Home——Introduction—The 369 Ritual—–The Spannermen——Background Information 1 / Background Info 2 ——Archives 1 / Archives 2 / Archives 3 / Archives 4 / Archives 5 / Archives 6 / Archives 7 / Archives 8 / Archives 9 / Archives 10 / Archives 11 / Archives 13 / Archives 14 —-Appendix —-Blog Latest —-Previously Featured —-Disclaimer
Reconstructing The Spanner Operation 1983 to 1990
Church of England
History and role
The Church of England is the established or state church in England. It is divided into two provinces – Canterbury in the South of England and York in the North. Each province has a head or Primate – the Archbishops of Canterbury and York.
The Church of England is part of the Anglican Communion, which is a worldwide family of churches in more than 160 different countries. On any one Sunday more than a million people attend Church of England services, making it the largest Christian denomination in the country.
The Established Church
The Church of England is the established church, meaning, amongst other things:
the Monarch is the the Supreme Governor of the church (theologically Jesus is the head),
the Church performs a number of official functions,
Church and State are linked
The Church of England traces its roots back to the early church, but its specifically Anglican identity and its links to the State date back to the Reformation.
Henry VIII started the process of creating the Church of England after his split with the Pope in the 1530s. Henry was anxious to ensure a male heir after his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, had borne him only a daughter. He wanted his marriage annulled in order to remarry. In 1534 after several attempts to persuade the Pope to grant an annulment, Henry passed the Act of Succession and then the Act of Supremacy. These recognised that the King was “the only supreme head of the Church of England called Anglicana Ecclesia”. Henry adopted the title given to him by the Pope in 1521, that of Defender of the Faith.
Even the “Supreme Governor of the Church of England” practised the occult ways, and was at the time, a noteable authority on contemporary necromancy, demonology, and the perils of withcraft.
Daemonologie—in full Daemonologie, In Forme of a Dialogue, Divided into three Books: By the High and Mighty Prince, James &c.
—was written and published in 1597 by King James VI of Scotland (later also James I of England) as a philosophical dissertation on contemporary necromancy and the historical relationships between the various methods of divination used from ancient Black magic. This included a study on demonology and the methods demons used to trouble men while touching on topics such as werewolves and vampires. It was a political yet theological statement to educate a misinformed populace on the history, practices and implications of sorcery and the reasons for persecuting a witch in a Christian society under the rule of canonical law. This book is believed to be one of the main sources used by William Shakespeare in the production of Macbeth. Shakespeare attributed many quotes and rituals found within the book directly to the Weird Sisters, yet also attributed the Scottish themes and settings referenced from the trials which King James was involved.
King James wrote a dissertation titled Daemonologie that was first sold in 1597, several years prior to the first publication of the King James Authorized Version of the Bible. Within three short books James wrote a philosophical dissertation in the form of a Socratic dialogue for the purpose of making arguments and comparisons between magic, sorcery and witchcraft, but wrote also his Classification of demons. In writing the book, King James was heavily influenced by his personal involvement in the North Berwick witch trials from 1590. Following the execution of a notorious sorcerer in the year 1591, the news of the trials was narrated in a news pamphlet titled Newes from Scotland and was included as the final chapter of the novel. The book endorses the practice of witch hunting in a Christian society. James begins the book:
The fearefull aboundinge at this time in this countrie, of these detestable slaves of the Devil, the Witches or enchanters, hath moved me (beloved reader) to dispatch in post, this following treatise of mine (…) to resolve the doubting (…) both that such assaults of Satan are most certainly practised, and that the instrument thereof merits most severely to be punished.
As detailed in his preface, the main sources of this work were that of historically confessed witches, judicial case history and the Bible itself, although he also amassed various dissertations on magical studies to expand his education on the relationships between infernal spirits and men. James generally sought to prove that the devilish arts have always been yet still are, but also explains the justification of a witch trial and the punishments which a practitioner of the dark arts merits. He also reasons scholastically what kinds of things are possible in the performance of these arts, and the natural causes of the Devil’s power with the use of philosophical reasoning.[A 1] King James sought to prove the existence of witchcraft to other Christians through biblical teachings. As such, his work is separated into three books based on the different arguments the philosophers discuss, with citations of biblical scripture throughout the text.
