Posts Tagged ‘Jimmy Savile’

Video: David Icke On The Queen,The BBC, The Royal Child Catcher To The Establishment

December 6, 2012

Much worse than the knighted Jimmy Savile’s own sordid habits, is that penchant for young children was not an isolated phenomenon. The deceased disc jockey with impeccable Royal connections was also a regular visitor to the notorious Haut La Garenne Childrens’ Home in Jersey, but much less well-known, is that this fixer wasn’t just acting  solely for himself…





Like the Taliban, BBC Erase Banksy Artwork Which Exposed Their Internal Savile Cover-up

December 2, 2012

What Do The Taliban And The BBC Have In Common?

The Needle


Before……. and After the Taliban


Before and……and After the BBC

Yes, that’s right, they both destroy great works of art in pursuit of their closed minded ideology.

Banksy, to my mind the UK’s greatest living artist (and actually, yes, I could justify that statement) created a piece of meaningful art outside of BBC Television Centre in central London which summed up just how disillusioned the British public, especially of my generation, feel right now. It was the poignant image of a young boy dropping his ‘Jim’ll Fix It’ medal into a drain. The BBC sent the workmen in to scrub it away.

Why ? Because it implied criticism of the corporation. All great art speaks, all great art stimulates thought, all great art, from Giotto via Manet’s ‘Olympia’ and beyond Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ to the present day, has been provocative.

The cultural philistines at the BBC can have as many Yentob inspired documentaries as they like but until they put artistic creation above managerial expediency they can never be a Corporation that Broadcasts for the British license fee paying public.

And do they own that hoarding ?

Does the BBC actually own that piece of hardboard that Banksy chose to place this artwork ?

And if the BBC are sued because a precious work of art has been destroyed and they didn’t own the hardboard hoarding opposite BBC Telivision Centre, who pays ?

Not the BBC management on their ludicrously high salaries, but all of us who pay the BBC license fee.

Just like McAlpine’s £185,000.


The Prince and the Pedophile: What Are Charles’ Connections to Jimmy Savile OBE?

November 24, 2012

Brandon Turbeville
Sleuth Journal

Fresh on the heels of the fallout from revelations regarding former BBC entertainer Jimmy Savile and his unbelievably sickening and innumerable instances of child molestation as well as the “look the other way” approach taken by the BBC…

Sir Jim was a good friend of Charles, dubbed a ‘mentor’ to him, by Princess Diana.

More and more questions are now emerging in regards to the connection between Savile and British Royalty, most notably Prince Charles.

At least, more questions should be emerging.

Unfortunately, however, the British mainstream media is deeming Prince Charles and the rest of his ilk in positions of power and perceived genetic royalty as if they are beyond reproach. This approach is typical and to be expected, yet it is also highly ironic considering the fact that such is the same position the mainstream media took with the allegations against Jimmy Savile for so many years.

As a result of the Savile affair, mainstream outlets, particularly the BBC, now have a lot of egg on their faces in the areas of credibility and respect.In short, any connections placing Prince Charles in an uncompromising position regarding his connections with Savile or his potential for sharing a penchant for unnatural relationships with children is being completely ignored if not officially covered up.

Although Prince Charles’ friendship with Jimmy Savile, allegedly begun when the two met in the 1970s during the course of working with children’s wheelchair sports charities, is now well-known, the extent to which the Prince and the Pedophile were connected appears to go much deeper than the mainstream media reports let on.

Of course, the two having come in contact at a “charity” event for the disabled is not too far-fetched, even if it is being reported by corporate outlets. After all, using children’s “charities” as a hunting ground and a cover for his true motives was a notorious method used by Savile who actually lived in children’s homes and hospitals so as to be closer to his victims. This method is by no means specific to Savile, however, as many other sexual predators and pedophiles know exactly what areas of society to be involved in and what careers to pursue in order to gain access to their victims. Jerry Sandusky stands as a perfect example.

Clarence House, Prince Charles’ spokesman, declined comment on much of the relationship between Savile and Charles, only claiming that the relationship was mostly a result of their “shared interest in supporting disability charities.”

Supporting charities, indeed.

Of course, Savile was doing much more than “supporting disability charities.” That is, unless one places serial child rape in a much different category than the average person might. Indeed, one would not be judged out of place to question whether or not untold numbers of sexually assaulted children thoroughly cancels out any financial “support” that may have been given in the past. Apparently, in the view of British royalty, it does not.

In fact, child molester Savile has enjoyed an unbelievable level of access to the Royal Family for the past 40 years.

For instance, in the late 1980s, Savile was said to have acted as a type of marriage counselor between Charles and Diana, visiting their residence several times. At these visits, Dickie Arbiter, who took care of media relations for the Prince and Princess between 1988 and 2000 stated that, at these visits, Savile’s behavior was uncouth to say the very least.

Arbiter stated:

He would walk into the office and do the rounds of the young ladies taking their hands and rubbing his lips all the way up their arms if they were wearing short sleeves. If it was summer [and their arms were bare] his bottom lip would curl out and he would run it up their arms. This was at St James’s Palace. The women were in their mid to late 20s doing typing and secretarial work.

Not only that, but Savile was brought in to the private marital affairs of the Royals once again in order to help the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, in matters which were not disclosed to the public. Savile later claimed he was brought in to help “Fergie” keep her profile down.

Obviously, the relationship forged between Charles and Savile went far beyond two men who merely performed charity work for the same organizations. This can be evidenced by the fact that, in 1990, Charles even consulted Savile for advice on the appointment of a senior aide for himself and Princess Diana.

