Friday, 4 September 2015


1. I would like to concur with your assessment Jacqui, with this proviso: I believe the reason so much covert effort has been ploughed into this case to discredit it and its protagonists, is that it is a 'wormhole' into a much deeper and darker world that has the potential to undermine the very foundations of the British political consensus and power structure. Hampstead is dangerous because it is an outcrop of a vein that runs underground that may lead to a lode that is both poisonous and explosive. It brings to the surface connected themes, some with literally murderous consequences, that have remained buried for over thirty years, and are now being slowly but irresistibly exposed. One of the reasons Hampstead is being 'buried' is that it destroys the only two 'fig leaves' left to government: that 'Satanism' and its practices in Britain is a figment of the imagination; and that all child sexual abuse is 'historic'.

2. Not only is it not historic, it proves that it is alive and well and operating in one of the most affluent and well connected areas of the Capital. The complete failure of the investigative, prosecuting and judicial systems to meet the challenge, indeed to misrepresent and occlude them, can only be interpreted as complicity at the highest political and social levels. The state cannot avoid the charge that it is part and parcel of refusing to deal properly with one of the most extreme cases of alleged child abuse ever to come to the surface. It may have done so in the mistaken belief it was protecting its reputation. However in acting the way it has it has ensured the exact opposite. It is now deeply mired in the opprobrium of the acts themselves and it is difficult to see how it will now extricate itself except by more attempts at secrecy, cover-up and persecution of those who have attempted to bring matters to light.

3. As always, and in this case the 'Hoaxstead' web site, ably supported by elements of mainstream media, obviously working at the behest of organs of government itself, have attempted to portray the defenders of the children as fantasists and 'conspiracy theorists', even deluded abusers themselves as the Judge prognosticated without any evidence. (She used the same injudicial approach to blame the mother and exonerate the father and others, quite contrary to the factual evidence known then or subsequently uncovered) This is a well-tried and proven device by government to rubbish fact-based examination and critique, we just don't expect it from High Court Judges, where we still wish to believe truth and justice reside. This case has certainly run a coach and horses through that misnomer.

4. The unpalatable truth that this case reveals, and is but the latest of many examples, is that within government itself there are elements that by virtue of their actions and purpose, are unable to reveal themselves, prepared to engineer events to secure ends contrary to all right-thinking citizens wishes, indeed even to commit crimes up to and including murder to achieve their ends. This is the greater scandal that is gradually being revealed in all its ugliness and which has the power to bring down the whole political 'pack of cards'. It is impossible to view Hampstead except in the light of all the other similar cases (too numerous to list here) and wider 'terrorist' narrative and particularly the events of 9/11 (E) and 7/7 (D). It is part of the reason why almost all of the political class and media has been running scared of the candidacy of Jeremy Corbyn in the Labour Party Leadership campaign, and indeed why he has had such enthusiastic - even we may say 'messianic' - support from the public wherever he goes. It is a sign that the public is heartily sick of a rotten system, of which Hampstead is clearly a part.

5. The Murdoch and other media empires have done their best to find anything they can to destroy Corbyns chances of winning. A recent one was highlighting a remark of his that the killing of a person claimed to be 'Osama bin Laden' was a 'tragedy' because it undermined democratic principles of justice and fair trial.  Let no one doubt that the killing of someone at Abbotabad WAS a tragedy, not only for whoever was killed, and the principle of fair trial but also for truth generally. Mind you when you have piled lie upon lie upon lie and fed it to the world for more than a decade, what is one more untruth to add to the pyre?

6. In this connection, as to the actions (or inactions) of our secret security services a proper, independent, searching and swift inquiry is still required into the small but related matter of the death of a certain Mr Kelly, the London Tube Bombing of 7/7 (the relatives of the bereaved are still waiting) (D) and the suspicious death of Gareth Williams employed by MI6 at the time (2010) And whilst they are at it they might like to throw in the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher (1984), the downing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, incorrectly blamed on Gaddafi of course, the apparent suicide of Stephen Milligan in 1994, the Chevaline Al Hilli killings, etc! not to mention all the recent strange events in which we are implicated if only by virtue of not objecting to the lies put out about them. We could in fact set up a permanent department of inquiries. Perhaps this will be one of Jeremy Corbyn's first acts on appointment? (In this regard a current civil case of MI6 involvement in N. Ireland is instructive. (F))

7. I wonder if the (necessarily) secret MI6 and its principals (and principles for that matter!) get the attention they deserve?