This work acts as a political and theological dissertation in the form of a philosophical dialogue between the characters Philomathes and Epistemon who debate on the various topics of magic, sorcery, witchcraft and demonology. The purpose seems to be educational piece on the study of witchcraft and to inform the public about the histories and etymologies of all subcategories involved in magical practices. The work also serves to make formal accusations against the practice of witchcraft and comparatively elaborates James’ views against papistry. In the preface, King James states that he chose to write the content in the form of a dialogue to better entertain the reader. By doing so, he follows the method of many philosophical writers prior to his time. As the main plot, Philomathes hears news in the kingdom regarding the rumors of witchcraft which seems all miraculous and amazing but could find no one knowledgeable on the matter to have a serious political discussion on the issue. He finds a philosopher named Epistemon who is very knowledgeable on the topics of theology.[A 2]
It has been noted that the themes taken from Daemonologie and King James’ involvement in the North Berwick witch trials may have directly contributed to Shakespeare’s work Macbeth. Evidence of this exists in the three witches use of ritual magic and direct quotes that directly relate to the testimony given from the witch trials described in the Newes of Scotland pamphlet. Macbeth had come into public enjoyment a few years after the publication Daemonologie and retains many of the same Scottish themes and settings.
Daemonologie assisted in the creation of witchcraft reform, heavily inspiring Richard Bernard in writing a manual on witch-finding in 1629 titled, A Guide to Grand-Jury Men which advised judicial trial procedure to take a stronger investigative approach to acquiring and analyzing evidence and obtaining witnesses to be present during witch-craft trials. There was also an influence on Matthew Hopkins in his work as a witch-finder between 1644 and 1646 in which an estimated 300 witches were tried and executed. In the year of Hopkins’ death, 1647, he published The Discovery of Witches which directly cited Daemonologie as a source for creating methods in discovering a witch.
The philosophical arguments King James poses through the character Epistemon are based on concepts of theological reasoning regarding society’s belief as his opponent, Philomathes, takes a philosophical stance on society’s legal aspects but sought to obtain the knowledge of Epistemon. This philosophical approach signified as a philomath seeking to obtain greater knowledge through epistemology, a term that was later coined by James Frederick Ferrier in 1854.[A 14]
It was not the magic or the practices used by the occultists that were outlawed as heresy or viewed as witchcraft, but the purpose to which those powers were employed.
Once a case was brought to trial, the prosecutors hunted for accomplices. Magic was not considered to be wrong because it failed, but because it worked effectively for the wrong reasons. Witchcraft was a normal part of everyday life. Witches were often called for, along with religious ministers, to help the ill or to deliver a baby. They held positions of spiritual power in their communities. When something went wrong, no one questioned the ministers or the power of the witchcraft. Instead, they questioned whether the witch intended to inflict harm or not.
A MASON-FREE ZONE?
THE NORTH Wales Child Abuse Tribunal cleared freemasonry of any involvement in covering up child abuse.
But why did some fascinating information about the brotherhood never come to light?
Why did the Tribunal’s own leading counsel not declare that he was a mason?
And why was there no mention of a police lodge during the public hearings?
‘Care home paedophiles were masons’
Keith Gregory suffered two years of mental, physical and sexual abuse at the Bryn Estyn children’s home.
Mr Gregory, now a councillor in Wrexham, said he was regularly driven out of the home by staff to a hotel where he was sexually assaulted. He claimed up to 13 other victims had committed suicide.
Mr Gregory told BBC Radio 5 Live he is convinced the abusers escaped justice through Masonic loyalty.
MASONIC CHILD ABUSE BY DESIGN
(from Australia, but fully accurate with regard to UK and European procedures)
A BLUEPRINT ON HOW IT WORKS – PART 1
The main way that high level initiates of Freemasonry can have a long running supply of children for sexual abuse is by infiltrating Child Care Centres, Government-run Children’s Homes and Boys Clubs.
There have been numerous publicly documented cases of these “Government Pedophile Rings by Design” especially during the last three to four decades, Worldwide. Yet every single one is systematically covered up by the same corrupt ‘old boys network’ that designed and orchestrated the rings from its very conception.
