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.
Ends:
|
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.
|
£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 published its groundbreaking research
into paedophile priests, The Black Museum of Priestly
Abuse in 1991. ( See: http://saff.nfshost.com/sickvics.htm
)
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!
( http://saff.nfshost.com/blackmus2.htm )
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 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 ( http://saff.nfshost.com/fontaine.htm
). 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.
On 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. )
This
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 ( http://saff.nfshost.com/rochdale.htm
) 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
( http://saff.nfshost.com/nspcc.htm
), 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:
( http://saff.nfshost.com/DIDpsychiatricvoodoo.htm
) 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: http://saff.nfshost.com/marchant.htm
and http://saff.nfshost.com/eyefelsteadmyers.htm
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:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrQRq-y01dc
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'.
Now 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: http://saff.nfshost.com/reachout.htm
) 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: http://saff.nfshost.com/winebald.htm
)
Simply 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 http://saff.nfshost.com/devilvid.htm
)
The 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 ( http://saff.nfshost.com/wilfredwongkidnap.htm
)
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
This 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: http://saff.nfshost.com/colemanrains.htm
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:
http://saff.nfshost.com/panoramavip.htm#1993origins
) . 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 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrQRq-y01dc
)
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: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9971255/Victims-Met-Police-corruption-incompetence-malpractice-tell-Boris-ditch-Cressida-Dick.html
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
By 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 http://saff.nfshost.com/hautgarone.htm
) 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 (
http://victimhood.nfshost.com )
The Death of 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
( http://saff.nfshost.com/savilemonster.htm
). 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. http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.com/
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!
The 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.
Completely 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 http://saff.nfshost.com/tateclevelandvid.htm
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.
The 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.
So 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.
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 http://saff.nfshost.com/panoramavip.htm
). 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.
Other
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.
http://saff.nfshost.com/bcamp.htm
Beatrix 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 ( http://saff.nfshost.com/broxtowe.htm
) 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 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEr0LzkZqJg
) 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: http://saff.nfshost.com/jjones.htm
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: http://saff.nfshost.com/shieldfl.htm
Was IICSA
infiltrated by Radical Feminists
Had
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: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/11/deserved-downfall-tom-watson-leon-brittan?CMP=share_btn_tw
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.
NSPCC = NKVD?
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.
As 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: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNlyI5rFlSE
). 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?
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 change.org 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 teachers 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.
Victoria 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:
http://saff.nfshost.com/stobart.htm 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;
and
•
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.
The Publication of the SAFF's Black Museum of
Priestly Abuse (BM1) in 1991 (see here: http://saff.nfshost.com/sickvics.htm )
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: http://saff.nfshost.com/blackmus2.htm
)
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 innocent
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."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54433295
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:
http://saff.nfshost.com/ryanmurphy.htm
http://saff.nfshost.com/belgianscandal.htm
http://saff.nfshost.com/churchofengland.htmm
http://saff.nfshost.com/blackmus2.htm
http://saff.nfshost.com/sickvics.htm
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.
For 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:
http://saff.nfshost.com/ryanmurphy.htm and
here: http://saff.nfshost.com/churchofengland.htm
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!
SHOCK!
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 http://saff.nfshost.com/stobart.htm
and http://saff.nfshost.com/nspcc.htm
and http://saff.nfshost.com/witchild.htm
).
Because
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' ( http://www.safechildafrica.org/
) 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.
Indeed 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 : http://saff.nfshost.com/everyman1.htm
)
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.
It 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: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZLNfgWD1Pc
). 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:
http://www.spanglefish.com/PAN/index.asp?pageid=304874
)
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.
This 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: http://saff.nfshost.com/pagancredo.htm
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.
Conclusions
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.
Ends.
John Freedom
Paula Young
Tony Rhodes

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.

|