The relationship between Charles and Savile, particularly Savile’s access to the Royal Family’s affairs and the respect which was afforded Savile in this regard, has confused many onlookers. After all, Savile was nothing more than a BBC presenter and disc jockey who was well past his prime. Not to mention the fact that Savile was well known as an uncontrollable freak, although many were under the impression that Savile’s television persona was merely part of his schtick.

Yet the clues to the Prince’s friendship with the Pedophile might have more to do with similar interests in entertainment than a mere happenstance relationship. Although the evidence which connects Prince Charles to pedophilia is nowhere near as documented as that of Jimmy Savile, a trail of information certainly seems to be leading in that direction.

At this point, it should be mentioned that, although the official line is that Savile and Charles met in the 1970s as part of the coincidence of mutual charity work, Savile himself has stated that he was friends with the Royal family “for a million years.” In fact, it was reported that Savile actually stated he was introduced to the Royals in 1966 by Lord Mountbatten, a known pedophile and sexual pervert. In addition to Mountbatten, however, Greg Hallett, in his book Hitler Was A British Agent, also names Prince Philip as a pedophile. In reference to how he became introduced and ingratiated with the Royal family, Savile stated,

Coming from Lord Louis, who was the favourite uncle of Prince Philip, that was quite something. So obviously I hooked up with the Prince – what was good enough for Lord Louis was good enough for him.

So, already, we have Savile, a notorious pedophile linked to other individuals of the Royal Family named as pedophiles as well. Prince Philip, of course, is Prince Charles’ father. Lord Mountbatten is largely considered Charles’ mentor.

Savile was indeed close to British Royals as well as other elites for many years. It seems his qualification for such high connections were mainly due to his ability to obtain children for the twisted appetites of those considered beyond reproach for the mainstream media and, unfortunately, the general public.

Savile himself seemed to hint at this possibility in an interview conducted with Esquire where he stated, “The thing about me is I get things done and I work deep cover.”

Savile’s ridiculous television show (created for the sole purpose of enhancing his access to children) was thus appropriately named, Jim’ll Fix It. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the public were completely unaware as to what he was fixing and who he was fixing it for.

Essentially, it is clear that Jimmy Savile was a procurer of children not only for himself but also for wealthy pedophiles all across the world, particularly in Britain. Even Savile’s own nephew has recently gone public with information tying Savile to a network of pedophiles and sick sexual parties where children were repeatedly raped. Guy Marsden, Savile’s nephew, also stated that the parties were attended by household names in show business.

However, as is being widely reported in the news, Savile’s escapades of pedophilia were by no means limited to parties with the elite of entertainment. Many of his attacks on children took place in the halls of the hospitals and charities he helped fund and operate, even residing in his own personal room at two of these institutions. At this point, it is worth noting that Savile and Prince Charles are open “supporters” of the same charities.

Savile’s Cottage in Glencoe, where he hosted Charles for private dining.

Apparently, Prince Charles and the Pedophile did have some similar tastes, some of which were even reported by the mainstream media. In 1999, after the Prince accepted Savile’s invitation to a private meal at Savile’s home in Glencoe, Scotland, Savile had arranged for three women to parade around dressed in pinafores, a type of dress without sleeves and an open back that is often worn over other dresses. Interestingly enough, pinafores were often worn by children.

After the dinner, Charles wrote Savile a Christmas Card with a note that read, “Jimmy, with affectionate greetings from Charles. Give my love to your ladies in Scotland.”

Of course, the mainstream is certain that Charles is referring to the local women brought in for the Royal entertainment. However, unless the hired help made an exceptional impression upon the mind of Charles, one must wonder whether or not these particular ladies are the “ladies” to which Charles is referring in his Christmas note. After all, Savile’s Scottish cottage was also the scene of much child abuse as well.

Later, Charles sent Savile a box of cigars and a pair of gold cufflinks on his 80th birthday along with another note that cryptically read, “Nobody will ever know what you have done for this country Jimmy. This is to go some way in thanking you for that.” Fortunately, many are now aware of what Jimmy has done for his country. Clearly, it would be best if they are given the full story along with it.

This is not likely to happen, however, as global pedophile rings are generally made up of some of the most elite individuals the world over. This is particularly relevant when it comes to any questions regarding the behavior of the Royal Prince. At any moment when there is a chance that information might be leaked that would be damaging to the reputation of genetic royalty, the documents are sealed, the whistleblowers are dealt with, and the controversy covered up.

Some have even speculated that Princess Diana sealed her own fate after threatening to reveal networks of pedophilia within the Royal family. Indeed, Diana did speak of “dark forces” and members of an “organization” that were monitoring her shortly before her death.

For instance, when it appeared that the so-called Black Spider Memos, a series of letters written by Charles to government ministers, would damage the perception of Charles’ impartiality if he were to become king, then memos were immediately blocked by the British government. Indeed, it would be extremely interesting to see the contents of the letters, since, in reality, the impartiality of the king is truly irrelevant in the grand scheme of British society and government.

What is particularly interesting is that the letters are being blocked from release now, as the biggest pedophilia scandal in British history is unfolding – specifically, at a time when one of the main focal points of the scandal, Jimmy Savile, was a close friend of the Prince. Even more so, it comes at a time when British government officials are also being implicated in pedophilia networks.

For those who may still be under the impression that pedophilia is a crime beyond the capabilities of British politicians, take a look at thispartial compilation of British politicians convicted of pedophilia in recent years.

But, while the connections between Prince Charles and the Pedophile Jimmy Savile are themselves enough to make one wonder, the fact is that Savile is not the only relationship with a potential pedophile that Charles has maintained.

