Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

ive come across the stuff mentioned there about the murder/sex abuse in Canada, theres a guy called Kevin Annett who campaigns on this, but the waters are muddied by conspiracy theorists and I vaguely remember hearing some slurs against him so not sure what to make of it. Theres a documentary he made in this link http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/unrepentant-kevin-annett-canadas-genocide/
Unrepentant documents Canada’s dirty secret – the planned genocide of aboriginal people in church-run Indian Residential Schools – and a clergyman’s efforts to document and make public these crimes.

First-hand testimonies from residential school survivors are interwoven with Kevin Annett’s own story of how he faced firing, de-frocking, and the loss of his family, reputation and livelihood as a result of his efforts to help survivors and bring out the truth of the residential schools.

This saga continues, as Annett continues a David and Goliath struggle to hold the government and churches of Canada accountable for crimes against humanity, and the continued theft of aboriginal land.

Unrepentant took nineteen months to film, primarily in British Columbia and Alberta, and is based on Kevin Annett’s book Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust. The entire film was a self-funded, grassroots effort, which is reflected in its earthy and human quality.
 
I thought I'd let this thread run its course for a bit, as I wanted to really pose the question and see what came back, as I don't see this is something that there is going to be conclusive evidence of either way - MI5 in particular not being party to the FOI act, so I don't know how anyone would get access to JS file to check that line of thinking for example.

We like to think of "rings" and networks but these things are loose knitted groups of disparate individuals who may or may not share other interests outside of abusing kids. There are all kinds of networks that overlap, some benign and some evil.
TBH this is more what I was getting at, and as I think I said in one of my posts, I'd not meant to use the word 'ring' in the thread title for this reason.

I do think though that there are almost certainly some fairly powerful people involved in some way in all this who've been able to keep a lid on multiple police investigations and other inquiries over 3 decades, so that only a few scapegoats get sent down, but the reports on the wider evidence of abuse get suppressed. Either that or the system is jus hopelessly broken, and there's some factor within it that has resulted in evidence of wider abuse being suppressed several times.
 
What the OP is talking about, though, isn't loads of small rings, but an over-arching "grand lodge" of child-molesting that nonces from all over the UK belong to/subscribe to, and that exerts influence on policy, over the criminal justice system etc.
is it?

That's certainly the extreme end of the spectrum of possibilities, and I'm not entirely discounting it, but it's not really what I'd consider to be the most likely situation.

Most likely IMO is that there are mulitple interconnected lose networks of child abusers who're aware of other child abusers activities, and possibly some either act as pimps to those networks to give them access to which ever kids home etc is considered a safe bet at that time, or less likely this information is just spread for free via word of mouth.

I do however think that within any of these networks there will be many who amass evidence against others as an insurance policy, and many will have evidence against each other, so that a form of mutually assured destruction exists that ensures that if powerful members do exist then they must excercise that power to ensure that any wider ranging inquiries are prevented from exposing anyone who posed a serious problem if exposed.

Going one stage further though, I also think it highly likely that if these networks did involve relatively highly placed individuals, then MI5 would have certainly made it it's business to know about it, because this is the crime with the greatest potential for blackmail by foreign powers / criminal gangs etc.

I also think it highly unlikely that MI5 would just gain that knowledge then sit on it and do nothing with it for no reason. It's far more likely IMO that they actually did use that information themselves in order to build up their network of informants - this after all is pretty much what they do, people generally don't voluntarily become an MI5 tout within their chosen industry / organisation / political party, so MI5 need to find ways of persuading them both to do it, and to stay silent about having done it.

The problem with this approach for MI5 is I think it's likely to result in severe blowback after a decade or 2, as at this point someone like savile could then turn the tables on MI5 and threaten to expose the fact that they'd covered for him for a decade while he abused hundreds of young girls. I can easily see in this sort of situation how MI5 could then find itself essentially sucked into the web of mutually assured destruction, and therefore feeling that it needed to intervene in situations which threatened to expose its role in covering up for child abusing informants for years / decades. This would fairly convincingly explain how / why multiple inquiries were able to be prevented from being made public.

