Let's just sit here and let our kids get abused.

a reply to: OrphanApology

The thing is a very large percentage of the children abused by people firmly entrenched in the establishment, were children who were in the care system. It appears that many paedophiles were given top jobs in children's homes and these poor unfortunate children were ferried from all over the U.K down to London, where these sick Bastards would physically and sexually abuse them; in some cases even murder them.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Don't get me wrong I think that children homes like that are a very bad idea for that very reason. They are perfect for wide scale abuse due to the isolation and helplessness of the victims.

As messed up as the foster system is in the U.S., at least with such a system you do reduce the likelihood of largescale abuse happening like that because the children are spread out among many different caretakers.

Also I am not surprised about there being links to the establishment.

I have a theory that the only people who get elected and appointed have some serious bones in their closets.

Reason? Potential blackmail and leverage for those who hold the pen.

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: TheDon

The majority of most rapes happen by known members. Not just in child abuse but adult rape as well.

Statistically it makes sense considering those who have the most access to children are family and friends not strangers. Same with general rape victims.

This thread is about the ongoing scandal relating to the child abuse and murder by people who were embedded in the Establishment, here in the U.K. They weren't family members, they were people many had probably seen on T.V, but would never have come across, if their circumstances had been different.

The claims have been well documented, yet still no arrests. Many of the perpetrators are either so old, they can't tell you their own name, or they are dead. It is a national scandal, yet very little seems to be being done about it.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Yeah I imagine the reason it's just now coming to light even though the perps are old is because someone decided that was the time for it to come to light.

How often do these perps get exposed when they're in the prime of their abuse?

a reply to: OrphanApology
This quote from your post gave me flashbacks to 2 girls, you are so right:

If I had a dollar for every woman I've spoken to that had been abused that told me she went to someone only for them to tell her it was her fault or she imagined it. Well...I'd have at least a 20.

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Yeah I imagine the reason it's just now coming to light even though the perps are old is because someone decided that was the time for it to come to light.

How often do these perps get exposed when they're in the prime of their abuse?

It appears never.

Although, I would suggest that the cover up and delay tactics points to a much broader involvement, probably from some serving M.P's, Lord's and others in the officialdom.

When allegations first arose, David Cameron was quick to jump on the 'Conspiracy Theory'bandwagon. It soon came to light that this wasn't the case, so I would ask exactly why did he say this?

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Well these politicians are not stupid.

If someone points out a conspiracy theory in regard to alleged sexual abuse then in my opinion they are just dodging.

If you notice the way a person will normally address sexual abuse when speaking to the media is that they will say "It's under investigation at this time, no further comment".

To start dodging by trying to make it seem like a conspiracy theory to me is just silly.

I do think though that there is a lot of potential for government bodies to use things like child sexual abuse as a way to ruin someone's life even if they didn't do anything(especially if they find child porn on computer, don't get me started on how easily that could be fabricated and planted). But I think when you have widespread victims coming out and especially if it's at the end of the alleged abusers life(BIG red flag that's it's very, very true...think Sandusky and Jimmy Savile)...I think automatically saying something is a conspiracy theory is a red flag in itself.

a reply to: PizzaAnyday505

If you dig deeper you find that the real reason they sexually abuse and use children has to do with occult mythology. They believe that since children are the most pure spirits, since they are mostly untainted, they can attain the most pure and strong energy from them through sex; which in their view, is a communion with God/higher self.

a reply to: Voyaging

Man that's disturbing. These people are mentally sick

originally posted by: Voyaging
a reply to: PizzaAnyday505

If you dig deeper you find that the real reason they sexually abuse and use children has to do with occult mythology. They believe that since children are the most pure spirits, since they are mostly untainted, they can attain the most pure and strong energy from them through sex; which in their view, is a communion with God/higher self.

Well their God isn't my God.

Even if this is true, it's not a valid excuse to abuse the innocent.

originally posted by: theMediator

originally posted by: Voyaging
a reply to: PizzaAnyday505

If you dig deeper you find that the real reason they sexually abuse and use children has to do with occult mythology. They believe that since children are the most pure spirits, since they are mostly untainted, they can attain the most pure and strong energy from them through sex; which in their view, is a communion with God/higher self.

