Connect with us

espionage

Shock interview reveals big names connected to international paedophile network

Published

9 minute read

Posted with permission from:

Survivor’s harrowing tale connects billionaire David Rockefeller and former Canadian PM Pierre Trudeau to global paedophile network.

In a chilling and unprecedented viral interview with Patrick Bet-David of the PBD Podcast, Anneke Lucas, a survivor of childhood trafficking, revealed harrowing details of her experiences within what she describes as a global network of elite paedophiles.

Lucas, who claims to have been trafficked by her mother into a Belgian paedophile ring at the age of six, shared stories that connect high-profile figures to her abuse, including former Belgian Prime Minister Paul Vanden Boeynants and the late billionaire and “Father of Big Pharma” David Rockefeller.

Lucas began her story with her childhood in Belgium, where she was allegedly sold by her mother to high-profile figures for sexual exploitation. She recounts being taken to various events, including one at a castle where she encountered severe abuse. Paul Vanden Boeynants, who later became Belgium’s Prime Minister, was implicated as a key figure in this network, using children for blackmail and to initiate new members into the fold.

The interview took a darker turn when Lucas spoke about her interactions with David Rockefeller, whom she met at the age of nine. Rockefeller, according to Lucas, saw her potential as part of an elite sex slave system aimed at controlling influential men through seduction and blackmail. She described being trained in mind control techniques by a German doctor, Hans Harmsen, linked to eugenics practices during Nazi Germany, to serve as a spy within this network.

Lucas’s revelations extend beyond political figures to include entertainers she met at gatherings organised by this secretive group. Although she refrained from naming living individuals due to legal and personal safety concerns, she hinted at the involvement of celebrities, suggesting a widespread operation that spans continents and includes both political and entertainment Hollywood elites.

The interview has sparked a significant public reaction, with many calling for further investigations into these allegations. While some of the accused are deceased, the implications for the survivors and the potential for ongoing activities by similar networks remain a grave concern. Lucas’s story adds to the growing discourse around child trafficking and the dark underbelly of elite societies, echoing recent high-profile cases like that of Jeffrey Epstein.

Bet-David addressed the urgency of addressing child trafficking, citing FBI statistics on missing children in the U.S, who number in the hundreds of thousands. He urged for more attention, resources, and legal frameworks to combat these issues. Lucas, on her part, has dedicated years to healing and now works with other survivors, aiming to shed light on these dark practices and promote healing and justice.

Her book, Quest for Love offers a detailed account of her experiences and healing journey. Bet-David encouraged viewers to support Lucas by purchasing her book, linking to it in his video description, hoping to bring more awareness and perhaps inspire change or further legal scrutiny into these networks.

Paul Vanden Boeynants

Anneke Lucas identified Paul Vanden Boeynants, the former Belgian Minister of National Defense and a two-time Prime Minister, as the head of the pedophile network in Belgium where she was initially trafficked. Lucas was introduced to Vanden Boeynants through her mother, who drove her to various “events” where she was abused. Vanden Boeynants allegedly used her and other children for blackmail purposes, leveraging their vulnerability to control or influence new members of the network. His position of power in Belgium’s political landscape provided him with the influence to orchestrate these gatherings, often held in secluded locations like castles, where Lucas experienced some of her most traumatic abuses.

Lucas described Vanden Boeynants as treating her with disdain, often as if she were nothing more than an object for exploitation. This treatment was part of a broader pattern where she was made to feel worthless, a tactic used to break the spirit of the children involved, ensuring their compliance and silence.

David Rockefeller

Lucas’s interactions with David Rockefeller were particularly detailed in her recounting. At the age of nine, she was brought to the U.S. where she was trained in various estates owned by Rockefeller, with the intention of turning her into what she described as an “elite sex slave.” This training involved not only sexual grooming but also lessons in elite etiquette, aiming to make her comfortable in high society environments to better facilitate her role as a spy and seductress among influential men.

