Sunday, 6 March 2016

Ex-MI6 Officer Spills the 'Beans'

Saturday, 5 March 2016

Andrea Davison exposes more about UK corruption and child abuse cover-up in her new Statement

Problem with justice in the UK is that the bad people can choose the Judge and so many judges are corrupt. So it's all too simple to set-up

All this is funded by you the Tax Payer.   Its time to stop the Legal Professionals gravy train ! 

Below is the new Statement of Andrea Davison 


In this statement I deal more specifically with UK CSAPT mandate described as   ‘dealing specifically with complicity/cover up or failure by the police (anywhere in the UK) and perpetration/complicity/cover-up by MPs.’

This Statement aims to shed some light on the machinations of a group of VIP privileged criminals and a lower network who rape, torture and murder children in the United Kingdom. The top level of this group held and or hold key positions in the United Kingdom.  From their senior positions within the Establishment they have successfully subverted the Justice System, the Intelligence and Security systems and Parliament itself to protect themselves.  Their powerful positions allowed them to continue to rape, torture and murder children for pleasure and profit.  Whilst the perpetrators are few, those who have aided and abetted them to cover-up these monstrous crimes are legion

The criminal cabal members have included Prime Ministers, Home Secretaries, Ministers, Judges senior and minor, Queens Councils, senior Police officers, senior Security and Intelligence officers.  All backed by a proliferation of civil servants who obey their edicts.  Promotion was guaranteed to anyone who actively supported the Cabal and it is because of this that those the cabal trusted rose up through the ranks to be placed in key positions. Whistle-blowers on the other hand are anathema, to be ruthlessly persecuted and ruined using the power and resources of the State.  Whilst the public purse has borne all the costs. 

The decades of cover-up must be laid bare and those who have profited from it removed from office, otherwise nothing will change and children will remain at risk.  

The full extensive submission to the UK Child Sex Abuse People's Tribunal (CSAPT*) can be read here

*The UKCSAPT is an independent movement that has been set up by child sex abuse survivors and and their supporters. See:

The truth behind the child abuse cover-ups

The report that first exposed child abuse in North Wales care homes has finally been published. But, says Eileen Fairweather, damning details have still been left out

