What Jimmy Savile Really Did28/03/2013 12:16
If you are not following the revelations about Jimmy Savile closely and believe that he was a loaner who touched-up a few young groupies, then you have been deceived. Jimmy Savile’s actions go far beyond what you can even begin to believe: until you look at the evidence.
In this article I am going to tell you exactly how you have been deceived, why you have been deceived and why it matters to everyone in the UK.
All links in this piece open in new browser windows o allow you to read the further information in conjunction with this piece.
On 11th January 2013, the Metropolitan Police and the NSPCC published their joint report into the Operation Yewtree investigation, titled “Giving Victims A Voice”.
The problems with that report were twofold. Firstly they did not actually give all the victims a voice, only the ones who reported lower-level abuse (and considering the abuse revealed included raping mentally and physically disabled people, the high-level abuse must be, as you will learn, far, far beyond even that). It will also become clear as to why some of the worst abuse will never have been reported to the Police.
The reason for this dumbing-down through an incomplete investigation, and reporting on it, is simple. The authorities failed at all levels when it came to Savile. By limiting the horrors we, the public, find out about, the less likely it is that there will be a public outcry against those who knew about, covered-up for and participated in the abuse at all levels of our society.
The second problem is that their main conclusion was false. It was part of a cover-up. The cover-up is in place to hide from the British public one very simple fact:
Child abusers linked to Jimmy Savile go right to the top of our society and acted with the full knowledge of our Government, security services, Police, Judiciary and Press.
“Evidence” I hear you scream!
DS David Gray, who helped to lead the Savile investigation stated there was no evidence to suggest that he was part of a paedophile ring.
We are meant to belive that a man who abused children over six decades never formed close links with those who shared his sickness? We are meant to believe that a man who had the ear of Royalty, Prime Ministers and the Police was not well-connected enough to know of other paedophiles and act with them? This predatory paedophile acted alone, or at worst as part of a “loose network”.
That sounds to me like we are being deliberately led away from the truth?
Jimmy Savile’s nephew, Guy Marsden, told the press:
“Uncle Jimmy took me to his sick parties”.
In the article he goes on to say:
“A nephew of Sir Jimmy Savile yesterday told how his celebrity uncle attended ‘paedophile parties’.
Guy Marsden was just 13 when ‘Uncle Jimmy’ took him to a wealthy celebrity’s house in London in 1967 for the first of many sordid social gatherings.
Over the next 18 months, Guy and his friends went to numerous ‘parties’ where he believes men sexually abused girls and boys as young as ten. Savile was at many of these events, he said.”
“Guy said Savile sometimes arrived with a man dressed as a priest and he believed the young victims may have come from an orphanage or children’s home.”
Does that sound like a man who is not part of a high-level paedophile ring? How was he informed the parties were happening?
Surely by definition, a group of men arranging for care home children to be brought to private homes to be abused must be….a paedophile ring?
Marsden goes even further, stating:
“The group of runaways ended up in a fabulous house – believed to belong to a famous pop impresario – with a big indoor swimming pool. The celebrity home was one of the party venues.
‘At night you would get about 15 or 20 people turning up. There would be music and tables full of food, we couldn’t believe it. There was everything we needed and we just hung around.
‘At first we automatically assumed the children lived there, but we soon realised they didn’t. They would be brought there, sometimes by Uncle Jimmy, and would stay for six or seven hours until 3 or 4am. They were just little kids, boys and girls.”
Guy Marsden, an eye-witness, close to Savile and with nothing to hide, states clearly not only that a paedophile ring was active, but that “Uncle Jimmy” sometimes supplied the children.
If you had the head of operation Yewtree in front of you now, would you not ask:
“How on earth did you conclude there was no paedophile ring when there is clear witness testimony that states the complete opposite?”
But That Was Just The Tip Of What Jimmy was involved in.
For decades there were rumours of a paedophile ring operating around the town of Scarborough, as this story from the Express shows.