Essentially I can see a mechanism by which MI5 could have ended up being sucked into this situation over a period of decades, and finding itself knee deep in the shit and desperately covering it's own arse never mind it's informants. I actually genuinely consider it to be far more likely that MI5 (and / or special branch and others) were / are involved in this sort of way than that they had no clue about any of it going on under their noses for as long as it apparently has been going on.

By MI5, I'm not really expecting the entire organisation to have been involved, it's more likely to have been a few case operators that started off using the technique at some point, then got sucked in so they had to cover their own arses, eg in N Ireland where the evidence and situation seems pretty credible, and by the time it got to the 80s & 90s they'd have been high enough up to be able to pull rank to get the worst of the welsh cases kept out of the public eye (and possibly to deliberately muddy the waters by ensuring the investigators dangled the carrot of compensation payouts in front of the potential witnesses when they first questioned them to make it harder to actually know what the truth of the situation was).

It's just basic arse covering really rather than any sort of principled child abuser ring conspiracy IMO.

We'll see I guess if they're still powerful enough to keep it covered up, or if they've actually now retired and lost most of their clout... that's if anyone actually starts asking the right questions.
 
I had a PM from someone who wishes to remain nameless but gave me permission to paraphrase the PM onto this thread.


Their mum was apparently in charge of hunting down paedophiles in council childrens homes, and other care facilities in the 80s.

They had their brakes tampered with on their care, followed home and had threats made against their family during this period.

Their mum always said that one day the house of cards would collapse, and it'd all come out, and that there are judges, MPs, senior police and all sorts involved, and that they're untouchable and protect each other.

This would be around the same time as all the abuse was going on in Wales, with police and council inquiries covered up.

Not that they were working in Wales (afaik), but they're pretty much saying the same thing was going on where they were working.

I believe the PM to be genuine btw.
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html

More stuff coming out about Peter Morrison, the aide to Thatcher that has already been mentioned in this thread (and is dead so therefore no libel issues).

Implicated in the Welsh Children's Homes scandal and also claims that William Hague would have known about this from the inquiry in the mid-90s, but that it may have been covered up - Hague denies any knowledge.

Thats useful because it does tend to suggest that Morrison was indeed one of the people named in the suppressed Jillings report. It seems reasonable to assume that the Jillings report is what the Daily Mail are calling 'official documents', 'notes' and 'preliminary report'.

The Waterhouse report that came from the subsequent public inquiry was a whitewash when it came to high-profile names. Not only were living people mentioned in evidence not allowed to be named, but Waterhouse also prevented the publication of the name of at least one deceased person.

Its hard to believe Hague wouldnt have known all the details.
 
I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous construction fusilier and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.
 
Nick Davies confirmed the existence of the specific ruling in the Guardian in 1997:

However, Sir Ronald then ruled that the media could not report the name of any living person who was accused or likely to be accused of abusing children in the North Wales homes unless they had previously been convicted of such an offence.
I know part of this article was posted before in sort of passing but that ruling is going to come in for some attention over the coming days i think
 
is it?

That's certainly the extreme end of the spectrum of possibilities, and I'm not entirely discounting it, but it's not really what I'd consider to be the most likely situation.

I'm not talking about the spectrum of possibilities, I'm talking about what the OP most likely meant in their opening post.

Most likely IMO is that there are mulitple interconnected lose networks of child abusers who're aware of other child abusers activities, and possibly some either act as pimps to those networks to give them access to which ever kids home etc is considered a safe bet at that time, or less likely this information is just spread for free via word of mouth.

Which is pretty much what I said a few posts on. :)

I do however think that within any of these networks there will be many who amass evidence against others as an insurance policy, and many will have evidence against each other, so that a form of mutually assured destruction exists that ensures that if powerful members do exist then they must excercise that power to ensure that any wider ranging inquiries are prevented from exposing anyone who posed a serious problem if exposed.

Going one stage further though, I also think it highly likely that if these networks did involve relatively highly placed individuals, then MI5 would have certainly made it it's business to know about it, because this is the crime with the greatest potential for blackmail by foreign powers / criminal gangs etc.

