Skip to comments.HOW THE TORIES COVERED UP THE PAEDOPHILE RING JIMMY SAVILE PROCURED FOR
Posted on 11/19/2012 4:36:12 AM PST by Renfield
The letter written below is penned by Simon Regan Editor of Scallyway Magazine who's half Brother Angus James Wilson, co founder of Scallywag and editor of its sucessor Spiked died in Cyprus around 1996 whilst the magazine was investigating the elite paedophile ring operating in North Wales children's homes and beyond.
In his letter dated February 2000 Simon documents Scallywag's investigation into the North Wales Child Abuse scandal and the tragic cover-up by the Courts and the Establishment.
Whilst the Establishment stole the affidavits the abused children had made, naming their high profile abusers, the notes of the interviews were kept by investigator Andrea Davison only to be seized by the Derby and North Wales Police in January 2010. http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/andrea-davison-jimmy-savile-serco-and.html
Now that this paedophile ring, which Jimmy Savile procured for, is being exposed its time that the Police returned the Affidavits and the notes of these interviews. The names given by these abused children, some of whom died tragically, should be investigated anew but who can be trusted to do the investigation?
The daily mail recently wrote this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224167/Former-Minister-says-Thatcher-aide-paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html which opened up the whole North Wales Child abuse scandal up again. William Hauge and other Members of the last Tory Government covered up the fact the Peter Morrison MP Thatchers close friend and aid was named by children in the North Wales children's homes as being a child abuser linked to an elite paedophile ring.
Simon Regan with party friends in happier times Photo by: Idris Martin
The Waterhouse Report
By Simon Regan
20 February 2000
The fact that the Waterhouse report went as far as it did is highly commendable, and obviously long overdue. But the trouble with any investigation which tries to break through a 'cult of silence' is the lingering doubts that it will ever get down to the whole full truth of the matter. Waterhouse is probably merely the tip of the iceberg.
The report suggests there is 'no evidence' that Freemasonry had anything to do with the scandal. Yet there were two inadequate and inconclusive police inquiries, including one into a senior officer, by a force in North Wales riddled with freemasons.
There was a consistent lack of initiative on the part of the local Clwyd CC in the face of overwhelming evidence of consistent child abuse at Bryn Estyn, ostensibly because the council insurers advised against any action. This in itself insults democracy in a way that borders on the criminal. By a policy of non-action, both the police and the council became embroiled in a blatant cover-up.
Anyone who has even vaguely become acquainted with paedophilia knows very well that they will go to the ends of the earth to keep their activities absolutely secret. They are professional experts in covering their tracks.
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. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.
Two of these young men, who had been 14-years-old at the time, swore they had been not only introduced to the paedophile ring operating in the Crest Hotel in Wrexham but had later been escorted on three or four occasions to an address in Pimlico where they were further abused.
We took them separately to Pimlico and asked them to point out the building where this had taken place. They were both positive in their identification. It turned out to be the private flat of a well known, and since highly discredited lobbyist who later went into obscurity in some disgrace because of his involvement with Mohammed al-Fayed and the 'cash for questions' scandal. At the time we ran a story entitled 'Boys for Questions' and named several prominent members of the then Thatcher government. These allegations went to the very top of the Tory party, yet there was a curious and almost ominous lack of writs.
The lobbyist was a notorious 'queen' who specialised in gay parties with a 'political mix' in the Pimlico area - most convenient to the Commons - and which included selected flats in Dolphin Square. The two young men were able to give us very graphic descriptions of just what went on, including acts of buggery, and alleged that they were only two of many from children's homes other than North Wales.
There was, to my certain knowledge, at least one resignation from the Conservative office in Smith Square once we had published our evidence and named names.
Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, Dr. Julian Lewis, now Conservative MP for New Forest (East) but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.
All of a sudden very private information, some of it even privileged between ourselves and our lawyer during the John Major libel action, was being published in selected, pro-Conservative sections of the media.
Subsequently, during a court case initiated by Lewis, I was able in my defence to seek discovery of documents and asked to see the seized files. The paedophile papers were missing. This is a very great shame, because Sir Ronald Waterhouse certainly should have been aware of them.
I believe that the secrecy the Establishment wraps around itself easily equals that of the paedophiles. They really do look after each other and quite professionally cover their tracks.
