The Lies That Fundies Tell.

louise dickens defamatory qanon pizzagate message

The Granddaughter of Geoffrey Dickens continues her Campaign to make herself look daft by rehashing old SRA lies and new untruths passed to her by Conspiracyloons.

  • The Hutchinson Hit-List
  • The MI5 Buggers

Watch SAFF dissect the wacky ideas of conspiracyloons on their new martyr Geoffrey Dickens.

"In the 1980s my grandfather an MP at the time campaigned tirelessly about a VIP peodophile ring, he received so much stick for this - as you can imagine. He managed to get P.I.E abolished, and named Peter Haymen in the house of commons.

He was added to a hitlist..


Louise Dickens has pushed this false meme before by retweeting fantasies from @ciabaudo such as:

Lies and Rumours:  Dickens was on a hit-list

Geoffrey Dickens guard for hit-list MPThere was no 'hit-list'.  It was a tabloid invention (see right) Arthur Hutchinson was not a contract killer, he was a psychopath who had served 5 years in prison already for the attempted murder of his brother-in-law. The despicable triple-murders and rape which he committed occurred in the same place and all at the same time following a random break-in at a house in Dore, Sheffield in 1983 whilst he was on the run from the police who had earlier arrested him for suspected burglary and rape in another case.

He was caught on 5th of November 1983 THREE DAYS after it was reported that the police, had found  a 'notebook' of Hutchinson's with a number of VIPs listed along with their addresses. The police took the precautionary step of warning Geoffrey Dickens.  So Dickens was under police protection for a few days until Hutchinson was apprehended.

1: Hutchinson was a psychopath not a 'contract' killer.  There is absolutely no evidence he was hired by anyone to kill anybody.

2: His crimes involved theft, burglary and rape to which murder became a wicked ancillary.

3: Hutchinson's notebook could easily have listed places of rich people whom Hutchinson thought were good targets for burgling, not killing.

4: The only connection Hutchinson had with Leon Brittan was that the Home Secretary was so appalled with Hutchinson's crimes he put him on Whole Life Tariff, meaning that he would never ever be released and die in prison.  He is still there today.

These facts are readily available for anyone who wants to look for them. Louise Dickens and her 'granddad was on a hit man's list and Brittan paid for it' conspiracyloons rearrange the world to suit the suspicions of their tiny minds. It's just not true.

Dickens office burgled"and had his homes burgaled, obviously looking for the evidence he had on them. "

UNTRUE.  From 1981 to 1995 when Dickens died we found a handful of reports of burglary. None at his Lancashire home as Louise Dickens' words seem to suggest, but one at his London flat and one at his office behind Westminster.

The first 'suspicious' burglary was in 16 March 1981 (see cutting right - click on it to get a large format to read).
This is in the heat of the PIE controversy. Dickens' paranoia is clearly seen here when he says:
'It was a professional job made to look like amateurs' (?) and his reasoning is -
'they only took a music centre and didn't leave
any fingerprints'.
Some criminologists would say that this is exactly what petty thieves would do but note the dates;
Dickens says that the break in 'occurred the Friday before last', that is, the 6th of March 1981. 
Tom O'Carrol,'s trial (
the organiser of PIE, ) ended on 12th of March. 
Three days later, Thursday 19th March, Dickens held a press conference to maximise the publicity and said he would name other paedophiles in parliament, a Hull vicar and a GP.  The GP , Dr Birt, turned out to be innocent on trial. The Hull Vicar killed himself on remand after a mob attacked his vicarage. 
Neither of them had anything to do with PIE. 
Neither of them had anything to do with SRA.

Bunter Deceives Everyone:  All this was somewhat overshadowed because at the same press-conference Dickens also introduced his mistress and announced he was leaving his wife, Norma, adding
'don't all rush
to the phone please lads, I haven't had time to tell my wife yet'. 

This was typical of Dickens' duplicity and dishonesty in his dealings with the press, the public and his own family.  In taking up the SRA banner of her grandfather Louise Dickens cannot really have known him for if she did why would she put her grandma through reliving his treacheries?    She forces us to recall that history to prove to her, and latecomers to the SRA controversy, just how extensive Dickens' dishonour and dishonesty was.

