The Mother Of All Child Abuse Inquiries confirms Priestly Abuse of children in Britain. The Final IICSA report on child-abuse by Priests and Clergymen now out -  Have they got it right?  -  SAFF dissects IICSA's major strand of child abuse

Contents of This Webpage.

CLICK on the links below to go to the Subheadings - use your browsers back button to come back to this contents list.

The Pagan Credo

Compiled by Stewart and Janet Farrar
with help from Leonora James, head of the Pagan Federation, Chris Bray and other Pagans.

First published April 1990

1. Paganism is a religion (or field of related religions) in its own right, being traceable from prehistoric times through most ancient and modern cultures, and making a continuing contribution to the spiritual evolution of our species.

2. It is not rigid or dogmatic in form its exact expression depends on the individual Pagan, or willingly cooperating group of Pagans. This Credo is therefore itself not dogma, but an attempt to describe the mainstream characteristics of Pagan philosophy.

3. Paganism aims to offer a way to recognise and attune oneself with the manifold forces of Nature, which already exist within and without us, and which are vital to our survival, fulfilment and evolution. By celebrating the seasons and becoming one with other living creatures, Pagans synchronise intimately with the planet, and liberate their personalities and magnify their perceptions and talents, in the interests of themselves, their groups and communities, and humankind as a whole .

4. Paganism believes in the same Divine Creative Force as anyone else, because if there is one there can only be One. Like any other religion, Paganism personifies this Ultimate as a means of attuning oneself to It, because It cannot be apprehended directly except perhaps in brief flashes of intuition.

5. Paganism's basic personification of this Ultimate is in Its creative polarisation of male and female aspects, as the Father God and the Mother Goddess. The God represents the fertilising, energising, analysing, intellectual, left-brain-function aspects. The Goddess represents the formative, nourishing, synthesising , intuitive, right-brain-function aspects.

6 As above, so below; this basic Divine polarisation is the primal cause of all manifestation, and it is reflected at all levels of being, including ourselves.

7 Pagans make use of many different God and Goddess forms as tuning-signals to different aspects of the essential God and Goddess. These forms vary according to cultural, geographical, and personal backgrounds, and are USUALLY (and naturally, since men and women aspire to emu;ate them) envisaged in perfected human form, but they are all valid. They are real, in the sense that if one attunes oneself to them sincerely they are vitalised and empowered by the Ultimate of which they represent aspects. They are not idols, but are the numinous archetypal symbols which are vital (or in everyday language, "God-given") components of the human Collective Unconscious.

8. Pagans do not worship the Devil; that would be totally incompatible with the principle of paragraphs 4 and 7 above. The Devil of monotheist religions does not exist in Pagan philosophy; Pagans regard evil as an imbalance to be corrected, not as an independent force or entity.

9. Like all religions. Paganism believes in multi-level reality. These levels are generally defined in Pagan thinking as the spiritual, mental, astral, etheric and physical levels. Each level has its own laws, but the laws of different levels do not conflict with each other, (as, for example, the laws of mathematics, chemistry and biology are different, but do not conflict with each other.) Pagans believe that by understanding these laws and their interaction, one can achieve results generally defined as magical.

10. Pagans regard all these levels as equally holy, and essential parts of the cosmic spectrum of manifestation. They totally reject the dualistic concept which equates the spiritual with good and matter with evil.

11. Pagan philosophy and worship therefore tend to be strongly Nature-based. Mother Earth is not a temporary stopping-place, but our home, of which we are a living part, and for the health and protection of which we bear a constant responsibility.

12. The Pagan view of the Cosmos is essentially organic. The Ultimate is its creative life-force; but all manifestation is part of the total organism. Our own planet can be regarded as one limb or organ of it, and we ourselves (and all Earth's other creatures and components) as cells within that limb or organ. Our health depends on its health, and vice versa.

13. Paganism therefore does not envisage a gulf between Creator and Created. The spectrum is continuous and interdependent. Each individual is of the same nature as the Source, and is capable of being a channel for it.

14. On the basis of all the foregoing, most Pagans regard all sincere religions as different paths to the same truths. The particular Deity-personifications, symbology, and meaningful mythology which suit one person as tuning-signals to the Ultimate may not suit another. Pagans are therefore essentially ecumenical, non-proselytising, and tolerant.

15. This does not mean that Pagans cannot voice constructive criticism of the attitudes of some religious hierarchies, or of the narrowness and bigotry of some dogmatic systems. Pagans reject as dangerous and destructive, in particular, the belief that one's own religion is the only true one, and that all others are devilish and therefore to be condemned and persecuted.

16. Pagans lay more emphasis on continuing spiritual development than on instant revelation, though they accept that the latter can sometimes happen - usually as a breakthrough to consciousness of a longer unconscious accumulation.

17. Most Pagans believe in reincarnation, in one form or another. This belief further strengthens Pagans' attitude to Earth as our continuing home for the foreseeable future, rather than as a temporary and restrictive stopping-place. It is also a powerful moral force, because it emphasises that all offences against other individuals, the community, or the Earth, and all failure to learn lessons, must ultimately be put right by oneself, and cannot be evaded by bodily death.

18. Pagans' ethical attitude is often summed up in the sentence: "An it harm none, do what you will." This means achieving full self - development while accepting equally full responsibility towards one's fellow-humans, one's fellow-creatures, and the Earth itself. Love for all of these is a foundation -stone of Paganism. In particular. Pagans feel a special responsibility towards the young; their vulnerability must not be abused, and they must be helped to develop themselves according to their own natures, so that when they are mature they can choose their own paths and their own religious forms - with maximum awareness and without pressurisation from their elders.


How the NSPCC worked hard to avoid any facts and information which undermined the lies on SRA and then after condemning the SAFF and refusing our evidence had to do an about turn and apologise for its SRA mistakes. 

The following is a non-exhaustive diary of correspondence between the SAFF and the NSPCC right at the start of the Satanic Panic which they promoted, back in 1989.

 Few people now remember that SRA allegations had been sporadically surfacing via Geoffrey Dickens MPs campaign during the previous year but up to this point no sensible child-charity had jumped on the bandwagon.  It was only when the NSPCC issued their July 17th  1989 press release 'rubber stamping' the existence of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse that the hysteria took off across the nation.  The NSPCC caused that hysteria to happen. This diary shows that they had a choice not to, but went ahead with the sensational and unproveable claims anyway, either for the publicity , or the fund raising.   Whatever it was, their despicable actions resulted in the mental torture of 86 innocent children and the splitting up of loving families. In one case a child was taken from his mother and father and kept in care for SIX years!  Remember this when an NSPCC volunteer next shakes a donation tin in your face.


April  28th 1989:  SAFF sends a copy of the 1989 Occult Census to Allen Gilmour , then Director of the NSPCC, along with a 2  page  letter  which   asks tne NSPCC not to jump on the SRA bandwagon.  SAFF provides a copy of the Home Office letter clearly stating that  THAT  THERE  IS  NO   EVIDENCE TO LINK WITCHCRAFT WITH CHILD ABUSE.  SAFF makes clear to Dr Gilmour  
that  there  is  no  substance  in the SRA allegations and  that  they  are  being   perpetrated  not to save children but to suppress Paganism and  Witchcraft  by   followers of an opposing religion.
May  11th 1989:  Christopher Cloke then Policy Information officer replies on Dr  . Gilmour's  behalf  acknowledging receipt of the information  which  has  'been  
placed on file for future reference'. 
(in other words, piss off)
July  17th  1989 NSPCC press release is issued supporting the Cook Report. It refers to  ritualised   abuse of children and gave the press the first and only non-fundamentalist support  
of  the occult-crime related allegations. Despite  its  ambiguous  wording  and  generalisation  this NSPCC press release provides  sufficient   righteousness  for the media to claim that the allegations had been  'proved',   even though no evidence was ever presented. 
July  25th 1989 SAFF contacts NSPCC and provides them with full and  total   breakdown   of  characters  and  background  to  anti-occult  conspiracy   and   complains to them  about  the NSPCC  statment  in support of Cook  Report.  The  28  page   document SAFF provides reveals the facts and thoroughly contradicts  the NSPCC statement.
July 27th 1989:  Alan Gilmour the director of NSPCC replies "Thank you for  your   letter  and its enclosures;  I would like to share these with my  professional  
advisers. "

 (In other words - we're kicking it into the long-grass)

August  10th 1989:  Barrett responds to an enquiry concerning the July 17th  NSPCC   statement by confirming its contents but declining the additional information   added  to it. ' I am not in a position to comment upon the refernce elsewhere in   the article to about 20 cases of this kind of abuse having come to light in the  
past year. I do not know where the journalist obtained such a figure or of any   organisation which might be able to confirm its accuracy.' 
October 20th 1989:  On being unable to obtain the promised response   from  the  NSPCC the SAFF instructs its solicitors to write a letter accusing  them  of   collaboration with the Cook Report to promote a myth. The NSPCC acknowledge our solicitor's letter but   it is not replied to. 
November 14th 1989:  Our solicitor has written more letters to   the  NSPCC  but  they have only replied that  they 'are  obtaining  legal   advice.'
December  1st 1989:  SAFF asks our solicitor to write yet again to  hurry up  the  NSPCC  .
December  6th 1989 :  NSPCC answers our solicitor's letter saying that following   legal  advice taken by NSPCC the society was not involved in Cook  Report  and   mentioned  the  programme in its statement ' in passing comment'.  The NSPCC  deny   that  their  statement  supported or condoned The  Cook  Report.    The NSPCC  admit   receiving  SAFF documented evidence concerning anti-occult  conspiracy   and The Occult Census but say that 'a reply was not called for'.  NSPCC say that   they  are not prepared to make comment on that material nor further  documents   now provided to them concerning the falsehood of the anti-occult  allegations.   The NSPCC refuse to comment any further. 
December  15th  1989 SAFF introduces itself to Kevin Barrett Policy  Information   Officer of NSPCC.  Educates him about background to conspiracy, confirms SAFF's earlier letters and evidence  and requests a copy of July 17 press statement.  
December  19th  1989.  Barrett acknowledges receipt of letter and says  he  will   reply in due course.
January  8th  1990  Barrett provides the NSPCC statement at long last  and  says   that  the NSPCC is only looking after the best interests of children and  that   the  NSPCC is not prepared to enter into any detailed observations  concerning  
the allegations.

JANUARY  25th  1990:  SAFF  writes to NSPCC concerning  discoveries  that  their   original  July  17 press statement was misinterpreted by The Press  Association  and   that   all   subsequent   press   exposure  included   references   to   Devil  
Worship / Satanism / Witchcraft / Evil / Coven  which words were not included  in  the   NSPCC  statement.    SAFF ask Barrett to disclaim reporting of that statement as   inaccurate  or make the NSPCC position clear as to whether they hold any  evidence  
to support Satanic child abuse theory.  SAFF also asked him to confirm that the  NSPCC  
is  aware  of  the  danger of young Pagan families being  split  up  by  NSPCC   inspectors   who  are  untutored  in  the  dignity  of  Pagan  religion  under   the misaprehension  that  Paganism is Satanism.    SAFF accuse NSPCC  of  harbouring   inspectors  whose  religious bias has interfered with  their  objectivity  and   produce   two  examples  of  NSPCC  inspectors  having  an  anti-occult   pro-fundamentalist  bias  in interviews;  exaggerating truth and  making  unproven   allegations on behalf of NSPCC.   
January 29th  1990 Barrett acknowledges receipt of SAFF letter.
February  5th  1990:  Barrett responds to letter of Jan 25.  "It is not for  the   society  to take any step in connection with an alleged  misinterpretation  by   newspapers  of  the  Society's press release.  
(In other words - we quite like all this publicity and are not going to minimise it!)

