How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?

[1%er]

They've included people whose only link to Freemasonry is that membership has been attributed to them on the internet.

Oh look at this "Mr Paddick confesses in his book "Line of Fire"

If anyone wants to know about freemasonry go to your local lodge and ask. I am sure that you will be made welcome.

Freemasonry, is a distraction. I am sure that you will find peado's with-in freemasonry, as I'm sure you'd find peado's here on Urban75. If people understood the structure of freemasonry and Lodges I think you'd understand how difficult it would be to have a massive conspiracy running through masonry.

But to have corrupt lodges would be possible but difficult to run under UGLE.

 

[Corax]

Freemasonry, is a distraction.

This.

Boys have been abused by people of wealth and power, and such abuse has been covered up by people of wealth and power.
Amongst the wealthy and powerful, a significant proportion belong to the funny handshake brigade.
So it's highly likely that Venn will possess quite a large intersection.

But so what? It's not like it's bloody causal is it. I doubt the masonic initiation includes buggering a minor.
Or is the suggestion that the rich and powerful covered for each other just because they were fellow masons? That they would have sung like a canary if they weren't so connected? 'Cos that, also, is palpably bollocks.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit which, like naming people who haven't been convinced of relevant offences, acts as a serviceable distraction for any actual child raping Tories who might feel threatened by public interest in their activities IMO.

Sure, no doubt some of them have engaged in a bit of corruption with their fellow funny-handshake merchants in the local plod, but that's only relevant after a compelling case for them raping little kids has been established.

If you drag it in before that's proven, you might as well include lizards from outer space as well.

 

[butchersapron]

Excellent - some self-policing on this thread is desperately needed.

 

[free spirit]

I reckon there's a fair chance that the masonic connection to all of this is a significant component in both the abuse and how it has been kept under wraps for so long.

It's almost certainly not the entire cause of the situation, and I doubt that everyone involved was a mason, but I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't a significant factor.

This is north wales in the 70s and 80s we're talking about here.

fwiw, the copper that was first accused of child abuse at these homes by the independant, and accused of this in court by 3 boys from the homes, then 6 former residents in the inquiry, but is obviously innocent because none of these witnesses can be relied upon.... he admitted to being a mason on the record in the inquiry, though I think he denied it was of any relevance - he also denied he'd done anything wrong at all which he was also believed about.

 

[elbows]

I've now read all 3 threads on this from that time, and still can't see what you're talking about, but I do understand the bit about overloading on this, and think there's probably a degree of that in your posts and the reaction to them.

fwiw, IMO you're better to actually quote an example of the post you're concerned about instead of making loose blanket statements of pissed offness, as with the latter approach everyone then tries to interpret what you're complaining about to see if it fits their posts and it's hard to know what / who you're actually complaining about. Then it just gets the backs up of people you might not have even been talking about for points you may not have been making.

OK let me put it this way -I dont expect you to get my point because you are one of the people I would like to complain about. Your dot joining is sloppy.

 

[Wilf]

I reckon there's a fair chance that the masonic connection to all of this is a significant component in both the abuse and how it has been kept under wraps for so long.

It's almost certainly not the entire cause of the situation, and I doubt that everyone involved was a mason, but I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't a significant factor.

This is north wales in the 70s and 80s we're talking about here.
.

That's my guess as well, particularly as we are talking 30+ years ago. Freemasonry isn't the story - it's about rape, powerlesness and the contempt the victims were held in, right through the various non-inquiries and non-police investigations. Freemasonry might provide a set of relationships, people who simply knew each other, channels of influence. Given this was the 70s there's every chance those channels of influence were used. However freemasonry needs to be seen as just that and should never get into the foreground of the story (still less should it become the story). If police or journalists focus on the real events, which police officers did what, which social services staff did what, which politician did what, that will be enough. I doubt that's ever going to happen, but starting with freemasonry only obscures it further.

Pedantic edit - rereading your post FS, I'd agree with you on 'component', but not 'significant component'

 

[elbows]

Please note that one of the reasons I moan is that one explanation for the powerful closing ranks and trying to keep a lid on exposure of 'one of their own' doing terrible things is that they fear all getting tarred with the same brush.

 

[Wilf]

... and what I'd most guard against is an assumption that freemasonry was inherently linked to abuse. It's a framework, a set of relationships, like any organisation of the powerful, but I'm not sure it should ever be taken as read that it has an inherent purpose. As always though, you get dragged in different directions - the last fucking thing I'd want to do is go anywehre near defending freemasonry, particularly the version that existed back then. However, the need to stop conspiraloons making this into a story that it isn't at all is just as strong.