I also think it highly unlikely that MI5 would just gain that knowledge then sit on it and do nothing with it for no reason. It's far more likely IMO that they actually did use that information themselves in order to build up their network of informants - this after all is pretty much what they do, people generally don't voluntarily become an MI5 tout within their chosen industry / organisation / political party, so MI5 need to find ways of persuading them both to do it, and to stay silent about having done it.

The problem with this approach for MI5 is I think it's likely to result in severe blowback after a decade or 2, as at this point someone like savile could then turn the tables on MI5 and threaten to expose the fact that they'd covered for him for a decade while he abused hundreds of young girls. I can easily see in this sort of situation how MI5 could then find itself essentially sucked into the web of mutually assured destruction, and therefore feeling that it needed to intervene in situations which threatened to expose its role in covering up for child abusing informants for years / decades. This would fairly convincingly explain how / why multiple inquiries were able to be prevented from being made public.

Essentially I can see a mechanism by which MI5 could have ended up being sucked into this situation over a period of decades, and finding itself knee deep in the shit and desperately covering it's own arse never mind it's informants. I actually genuinely consider it to be far more likely that MI5 (and / or special branch and others) were / are involved in this sort of way than that they had no clue about any of it going on under their noses for as long as it apparently has been going on.

By MI5, I'm not really expecting the entire organisation to have been involved, it's more likely to have been a few case operators that started off using the technique at some point, then got sucked in so they had to cover their own arses, eg in N Ireland where the evidence and situation seems pretty credible, and by the time it got to the 80s & 90s they'd have been high enough up to be able to pull rank to get the worst of the welsh cases kept out of the public eye (and possibly to deliberately muddy the waters by ensuring the investigators dangled the carrot of compensation payouts in front of the potential witnesses when they first questioned them to make it harder to actually know what the truth of the situation was).

It's just basic arse covering really rather than any sort of principled child abuser ring conspiracy IMO.

We'll see I guess if they're still powerful enough to keep it covered up, or if they've actually now retired and lost most of their clout... that's if anyone actually starts asking the right questions.

It's not just about asking the right questions, unfortunately, it's also about doing so within earshot of someone powerful enough and interested enough to disseminate the answers to your questions.
 
I had a PM from someone who wishes to remain nameless but gave me permission to paraphrase the PM onto this thread.




This would be around the same time as all the abuse was going on in Wales, with police and council inquiries covered up.

Not that they were working in Wales (afaik), but they're pretty much saying the same thing was going on where they were working.

I believe the PM to be genuine btw.

It very likely is.
You could go to any city or large town in the UK, look at local and regional papers for the '70s and '80s, and find inquiries (usually followed by cover-ups) into abuse rings in childrens' homes, prostitution rings in childrens' homes and drug dealing in childrens' homes. You can also, if you're unlucky, come across the dozen or so cases where HIV+ care workers who were abusing carees, were allowed to keep working with children (for what boiled down to "political reasons").
We remember Kincora etc because of the wealth of information the whistleblowers put in the public domain, but there's so much more still lurking there.

Of course, the most rancid thing is that many incidences aren't kept quiet for reasons of "national security", it's because of money, where municipal insurers and municipal authorities have colluded to gag victims. They learned a long time ago that stuffing a damaged person's mouth with money and getting them to sign a non-disclosure agreement is cheaper than abuse cases seeing the light of day in court, with the inevitable class action against the authority.
 
I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous construction fusilier and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.

The famous "bag-carrying" construction fusilier, surely?
 
I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous construction fusilier and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.

I've not seen the issues but I've now read enough to ascertain that if there is any fanciful conspiracy stuff, it almost certainly came from the magazine at the time, rather than people lying about what the magazine said later.
 
I've not seen the issues but I've now read enough to ascertain that if there is any fanciful conspiracy stuff, it almost certainly came from the magazine at the time, rather than people lying about what the magazine said later.
Just noticed that it went bust before the waterhouse inquiry was even announced, so if it did mention anything it could not have been related to the findings or methods of the report - only to allegations.
 
Just noticed that it went bust before the waterhouse inquiry was even announced, so if it did mention anything it could not have been related to the findings or methods of the report - only to allegations.

Waterhouse was supposed to draw a line under things, it was the last chapter in a story that had some media attention for almost 10 years.