The Society  has  always  been  
sensitive to the needs and requirements of members of different social,ethnic  
and  religious  groups

 The  Society  has no comment  to  make  about  remarks   attributed  to  Mr  Kearns  (fundamentalist inspired  NSPCC  inspector)  in  a  
newspaper published in July 1989."
February  21st  1990 :  SAFF replies insisting upon NSPCC addressing problem  of   funadmentalism  in its ranks.   Reminding Barrett that NSPCC has not  complied   with the request to issue a directive warning its inspectors to take  minority  
beliefs  such as Paganism into account.  SAFF makes point that over two  dozen   vicars  were prosecuted for child-abuse during 1989 and asks NSPCC to  confirm  
that  they  will  inspect their procedures to ensure Pagan  families  are  not   mistreated  through ignorance and prejudice.   The letter also discloses  that  
SAFF  have discovered that the systems operator of a Christian  fundamentalist   bulletin  board  which imports sensational and discredited information on  the  
satanic  child-abuse scare CLAIMS TO BE A SENIOR INSPECTOR FOR THE  NSPCC  and   what do the NSPCC intend to do about this? 
March 2nd 1990: Barrett responds that all this has been carefully considered and   that  the  'Society  can  do  no more than to emphasis  what  I  said  in  the   penultimate  paragraph of my last letter to you'
That the NSPCC has no further  
comment to make on fundamentalism within its ranks. 

March  12th 1990:  NSPCC  publish  their  annual  report  containing  allegations  of   Ritualised Abuse of children and their National Child Care Officer Jim Harding   (it is he in the cutting at the bottom of the next column headed Children Forced Into Satanic Sex Rituals) Harding talks  of Cult Sacrifice and singles out Witchcraft and Devil Worship for  blame.

March 10th 1991.   The NSPCC eat humble pie after their Rochdale SRA case collapses and they are castigated by the media and lose the highly lucrative 'at-risk' registers.  Harding apologises on behalf of the NSPCC for using 'wild statements' that they cannot substantiate.  The Mail On Sunday headline reads:  A Rethink by The NSPCC.  NSPCC Sorry for 'Wild Statements'.  

Yeah, sure, like a crocodile sheds tears when it is eating its prey.

IICSA report on abuse in religious institutions and settings cover£100 Million down the drain?

Government mega-inquiry into child abuse in Religion hides the perpetrators, misleads the public and lets the child-scare industry off the hook.

It took six years and £100M for IICSA to do what the SAFF had already done for free three decades ago;  and it looks like they've still made a hash of it.

The SAFF's Black Museum of Priestly AbuseThe SAFF published its groundbreaking research into paedophile priests, The Black Museum of Priestly Abuse in 1991. ( See: )  This was the very first attempt to quantify the extent and nature of child-abuse in Christian churches from 1978 to 1991, but the world was not ready for the truth and the Great and the Good ignored it.

 The SAFF repeated the survey in 1996 in greater detail in Black Museum 2 and CONFIRMED the now undeniable threat that paedophile priests posed to children. Black Museum 2 showed that Priests and clergyman mainly preyed upon 8-12 year old boys and sucked-in three new child victims each and every week!
  (  )
SAFF also charged the Catholic and Anglican churches with COVERING-UP this abuse and protecting priests by moving them to other parishes where some abused again.  

These findings were astounding and shocking but
What happened?  Very little, some of The Great and the Good refuted our findings, others turned a blind-eye as though it had never happened! 

SAFF Research proved that 3 children are abused each and every week by Clergymen and that when their crimes are discovered the churches sought to hide them and cover-up the abuse.

Undetered the SAFF worked with several TV companies on documentaries to 'out' paedophile priests and get something done,  the first being World In Action's The Sins of The Fathers, first broadcast on 7th July 1992 which bypassed the Establishment and brought the debate out into the open.  Slowly but surely the threat of Priestly Abuse was being accepted and there was a watershed in 2014 when the UN denounced the Vatican for its handling and cover-up of child-abusing priests.

Since BM1 the SAFF has spent three decades urging society to recognise the problem of consistent abuse in the orthodox churches.   The USA followed a similar path and was the first to unearth astonishing numbers of victims of abusing priests, then in 2009 came the Ryan and Murphy reports in Ireland which lifted the veil on Catholic church secrecy and confirmed everything the SAFF had said in 1991.

It was only a matter of time before the scandal had to be addressed in the UK and it was the national uproar over Jimmy Savile which was the watershed.  Here, below, is the inside story of how successive governments tried to turn a blind eye to the fact that some priests are paedophiles and abuse children in their care.

The government's Independent Inquiry into Child sexual Abuse (IICSA) was announced on 7th July 2014 by then prime minister Theresa May largely in response to public pressure over the Savile allegations.    Successive governments had been hit by several child-abuse scandals of preceding years going back to the sensational  Satanic Ritual Child Abuse allegations of the 1990s. 

Dangerous Strangers - a primal human fear

 The fear of child abuse and murder from 'dangerous strangers' is an atavistic fear amongst parents,  even though child welfare specialists know from statistical data that the vast majority, perhaps 99.9%, of abuse occurs not from strangers but by close relatives or someone the child knows well. 

The 1985 murder of 14 year old Jason Swift following a gang rape lead by the pervert Sidney Cooke, caused outrage across the UK and became a rallying cry for every decent person.   Following on from the massive publicity surrounding the Swift case, child protection charities jumped on the bandwagon and a focus on 'dangerous strangers' gave the general public the idea that a hidden sub-culture of paedophile gangs existed which was a greater threat to children than any other.

By 1988 this suspicion had morphed into rumours of  'paedophile rings' and the inevitable 'Satanic Ritual Child Abuse hysteria which was a shibboleth representing the absolute worst in human nature;  an abomination unto god. 

Still the statistics told the same truth -  a child was almost exclusively at risk from family and relatives and dangerous strangers were a rarity,  but this fact was too unpalatable for both the child welfare charities (always on the make) , the government and society at large, so the Child Abuse Industry, in particular the NSPCC,  backed the myth of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse ( SRA ) as a rallying cry to the populace.   Now with the permission of the highly respected NSPCC we could all justifiably hate an underclass of sub-humans who apparently committed abusive crimes for pure evil; an evil which ordinary decent folk could simply not understand;  and in the process ignore the thousands of cases happening daily where 'ordinary' people were actually doing the abusing.  

Of course only the SAFF saw the truth - that the majority of people trying to convince us all about the existence of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse were from churches who had for years covered up child-abusing priests who were endemic in their midst.  SRA  was the best smokescreen that the orthodox churches would ever get.

Many of those trying to convince us that  Satanists sexually abused and murdered children were from churches which had for years covered up thousands of child-abusing priests in their midst.

As time, and the failure of every single allegation of SRA has proved, the dramatic and sensational claims of Satanic Abuse simply did not exist.  It was a mass hysteria, but it set in motion a sequence of events which lead directly to the inauguration of IICSA in 2014.   Here's how that happened:

The Extent and Nature of Satanic Ritual Abuse - front cover of the official 1994 government reportThe 1990 SRA hysteria took five years to subside. It was scotched by the government's own report authored by Prof. Jean La Fontaine and published in 1994 titled The Extent and Nature of Organised and Ritual Abuse  ( ).  The report found absolutely no evidence of SRA in any of the 86 cases claimed to contain it during the Satanic Panic.  

The report found absolutely no evidence of SRA in any of the 86 cases claimed by the NSPCC and other child-scare industry stalwarts during the Satanic Panic.  

During those five years millions of pounds worth of government funding and police resources had gone into chasing mythical Satanic Abusers and the child protection industry enjoyed a renaissance of funding.   The 1991 Orkney SRA case public Inquiry cost six million pounds alone.  Child charities, particularly the NSPCC but also the National Children's Home had not only grabbed acres of self-promoting headlines, appeared on dozens of documentaries and sponsored regular Satan Seminars at £450 a throw,  but also appealed for funding to fight SRA, (something that did not exist and which they could not therefore correct).  

Regardless of these charities and lobbies bearing responsibility in creating the SRA hysteria in the 1990s, a decade later the UK government and local authorities donated over £20 million pounds in funding to the NSPCC (2009). The following year (2010) the NSPCC turned-over just short of £150 million.  The British government gave £11 million  that year alone just to fund the running of  'Child-Line' (now totally owned and run by the NSPCC).  Lesser government funding went to other similar charities.  The child-scare industry is a major drain on government finances yet for decades it has been impossible for the NSPCC and other child-charities to actually correlate children saved to money spent. In other words the cost of their operations increase without any definite rise in the number of children helped.  It's all PR hogwash.

Brainwashing Kids for Hours on end like the Spanish Inquisition.

 NSPCC poppets and puppets in Broxtowe SRA caseOn the back of the 1990 Satanic Panic an evil thing happened.  Despite being proven wrong in all the cases they had claimed were Satanic Abuse RAINS and the Radfems refused to say they had been wrong and instead insisted that SRA existed. To 'prove' it  people working in the child-protection world began to seek out vulnerable people and put false memories of SRA into their heads.   

It started originally with the children, whom social workers questioned hour after hour until the poor kids were fed with images and horrific suggestions, which were themselves highly abusive to the mental health of the child,  and then when the exhausted kids  replayed them back to the social workers who had put them there, these crusading social workers, many of whom were ardent Christians,  immediately ignored the other eight hours of negative responses the children had given and selected the SRA suspicions  they were after in the first place!  The yellow panel on the right is a good example of how this worked. Double click on the image to get a larger version to read more easily.  ( Please note that you can enlarge all the images on this web-page to get readable copies in the same way. )   

Press coverage of the 1990 Rochdale SRA caseThis brainwashing of kids happened in 86 cases during the early 1990s and the social-services witch-hunt eventually resulted in the seminal Rochdale SRA case ( ) which, when challenged in court utterly destroyed the SRA allegations that social workers and the child charities like the NSPCC who worked on that case, had originally maintained.   

Social Workers were, rightly condemned in the national press and chastised by judges in family hearings. The clutch of SRA cases (Epping, Ayrshire, Orkney etc) which were already in train, were taken to task in courts across the country and proved nonsense.   All of them failed. SRA was a MYTH driven by sectarian prejudice and money-grubbing charities.

The NSPCC which had driven much of the Satan Scare  ( ),  lost the highly lucrative 'At Risk Registers' which they maintained at high cost for some local authorities, (£90,000 a time ). Trust in the expertise of the NSPCC and social workers dived to an all time low.