As reported by the Digital Journal, the Right Reverend Peter Ball is the most senior member of the Church of England to be arrested for offenses against children. Ball was arrested on eight suspected cases of abuse against boys and young men ranging from ages 12 to 20 during the 1980s to 1990s. Ball, who was the former Bishop of Gloucester, resigned in 1993 after he was served with a police caution for “committing an act of gross indecency against a teenager.”

Upon his resignation, Ball retired to Manor Lodge, “a wisteria-clad property owned by the Duchy of Cornwall.” Manor Lodge is a property of the Prince’s Duchy of Cornwall.

In reference to his new living arrangements, Ball stated, “He (Prince Charles) has been wonderfully kind and allowed me to have a duchy house. The prince is a loyal friend. I have immense admiration for him, he has been through horrific times and is a great person.”

Considering the connections and personal friendships maintained by Prince Charles, one must question whether or not Charles himself has had some experience in the underworld of pedophilia. At the very least, the Prince is the absolute worst judge of character who ever lived.

What is also very interesting regarding the people named in these child sex scandals and the scope of the scandals themselves, is that the individuals who have been trying their best to bring this information to light have been ignored and derided for years on end. This has been the case whether the individuals were whistleblowers, researchers, or even victims themselves.

For instance, while much of mainstream Britain has had quite a time laughing at David Icke, suddenly his claims do not seem so fantastic and funny after all. Indeed, it was Icke who mentioned the global cabal of pedophiles and even many of the participants in them by name many years ago. While his voice was scarcely heard above the laughter at the time, he is, at the very least, on the record as having exposed these networks early on.

As for Icke’s remarks regarding the scandal today, he had this to say on November 7, 2012.

This guy, William Hague, the foreign Secretary, needs to be questioned on why that Welsh inquiry into the massive pedophilia in Welsh children’s homes was given the brief that it did and therefore stopped these kids from talking about what happened to them. And this is the big thing. If the police investigation does not knock on the door of Buckingham Palace over this whole Savile [case] and the wider implications that have followed then it’s a cover up. Because the British Royal family are fundamentally involved in this right to the top. Right up to the people like Prince Philip and all these other people . . . . . This man [Savile] was an aging sleazy disc jockey, right? And he had complete access to the British Royal family AND they used him as an official go-between [with] Prince Charles and Princess Diana when they were falling out in their marriage. And now it’s come out this week that he was advising Prince Charles on aids to employ. Why is this man so close or was so close to the British Royal Family? The answer to that will bring the British Royal family down.

Considering Icke’s accuracy in terms of information on this particular issue, perhaps it would be wise if those who heard him speak years ago might take him a little more serious the second time around.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions andDispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over 175 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at)



Child Sex Rings Reveal the Most Horrific Acts of Society’s Power Elite

November 15, 2012

Mark West
Activist Post

One of the most difficult things to convey to people who are relatively new to information that appears in the so-called alternative media is just how diabolical the controlling elite really are.

People can seem to accept that the world is run by a bunch of ruthless bankers, or perhaps they realize that presidents and national leaders are puppets to corporate interests, or perhaps they even have come to grips with the fact that “The Elite” are willing to destroy nations and people to consolidate power and form a one-world government.  Poison the planet with depleted uranium? Yes. Poison the food supply with GMO’s? Definitely.

But one topic that has been routinely shrugged off as manifestly impossible is that those at the very top of the pyramid, including well-known politicians and public figures, have engaged consistently — and on a widespread basis — in the organized sale, rape, torture and murder of children. Frankly, we had a hard time fully believing it ourselves until recently. But the evidence has become so overwhelming that we must have the courage to look into the very worst cesspit; one which better belongs in paintings of Hell’s torments, not on the evening news.

According to, 800,000 children under the age of 18 go missing each year globally — 2,185 per day. Their hotline received an average of 580 calls per day to this point in the last quarter of 2012 — 3.5 million calls since the organization’s inception in 1984. It is clearly an epidemic of staggering proportions.

When Fritz Springmeier and David Icke began talking 20 years ago about organized pedophile rings and mind-controlled sex slaves (often with overtly Satanic themes) within the highest levels of society, most readers met them with serious doubt or outright dismissal. We would be very unwise to dismiss their research now.

Diana described Savile as Charles’ ‘mentor’.

The Jimmy Savile scandal has taken center stage in bringing these revelations to a wider audience, as it is embedded within Britain’s BBC corporate media itself where they were forced to lamely issue an apology that the original Newsnight investigation into numerous claims of sex acts with children was dropped, all the while insisting that “there was not enough evidence to say whether sexual abuse or harassment at the corporation was ‘endemic'”.

David Icke certainly has a different take on it. According to Icke, Savile “was the child-supplying fixer for the rich and famous in politics, entertainment and royalty” and can be linked to a massive child abuse scandal in North Wales. (Source)  Icke’s 1998 book The Biggest Secret details a seemingly unbelievable number of prominent U.S. and UK political leaders who centrally figure into these scandals. Icke details how Savile is indicative not of a single evil person using their position of  power to destroy innocence, but is indicative of an entire lifestyle embraced within the top echelons of society.

Savile’s close connections to the royal family cannot be denied, and even skeptics have to wonder how people in the highest positions could not have at least known and covered up the details of what was taking place.

Savile himself would boast about his connections to the royals and it was publicly acknowledged that he was a regular visitor to Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace (where Princess Diana lived after her marriage ended with Prince Charles), and Highgrove (the country estate of Prince Charles).