Recently independent investigative reporters have started uncovering the truth of what happened there. It is a story that involves a widespread knowledge amongst the local people, that was ignored due to the power of the people involved in it.
It is alleged to have involved a prominent local businessman, Peter Jaconelli, a friend of Jimmy Savile as the picture on the Express story linked to above shows. There is also evidence it was a paedophile ring that involved local government officials and members of the North Yorkshire Police. The NY Police had evidence and reports regarding the ring, Jaconelli and Savile for decades, but all investigations came to unexplained halts.
This article from the Real Whitby site, also gives evidence that Savile took children from a care home he had no jurisdiction over, for weekends away in, you guessed it, Scarborough. Jimmy used his cult of personality to take children to the abusers:
“The Sunday People article confirms that Savile took patients from the safety of a secure controlled environment at Rampton to visit his close friends Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Corrigan. The patients did not meet anyone else.
They were taken to Jaconelli at his Council offices in 1971. During the 1972 visit they met him at one of his ice cream parlours (where Jaconelli is alleged to have routinely committed sexual offences) and from which the public had been specifically excluded, thereby ensuring that there were no witnesses to what happened.
The conclusion is therefore inescapable that Savile chose to take patients from Rampton to Scarborough in preference to taking patients from Broadmoor because:
Rampton is closer to Scarborough and where the other members of Jaconelli’s ring were located.
Scarborough was Savile’s preferred place to offend because Jaconelli’s status ensured they could operate safely without fear of arrest.
The sole reason behind both trips was to move vulnerable people to Scarborough to Jaconelli.
Given the allegations against Jaconelli and Savile, the concern must be that it is highly likely that the patients were abused on both visits, possibly even in the Mayor’s Council Offices.”
Savile was no lone wolf. savile was a procurer of children for multiple high level paedophile rings, operating in Britain with the full knowledge of, and at times participation of, the people who we trust to run our country.
But Jimmy Was Not Just A Local Paedo Ring Procurer.
In 2008 the form childrens home of Haut De La Garenne on the island of Jersey was the centre of unbelievable child abuse allegations. Those allegations were so widespread and so evil that many people simply did not believe them.
The worrying thing about Haut De La Garenne is that the initial findings were suddenly criticised. The original Police chief taken off the case and the whole thing was dumbed-down and finally forgotten again. It was, in short, covered-up.
The problem is that 116 former child residents of the home, stand by what they say about the horrors that went on there. When we speak of horrors, let us be clear, we mean the rape, torture and murder of children by paedophiles.
Without going into details about the horror and cover-up of the Jersey paedophile scandal, I do want to address the Savile link to it.
In 2008 Jimmy Savile sued the Sun newspaper over pieces they had written in which the linked him to the abuse at Haut De La Garenne by claiming he visited it on many occasions.
The Sun produced photographic evidence of Savile at the home:
Savile’s response? He slapped a super-injunction on the photo, forcing the Sun to not print it.
So Savile lied. He had visited Haut De La Garenne. Children from the home state he visited on MANY occasions. Even the head of the Police investigation, removed when the revelations about human remains came to light was reported as saying:
“The former head of the Jersey child abuse investigation has said he now suspects that Sir Jimmy Savile was implicated in the Haut de la Garenne children’s home abuse scandal.”
It was also revealed that:
“A solicitor who acted for victims of child abuse in Jersey also told the Guardian that some former Haut de la Garenne residents, both women and men, now claim they were assaulted by Savile in the 1970s.
Alan Collins, a solicitor for several Haut de la Garenne victims, said “a handful” of former residents have now made abuse allegations about Savile. He said Savile’s name was mentioned several times during the police investigation of 2008 but that the evidence did not seem to stack up at the time.”
We are going to go down the rabbit hole a bit deeper now in relation to Jersey, so you can see the implications of what Jimmy Savile was part of. As you have already seen he was evidently a procurer of children for paedophile rings.
This excerpt is from the now defunct News of the World:
“The youngsters were told by care staff the boat rides were treats—only to be assaulted and RAPED at sea by pervert toffs.
