Dame Janet Smith’s 1,000-page report into the sexual misconduct of Jimmy Savile and Stuart Hall and the actions and policies of the BBC during that time has now been published on the BBC website.
It is already being labelled by some as the most expensive whitewash in history: a £6.5 million investigation that tells people nothing new and carefully steers clear of vast areas of possible inquest.
The opening statement in the report refers to a “macho culture” as the key element that enabled Savile to get away with decades of the grossest criminal behaviour.
The Review claims to have contacted over 800 people, claims to have interviewed over 380 witnesses in the Savile investigation (and 100 in the Stuart Hall investigation), and concludes that although BBC employees were aware of sexual assault complaints against the late Jimmy Savile, they did nothing to stop his operation.
Yet the BBC has also essentially been cleared of responsibility, with the former court judge finding no evidence that senior managers “ever found out about any specific complaint relating to Mr. Savile’s inappropriate sexual conduct”.
But, really, no one should expect any better from any official investigation by institutions whose own interests are not served by said investigation.
This report was never going to be any better than the farcical Diana Inquest, for example, the 9/11 Commission report or the Warren Commission report into the JFK assassination. We should, for that matter, not be awaiting the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War with baited breath either.
What we get with Dame Janet Smith’s report is something designed to scale down the nature of Jimmy Savile’s crimes and the far-reaching nature of the cover- up, with all of its implications beyond Savile and the BBC. In other words, a report admitting only that which there is no choice but to admit at this stage; and nothing more.
In essence, the statement is something along the lines of ‘well, some really dodgy shit happened, but it was a long time ago and that’s just how things were back then’.
In terms of the statement that no senior people at the BBC were aware of Savile’s operations – that seems pretty unconvincing, given how many people (including people employed by the BBC) have since stated that they *were* aware and given that Savile’s nature in fact seemed to have been common knowledge to all kinds of people working at the high levels of media.
There must’ve been *some* reason the BBC kept Savile away from events like Children in Need *every year* forever, even when he was still a major figure at the corporation.
The report doesn’t begin to deal with, as The Independent put it, ‘The disturbing implications as to how Savile was able to operate unimpeded and his connections to rich and powerful people’; adding that this has been vetoed ‘in favour of focusing media attention on other minor celebrities and has-beens and the occasional dead politician. While there have been hints pointing to paedophile rings linked to members of the government – notably after Tom Watson MP raised the issue in Parliament – few mainstream journalists have conducted a thorough investigation’.
But however much this reference to “macho culture” cleverly downplays the far more serious and wider-spread reality of Savile’s activities, it would be fairer to the BBC to consider that this wider-spread reality to Savile (and the vast, accompanying cover-up) went well beyond the BBC itself and into the larger realms of government, royalty and the Establishment.
Because the biggest reason Savile can’t be fully, comprehensively exposed is because of his connections to too many other high-profile figures; and therefore the follow-through investigations that would have to be conducted into politicians, royals, and high-level figures of various professions – both living and dead.
The reason why the true scope of the Savile scandal cannot be properly addressed in mainstream outlets is something I previously covered at length in this older article: because Savile is the thread that could potentially unravel the entire Establishment in Britain and perhaps even beyond.
The evidence is abundant that Savile wasn’t just a pedophile himself, but a “procurer of children” for other powerful offenders, including high-profile politicians, the most famous of which may have been former Prime Minister Ted Heath.
It is quite clearly demonstrated in fact that Jimmy Savile was a steady supplier of young boys for high-level ‘clients’ – many of them from the Jersey children’s home, ‘Haut de la Garenne’, with the full cooperation of those who ran the home.
‘Haut de la Garenne’, for those who haven’t heard of it, was a children’s home on the allegedly Satanist island of Jersey, where human remains were found and where children are believed to have been sexually abused and tortured for many years. Saville denied ever having visited the home, despite the fact that photographic evidence exists of him at the site (as well as of Heath himself and allegedly Richard Nixon).
It was, for that matter, the revelations about Saville after his death that acted as a catalyst in the mainstream media for more and more historic sex-crimes to be taken seriously and not limited anymore to the realms of ‘conspiracy theorists’. Jimmy Savile, aside from being friends with Ted Heath, was a close friend of Margaret Thatcher (half of her Cabinet are accused of child sex-abuse offenses too), Lord Mountbatten, Prince Philip and Prince Charles. Savile had countless close and intimate relationships throughout the realms of British politics and he claimed to have spent several Christmases with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her husband Dennis every year for a decade. He, it has since been revealed, was also a trusted adviser to Charles and Diana, the former in particular.
