Ed Opperman, Lift the Veil on the Hampstead SRA hoax: ‘The show’s over’

Who among us can forget the infamous Ed Opperman, Abe Christie, David Shurter, and Guidance 2222 dust-up of late 2015/early 2016? Not us, that’s for sure!

But for those who are new (or new-ish) to Hoaxtead Research, here’s a quick overview: Abraham Christie, in an attempt to gain some profile across the pond for the Hampstead SRA hoax, did an interview with self-styled “private detective” Ed Opperman, on the recommendation of one David Shurter. Even during the interview there was a bit of tension, as Mr Opperman asked a few less-than-creme-puff questions, but things went completely berserk within 24 hours, as Abe’s erstwhile fart-sniffer Guidance 2222 posted Mr Opperman’s video on his own channel, claiming that it now belonged to all of humanity or some damn thing. Mr Opperman didn’t take kindly to it, there was a great deal of wrangling to and fro, and ultimately the only two people speaking to one another were Mssrs Opperman and Shurter.

In a video live-streamed yesterday, our dear old friend Nathan “Ricky Dearman stole my brain and all I got was this lousy girlfriend” Stolpman chatted with Mr Opperman, and even more rifts in the Hoaxtead Mobster Alliance were exposed.

The fun starts around 21:55:

Nathan Stolpman: What I’m interested in these days is trying to get stuff done in these cases, in whatever way is possible. It’s one of the reasons I kind of abandoned Hampstead. You guys talked about that. Oh, I’m sorry, you and David Shurter talked about that, I talked about it with him too, is that I worked with Ella, I interviewed her, and I did at least nine hours, maybe more, of coverage, just on Hampstead, and I was looking to get somewhere, and it didn’t seem like it was goin’ anywhere, y’know, and it didn’t seem like I had necessarily a willing partner on that. So I wanted to move onto something where I did, where there was some route to go…and oh, you know what else I heard with Hampstead, maybe you can tell me? David Shurter says he has information that the kids are safe and happy. Do you have any information on how the kids are doing? That’s what I’m most interested in.

Ed Opperman: No, I do not. I dropped Abe and Ella, shortly after the interview, and I stayed in touch with Shurter about that, I guess until about nine months ago…I don’t know anything more about Abe and Ella other than that whatever they have goin’ on there on YouTube with their fake accounts and their trolling is just that they’re on some bizarre trip that has nothing to do with the kids, or exposing anything. I don’t know what they’re into doing, but it’s a big game with them.

Can’t argue with either gentleman on that point.

This is a big game for Abe and Ella, they are on some kind of bizarre trip that has nothing to do with the kids, and Hoaxtead is going nowhere.

We got a good laugh out of what followed, though:

NS: Yeah, you were talking about the trolls at one point and how they show up in odd ways, and I think there’s something going on there, with both sides maybe being operated by the same operation.

EO: Absolutely, I 100% agree with you on that. Yeah, because even stuff that was leaked out, stuff was leaked out to the other side. It’s just…there’s no way. There’s something very bizarre goingโ€”and it’s not even a professional operation, either. They’re very sloppy about what they’re doing. I think it’s just a bunch of goofballs. I don’t think it’s really a big psy op or anything like that.

NS: Yeah, well Ella kept telling me it was the UK government, I think it could very well be the UK government, I’m not sure. I had human intellโ€”I had somebody come, um, pretend to be my girlfriend online, and then run psy ops on me. And she was, you know, she had this terrible fall, and all this supernatural stuff was happening to her, and she was near death and her house was possessed and herโ€”she said her daughter’s roommate in college was approached by somebody, but I think it was all to make me think that. Because she encouraged me to cover Hampstead, right, and then did all this stuff to make me think she was under attack. I found out it wasn’t true, so I’m not just bein’…and then she sent the cops to my house for a quote-unquote wellness check, so there was real stuff involved with this Hampstead, like I think they wanted me to cover it, and then to just destroy me, so that anybody else who wanted to cover it wouldn’t want to, I really feel like that’s what they were trying to do. Um, but anyway, that’s what happened to me, um…

EO: That’s interesting, that’s interesting. Because it was such a chaotic situation, with so many people coming at you, it would be easy to get drawn into it. I think Shurter was, Shurter got very drawn into that, with those (sic) Hoaxtead page, you know, arguing back and forth, and he kept sending me stuff and I’m, “I don’t care about that!” Y’know, the show’s over.