The flat which had been burgled had been used as the love-nest in which Dickens had entertained TWO separate women, Pat Briggs and Maureen Knight, in concurrent affairs over a long period whilst his oblivious and dutiful wife was keeping house for him 'up North'.

Treacherous Geoffrey Dickens Meet My New LoveWhen Dickens chose to dump his wife in a press conference it caused a sensation that went all across the headlines nationally BEFORE actually telling his wife that he was moving in with Maureen Knight. It was left to the Daily Star to do his dirty work for him. They phoned Norma and told her the news. reporting her crying and sobbing over the phone in astonishment.  

When Pat Briggs, Dickens other mistress, saw the headlines she realised she had been had by Dickens too and phoned Fleet Street.  Dickens was challenged with Pat Briggs' statements and he LIED again, absolutely assuring journalists and everyone else that it was an imagined relationship and Briggs was stalking him.  Briggs then produced love-letters and poems and other evidence proving that Dickens had conducted a 9 month relationship with her, including details of his flat and the bed she claimed they had sex on. Is that one lie or two lies from Bunter so far?  Three if you count leading on his wife for 9 months. 
Besieged by the media Norma Dickens herself confirmed that Geoffrey  had come clean and told her that he was conducting affairs with two other women. 

By April 2nd the grinning buffoon who had despicably posed for tabloid photographs kissing Maureen Knight and taken her kids for a seaside jaunt where they were pictured running hand in hand enjoying themselves (thoughtlessly twisting the knife in Norma), was having to face reality.  One can imagine the furore at Tory Central Office. Diplomacy with the press from his local Conservative Association was deftly handled as though Dickens had been struck with a mind-altering disease instead of multiple philandering.  Bunter quickly returned to Louise's Grandmother whose magnanimity in accepting him back was amazing. She spoilt him by making his 'favourite steak meal and a bottle of wine'.    There followed a clean up campaign by the Tory press who published several simpering 'how to renew a jaded marriage' articles but if anyone thought Dicken's treachery was just some mid-life crisis they were soon to learn different as on April 5th, three days after returning to Norma,  he was telephoning his mistress Maureen Knight and was reported as saying that he had assured her that their relationship was intact.  A Sunday Mirror reporter was actually standing by the side of her when she took the call.   How many Bunter lies is that so far? Six or Seven? 

Geoffrey Dickens and his mistress Maureen KnightThe story of Geoffrey Dickens' duplicity did not end there, reportedly Bunter's affair with Maureen Knight continued for another five months, until August 1981 when he stood Maureen up after promising to attend a Royal Wedding ball with her. He then wrote her a 'Dear John' letter saying it was all off.  The  News of the World report on it (see right) must have been terrible for Norma Dickens .  Maureen Knight said: 

'All the while he was convincing his wife that he wasn't seeing me. She'd ring the London flat where we spent so much time together and he'd make clear to her that he was all alone.'

How many deceitful lies is that Louise?   You are defending a despicable, self-centred, lying bigot.   Geoffrey Dickens was not a martyr, he was a philanderer who didn't care much how his actions affected others, even those close to him.   And you and your conspiracyloon friends believe his every word? Personally I wouldn't believe anything he said without proof, and proof is sadly lacking in all his major allegations and claims of SRA.  We commend his work in outing Hayman and putting pressure on PIE, at least that threat was real.  His meanderings on SRA were utterly and completely different. Those accusations were based solely on Religious discrimination and prejudice.  