Savile told Esquire: ‘The thing about me is I get things done and I work deep cover. I’ve known the Royal Family for a million years.’ (Source)

As Icke highlights, one of Savile’s own nephews, Guy Mardsen, is now discussing what happened at Savile’s “paedophile parties” with many children coming from orphanages or children’s homes.

To those who still think Icke might be crazy to suggest something much larger, The Telegraph just released statements from the former policeman who exposed Savile. He says that Savile “engineered” his show specifically as a vehicle to gain access to children.

I believe he engineered his programmes within the BBC and Radio Luxembourg in order to gain access to children.

The classic examples are Top Of The Pops, Savile’s Travels, Jim’ll Fix It – all of them gave him access to young children. That’s why there were so many victims. (Source)

At least 300, and many more inquires.

This is not the only scandal that large news outlets like the BBC have failed to cover. Sian Griffiths, a local council official in North Wales, collected details about allegations made between 1991 and 2000. The stacks of documents she reveals in the video below is beyond shocking, but nothing more so than the evidence of a coverup which followed the mention of high-profile figures who attended child sex parties. (Source)

(…) But one group really shows the scope of child sex slavery, abuse, and every vile activity imaginable: DynCorp. DynCorp is responsible for recruiting, training and deploying civilian peacekeepers and police trainers to 11 countries, including Haiti, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq, for the Department of State. (Source)

Whistleblowers, Ben Johnson and Kathryn Bolkovac, were both fired after attempting to stop DynCorp employees and supervisors engaging in sex acts with children. These children had been purposely kidnapped from other regions to serve as sex slaves. No one was formally prosecuted, even as more reports came out that DynCorp was part of a large network of child prostitution involving international aid workers.

More recently in Afghanistan it was revealed by a WikiLeaks cable that DynCorp threw “boy-play” parties for new Afghan police recruits. The exploits of DynCorp — funded by the U.S. taxpayer — is perhaps the supreme example of the predators stalking this planet. Here is Donald Rumsfeld stammering through an attempt to explain the continued governmental support for DynCorp:

Read more

The Original SCALLYWAG Magazine Paedophile Ring Investigation Turns Up Online

November 15, 2012

21st Century Wire

It seems that the original 1990’s SCALLYWAG Magazine paedophile investigation has popped-up online, included in it the complete exposé of the North Wales Boys Home scandal, and details of a sophisticated child abuse network running through Westminster, and elsewhere.

The SCALLYWAG article in questions is as hot today as it was back then, and names X, Y, and Z – including top Tory Party officials, police, along with other detailed information on men surrounding Bryn Alyn Boys Home in Wrexham, Wales. The article states:

“This ‘rent boy’ ring has operated for more than 20 years, and is still in operation at addresses all over Britain, despite the fact that the mastermind behind it all is at present on bail awaiting trail with 10 specimen cases against him…”

At the time, this particular Scallywag Mag in-depth investigative article from the 1990’s contains pieces of information from other investigations in the Observer, Private Eye, HTV and the Independent on Sunday, all of which were under threat of libel of North Wales ex-Supt Angelsea at the time.

Some commentators believed that Scallywag had sufficient evidence during the time of their publishing the article, but details are sketchy. Other famous politicans did sue Scallywag, like John Major, over allegations of an extramarital affair.

This Scallywag article was very controversial at the time and continues to be so today, with speculation that it may have been connected to the bizarre death of the magazine’s editor Angus  James, co-founder of Scallywag, who died  in Cyprus in 1994 some time after the magazine  was investigating the elite paedophile ring.

Photo: Scallywag publisher, Simon Regan

The  letter below was penned  by Simon Regan, Editor of Scallyway Magazine, and  half  brother  of Angus  James Wilson,  co-founder of Scallywag, who later died  in Cyprus in 1994.

Regan laments the tragic  cover-up by the Courts and the Establishment – a concerned shared by most of Britain, especially in the wake of hundreds of  different Jimmy Savile revelations. Here’s his letter:


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….

Read full text of Regan’s letter here

So why are the Law Lords so eager to shut this case down?

Here is a recent interview with survivor Steve Messham, where it appears as if the police deliberately lost the key evidence…

It’s an incredible story, but only a proper resourced, independent investigation can do this kind of story justice.

Will we get one this time around?

Good question… good question.


RELATED: Max Clifford on Alan Clark: ‘I have all the evidence’, know where all bodies are buried

RELATED: CAMERON JUST DOESN’T GET IT – The Police and Judiciary are Part of UK Abuse Problem

A SHOCKING INTERVIEW: Wrexham Child Home Abuse Victim Describes Elite Paedophile Sex Parties


INTERVIEW: Wrexham Child Home Abuse Victim Describes Elite Paedophile Sex Parties

November 14, 2012

21st Century Wire

Watch this shocking documentary 

Harrowing interview with this man who was in the North Wales Boys Home in Wrexham, where he describes how he was taken from the children’s residence at 12-13 years of age, on a weekly basis, into London – and possibly to a military barracks as well – for sex parties in expensive properties where older men would abuse them until the early hours of the morning. In this scenario, large amounts of money would have changed hands between the older male clients and the operative who delivered the boys from the care home to the ‘party’.

Yet, some media figures are still claiming that this type of organised paedophilia among the nation’s powerful elite doesn’t exist and is just a ‘conspiracy theory’. We do not believe this to be the case. According to the evidence, victim Steve Messham was violently abused and intimidated – by older men in positions of power, and finally, he was hung out to dry, publicly humiliated by the BBC who folded to establishment demands of silence on this issue.