So apparently we are not only on the side of the Hoaxtead mob, but we sent Nathan some loon of a girlfriend, who encouraged him to investigate Hampstead, flipped out on him, and then sent the cops in to check on his mental health. Because that is totally something the UK government would get involved in. (Oi! You in back! Stop snickering!)

Mr Opperman goes on to describe how he totally believed the McMartin Preschool allegations, which tells us all we need to know about his gullibility levels; as for poor Nate, hey man, sorry about the girlfriend. Next time we’ll send you someone a bit less unstable. Our bad.


163 thoughts on “Ed Opperman, Lift the Veil on the Hampstead SRA hoax: ‘The show’s over’

  1. Opperman @ 1:28:26 (much to Stolpman’s amusement) – “I kinda trust David Shurter’s instincts, to be honest with you, you know, as far as that goes. I think he’s a sincere guy but you know, the guy’s, he’s, you know, and and, you know, he can be annoying as hell, man, sending me messages every 5 minutes.”

    Liked by 1 person

  2. What gets me is none of them have heard of ‘short and snappy’, I mean look at it- an hour and a half of them droning on and on and on and on and- well you get the idea LOL
    I watched a movie last night that was shorter than that drivel- at least it was funny…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Eclipses move from west to east because the moon orbits in that direction. I’m not sure how they imagine you can fake an eclipse, especially when they can be predicted centuries in advance – you don’t get surprise ones!

      Liked by 2 people

      • We’ve had several eclipses in the UK in my lifetime and can’t recall one person ever panicking or shitting themselves or crying “Waah waah, the end is nigh”. Is it an American thing?

        Liked by 1 person

        • I made the journey to South Devon to see the last UK total eclipse in 1999. No panic at all, in fact when the sun came out at the end of it there was a round of applause! Rather like being at a cosmic stage show.

          Liked by 1 person

          • I was there in South Devon,yep on the applause.Abiding memory was how the birds fell silent as darkness set in and dawn chorus kicked back when light recast.Interesting piece of higher system movement but nothing to ruin a perfecyly good pair of underpants,unless the interstella pool cue gets an airing ๐Ÿ™‚

            Liked by 2 people

          • 1999 eclipse, that brings back memories. Down a little further in Cornwall we had an Eclipse Tzar he was in charge of planning for the eclipse.It had been predicted that Armageddon would befall Cornwall due to the extra number of tourists headed this way, we would be gridlocked, run out of food and water, we would sink under the extra weight, the sky would fall in, that sort of thing. In the end due to the publicity, including road signs on the approach to Cornwall, only a few more tourists than normal turned up.

            I got a day off work though.

            Liked by 2 people

        • Last time I recall this much excitement over a predicted event was the Y2K mania in December 1999…and as we all know, the world came to a crashing halt on 1 January 2000. Sadly, I slept right through and missed all the fun.

          Liked by 2 people

    • well that’s silly.. you can’t control an eclipse..

      ethel, kindly leave luverley alone though. she can be silly at times and not think things through, but unlike dave she isn’t an ass to people, and i still consider her somewhat a friend


        • as i said, she can be a bit silly. her mind is a bit.. broken. but for the most part she sticks to her own little world, and she does not attack people like david does, and david has a tendency to trick people, as he tricked me, so she may at times accept and say things like the paedo part. she was there for me when shurter lashed out and made me suicidal, as well as a few other times. and there were times when i was not mentally well and fucked with her, and she took it without lashing back out and was forgiving of it. i feel i owe her a little loyalty, so i was kindof asking for some immunity towards her. she is not someone who would be swayed, and i don’t believe it’s you guys’s perogative to attack the mentally ill if they aren’t really hurting anyone


          • “i donโ€™t believe itโ€™s you guysโ€™s prerogative to attack the mentally ill”

            Fair enough. Find us a sane one to have a crack at then and we’ll do our best ๐Ÿ˜€

            Liked by 4 people

          • But sadly, they do hurt people.
            They hurt a lot of people by giving sustenance and support to very vicious people who defame, try to destroy people and accuse them of all manner of vile crimes.
            Anyone who thinks someone gets a free pass by doing this is dreaming.