The supposition from conspiracyloons is that the break-in at Dickens' flat was linked to the PIE trial, but as can be seen from the above, lots went on there and others may have had access.   Even so the PIE/Hayman debacle was no secret; it had become common knowledge as far back as October the previous year through Private Eye magazine.  Louise and her conspiracyloons will tell you that Dickens outed PIE and got them banned. In fact it was Private Eye who did all the work in exposing the Hayman link with PIE in great detail in early October 1980 before anyone else in the press or politics had known about it, when the committal proceedings took place at the Old Bailey

At first it was thought that a whistle-blower policeman had contacted Dickens  to get his help in exposing  what can now be seen as a definite cover-up to protect Hayman and the Establishment, and indeed there must have been some police involvement because of the insider knowledge, but it soon became clear that Dickens was being 'enthused and directed' by a journalist. (still unamed to this day)  Labour whip Walter Harrison gave an interview in March 1981 to the BBC in which he said that a journalist was 'pulling Dickens' strings' 

I'm sure that if the security services had wanted to enter Dickens flat, obtain information, copy it and get out without being noticed they had the skill and resources to do so. They could have probably just asked Briggs or Knight for the key to copy.  Making it look like a burglary would have been a cretinous act but it suited Dickens' thirst for publicity to imagine that is what happened. It increased his sense of self-importance.

Dickens says his flat has been buggedOn the 21st March 1981 (the same day the press broke the news that he was  leaving his wife, Norma) Dickens also extended and exaggerated his fantasies about the 6th March break-in by making claims that his flat had been 'bugged' by the security services.  (see left).  He said in other cuttings that he was getting an electronics expert to check the flat to find the 'bugs'. 
Newspaper reports of
bugs being found were noticeable by their complete absence afterwards.
Rent-A-quote dickens had actually found any you could be sure that it would be plastered over the Nationals in short order.  In other words Dickens' flat had NOT been bugged, by MI5 or anyone else. Dickens was somewhat of a Walter Mitty character.  

PIE AND SRA NOT CONNECTED:  It is important to note that there was absolutely NO connections with SRA or the Occult in these occurrences or in any PIE claims. They have been tacked-on afterwards by conspiracyloons.
Geoffrey Dickens SRA campaign didn't start until April 1988 long after the PIE debacle. 
The PIE period was from March 1981 to March 1986 when Dickens then switched tack and started a campaign against homosexual priests and vicars alongside Childwatch which was run by Dianne Core.
At this point Core was pushing the case of  Jan Knox a hull vicar who was accused of abusing 28 kids.
Dickens and Core cooperated in assembling a 'dossier' of cases of priestly abuse which they presented to Lambeth Palace in April 1987. 

Predictably Dickens threatened to name these 10 suspected paedophiles in the Commons if the CofE didn't take action.   When Knox killed himself prior to trial Dickens' hunt for abusing priests tapered out.   But in late 1987 the first claimed SRA case in the UK had occurred in  Broxtowe,. Nottingham. It became a celebrated cause within social work and child-protection networks. However the public didn't get to know about it until Childwatch and Dickens jumped on the SRA bandwagon in April 1988 where it was referred to in Dickens' Commons statement.

There is therefore NO connection whatsoever between PIE and SRA claims.  Dickens switched from PIE to attacking the Church of England about homosexual priests and then TWO YEARS AFTER PIE switched tack again to ride the new hysteria of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.

MI5 may have burgled my flatAny supposed connections have been created by conspiracyloons themselves who have intermingled one with the other to 'float' a better fantasy.   The existence of PIE does NOT denote in any way proof of the existence of SRA, the two things are entirely separate.

Dickens' second break-in report of 23rd April 1982 appears to be a restatement of the 6th of March 1981 break-in but presented as new. 

On 23rd  April 1982, ( over a year after the first break-in), Dickens obtained publicity from the Daily Mail by linking the earlier break-in at his London flat with a new break-in at the home of Timothy Raison (Minister for State at the HO).   There was absolutely no evidence of MI5 involvement in either.

1981 had been a busy year for Rent-A-Quote Dickens but PIE was over and done with by April 1982. For the past 8 months there had been few headlines from Rent-A-Quote other than obvious photo-opportunities such as a sponsored crash-diet with funds going to Huddersfield Sea Cadets etc.  The controversy had passed, he'd dumped his two 'other women' and gone back to Norma, and so there was nothing important Dickens had to hide from the secret services anyway, though he guestimated 'Data Protection' was the issue the imaginary spooks were seeking (nothing therefore to do with PIE, child-abuse or SRA). This second burglary claim appears simply to be a method of hi-jacking Raison's burglary for Dicken's own self-promotion.  Indeed, we can't find any evidence of a police report by Dickens at this time therefore he may actually be restating the previous break-in at his flat on 6th March 1981.