Well their God isn't my God.

Even if this is true, it's not a valid excuse to abuse the innocent.

It's probably something they tell themselves in order to justify their depraved actions.

a reply to: OrphanApology

I completely agree. The justice system is ill equipped to deal with these matters, but I believe that one way they could start to address the problem is for sentences to be much, MUCH longer. A minimum of life in prison on the first offence would be a good start.

a reply to: TrueBrit

The problem though is deciding what falls into the category of life sentences for sexual crimes.

-Do you lock someone who has looked at child porn away for the rest of their life?
-At what age does rape enter the age of adulthood with lesser sentences? Is a young woman at 13 being raped by someone different than say, a child that's 11? Do you give the man who raped the 13 year old a lesser sentence and eventual release? Why or why not?
-When it comes to severity of a crime, death is the ultimate crime. So in that context, how do you make the argument that a child molester gets life in prison when a killer may only get 20 years?
-Many times those who surround these child abusers are just as guilty in my opinion than the abusers themselves. A woman who was sexually abused as a child is very likely to date men who resemble their fathers later in life, exposing their children to danger. How do you deal with the flip side of the coin? The women who are usually involved in these messes? Do you put them away for life as well. After all, although removed by a degree of separation...they too are child abusers and responsible for these cycles of abuse.

a reply to: TheDon

If you have a problem with my position on the topic, attack that, if you actually have the wit to manage it. If not, do not resort to attacking me personally. That is not acceptable behaviour, and you should know better having been here since 2009.

Brace yourselves - this is going to be a long, miserable post. Don't feel obliged to read to the end.

As an adult, I found out that a man who used to live two doors away from me (when I was a child) was a child molester. We lived in a street with many young families and an infants' school just down the road.

The man's son was in his early to mid teens and used to bully the little kids, including me, very badly. We were all scared of him and one day, when I stood up to him, I got my face slapped - very hard. This boy was entrusted by my mother to babysit us once a week. He used to shout at us and hit us until one day the abuse was so bad I went crying to a neighbour and it got stopped.

I understand now what his father must have put him through and that does help to explain some of his behaviour.

The reason I know about the older man is that I was informed by someone, who had been a little boy back then, that the man had paid him for favours. I stopped to think of all the little boys who lived in our street, including my best friend at the time, and it makes me want to weep. I can't imagine that the man only stopped with the one who told me about him. That particular victim had been abused by the teenaged son as well.

My point? Where is the evidence? How could anyone who suffered at the hands of these two ever have mounted a successful prosecution years later? Even if half a dozen of them had got together and tried to sue, where would it have got them? Just their word against that of the perpetrators. The victim I spoke to blames himself - largely because he accepted money and sweets in return.

Those of us who grew up together probably wouldn't try to get back in touch to try and bring the younger of the two perverts to justice - the older one is dead now. I only know any of this via the one person, who I trust to have told me the truth, knowing what I do about the abuse I suffered from one of them.

How many other kids did those two abuse because because our little gang had it impressed on us that you never, ever told tales? We would all have been too embarrassed or scared of being thought of as naughty to have told any grown-up about any of this, let alone each other - I'm pretty certain of that due to my own attitude. None of us would have wanted to be branded a tell-tale either.

A few years ago I had to tell an employer about some skulduggery at work - I was shaking like a leaf and could hardly get my words out. I'm still not a tell-tale unless it's practically life or death.

...

One of my best friends comes from an unfortunate family. The parents abandoned practically every one of them. My friend spent his first 2 or 3 years in a children's home. When he eventually got fostered he was moved into a home where there was already an older, adopted, son. My friend has had extensive therapy to help cope with the abuse he suffered at the hands of the older boy who not only beat him up and humiliated him regularly, but sexually abused him as well. This older boy had a reputation as a bit of a nutcase locally but it's unlikely that anyone knew the extent of the abuse my friend suffered because he would never have told.

The question that came to my mind was how did a young boy become so depraved as to subject my friend to the horrible abuse that occurred? Who must have twisted him?

What now, if my friend wants to accuse him in court? Where's the evidence? Yet another case of the victim's word against that of the perpetrator.

Further, my friend's older sister was put into foster care where she was sexually abused by the foster father.