            Liked by 2 people

        • Wow..”not think things through” is an understatement. Marvelous this InterWebs thingy- you can be absolutely anything sitting at a keyboard. Even when you are barking mad.

          Liked by 1 person

          • @Ghost of Sam, i understand that by supporting those who slander others, they play a part in hurting them. this makes me to blame as well, since i used to support david and used to believe what he said about you guys and distrusted those he “outed”. a few i even feared, but i dont anymore, and hell, with the way my personality and mind work lately i could be just as bad or get along famously even if you guys were like that. i just chose to be respectful and loving instead. i have made some apologies since my.. revelation, for my misjudgments. some apologies to people who were not aware i misjudged them, as i did not attack anyone or talk about them and i for the most part just tried to respectfully disagree or stay silent with anyone trolling me.

            all that aside, yes, anneliese “supports” shurter. and yes, she occasionally uses the pedo word, a lot of people do nowadays, though i do not believe she uses it to mean you guys, (and if she does i cannot blame her, having once misjudged you guys myself). But to her credit, to my knowledge she has never attacked or slandered anyone, or discussed or named anyone in particular, and does not join shurter in that. to her credit, she sometimes disagrees with shurter when he slanders people, and i am not the only one she has been there for, believed and supported when shurter slandered them. she has issues, but she is a reasonable person. she is on his facebook and occassionally comments, but it is relatively rare, and she does not support him monetarily. given all that, her sin is reduced to the simple fact that they are facebook friends, and that she sometimes posts bible shit or chemtrail shit, etc, in response to his posts. i don’t feel like that is grounds enough to go trolling her or attacking her, especially knowing she has mental issues and depression/suicidal issues. with others i would be all for it, but in her case it feels rather like bullying


      • No worries – I’ve no particular beef with Annaliese. Besides, if you want to see a real psycho on Dave’s friend list, check out Karen Brackley, who constantly calls for the “elites” to be massacred and for North Korea to be nuked. Have you had any dealings with her?

        Liked by 2 people

          • although, to be fair to that person, i did specifically contact her, through an alias, and other people, to get them to try to view the posts and keep an unbiased and open mind. and then when she blocked me and i went to my real facebook to contact her and continue the arguement because she pissed me off with her judgemental attitude.. to be fair i was quite angry at the time, and she viewed my facebook and previous posts in which i’d vented about shit were not exactly socially acceptable or encouraging as far as the whole “this person isn’t a psychopath”, so things went further downhill

            Liked by 1 person

        • i love you guys. you’re so much more reasonable than i was lead to believe, and much more reasonable than..
          ..im getting a bit tired of saying his name… so… he-who-must-not-be-named.
          a guy we know would have thrown a fit if i’d asked him to refrain from attacking someone who disagreed with him. so much for “loving your enemies” and “do your best to be at peace with all men” you guys do no worse than him, as he attacks people, guilty or not, and slanders and laughs about them when they defend themselves, but you guys are reasonable so long as i treat you with respect.
          i gotta head to bed, ttyl

          Liked by 3 people

          • I’ll let you in on a little secret we aren’t all the same person. We have different ways of arguing with people, especially people perpetuating the Hampstead stuff.

            I don’t think anyone’s aim is to hurt. Well, I hope it isn’t. Persuade, mock, ridicule, hold up a mirror, shine a light on bad behaviour, pull back the gossamer thin veil of supposed anonymity certainly, but that isn’t the same thing as trying to hurt people.

            I’m the nice one, of course.

            I posted up that link to the animation to hopefully drag a chuckle out of you about a very dark subject. I also hoped that you would see how the targets have remained pretty much the same between the whole pizza place stuff and the tabloid frenzy that inspired the piece. I hope you spotted the priest feeling hot under the collar despite not being targeted, right at the end ;p

            Liked by 3 people

      • Snedders! I thought she backed off after her grandchild was born, but it looks like it was only a temporary hiatus. Too bad, really, she seemed much more pleasant when not three sheets to the wind.


