Establishment Paedophiled Part 2 : **Warning, potential triggers**

[standwellclearvehiclereversing]

A new thread following on from the previous one in Chat here

My aunt and uncle have lived in Blanca, Spain for many years. They have settled and are part of the community.
At the local church there is a guy of twentyish who lives in room at the church. He keeps the church tidy and in order, in return for his board.

My uncle isn't religious at all but sees him sometimes as he passes the church. He struck up conversation with the him and realised he had MH problems and was from the east of europe.

Over the years my aunt and uncle struck up a friendship with him. He is a kind soul but very nervous and avoids eye contact. My uncle would bring him some food and lend him any tools if anything in the church needs fixing.

This brought my uncle into his room for whatever reason, and he was taken back at how start the room was. Just a bed, chair etc. My uncle went back with some blankets. He broke down in tears and explained that he id being sexually abused by the priest. He showed my uncle his scars where he has been forcefully penetrated.

Since then my aunt, uncle and some of the villagers have continued to offer him an escape.My uncle has an annexe that the lad could live in and the villegers have approached the police about the priest.
The police have shrugged and said whilst they don't doubt his story there is no way that anyone would believe a "crazy foreigner"

This is continuing now, he still lives at the church but is too frightened to leave. The priest denies everything and all the parishners won't believe a word of it. The abuse is so ingrained in his daily life he cannot see a way out and believes he deserves it. He is even grateful to the priest as he has given him an opportunity.

Abusers have so much power it's frightening.

It's terrifying. Not just for the victims' sake, who clearly need to be the priority and focus, but the wider ramifications seem surreal. Really surreal. Just what kind of people can work their way up so high, and be so morally repugnant. The thought that these types of people might be significantly involved in ruling and governing our country, making decisions about our everyday lives, safeguarding our vulnerable and future generations.

I've seen internet rumours about the RF and always dismissed as conspiracy claptrap. But the articles I posted earlier, and the later one of Garlic's can't really leave anyone not slightly . I can't believe I only just discovered them. And when you add in the recent moves to suddenly legislate, giving members of the RF Get Out Of Jail Free Cards, I think you have to be in another universe if that doesn't make you raise an eyebrow. I mean, the timing, the speed of it, really? (Does anyone know the latest on this? I remember reading about it the same same time as Cameron was rushing something else highly significant through. But did it go through?)

I actually wish someone would come along and show us this is all paranoid nonsense, and it's all some horrid big wind-up.

Freedom of Information Act, Section 37:-
Communications with Her Majesty, etc. and honours.

(1)Information is exempt information if it relates to—

(a)communications with the Sovereign,

(aa)communications with the heir to, or the person who is for the time being second in line of succession to, the Throne,

(ab)communications with a person who has subsequently acceded to the Throne or become heir to, or second in line to, the Throne,

(ac)communications with other members of the Royal Family (other than communications which fall within any of paragraphs (a) to (ab) because they are made or received on behalf of a person falling within any of those paragraphs), and

(ad)communications with the Royal Household (other than communications which fall within any of paragraphs (a) to (ac) because they are made or received on behalf of a person falling within any of those paragraphs), or]

(b)the conferring by the Crown of any honour or dignity.

(2)The duty to confirm or deny does not arise in relation to information which is (or if it were held by the public authority would be) exempt information by virtue of subsection (1).

Amended in 2011, unpublicised. Commentary in the Independent at the time.

Knitted Is there another central charity, body we can get behind?

I don't know. I'm not sure who is leading on this in the vol sector.

I am saddened by the lack of support from MNHQ, when you think about what this forum is all about, who else is there to stand up for vulnerable children and young people, and shout about the wrongs in our system? Particularly since the "We believe you" campaign.

Maybe it's in the "too hard to deal with" tray, and at some point it might become easier for MNHQ to take a stand. At least these threads haven't been zapped - that could have happened all too easily.

