frustration at being in the dark as I so want to get concrete facts of what he is charged with, what stage the case has now reached and various other questions.

      Like

      • I’d like to know what he’s charged with as well.

        Regarding his address though, if anyone seriously wanted to know it, I bet it could be found quite easily enough.

        What nonsense and arrogance.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @satanic views I feel the same way! Why should Snoopert have any privacy after HE was the one releasing where he was from, ect. ect. The victim’s didn’t get this consideration and it’s easily re-dacted. So annoyed to have to wait to hear about this Lying Bum! Do we know if he has Private Counsel? They probably just had a “pre-trial” conference type thing today…:/

        Liked by 1 person

  7. Making herself look good? Where the f*ck did the arrogant numbskull get that from, lol?

    “+Google Hoaxtead you’re a perverted sick pedo huh? Yeah I was told about you. 😂😂😂 please go to police like you threatened cuz they’re watching you already sunshine. Good luck to you you perverted sick fuck whose only mission in life is to sexually abuse children and worship Satan. You Hoaxted fucks are gonna need it. You’re ALL coming down. Funny thing is NOT by me! 😂😂😂 take your disgusting life and go do some spirit cooking or something cuz you are in a severe panic! Good luck to ALL of you satanic molesting fucks!!”

    “+Google Hoaxtead how am I making myself look good you lil shit?! Hiding behind a keyboard until you’re craving pizza?! Now fuck off. Come at me again and YOU will be getting a call from your police. Is that the Satanic police or the Hoaxstead police? Who the fuck do you think you are harassing people? You’ve lost pal you’re a keyboard loser. 😂😂😂 💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩”

    Like

    • “…whose only mission in life is to sexually abuse children and worship satan…”

      Hey, that’s two missions!

      I’ll have to learn to multi-task.

      Like

  8. With all the babies being transported from abroad and delivered via well known couriers, you’d think some hard evidence would be found by now.
    Abraham also claimed that the snuff/ child abuse movies are being sold to Portugal, Brazil ,Brussels and world wide, so you would expect someone to slip up and one of them to surface to law enforcement.
    Far from being hard evidence of a cult, the clips Abraham filmed are evidence of coercion.

    Like

    • By dang! There it is, the core of false SRA accusations, naked & exposed:
      “…I can gauge truth intuitively…”

      Just like I’ve been saying, for decades.

      Liked by 1 person

      • By the same token it is not difficult to intuit that Mr Kaoutal is a paticularly damaged being who will eventually achieve something of vague benefit to planet Earth when he makes the transition to becoming a clod of soil.

        Like

  9. “I Was too Busy Hanging Out In The Snooker Rooms, Racking Coke & FUCKING Sexy Bitches Twice My Age When I Was 13.”

    Ah, so Arthur admits to associating with paedophiles and drug dealers. Now we’re getting somewhere!

    Like

  10. Another shooting in US by youtuber FAKETRIOT SCARY OPEN CARRY IDIOT! “Justin Wooley” aka Hess. Kills Mother and one other….;(

    Like

Comments are closed.