  3. I see that Debs has her finger on the pulse of the nation as always. This article is from 26th September 2014, the day said documentary went out ๐Ÿ˜€

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Debs is all guns blazing at the moment. She’s been sucking up to Shurter, calling for an uprising and promoting the McMartin bollocks on YouTube; and now she’s stumbled upon the “report” by that weird Maranatha cult and posted it without thinking, reading it or looking into said cult:

    Here, Debs – check this out, if you can be arsed:


    Liked by 1 person

  5. Nice review of those events, Coyote!

    Credit where it is due – Ed Opperman is by far the best interviewer in the SRA-pizzagate believers crowd. In fact, he’s the ONLY one whose faux “interviews” aren’t simply two fantasists confirming each other’s pre-conceptions and delusions. Ed asks REAL questions that challenge people to validate what they’ve just said to him. Sometimes.

    His fascination with “the McMartin digs” is misguided, of course. So he interviewed a ground-penetration radar operator, who explored the post-demolition site and claims to have found some kind of crude “cellar” under the garage. The children weren’t alleged to have said anything about tunnels or rooms under the garage, or the house, only & just the school itself. So its totally irrelevant. So are McGauley & Gunderson’s opinions.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Voluminously stringing together shallow clichรฉs into an ill formed,cacophonic hotchpotch and blaming everything but self for disharmonious flow of events hardly seems likely to add anything remotely of worthwhileness to the common good(apart from the occasional belly laugh).

      If Moo were perhaps to focus her energies into making a perfect omelet,only then will she develop possibilty to DO something less utterly futile.

      Breath decidedly unheld.

      Liked by 2 people

    • The whole Shirley Oaks thing is very sad. Having attended school (nursery and infants) in Lambeth from 1971 to 1975 and had a very positive experience there, I’d always – perhaps naรฏvely – been under the impression that Lambeth Council was very progressive and forward-thinking in terms of child welfare and education. At the school I was in, I still recall a number of initiatives that were ahead of their time, as well as a very modern outlook among the staff (e.g. massive drives to promote multi-culturalism and to stamp out racism…in 1970s South London!). And I certainly never saw so much as a hint of anyone being abused. In fact, I don’t even recall witnessing any corporal punishment being meted out, despite that being normal and legal back then. And I don’t think it’s a case of rose-tinted specs, as I recall my time there vividly and I do have some criticisms of said school. But yeah, the Shirley Oaks scandal is tragedy. Shame on Lambeth Council and my heart goes out to the victims and their families.

      Liked by 1 person

    • “I’m not against people who have learning difficulties…It’s not their fault.”

      Fair enough, Dave. I’ll give you that one. Thank you

      Liked by 2 people

      • Speaking of that…I think I see signs of a systemic impairment, when I watch Nathan’s videos. He has talked about mental health issues, but that’s not it. I don’t really want to say more, here.

        Liked by 1 person

    • WTF @ 1:11?

      Can someone please confirm whether I’ve got this right? Neelu’s mate rudely says to the bailiff, “Just put it in the envelope, fatso.” She then gives Neelu a wodge of cash (far short of the ยฃ713 owed, by the look of it) and says something along the lines of, “Don’t give it to her, though.” Could this possibly be Neelu and her mate faking paying the fine for the camera so that she can rant about fraud in subsequent videos/comments? Perish the thought!


      • Bailiffs wisely having a thorough check they are not being palmed off with any dodgy Swizlidiot bonds or promissory notes redeemable on the invisible seventh moon of planet KhrkrhrkhkrhrkhZB9Q or somewhere.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. I’ve recently been reading about Kenneth v Lanning and his writings into SRA in America and come across a quote the remind me of those who find it ok to share images and videos of the Hampstead children, its how he terms the difference between child pornography and child erotica. “Child erotica, on the other hand, is a broader and more encompassing term. It can be defined as any material, relating to children, that is sexually arousing. It is in a sense a subjective term, as almost anything potentially could be sexually arousing. However, some of more common types of child erotica include photos that are not sexually explicit, drawings, sketches, fantasy writings, diaries and sexual aids” from the book “Child pornography and sex rings.”