There has Now come the time however that more than ever before many more off these secret-society pedophile rings are being exposed into the public eye.
It is Not the case that there are now more sexual predators in the government therefore more cases of abuse. It is more the fact that the lies and deceit that has covered up these clandestine crimes for decades against our children is breaking down. The Truth can Only be Veiled – and Never Destroyed!
The Days of Truth are upon us and the Truth is now starting to become Fully Transparent for All to See.
THE MAIN FUNDAMENTAL STRATEGY OF HOW THE SECRET SOCIETIES OF THE WORLD RUN THEIR CHILD ABUSE NETWORKS
Scallywag Magazine details
“The SCALLYWAG article in questions is as hot today as it was back then, and names X, Y, and Z – including top Tory Party officials, police, along with other detailed information on men of note and aspects of the scandal surrounding the now notorious Bryn Alyn Boys Home in Wrexham, Wales.
This Scallywag article was very controversial at the time and continues to be so today, with speculation that it may have been connected to the bizarre death of the magazine’s editor Angus James, co-founder of Scallywag, who died in Cyprus in 1994 some time after the magazine was investigating the elite VIP paedophile ring.”
Are Secretive Cabals Keeping Us in the Dark Over UK Child Abuse?
An ugly truth: our system of law enforcement and justice is broken. Quite simply, it bullies the victims, and protects men in positions of power.
Old wounds are being reopened again…
Another previously buried report of organised paedophilia in North Wales has turned up – fears that revelations could lead to the authorities being sued – again. It’s the same pattern of key evidence and key witnesses NOT being included in these Inquiries and Hearings.
It prompts the question: what else hasn’t been included as evidence?Was evidence destroyed? More key incriminating evidence in the North Wales scandal has been reported as ‘lost’ by the police. This appears to be generally acceptable for the government, seeing that no counter investigation was launched to find out who has been ‘losing’ all this important evidence.
It’s also known that former Deputy Director of the Bryn Alyn boys home, Des Frost, was NOT called as a witness, despite being one of the men who had originally reported abuse at the home to the police.
What should be clear by now, is that the Waterhouse Inquiry was anything but thorough, and now Lords Peers are calling for further Waterhouse reviews to stop
Question: What did then Welsh Secretary, William Hague, know and when did he know it?
The establishment’s story line today were expected to support is this: five separate documented cover-ups in 27 years, and 0ver 2000 witness statements… are all the work of media vandals and deluded conspirators.
It seems like those in positions of power and influence, as well as wealthy elites in public life are pushing back, because they don’t want certain dirty deeds to be exposed to the public at large. If they are exposed, it will most surely alter the power structure in Britain for some time to come. These revelations simply cannot come to light, period.
There is nothing “historical” about the cover-up. It is very much ongoing.
(Quote from Scallywag magazine)
“It has been alleged that officials and councillors in a number of local authorities may be receiving payments for identifying ‘appropriate’ young people in care and introducing them to the ring, and ultimately to Laud and Lewis and their associates, who then, it has been alleged, introduce the boys to ‘interested’ VIP’s.
Within the list of alleged collaborators in counties along the south coast with the supply of teenage boys for exploitation is a Social Services Director in one LA., an Assistant Director of Children’s Social Services in another, chief executives in two others, several social workers and also a number of child protection workers. As well as a number of Councillors, including former Leader of Hampshire Council and Lord Mayor of Portsmouth, Freddie Emery Wallis who was convicted in 2001 of molesting young boys.”
It was immediately after this threat in November 1983 when the OPB in conjunction with others, started to target visitors ( including the Spannermen) to the whistleblower’s address.
Though the ongoing frantic searches seemingly for extreme child porn or snuff movies, (and for the next three years) was concerned more with adverts from the magazine “Gay Galaxy”, and raids upon gay men who had contact with that magazine, prior to returning later to raid and punish the Spannermen in 1986-87. Had the raids on targeted gay men from 1983 to 1986 also involved men who had purchased unlawful porn from a Gay Galaxy box number operated by the police, and recovery of the items through the raids to ensure an explanatory reason for the arrests/raids?