The Satan Hunters retired to lick their wounds and regroup.  They lied and said that it was the media who had pushed the Satanic sensationalism but 'ritual abuse' was real.   The core of people who had started the SRA myth  - the radical feminists who were members of the now infamous RAINS (Ritual Abuse Information Network and Support) continued to hold their Satan Seminars to indoctrinate other people in the child abuse industry,  but this time away from the public glare and media reporting they had earlier coveted so much.  

How the 'Survivors' Movement was created.

Prof. La Fontaine's 1994 report resulted in the government Social Services Inspectorate banning the use of repetitive questioning and imprinting of false memories into children during 'disclosure' questioning. They couldn't twist the minds of kids any more so these witch-hunters turned instead to trawling for vulnerable adults who were already either in psychiatric care or were being 'helped' by Christian 'counsellors' who had a fast-track to a hard core of fundie therapists who were ready to diagnose Satanic Abuse at the drop of a hat.

These 'counsellors' used an unproven and harmful pseudo-therapeutic method called MPD (Multiple Personality Disorder) which the SAFF have exposed as fraudulent here: ( ) MPD/DID took vulnerable people and tortured them mentally to produce horrific memories of things that never happened, and then made them  'inform' upon and blame their spouses, their fathers, their relatives, celebrities, people in the news; anyone in fact who was handy.   Hundreds of these cases occurred and at least two deaths resulted from it.   ( See:  and  
for full details of  those cases )

This creation of a sub-culture of hundreds of people, usually neurotic women, also generated another phenomenon which was to completely capture the child-scare Industry and give rise to IICSA - the Survivor Movement .   The very same MPD/DID techniques were being used by other therapists who did NOT believe in Satanic Abuse and so they also were creating fictional stories of abuse unrelated to claims of SRA in their patients' minds.    The Evil technique of MPD/DID was used to implant false memories in people of all kinds. Those therapists from the Christian network who had a personal obsession with the Devil implanted false memories of Satanism but therapists using the technique who were not religiously biased still produced false memories in their patients of 'ordinary' abuse.  This phenomenon directly demeaned those genuine victims who had been abused and undermined their true stories.  MPD / DID therapy should have been banned but it was actually welcomed and promoted by dolts at the Royal College of Psychiatry.

Christian therapists who had a personal obsession with the Devil implanted false memories of Satanism but therapists using the technique who were not religiously biased still produced false memories in their patients of 'ordinary' abuse.

The tranche of patients who believed they had been satanically abused were urged by SRA hunting social workers to tell their sensational stories, either on church podiums, or during group-encounter sessions, to the media and at Satan Seminars to convince those in social work and the police who doubted the issue.    You can see this happening from this clip on the SAFF YouTube channel here:   of Vera diamond using the infamous recovered memory therapy (RMT)

The 'Survivor Movement' became a hotbed of DIY psychiatry. It empowered victims and taught them how to  play to the gallery.  Being mentally vulnerable and impressionable, meant that most SRA 'victims' overdid it and in gilding the lily with even more sensational claims caused them to step away from mainstream therapy into social groups of their own, finally becoming their own therapists using free-style therapeutic methods and then embellishing their sensational horror stories ad infinitum on social media to other 'survivors'.    

Maureen Davies Waverley College CounsellingNow let us make it perfectly clear here that once the 'Survivor Movement' phenomenon had gained pace many genuine  people claiming to be survivors or ORDINARY sexual abuse started their own groups and one of their main aims was to get attention for institutional shortcomings in Children's homes, churches etc.,  and bring historic abusers to justice. This is of course a major plank of IICSA, a kind of Truth and Reconciliation hearing where victims can tell their stories and get it all of their chest in the hope that it will help themselves and others to gain closure. 

The Scam of Christian Counselling.

We are not in any way criticising the rights of such groups to exist, we are pointing out that these type of groups had their origins in the pseudo-therapy of 'counselling' which was originally invented by Christian evangelists to missionise to nominal Christians and act as a recruiting platform for SRA victims.  It is an organised form of 'Confirmation Bias'.

This can be clearly seen by the publication in  Spring of 1994, just before La Fontaine's report was published, of this article alongside, 'Caring for Ritual Abuse Survivors' in 'Counselling magazine, an outreach of the Waverley College.  Note that Waverley was a key participant in defining and organising professional qualifications for counselling for the UK government.  

The article was  written by Maureen Davies, an out and out bible-thumping fundamentalist Christian who was a key player in foisting the Satanic Ritual Abuse Myth onto Britain (see: ) and actually taught a new generation of police top-brass mediaeval concepts akin to the Spanish Inquisition, during training sessions at Bramshill Police College in 1990.    It is due to her obsessive work against the devil, and the efforts of other fundamentalist agent-provocateurs , that the Metropolitan Police eventually caved in and started new Satanic Seminars for their child-protection officers in 2004 and ended up making a fool of themselves over human sacrifice claims. ( see: )

Christian Counsellors put false memories into the mind of Jennifer who made untrue claimsSimply put, what happened was that fundamentalists hi-jacked the growing 'therapy' movement and snatched the initiative away from mainstream psychiatry.

The government found 'counselling' attractive because it was so cost-effective. Whenever any tragedy occurred, be it crime or accidental death through train crashes or other disasters, the government could rely on an army of do-gooders trained as 'counsellors' at Christian centres like the Ellel Grange Trust, just outside Preston in Lancashire,  to give the victims a shoulder to cry on.  In the vast majority of cases the counsellors were volunteers who did it for free.   What's not to like?  You shall soon see the dangers. 

Ellel Grange is unashamedly Christian fundamentalist.  Being a Christian was the ONLY qualification required to sit their weekend course in Counselling abused people, after which the evangelicals who attended were given 'counselling credentials' to go out and discover more SRA!    It was a kind of religious pyramid sell, preying upon vulnerable people, like Jennifer, a mousey woman who was 'counselled' by Ellel Grange into claiming that she had given birth to a baby which had been killed by a Satanic Coven.  She was the 'star witness' in the 1992 Bogus Devil Video Hoax, which other fundies foisted on Channel 4 TV who dutifully broadcast an hour of abject lies which cemented the phantom of SRA in the minds of the populace, only to have the SAFF overturn every single part of the 'evidence' produced within days.  Jennifer was found and confessed that she was programmed to lie about the baby which never existed by Ellel Grange and then transferred to the fundie producer of Beyond Belief as a 'witness' to make false claims of murder.  ( See )

Ministering to the Sexually Abused Ellel Grange creates christian counsellorsThe way that fundamentalist Christians hi-jacked therapy can clearly be seen in the 2020 case of child-kidnappers Wilfred Wong and Janet Stevenson.  Stevenson is a Christian counsellor who together with Wong conspired to abduct an 8 year old child from Anglesey in Wales because they believed (wrongly) that the father was a Satanic Abuser.  See (

Wong inculcated vulnerable folk into believing that SRA existed through multiple interviews he gave on the internet 'diagnosing' what he believed to be SRA.  When people got in touch with him for information about SRA, he passed them to Janet Stevenson who used Christian counselling to 'confirm' that they had been satanically abused!   This is little more than what Ellel Grange had inaugurated in 1990. 

You will notice in the extract from Ellel Grange's course (see image right - double click on it to get a larger version to read more easily ) that the most innocuous everyday things are reinterpreted as indications of Satanic Ritual Abuse, which means any and every vulnerable person who falls into their clutches will be brainwashed with those false ideas and end up becoming a 'survivor' of SRA.   

Notice that Ellel Grange add the additional technique of EXORCISM to their MPD/DID treatments!   People like these should've been prosecuted and stopped by the authorities but they are still flogging this stuff today. The government and the police won't touch them because they claim to be Christians.    

Imaginary Survivors damage real victims of abuse

IICSA refuses evidence from SRA liar WM-A5This problem of a phalanx of imaginary 'survivors' within the regular survivor movement can clearly be seen in the way that Alexis Jay had to publicly rule a woman's (codenamed WM-A5) evidence of being a victim of Satanists in High Places as bunkum.   The woman's story fell apart in half a dozen key places, all outlined by Private Eye. We attach just one extract from WM-A5's evidence alongside.   WM-A5's submission to IICSA was easily disproven as unreliable fantasies. Such fake evidence may have convinced Alexis Jay to reject outright any evidence related to the then current Westminster strand SRA accusations which she struck from IICSA's agenda in January 2018.

By 2007 the mentally disturbed patients in the SRA victim-imposter stable had worked-up their stories to begin to include VIPs and celebrities.   Joan Coleman, founder member of RAINS, compiled a 'Who's Who' of Satanic Abusers in high places, known as the Helen-G List  the origins and contents of which you can see here: 

The SAFF were the first to expose this previously secret list which had been passed surreptitiously around the SRA believers' network.   The utterly false allegations in the Helen-G list were amassed from victim-imposters in the RAINS therapy circuit and were distributed to all RAINS members.  It dramatically corrupted many police investigations which followed and wasted £2M in Operation Conifer run by Wilts Police and other investigations.  Ted Heath was mentioned and falsely accused in the Helen-G list. The SAFF have traced these fantasies back to Jim Phillips 'stable' of SRA victim imposters in 1993 where Phillips and Vera Diamond (RAINS member) got headlines also accusing the Royal Family of being Satanists (see: ) .   You can see how Phillips created victim imposters from a group of chronically mentally ill patients which mainstream psychiatry had jettisoned in this clip on our SAFFutube Channel (  )

Within a short time VIPs mentioned in the Helen-G list were dutifully investigated by the police which had, under pressure from radical feminists, adopted a process of believing everything that any accuser said about their claimed abuse even before an investigation to establish the facts had been undertaken!    As time passes the mistakes of the authorities in these cases has faded into history but not quite gone from view yet,  as the Daily Mail newspaper recently published a series of articles on how those falsely accused VIPs are fighting back to demand the resignation of the Met's Chief Constable for incompetence.  See here: 

The comedian Jimmy Tarbuck was one of those unfairly dragged into this nonsense.    Another name on this list of dozens of supposed Arch Satanists was Ted Heath (former UK prime-minister).  Celebrity/VIPabuse had arrived! 

The 2008 Jersey SRA Hysteria

Guardian reports a child's skull has been found Jersey SRA caseBy 2008 another SRA high-point was hit when allegations of Satanic Abuse in Jersey created yet another national panic which included claims of the finding of a 'child's skull'. This turned out on analysis to be a piece of coconut! ( see )    Again, following a lengthy police and government inquiry the Jersey SRA case ws found to be nonsense and quietly faded from view but the initial scaremongering yet again reinforced the untrue idea of SRA and abuse in the minds of the unquestioning populace.  

The NSPCC 'helped' the police by trawling for 'victims' in the Jersey SRA case. They found many people who claimed to be victims but in the end there was only one prosecution of historic physical abuse by a teacher who had long since retired. There was no sexual abuse and no Satanists were involved.
By March 2011, the RAINS mob were on a high, campaigning to re-establish the use of MPD and get government funding for it, by the devious practice of simply renaming MPD which had by then become tainted by its links to false SRA allegations, and calling it DID (Dissociate Identity Disorder ).  They succeeded - in 2019 they got just short of a million pounds. 