    Also noteworthy is this from” Lanning’s guide to allegations of childhood ritual abuse, part 10 “There are many possible alternative answers to the question of why victims are alleging things that don’t seem to be true. The first step in finding those answers is to admit the possibility that some of what the victims describe may not have happened. Some experts seem unwilling to even consider this. Most of these victims are also probably not lying and have come to believe that which they are alleging actually happened. There are alternative explanations for why people who never met each other can tell the same story.
    I believe that there is a middle ground – a continuum of possible activity. Some of what the victims allege may be true and accurate, some may be misperceived or distorted, some may be screened or symbolic, and some may be “contaminated” or false. The problem and challenge, especially for law enforcement, is to determine which is which. This can only be done through active investigation. I believe that the majority of victims alleging “ritual” abuse are in fact victims of some form of abuse or trauma. That abuse or trauma may or may not be criminal in nature. After a lengthy discussion about various alternative explanations and the continuum of possible activity, one mother told me that for the first time since the victimization of her young son she felt a little better. She had thought her only choices were that either her son was a pathological liar or, on the other hand, she lived in a community controlled by satanists.

    Law enforcement has the obvious problem of attempting to determine what actually happened for criminal justice purposes. Therapists, however, might also be interested in what really happened in order to properly evaluate and treat their patients. How and when to confront patients with skepticism is a difficult and sensitive problem for therapists.

    Any professional evaluating victims’ allegations of “ritual” abuse cannot ignore or routinely dismiss:
    . the lack of physical evidence (no bodies or physical evidence left by violent murders);
    . the difficulty in successfully committing a large-scale conspiracy crime (the more people involved in any crime conspiracy, the harder it is to get away with it); and
    . human nature (intragroup conflicts resulting in individual self-serving disclosures are likely to occur in any group involved in organized kidnapping, baby breeding, and human sacrifice).
    If and when members of a destructive cult commit murders, they are bound to make mistakes, leave evidence, and eventually make admissions in order to brag about their crimes or to reduce their legal liability. The discovery of the murders in Matamoros, Mexico in 1989 and the results of the subsequent investigation are good examples of these dynamics.

    Overzealous intervenors must accept the fact that some of their well-intentioned activity is contaminating and damaging the prosecutive potential of the cases where criminal acts did occur. We must all (i.e., the media, churches, therapists, victim advocates, law enforcement, and the general public) ask ourselves if we have created an environment where victims are rewarded, listened to, comforted, and forgiven in direct proportion to the severity of their abuse. Are we encouraging needy or traumatized individuals to tell more and more outrageous tales of their victimization? Are we making up for centuries of denial by now blindly accepting any allegation of child abuse no matter how absurd or unlikely? Are we increasing the likelihood that rebellious, antisocial, or attention- seeking individuals will gravitate toward “satanism” by publicizing it and overreacting to it? The overreaction to the problem can be worse than the problem.

    The amount of “ritual” child abuse going on in this country depends on how you define the term. One documented example of what I might call “ritual” child abuse was the horror chronicled in the book A Death in White Bear Lake (Siegal, 1990). The abuse in this case, however, had little to do with anyone’s spiritual belief system. There are many children in the United States who, starting early in their lives, are severely psychologically, physically, and sexually traumatized by angry, sadistic parents or other adults. Such abuse, however, is not perpetrated only or primarily by satanists. The statistical odds are that such abusers are members of mainstream religions. If 99.9% of satanists and 0.1% of Christians abuse children as part of their spiritual belief system, that still means that the vast majority of children so abused were abused by Christians.

    Until hard evidence is obtained and corroborated, the public should not be frightened into believing that babies are being bred and eaten, that 50,000 missing children are being murdered in human sacrifices, or that satanists are taking over America’s day care centers or institutions. No one can prove with absolute certainty that such activity has not occurred. The burden of proof, however, as it would be in a criminal prosecution, is on those who claim that it has occurred.