Details of the sick attacks emerged as we discovered even more blood has been found in a bath in the dungeon underneath the Haut de la Garenne home—and in the drains. And our reporters have been told how builders on renovations at the home were urged by staff to BURN any bones they dug up.
We also uncover the full extent of the dark forces of corruption hampering the police investigation. We can reveal worried cops feel under so much pressure over the abuse allegations they are preparing to BYPASS Jersey’s own legal system and hand their evidence to our government.
This could include files on up to seven social workers and carers who worked at the sinister home—including one nicknamed the ‘pinball wizard’ who HURLED kids against the walls to see how far they would BOUNCE. At least two previous senior employees of children’s services on the island are also under investigation despite the attempts of corrupt former policemen, politicians and businessmen to scupper the inquiry.
We understand that two weeks ago Jersey ministers SECRETLY VOTED to have senior police investigator Lenny Harper removed from the case because they believed he was too open with the media. But the Chief of Police Graham Power refused.
One of the most serious lines of inquiry in the investigation is that children were regularly loaned to wealthy yachtsmen to “do with them what they chose for the day,” according to our source close to the investigation.
“Haut de la Garenne staff described the trips as a treat for children who spent long hours cooped up at the home. But in reality the kids were subjected to the vilest sexual abuse on board the luxury boats.
“Our source said: “The allegations about the yachting community have come in from a number of different people…”
I will go no further than to state that one of the people who regularly sailed around Jersey was The then Prime Minister Edward Heath.
Bearing in mind what you have read so far and will read from this point on, can you begin to see the implications of what Jimmy Savile may have been involved in, and see reasons why the Government and security services would suppress the truth?
The Glass Elevator Smashes Through The Roof.
In the late 1980′s Prince Charles and Diana were having, as we all know, some pretty fundamental marriage problems.
Who did they turn to for assistance? Jimmy Savile. It is incredible, but true. The piece just linked to gives an overview of the story, but you have to look BEYOND what is written to see the reality. This is not a story about Jimmy’s inappropriate behaviour at St James’ Palace, you have to ask: why was he allowed to wander around?
“Savile is understood to have visited Prince Charles’s official London residence several times in the late 1980s when he was acting as a kind of marriage counsellor between Charles and Princess Diana. A spokesman for the Prince of Wales confirmed the prince and Savile formed a relationship in the late 1970s after coming together through their work with wheelchair sports charities. Charles led tributes to Savile when he died a year ago.”
So we have clear confirmation that Savile talked intimately to Charles and Diana. We see that he was also a confirmed friend of Prince Charles for many years. A man who we now know had allegations of paedophilia surrounding him for decades, was allowed to become close personal friends with the heir to the throne? Where were MI5? Are we to believe the security services, who already knew Savile’s lifelong friend Cyril Smith was a paedophile, were not aware? That they had not done a security clearance check on him as would be standard procedure?
It is odd. Negligent even. Perhaps the security services simply never informed Charles or Diana of their knowledge. Perhaps Charles just trusted someone who made themselves appear trustworthy.
Lets join some more dots for you right now.
Elm Guest House, Islington & Richmond.
In late 2012 MP Tom Watson shocked the house to silence when he rose and stated that he had seen clear evidence of a high level paedophile ring operating high in London society, going even to the doors of number 10 itself.
“But a former detective who worked on the case revealed they were suddenly told to halt the probe.
The furious ex-policeman said: “It wasn’t that we ran out of leads but it reached a point where a warning to stop came.
“It was a case of ‘get rid of everything, never say a word to anyone’. It was made very clear to me that to continue asking questions would jeopardise my career.”
“Evil and probably part of an obvious cover-up. But, how does this link to Uncle Jimmy?” I hear you say. OK, lets move on.
To The Palace.
For ten short days in 1982 the press openly and frequently reported on the Elm guest house scandal as it unfolded. Then, suddenly, despite all the evidence mounting of a paedophile ring involving the government and being covered-up by the government, they stopped.