The third complaint of a break-in from Dickens was two years later in December 1983 at his Westminster office overlooking Dean's Yard. We are told that a desk drawer was 'forced open' but the only thing taken was 'headed notepaper'.  All MPs have posh notepaper printed for them with their names above a government crest.  Why anyone would force open a drawer to take letter-headings with Geoffrey Dickens name on them is a mystery.   Desk drawers are notoriously insecure and easy to pick, but again Dickens exaggerates this incident and elevates it to a conspiracy to obtain evidence from 'his files'.  Much later (15th May  1992), an MP who took over Dickens' office found a cache of occult magazines in the same desk drawer but he didn't need to break into it, it was apparently left unlocked!  Dickens said he'd forgotten all about them. Dickens' approach to security is somewhat mystifying. One minute he is the holder of 'secret' information hidden from MI5 and the next he can't even be bothered cleaning out his desk of 'evidence' to back his claims of Witches killing and eating children.

Bear in mind that since his last bout of self-promotion Dickens had, that year, Dickens Office Desk brokenbeen busy pressing for the restoration of the death penalty and fighting election at the newly inaugurated constituency of Littleborough and Saddleworth (June 1983)  putting his child-abuse campaigning on the back-burner.

In August 1983, after getting elected, Dickens began expanding on his campaign against child-abuse by adding '8 names of VIPs' to his dossier on Hayman & PIE.  These names had been mailed in to him he said. He had received thousands of letters following his earlier 'naming of names'.  He had filtered these postal accusations based on the number of people who complained about each suspect, he said.  He had only passed on the names of VIPs which had multiple accusations and there were 8 of them.

This happened to precisely coincide with work by Scotland Yard's Obscene Publications squad which had gone through all past editions of PIE's newsletters and made a list of people's names and whereabouts if known. There were over 300 of them.  The OPS visited Dickens for his list of 8 names.  The difference is that the yard's names were forensically authenticated, Dickens' names were third-hand suspicions.  However soon thereafter Dickens was to gain publicity for a dossier of 'several hundred names' which could have only been the OPS report. 

N.B. : There is a difference between 300 names of paedophiles and 8 names of VIPs accused of paedophillary in Westminster.  In a population of 60 million 300 paedophiles countrywide would probably be expected.  One does not 'prove' the other. 300 paedophiles countrywide does not confirm that 8 rumoured VIP paedophiles existed in Westminster.  Geoffrey Dickens hated homosexuals and was a key player in far-right Tory groups which campaigned against them. He was involved in imposing the infamous Clause 28 in the local government bill.  To Dickens ALL homosexuals were child-abusers.  SAFF have asked Louise whether she believes the same but she has never replied.  In any event fundamentalist Christians who wrote to Dickens to condemn VIPs could simply be outing 'gays'. We have many more gay MPs today  and there is obviously no threat to children from any of them.  One has to be careful with Dickens' loose definitions and keep in mind his religious bigotry and the kind of people who supported him. 


It does not appear that any of those PIE members were ever prosecuted by the CPS.  That was very wrong and of course indicates that a paedophile subculture existed across the UK which the government decided to ignore.   At the time child-abuse wasn't as high a priority as it should have been. The resources required to investigate over 300 paedophiles would today be given instantly.  Back in the day it seems that political expediency, wrongly, came first.   Thus the real scandal of PIE is that the government failed to pursue those 300 names and bring as many prosecutions as they could.  Whatever reason they had for doing that was not an attempt to cover up a VIP abuse ring in parliament, because the existence of the 300 paedophiles across the country is not evidence of an abuse ring in parliament.

N.B.   Despite inferences to the contrary from Satan Hunters  the SAFF have never tried to deny that PIE existed nor have we ever supported paedophiles of any kind.  Our Black Museum of Priestly Child Abuse here clearly proves that we seek to expose them. 
What the SAFF say is that SRA does not exist. 
SRA and PIE are NOT related issues.