 

[elbows]

Take for example the title of this thread. A long term high level paedophile ring. The focus on 'high level' seems to do a potential disservice to possible realities, which are more about people who know each other but are not all on the highest of levels. I think I would prefer a terms such as 'people with some authority or standing in the community'.

Its a tricky one to some extent though, since the higher up you go the more people have reason to get paranoid or carried away, and the more mechanisms are theoretically available to cover up. Or perhaps not, perhaps if you are too high up then you are also rather high profile and are therefore taking a bigger risk, eg of being recognised or exposed. Then again so much is about location and context, people who are not powerful in the grand scheme of things may have a scary degree of power within a certain limited realm.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I reckon there's a fair chance that the masonic connection to all of this is a significant component in both the abuse and how it has been kept under wraps for so long.

So, Freemasonry as opposed to any other reason like, oh..I dunno... the fact that they're degenerate perverts from various walks of life who'd conspire to cover up their deviance anyway?

It's almost certainly not the entire cause of the situation, and I doubt that everyone involved was a mason, but I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't a significant factor.

This is north wales in the 70s and 80s we're talking about here.

Was north Wales in the '70s and '80s particularly rife with Freemasons?

fwiw, the copper that was first accused of child abuse at these homes by the independant, and accused of this in court by 3 boys from the homes, then 6 former residents in the inquiry, but is obviously innocent because none of these witnesses can be relied upon.... he admitted to being a mason on the record in the inquiry, though I think he denied it was of any relevance - he also denied he'd done anything wrong at all which he was also believed about.

So, one admission of membership. many tens of thousands to go!

 

[free spirit]

OK let me put it this way -I dont expect you to get my point because you are one of the people I would like to complain about. Your dot joining is sloppy.

well if you'd spat that out first time around it'd have saved me time trying to work out if that was what you were getting at.

as with you, I'm struggling to get my head around all of this, and joining multiple dots from reports and events of 20-40 years ago. If you spot something you disagree with please say, and say why, the sort of vague crap you pulled there, and butch tried earlier in the thread though is just fucking annoying tbh, and certainly doesn't help the situation IMO.

 

[ViolentPanda]

All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit which, like naming people who haven't been convinced of relevant offences, acts as a serviceable distraction for any actual child raping Tories who might feel threatened by public interest in their activities IMO.

Sure, no doubt some of them have engaged in a bit of corruption with their fellow funny-handshake merchants in the local plod, but that's only relevant after a compelling case for them raping little kids has been established.

If you drag it in before that's proven, you might as well include lizards from outer space as well.

Quite.

 

[elbows]

It's a framework, a set of relationships, like any organisation of the powerful, but I'm not sure it should ever be taken as read that it has an inherent purpose.

The inherent purpose is surely about the relationships you mention. People like to hang out with their peers. Some people love structures, formal or informal positions, routines, games, etc.

Anyway one who has been involved in an internet community may have witnessed modern forms of this, even the humble internet forum reflects some aspects of the way humans behave when there are structures, rules and a smaller subset of people who try to keep the whole thing running. I was quite amazed years ago when I was a moderator on a forum, how quickly an 'us and them' thing developed, how quickly cultures of secrecy and suppression of the full picture emerged.

 

[nino_savatte]

Catholics have a Catholic version in those countries, the most famous Lodge being P2, lots of Mafia and money laundering links.

[Shrugs]

 

[ViolentPanda]

OK let me put it this way -I dont expect you to get my point because you are one of the people I would like to complain about. Your dot joining is sloppy.

No, it isn't, but that's all it is - joining one dot to another, without any logic beyond "x was a member of lodge A, and y was a member of lodge B, therefore...". None of the Freemasonry advocates have presented even a circumstantial case, just bits of info that may or may not be connected, depending on how much of a free pass you give the lack of actual evidence.

 

[elbows]

well if you'd spat that out first time around it'd have saved me time trying to work out if that was what you were getting at.

as with you, I'm struggling to get my head around all of this, and joining multiple dots from reports and events of 20-40 years ago. If you spot something you disagree with please say, and say why, the sort of vague crap you pulled there, and butch tried earlier in the thread though is just fucking annoying tbh, and certainly doesn't help the situation IMO.

My original complaint at a very specific moment in this thread wasnt aimed at you. I had ignored your earlier excesses because I saw how unwilling you were to engage with butchers earlier criticisms and I didnt really want to derail the thread. But since you decided to focus on my complaints I thought I would point out that I do not anticipate you getting the point. I dont think you are entirely barking up the wrong tree's, you just go a bit too far in almost everything you say for my tastes. Never mind, its hardly the big issue here.