The senior officer from Manchester Children’s Services, Mr. Greenwood, who had made the threats mentioned above – (Ref: Lost in Care, chapter 21, para. 115) was alleged to have been involved with assigning children from the Manchester area (who had previous sexual experience) to the Bryn Alyn Community for and on behalf of John Allen, (whom he had claimed to have personally known for some twenty years). During the recorded telephone call to Williams, he had also claimed to be in charge of investigating any child abuse claims at the home on behalf of all other local authorities nationwide.
It was unlikely that he was merely acting on his own behalf, as it would appear, despite investigations, that he was never charged with any offence.
Threats against Whistleblowers should not be taken lightly. (from Andrea Davison)
3.18 The power and influence of the paedophile network in the United Kingdom is such that even Prime Ministers fear to expose it. The abused children were terrified by the power their abusers had over the police and the judiciary “when we were boys it was not just the sex abuse it was the gagging, beatings and threats to kill which still wake me in the dead of night “recalled one man
3.19 Because the paedophile ring has such far reaching power, investigators like myself whistleblowers and survivors are at risk of persecution and even assassination. The paedophile ring could silence almost anyone using bribery, blackmail or intimidation or worse. The extent and success of the cover-up provides clear evidence of a powerful, influential, well organised criminal group
3.20 Anne Machon former MI5 officer said “the need for integrity in intelligence, describing the terrible ethical dilemma that confronts government employees who witness illegal activity including serious threats to public safety and fraud, waste and abuse.”
3.16.1 The Inquiry did properly conclude that the discouragement of whistle-blowing may persist and fear of reprisals should be eliminated.
3.16.2 (92) There is real danger that the discouragement of “whistle blowing” may persist and positive action is required to ensure that the new procedures are implemented conscientiously and that any fear of reprisals is eliminated
3.16.3 Whistleblowers continue to be persecuted by those who profit from the exploitation of children. The climate has not improved because those who were active in the cover-up were all left in place so there was no chance of a culture change.
3.14 Suspicious Deaths
3.14.1 Journalist Nick Davies wrote in 1997 that: – On the fringe of the tribunal hearing, there are disturbing suggestions of a violent cover-up. The London Evening Standard has run a series of stories about two brothers, Adrian Johns and Lea Homburg, who were abused by a convicted paedophile named John Allen. Allen ran a complex of homes in North Wales and London and is said to have been supplying boys to wealthy outsiders. The Standard reported that the two brothers were trying to blackmail him when, in April 1992, Adrian was burned to death in a house fire in Brighton. Lea later died in mysterious circumstances.
A dozen others who complained of abuse by the alleged ring have also died. One is said to have slipped on ice on a railway bridge and fallen to his death. Another, who was found dead in his flat was said to have died of natural causes; he was aged 21. Several are said to have committed suicide although in the case of one of them, his mother said his supposed suicide note was written in someone else’s handwriting. Others died apparently through abusing heroin, alcohol and solvents’.
3.13.1 It is reported that Local authorities paid more than £28 million to the Bryn Alyn community of children’s homes. Their owner John Allen was jailed in 1995 for child abuse. John Allen also gave gifts from public funds to the abused children as hush money, one single boy being paid £25,000. The Inquiry however did not appear to fully investigate the financial affairs of John Allen or the matter of the gross waste of public money. Public money, which for decades, had been poured into the pockets of paedophiles who were exploiting the children in their care. The Inquiry should have investigated all the people who benefited from this massive fraud and those who covered it up for reasons of personal gain such as the child procurers.
The Various Spanner Appeals
“Things looked quite hopeful for the hearing in the light of some recent rulings in the U.K.. In June 1994 the CPS had defined actual bodily harm as ‘minor but not merely superficial cuts that require stitches’. The injuries in the Spanner case were far less serious and yet they had been charged with Actual Bodily Harm. In December 1995 the Law Commission recommended that SM, short of causing serious or permanently disabling injury, should be legal. Also in February 1996 The Court of Appeal overturned the conviction of a husband who branded ‘his initials with a hot knife on his wife’s buttocks with her consent’, concluding that ‘Consensual activity in the privacy of the matrimonial home was not a matter for criminal prosecution’.