The real trouble about exposing paedophiles is that former victims of child abuse make lousy witnesses. By the very nature of the abuse, when they are rudely shoved out into the wide world (one of the witnesses, Stephen Messham, for example, was released on his sixteenth birthday on Christmas day after two years of abuse, and had to sleep rough on the streets for four and a half months), they are often deeply psychologically disturbed.
Some of the extreme cases commit suicide, many more were sexually disorientated in the worst possible way. Some became gay prostitutes, others drug addicts, and in nearly every case, at some stage, they needed lengthy counselling. Marriages quickly disintegrated in psychological turmoil and a lot of former victims had real difficulties raising their own children. There are very few victims of child abuse who come out of it without deep scars.
It was all very well for us to take statements from former victims in the cosy atmosphere of a pub lunch, but put them up against an agile and eminent QC whose sole task is to discredit them, and they quickly crumble, even break down in tears. Many former victims now have criminal records of some kind, owing almost exclusively to the abuse itself, and the barrister will brutally exploit this as evidence that the witness is unreliable and tainted. Faced with the choice of a clearly neurotic young man who quickly falls down in the witness box, and a smooth, experienced, erudite and often highly respected culprit, juries tend to give the accused the benefit of the doubt.
I watched it in the now famous Court 13 at the High Court during the libel action between former Supt. Gordon Anglesey and Private Eye (and others) when, despite the fact that under cross examination, Anglesey had to admit that his evidence did not correspond with his own notebooks, the 'other side' subsequently tore the five main prosecution witnesses to pieces in a monumental act of judicial harassment. Like the whole story of child abuse in North Wales and elsewhere, it broke my heart.
Simon Regan (deceased) was editor of Scallywag Magazine
Read more:- link to one actual Scallywag article about McAlpine written by Angus James http://scallywagmagazine.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/scallywag-magazine-article-on-lord.html
The final paragraph reads "and by the way just for the record the editors of Scallwag absolutely hate satsumas"
This Satsuma reference is to Stephen Milligan who was a Tory MP and Parliamentary Private Secretary to the notorious Tory cabinet minister Jonathan Aitken. Stephen Milligan the PPS who knew too mutch. On 7th February 1994, he was reported to have been found tied to a chair with a plastic bag over his head and a satsuma stuffed into his mouth. The usual embarrassment surrounding these cases seem to have prevented the press from carrying out an in-depth investigation into various discrepancies in the case. Aitken, was known to have an particular interest in Sado-Masochistic sex - Milligan wasn't. He was a normal guy engaged at the time to a woman who is now a Tory MP. More relevant perhaps is Aitken's well-documented links to intelligence agencies and his role in shadowy arms deals that were conducted in the Ritz hotel in Paris in 1993.At this time Aitken was the head of an International Intelligence Service called Le Cercle and Milligan was taken out in this bizarre way perhaps as a warning to Aitken or perhaps to silence him. Aitken quickly toppled from his high perch shortly after Milligans Death.
In the minds of those repulsed by this behavior----the pedophile lurks as an evil monster.
But keep in mind, amoral, souless pedophiles are amazingly persuasive. They take pride in their ability to dupe people without displaying their true nature.
People are easily taken in by these calculatedly charming, persuasive predators. Pedophiles entice their victims by gaining their trust.......the same way they get others to cover-up for them.
Penn State was an eye-opener. Shows how persuasive the predators are. They are expert at the protection racket---getting others to protect them.....being their willing enablers.
Even after numerous victims tearfully recounted their horrendous experiences, Sandusky is still publicly denying his actions........he sees nothing wrong in what he did.
Pedophiles should get an Academy Award for their acting talents.
SINGLE MOTHERS ALERT Single mothers with young children are prime targets of child molesters. The pedophiles romance the moms, even marrying them, to get access to their young children.
The molesters are charming and personable. Who would ever suspect? One sad story televised a weeping mom beating herself up--- b/c her child repeatedly told her what was happening---but the mom ignored it---not believing her charming, loving husband was a pedophile.
Before we judge their protectors---we should acknowledge that molesters are personable, convincing----and very able to dupe others into protecting them.
As was revealed in the Sandusky case---those who suspected he was a pedophile were silenced---b/c nobody wanted to hurt a "nice guy" like Jerry. Seems everybody was eager to protect personable Jerry. Years passed and his deeds finally caught up with him. Yet, even the first judge in the case "protected" him---letting Jerry walk free.