Seventeen years ago, a nervous-sounding woman rang and asked me to publicise a top-secret report. She was not the whistleblower, she explained, but a go-between. She would not give me her name: “It’s safer if you don’t know.”
That secret report revealed the extensive rape and savage beating of countless children in North Wales children’s homes. It was titled “Child Abuse: An independent investigation commissioned by Clwyd County Council, period 1974-1995”. Last week, John Jillings’s report on the Clwyd scandal was finally published. But Flintshire county council – successor to Clwyd – has heavily censored it. I dug out the original and discovered, unsurprisingly, that the cover-up continues.
The cloak-and-dagger way I obtained the redacted report speaks volumes about how those struggling to expose Britain’s child abuse rings were intimidated and derided. Few then believed children’s allegations that people in power, including politicians and senior police, were involved. I was myself incredulous when first asked in 1990 to investigate a social worker. Weren’t care professionals all kind?
It was a baptism by fire, as one investigation rapidly led to another, and I realised that paedophiles had comprehensively infiltrated Britain’s children’s homes since the 1970s.
Back in 1996, only a handful of local politicians and officials were allowed a copy of Jillings’s report. They were told – by police, insurers and the council – that they risked their careers, arrest and being personally sued if a word reached the media. The uncensored Jillings report includes these chilling threats.
Every report had a number, imprinted as a large watermark on every page. Any journalist who quoted it would supposedly be ordered by the courts to produce their copy or photocopy or face jail, and the watermark would expose their source.
My caller said apologetically I must write out the report by hand. I was also told to share it widely with other reporters. Journalists need exclusives, but the rationale was sound: “If all the media cover this, there won’t be a witch-hunt.”
I collected the report from a safe 'drop’ point. It took me three exhausting days, holed up alone in a poky room in a B&B, to scribble out hundreds of pages. I fed to different newspapers and broadcasters different extracts suggested by my source. I only produced one article, and later a programme for HTV, under my name.
At least one paper and a news channel independently acquired the report: clearly, others whistle-blew. The coverage was widespread, and the whistleblowers’ drip-feed strategy worked: no one was arrested or sued.
Clamour mounted, and the Government announced a public inquiry. Yet surely, no further inquiries were needed: instead, police could have acted on the evidence already given to them by hundreds of victims and concerned staff, kicked-in doors and arrested suspected perpetrators.
The late judge, Sir Ronald Waterhouse, took evidence over three years, and in 2000 produced a report, “Lost in Care”. His tribunal had cost millions and ultimately achieved little, other than fat fees for lawyers. It amplified the horrors described by Jillings but it did not lead to arrests or managers being disciplined or struck off.
Jillings – the retired former director of Derbyshire social services – and his team, Prof Jane Tunstall and Gerrilyn Smith, had been commissioned after several former workers at Clwyd care homes were prosecuted in the early 1990s for abuse. But victims described many more abusers, and alleged organised child prostitution.
Last autumn Rod Richards – a former Welsh Conservatives leader, who has recently joined UKIP – revealed that the late Sir Peter Morrison MP, a close aide to Mrs Thatcher, was implicated in the North Wales care scandal. Did this limit the political will to act?
Flintshire county council says it has redacted much of the Jillings Report on the advice of Operation Pallial, which in April confirmed it is examining 76 new allegations of abuse in 18 North Wales care homes between 1963 and 1992.
North Wales Chief Constable Mark Polin has warned abusers: “If you believe that the passage of time will reduce the resolve of Operation Pallial or any police force to identify people still alive who have caused harm to others and bring them to justice, you are sorely mistaken. Offenders should quite rightly have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives.”
Mrs Justice Macur is also examining the evidence excluded from the Waterhouse inquiry. Following a key arrest, I am cautiously hopeful that, this time, police mean business.
The authorities had issued such stern libel threats to Jillings’s panel that it only named a few of the accused staff who were allowed to resign unpunished. But he exposed the excuses of the jobsworths who allowed sadists to control these terrible homes. This is the real censored dynamite in the report.
The whited-out paragraphs in the redacted version help minimise the breathtaking incompetence and laziness of ''the suits’’ – those in the Welsh Office, the Social Services Inspectorate, the local council and welfare directors.
Some cuts are not even indicated. Jillings wrote that one Bryn Estyn boss – allowed to take early retirement following grave concerns – caned children “despite Welsh Office guidance to the contrary”. In the redacted version, at section 8.6.4, the key words “Welsh Office” have vanished.
So many looked the other way, despite desperate children and a lone, brave social worker begging for years for action. Shamefully, the whistleblower Alison Taylor’s name is also redacted from the online version of Jillings. This heroine was sacked. But those who looked the other way were promoted, moved to senior child welfare roles elsewhere or retired on enhanced benefits – like many alleged abusers.
Jillings, in the non-redacted report, reveals that one head of a home who allegedly cruelly beat boys even had a post secured for him by Clwyd at an exotic holiday destination abroad. Might some who failed to act now be investigated for neglect or conspiracy? When does inertia become criminal?
Many children ran away, but police returned them, weeping, to their abusers. At Bryn Estyn – famously described by Jillings as “the Colditz of residential care” – one boy was crammed into a laundry basket, the lid tied shut and tossed into a swimming pool. Other children saved him from drowning.
Jillings also describes ''M’’, a 15-year-old girl. Three men were eventually convicted of unlawful sex with her at her foster home. They tied her to a wooden pole, dragged her upstairs and half-drowned her in a cold bath. Yet managers claimed the sex was consensual. The uncensored version exposes concerns that she was prostituted. Such subtle redactions make it harder for people to join the dots.
In May 1997, after the Jillings report, a key member of Clwyd’s fostering panel was imprisoned for abuse. Roger Saint had been appointed despite his known history of abuse.
Other redacted details concern Unit Five, where older boys routinely abused younger ones. It was feared that they violently “broke in” recruits for a paedophile ring. But managers said the sex was consensual.
The redacted version also conceals the fact that David John Gillison, imprisoned in 1987 for three years for gross indecency against a boy in care, was prominent in the local Campaign for Homosexual Equality. Why conceal that? Paedophiles in other child-care scandals have similarly hijacked the banner of gay rights – to the detriment of both children and ordinary, decent gay men.
I earlier exposed a similar scandal at Islington children’s homes, where paedophile staff cynically accused anyone raising concerns of “homophobia”.
The redacted version has also removed the fact that a former Bryn Estyn head was arrested for abuse but the charge dropped. Yet Mat Arnold was long dead, so why was this cut? Jillings later – seemingly randomly – mentions that Arnold died of an unspecified blood disease. Later he notes his concern that the abusers put their victims at risk of sexually related diseases. Did he fear that Arnold died of Aids – and is that still too politically incorrect to mention?
I later exposed Mark Trotter, a Hackney social worker who died of Aids after abusing boys in care. His council believed him an Aids martyr and covered up his abuse.
The real martyrs are the care children who killed themselves or died violently. Jillings lists 12. He called them R1, R2, etc, with just a few poignant lines about their deaths by hanging or falling from heights. My hand ached after I wrote out that report, and so did my heart.
I later learnt of four other abused boys who died tragically or mysteriously. I rang the secretariat of the Waterhouse tribunal and asked if it would examine the deaths of these 16 boys. The official said no and, when I asked why not, became supercilious. If they’re dead, he snapped, they can’t give evidence – can they?
I slammed down the phone and wept.
Back in 1996, my sole news story about Jillings’s report appeared in a Sunday paper. It had been severely cut. I understood why – I had focused on something key but “dry”, namely the insurers’ role in suppressing the report. But I felt I had failed these hurt children and my distress infected a weekend with old friends.
Even they seemingly thought I was exaggerating the scale of the scandal. I glumly trailed round a stately home’s garden with them and shut up. One, a psychoanalyst, wrote me a sweet, implicit apology after the Jimmy Savile revelations and said she and colleagues had since been inundated with people painfully disclosing long-hidden abuse. She thanked me for helping make the unbelievable believable.
I have sometimes thought of those who escaped the Holocaust during the war, but no one believed their stories. This has been a hard journalistic beat to tread. Yet I am not one of the victims of Britain’s holocaust of children, just a witness, a reporter. Dear God, please, this time, let us not fail them.
Eileen Fairweather is an award-winning journalist whose investigations over 20 years have helped expose several paedophile rings