For example:

IN 1991 JOURNALISTS on broadsheet newspapers began to publish stories claiming that Bryn Estyn, a home for adolescent boys on the outskirts of Wrexham, lay at the centre of a network of evil – a paedophile ring whose members included a senior North Wales police officer.

http://www.orwellpress.co.uk/brynestyn.htm

Also Scallywag continued online for some years after several legal actions killed the print edition. Sounds like they had a bit of legal trouble online too, and with the death of their main man Simon Regan in 2000, that was that.
 
The best background & context for the Scallywag stories that I've been able to find was from Simon Regan himself, in a piece he wrote after the Waterhouse report was published. I dont like linking to most of the sites that have the full article, but if you google the following you should get plenty of results:

In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed

Irrelevant comedy PS. Google search wants to turn Bryn Estyn into Brian Epstein!
 
According to The Times yesterday (sorry, no link as behind a pay wall) Savile held a regular Friday “social club” meetings at his home with senior police officers, mostly from West Yorkshire Constabulary, at the same time as he was being investigated by other forces in relation to alleged sex offences.

The meetings were held over a period of 20 years.

It adds credence to the suggestion in his autobiography that if he was exposed, he would take down a number of police officers with him.
 
According to The Times yesterday...


Jimmy Savile cultivated the friendship of a group of senior police officers through weekly meetings at his penthouse apartment, while being investigated over a string of abuse cases, a friend of the star has told The Times.

The broadcaster’s “Friday Morning Club” included up to nine serving and retired police officers. The meetings were held regularly for almost 20 years until shortly before his death.

There is no suggestion that the men had any idea that Savile was involved in abuses, or that during this period police in other parts of the country were investigating at least six allegations that he had sexually abused children. Scotland Yard has been contacted by more than 300 possible victims with accounts of abuse over 40 years.

Most of the officers who attended the “club” at Savile’s home in Leeds were from West Yorkshire Police, the force now investigating claims that Savile abused vulnerable children while working as a volunteer at Leeds General Infirmary.

Joseph Barker, a friend of Savile’s since primary school and a founder member of the club, recalled yesterday: “They used to meet every Friday, about a dozen of them. Three quarters of them were police.”

He described how Savile would “hold court”, leaning back in a black leather armchair with a cigar. “We just drank tea and made light conversation. He was more of a listener when we were there — he liked to get people’s opinions,” Mr Barker, 85, said.

“Princess Di used to phone him while we were there in the Friday Morning Club. Just like that.”

He said the BBC Radio 1 DJ and host of Top of the Pops and Jim’ll Fix It had befriended some of the officers while giving talks at corporate functions or community events.

Mr Barker was one of Savile’s oldest friends alongside the DJ’s long-serving BBC radio producer, “Uncle” Ted Beston. He met Savile when they were pupils at St Anne’s Primary School in Leeds. They became close friends, cycled together in the Yorkshire Dales and threw a joint 21st birthday party. Mr Barker filmed two documentaries with Savile about mining, one for the BBC and one for ITV. He and his wife, Iris, would go on holiday to Scarborough three times a year and tried to co-ordinate their visits with Savile.

He is devastated by the revelations about Savile, saying: “He never mentioned women. It was always racing, cycling and music. I just can’t believe it. It’s like Jekyll and Hyde.”

His wife, who knew Savile for 50 years, thought it was odd that he had never mentioned women.

“I’d never known him have an attraction to a woman his own age,” Mrs Barker said. “We always thought he saw himself as one of the mafia. Any problem that arose, he used to say, ‘My people will take care of it’. Now we are wondering who ‘my people’ were.”

Savile wrote in his autobiography about an incident in the 1960s when he spent the night with an attractive girl, who had run away from a remand home, before handing her over to police in Leeds. He said a high-ranking woman police officer was persuaded by her colleagues not to charge him as “it was well known that were I to go, I would probably take half the station with me”.

Other members of the club included Howard Silverman, a hairdresser and friend for 40 years, Jeffrey Marlowe, a running companion, and David Dalmour, a singer, who along with Mr Barker were each left £1,000 in Savile’s will. Mick Starkey, who retired from West Yorkshire Police as an inspector shortly before Savile’s death, was also a member of the Friday Morning Club. The DJ joked that the officer was his “bodyguard”.