His brother was put into a care home where he was regularly sexually abused. He grew up to be a rent boy - obviously so inured to that sort of treatment that it just became a way of life. And so easy to earn money when he was short of funds.

...

The thing is, it's hard for little kids to confess that this sort of thing 'happened' to them. They see it that they 'participated' in it - and, knowing that they are not supposed to behave in that way, they feel guilty. They don't want to risk embarrassment or being laughed at, or getting into trouble by telling.

Fast forward a few years and those children are grown-up and find themselves in a more enlightened society, maybe some of them feel it's ok to speak out. Perhaps it's getting through to them that they're not at fault.

But, by then the abusers have had years in which to molest other little kids - adding to the burden of guilt of their original victims.

I've just thought of someone else I used to know who told me about the abuse he'd been inflicted with (by a stranger) when he was a little boy. He was distraught and blaming himself. I suggested that next time he was out and saw any little boys he should have a good look at them. If he did, he would see their innocence - exactly the innocence he had when he was small. He could see, then, that those children were not capable of colluding with a grown man who was intent on abusing them. That being so small and not understanding fully what was happening, they would have little defense against it.

Three of the people I've mentioned above have had problems with drink and drugs throughout their lives - at least one of them starting by the age of nine or ten.

I'm not talking about people in the higher echelons of society - just ordinary people. Why, if I know about this sort of thing happening at my level of the social scale would I have any trouble accepting that it happens higher up where people have more opportunity and the resources to procure whatever it is they want?

If my local child molester could persuade his neighbours' kids to allow him to do what he did for a handful of small change why is it such a stretch to believe that the rich and powerful could do the same?

This problem is widespread and I don't know how it can be stopped. I've no idea how the guilty can be proved to be guilty BUT I do hope that children are being raised with different attitudes now. That parents can find ways to persuade them that they must speak out if anyone does anything to them that they don't like. And speak out after it happens once, don't wait until it happens again.

And perhaps we can have less heated debates on here - if we all agree that the sexual abuse of children is wrong then perhaps we can confine our efforts into thinking of ways to stop it and bring the offenders to justice rather than keep shouting each other down and forcing these types of thread to descend into farce.

a reply to: berenike

I hope I don't get in trouble for this, but here goes.

In this day and age, you have to think that evidence could be easily found on even the rich and famous people doing these horrific deeds.

By a certain group of people who have extraordinary skills having to do with computers. Aren't they supposed to be "the good guys?" Then they should certainly prove it.

Because it needs to be stopped. Yesterday.

a reply to: chiefsmom

They are working on it and in fact started a thread about it on here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: TrueBrit


If the people giving out the sentences and governing the justice system are part of these sick groups then the sentence could be death, it wouldn't matter.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Thank you for that.
Very glad to see they are... ahem.... "reporting" on it.

a reply to: chiefsmom

Since I made my post I've thought of two men I've known about recently who were rumoured to be paedophiles. It appears that sometimes neighbours have an idea but don't know what to do about it or have no actual evidence. Maybe the men concerned had been caught and already punished.

On one occasion a friend went to look at an apartment he was interested in moving to and was just leaving when two elderly people hesitantly approached him and warned him that the current occupant was suspected of being a paedophile. My friend was a bit worried about taking the apartment after that because the place might have been targetted for future attack by people who didn't know the previous occupant had left, or he could be assumed guilty by association.

As for finding proof of the guilty, I hope it can be done - sooner rather than later but one of the excuses for the long drawn-put delay is that nobody wants innocent people to have their lives ruined by false accusations. That's perfectly understandable but it helps the guilty to hide.

I've noted, too, that many of the accused are elderly or dead and it's true that the dead cannot defend themselves. It's true, also, that they are no longer in a position to be useful to anyone on the way up.

Politician A, for instance, may well see a file that contains damning evidence against the more senior Politician B. Someone who could help Politician A to advance in the ranks. Knowing that Politician B could be responsible for his next promotion, is Politician A going to hurry to expose Politician B?

It's hard not to believe that the living high profile persons who have been found guilty must have outlived their usefulness or never have been of much use in the first place. I don't think it's all about blackmail - but that's just my thoughts on the matter.