    The explanation that the satanists are too organized and law enforcement is too incompetent only goes so far in explaining the lack of evidence. For at least eight years (Note 1) American law enforcement has been aggressively investigating the allegations of victims of ritual abuse. There is little or no evidence for the portion of their allegations that deals with large-scale baby breeding, human sacrifice, and organized satanic conspiracies. Now it is up to mental health professionals, not law enforcement, to explain why victims are alleging things that don’t seem to have happened. Professionals in this field must accept the fact that there is still much we do not know about the sexual victimization of children, and that this area desperately needs study and research by rational, objective social scientists.

    If the guilty are to be successfully prosecuted, if the innocent are to be exonerated, and if the victims are to be protected and treated, better methods to evaluate and explain allegations of “ritual” child abuse must be developed or identified. Until this is done, the controversy will continue to cast a shadow over and fuel the backlash against the validity and reality of child sexual abuse.”


    Liked by 2 people

    • So they have time machines too….
      Is there no end to `their’ abilities?

      I mean- they have time machines…
      freakin time machines….
      freaking time freaking travel freaking machines….
      That freaking let them travel in time….

      And what do they do?
      Go back in time and kill Hitler?? (for the good guys)
      Go back and dig up all the gold before its discovered in the Gold rushes??? (for the bad guys)


      No they dont…


      pick on neelu
      by finding out her `keywords’ in the future and `plagiarising’ them
      This magically stops all her wacko remedies from working in some strange and unexplained way in the present….


      Liked by 3 people

  7. Hey there David Shurter , guess who is back???? have you guessed yet ?????? its FIONA BARNETT’S ….. Uncle John listened to the interview you had on the 4th August , please , learn how to pronounce my name, and how do you draw the conclusion that I am obsessed with you and Barnett, you have had a bloxxxx job done on you by Barnett, look readers, they are both looney tunes, please google and visit the Exposing Survivors Voice Australia website and read all of the articles and that will give you a sound background on why I am on the web, no obsession , just exposing frauds like Shurter and Barnett on behalf of the REAL victims the one who advertised and asked for help , so If you had moron niece (sorry FIONA for using your descriptor, remember your pathetic face book attack on me, a fat moron ) You will see that Barnetts daddy is a convicted criminal from growing weed in a 2 story bunker under his house , you should also google Barnetts own page fionabarnett.org and read her own life story call An Edumacation , especially the CAT KILLING part and her daddys violent behaviour, and the rest of her fantasies , how does one return to a normal happy life after being xxxxxx by NIXON and the Aussie Primeministers, like she alleges, with no substantiated proof, thats why mainstream media woke up to her, but she still looking for support , and Shurter, your it, I tried to talk to you man to man , but your a looney tune and your teeth, is that what crack does to you, go put your silly hat on and please don’t try to lie about what happened between us I deleted you before you said that you did it, I got to you, readers have you noted how Shurter has closed lis pages for comment theres a reason for it he’s a looney and doesnt like the flack Shurter if the FBI or whoever wanted to get rid of you, you would simply disappear, without a trace , easy as that , none of the crap you carry on with, go to the sites I suggested above read it all THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DO

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I just finished reading the long recent post on the attack on Barnett posted by the unmentionable person free zone what a fantasy and someone published it the pictures are not of the real people just someones picture and the story content is what can you say a fantasy the poster of the article posted does not allow public comment why


    • Can I suggest a few calming deep breaths???
      Fiona is (quite rightly IMHO) considered a complete nutcase by most people
      Your own posts dont help in that they are also totally incoherant, so much so that I (who know quite a bit about her) cant even make sense of them…

      start again from the beginning…


      • G’day Steved, thanks for you comments , I suppose that if one is not familiar with the whole family story and background then what I write is incoherent, just bits and pieces and rambling and I apologise for that.
        Now I know that someone with good intentions is reading my posts, as you have commented with constructive suggestions. How much do you know about her ???? I am her uncle, her uncle john . There are several chapters to my research which deal with different aspects of the whole story, begins with my parents coming to Australia, Fiona’s time that I recall from her birth to 1991 ,then her attack on my father when he passed away in 1991 and then the attack on my mother in 2011, after she passed away, her families questionable involvement by their actions involving property they own, her father who is a convicted criminal by illicit drug manufacturing, the circumstances on how I became involved and what been happening to me since , in particular more recently, and what I believe is to shut me down , looks like she found a friend in David Shurter who is defending her , for his own personal reasons . I would be pleased if you would give me an outline on what you think would be relevant reading , as you can see , the story has a complex history
        my regards
        John Holowczak


      • As DOTB said, I am not sure that this is the right blog to expand on Fiona’s fantasies, although I certainly feel for anyone in her family that’s had to endure her behaviour….