The MPD/DID circus was churning out 'victims'  and the whole  idea of Victimhood, pushed by radfems in academe, had become an 'accepted fact' because  the general consensus was that to repudiate a victim's tale would be to add insult to injury .  Radical feminists insisted this would be mental abuse in itself and the government and police bought into it.  The logic was poor because many of those who were self-declaring themselves as 'victims' were doing so using false memories.  The traditional police method was to take down their statements without comment and then check out the locations and people involved to see if any of it gelled.   The new method, promoted by Keir Starmer and the College of Policing, was to believe instantly that the accuser HAD been abused and make allowances which corrupted the investigation, for instance, having their 'therapist' alongside them giving them cues when at the police station and constantly replacing and expanding on their statement when they had invented more!  As most of these victims were already networking with survivor groups on social media the contamination of stories was immense.   See ( )

The Death of Jimmy Savile

The 'Satanic' Jimmy Savile Later that same year (October 2011) a watershed occurred;  the death of Jimmy Savile.   The Savilemonster hysteria was another sensational replay of the 1990 Satanic Panic.  See ( ).   Again the media lead the witch-hunt . With an accused who was now dead there was no accountability and hacks and 'victims' could make any allegations they liked and many did.  
Savile's fanbase found dozens of inaccuracies and fake allegations in the accusations from people who came forward but the tsunami of hatred in the media overwhelmed these.   See.  for perhaps the best examples of the inside story about Savile ).

 The NSPCC, never one to miss an opportunity, organised the trawling for Savile victims and he became the most hated figure since Hitler in the minds of the populace.   They ended up with 450 Savile victims. Months later it was revealed that 239 of these were fake and their cases were refused compensation.   This could be taken to indicate that 50% of all historic abuse allegations may be false.  

Some of Savile's 'victims' said they had been abused by him in Satanic Ceremonies. Close-cropped photos appeared on the internet of him wearing a Satanic Green  Robe (see alongside)  but the full uncropped photo showed it to be a flamboyant vestment he wore when he regularly attended St John's Church, Hebden Bridge, Yorkshire,  where he was an honorary church warden!  Savile's good work for this church had somehow been inverted to become evidence of Satanism!

Jimmy Savile meets the PopeThe media entirely forgot the millions Savile had raised for kids and the underprivileged, his 'clunk-click' campaign to persuade people to wear seat-belts which saved literally tens of thousands of lives before becoming compulsory in 1983.  Neither did the media mention the fact that he had raised enough money to establish Stoke Mandeville Hospital which had helped thousands of sick people.   And so as not to tarnish their demonisation they completely omitted from their narrative the fact that he did such good work for people in need of help that he was invited to meet the Pope and given an award by him.  

Only when the hysteria had abated and official inquiries had looked into the claims made by people against Savile did it become clear  that this was another Satanic Witch-hunt by any other name and a direct development of the SRA myth melded with Celebrity/VIPabuse which RAINS had itself created.    The same people who were behind the 1990 Satanic Panic were also involved in the Savile SRA allegations. They had bided their time and polished up their propaganda for an opportunity like this. 

Savile was part of a Satanic RingCompletely bowled over by the sheer vituperance of the media and the populace combining in anger against the abomination called Savile, whom they had earlier lionised and lauded for most of his life, and,  on the back-foot due to several detailed previous inquiries into abuse in children's homes the government and the BBC were open to claims that 'they didn't do enough' .  In response the BBC inaugurated an independent inquiry (The Smith Inquiry) into why they hadn't spotted 'the world's most prolific abuser' during his 40 year reign at the BBC.  Theresa May then announced the final, be-all-and-end-all mega-child-abuse inquiry of them all ;   IICSA!   
IICSA would gather witness accounts, hear evidence from people involved in accused institutions, delve in detail into historic cases and get to the bottom of it once and for all.
But it didn't get off to a good start.

The Commencement of IICSA

The government had earmarked Baroness Butler-Sloss for the post as chairperson of the inquiry. She had chaired other inquiries very capably in the past,  but the radical feminists in the child-scare industry mounted a campaign to deny her the post.  Why?  She had been in charge of the governments 1988 public inquiry into the Cleveland Mass Lifts Scandal which some of RAINS members were peripherally involved in and the radical feminists in child-care refuted her conclusions in the Cleveland Scandal and had ever since tried to discredit her report.

Cleveland was the first case of mass abuse in the UK and created the notorious Dawn-lifts of 120 children stolen from their parents by social workers based on a trick anal dilation syndrome (see for full details ). Baroness Butler-Sloss saw all this and pronounced it all wrong, making various recommendations to stop mass-lifts happening again.  This stopped the radfem juggernaut in its tracks.   So someone uncovered a family connection which might have possibly  compromised Butler-Sloss's independence.  Her brother had been Attorney General during the 1980s and as she might have had to oversee some of his judgements this might undermine the independence of IICSA, some said. As one of IICSA's main strands was an independent inspection of government action related to historic child-abuse which some victims said it the government had itself covered-up this wouldn't do and Baroness Butler-Sloss  declined the chairship of IICSA.

Portrait of Dame Lowell GoddardThe UK government then went to Australia to find another person who this time had no connection whatsoever with the past history of the UK child-scare-industry or its government.  Justice Lowell Goddard was imported to handle the job.  She commenced work and in November 2015 published a list of the organisations from which she would take evidence.  However  the political ramifications of this inquiry were quickly becoming apparent and the radical feminists did not appear to like Goddard's independent approach. 

In early March 2016 the UKCSAPT (UK Child Sex Abuse People's Tribunal) sent a presentation to Goddard which mentioned Satanic Ritual Child Abuse 32 times in a 36 page presentation!    In response the SAFF wrote to Justice Goddard in late March sending a presentation exposing the links between the SRA hunters in Britain, some of whom were queuing up to present evidence to her.   In July 2016 the Daily Mail revealed that the chair of IICSA would be paid two and a half million pounds over five years.  

By August 2016 Goddard had resigned her post stating that the conflicting pressures and political chicanery attached to IICSA  were 'insurmountable'.  

 Later that year (November) BBC Newsnight reported a relative avalanche of resignations from IICSA:

"BBC Newsnight understands that Aileen McColgan has quit because of serious concerns over the inquiry's leadership.   She was the barrister leading the inquiry's investigations into the Anglican and Catholic Churches.  The inquiry said that lawyers come and go according to their professional obligations - and a spokeswoman declined to "comment on specifics".

It is understood Aileen McColgan had concerns over the competency of the inquiry's leadership and the way it had previously responded to the resignation of lawyers instructed by it. As well as working on the inquiry, she is also a Professor of Law at King's College London.

It is understood that two other barristers have told the inquiry of their desire to leave because of similar concerns.

The inquiry has suffered a series of setbacks in recent months, including the departures of a number of senior lawyers.

Portrait of Baroness Alexis JaySo a satisfactory chairperson was eventually found who was also acceptable to the Radical Feminists;   Prof. Alexis Jay, the woman who had authored the 2014 Rotherham Asian Gangs report estimating 1,400 children had been raped there.  She was definitely on the side of the victims,  and was well qualified to do the job.

In making her the chair of IICSA the government may have thought they had pacified everyone. 
How foolish of them. 

Sympathy for The Devil Alexis Jay attends Berne Satan Seminar Much later in the middle of the inquiry in February 2018 Private Eye Magazine revealed that Jay had attended a November 2017 meeting of the ESTD (European Society for Trauma and Dissociation) an umbrella group for MPD/DID therapists whose journal carried articles promoting Satanic Ritual Abuse and featured lectures on SRA at this  conference, including contributions by Valerie Sinason, a founder member of RAINS!     Wasn't this a clear conflict of interest?     Jay's team  said she had been invited to observe proceedings and dismissed it as irrelevant.

Although IICSA originally took 'evidence' on the Westminster/VIP abuse strand, (which included allegations of Satanic abuse by Ted Heath and others ) by January 2018 they ruled it beyond IICSA's remit.  This Wise decision begs the question why did Alexis Jay attend the ESTD conference three months earlier when it was clear to any informed observer that the ESTD was a hotbed of believers in the 1990 Satanic Panic and harboured key players active in that scare? 

At the time the police had begun to investigate a key witness in SRA claims made against Ted/Edward Heath (RAINS list)  for perverting the course of justice.  It was Carl 'Nick' Beech's testimony which had driven the media frenzy on VIP/Westminster abuse (See ).   However, on 22nd Jan 2019 this key witness,  Carl 'Nick' Beech,  admitted downloading kiddie porn;  by 18 July 2019 he stood trial for perverting the course of justice and was sentenced to 18 years in prison for lying about his abuse to gain compensation money.    This sequence of events shows clearly how false accusations drove the survivor narrative which was at the heart of IICSA,  both in the press and in the political arena.

Beatrix Campbell and the Cleveland Radfem Mafia.

Beatrix Campbell tries to influencew the IICSA inquiry that Cleveland Inquiry was wrongOther strands of the inquiry were also apparently being compromised.  IICSA took evidence from Beatrix Campbell, a feminist Marxist activist who had been heavily involved in both the Cleveland Scandal and the Satanic Ritual Child Abuse scare of the 1990s. 

On 26th February 2018 Campbell was given an IICSA  platform to rewrite history and complain that Baroness Butler Sloss's 1988 Cleveland inquiry (fully accepted as accurate and professional by the government at the time) had reached the wrong conclusions.  

Not only was IICSA content to listen to this re-writing of history and allow it to go unchallenged but IICSA also hosted a seminar titled 'Social and Political Narratives about Child Sexual Abuse' of which the keynote speaker was none other than Beatrix Campbell!  

Campbell's presentation repeated her now tiresome Marxist chant that there was a hidden epidemic of abuse against children orchestrated by The Patriarchy and that it would continue to cover it up unless the Patriarchy was dismantled and women were put in charge. Or words to that effect, as you can see by this SAFF bio of Campbell's political activities here and in the U.S.

Beatrix Campbell Allowed to attack and defame the Cleveland Public InquiryBeatrix Campbell's obsessive belief In Satanic Ritual Abuse lead to her involvement in the very first claimed SRA case in the UK in Broxtowe, Nottingham ( )  in 1988 whilst the Cleveland controversy was still ongoing over the disgusting actions of the despised Marietta Higgs and Wyatt and Wynn.  

You can see Campbell's take on SRA in a documentary 'Listen to the Children' here ( ) which Campbell produced and narrated on the Broxtowe case to promote the acceptance of the idea that Satanists were abusing the children.  Campbell was closely involved with Team 4 at Notts Social Services and they insisted that Broxtowe was the FIRST example of SRA which had been uncovered in Britain.   Campbell's documentary turned out to be misleading and perpetuated falsehoods in major aspects as is noted in comments to this video.