Savile was also friends with the prolific serial killer Peter Sutcliffe (the Yorkshire Ripper). In fact, extraordinarily, it was revealed after Savile’s death that he had been a suspect in the Yorkshire Ripper case – which raises all kinds of questions, but is a fact that has been curiously under-reported in most mainstream outlets.
There is also a case to be made that Jimmy Saville himself may have been working for MI5 directly; and this isn’t the only thing linking VIP child-abuse rings to the intelligence community.
Savile, a man who sexually abused several hundred people and was also a necrophiliac, was nevertheless decorated and honoured by the Queen and, when he died, his coffin was ceremonially carried into Leeds Cathedral by a full military guard. In fact, a cursory analysis of photos from Savile’s elaborate, ceremonial funeral reveals the presence of numerous figures clearly donning Masonic symbols, all indicating that he was considered a very important, revered figure.
In addition to his two knighthoods from the Queen, his OBE and honorary degrees, Savile was a ‘Knight of Malta’. Within Freemasonry, the degree of Knight of Malta is said to be “universally associated with the Masonic Knights Templar”.
Jimmy Savile was also honoured with a Papal knighthood by Pope John Paul II in 1990.
And again, as previously explored in this older post, the implications are strong that Savile has simply become the visible aspect of something far wider spread and more disturbing; and involving not just vast levels of sexual abuse of vulnerable people, and not just paedophilia, but highly organised Satanism involving very high-profile figures, and which may have been taking place for a very long time, protected by an institutional, across-the-board cover-up.
The Daily Express reported that at least two of Savile’s victims were not only abused, but abused within the framework of a Satanic Ceremony.
Savile’s highly publicised voluntary work in hospitals gave him vast access to numerous vulnerable patients to abuse; it also allowed him access to hospital mortuaries – which was significant because, as fellow DJ Paul Gambaccini has claimed, Savile was also a necrophiliac (as in, engaging in sexual acts with corpses).
The Express also reported about alleged rituals conducted in the basements of hospitals including Stoke Mandeville, where Savile was a volunteer porter and fundraiser for almost twenty years. According to this, one of the victims “recalled being led into a room that was filled with candles on the lowest level of the hospital, somewhere that was not regularly used by staff. Several adults were there, including Jimmy Savile who, like the others, was wearing a robe and a mask. She recognised him because of his distinctive voice and the fact that his blond hair was protruding from the side of the mask. He was not the leader but he was seen as important because of his fame. She was molested, raped and beaten and heard words that sounded like ‘Ave Satanas’, a Latinised version of ‘Hail Satan’, being chanted…“
And it may not have just been Savile. The Daily Mirror ran a story some time ago alleging that deceased and knighted MP Cyril Smith was involved not just in inappropriate acts with minors, but in satanic rituals and allegedly the rape of children as young as two years old.
There’s no way of knowing if the allegations about Cyril Smith are true or not.
An alleged victim provided shocking details of the rituals, claimed to have been set up by his stepdad (a man named Michael Horgan), who became known as the ‘High Priest of Satan’.
Highly-placed members of this alleged network attended events where young girls and boys were repeatedly raped while being filmed; some of these events (referred to as “parties”) are said to have taken place on Saddleworth Moor, where infamous child-killers Ian Brady and Myra Hindley had buried their victims.
‘Saville and the 9th Circle’ by Russell Burton really is a video to watch; it’s very dense with information and some of the info or allegations are difficult to verify or look into, but for the most part it’s an eye-watering sucker-punch of check-able information and sources, most of which the mainstream media is unwilling or unable to go anywhere near.
A “macho culture” at the BBC doesn’t even begin to touch the surface of what was going on.
Remarkably, Savile himself didn’t seem to even care about his reputation, but in fact seemed to revel in his depravity and sense of invincibility, often making jokes or tongue-in-cheek statements hinting at his activities; it was the attitude of someone who knew he was extraordinarily well protected, would never be exposed in his lifetime and never be brought to justice.
He really was considered *that* important and that ‘untouchable’ – and not merely as a celebrity or TV personality, but most likely as a figure of more ‘occult’/ritual significance.
Listen to this quote from his own mouth, from around May 2008, and it is clear he was cavalier about his activities and often almost daring people to try to expose him. “I am… the grey, shadowy figure in the background. The thing about me is I get things done and I work under cover.”