I was wondering why this wasnt on my tio, jsut realised i didnt comment on here

I am here, reading and following. Its shocking :(

Ooh x-post Garlic. Will read

A Freedom of Information request on whether the Queen & Prince Charles are subject to criminal or civil prosecutions was refused by the Attorney General

Wikipedia says the monarch is immune from arrest in all cases; members of the royal household are immune from arrest in civil proceedings. No arrest can be made "in the monarch's presence", or within the "verges" of a royal palace. When a royal palace is used as a residence (regardless of whether the monarch is actually living there at the time), judicial processes cannot be executed within that palace.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#United_Kingdom

Welcome back, Beyond

Bees, your sad & repulsive story about the priest's protegé/victim really illustrates how abuse devalues victims in their own minds. Also how abusers manage to abuse those around them - in this case, the parishioners - by twisting their belief systems; effectively gaslighting them.

Somebody should tell the Pope about him! Unfortunately they'd probably have to get the Francis directly, as there isn't much evidence those around him share his shame at his church's activities.

get to Francis - I haven't invented a new religious process called "The Francis"

Thanks Garlic - it seems the issue wasn't so much that it was a recently rushed through process, but that it was buried in the small print and unpublicised. I am certain it was reported on recently, alongside the rush on processing the snooping law, but can't find where at the mo!

I saw that, too, Whistling, and similarly couldn't find it later (didn't help that I crashed my PC, hadn't backed up for a year and lost all my bookmarks.) At a guess, the amendments were proposed in 2011 and ratified earlier this year without debate. It was an interesting legislative set. FOI gained several major constraints, and we lost most of our rights to privacy. Iirc, it had to be approved in a hurry because there was 'no time' although Parliament had just given itself an extra week off as there was no legislation to discuss

I'm a lurker on these threads and just wanted to show my support.

I have gone from hearing about PIE and thinking it was a load of conspiracy-theorist nonsense, to fully supporting the idea that there is a sinister network operating in the UK and Europe and being deeply disturbed by it. I'd like to thank you all for raising awareness of it all and offer my support (in as much as I can offer....I am currently an expat and therefore don't have an MP or anyone I can go to about this).

Some of the teachers at the private school I went to were eventually discovered to have been operating an informal paedophilia network (although none of us came to any direct harm), which was a real eye-opener about the fact that paedophilia isn't so much of a dirty, private secret, but actually something that people share and talk about in nasty groups.

In my professional life, I have worked in public affairs and met with many MPs, and that too was an eye-opener, not in terms of links to sexual abuse, but in terms of seeing the dirty tricks they play and how everything in parliament is just one big game to them. I honestly never met a single decent one, and I dread to think of what deals and manipulation goes on behind the scenes at Westminster. I was even involved in a stage-managed appearance by one MP when he told us in advance that he was going to shout at us when we (my company) and him were seen together in public, so his constituents thought he was on their side, but 10 minutes later he was round the back having a cup of tea with us and laughing about it. Utterly vile behaviour.

I am still slightly agog at what my eyes have been opened to on these threads, so those of you in the know, please keep digging away and posting as it's not going unnoticed.

It's all smoke and mirrors isn't it.

I'm also reading, have nothing to add really as this is all completely new to me. Am absolutely horrified, I just cannot believe this is going on all around us.

Exaro reports Church leaders have earmarked £2 million for counselling and other support for victims of child sex abuse by priests. The move is part of a determined effort by Justin Welby, who became archbishop of Canterbury last year, to tackle what he recognises as a paedophile problem at the Church of England (CoE).

The Lantern Project has posted this on its Facebook, but I can find no other reports of this development. I would have thought it significant that the archbishop continues to press the issue; seems nobody else does!

Good news, I think, anyway.

it's a step in the right direction

Apparently David Cameron met with Justin Welby and the guy from the Lantern Project. I bloody hope this is with a view to investigating the extent of systemised CSA and not ways of keeping victims quiet!

I'm going to try & leave my cynical hat on its peg today

It's the covering up that is what worries me most as these people are still in power or have promoted / trained people in the same ilk.

They are the people who need rooting out as they create an environment for this to thrive.

Very pleased to find this thread. I have been following the alleged Westminster/organised child sex abuse ring/cover up on this blog:
ianpace.wordpress.com/

The most important point is for people to recognise that this is not just about child sex abuse/paedophilia.
It is about the cover up, by powerful groups and individuals, of VIP child sex abuse.