He also describes how children were brought from other care homes from around the country to the same parties…

RELATED: The Original SCALLYWAG Magazine paedophile ring investigation is available online



November 14, 2012

This is what the BBC are expecting you to pay for – Jimmy Savile and George Entwistle’s golden parachute.

Putting things into perspective…

The over-inflated blimp known as the BBC has long sold off its TV License collection business to Captia Ltd and others, to carry out that dirty job of extorting hundreds of pounds from peaceful citizens in order to make programs people don’t like and don’t watch, and to pay millions to people like Jonathan Ross – and Jimmy Savile.

Worse yet, the BBC paid off their outgoing DG George Entwistle to the tune of GBP 450,000 ++ for just 55 days work. Remember: ‘It’s not what you know, but who you know’. Great if you have a ticket on that gravy train, but if you don’t, then you are expected to pay your 140 quid – and shut up.

Now the plebs are seriously pissed off…

They claim he resigned because of Newsnight’s vs Lord McApline and the leak that wasn’t, but in reality, that money was paid to keep him quiet about what he really knew, while the BBC drags its heals ‘investigating itself’ on its cover-up.

TV License is a register trademark of the BBC, but they have almost franchised it out – for a profit one would hope, to their esteemed private partners.

One thing is certain, they are counting on the public to be stupid in order to make this bad deal work.

So when Capita Ltd or another private outfit come threatening you with a massive fine or a jail sentence if you don’t pay, do remember your rights. By definition, if a limited company come to your door demanding money for a service you don’t use, that can be viewed as soliciting. The fines and jail threats appear to be excessive, when you consider how the TV license deal is currently structured. Is solicitation, backed by threats, legal in Britain?

What’s a license anyway?

Also, to concept of a “license” infers that if you don’t hold one, then you are operating illegally. There is nothing “illegal” under common law about operating a TV without a license. You can only be nailed in a statutory, or ‘administrative’ court – not for breaking the law, but for violating corporate policy. They need to sort out this grey area or this thing just won’t work.

Here’s novel idea for the BBC: what if people were happy to pay? Maybe Auntie needs to consider how they can  achieve that, instead of relying on coercion, and intimidation. Maybe it’s time to live up to that lofty mantle of “Public Broadcaster” and allow the public access to its airwaves, or even allow the public onto the BBC Trust’s board. What, is that too risky? Don’t trust the public?

Let us know your thoughts below…

It’s up to you to know where you stand on this issue, but when the TV inspector comes calling, remember that you have choices.

Here’s one man exercising his… Watch:



November 9, 2012

Ben Fellows
21st Century Wire
Guest Columnist

Here’s how it’s played out: David Cameron got ‘carried away’ with ‘fluffy’ issues after becoming Tory leader, neglecting voters’ key concerns, one of his closest advisers said last night after getting the phone call from his Bilderberg masters.

It might be a surprise to members of the public why Planning Minister Nick Boles is suddenly coming out – in a bid to oust David Cameron as party leader; as Mr Cameron struggles to get to grips with the complex issue of paedophiles within politics.

The Planning Minister said the modernisers who seized control of the party in 2005 had become ‘overly obsessed’ with impressing Oxbridge-educated professionals while neglecting Britain’s ‘hard-working strivers’. Isn’t that just what the doctor ordered, someone who appears to speak utter sense making the British public feel that at least this guy gets it, but does he? Or was he told what to say in a private conversation with Bilderbergers last night and given the green light to begin the coup on the Tory Party leadership after Cameron’s latest “gay” paedophile gaffe with Philip Schofield on live national TV?

And by the way, Mr Cameron, what exactly did you mean by a “gay” witch-hunt in Whitehall?

Just for the record – being gay does not mean you are a paedophile. You cannot equate that depraved behaviour with homosexuality. Perhaps someone should tell this to the Cabinet Office and Prime Minister David Cameron after the Cabinet Office wrote to blogs in the past couple of weeks threatening to sue over my allegations.

My accusations involving an incident where *********************(redacted) Ian Greer’s office – are matter of fact, as far as I’m concerned. Yet, the Cabinet Office saw fit to send emails to blogs protesting that ********(redacted)  ‘wasn’t gay, so therefore he couldn’t be a paedophile’. To be clear, I have never accused any government minister of being gay – I could not care less about his or any other person’s sexuality. But I did make accusations of gross misconduct. This just demonstrates the government’s general ignorant belief that to be a paedophile you have to be gay, which of course, simply diluting the debate by introducing the gay card – in order to escape the reality that paedphilia is a social disease which afflicts all sectors – as well as straight men and women. Shame on you all!

What’s coming for David Cameron, as if he didn’t know, and sooner than he could have imagined is a vote of “No Confidence” within the Tory Party. David Cameron like Margaret Thatcher before him will be replaced  – but by whom?

Clearly it’s now time for Nick Boles to come forward as the next government leader after attending the Bilderberg Meeting this year introduced by Minister Without Portfolio Kenneth Clarke.

Kenneth Clarke is a senior Bilderberg member and attends on a regular basis introducing the next Prime Minister or party leader. Reports from within Bilderberg say that new leaders are introduced to the cartel by having to serve high profile members drinks, as well as open doors etc. Both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were summoned to attend in this capacity before they were anointed by their respective parties to lead. David Cameron attended before his premiership as it seems to be part of the grooming process. To be accepted you need to demonstrate that you are willing to humiliate yourself in front of people like luminaries like Henry Kissenger et al.

The Jimmy Savile paedophile abuse scandal, the Lord McAlpine incident, and the rest, seems to be proving too much for David Cameron – and after his latest ‘all paedophiles are gay’ gaffe on ITV yesterday – it looks like enter stage left… for Nick Boles, right on cue.