Therefore it was a great shock when the court decided that there had been no violation as ‘not every sexual activity carried out behind closed doors necessarily falls within the scope of Article 8’. The fact that there were quite a few people involved, combined with the videoing of proceedings made the court regard their actions as falling outside the notion of ‘private life’. One can deduce that in certain contexts unconventional sexualities existing outside the cosy confines of the ‘matrimonial home’ pose too much of a threat to social order to be tolerated. Yet instead of clarifying their position which seemed to consist of a handful of jumbled judgements, the court opted out be decreeing that it was primarily a matter for the State concerned to determine the ‘tolerable level of harm where the victim consents’. Thus they washed their hands of the whole messy business that it appeared that they could not even begin to comprehend.
They went on to uphold some of the outrageous positions taken in the House of Lords (an unelected body whose opinions should arguably have little power in deciding what is best for a ‘democratic society’) to grant that the ‘National authorities [were] entitled to consider interference “necessary in a democratic society” for the protection of health’ and was ‘entitled to prohibit activities because of their potential danger’. Following the line taken by the Lords, the court then moved from the issue of health to personal morality which one feels has no place in a court of law – law , which as Trevor Jaques stressed in his reply to Judge Pettiti on the case, ‘rests upon the burden of proof’ and not upon ‘ultimately unprovable beliefs’. The court ruled that activities like those of the Spanner case ‘may be banned also on the grounds that they undermine the respect which human beings should confer upon one another’, thus clearly illustrating their ignorance of the core of sado-masochistic relationships where respect is essential. They went on to recommend that governments should seek to ‘regulate, through the operation of the criminal law, activities which involve the infliction of physical harm… whether the activities in question occur in the course of sexual conduct or otherwise’.
I would argue that it is more harmful to prohibit individuals’ expression of sexuality when it is consensual. In doing this, the driving force that is sexuality is channelled into other areas, where it can manifest itself in far more negative ways in human relationships – in depression and frustration which can lead to aggression and unconsensual violence which seems only too evident in society at present. Sexuality has always been persecuted from outside in the West – by the Church and now by the State. However the reassuring thing about all this is that sexuality has always triumphed. Sexuality is too strong a compulsion to be controlled by institutions and legislated into oblivion. Measures like these will only force it further underground where there is even less chance of it being controlled by the State. Throughout the ages people have always done what their sexuality has impelled them to do, and thank fuck, always will.”
“The police pressed various charges – including that of ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ – against 16 of the men. Even more disturbingly, all 16 were found guilty and subject to a variety of penalties that ranged from fines to a four and a half year prison sentence. Nor did the situation improve when the defendants launched an appeal. The case went to the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords before finally ending up at the European Court of Human Rights. The defendants lost their appeals in every Court.
Within the UK, the various judges came to the rather strange conclusion that, even though all of the men had been willing participants, it was still somehow possible to ignore their consent and declare it a crime. For example, one of the House of Lords judges declared:
“I am not prepared to invent a defence of consent for sadomasochistic encounters which breed and glorify cruelty.”
The European Court of Human Rights basically took the position that ‘it’s up to each individual country to decide how to deal with this sort of thing.’
These were particularly extraordinary judgements in light of other case law involving BDSM and, in one case, rape. For example, the case of R. v Wilson (1996) involved a man who used a hot knife to brand his initials on his wife’s buttocks. She had consented and the Court of Appeal had ruled that this meant there was no criminal act. More disturbing was the case of DPP v Morgan (1976), wherein a man had convinced three of his friends to rape his wife. He had told them she was ‘a bit kinky’ and would ‘pretend’ she didn’t want to do it. When all four men were tried with rape three of them argued that they thought she had consented. They were found guilty but not before the House of Lords had decreed that the mistaken belief that the victim had consented could be enough ‘to rebut a charge of rape’.
So, in one case the Court finds that consent does absolve the perpetrator of criminal liability and in another the Court finds that simply being mistaken about consent can be enough to escape criminal liability. Which raises the question of why the same logic wasn’t applied to the 16 victims of Operation Spanner. There really is only one fundamental difference – and that is the fact that the other two cases occurred in the context of heterosexual marriage.”