The Dirt Book: How the sexual abuse of children is used for political gain

In 1995, the BBC showed a Michael Cockerell documentary called Westminster’s Secret Service about the role of the chief whip, whose task it is to ensure MPs attend important debates and vote as the party leadership desires. It was revealed that the chief whip kept a little black ‘dirt book’ which contained information about MPs, and this was used as a method of political control.

Tim Fortescue, who was Ted Heath’s chief whip from 1970-73, said:

For anyone with any sense, who was in trouble, would come to the whips and tell them the truth, and say now, I’m in a jam, can you help? It might be debt, it might be…..erm……erm, a scandal involving small boys, or any kind of scandal in which, erm er, a member seemed likely to be mixed up in, they’d come and ask if we could help and if we could, we did. And we would do everything we can because we would store up brownie points……., and if I mean, that sounds a pretty, pretty nasty reason, but it’s one of the reasons because if we could get a chap out of trouble then, he will do as we ask forever more.

In short, the chief whip would cover up any scandal, even if it involved “small boys”, child sexual abuse, child rape, whatever you want to call it. They wouldn’t report the crime to the police, although they may use their contacts with the police to make sure to make sure the matter went no further. This means that a paedophile would be the ideal candidate for promotion within the party, easily blackmailed and bought, loyalty and discretion guaranteed.

An example of how the dirt book may have been used is the case of Sir Peter Morrison, who was Conservative MP for Chester from 1974-1992, as well as being Margaret Thatcher’s Parliamentary Private Secretary. Morrison has been linked to a notorious paedophile ring that sexually abused children in North Wales care homes.

Chris House, who worked as reporter for the Daily Mirror, twice received tip-offs about Morrison being caught abusing underage boys which resulted in just a police caution, but libel threats stopped the newspaper from running the story. Peter Connew, the former editor of the Sunday Mirror, said “such was the hush-up that nobody could get hold of a log of the arrest”.

Edwina Currie, who was a Conservative MP at the time, said “Peter Morrison has become the PM’s PPS. Now he’s what they call ‘a noted pederast’,’ with a liking for young boys; he admitted as much to Norman Tebbitt when he became deputy chairman of the party, but added, ‘However, I’m very discreet’ – and he must be!”

It seems possible that Morrison was given the job of PPS precisely because he was a paedophile; the party had ‘dirt’ on him so they could rely on his loyalty.

Morrison was an alcoholic, famously incompetent, and often found asleep at his desk, so I can’t think of any other reasons for his promotion to PPS. Not a thought was given to the poor children who he abused, and nobody in his party went to the police to stop him committing these crimes. Edwina Currie was quite happy to save this ‘gossip’ about child rape to boost her book sales.

If an MP’s ‘indiscretions’ became too public to cover up, they were demoted or exiled to an obscure position.

Mike Hames, who was head of Scotland Yard’s Obscene Publications Branch, talked of a raid on a brothel during which a man in pinstriped suit announced that he a cabinet minister. “That was before the end of Communism and, through a politician friend, I informed the PM, Mrs Thatcher. I noticed that the man, a junior minister, was quietly dropped later in a reshuffle.”

Elm Guest House would have been well known to Margaret Thatcher, having been raided by 60 police and then covered up by the DPP and the Attorney General, who stopped the press from reporting on it. It is thought that at least 7 Conservative MPs were visitors to the paedophile brothel.

Were any of these MPs later promoted to ministerial positions?

Ted Heath is credited with introducing the dirt book:

The most significant changes in the role of the whips appear to have taken place during the late 1950s and early 1960s. Heath as chief whip from 1956 to 1959 brought a new professionalism to the job; he was the first holder of that position to routinely attend cabinet meetings,although neither he nor his successors have been full cabinet members. More significant was the way he systematically gathered information about every member of the party, and developed the art of using this to maximum advantage. He was after all responsible for piloting the Conservative party through the Suez crisis and its turbulent aftermath. When Edward Short became Wilson’s chief whip in 1964 he found that it ‘had been the practice to keep a “dirt book” in which unsavoury personal items about members were recorded’, and he immediately ordered this to be discontinued. It is probable that such stories arose simply out of the thoroughness with which Heath and his successors had gathered information. Heath himself explained his professionalism: ‘I acted on the principle that the more you know about the people you ae speaking for, and the more they know about you and what you are being asked to do, the better.’ (extract from ‘Churchill to Major: The British Prime Ministership Since 1945′ by Donald Shell)

So the chief whip would proactively look for ‘dirt’ on MPs, not just wait for them to get into trouble. This might explain how the child abuse campaigner Geoffrey Dickens MP was so quickly exposed for having an extra-marital affair after he named the paedophile diplomat Sir Peter Hayman.