Nobody appears to have a copy of the 8 names on Dickens' suspect list, though Lord John Mann recently was reported to have 'seen' that dossier. I wonder if he meant the 300 names put together by the OPS?  

As the government did not act on the OPS report one might have thought that Dickens' would have then continued his naming and shaming campaign in the House of Commons under parliamentary privilege to 'out' these 8 VIPs, as was his usual tactics, but he did not do so.  This suggests to us that the 8 people were not paedophiles but MPs who happened to be gay. Dickens capitalised on those 8 names with the press, of course, but never named them, inside parliament or outside it.

One might also have expected, in today's climate, John Mann to name those suspects in the house today too, if he saw those 8 VIP names, which again probably indicates the unworthiness of the accusations being made against them by Dickens' correspondents.

In any event there were absolutely no claims of SRA in any of this. No rumours of occult rituals or tortures, or anything of that kind.

So there we have it.  The facts show that there was probably only one break-in at Dickens' flat/love-nest, on 6th March 1981 and then another 'non-burglary'  two years later in his office next to Dean's Yard.   It is typical of the way Dickens worked-up publicity for himself that he was able to obtain such repetitive coverage of petty theft and turn it into an MI5 conspiracy to silence him.   More or less what his granddaughter and her conspiracyloon friends are doing today.

"During his research in to CSA, he became aware of SRA, he made his findings public and reported to the police but obviously nothing was done, except make him out to be a lying buffoon  (He was a Lying Buffoon!)

"I began a few years ago looking in to my grandfather's work and came across an organisation, which if anything just makes my toes curl. They are fronting as being all about human rights etc. But they clearly aren't. The curator of this organisation is I believe to be the former owner of a shop based in West Yorkshire, I can't remember the  name of it but it was a book shop of sorts and the base for exchanging Child abuse images and information. When grandad named this shop I understand a group of Christians burnt the shop down. This has obviously fuelled the hatred of my grandad and now in turn me. "

Louise Dickens has lied.  It is actually constructive criminal libel and the owner of the shop is now suing her.  The following are THE FACTS:

1:  THE SAFF IS NOT A HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP LIE:  The SAFF is a group which protects Religious Rights and we've been doing it for 32 years.  We have worked with the UNA and the Commission for Racial Equality, and with many government departments and with the U.N. over the past three decades to protect the human rights of minority beliefs from lies and the kind of agitprop put out by sectarians like Geoffrey and Louise Dickens.  To say that SAFF's work on human rights is a pretence is ludicrous. She really doesn't want anyone to consider our work at all does she?

2: THE CHILD-PORNOGRAPHY LIE:  The creator (not curator) of the SAFF was indeed the proprietor of the Leeds bookshop she mentions but SAFF is a separate legal entity run by many volunteers whose fine work has been crucial over the past 30 years to stalling the persecution of Pagans and other falsely accused people with untrue allegations of SRA.  The Bookshop has never exchanged or countenanced Child-Abuse images of any kind.   That is a downright evil lie from a false-accuser who clearly hates the bookshop owner because he exposed her grandfather as a lying cheat.   

Geoffrey Dickens SRA announcement 27 april 19883: GEOFFREY DICKENS ACCUSED HIM IN PARLIAMENT LIE:  The only allegations Geoffrey Dickens actually made of the Leeds shop was in the Commons under Parliamentary Privilege and he did that knowing that he could not be sued.   He knew that had he repeated those things outside the Commons he would have been slapped with a writ.  What he said can be seen in the image on the right and Louise Dickens rabid false accusations today form no part of it.

Indeed  the very day Dickens made his commons announcement the shop-owner sent him a letter demanding he retract and offering to educate the oaf about Witchcraft and Paganism.  The slimy Dickens refused to reply. 