With claims and counter-claims the controversy over Broxtowe lasted years and became a cause celebre for radical feminists nationally and the lobby of therapists  who believed in the existence of SRA.  Unfortunately for them, Broxtowe was officially declared NOT to have any Satanic Content in 1997 when Nottingham's JET inquiry report explained how Tim Tate (the producer/researcher of the Cook Report) and Ray Wyre (a Baptist preacher turned paedophile therapist who ran courses to 're-program'  Christian Priestly abusers who had reoffended after the churches had backed them ) had inveigled their way into Team 4, given leading-edge SRA materials including a now notorious false SRA indicator list from the U.S. to foster parents looking after the children.  The children had been in care for over a year without mentioning SRA but It was only after this SRA information was presented to the foster-mothers that the children began talking about witches and ghosts in response to the foster mothers' questions.  When the teenage victims in the case reversed their earlier statements  of what happened and explained that they had originally been threatened with social work power shadow if they didn't confirm the smaller children's accounts, the full story came out.   

Nursery Crimes.

In the U.S.  in 1986 an infamous mass abuse case was alleged to have occurred at the McMartin Nursery at Manhattan Beach California.   The hysteria surrounding this case, which included many SRA motifs, lasted until July 1990 when all the defendants were acquitted. It was the longest and most costly trial in US history.   No abuse had occurred.   During the late 1990s in Newcastle, England,  a complicated series of events resulted in an attempt to establish  a case of alleged abuse at a nursery which had very similar motifs and allegations to the McMartin case and  this controversy went on for years too.  It resulted in legal actions which put the case out of the view of the public.  The Newcastle Nursery Crimes case was finalised in the summer of  2002 when the high court ruled for those who had been falsely accused and against those who had accused them.  The Daily Mail exposed the shenanigans in the Newcastle Nursery Crimes fiasco here: 

After the court case had concluded.  researchers were free to comment and the SAFF published a comprehensive insight into how the facts had been manipulated for political purposes here:

Was IICSA infiltrated by Radical Feminists

Beatrix Campbell defends Tom WatsonHad IICSA been hijacked and taken over by radical feminists who had first promoted the idea of non-existent Satanic Ritual Child Abuse?

 When Tom Watson, then deputy leader of the Labour Party began his campaign to smear leading Conservatives with allegations related to the false Westminster/VIP abuse allegations in 2015  he was subsequently roundly condemned in parliament and forced to apologise.  His scurrilous attacks on Lord Brittan, based solely on the allegations of  Carl 'Nick' Beech (whose testimony was proven false and fraudulent in 2019) was even criticised by the Guardian.   See:  

One of the few people who came out publicly in support of Watson in TV interviews and discussions was Beatrix Campbell.

Mandatory Reporting

The SAFF knew what was happening with IICSA.  The movers and shakers behind the child-scare industry were putting their ducks in order to get another watershed change of legislation to enforce Mandatory Reporting

This is something they've been after for many years  since the Radfems successfully pressed for it in the U.S. in the 1970s.   Mandatory reporting is one of those ideas which sound good at the time but when looked into has massive deleterious manifestations. It provides a legal responsibility in law which makes any person knowing of abuse and not reporting it to be guilty of a crime and therefore can be imprisoned for it even though they were not complicit in the crime.  Note here that we are not taking about someone who is an 'accessory' to a crime. Someone who knows abuse is going on and tacitly condones it, or facilitates it,  can be prosecuted under the law of Accessory.  Mandatory Reporting is not for that.  It is to punish bystanders who, had they been more aware or clued in, MIGHT have spotted abuse being undertaken by someone else but failed to notice it.  The child-scare industry would say they SHOULD have known and are therefore guilty.  In that case almost ever single person working for the BBC might go to prison under Mandatory Reporting,  for Savile was said to have been abusing hundreds of victims 'in plain sight' and nobody noticed.

I know of no instance where anyone in social services, or any teacher or other professional has known that abuse has been taking place and not reported it.   The main aim of Mandatory Reporting is to create a situation where a professional person becomes neurotic and over-reports suspected abuse in order to cover themselves for any later blame and charges under the law of  Mandatory Reporting. 

How Dangerous is Mandatory Reporting?

Mandatory Reporting can and will destroy the careers of doctors, teachers, social workers and anyone else who regularly comes into contact with children or vulnerable adults and who does not constantly act as an inquisitor for the child-scare industry.    In other words on the better-safe-than-sorry principle people will report the slightest whiff of allegations of abuse,  the slightest symptoms, Satanic or otherwise,  to exculpate themselves from blame - just in case!   False allegations will become the norm and increase in number exponentially.   This is exactly what happened in the United States following their adoption of Mandatory Reporting. 

"As of 2013, there had been a huge increase of reporting over the decades with enormous numbers of unsubstantiated cases.[7][8] Referrals increase each year, but the actual substantiated cases remain low and are approximately the same or decline each year.[9] Media and commentators often take the number of referrals to be synonymous with the number of cases of actual child maltreatment, which makes the problem appear larger than it actually is.[10]

The figures clearly show that whilst ACTUAL cases are diminishing in number False Allegations of child-abuse increased astronomically year on year. 

The Statistics shown here are astonishing.

Nationwide, there was a 2,348% increase in hotline calls from 150,000 in 1963 to 3.3 million in 2009.[8] In 2011, there were 3.4 million calls.[9] From 1992 to 2009 in the US, substantiated cases of sexual abuse declined 62%, physical abuse decreased 56% and neglect was down 10%.  About 1% of the child population are substantiated victims of abuse.[11]

In short Mandatory Reporting  is a Snitches' Charter.

It distorts, exaggerates and magnifies the reporting of suspected child-abuse for no good reason and can only be seen as a pyramid selling process to fill the coffers of the rich child-protection charities and push more 'victims' into the therapy industry which wastes millions of pounds of taxpayers' money each year.  In our analysis of the MPD/DID therapy movement alone we estimate that DID therapy wastes £60M of government funding each and every year, and it's growing.  


You can see this harvesting of victims happening today with the NSPCC's Childline telephone line reporting system where  in 2014 more than a million (1,200,000) children phoned the Childline free phone service.     The really crucial figure of course is how many of these children received help and were saved from abuse?  That simple statistic is never ever disclosed because, as with the US experience of  Mandatory Reporting, the actual abuse statistics remain fairly static, it is the astronomical number of false allegations which increase because telephone call-in services spend a fortune advertising themselves to children to encourage them to call in for absolutely any reason which makes them feel 'unhappy'. 

This is the way that all witch-hunts go.  Stalin's 'Great Terror' during which millions of innocent people were killed or transshipped to Siberian work camps to die from deprivation was overseen by the NKVD who 'discovered' millions of 'traitors' by asking two simple questions during interrogations.  Who recruited you? and Whom did you recruit? 

Terrified suspects gave, under mental and physical torture, any names they could think of. Neighbours, relatives, even their own children.  The answers doomed thousands more innocent people each of whom were asked the same two questions in a kind of pyramid selling scheme designed solely to elicit more victims for the NKVDs torture chambers.  

It created a paranoid climate in Stalin's Soviet where everyone was considered a government snitch.  Where all public and family discourse had to be censored, children informed on their parents, and even Jokes could literally condemn one to death. Voluntary State-Snitches were everywhere; terrified of being implicated they consistently informed on others around them  using tittle-tattle, rumour and personal jealousy/enmity to avoid being interrogated themselves.   This is the kind of climate Mandatory Reporting will create, and false accusations will explode, just as they did in the U.S. enabling the child-charities to demand MORE funding from government.   

During the witch-hunts of the 15th century inquisitors asked almost the same questions to get 'witches' to confess their 'accomplices' .   It was officially termed 'putting the question'  and the naming of people by those calling out names to stop the excruciating tortures being inflicted upon them,  implicated thousands more 'witches' into the hands of the Inquisition to be tortured and burned a the stake after they themselves had been tortured into calling-out more victims in a horrific cycle of violence.    About 350,000 innocent people, mostly women, died in this way.

Carl Nick Beech worked for NSPCC childline advising children who claimed to have been sexually abusedAs you can see, Childline is a similar method of recruiting victims and of falsely accusing suspects.  It has been working now since the mid 1970s.  I have yet to see any statistics to show how effective the scheme is in saving the suffering of children who are in abusive situations.  We doubt if more than a few hundred have actually been helped during that entire time and challenge the NSPCC to release statistics on their success rate . 

Of course the NSPCC lists all these calls as 'evidence of abuse' and refers them all to local child-protection departments, when it is clear that many kids telephone Childline because they need a friend or someone to talk to, are subject to teeange angst, or are just up for the jape to see how they can manipulate gullible adults on the other end of the phone. 

The seriousness and severity of each call is rated by NSPCC staff, mostly volunteers, who have a vested interest in eagerly defining abuses.   Ironically,  in December 2017 the Daily Telegraph revealed that  Carl 'Nick' Beech, the pervert who plead guilty to having kiddie-porn and who was subsequently given 18 years in prison for lying about Satanic child-murder ( and causing a £2M Police investigation after fraudulently accusing several innocent people of child abuse which never happened), had volunteered as a Child-Line phone answerer, giving advice to children whom he deemed had been abused!    This is the man who tricked the Metropolitan Police into besmirching the reputations of MPs, Ministers and leaders in Westminster by making invented false accusations to obtain abuse compensation of £22,000.00 by fraud!    A classic example of the dangers of Mandatory Reporting.

So can you trust in conclusions and opinions made by people in the child-scare industry?  Well, way back in August 1990 a national conference on child abuse was held in Harrow, England.  One section of this conference unveiled the then very new claims about Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.  The conference was one of the first Satan Seminars.  Amongst the attendees was Valerie Howarth, then director of Childline.   On the subject of 'Child abuse linked to Satanic Cults' she told The Guardian newspaper:

'Valerie Howarth a former local authority director of social services told the conference on Monday that there was no stereotype of child victims of abuse .   I particularly want to commend what Sue Hutchinson has to say, said Miss Howarth a director of Childline, the child abuse phone service. " I will vouch for Sue and her sisters" 

Guardian Wed August 8th 1990
Sue Hutchinson was a prototype SRA victim imposter who claimed to have been abused in Satanic Ceremonies. She had links with SRA supremo Vera Diamond (see here: ).  She started SAFE, a survivor group for SRA 'victims'.  In the past 30 years she has never ever been able to prove her allegations about Satanists abusing children and none of the cases she supported have been proven real.   I wonder if Valerie Howarth would publicly commend and support Sue Hutchinson's allegations about SRA today?    I wonder also whether Childline phone answerers have been trained in how to detect non-existent Satanic Ritual Abuse?

What Happens to People Who Sense Accusers are Lying?

Kathryn Bell Head Teacher has career cancelled for telling the truth Mandatory Reporting will be a new form of Stalinist child-protection with extensive ramifications illustrated by the awful case of  Head teacher Kathryn Bell who refused allegations from a pupil which she considered to be mischeivous and was subsequently crucified and lost her job because of it. (see image right).

 See the image below right from the petition for Daniel Pelka. This is instrutive because it  clearly shows what is going to happen if Mandatory Reporting is put into law.  Daniel Pelka was murdered by his parents and this petition clearly lays the cause of that at the feet of his teachers for not reporting his abuse.  