BE AWARE There is a huge push to normalize pedophilia, incest, and other deviant sexual behavior BY PLANNED PARENTHOOD, NAMBLA, and other groups----who have been organizing for years.
It is being covered quite extensively in the Daily Mail
THE NORTH Wales Child Abuse Tribunal cleared freemasonry of any involvement in covering up child abuse.
A Mason-Free Zone
Australia Orders Federal Child Sex Abuse Inquiry - (Catholic Church)
Australian government reports on Catholic Church moving pedophile priests
Catholic Church sex abuse scandals around the world
Not only was he *allegedly* a devout Catholic, he had a papal knighthood for all his charity work. In truth, he was a psychopath who used his charity work as a cover for what he was getting up to.
Give it up dude. There have been loads of witnesses independently verified and he practically boasted about molesting underage girls in his autobiography. He is as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo...
We’ve been through this before.
And I stand by my opinion that all the evidence I have seen points to a dirty old man who had consentual sex with young teenage girls. And young women in their late teens and 20’s. And whose ‘violent abuse’ seems to have been nothing more than some unwanted groping.
No evidence of rape. No evidence of abuse. No evidence either of the more ludicrous claims about him.
And much of the evidence as we discussed in an earlier thread has simply been a load of crap. Some of it already refuted, and wont be part of the investigation (the ‘taxi driver—12 year old’ story for example OR the Duncroft accusations which have been ripped apart by the former headmistress). ITV even has the cheek to follow up their first dreadful joke of an ‘expose’ this month. (btw, google the ITV expert......expert my arsesticles, and has a few dubious morals and court appearances himself)
Loads of witnesses?. Mate, have you actually taken the time to read the stories, the accusations?. I have, and much of the supposed evidence of rape or abuse or paedophilia is simply not there. Once you get by the screaming headline, actually there is little or no evidence except for suggestion and accusation. Second and third hand many times as well.
Look at the Coleen Nolan accusation for example. We can all see with our own eyes thanks to BBC film that the silly woman was about as attacked and molested by Savile in 1978 as you and I were. Look at the ‘secret audio clip of Savile abusing a young girl’, which turned out to be an old clip from ‘Savile’s Travels’ on Radio 1.
And as I said, other major stories like the supposed abuse of the Duncroft girls has been shown never to have happened. In fact, the Duncroft girls have been shown to be a pretty slaggy bunch of girls who would F8ck anything for a cigarette and a bottle of booze. Yet they are being portrayed as poor little virginal victims.
And lets be blunt here, much of it is simply unbelievable nonsense 40 years late from people who cannot prove their accusations. Frankly, the TV and radio in the UK are full of rather odd middle aged women making all sorts of unprovable and frankly ludicrous accusations.
You call me nieve, I think its you who is. You and I have read all the stories, all the accusations. Even you must admit that a lot of it is simply nonsense. Bandwagonning by sad middle aged people who can see a few quid their way if they can sound convincing enough. And thats what this is all about: money.
Justice?. Give over, guvnor. Its all about getting a bit of dosh from Jimmy’s estate. Oh, and the BBC while we are at it. Do you think for a second if Savile had been a pauper when he died, this whole saga would have started?.
I suppose you believe the Rossiter story as well. Or the stories about every DJ/pop presenter circa 1960-1980. This is hysteria and peado panic at full blast, and Britain at the moment is a stupid, hysterical little island. Where actual evidence takes second place to accusation.
ALL that abuse, all that rape by Savile, and not one victim ever went to the police (oh wait a minute they did, and nothing was ever found)?.
Savile was probably a ‘dirty old man’ with a fondness for jailbait and young women. He was not however a rapist, paedophile, child abuser or necrophiliac. He didnt abuse little girls in his dressing room, he didnt wander hospitals at night, he didnt violate bodies in the morgue.
When all the evidence is at hand, and the investigation reaches its conclusions, I dare say we will find Savile was far less of the evil pervert that the hysteria has him as currently.
So sneer away, mate, sneer away. But it is ME who is the one who is looking at this with calm eyes, whilst all around me scream paedo! and reach for their pitchforks......
I think those lawsuits are over mistaken identity. The British left found a name of someone apparently involved in this back in the 1980s. There was a Tory MP from the same time period, who has now been made Lord something or another, and they ran stories with the idea that they were one and the same person. Turns out it was two different guys with the same name. A number of lefties had posted gleeful comments on Twitter, and he has sworn to sue every one.
Something like 5 pounds and a written apology.