Question: do we really want to be led by anyone who attends clandestine meetings with the world’s power brokers who decide ours and the world’s fate each year – laid out in the annual Bilderberg agenda? From orchestrating the economic global collapse, to the depopulation – in order to save the planet (of course), or inching the west towards a World War 3 situation.  Bilderberg does it all, in the name of progress, moving us ever closer towards a global, One World Government, which they themselves often refer to as, The New World Order.

What is all this Bilderberg nonsense about?

Bilderberg takes its name from the hotel in Holland where the first meeting took place in May 1954. That pioneering meeting grew out of the concern expressed by leading citizens on both sides of the Atlantic that Western Europe and North America were not working together as closely as they should on common problems of critical importance. It was felt that regular, off-the-record discussions would help create a better understanding of the complex forces and major trends affecting western nations in the difficult post-war period. Sounds good right? No, for example it is illegal for American politicians to attend as it violates what is called the Logan Act.

The Logan Act is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorised citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994. Violation of the Logan Act is a felony punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years. However, no one who attends from the United States government ever gets arrested; just journalists and protesters who stand in the cold attempting to hold to account world’s politicians and expose this most vile of world institutions.

The Bilderbergers are people who say they are helping humanity just so they can make billions. They appear in the shadows, as arrogant as Lucifer and no more sympathetic than he is towards mankind. They live under the “golden rule” – whoever has the gold makes the rules. Rockefeller himself admitted they are conspiring against the best interests of the Unites States to form a one world government. A surveillance led global totalitarian regime which is a mixture of fascism and communism rolled into one.

The Bilderberg Group is much more than just a social club. It has played a major role in shaping the direction of the world since it was created in 1954. The Bilderberg Group created the European Union and the euro. This year efforts to save the euro are rumoured to be high on the agenda.

Past Bilderberg attendees have included Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Prince Charles, David Cameron, Tony Blair, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Angela Merkel, Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Rick Perry, David Rockefeller, Herman van Rompuy, Jean-Claude Trichet, Jeff Bezos, Chris R. Hughes, Eric Schmidt, Craig J. Mundie, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Richard Perle, Paul Volcker, Lawrence Summers, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

This year they welcomed all the way from the United Kingdom to Chantilly Virginia, where this Lord Peter Mandelson, John Micklethwait – editor and chief of the Economist, Gideon Rachman from the Financial Times, Martin H. Wolf from the Financial Times, Peter Voser – CEO Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Marcus Agius – Chairman Barclays Plc and former BBC Trust Board of Directors, Kenneth Clarke – Cabinet Minister without portfolio and, drum role please… future Tory Party leader Nick Boles.

David Cameron could well do an IDS, and be ousted very soon for Nick Boles to take over the Tory party leadership.

Will it be Boles?? Just remember, you heard it here first.







David Cameron just doesn’t get it – the police and judiciary are part of UK abuse problem

November 9, 2012

Full public inquiry and special commission must happen now

Peter Sterry
21st Century Wire

As the rippling waves emanating from the cesspool that is Sir Jimmy Savile’s legacy break on the shores of the British establishment, it is becoming increasingly clear how the establishment is attempting once again to protect its own.

In response both to Tom Watson’s questioning in the House of Commons – and the fabulous impromptu exposure by Philip Schofield (an event surely set to become legendary in television history) British Prime Minister David Cameron’s singular response is that anyone with any evidence should go to the Police, regardless of how powerful the accused may be. Is Cameron aware that multiple victims in the North Wales inquiry names the same high ranking Tory politician, and in at least one case, the police deemed their testimony as “fantasy”? For a Prime Minister, it is a breathtakingly, though probably deliberately naive approach. It feels like a government’s greasy denial that paedophiles are operating in positions of power. North Wales abuse victim Steve Messham testified that his life was threatened by his abuser, which is a common intimidation tactic seen in many abuse cases. Death threats change the playing field considerably.

Cameron: confused, or just waiting to pass the buck on?

So where exactly is David Cameron suggesting survivors take their evidence ? The serving police officers referred to by some of those abuse at the hellish Bryn Estin in North Wales? Or is the Prime Minister proposing just walking in to your local cop shop ( if you can still find one of course, given the aggressive programme of police station closure now being implemented by Cameron’s government) and saying “Hey! I was raped by ********* twenty years ago”?

Sensitive matters such as child rape require sensitive solutions. Cameron’s response is not only inadequate, it is simultaneously ignorant, insulting and ludicrous. Lest anyone has missed it, serving police officers and members of the judiciary are among those named by Bryn Estyn victims. It is increasingly clear that the original inquiry was a cover-up, and let us not forget the Masonic connection.

The Waterhouse Tribunal set the tone for its approach to freemasonry right from day one.

In the very first session the barrister for one of the groups of former residents of care homes made an application about masonry. The barrister, Nick Booth, asked that “the Tribunal should keep a register of the masonic membership amongst its staff, the members, its representatives and witnesses who appear before it”. He explained: “The duty of loyalty to a brother mason and his duty of impartiality if he is involved in the administration of justice is not a new one and it’s one that’s very much in the public eye, particularly at the moment.”

“The Tribunal will be aware of the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee which is investigating the issue,” he added. “Sir, I stress, if I have not stressed it before, that I am not making any suggestion of disreputable conduct, merely to put the matter beyond the reach of any possible public comment which might undermine the public confidence in the Inquiry.”

Sir Ronald Waterhouse, who chaired the Tribunal, felt that the application was a slur on the integrity of the Tribunal’s staff.