 

[nino_savatte]

All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit which, like naming people who haven't been convinced of relevant offences, acts as a serviceable distraction for any actual child raping Tories who might feel threatened by public interest in their activities IMO.

Sure, no doubt some of them have engaged in a bit of corruption with their fellow funny-handshake merchants in the local plod, but that's only relevant after a compelling case for them raping little kids has been established.

If you drag it in before that's proven, you might as well include lizards from outer space as well.

Don't forget the Illuminati!

Shit, I said it!

 

[ViolentPanda]

[Shrugs]

Actually, as I'd already aid to him/her, many Catholics join Freemasonic lodges anyway. P2 was a para-Masonic lodge that sucked in members of influence from Freemasonic lodges in Italy.

 

[nino_savatte]

Actually, as I'd already aid to him/her, many Catholics join Freemasonic lodges anyway. P2 was a para-Masonic lodge that sucked in members of influence from Freemasonic lodges in Italy.

Yep.

 

[butchersapron]

well if you'd spat that out first time around it'd have saved me time trying to work out if that was what you were getting at.

as with you, I'm struggling to get my head around all of this, and joining multiple dots from reports and events of 20-40 years ago. If you spot something you disagree with please say, and say why, the sort of vague crap you pulled there, and butch tried earlier in the thread though is just fucking annoying tbh, and certainly doesn't help the situation IMO.

What vague crap? I told one person that their defence of a link that was only partly wrong was the sort of thing that those who might be guilty or might be looking to engage in a cover up love. They love that shit. And i pointed out the change in thursday/friday focus as the sort of result this brings. I named who i meant and what they had done that meant the thread was slipping out of control - where is my vagueness? I'll name also prole and all those not bothering to check up on his/her bona fides on this site alone before integrating their tidy links into the story.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Surely the best service that the victims of abuse can be afforded is the rigorous investigation of their claims; that should be the primary focus of the activity. The belief in and the desire to expose networks of corruption in high places, may be supported and satisfied by these investigations, but that shouldn't be their most compelling objective; it is in such a compulsion that the victims will be squeezed out and the guilty escape. So please please lets keep the conspiritorial speculation to a minimum and the hard evidence front and centre.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[ViolentPanda]

That's my guess as well, particularly as we are talking 30+ years ago. Freemasonry isn't the story - it's about rape, powerlesness and the contempt the victims were held in, right through the various non-inquiries and non-police investigations. Freemasonry might provide a set of relationships, people who simply knew each other, channels of influence. Given this was the 70s there's every chance those channels of influence were used. However freemasonry needs to be seen as just that and should never get into the foreground of the story (still less should it become the story). If police or journalists focus on the real events, which police officers did what, which social services staff did what, which politician did what, that will be enough. I doubt that's ever going to happen, but starting with freemasonry only obscures it further.

Pedantic edit - rereading your post FS, I'd agree with you on 'component', but not 'significant component'

There's also one factor that the "Freemasons are paedos" tendency have missed - the heavy scrutiny Freemasonry underwent in the 1980s after Stephen Knight's "The Brotherhood" was published - loads of tales of corruption, from speeding tickets torn up to crimes covered-up were shone a light on, and yet hardly a whisper about organised paedophilia.
Component, yes. Significant component, not unless Freemasonry is far more occult (in the proper meaning of the word) than is commonly assumed.

 

[elbows]

No, it isn't, but that's all it is - joining one dot to another, without any logic beyond "x was a member of lodge A, and y was a member of lodge B, therefore...". None of the Freemasonry advocates have presented even a circumstantial case, just bits of info that may or may not be connected, depending on how much of a free pass you give the lack of actual evidence.

Yes thats what I meant really, well put.

Personally I do a fair amount of dot joining myself, but I have no special desire to preserve the links I've pondered on. I am quite happy to leave them as thin dotted lines that are more likely to quickly be rubbed out in my mind than reinforced for no good reason other than a desire for certainty. And when talking with others about this stuff I leave out the most fanciful possibilities because of how quickly this stuff can spread and take on a life of its own.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Take for example the title of this thread. A long term high level paedophile ring. The focus on 'high level' seems to do a potential disservice to possible realities, which are more about people who know each other but are not all on the highest of levels. I think I would prefer a terms such as 'people with some authority or standing in the community'.

Its a tricky one to some extent though, since the higher up you go the more people have reason to get paranoid or carried away, and the more mechanisms are theoretically available to cover up. Or perhaps not, perhaps if you are too high up then you are also rather high profile and are therefore taking a bigger risk, eg of being recognised or exposed. Then again so much is about location and context, people who are not powerful in the grand scheme of things may have a scary degree of power within a certain limited realm.