Like most statistics and cases opportunised by the child-scare industry it is another blame-swapping exercise,  for Daniel's family had been under social services care for FOUR YEARS before he was beaten to death. He had a long history of referrals and problems which so-called child-protectionists missed or misinterpreted.

In 2011, a year before Daniel's death, he was taken to hospital with broken bones and bruises whereupon lazy social service personnel in charge of his case allowed a doctor's estimation that the break could have occurred by accident to rule their better judgement and they returned him to the parents who eventually killed him.  As you can see Daniel Pelka's death had nothing to do with his teachers.  It is the social services, doctors and police who should be blamed for his murder. Yet this petition misuses Daniel's death for its own purposes and tries to convince readers that Daniel could have been saved if Mandatory Reporting was on the law books. It is utterly false.

 If this case is the best that Paula Barrow can come up with to persuade people to adopt Mandatory Reporting  it doesn't gel. She claims Mandatory Reporting would 'Better protect vulnerable children'  but the Pelka case is actually an indictment of how the child-scare industry constantly seeks to  blame avoidable tragedy on others to cover their own failings in caring for vulnerable children.   The Pelka case is not an example of a child being abused, spotted and then ignored, which is the worst-case-scenario Mandatory Reporting advocates always claim, for in fact Daniel's school did notice and referred Daniel several times early on in the case.  It wasn't the
Daniel Pelka petition to force mandatory reporting on UK parliamentteachers who let Daniel down,  the entire panoply of child safeguarding systems let him down.  The police, the social services, his doctors, his school - everyone.  He died because they all failed to do their duty, he didn't die because teachers did not report his abuse and it is wicked to suggest it.   In short Mandatory Reporting would have done nothing to save his life.

 Here, teachers who left Daniel Pelka's plight to social workers who made crucial mistakes in their duty of care,  are being persecuted by the child-scare industry for not doing child-protections job for them!  They and poor Daniel are being used as a scapegoat in a campaign to get Mandatory Reporting on the UK statute books.     

But Daniel Pelka's case is not the only one in which a child who was under the 'care' of child-protectionists ends up dead because they can't do their job right. The  tragic case of 8 year old Victoria Climbie in February 2000 condemned the entire child-scare industry. 

Victoria Climbie's Death.

Portrait of Victoria Climbie ClimbeVictoria had been under social services and NSPCC family unit care for seven months yet was still beaten to death by her vicious guardians in what is perhaps the first recorded case in the UK of Witch-Children. (Note:   'witch-children' have nothing to do with witchcraft or Satanism, it is a product of the fevered mind of Christian fundamentalists seeking out Satan and blaming misbehaving children of being possessed by devils. The children are then beaten to drive the devil out of them and some die. The SAFF's unique expose of the phenomenon can be seen here:  and we comment at length on it below here:  ) .   Mandatory Reporting would not have saved poor Victoria Climbie's life either but less hypocrisy in the NSPCC and social services might have.  Here's how Angus Stickler reported the Inquiry into Victoria's  death for the BBC.

"The Public Inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbie has heard damning evidence about the role of the NSPCC in events leading up to the little girls death. The eight-year-old was murdered by her great aunt Marie Therese Kouao and Kouao's boyfriend.

She was regularly beaten, trussed up in a bin liner and left in a freezing bath-tub.
Victoria was referred to a centre run by the NSPCC, which worked with problem families, it was an urgent case, but no action was taken for nearly seven months. Confidential documents shown to this programme also prove that crucial details on files were changed after Victoria's death. Members of staff were questioned during the inquiry about whether they had falsified documents to hide the truth. And the charity itself has been criticised for providing the inquiry with doctored photocopies rather than original documents.

The NSPCC is keen to promote an image of slick professionalism at the cutting edge of child protection. But this is at odds with evidence heard by the public inquiry into the death of eight year old Victoria Climbie. She was referred to one of the charity's Family Centres in North London on the 5th of August 1999, nearly seven months before her death. There were concerns about poor hygiene, inappropriate dress and that she seemed anxious around her great aunt. She was a child in desperate need. But even though she was referred to the project as an urgent case, staff were preparing for a party. It was a week before she was allocated a social worker. And even then, no one at the project ever went to see her. During the inquiry NSPCC staff admitted that the centre was a shambles, a project in crisis, where the difficulties were so entrenched that it was unable to provide a quality service...."  (Source: BBC Radio 4 'Features' 29 January 2002 )

The SAFF has tweeted many times since IICSA began its hearings in 2015 that the child-scare industry was seeking to conclude and recommend Mandatory Reporting to the government which parliament will not be able to resist, and which will recommence the sex-abuse witch-hunt anew with more life destroying false allegations without doing one whit to protect children at risk.  

IICSA Promises Mandatory Reporting

 In the latest Sept 2021 report from IICSA on Child Abuse in Religious Organisations they actually admitted that SAFF prediction was correct where on page 117 they say:

H.2: Matters to be explored further by the Inquiry
36. The Inquiry will return to a number of issues that emerged during this investigation,
including but not limited to:
•     mandatory reporting;
•     vetting and barring;
•     regulation of the voluntary sector in respect of religious organisations and settings;
•     introducing primary legislation to provide that voluntary settings adhere to basic
child protection standards.
We anticipate these issues will be addressed in our final report
Yup, top of the list.    There are 90 mentions of Mandatory Reporting in the 226 pages of this report and it comes first in the summing up of matters that IICSA intends to focus on in their final overall report next year.     In other words, as SAFF predicted,  their first and foremost aim is to impose Mandatory Reporting on the public, which according to their text will include people who work with kids in Social and Sports arenas etc.  If  your job involves working with kids you should be worried, very worried, for experience of past inquisitions shows that once the blame-game starts innocents are often drawn in and can have their lives destroyed.  The spate of false allegations during 2015 which stigmatised and tortured innocent VIPs and celebrities must be kept in mind. 

The Black Museum of Priestly Abuse and the Selective Cognisance of IICSA

Having followed the IICSA circus since its inception the SAFF have tried to obtain input to the proceedings and we have sent documentation to it but IICSA have assiduously avoided any direct contact with us or any consideration of SAFF historical research on the subject of child protection.   After reading the above insider information you might now know why a £100M inquiry-to-end-all-enquiries has never responded to any documents the SAFF have sent them, nor any tweets we have made on their timeline.

How the NSPCC refused to warn the public about priestly abuseThe Publication of the SAFF's Black Museum of Priestly Abuse (BM1) in 1991  (see here:  ) was a watershed which was resisted tooth and nail by the great and the good in the child-scare industry.  They simply refuted it.

We updated those statistics to get confirmation of BM1 in 1996 when we published BM2.  (see:

We then took both of these ground-breaking studies to the NSPCC in 1997 with a request for them to add the threat of Priestly Abuse to their established pie-chart of risks to children to warn parents.

The organisation which had been the front-runner in scaring parents with false tales of non-existent Satanic Abuse in nationwide headlines in the 1990 Satanic Panic actually REFUSED to include Priestly Abuse in their pie-chart of risks to children when the SAFF met them. (see image right - double click on it to get a large version to read).  We asked the @NSPCC to alert parents but they refused!   SAFF calculate that  nearly 5,000 more children have been abused by priests in the years following our publication of BM1.  

However, although not taking any part in the condemnation of abusive priests the NSPCC were later found trawling for victims of Jimmy Savile and bigging-up his abuses.   In the end despite the mass hysteria about Savile there were 211 'official'  Savile victims. This is shocking but nowhere near as shocking as the THOUSANDS of child victims of paedophile priests which the NSPCC was ignoring.  

NSPCC Wash Their Hands of Priestly Abuse

You see dear reader, decent Catholics and Anglicans are precisely those people who support and fund the @NSPCC most.  THIRTY YEARS after the SAFF had alerted society to Priestly Abuse an estimated 5,000 small
NSPCC caught spinning the number of Savile victimsinnocent children had been horribly abused by clergymen,  their suffering was being ignored entirely by the chattering classes in the Child Scare Industry.

THIRTY YEARS after the SAFF's unique work on this issue which everyone else wanted to sweep under the carpet, the government's turgid Historical Child Abuse Inquiry (IICSA) questioned the churches and their victims. What were  IICSA's conclusions? 

They came out with the weakest and most mealy-mouthed semi-condemnations of thousands of undeniable cases of the clearest child-abuse imaginable on a far greater scale than any of the other strands in their inquiry.  Far greater than children's' homes, far, far greater than Celebrity Abuse, far, far, far greater than VIPabuse and any of the other strands IICSA is pursuing.    After learning of the THOUSANDS of undeniable instances of Clergymen abusing kids what do IICSA have to say? 

"The report, which is the latest in a series of publications from the IICSA, said 390 clergy members and other church leaders were convicted of abuse between the 1940s and 2018." 

SAFF'S own reports show that this is a grossly underestimated statistic. There are far more than 390 instances of priestly abuse in our own files.  How could IICSA with six years and £100 million pounds worth of resources and staff come to any lesser conclusion?   Because it is the usual white-wash.   Readers who deny this should check out the following fantastic SAFF exposes:

Child-Abuse has become an Industry and as SAFF experience shows, is rarely about saving children from abuse. If they REALLY wanted to protect kids they'd have taken SAFF research seriously 30 years ago and saved thousands of them from abuse.   They clamour for Mandatory Reporting but utterly fail to listen to the SAFF's reporting on these issues.     Not listening to the SAFF was a dereliction of their duty to children everywhere.

Did IICSA condemn the orthodoxies?

So after 100 million pounds worth of taxpayers' money went into IICSA over six  years, what did they say in detail about Clergymen abusing kids.   Well not much, because they hid the true guilt of the Catholic and Anglican churches by subsuming them with a handful of cases from minority religions and cultures to spread the blame which the Catholic Church and the Anglican church deserved. 

They hid the guilt of the churches by amalgamating their extensive crimes with a handful of cases from minority religions to spread the blame which the Catholic Church and the Anglican church deserved. 

The ONS survey of religions by percentage of population taken from census data concludes that:

59% of people in Britain are classified as Christian. 
Only 5% are Muslim.
Just 1.6% are Hindu and
0.5% are Jewish.
Buddhist and Sikh populations are also around 0.5%. 
All these beliefs are lumped together in IICSA's survey of religions, including Paganism of which there is at last count an estimated 200,000 which is approx 0.1% of the population.

Clearly the impact of abuse in Christian churches is phenomenal when compared with  other faiths where instances of abuse is a drop in the ocean. Whilst it would be remiss of IICSA not to include observations and recommendations from all religions,  treating them all as part of the same problem is just nonsense and can only be seen as a tacit cover-up of enormous proportions.   Forcing Buddhist temples to set up child safeguarding rules which are never used will not stop abusive Priests or Clergymen from their consistent proven continuous abuse of children in mainstream churches.   

The Vatican refuses to cooperate with the Ryan Murphy reports on priestly abuse of Irish childrenFor instance, the Catholic Church alone was calculated to harbour over 40,000 child-abusing priests when the Ryan and Murphy reports concluded their investigation in Ireland in May 2009 .  

Yes dear reader, most other Western countries have also undertaken similar long-term inquiries into failures in their own child-protection systems and they did so much earlier than we did in the UK.