As many point out, this is not a new story, but that does not mean it is old news. On the contrary, the reason the same stories are surfacing after 10, 20, even 30 years, is that they have been buried by the establishment time and time again, suppressed, denied, covered up.

This is corruption and the abuse of power by our government, police, judiciary and security services.

Victims and whistleblowers have been smeared and silenced for decades, whilst the abusers have been allowed - and even helped - to carry on abusing - see Cyril Smith and Jimmy Savile.

IN my opinion this is the biggest scandal our government has seen, although you wouldn't know it from the current silence in Westminster and the muted media response.
So it's up to us - the people - to keep pushing for justice. Don't let this story get buried again.

Yes to what you said Noddy. The friendship of one royal with Savile alarms me.
Hope you're ok Jetcat. What happened to you is terrible.
Whistlingpot, it is surreal. In a really odd way though, it made sense of what happened to me as a child. My brother touched me inappropriately and sexually harrassed me throughout my teenage years. My family behaved like I was making a fuss when they found out. I was made out to be rather mad and my mum spread the word around family members that I was mentally unstable. I think amongst some people at the time it was seen as normal. The silence of so many and the covering up sort of explains to me how people get away with it.
Totally agree with you bibjay. Biggest scandal ever.
The company some people keep is pretty shady. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/mar/08/jeffrey-epstein-prince-andrew-chris-bryant

Also commenting after lurking during this and previous thread, like many I have nothing to add other than disgust, sadness and anger. There must be more we can do? Only 197 comments on an issue of this magnitude? I know the other thread ran longer but still, feels like grains of sand in the grand scheme of things... Does anyone at all have any sway with MNHQ or anyone else who could help? Could Simon Danczuk get involved with a group of mumsnetters who want to campaign? As a staunch Attachment Parent/believer in gentler parenting I generally despair at how children in UK society are treated. This has taken this to a terrifying new level and I am ashamed to be part of a 'society' that treats its most vulnerable and smallest members in this way.

Also a while back I came upon another huge controversy which links CR/Jill Dando murder/high profile paedophile ring with the 'abduction' (IMHO - and that of many others - a huge cover up for at the least manslaughter, probably worse) a very famous little girl several years back... Does anyone else know/agree with what I am alluding to here?

I've just been reading some great blogs about the whole issue - by lawyers and such, not the dreaded-but-invaluable ilk of Icke. This struck me as beautifully clear:

It's on the outcry against Butler-Sloss's appointment, by Dr Eilidh St John

..........................................................................

As I think about it, however, it becomes clear to me why there was so much surprise and resistance to the idea among many commentators and politicians that the appointment was wrong. The word that springs to mind is “entitlement”.

Entitlement is a theme which runs through the entire matter.

The abuse of children must be grounded in entitlement. Adult men, whether they are priests, politicians, judges, lawyers, doctors, or garbage collectors must think they are somehow entitled to sexually abuse children.

Attorneys-General and other people in high places must think they are entitled to protect their friends and colleagues from public exposure when they commit crimes. I refer to Michael Havers’ statement again:

“All Mr Dickens has done is make certain that Sir Peter’s shame and embarrassment is known to the world. There cannot be any justification whatsoever for what has happened. How can the public have gained by this? How can it be in the public interest to name this man?"

I wonder if he would have asked the same question about the naming of an unemployed person who had burgled a house or over-claimed on a social security payment. I suspect not.

Home Secretaries must think they are entitled to appoint one of their own to oversee inquiries into the activities of others of their own.

..........................................................................

Why do so many seem not to get this? Is it that 'we' collectively accept men's entitlement to rape children, and posh people's entitlement to do what they like without censure?

Lulu, do you mean Madeleine McCann? I only took a look at the details a few weeks ago, having had scant interest in it beforehand. There's certainly been a now-familiar routine of police 'incompetence', accidentally destroyed evidence, and material facts denied.

Apologies if that's not what you meant.

I'm afraid to say name as sure I read a while back that mumsnet deletes mention of said case for fear of libel. I encourage you to google [surname] + files.com and also look up the various FB groups, some crazy talk on them but I was totally convinced by it all... I'm sure there's a link.... Like you say similar threads of incompetence, cover-up, mainstream media towing the line etc. It's horrific beyond belief.