Perhaps because of hints in some of the stories printed at the time and later.
The link had been established between the scandal of care home children from Islington and Richmond being supplied to paedophile brothels, to paedophiles within the Palace.
Now I know you are thinking “I see where you are going, but this is circumstantial evidence. Just because there were paedophiles operating at the Palace, it does not mean Jimmy Savile knew that”.
Let’s just fill you in on a few more details.
Savile was not only “brought in” to help Charles and Diana. He was also called upon to aid Sarah Ferguson.
“I was helping her not get publicity rather than get it – to cool things down….”
Does Jimmy Savile seem a likely person to you to call upon to help you lower your profile? No, me neither. So you have to question the reason for his calling upon.
You probably also don’t know just how cosy he was with the Queen:
“As for Savile’s relationship with the Queen, he suggested it was somewhat lighthearted. “She thinks I’m odd because odd things always seem to happen when I’m at BP,” he said last year, referring to Buckingham Palace. “One time I was at a party there and the Queen said: ‘I do not recognise this person, I bear no responsibility if anything should happen’ – the Queen likes a joke. The next minute I bump into a lady who turns out to be Barbara Bush.
“When she sees me she says: ‘Jimmmyyyy!’ and flings her arms out and knocks champagne all over the woman next to her who says ‘S***!’ in a very loud voice and steps back in her high heel on to the foot of the woman behind. The Queen shook her head, took me by the arm, stood me against the wall and said: ‘Stay there and don’t move!’ So I did. After all she is the Queen.”
Diana mentioned Savile in the “squidgygate” tape:
“She was recorded saying: “Jimmy Savile rang me up yesterday, and he said: ‘I’m just ringing up, my girl, to tell you that His Nibs [Charles] has asked me to come and help out the redhead [Ferguson]‘.”
“Exaro has established that Haroon Kasir, known as Harry, who was co-manager of the guest house, used to boast that he was “best friends” with Savile. Kasir would tell friends how Savile used to visit him frequently.”
“Harry started to behave strangely after Jimmy died”.
One Final Drop Down The Rabbit Hole.
My final piece of the puzzle comes from Mr Andy Kershaw. In his article he says:
“When the news broke of Jimmy Savile’s death, I sat before the rolling television news channels in a state of exasperation and disbelief. Celebrities, media heavyweights, and even representatives of the great and the good, were scrambling to gush eulogies to a man they were eager to canonise as Saint Jimmy of Stoke Mandeville or, at least, a much-loved national treasure.Every one of these mourners knew better than to pay tribute. For every one of them, as creatures of the media or the entertainment industries, had, for years, heard the persistent rumours about the real Jimmy Savile. Even in death – and for another 12 months – Savile would continue to pull off a public relations swindle of spectacular audacity.”
He goes on to say:
“Typical of those with 20/20 hindsight was Esther Rantzen. Within a couple of days of the Savile scandal breaking, Esther Rantzen, founder of Childline, and someone not previously shy of hobnobbing with Savile, was asking us to believe she had heard the rumours but had dismissed them as “green room gossip”. Later, and presuming to speak on behalf of the nation, Rantzen popped up on BBC News to wring her hands and claim: “We are all guilty now.”
Not me, Esther, old thing. At Radio 1, as soon as I heard the Savile rumours, I gave the guy a very wide berth. And in my autobiography, No Off Switch, written and first published while Savile was still alive, I hinted as strongly as I could that there may be a darker side, describing him as a “veteran Radio 1 DJ, tireless charity worker, another national institution, widely recognised for his interest in young people”.
Note the words I have highlighted. Kershaw states he hinted at the true scale of what Savile did. Now look at the title of his article:
“The Jimmy Savile scandal will not be snuffed out”.
Snuff is of course a term for movies which involve the murder of people in a violent sexual context. Most of these unbelievably evil films involve paedophiles and children. In the age before the internet they were passed around in video cassette for significant sums of money. It was an industry, men got rich out of the absolute evil depicted.