Mr Starkey, 61, could not be contacted yesterday, but after Savile’s death he told his local newspaper how he often drove Savile in his £150,000 Rolls-Royce, including taking him for a spin in the Yorkshire Dales four days before his death.

“He was a part of my life as I grew up. He was a distant figure associated with Top of the Pops, Pan’s People and everything that was trendy,” Mr Starkey said. I never thought for a minute that in later life, as a serving police officer, I would meet him professionally or that subsequently we would become close friends.”

Another officer named as a club member, Sergeant Matthew Appleyard, who was on duty at Wetherby Police Station in West Yorkshire yesterday, refused to comment. Other officers in the club could not be traced.

Savile received recognition for his community work from police forces across the country. An auction of his possessions in July included a table lighter inscribed “To Jimmy Savile from his friends at the Fraud Squad”, along with a series of plaques and awards including the Metropolitan Police 150th Anniversary medal.

A spokesman for West Yorkshire Police said that the force had not conducted any past investigations into Savile but had received calls from victims as a result of the recent media coverage. “None of these alleged any failure by police to investigate previously,” he added.

The spokesman said Savile had publicly supported some West Yorkshire Police campaigns, although none in recent years. He said that the force had no information about officers attending Savile’s Friday Morning Club but that they were free to do what they wished when off duty.
 
On a slight tangent

I like this



I am not for a moment suggesting that high level networks of child abusers do not exist. I believe that there are indicators that they do in fact exist. I believe that evidence free conspiracy theories regarding Satanic ritual abuse, lizards and jooz muddy the waters and may very well result in victims of genuine abuse not being taken seriously.

I also think that, IME, CTers tend to "join up the dots" far too freely, making connections between disparate situations and individuals and, as a result, draw conclusions that are false and fantastical. This is especially unhelpful in those situations in which truth is stranger and more shocking than fiction, Savilegate being one of those situations.
 
The Daily Star have gone after a different Tory angle:

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/279380/TORY-PAEDO-COVER-UP/


POLICE probing an underage sex ring at the heart of Maggie Thatcher’s government were warned: “Stop investigating if you want to keep your jobs.”

Officers in London were inquiring into allegations made by a teenage rent boy that a Cabinet minister had been abusing him.
The youth claimed to be one of a number of boys regularly having sex with rich and powerful men in the 1980s – some of whom would fly to the illegal orgies from Europe.
As well as the Cabinet minister – who is still alive – he pointed the finger at judges, European bigwigs and senior civil servants.
He told his story to detectives, who are understood to have received other allegations against the minister.
But a former detective who worked on the case revealed they were suddenly told to halt the probe.
The furious ex-policeman said: “It wasn’t that we ran out of leads but it reached a point where a warning to stop came.
“It was a case of ‘get rid of everything, never say a word to anyone’. It was made very clear to me that to continue asking questions would jeopardise my career.”
 
Its a nightmare trying to get to truth when going down the road of Scallywag and its offshoots. Everything starts looping back on itself. But there was some actual journalism and people with contacts involved.

The main example of the loopback I mentioned:

One of their stories involved turning the 'cash for questions' scandal into 'cash for boys'.

Simon Regans half-brother Angus Wilson, who was also a founder of Scallywag, went on to setup a successor magazine called Spiked. Al-Fayed is said to have provided some finance to this venture at some point, which fits as by then he had it in for sections of the establishment and later rescued Punch.

Angus Wilson died in a car crash in Cyprus, apparently just after seeking finance for Spiked from Asil Nadir in exchange for printing his side of the Polly Peck story.

In the last years of his life Simon Regan was said to be especially interested in Diana death conspiracy theories.

I've hurt my brain staring at a screen too long this afternoon so I dont have all my sources for these details handy. But here is one that has pnety of the Angus Wilson details in it. Its a story following on from the John major Edwina Currie revelations, with most of the interesting stuff coming from surviving brother Robin Wilson. Its quite fascinating and stays well away from the loopy stuff.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Major's lies over affair destroyed our family; THE LITTLE MAG THAT...-a092484859
 
Back
Top Bottom