Later that year, realising that Dickens did not want the Truth, but was on a fundamentalist campaign to close his shop down,  the bookshop owner sent a solicitor's letter to Geoffrey Dickens' home address, Sycamores, Greenfield, Oldham. This was sent registered post and he still has a signed slip for its delivery.   
He warned Dickens that if he repeated the libels he would be sued. 
Dickens never repeated the libels in public because he knew he couldn't substantiate them.  
We thought Geoffrey Dickens was a fool but he was clever enough to not dare to tell those lies in public. 
Louise Dickens fell for them and because she trusted in her lying grandfather's words she has repeated those lies and expanded on them with
fictitious claims.   She will realise what that means when the writ for libel is placed in her hands.   

Her grandfather had absolutely no evidence to implicate the Leeds bookshop owner or his business in any wrongdoing. 
When confronted by the shop-owner's MP in Westminster, Dickens is on record as saying that
'Frankly he seems not to know a great deal about your business but is convinced that what he calls 'a list of sale items' has been complained about to him by various people.

In other words complaints from other fundies who disagreed on religious grounds with the books sold by the bookshop.
It was simpy sectarian hatred. 
The main thrust of Dickens' Hansard speech was that the bookshop provided manuals on occultism, witchcraft and Satanism and sold altar images.
He DID NOT make any reference to child pornography. 
He DID NOT accuse the owner of being involved in Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.

These utterly despicable false allegations of child pornography have been tacked-on by Louise Dickens herself.
She has absolutely no evidence to back up those evil accusations , which is why she is trawling this Qanon Pizzagate conspiracyloon forum to try to get dirt on him and the SAFF.
She will never get any 'evidence' of wrongdoing because the bookshop owner is utterly innocent of them. 
Until she accepts this fact she will be ridiculed every time she states an untruth and end up paying a lot of money to him in damages.

Like her dishonourable grandfather, Louise Dickens appears ready to say and do anything to smear an innocent man.
She similarly uses terms like 'monsters' and 'vile' and 'makes my toes curl'  in reference to the SAFF even though we have done nothing in any way wrong.  She insults us to avoid facing up to the fact that her grandfather was a despicable, dishonourable, liar who broke trust with almost everyone he came into contact with, including his parliamentary colleagues and his long suffering wife. 

The Leeds bookshop was an entirely legal entity involved in honest trade, to 40,000 regular, decent, honest customers. 
The bookshop owner has not done anything wrong ever; he doesn't even have a parking ticket against his name. 
Geoffrey Dickens' assumption that he must be up to no good because he sold books on Witchcraft and Satanism revealed only his bigoted Christian fundamentalist world-view which his granddaughter has aligned herself with.

louisedickensdanczuktrystewhatdidsheexpect4: GEOFFREY DICKENS WAS NOT BLAMED FOR THE FIREBOMBING OF THE BOOKSTORE.   The Leeds bookshop was firebombed in August 1989 by Christian Fundamentalists, thirteen months AFTER Geoffrey Dickens started  his campaign. It happened a week after  the despicable Cook Report 'The Devil's Work' was broadcast.  It was that programme which caused the firebombing.  Grandfather's lies may have fanned the flames but in his statements following the fire, the bookshop owner blames The Cook Report directly for it, not Geoffrey Dickens.

This is clearly proven here:   In that very long and detailed history of how the Cook Report persecuted him, there are only two sideways mentions of Geoffrey Dickens.  Louise Dickens' insistence that the SAFF is victimising her for Granddad's actions is utterly fallacious.  We are simply highlighting historical errors and lies which she is perpetuating. And rightly so.   

Louise claims that the SAFF 'turned on her'
.  In fact we have been trying to educate her since 2016 by pointing up the lies about her grandfather's campaign which she wrongly believes in.  We have done this civilly, though Louise has been antagonistic and obdurate from the start.  We were actually trying to help her to avoid getting herself and her family into the exact legal trouble which her obsessive stupidity over SRA has in the end created. 

And the only person who has 'made her toes curl'  appears to be the Labour MP Simon 'spanker' Danczuk, whom Louise admitted she had bedded in 2016 whilst planning to write a book about Granddad Geoffrey's child-abuse campaigns.  .

"So, what I'm asking is, does anyone on this group in the UK have any information on this cult?  Take a look at their website, it's vile reading.