Rockefeller, according to Lucas, saw her as a project, someone he could mold into a tool of influence. She spoke of an instance where she was taken to meet a member of the Rothschild family on an island off the U.S. northeast coast, suggesting a wider network involvement. Her training included mind control techniques in Germany, where she was subjected to harsh psychological manipulation to ensure her loyalty and effectiveness in her future roles.

Hans Harmsen

Hans Harmsen was mentioned in relation to the mind control training Lucas underwent in Heidelberg, Germany. Described as a doctor with a background in eugenics from Nazi Germany, Harmsen’s role was to ensure that victims like Lucas were not just physically but mentally conditioned for compliance. Lucas recounted how Harmsen used methods like forced observation of films to predict and control behaviours, employing extreme measures like strangulation to enforce learning through fear and near-death experiences. This training was part of a larger strategy to create programmable assets for the network’s use.

The Broader Network

While Lucas was cautious about naming living individuals, she alluded to encounters with other notable figures during events organised by this network. One such event was described near Lake Como in Italy, where she was exposed to a mix of politicians, celebrities, and aristocrats. Here, she was used in various ways, from performing to direct abuse.

The interactions she described with these figures often involved her being used to test or exploit their weaknesses, a method used to gather blackmail material or to ensure their continued cooperation within the network.

Pierre Trudeau

Lucas mentioned encountering Pierre Trudeau, the father of current Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, during one of the events she was trafficked to. She described this interaction as one of the most terrifying experiences of her life, stating, “I said that I could never please him as long as I was alive,” indicating the level of fear and trauma associated with that encounter. This interaction was part of her role where she was expected to report back on the weaknesses or preferences of the men she was forced to be with, information which could be used for blackmail or manipulation by the network leaders like David Rockefeller.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

espionage

“Suitcase of Cash” and Secret Meeting Deepen Britain’s Beijing Espionage Crisis

Published on

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

Britain’s most consequential espionage scandal in a generation has narrowed on Keir Starmer’s inner cabinet after The Sunday Times revealed that alleged Chinese agent Christopher Berry was intercepted at Heathrow Airport with a “suitcase full of cash” — and that senior officials, including National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell and Cabinet Secretary Christopher Wormald, held a closed-door meeting, allegedly discussing that advancing the case would harm relations with Beijing, weeks before prosecutors abandoned the insider-threat file.

The revelations, combined with an explosive Opposition letter from Kemi Badenoch and a rare diplomatic intervention from Washington, have plunged Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government into the most serious national-security controversy of its tenure — one now shaking both Westminster and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. Not since the Kim Philby affair and the exposure of the Cambridge Spy Ring has a British government been so roiled by allegations of insider compromise and appeasement toward a hostile foreign state.

As The Sunday Times reported, Christopher Berry — a 33-year-old academic from Oxfordshire — was stopped under the Terrorism and Border Security Act after a February 2023 flight from China. Police seized £4,000 in cash, believed to have been supplied by his Chinese handler, codenamed “Alex,” linked to the Ministry of State Security.

A witness statement tabled in Parliament last week indicated that Berry funnelled real-time political intelligence through his MSS handler to one of Beijing’s senior leaders, all collected from a former Chinese teaching colleague — a Parliamentary researcher with deep access to senior Conservative MPs. Beijing reportedly viewed those MPs as a strategic threat, fearing that if they rose to higher office they would adopt a far stricter stance toward China’s geopolitical ambitions.

Though Berry was not detained at the time, the incident became central to the espionage case later dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service when the Starmer government declined to certify that China posed an “ongoing threat to national security” — a legal requirement under the Official Secrets Act.

The Sunday Times also revealed that Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Collins, the government’s sole witness, privately acknowledged that the decision not to describe China as an “ongoing threat” was “political.” The paper further disclosed that Jonathan Powell — a former banking executive who rose to become Starmer’s National Security Adviser — chaired a meeting on September 1 attended by Cabinet Secretary Christopher Wormald and MI5 Director-General Sir Ken McCallum, in which “the general theme of discussion was how the UK’s relationship with China was going to be damaged by this case.”