“Category 5″ child porn. The type that Police officers have to watch and state, understandably, that it ruins their lives having to do so.
Elm Guest House had video equipment. Men linked to the Elm scandal also had links to child trafficking and porn in the Netherlands.
Jimmy Savile. Elm Guest House. The Palace. The Government. Child Trafficking. Snuff movies.
Another person has stated that Cyril Smith, who as we know was a lifelong friend of Savile, was friends with a noted Satanist and visited his house.
Others are also now beginning to break their traumatised silence on having seen children killed in satanic paedophilie rituals involving notable people including Jimmy Savile.
Jimmy Savile. Elm Guest House. The Palace. The Government. Child Trafficking. Snuff movies. Satanism.
Now can you begin to see why, even if only half of the above is true, why the establishment have covered-up the truth about what Jimmy Savile did?
Discount the Satansim as fantasy. You still have links to Royalty, Politicians, paedophile rings containing murderers and cabinet ministers, child trafficking and snuff movies.
Don’t want to believe the royalty stuff? Take that out as well. You still have The Government, child trafficking, snuff movies and a paedophile ring containing politicians and a child murderer.
Can’t contemplate the snuff movies stuff, take that out as well. In fact, take it all out, everything you have just read.
Do you still, after reading it, really believe Savile was a lone wolf who touched up a few women and had sex with willing groupies, and that there has been no cover-up?
Of course you don’t. You have a brain. But just in case you are still doubtful. Edwina Currie was asked on Twitter if there has been a cover-up about Elm Guest House:
If there was a cover-up there, then there was a cover-up over Savile. Victims have not come forward to report some of the worst abuse, because a you have seen, he may have been in a paedophile ring with Cyril Smith that contained a prolific child murderer. You cannot report a crime if you are dead or have been trafficked abroad.
Why This Matters To You.
Some have dismissed this scandal, even if you believe all I have told you, as all in the past. Old news. people now old or dead. irrelevant. A previous generation, different rules.
It Could not happen again.
Deep down you already know it could happen again. If they got away with it last time, there are probably protected people doing the same thing to innocent stolen children right now. Safe in the knowledge they can do what they want because the establishment is covering up for them.
I know you are thinking “why would they cover this evil up?”
One of the named people who was allegedly photographed at Elm guest house having sex with children was a top politician. He has links to both David Cameron and Nick Clegg and their families. If he is arrested, people will ask how on earth none of those people knew.
How did the security services, who vetted BBC employees throughout the 1960′s and 1970′s, not know about Savile, or Elm guest house and inform anyone? How was Savile allowed anywhere near the Royal family?
How did the currently serving politicians, who were at the time senior councillors and legal people linked to Islington and Richmond councils never hear about what was evidently a widespread scandal of child trafficking in their boroughs?
How did nobody in the BBC ever hear anything so dark and horrifying? Even with the current stories of yet more BBC paedophile rings involving staff on both Doctor Who and Eastenders showing that their “saw no evil, heard no evil” stance simply isn’t credible?
How did so many ex-Police and care workers never get listened to when they spoke out about both the scale of the abuse and the fact they were warned off, time after time after time?
The truth, whatever the exact details of what Jimmy did, or what the Politicians and others did, is:
THEY ALL KNEW.
THEY ALL KNOW.
THEY ARE ALL COVERING IT UP TO PROTECT THEIR OWN SKINS.
What happened in this country is a national scandal. If the truth is allowed to come out, through the Police involved in operations Yewtree, Fernbridge and Fairbank having their shackles taken off and the evidence stolen from them by MI5 in the 1980′s, including photo’s, are returned to them, then it would make the Profumo scandal look like a tea party.
If you have a shred of compassion for children and a sense of right and wrong, what you have read should have left you shaking with anger.
Innocent children, taken from care homes, disowned and then destroyed by powerful, evil men and all covered-up by other powerful people who want to avoid a scandal.