The following reblogged from:

  1. In 1988, Californian therapist Pamela Hudson put these ‘key indicators’ together after having listened to oodles of children and parents:
    1. Child was molested by other children, child group sex
    2. Child was molested by adult strangers, day care workers
    3. Child reported the following types of physical or psychological abuse:
      • Reports being locked inside a ‘jail’ or cage
      • Reports telling that abusers threatened to kill their parents, siblings or pets, if they told
      • Was buried or put inside caskets, coffins, boxes
      • Was held under water
      • Was threatened with guns or knives
      • Child was injected, drugged or ‘poked’ with needles
      • Children were photographed or filmed during abuse
      • Children were tied by ropes, hung form hooks, placed in closets, spread over inverted pentagrams or inverted cross
      • Child describes abusers wearing robes, masks having candles
      • Children were forced to participate in mock marriages
      • Children were defecated and urinated upon, and forced to ingest both
      • Children observed animals tortured and killed
      • Children described being given fake operations
      • Children describe the torture and sexual assault of others or of themselves
      • Evidential medical examination: findings commensurate with sexual assault
      • Children described small children and babies being killed, carved up and eaten by participants, sometimes including themselves
      • Children report being taken away from the care provider, traveling by car, airplane, helicopter, boats or submarines
      • Children describe being taken to churches, other day care centres and graveyards for more terrorising, torture and sexual assault.