If accurate, that account directly contradicts Starmer’s assurance to Parliament that “no minister or special adviser was involved.” The implication — that Britain’s most senior national-security officials were weighing diplomatic consequences while an active espionage prosecution was still underway — has intensified accusations that the case was derailed by political interference rather than evidentiary weakness.

Within hours of the Sunday Times story, Opposition Leader Kemi Badenoch posted a letter to X accusing Keir Starmer of misleading Parliament and concealing ministerial involvement in the case’s collapse.

Framing the letter, Badenoch sought to explain the rapidly evolving affair to a wider audience. “I don’t blame you if you’ve struggled to follow the China spying case engulfing Parliament. Even MPs are finding it hard to keep up with a story that seems to change by the hour,” she wrote. “I suspect many fair-minded people have assumed this story can’t contain much. It seems too implausible for the government to have deliberately let off people who were accused of spying on MPs. But the story is truly astonishing. The layers of it have unravelled over the past few weeks like something from a spy novel.”

In the letter itself, Badenoch demands full disclosure of all correspondence, meetings, and witness-statement revisions involving Jonathan Powell, the Attorney General, or the Cabinet Office. She references the Sunday Times account directly, noting that “Powell left attendees with the understanding that Deputy National Security Adviser Collins’s witness statement would operate within the language of the report,” implying foreknowledge and coordination between Downing Street and prosecutors. She further alleges that Starmer’s ministers “softened” later witness statements to downplay Chinese espionage, replacing hard intelligence assessments with diplomatic phrasing designed to reassure Beijing. Her conclusion is cutting: “You have shown Britain is weak in the face of espionage, and have emboldened our enemies to believe they can spy on us with impunity.”

As reported previously by The Bureau, the controversy has now drawn international concern. The Chair of the U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, John Moolenaar, has issued an extraordinary public rebuke on the court matter — a move almost without precedent between close allies. In a two-page letter dated October 16, 2025, addressed to James Roscoe, chargé d’affaires at the British Embassy in Washington, Moolenaar warned that Britain’s decision to abandon the prosecution risked setting “a dangerous precedent that foreign adversaries can target democratically elected legislators with impunity.” He wrote that the decision “deeply troubles” U.S. lawmakers and “undermines Five Eyes security coordination,” given the substantial amount of evidence against Berry and Christopher Cash, who were accused of funnelling parliamentary intelligence to the Chinese Communist Party.

“I hope the UK government will not allow this case to falter,” Moolenaar said, “and will instead take the steps necessary to ensure that both justice and due process are served.”

The letter, co-signed by senior members of the Committee and publicly released by Congress, marks an exceptional public intervention in a live national-security case involving a Five Eyes partner. Moolenaar added that the decision to drop the prosecution — despite evidence confirming a direct intelligence channel from Westminster to Beijing — “paints a concerning picture,” noting the resumption of high-level UK–China trade talks, negotiations over China’s proposed “super embassy” in London, and London’s ongoing review of its diplomatic posture toward Beijing. “Allowing this PRC aggression to go unchecked,” he warned, “would only incentivize the CCP to further interfere in Western democracies.”

As The Bureau previously detailed, Matthew Collins’s witness statement traced an intelligence pipeline connecting Westminster directly to Beijing’s leadership. Berry, via his handler “Alex,” transmitted reports obtained from Christopher Cash, a parliamentary aide with access to Conservative MPs critical of Beijing. Collins confirmed that some of the same intelligence later appeared in the possession of a senior CCP Politburo Standing Committee member — reportedly Cai Qi, one of Xi Jinping’s closest allies. Collins also documented Beijing’s targeted inquiries into the 2022 Conservative leadership race, focusing on Tom Tugendhat and Neil O’Brien, both members of the China Research Group (CRG) and long-standing critics of the CCP.