8. Sir Richard Dearlove (A) was head of MI6 between 1999 and 2004, and Sir John Scarlett (B) was chairman of the joint intelligence committee from 2001 to 2004 and thereafter to 2009, head of Service. They are therefore both in highly influential and central roles during the critical period. Both have given evidence to Chilcott. Although both have semi-public C.V.'s, their actual involvement and influence, is shrouded, particularly as it relates to the co-ordination with other agencies and the extent to which it was known the stated causes for action were flimsy or false. This observation applies even more to their colleagues and employees of the organisation, who beside a couple of whistle-blowers, are not heard from at all.

9. Both Dearlove and Scarlett have had long and glittering careers in the Security Service, the former at one stage head of the Washington Station and Scarlett head of the Moscow one. On the face of it, it appears there may have been a degree of tension between the two figures based upon Scarlett's close working relationship with Alastair Campbell on the disputed "sexed-up" and fraudulent "dossier", on which so much reliance was placed. Sir Richard is on record as telling ministers in July 2002, that in the US "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" by which we may assume he thought the same was happening here. He has apparently written a book on the subject that he proposes to publish (if the government lets him!) after Chilcott reports, which might or might not be another contributory factor to the delay in publication. He is also on record as thinking the Muslim terrorist threat has been over-stated and counter-productive in security terms.

10. Meanwhile Sir John, now a Director of Times Newspapers, was reported by the Guardian in 2011 as stating in a memo to Tony Blair's advisors at the time, "the benefit of obscuring the fact that in terms of WMD Iraq is not that exceptional". Of course this rather infers that the story told to the public to justify invasion, was at the time, known to be either unreliable or false. (C)

11. Of course Corbyn is not alone in his assessment, which errs on the side of caution, for even now it is a dangerous thing to challenge the approved narrative of 9/11 onwards. How could he forget the fate of Robin Cook and many others who were brave enough to do so? (1)

12. Only a couple of months ago the story of Bin Laden was challenged authoritatively by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, who claimed on the back of reliable sources that "the White House and CIA repeatedly lied to the public about nearly every aspect of the bin Laden raid.” (2) Indeed many would go much further and claim that the whole Al Qaeda scenario surrounding the events of 9/11 and others is a pack of lies from start to finish and that the evidence for this is overwhelming. (3)

13. Yet still the American and British governments deny it, and no other country except perhaps Russia and Malaysia are brave enough to stand up and say so, virtually ignored by western media outlets, and look what has happened to them. (4)
Nor should we forget that the target killed on that day was not the only one to die. That many Navy Seals that took part lost their lives then and subsequently in August 2011 when 22 of Seal Team 6 were shot down in Afghanistan under suspicious circumstances that have never been properly explained. (5)

14. Now factor in the possibility that the target was not even the real Osama, who only weeks before 9/11 was being treated in an U.S. military hospital and who it is claimed died in 2001, having had nothing to do with the attacks on America. (6 & 7)
The reason why Corbyn himself is under attack, simply because a lot more than the future of the Labour Party rests on any attempt even to hint at exploding the myth that is 'Al Qaeda' and Osama bin Laden's part in it.

15. So to return to the subject of the Hampstead case, I would contend it must be viewed in the context of wider and deeper deceit and corruption that is in fact interconnected with strands that run into high finance, the media, the entertainment industry, the BBC and government itself, all centred around international policy objectives, with Israel and the middle east at its philosophical and geographical centre. In this regard at least, despite all the momentous and insignificant events that have occurred in the intervening period, nothing much has changed since the creation of the Mappa Mundi in c.1300. end.


(C) This talk by Annie Machon to the Cambridge Union in 2011 is also very revealing.
(D) For the deception concerning the events of 7/7 see
(E) For the deception around 9/11 see

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.