The chairman of the Tribunal, Sir Ronald Waterhouse, and the two other members of the Tribunal, retired for a brief adjournment.

“It will not surprise you that the application is refused,” said Sir Ronald on their return. “As far as the staff are concerned,” Sir Ronald said, “in so far as the application carries any reflection upon the integrity of the staff of the Tribunal it’s repudiated, wholly unwarranted; there is no evidence whatsoever to support any suggestion that they have not acted with complete integrity… ”

“The members of the Tribunal are in this position: the Tribunal was set up by Parliament and the members of it were appointed by the Secretary of State for Wales and the [criticism of the composition] should be addressed through the proper channels.”

He said that the Tribunal’s own Counsel, Gerard Elias QC, was appointed by the Attorney General. “Any criticism … should be addressed through the usual Parliamentary channels,” he suggested.

Gerard Elias said nothing during Booth’s application and he remained silent after Sir Ronald had made the Tribunal’s ruling.

Gerard Elias QC. Leading counsel to Tribunal kept silent on discussion about a register of freemasons. He himself is a freemason…

Yet both Sir Ronald and Gerard Elias knew something that journalists reporting on the Tribunal would have wanted to know.

Gerard Elias is a mason. He’s a member of perhaps the most powerful masonic lodge in Wales, Dinas Llandaf. The lodge, which meets in Cardiff, is made up mainly of legal professionals and members of the Conservative party, although there are members from other political groups. This in and of itself is not a problem, but there is a problem if fellow members have an oath of loyalty to each other which supersedes their oath to uphold law and conduct due diligence in any proper investigation into organised crime.

British ‘Justice’ done in the dark

Imagine a mafia trial where the prosecution and the defense had members of the mafia embedded in key positions. What would be the chances of full disclosure?

We have to ask ourselves, is it possible to have an investigation free from private allegiances stemming from Masonic interference? The British people will demand both a full public enquiry  into the extent of child abuse , rape and murder in Britain both past and present, and a new independent Police investigation with a remit to arrest and prosecute, headed by officers prepared to DECLARE PUBLICLY that they are members of any secret society.

David Cameron can do this now, and retain some personal integrity, or wait until his hand is forced, and retain none.




November 8, 2012

By Peter Sterry
21st Century Wire

Ivory towers have never been built so high, and the public kept so removed, as it has with the BBC.

Explaining things to the public is, theoretically, one of the BBC’s principal tasks, but its principle executives have found it impossible to do so when it comes to issue of institutional paedophilia.

While the focus of media attention has rightly moved to the widening investigations into child abuse in government and public institutions, and away from Sir Jimmy Savile, the national broadcaster still remains at the forefront of the issue.

Few are in any doubt that their handling of the subject has been an abject failure, and still refuses to grasp the enormity of the issues.

Even former Director General Greg Dyke called the BBC’s handling of the past four weeks as “pretty disastrous”. Dyke adds, “They let the speculation go on for too long. And then, of course, more and more came out, so it got harder to deal with. The idea that they didn’t show Newsnight’s investigation because of [he affects a sneering tone] ‘editorial reasons’ is very weak. Explain your reasons to the public. That’s important.”

You’d be smug too if you were paid a fortune to do nothing.

At the time of the Newsnight investigation into Sir Jimmy Savile’s activities, the man in the top job at the Beeb was Mark Thompson, now CEO of The New York Times. In common with many of his erstwhile senior BBC colleagues and even his successor in the top job, George Entwistle, Thompson has struggled to get his own story straight.

What Thompson Knew

In the BBC’s grand structure, the director general is both the CEO and editor-in-chief, so editorially controversial matters eventually find their way to him (yes, up to now it has always been a ‘him’). Firstly, Thompson said he knew nothing at all about Newsnight’s Savile story. Then he admitted he might have been generally aware of it, and that it involved allegations of child abuse. Then he agreed that he’d been told of it specifically by a BBC journalist at a drinks party and had subsequently asked senior news managers about it. By then, he says, they told him the investigation had been called off for ‘editorial reasons’. This is not over yet – since the full story of what actually happened and who knew what – has yet to be told, but already the reader’s editor is wondering out loud whether Thompson is fit for any such job. Not only has he changed his story three times already, but is openly intent on avoiding responsibility and passing this most unwelcome buck as quickly and as far as possible. Were he still at the BBC helm, he would surely be under enormous pressure to resign.

Was Entwistle promoted to the BBC’s top job as a result of his own aiding and abetting in the Savile Newsnight cover-up as Director of Programming, while Thompson is swiftly moved safely off shore? We are constantly told that corrupt executives are often promoted to their own level of incompetence, but could this be an actual case of top dogs being promoted for loyally playing a role in a cover-up?

Sir Jimmy was a BBC asset, and was protected throughout his career by men like Thompson.

The crisis is not confined to Mark Thompson’s career as a highly paid media executive. The BBC initially maintained in advance of the ITV documentary – and knowing the thrust of its allegations about Savile’s activities – that it had searched its archives and found no evidence of complaints about Savile and therefore that there was no case for further action. However, once the scale of alleged abuse started to become clear, that line simply couldn’t hold, and the BBC said it would hold its own Savile enquiry as soon as police enquiries were complete.

As for the Newsnight decision, the BBC said there was simply no case for questioning the editor’s original decision to drop the investigation. That line didn’t hold either and within two weeks the BBC had been forced to announce two major internal inquiries – into Savile, and the Newsnight decision – and a third into sexual harassment more generally at the corporation. We’re getting the picture that there could be an institutional disease at the Beeb.