The Irish public inquiry roundly berated the Catholic church not only for ignoring the damage that their abusive priests had caused but for hiding abusive priests in other jurisdictions to avoid their cases getting out into the public domain. 
Additionally the Ryan report specifically condemned the Vatican for refusing to cooperate with it and provide information on cases only they held.   

In the U.S. where thousands of cases occurred many diocese were bankrupted by the compensation claims from an avalanche of historic cases. 

However, in Britain IICSA has been very limp-wristed in its dealings with the churches showing the usual deference which allows them to escape accountability.   The SAFF have logged literally THOUSANDS of instances of abuse by Catholic Priests and Church of England vicars and clergymen in the UK.   But when trying to obscure this undeniable avalanche of abuse by clergymen IICSA resorts to paying, of all people, the NSPCC to do 'research' into the use of religious texts and beliefs in minority religions to see if they had been mis-used in abuses to children. 

Remember that the NSPCC were the ones who REFUSED to address the problem of Priestly Abuse when the SAFF first alerted them to it!  All part of the heady 'incestuous' circle of the child-scare industry.
What did the NSPCC find?

C.4: The use of religious texts and beliefs

13. For many, religious beliefs are strongly held and deeply ingrained. Abusers have been
known to take advantage of a victim’s faith in order to facilitate their abuse, and to ensure
their silence.

14. The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) analysed serious
case reviews involving religious organisations and settings, and undertook work in 2017 in
relation to Hindu and Buddhist communities. It identified that the use of religious texts and
teaching affected attitudes and behaviours in safeguarding children.

In other words the NSPCC which had told the world that they had found a new type of mass abuse by Satanists which involved sexually and physically abusing small children and babies which turned out to be completely untrue,  is now blaming Hindu and Buddhist communities for having holy books which are open to manipulation by abusers! 

Remember that the NSPCC have for years utterly ignored SAFF research into the dangers to children of paedophile priests which had proved thousands of extant cases,  yet  is  now turning over stones to try to find examples of it in Hinduism and Buddhism for IICSA.    See how they fly?  

By accreting the handful of cases in which Hindu and Buddhist preachers had abused children and positing abuse as being present in ALL religions, IICSA and the NSPCC utterly corrupt and contort the real truth which is that THOUSANDS of children have been abused by Catholic Priests and Anglican clergymen over the past 30 years.  They know it but they simply won't admit it.  They want to reassure the public that there is no difference between renegade Priests of any religion  but this hides the fact that a predominance of abuse has gone on and continues to go on inside Christian churches which is out of proportion to any threat of any kind posed by minority religions like Buddhism and Hinduism, Judaism and Islam.  

The SAFF maintain that there is an abuse peculiar to Catholicism and Anglicanism and it is not the same type of abuse which occurs sporadically in minority cultures.  We proved it here:  and here: years before IICSA tried to minimise it.   For instance, IICSA appear to  have taken absolutely no account of the effects of Celibacy in the Catholic church. Something which is alien to Hinduism, Buddhism etc. Celibacy is notable by its complete absence in this latest IICSA report. 

The IICSA report on 'Child Protection in Religious organisations and Settings' is a partial, overly-mild and ineffective form of condemnation of orthodox churches which under-estimates the real damage and suffering that Priestly Abuse causes to victims. Palming it off as 'typical' of all religions is disgusting and thoroughly misleads the public and other professionals into the standard pitch that there's nothing to see here , when in fact an estimated 4% of all Priests are evil perverts who abuse kids and escape because their church covers up their crimes.   Remember, these are the people wanting to harangue teachers, sports trainers, scout-masters and the like with Mandatory Reporting!

How the NSPCC caused the 1990 Satanic PanicSHOCK!  In a 6 year long investigation into UK child abuse there is no mention whatsoever of Satanic Ritual Abuse in this IICSA report!

But the real bombshell from IICSA's report is that this comprehensive overview of Abuse in Religious Organisations which evolved directly from the NSPCC's 1990 claims of Satanic Ritual Abuse , does not include one comment on SATANISM!  

As SAFF have shown above, the various child-abuse hysterias which have occurred since 1988 have all followed and been predicated upon the 1990 Satanic Panic.   Allegations of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse began the mass hysteria over child-abuse and have resurfaced in ALL of the strands IICSA have undertaken yet their 
Child Protection in Religious organisations and Settings report  does not report on or mention  Satan or Satanists once.  Not once.   It is as if it doesn't exist.
That's because it DOESN'T exist!

IICSA's Final Report on Abuse in Religious Settings does not mention Satanism once.  That's because it DOESN'T exist.

There is however ONE mention in the report of abuse through a belief in WITCHCRAFT.    When one looks carefully at this we find it is simply a replay of the fictitious link with Witchcraft which has historically been used by the child-abuse industry to avoid having to address the fact that abuse occurred because Christian evangelists had accused children of being witches and beaten them, in some instances, to death to drive the devil out of them.    

This is therefore not abuse in Witchcraft but another example of  physical abuse by CHRISTIAN CHURCHES, usually evangelical and fundamentalist ones,  It is another form of child-abuse by Christians and has nothing whatsoever to do with witchcraft.  For goodness sake people!  If IICSA cannot see the reality of  this and has rushed to condemn a belief in Witchcraft as a form of abuse how  on earth is this inquiry supposed to fix the problem that really exists by letting Evangelical Christians off the hook and blaming it on witchcraft? 

How on earth is this IICSA inquiry supposed to fix the problem of abuse of children in churches by letting Evangelical Christians off the hook and blaming it on Witchcraft when it has nothing to do with Witchcraft?  

As we mentioned above, the SAFF identified the utter falsity of  'witch-children' back in 2006 when ANOTHER government inquiry into child-abuse, the Stobart report, was set up to chart the rise of incidences of abuse of children in church exorcism ceremonies ( see and  and ). 

Black Pastor Abuse - not witchesBecause the name 'witch-children' caught-on in the Media, leading to exaggerated headlines, it was useful for the child-abuse industry to maximise the hysteria and like the Satanic Abuse allegations which had served their purpose a decade before, it falsely reinforced in the minds of the populace that somehow Witchcraft and the people who believed in Witchcraft (i.e. Pagans) were at it again!  

 It mattered little to the press, to the TV;  and to IICSA it would seem,  that Pagans were diametrically opposed to Satanists in their liturgy and philosophy and had never abused any children.  What mattered to everyone, it seemed, was blaming the 'untermensch' again for child-abuse when it was actually happening right under their noses in Christian Churches!

Of everything IICSA has dealt with in its inquiries the 'witch-children' hysteria of 2006  is proof positive of the fact that the entire child-abuse system was refusing to look at the TRUTH of a situation because the bald truth was unpalatable to those involved in assessing it who were, because the UK is a majority Christian country, mostly Christians who would not condemn the crimes against children occurring in a religion they had chosen. The additional fact of it being specific to BLACK Christian churches, i.e. racially specific,  made them recoil from the truth even further.  How much easier for them to just blame the Witches eh? 

The Witch-Child hysteria showed the vicious feedback cycle of abuse in some Christian Churches.    Whilst blaming Satanists for abusing children in the most horrendous ways the very Churches themselves had worked-up a belief in the reality of the Devil in their congregation to hysterical proportions.  This caused superstitious evangelical Christians to see the devil in their wayward children and blame them for everything negative in their lives.

These churchmen accused small children in front of the entire church of being possessed with devils and they tortured and beat the poor kids to drive the Devil out.  Some of them died. Many ended up needing medical help.  How clear can it be?  The very churches who invented the Satanic Panic and promoted it also condemned small children to suffering and in some instances, like that of poor Victoria Climbie, death.  And in both instances blamed Satanists for doing it whilst the stupid British Media took the lie and ran with it.   But this was not clear to the great and the good who populate IICSA I'm afraid.  Here's what their misguided report said:

20. There is a governmental national action plan, on which the Department for Education
is taking the lead, to tackle child abuse linked to faith and belief, which provides information
about child abuse linked to belief in spirit possession, demons or the devil, the ‘evil eye’,
djinns (in the Islamic faith context), dakinis (in the Hindu context), and rituals related to magic
Child protection in religious organisations and settings: Investigation Report
and witchcraft. Such beliefs are not confined to one faith, nationality or ethnic community.
There are examples recorded in Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Pagan faiths, among others.
While only a small minority of those who hold such beliefs go on to abuse children, such
abuse is seen as being under-reported.  There is relatively little known about the nature,
scale and frequency of this type of abuse.

There is relatively little known about it?   EVERYTHING is known about it!  
The SAFF and Stepping Stones Charity ( now known as 'Safe Child' (  )  have known about  'Witch-Children' for nearly 20 years!   How in good conscience can Alexis Jay's inquiry act as though little is known about  witch-children whilst refusing input from SAFF and Stepping Stones?
We know that the exorcism of  children is a form of child abuse which can lead to torture and death.  
We know that it is predominantly practised in Black African evangelistic churches. 
We know that despite a handful of cases occurring in Islam, Hinduism and other minority beliefs the over-arching cause is a belief in spirit possession engendered by the Christian Church.

Archbishop of York demands exorcism on the NHSIndeed the SAFF exposed the dangers of Christian Exorcisms of all kinds way back in 2002 and we actually publicly blamed and condemned the BBC Religious Affairs department and churches of promoting harmful exorcism. We warned them what harm it would cause to adults and children.  (see :  )

Yet the BBC and MSM's promotion of Exorcism as a valid form of therapy lead to the Archbishop of York,  John Sentamu, actually calling in the House of Lords for the government to provide Exorcism therapy on the NHS!  (see rightmost image) 

Yes, you heard that right.  In 2011 four years after the Witch-Children hysteria had manifested, one of the pillars of the Church of England demanded that adults and children be exorcised as a form of therapy and exampled the fact that he had himself conducted an exorcism on 'a young girl'.   Are you getting this Alexis Jay?    Who have you got working for you there at the IICSA, a bunch of amateurs or what?   Here at the SAFF we are all volunteers but we are top notch at what we do.  If we can research and log all these cases why can't IICSA find them? Why did IICSA conclude falsely that 
'There is relatively little known about the nature, scale and frequency of this type of abuse'.   Wasn't £100 million pounds enough to enable you to do it? 
Yeah, we know the answer IICSA - it's a whitewash as usual.

Black Boy in London Exorcism ChurchIt is very difficult for people who believe in the goodness of Christianity to even consider how Christ's teaching can be misconstrued and used to abuse children so the SAFF uploaded a rare film of mass exorcisms in a Black London church in the mid 1990s ( See:    ).    Some of the children you see in this clip from the BBC are likely to have been physically abused and tortured in exactly the same way that Victoria Climbie was in 2000, and may have, like her, died from it.   IICSA would have done well to watch this clip and learn but they obviously didn't did they! 
That's why, like the three Brass Monkeys,  they can make the blatant lie that :

' There is relatively little known about the nature, scale and frequency of this type of abuse.'

They would sooner close their eyes and ears to Christian Exorcism abuse and talk about non existent 'WITCHES'  instead.  Watch the clip and weep.