Although the Labour chief whip, Edward Short, claims to have discontinued the dirt book system, it seems obvious that both Labour and the Liberals would have continued to use it.

The Liberal MP Cyril Smith would have needed his own book given his record of child sex offences stretching from the 1960s to the late 1990s, which makes it all the more staggering that former Liberal leader David Steel claims never to have received a complaint about him

Smith, as an Elm Guest House visitor, a friend of Jimmy Savile, and an associate of both Peter Righton and Sidney Cooke, would have been impossible for the chief whip to control, as he would have been able to bring most of Westminster down with him.
 
Fleet Street also have their own version of the dirt book, used to exercise control over politicians. What other explanation could there be for the Sunday Times/News International not using the leaked Operation Ore list, despite there being enough VIP paedophiles on the list “to fill newspaper front pages for an entire year”?

Source of article http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2013/05/11/the-dirt-book-how-the-sexual-abuse-of-children-is-used-for-political-gain/

Stop state child stealing in the UK: There is a word for it - Fascism

'The UK is the ONLY State in the WORLD that gags parents whose children have been taken by Social Services.

 

2. The UK is the ONLY State in Europe to permit forced adoption.

 

3. The UK is the ONLY State in Europe to allow Punishment without Crime, i.e. the taking of children by Social Services from parents who have not committed any criminal offence.

 

4. The UK is the ONLY State in Europe taking children for emotional abuse and “risk of emotional abuse” – on the basis of predictions from overpaid 'experts' that one day parents just might harm their children.

 

5. The UK is the ONLY State in Europe to censor conversation between parents and children in care. Children are left wondering what they have done wrong, as parents are forbidden to explain the situation, or discuss the court case in any way. Phrases such as “I love you and I miss you” are also forbidden under the threat of contact being stopped immediately if the parents “transgress.”'

 

Why this is important

 

While legally kidnapping is an international phenomenon, Forced Adoptions are unique to the UK. When 2,000 signatures are reached, they will be taken to MEPs.

This petition aims to stop all institutions involved in covering up these destructive practices, greatly helped by the Secrecy of Family Courts and a Judiciary that is independent from Government.

Over 1,000 children per month are put into 'care' in the UK. Generally against the will of parents and grandparents. Most of them are foreigners. Only a small percentage actually gets adopted.
http://bit.ly/RYV1Jq

An estimated 10,000 children went missing according to a report of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Runaway and Missing Children: http://bit.ly/19GAi5L

The UK is the only country in which parents are 'gagged' and threatened with prison, if they speak out. In 2006, 200 prisoners were in prison due to the family courts. Hearings are carried out in secrecy, at times not even open to the media.

Although ratified on paper, the UK does not implement the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child or Article 8 of the European Human Rights Act, the right to family life.

More on what's unique in the UK on "Punishment without Crime": http://bit.ly/MbzhX3

Background information:

For the normal non-believer, this is your induction:
Mainstream Media Overview – quite a lot of articles that didn’t make a difference: http://bit.ly/N45qUG

Our Portfolio of Nine Cases that we submitted to the Education Select Committee when it investigated child ‘protection’: http://bit.ly/109Bei8

For the experienced cynic, this is your analysis:
Child snatching is one of Seven Deadly Syndromes and Seven Media Cover-Ups: http://bit.ly/WLlc9V

For the person who can be convinced by Statistics: http://bit.ly/10WmFQx
• The Money: http://bit.ly/UODtAt
• The Kids: http://bit.ly/Woo9Am

From victims and their supporters who signed the online petition
• The Secrecy of Family Courts should be lifted NOW: http://bit.ly/kExfF1
• and added these marvellous comments: http://bit.ly/ZprkcH

LINKS:
Legally Kidnapped: http://legallykidnapped.blogspot.co.uk/
Forced Adoption: http://forced-adoption.com/introduction.asp
The Independent - The untold story of gagging orders: http://ind.pn/kPhKRn

What is worst: babies are taken at birth, without mothers getting a chance of proving their parenting skills, or, even worse, in prison. Foreigners and immigrants are targeted – at a loss to understand and with hardly any chance of ever seeing being a family again.

Furthermore, it has become politically correct for homosexual couples to adopt children.