The Casting Couch

Though I never worked at the BBC, I was at the other side of television, at ITV, in younger days where sexual harassment was a standing dish and the casting couch was very much in operation. Unfortunately for me, the casting couch of a gay nature, and it was made quite clear to me and colleagues, that rapid advancement up one greasy pole was entirely dependent on embracing another. I would be very surprised if it was any different at the BBC (many staff including senior management flit between the two), where promotion has always been based on who you know – in the biblical sense. Former child actor Ben Fellows went a long way to detail the depths to which older BBC employee regularly sink in order to secure sexual relationships with younger employees or actors. Savile was merely the very filthy end of that particular professional pole.

For the time being, it looks as though by announcing these inquiries, the BBC has skillfully kicked this and all other issues into the high weeds, to be retrieved at any unspecified time in the future. When these inquiries finally report, senior managers will have calculated that the furore will have died down considerably and there will be much wringing of hands and perhaps a sacrificial lamb, most likely an ex-BBC employee, or even better, one which is already deceased.

The BBC, the Vatican and the Mafia

Sir Jimmy was the BBC’s envoy to the Vatican, two very similar organisations.

Such is the self-regarding nature of the BBC, which reminds one of the Vatican announcing its own ‘internal inquiry’ into protecting its child abusing priests. Come to think of it, there are numerous parallels between the BBC and the Vatican – both are rich, haughty, sanctimonious monoliths, presided over by self-elected elites, and both are institutional protectors of child abuse masquerading as venerable bastions of decency. In fact, both these institutions celebrated and honoured Sir Jimmy Savile. It seems that the myths of their own infallibility have blinded them  to their own failings and the reality of the world they live in. But though the Vatican does like to enrich itself at the expense of the congregation, the BBC’s business model is much closer to that of that other infamous Italian racket, the mafia.

Above all, the Savile affair has reminded us once again that like the mafia, the BBC serves itself above all others. As it goes, the British public are still mostly unaware that the BBC had flogged its TV license collection business to a private company called Capita Ltd.

Like the mafia, the BBC see the general public as a resource to be extorted, they are there to pay for whatever the BBC decides it wants. Currently, the BBC’s level of public accountability is represented by us writing to ‘Feedback on Radio 4’, or their illustrious Board of Governors. If we are lucky, someone may deign to tell us why we are wrong. Just like mafia, non-payers are dealt with severely, Godfathers and Director Generals alike send heavies round to the front door of anyone daring to challenge their racket to threaten them that if they don’t pay now, they will have to pay a great deal more very soon. The BBC sold off their TV License business years ago, but kept it a rather hush hush affair, for fear that the public would eventually realize that the man coming to your door, insisting to come into your home to look around, and then threatening you with a fine or imprisonment if you cannot pay him a £160 license fee. British citizens should note here that when a private limited company comes to your door and demands money, that’s solicitation, which is technically illegal.

The flagrant disregard for Savile’s activities shown by the BBC is the same sheer arrogance that allows the corporation to extort its so called “licence fee” regardless of one’s income or our desire to consume a relatively mediocre product (with an exception of their nature and gardening programmes, still top notch).

Where the Mafia offer violence, the BBC threaten jail. Both have the solemn code of Omerta, silence in the face of accusation or criticism.

It is the very same arrogance that pulled the Newsnight story about their protected asset Savile, in favour of broadcasting more gushing, hagiographic tributes to Britain’s most prolific paedophile and a serial rapist.

It is the same arrogance that in spite of being a so called public broadcaster, means it is a closed shop, with no public access to its airwaves and all programming handed down from on high. Given its topicality, a real public service broadcaster should have enough backbone to screen a piece like “Sun, Sea and Satan”, British filmmaker Bill Maloney’s gruesome investigation into the appalling goings on at one of Savile’s favourite haunts, the notorious Haut La Garenne children’s home in Jersey, but not the BBC. There is not a cat in hell’s chance anything remotely controversial will ever appear on its screens, or anything that isn’t produced by one of its own perfectly groomed team.

It is the same arrogance, in this case with its extorted loot, that means Beeb thinks its perfectly okay to stuff great chunks of that same loot into the pockets of its cosy club of senior management, and often rude presenters and retired soccer players.

Alan Hansen: another over-inflated BBC celebrity, and not even smarter on footy than any bloke at your local pub.

The soccer pundits are a case in point. The lumpen salaries paid to football players still playing the game are justified by their unique skill on the pitch and the role they play securing the club honours and are paid largely by the huge television fees generated by the game worldwide. But once they have left the field of play, these men are no more skilled than the next man in the queue for a mug of Bovril and a meat pie. So why exactly is Alan Hansen paid £20K a week to say “shocking defending” and “unbelievable” every Saturday night? Why should impoverished pensioners, or any of us for that matter, be forced by law to make involuntary contributions to the BBC and Capita Ltd, in order to pad his and other millionaires’ pension funds ? There are hundreds of former soccer players, and I have no doubt I could find many who would give equally incisive and probably far whittier commentaries than the ex-Liverpool centre half at a tiny fraction of the cost, but the BBC likes to keep the self-inflated balloon of its own hyperbole afloat at all costs, particularly where jaw dropping salaries are concerned.

The BBC maintains a view of itself and its “stars” entirely divorced from reality, and nothing must be allowed to puncture this mythos, lest some of the hot air that keeps it afloat should seep out. The Savile affair has punctured their zeppelin sized balloon of hubris from which the good ship BBC is suspended, and now its heading back to earth.

Auntie, as she likes to be known, is fact a hideous old crone whose final demise is long overdue.