  2. truth1now
  3. You know, even if there were no legal victories at all, the fact that so many testify about these things, and that many have done so, and that their stories all harmonize and reinforce each other; that these memories also testify to many communities being cult communities and that these go back to the 1950s, and to be revealed in the 80s on to the present, without let-up, now in the thousands.
    None of this can just be wiped away and ignored. Something does not persist for over 30 years covering 50 years, and just be an anomaly or an aberration. It represents only the tip of the ice berg, such as the one that took Titanic down. Unsinkable they say it was, as it rusts on the sea bottom now. Oh, and I loved the Arnold video. Excellent touch.
    SRA is not rare, its full of detail and consistency. It largely belongs to secret government agencies who depend on Mind Control to carry out their dark missions in secure secrecy. Or at least they thought it was secure. Till MK victims started breaking down in the 80s, that is.
    NKJV) Mark 4:22 “For there is nothing hidden which will not be revealed, nor has anything been kept secret but that it should come to light. 23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”
    We have a promise from God that all will be revealed sooner or later. I think the time has come or soon will, when this will be impossible to ignore. We can only wonder at what it will bring.
    I will relate something similar. I was thrown out of Jehovah’s Witnesses, so called but they disown Hi with their wick works; in 1990. They never actually said why I was “disfellowshipped,” but I will make it clear, it was because I exposed the rape of a 17 year old female in our congregation at the time, and it was disguised (covered up) as being a mere adultery. The guy was in his early 50s. And I read a book by a former member of the governing body who got thrown out himself for dissenting opinions, heaven forbid although heaven does not forbid.
    1990. Now in 1997: Eventually the net took off and I mentioned my experience to the many other xJWs on the net and none had ever heard of such a thing among Jehovah’s Witnesses. Still nothing in 1999. But I used to say to them, given the consistent nature of Elders and their ways, that there had to be many more than what I just knew of. 2001, another report surfaces. Just one but it was a start. Then it was 2, then 3, then 10, and soon right off the hook. By 2003, thing were rockin and it just got worse.
    But 10 years went by with nothing. We have about 1 years since the videos surfaced. I first learned thru those videos. They are dear to me and so is the person or persons who might have had a hand in that selfless act, if it wasn’t just Google’s lax security and a hacker taking a ride. I only know that Google, according to what I have read, is a CIA/NSA operation with the appearance of privately owned company. The CIA has been doing this sort of thing for a long time.
    But the world does not likely have 10 years left. Maybe just 8 or 9. If a/the false messiah arrives, then we have precisely 7 years left. So I expect that the time for revealing the evil that has overtaken us is near to being revealed by none other than Jesus, son and real messiah of God, and if you don’t like “Jehovah” as his name, then try this alternate form, YHWH, which some use as it is the original Hebrew form, free of vowels as their language was.
    I believe something will happen. I do not think October 2015 came about for nothing. In that month, much happened all over the world. It sets up lots of possibilities. But maybe all those were setup so that a fire could be ignited at any time with just one match, should the Hampstead case suddenly explode.
    But regardless, its coming out and it can’t be stopped. Jesus will not have it. A door will be opened and no one will be able to shut it, kind of like my big mouth. These are exciting times we live in. And many of us hold 2 children and their equally wounded and hurt parents in great care and tenderness. None of this should ever happen to anyone. So let us rejoice in what is soon to come!
  4. Interesting post and generally on message. Looks like you were ‘de-fellowshipped’ from the ‘Jehovah Witnesses’ ‘Truth1now’ but you have retained their belief in ‘end of times’. I take an ambivalent view to such things I’m afraid. Undoubtedly mysticism and prophesy from the ancient religions have had a huge impact on the human psyche and the human world view, both for good and bad. It is perhaps the most significant single cause of the evangelical and jewish justification for the creation and expansion of the zionist state that perhaps one of the biggest scourges of our age. Whether millennial predictions are true or not – they have been believed and disappointed for more than two thousand years – the danger is that they deflect from human culpability for its actions and consequences in the world or even excusing them as merely being the unavoidable result of divine prophesy. Humans must learn to grow up and take responsibility for what it does and what it has done.
As to the forced transfer of thousands of orphans to Australia by the British authorities, where many were seriously , mistreated or abandoned, see:


  1. Devastating...we cannot rest until we fully, irrevocably expose this, prosecute the abusers and help the children even adult children heal....thanks for all you do

  2. p.s. Still can't square the Gordon Bowden stance on Andrea Davison tho.....he is so thorough.....confusing

  3. Never let leave of a healthy scepticism - from whatever quarter is, I think, a useful motto! "Fides tamen quin"? Regards, Tim.

  4. David Ike's take on Dunblane here: March 5th, 2016 at 3:23 pm
    These incidents are as intriguing as they are are tragic and even with the passage of time, remain so. It is hard to come up with a psychological explanation equal to the circumstances. Why would a man wish to inflict such carnage on innocent children? Was it to fulfill some demented fantasy, or to satisfy some vindictive grudge, or according to instructions received, or even not carried out by him but blamed on him by person or persons unknown? All of these are not beyond the realms of possibility. If as seems to be the case, Hamilton was shot TWICE in the head, it certainly raises a serious question as to how he died and by whom. And if there is a question about that, there is a question about everything. I know little or nothing about the case but know enough about others, never to necessarily take the official description or explanation at face. How and why, I ask myself, was Hamilton carrying two different weapons – a Browning pistol, plus 25 extended box type magazines, each containing 20 bullets? Was the .357 Smith and Wesson revolver in a holster that would enable him to handle the Browning revolver including changing the magazines? Is a possibility that someone else did the shooting to be blamed on Hamilton who had to be ‘neutralised’ as part of the plan, so out of the question. Knowing of the wider highly inflammatory activities of a wider network of high-profile figures that Hamilton was probably wise to, his danger and the need to get rid of him, is not hard to visualise. The subsequent treatment of the case and the unprecedented secrecy that surrounded it, tend to support such a possibility. Only a thorough and careful analysis of the facts enables certain hypotheses to be at least ruled out, one of which appears to be that Hamilton killed himself.