This man has seemed to make it his life's work to slur my grandad and all his work on protecting children and making people aware of the evil in our world. And if he had nothing to hide, surely he wouldn't go to so much trouble...? "

The Reason why the bookshop owner continues to point out the lies of Louise Dickens' grandfather is simply that they involve dastardly false allegations against himself.  A key indicator of the foolishness of this woman is her insistence that it is somehow unfair for a person who has been falsely accused to counter lies against himself with the Truth.   Does she expect him to remain silent whilst people  make horrendous criminal allegations of the most disgusting kind against him? 

Of course Louise is so sold on grandfather's retrospective saintly image that she appears completely ignorant of what he actually did.  Each time she promotes one of his old lies in order to try to discredit the SAFF we obviously reply with FACTS which prove that she's ignorant of what happened. When she runs out of facts she can turn to confabulating things (see; Black Witch stuck pins in a voodoo doll of Geoffrey Dickens on James Whale Show here: ).  IT NEVER HAPPENED.  She staked her 'life' on it yet it never actually happened! 

If this injudicious woman wants to continue to lie about innocent people and misrepresent and libel the good work of the SAFF in the public realm then the SAFF will have no alternative than to expose hypocrisy and the untruths she often disseminates whenever she promotes them; so the public are not mislead into following another scare.

As the granddaughter of Geoffrey Dickens she is being made a celebrity in the conspiracyloon circuit. She is, without possessing evidence, rehashing and promoting the sectarian lies which her grandfather started in 1988 and which the SAFF discredited at that time. As can be seen by the lies she glibly trotted out above concerning the Leeds Bookshop owner and child pornography, Louise adds stuff which grandad did not say and which is completely untrue.  Her self-righteousness is unending.  
Yet there has never ever been any historical allegation about the bookshop concerning child-pornography. None. Ever. 
Where did that come from? 
Either she made it up or someone feeding her with misinformation made it up.
Either way it is an evil thing to do to accuse someone of such serious crimes without one jot of evidence.   There is free speech in Britain and she is free to make statements but must realise that when they are lies she will be held legally responsible for them.

 Simon Danczuk sexting a 17 year oldObviously the SAFF respects and lauds TRUTH; it is our mission to parry lies with Truth.  We have done that for over three decades and sooner or later Louise Dickens will realise that she will not be allowed to get away with slandering or libelling anyone when SAFF has the documentary proof which provides the facts otherwise. 

The SAFF confront and correct LIES.  If people stop fantasising about SRA and the SA then we will have no need to challenge them.

For  example in an attempt to besmirch our intent she has called us a 'Cult'.  The SAFF is no more a cult than the National Trust is!  In various twitter exchanges we have explained to Louise Dickens several times that we are NOT a Satanic group and that we do NOT support paedophiles, we actively hunt them out.  Our membership comes from all walks of life and all religious beliefs, including Christianity.  Volunteers work to assist the aims of the SAFF when they can because they wholeheartedly agree with them. Many of our helpers have been the victims of false allegations themselves.  We impose nothing upon them and we do nothing cult-like.  Yet still Louise Dickens refuses to see the Truth.  Still she insists that Black is White.  Still she defames us and anyone else she self-righteously considers to be her enemies.  She cannot accept the fact that religious rights extend to ALL beliefs and that Satanists and Pagans have religious beliefs which are just as valid as hers.  To protect her fragile world-view she seems driven to insist that we are liars or disingenuous or in error.   She appears ready to paint us with an evil brush to stop anyone else listening to us.   When the SAFF interjects to stop the persecution of Pagans and Satanists she repeats those untruths which she already knows we have answered. 

SPOT THE MISTAKES COMPETITION:   So far we've mentioned over a dozen factual mistakes, errors and downright lies in Louise Dickens statement above to Qanon Pizzagate Forum. How many can you find?

John Freedom

We want this website to represent a fair cross-section of opinion. Would you like to add more Information, Observations, Personal Experience, Criticisms or Corrections to SAFF files and publications?
Then please click here to go to our Feedback Forum - You can leave a message anonymously or just read what others have to say.

Click here to return to the SAFF frontpage