        Can I suggest we ask the owners if they would be happy with expanding into our Ozzie cases?
        if not I might be able to set up a wordpress blog similar to hoaxtead for your case for you, although I cant guarantee anything about visibility or responses

        Liked by 2 people

      • G’day Daughter of the Blade,
        When I get to know you and your views on life , then we may communicate in a private manner, if that is your desire, but until then, I would recommend that you visit these 2 sites , for a bit more on the back ground on the Fiona Barnett allegations and the group that are exposing her unsubstantiated claims .
        Please visit ” fionabarnett.org ” , the best story on her own upbringing is under her published article called
        “an edumacation”.
        Then visit the website “Exposing Survivors Voice Australia”, this group was on Facebook but were closed down and had to open a new site outside of Barnett’s ability to close it down.
        ESVA sought my help with exposing Fiona Barnett , my niece.
        The most recent Shurter story is a fabrication of fantasy , looks like he’s been well and truly manipulated . Enjoy the read and I hope it gives you a better background to the organisations working for and not against the real victims of abuse, abuse of any kind, and unfortunately , the paedofile disease is like influenza , rampart throughout the world, with no cure in sight, the cover ups continue and from what I read , moving the treatment to the psychiatric profession to assist.
        Fiona Barnett completed a degree in psychology at the Bond University in Queensland Australia but they refused to allow her to practice, but she has signed a recent post on her own page with her degree status , perhaps the truth, or , perhaps a lie, judge for yourself. Read all that is written on both sites.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I suspect GOS has a bit to contribute about Fiona as well- she has quite a history in Oz
          I have stayed away from it in the past as she was quite close to me at one time (in location) and I didnt want to end up being ‘outed’ by her and her cronies…

          Liked by 1 person

      • you’re ok, nobody here is accusing you of anything, nobody intelligent would accuse someone without letting them defend themselves or looking into it, so just ignore the stupids and block them.. i know it hurts, but who gives a fuck what they think? they don’t know you. some of these people would believe unicorns existed if there was enough hype about it


  9. Hello again Steved and Daughter of the Blade,
    Its not my intention to hijack this site, I have access thru the ESVA site for updates for the Australian readers, the site seems to be gaining momentum with a lot of views as I am told,, and also my own site Holowczak666 that I set up to publish the whole story, chapter by chapter . I have not yet posted on my own site , to many spot fires to attend to with the comments and posting by my 2 freinds.
    I do find it very interesting that there are other sites such as this site that appear to have the same purpose , exposing fakes and protecting the real victims.
    Its up to this sites creator as to how far and how much, unfortunately the Barnett and Shurter content is expanding , perhaps a brief comment from me to direct the readers to the other 2 sites if they are interested in the story, Shurter did read comments on this site , thats why I responded to his comments , yet he could not see the forest for the trees , claimed he closed access to prevent me from getting to him, but I had already closed my access name down because you cant reason with a fool. He does not allow public comment on his own sites now , hows that , yet he seem to make a youtube video daily.
    thanks for you comments


    • The main reason he is ‘not named’ here (hint- don’t mention his name anymore ok!!)

      is to limit his public viewing

      google wont pick up on ‘him’ if we don’t mention him- even if we all know who we are talking about

      plus he seems to be in a major meltdown ATM, and it seems to be the group consensus that being the ‘good guys’ we shouldn’t encourage anyone (no matter how deserving) to self destroy themselves…

      Liked by 2 people

  10. Hey always calm just feeding an apple to the unicorn , had a tortoise shell coloured cat for a lot of years , we had many a session on domination, boy she was persistent LOL be sound asleep. rip the lid of a can of cat food and there she was

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.