Taken together, the Heathrow cash seizure, the Powell-chaired meeting, the Badenoch letter, and the U.S. congressional intervention point to a modern Cold War crisis — a confrontation that has now moved beyond Westminster to test the cohesion of the Western alliance itself.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

espionage

PEI to Ottawa: Investigate CCP Footprints—Now

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

A tiny province just did what the federal government refuses to: demand answers about foreign interference and Chinese money.

Prince Edward Island’s new government just lit a signal fire Ottawa can’t ignore—two formal letters demanding immediate, transparent federal investigations into alleged foreign interference and money laundering on the Island. One to RCMP Commissioner Michael Duheme, the other to FINTRAC CEO Sarah Paquet. Clear, direct, no hedging: talk to the whistleblowers, follow the money, and determine whether criminal or regulatory action is warranted.

And here’s the part that should make every sane person furious: why did it take a new government to do the obvious? Where was this urgency from the last crew running Charlottetown? For years, Islanders were told to calm down, look away, don’t ask questions—and now, in week one of grown-up supervision, we suddenly discover the tools were always there. Why didn’t the previous government pull them?

Even worse, why hasn’t the Liberal establishment in Ottawa barley lifted a finger in regards to foreign interference in this country? This is the same crowd that held a public inquiry into foreign interference, took victory laps, and then… parked the file. The commission issued volumes of findings and 50-plus recommendations, but action? Mostly press releases. Meanwhile, the much-hyped foreign influence registry —passed on paper in 2024— still isn’t fully in force, with cabinet dithering while everyone pretends it’s complicated. If the smallest province can move in days, what’s Ottawa’s excuse after years of warnings and a law they already passed?

Premier Rob Lantz framed it plainly: Islanders deserve clarity and competent, depoliticized scrutiny. The province says the move follows years of speculation and a Parliament Hill press conference on Oct. 8 where a former RCMP superintendent suggested evidence could justify a criminal probe centered on PEI. Translation: this is no longer a fringe concern—it’s now an official paper trail with the RCMP and FINTRAC on the hook.

PEI also reminded Ottawa that in February 2025 it ordered the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (IRAC) to run an independent land-ownership investigation—with new powers added to the Lands Protection Act in 2022—amid public questions about complex land purchases and potential indirect control. That review is ongoing and now sits alongside the requested federal probes.

Context matters: investigative reporting in recent weeks connected these concerns to Buddhist-affiliated networks and called for a wider federal inquiry. Whether every allegation holds or not, PEI’s letters escalate the file from media claims to formal federal scrutiny—exactly where it belongs if Canada is serious about foreign interference.

Bottom line: a tiny province—Prince Edward Island of all places—just forced a national reckoning. Not Toronto, not Ottawa, not some vaunted federal intelligence agency. No, it took 160,000 salt-of-the-earth Islanders to do what the entire Liberal Party has refused to do for years: demand an investigation into what looks suspiciously like CCP-linked land grabs, money laundering, and political influence operations happening right under our noses.

And yet—silence from Ottawa. Why? Because could it be that the same people now running the show in this country are the ones who spent the last decade cheerleading for the Chinese Communist Party? Mark Carney, has a track record with China that reads like a LinkedIn endorsement from the People’s Liberation Army. Brookfield, where Carney was Vice Chair, took $250 million from the Bank of China to fund its real estate empire. You think that doesn’t come with strings? Please.

And Trudeau? Let’s not forget, this is the man who once said he admired China’s “basic dictatorship”—because, of course he did. That kind of centralized control makes things so efficient when you’re trying to crush dissent and funnel wealth into the hands of a compliant elite.

The ball is in the RCMP and FINTRAC’s court. But if you’re expecting urgency from institutions shackled to the same political class that let this rot take hold, don’t hold your breath. PEI just did the hard part. Now we get to find out if Canada has any real institutions left.

Dan Knight · Hundreds of paid subscribers
I’m an independent Canadian journalist exposing corruption, delivering unfiltered truths and untold stories.
Join me on Substack for fearless reporting that goes beyond headlines

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight

Continue Reading

Trending

X