Housemasters in boarding schools and childrens' homes, for example. Social workers, healthcare workers, local government bureaucrats...

 

[ViolentPanda]

The inherent purpose is surely about the relationships you mention. People like to hang out with their peers. Some people love structures, formal or informal positions, routines, games, etc.

Anyway one who has been involved in an internet community may have witnessed modern forms of this, even the humble internet forum reflects some aspects of the way humans behave when there are structures, rules and a smaller subset of people who try to keep the whole thing running. I was quite amazed years ago when I was a moderator on a forum, how quickly an 'us and them' thing developed, how quickly cultures of secrecy and suppression of the full picture emerged.

All of which is pretty standard social dynamics. In every in-group or interest group you have a core and a peripheral membership, all of which has a potential for the formation of further internal groupings.

 

[elbows]

All of which is pretty standard social dynamics. In every in-group or interest group you have a core and a peripheral membership, all of which has a potential for the formation of further internal groupings.

Indeed, and I suppose thats also where some of the paranoia and false accusations come from. Those left on the periphery have reason to be disgruntled and at times suspicious, but it so quickly goes out of control and ends up further encouraging the insiders to erect walls and barriers.

Meanwhile another great Eileen Fairweather article, which gets into some interesting detail about the Peter Righton stuff. Those interested in what started Tom Watson off should certainly take a look:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ice-requires-detective-work-not-hearsay-.html

 

[Buckaroo]

We don't know how much evidence there is partly because of the limits and failures of investigations and the difficulty investigating crimes committed decades ago. As for 'High level', sadistic rapists don't need to be part of shadowy elites to commit crimes and cover their tracks....but it probably helps.

 

[free spirit]

So, Freemasonry as opposed to any other reason like, oh..I dunno... the fact that they're degenerate perverts from various walks of life who'd conspire to cover up their deviance anyway?

please consider the difference between 'a significant component' and 'the entire cause of the problem'

Was north Wales in the '70s and '80s particularly rife with Freemasons?

Yes.

Post war periods experienced an acceleration in that growth. During the Province´s long history three Provincial Grand Masters served for conspicuously longer periods than most, firstly Sir Watkin Williams Wynn, Bt., M.P. 1852 to 1885; Sir Herbert Lloyd Watkin Williams Wynn, Bt. C.B., T.D., 1914 to 1945 and Lloyd, 5th Baron Kenyon, C.B.E., D.L., 1958 to 1990.
Under their respective periods of leaderships 16, 24 and 38 Lodges were consecrated. Prior to his assuming the leadership of the Province Lord Kenyon consecrated a further 8 Lodges as Deputy Provincial Grand Master.
At the time of writing there are 113 active Lodges in the Province together with 36 Royal Arch Chapters but with another pause in the growth of Lodge numbers.

[source - north wales freemasons website]
the number of lodges in North wales grew by 50% between 1958-90 vs no new lodges since 1991

So, one admission of membership. many tens of thousands to go!

you see that Lord Kenyan in the quote above, listed as being the Provincial Grand Master of North Wales?

that's the same Lord Kenyan who's son Thomas Kenyan who died of Aids in 1993 and is alleged to have been the son of a Lord referred to in the Nick Davies article in the first post of this thread. It's also alleged in this article and this book that he was also a member of the North Wales Police Authority, which I think included through the 70s and 80s.

So the Provincial Grand Master's son is implicated in involvement in all this, yet it's apparently not something worth discussing on this thread.

That article also alleges that Sir Walter Stansfield, the former Deputy Chief Constable of Denbigh Police Force (prior to it being amalgamated into north wales police), and then Chief Constable of Derbyshire police was an active mason... along with a fair few other allegations that are hard to substantiate, but they claim to have evidence of.

 

[free spirit]

What vague crap? I told one person that their defence of a link that was only partly wrong was the sort of thing that those who might be guilty or might be looking to engage in a cover up love. They love that shit. And i pointed out the change in thursday/friday focus as the sort of result this brings. I named who i meant and what they had done that meant the thread was slipping out of control - where is my vagueness? I'll name also prole and all those not bothering to check up on his/her bona fides on this site alone before integrating their tidy links into the story.

You're doing occam's projection. Connect all these dots properly.

I was referring to this post of yours, but tbf that was a while ago and I probably shouldn't have brought it up as I've mostly found your contribution to this thread helpful, it just stuck out in my head as being similar to elbows post in terms of saying I'm not joining the dots properly, but not giving any indication of in what way, or which dots.