And of course they tried to blame Paganism again didn't they?

In that context IICSA astoundingly tries to shift some of the blame onto Paganism and Witchcraft.   For instance, IICSA append a very long and detailed glossary in their report to define all the beliefs which are covered by their report.   The Pagan Federation, long since seen as an amateur association of gullible pagans, were naive enough to take part in the report and in so doing inadvertently rubber-stamped the un-fact that some abuse occurs in Witchcraft and Pagan ceremonies.   To be fair the PF attempted to make the distinction the SAFF have above but in rather meek form, requesting that IICSA make it clear that Stobart's report on 'Witch-Children' had nothing to do with Witchcraft and Paganism.   They were digging their own grave of course because IICSA said exactly the reverse. 

25. There were other organisations that made informal spiritual or pastoral support
available, but this support is often not systematic or well publicised. For example, Mr Michael
Stygal, President of the Pagan Federation, said that it:
“has not been directly involved in the provision of pastoral support to victims
of child sexual abuse, partly because of the lack of recent allegations, and also
because we do not have a pool of volunteers trained to provide such support.”

So IICSA have misused the honesty of the Pagan Federation, a voluntary group set up by like-minds to look after the interests of  Paganism in the UK.  In admitting that they do not  have any rules for dealing with child abusers in their midst because there haven't been any, their words are twisted it to imply that there is abuse in Paganism but the PF has not the resources to cope with it!   

This has historically been what happens when naive pagans attempt to deal on a trusting basis with the child-abuse industry.   Of course IICSA did not come to the SAFF for its extensive knowledge on Paganism and the Pagan community. They certainly didn't go to PAN  ( The Pagan Anti-defamation Network ) which has spent the last 30 years decrying false and fraudulent allegations of child-abuse against Paganism and which has consistently berated the Pagan Federation for its lackadaisical response to sectarian lies of this kind.  PAN's website is here:  
For all the world it seems that IICSA wanted a patsy so it could confuse the issue with the public;  and the Pagan Federation fell for it.

Pagan is as Pagan does

Nowhere is IICSA's ignorance of their subject more glaring than in the report's  throw-away definition of Paganism in IICSA's glossary.  Here it is: 
Paganism:   A polytheistic or pantheistic nature-worshipping religion.

Of course this completely misses the point, for it does not differentiate between traditional ancient Paganism and today's Neo-Paganism.  Although the Pagan Federation continually bills itself as representing 'Paganism' it in fact can only represent Neo-Paganism.  The original Paganism was the animistic belief of prehistoric times which came to the fore in the stone age when religious icons like Stonehenge and many other prehistoric sites dotted our land.    All countries the world over have their unique Pagan religious roots, thus Paganism is the original religion of mankind.  Why was this not stated?  

Paganism:  The prehistoric religion of mankind.  The first religious philosophy known in history involving pantheism and the worship of nature.
This truth was not stated because it would upset the orthodox churches and we couldn't countenance doing that could we?
 I mean there's only 40,000 abusive priests in the orthodox religions, we don't want to insult the poor things do we?
 If we can't bring ourselves to admit that they've abused thousands of kids we certainly can't admit that Paganism was the world's first religion because the church tells us they are the source of all evil don't they? 
Apologies for the sarcasm, having to repeat these facts every other week for three decades becomes somewhat tiresome. 

A proper definition of Paganism is crucial because being the original religion of mankind  Paganism came into conflict with Christian missionaries when that religion imposed its absolutist theocracy upon the world and outlawed Paganism when they took control of the Holy Roman Empire after the death of Constantine in 337CE.    It is the historic enmity created by Christianity towards Paganism which perpetuates the false idea that Witches abuse kill and eat babies to this very day - the very motifs which started the 1990 Satanic Panic which is at the root of the child-abuse mania.

Kindly note that Paganism is based on a reverence for Nature and flourished in all countries with different pantheons.  It was only when the Christian church developed its brand of radical monotheism that conflict occurred.  Once in power the early Christians said:  There is only one god, and our's is it.  Your pagan gods are counterfeit and you must convert to Christianity or be extirpated.   And this they did through destroying all Pagan temples and via hundreds of years of genocide and the burning innocent old women at the stake as witches and the creation of the Satan Myth.

Today's Neo-Paganism

Neo-Paganism is the style of Paganism which was reconstituted following the change in the law in 1951 which repealed the age-old Witchcraft Act which had for centuries driven it underground.   Strains of Paganism, Pagan folklore, natural healing wisdom and other liberating perspectives which had been held secretly in families and stored away in little known documents and manuscripts were then unearthed by Neo-Pagans and reprinted to capture the enthusiasm of a new generation of young people who found Neo-Paganism a fine philosophy which respected the planet and all creatures on it.  They reconstituted the Old Ways and in the process repudiated the old sectarian lies from Christianity about the supposed dangers of Witchcraft and Paganism.  This age-old conflict is at the base of all of today's claims of sexual abuse of children in Paganism, Witchcraft and Satanism so you think IICSA would have made efforts to get it right.

The Pagan CredoThis true history is instead apparently ignored by IICSA.  Their sanitised throw-away one-liner definition is so unfocused it would apply not only to Neo-Pagans but also to Hindusim, which of course is one of the few religions going back to prehistoric times and therefore more Pagan than modern Neo-Paganism itself.

There are many other sects which have animistic propensities, including the oldest religion in the world - Zoroastrianism.  And these beliefs don't abuse kids either!

 IICSA's perfunctory definition is NOT therefore a proper definition of Paganism, it demeans Paganism - but what would they care - they're only producing a historic national inquiry into harm caused in religious groups in today's Britain.

Had IICSA asked SAFF we would have referred them to the Pagan Credo, a statement of the philosophy of Neo-Paganism first published in 1990 by the SAFF in conjunction with the Pagan Federation, and several leading lights in the Neo-Pagan movement at the time.  
You can read it here:   and we've also reproduced it in the leftmost column of this web-page.  

The Pagan Credo was distributed in response to the massive misrepresentation of the tenets of Paganism being made in the media during the Satanic Panic.   How telling that we are having to re-use it again 30 years later.   Do you think IICSA was interested in all this?  Why would they be, they've just tacitly repeated those age-old sectarian lies! 

Again this is another good example of the way that IICSA's world-view has been distorted and manipulated to present its own perspective on the problems of child-abuse within religious organisations.   If their intention was to do a thoroughly accurate and insightful overview of religious harm they would have included all this instead of tacitly accusing Pagans of being child-abusers 'like some Priests are'.

 Having tracked the SRA myth since 1988 the SAFF is best placed to comment and our research and analysis shows that there has not been a single case of child sexual abuse within Neo-Pagan covens in the last three decades.  There have been a handful of instances of perverts using the trappings of the occult to manipulate children into abuse but they were not genuine Pagans and their abuse had nothing to do with the rites and ceremonies of Neo-Paganism.  It is impossible to control or even detect pretenders of this type who may disguise themselves as representatives of any religion so IICSA's new rules for safeguarding would  therefore miss their mark.  This is a completely different thing to the abuse problem in the Christian Churches because those abusing clergymen are members of the Church - they are not pretending to be.  This is what the Pagan Federation should have told IICSA and this is what should have been noted by Alexis Jay in her report. 


It's all down to a sense of proportion which is sadly lacking in IICSA's report.   
If the Tory government thought that this mother-of-all-inquiries was going to get at the truth it was sadly mistaken. 
If they thought it would silence the Satan-hunters, it was a forlorn hope. 
If they expected it to actually protect children they were deluding themselves. 

As far as we can see from this strand of their inquiry IICSA have radically missed the boat and offered up the usual platitudes, placing the blame on dead people and demanding the usual rigmarole;  'More Money, More Training.' 
We've heard it SO many times before.
We heard it after Cleveland, after Rochdale, after Orkney, after Ayrshire, after Conifer, after Midland and all the rest, the thread-bare cry goes up.   'Yes, we made mistakes, now give us a few more million so we can increase training and qualifications'. 

What they never say is that the child-scare industry is a self-serving behemoth which rarely saves children from any harm when it really matters. 

Charities like the NSPCC, the NCH and others which offer a lot and deliver little,  should be looked at by the Charity Commission and millions of pounds of taxpayer's money distributed to them via government and local authorities should be checked to see where it is going and whether it is giving good value or simply powering a massive PR machine to benefit the charity itself.    

Damaging and dangerous therapies such as DID and MPD should be banned for perpetuating the patient's sickness and trapping them in a Bizzaro world for life.   If they are allowed to prosper then government funding should be withdrawn from them immediately.

Lastly, if IICSA wants to recommend a new law then it should forget Mandatory Reporting and instead recommend a law for the removal of the indemnity which local authorities, the NHS and professional bodies extend to their employees and members. At the moment any doctor, policeman, social-worker or therapist can do his or her worst and get off scot-free, damages claims are aimed at the organisation or local authority, not the person who caused them.  This just encourages bad practice.   That protection indemnity should be removed so that, at last, patients whose lives have been destroyed by pseudo-psychiatry and tragedies caused by obsessive religious beliefs of social workers, can gain redress through the courts by suing the person who persecuted them.   This would be an easy move and in an instant change the landscape of child-protection for the better whilst saving taxpayers millions of pounds a year.

At the moment allowing the child-scare industry to police itself gives as good a result as allowing the churches to police themselves over abusive priests did.  It resulted in decades of a self-serving cover-up and more abused kids into the bargain.

 That is the real lesson from IICSA's wasted millions.


John Freedom
Paula Young
Tony Rhodes 

NSPCC claiming Satanic Ritual Child Abuse exists and then saying they were sorry for wild statements

Above:  March 1990 'NSPCC say five year olds are being forced into Satanic Rituals involving sexual abuse animal sacrifices and drinking blood.    One year later:  March 1992.  Rochdale Case, which the NSPCC was involved in, crashes. There was no Satanic Abuse and the NSPCC recant 'We are sorry for our wild statements'.   
Are they?   During 1990 the SAFF wrote to the director of the NSPCC multiple times offering our expertise, insight and research on SRA showing that it did not exist.  They gave us the run-around. We offered to come down and give their staff a presentation on the subject. They messed us about. Clearly delaying and refusing our input.  We threatened to go public. The NSPCC then paid for their blue-chip barristers  Mischon de Reya to threaten to sue us for libel if we did. 
We replied that you can't be done for libel if you are telling the truth.
The NSPCC ACTIVELY manipulated the situation to avoid any diminution of their chosen false message that SRA existed and was a threat to children.  So you can see how the child-scare industry lie and cheat we have appended a diary of correspondence with the NSPCC in the leftmost column.  Note that this is only a partial list of information we sent, it is not exhaustive.

How the NSPCC faked stories to raise cash

How the NCH tried to gain funds from non-existent threats of Satanic Abuse

Daily Mail report. NSPCC criticised for sharp practices in fund-raising

NSPCC fund-raising manager leaves 130,000 per year job

We want this website to represent a fair cross-section of opinion. Would you like to add more Information, Observations, Personal Experience, Criticisms or Corrections to SAFF files and publications?  Reach us at