The motivation of Social Services tends to be money in a multi-billion industry that leaves broken hearts and damaged lives behind: parents, often falsely imprisoned, and children who will later use Facebook to find their roots and heal their feelings of abandonment.

 

NB

 

Sabine McNeill has launched a petition to Stop Forced Adoptions in the UK that non-UK MEPs want to take further in Brussels, as soon as 2,000 signatures are reached

So lets help get those 2000 signatures. Please sign.

Leon Brittan and the Paedophile Information Exchange

 

Leon Brittan became Margaret Thatcher’s Home Secretary on 11th June 1983. Not long after starting in the role, he came under pressure to ban an organisation called the Paedophile Information Exchange.

The Paedophile Information Exchange, or PIE, campaigned to have the age of consent reduced to 4 years old, which would have effectively legalised paedophilia. PIE published a contacts page in its newsletter with a PO Box number, so paedophiles across the UK and abroad could forge links and trade tips on how to access children, and how to obtain images of child abuse.

This was how organised paedophile networks developed in the UK, and helps to explain how paedophiles ended up infiltrating so many schools, children’s homes, and other institutions. By the early 1980s PIE had over 1000 members, including people in prominent and powerful positions in the British Establishment such as diplomats, MPs, aristocrats, intelligence agents, teachers, and child protection experts.

There were a number of big news stories in the early 1980s involving child abuse and missing children. One of these was the ‘Brighton Beasts’ case in August 1983; a 6 year old boy was snatched off the street and sexually assaulted by three men.

These cases intensified public opinion about paedophiles, and strengthened the case for an outright ban of PIE and similar organisations.

Leon Brittan, however, did not share the public’s urgency to ban PIE.

He outlined a ‘three step approach’ to the issue, which consisted of asking chief constables to report to him, asking the Department of Public Prosecutions to ‘consider’ prosecuting PIE members, and asking parents to keep a close eye on their children.

This provoked an angry reaction both from the public and some sections of the press. The mother of the 6 year old boy who was assaulted in Brighton said Brittan’s policy was “weak and worthless“. Charles Oxley, a headmaster who had infiltrated PIE and provided his information to the police, criticised Brittan’s policy as “apathetic”.The Daily Express, in a comment piece on 2nd September 1983, were most damning of all:

 

 The policy of asking the DPP to consider prosecutions seems particularly suspect, since the DPP had already decided not to prosecute PIE member Sir Peter Hayman.


There was even a reported panic among prominent PIE members to cancel their memberships in anticipation of a clampdown. But they needn’t have worried because Mr. Brittan didn’t do anything.

Brittan’s inaction on the issue led a Conservative MP called Geoffrey Dickens to launch a campaign to ban PIE, which attracted huge popular support. Dickens started a petition, and with the help of coverage in the Daily Express and the Daily Mirror, it received over 1 million signatures from members of the British public.

In November 1983, Geoffrey Dickens gave Leon Brittan a ‘massive’ dossier on child abuse, with specific allegations about a link between PIE and Buckingham Palace staff, Foreign Office staff, and the civil service. Brittan did not investigate. It now seems likely that this paedophile ring would have been involved in the child abuse at Elm Guest House, seeing as the visitors to Elm Guest House included senior members of the Royal Household, civil servants, and other prominent Establishment figures.

Had Brittan acted on this dossier, a powerful paedophile network could have been smashed, and countless children saved from abuse.

In January 1984, Dickens gave Brittan a second dossier alleging child abuse in a children’s home and naming prominent paedophiles including a television executive.

In all probability this would have been the BBC, as they allowed Jimmy Savile to get away with abusing children for decades.

Again, had Brittan acted on this dossier it would have almost certainly led to Savile and many others, and could have stopped the abuse of hundreds of children.

The Home Office now say the dossier is missing, and when Paraic O’Brien recently asked Leon Brittan about it, he said “I do not recollect this and do not have any records that would be of assistance“. How strange that he can’t remember these incredibly important files.

In November 1984 two members of PIE’s executive committee were jailed, for 6 months and 18 months respectively. PIE bowed to public opinion and officially disbanded after the trial, which meant that after stalling for so long, Leon Brittan never had to make a final decision on banning PIE.

It appears that the rights of child abusers were given prominence over the rights of children. I’m sure Mr. Brittan had a reason for his failure to act on child abuse but we may never find out due to his inability to recall events from the 1980s.

Source here

Also see following

Fantastic News For Robert Green

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.