  5. Note parallels with other mass shootings, world-wide. Published on 2 Sep 2014
    Sandra Uttley discusses what she knows about the Dunblane murders. There was a coverup to the highest degree, from the police, and Freemasons, to Government officials. Thomas Hamilton looks like he was supplying and grooming children for his rich elite controllers. We need an open inquiry into this.

  6. Sandra Uttley's Dunblane interview continues here:

  7. In response to this video I made this observation:

    "These films are inherently unreliable if not intentionally misdirecting. As usual focus on everything OTHER than the difficult questions. They concentrate on the very understandable and moving emotional consequences for the next of kin. Post Paris, it cannot escape notice that despite the distance in time there are strange similarities. Notice the wording: Major says "What happened cannot be understood". Those were the words used by Bush and others about planes flying into the twin towers. In both cases we now know in fact it could be understood, but the explanation could not be revealed. Indeed in an unprecedented move all the documents relating to the case were by the order of Lord Cullen made secret for a century! Why? The reasons given are unconvincing. It replicates what happened in the not unrelated Holly Grieg case. There are many dubious issues that are glossed over - the fact that he set off much earlier than stated yet missed the assembly, his technical ability to cut telephone wires, the ability to carry so much ammunition into the school, a Smith and Wesson, a convenient letter to the Queen just before, the fact that he had TWO head wounds(!) - but so many accurate shots in so short a time including head shots, both technically and psychologically points to a trained killer. Hamilton might have had many defects, but those were not some of them. The unrevealed hinterland of high-level political and other contact around the topic of pornography and child abuse creates question that were never even addressed by Cullen and all emphasis was placed on perhaps largely irrelevant gun control that would not have been possible without the incident. How often have we seen these recurring in other incidents around the world? The question never posed in MSM (what a surprise) is did Hamilton in fact shoot himself, was it him that shot the children, was he in fact a 'patsy' that had to be eliminated in a military style operation with a two fold objective of removing a risk and achieving policy objectives that would otherwise be impossible?"

  8. Exaro report on the BBC 'Smith Review' here:


    "Annie Machon (born 1968) is a former MI5 intelligence officer who left the Service at the same time as David Shayler, her partner at the time, to help him blow the whistle about alleged criminality within the intelligence agencies. By doing this, they had to give up their careers, go on the run across Europe (August 1997), live in hiding for a year, and then spend the next two years in exile in Paris. They, and many of their friends, family, supporters and journalists, claim to have been intimidated, and some of them were arrested and put on trial. A death threat was announced against her on a Middle Eastern radio station."

  10. The Macur Review is an independent review, chaired by Lady Justice Macur, DBE. It's a review of Sir Ronald Waterhouse’s inquiry into the abuse of children in care in the former Gwynedd and Clwyd council areas of North Wales between 1974 and 1996.
    The Macur Review was set up by the government to:

    review the scope of the Waterhouse Inquiry, which published its report Lost in Care in February 2000
    determine whether any specific allegations of child abuse falling within the inquiry’s terms of reference were not investigated
    make recommendations to the Secretary of State for Justice and the Secretary of State for Wales, It is totally independent from the government. See:
    An inquiry that found "no evidence" of historical abuse by establishment figures in former north Wales children's homes has been backed by a review.
    Lady Justice Macur published her two-year review into the 2000 Waterhouse inquiry on Thursday.
    She said there was "no reason" to undermine its findings.
    Welsh Secretary Stephen Crabb said the government welcomed the findings but the abuse "must never be forgotten".
    Sir Ronald Waterhouse's inquiry looked into historical child abuse in care in the former Gwynedd and Clwyd council areas between between 1974 and 1996.
    It found there had been "appalling mistreatment" of children over 20 years but nothing pointed to abuse by prominent public figures.


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