The Mammoth Book of Cover-Ups

incumbent of the head job at the Foreign Office. A Guardian report in December 2006 traced the ways in which the RIIA cosily spreads British government propaganda as news. What always sets conspiracy alarm bells ringing, however, is the famous Chatham House Rule, which, when invoked, ensures the confidentiality of all meeting participants. The rule currently reads as follows:

When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.

Inevitably, Chatham House maintains that the secrecy rule is necessary for free speech to occur at meetings; if there were no such rule, participants would not genuinely engage for fear of their comments being reported in the press.

As with the CFR, the origins of the RIIA lie in a dream of the British adventurer and diamond magnate Cecil Rhodes. In the late Victorian era, few men on Earth matched Rhodes’s wealth and power; the country Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) was named for him. In 1877, Rhodes wrote in Confession of Faith: “Why should we not form a secret society with but one object: the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole civilized world under British rule, for the recovery of the United States, for making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire.” Rhodes put his money where his mouth was and set up the Round Table organization, to be funded in perpetuity by a bequest in his will. (Rhodes also founded the Rhodes Scholarships at Oxford, of which Bill Clinton was a recipient… but that’s another story.) Nearly 20 years later, at the Versailles Conference which ended the First World War, some men who shared Rhodes’s Round Table ideals met with diplomats and statesmen from both Britain and the US. Out of their discussions both the RIIA and CFR were conceived. It follows, therefore, according to conspiracists, that both the CFR and RIIA are the present embodiments of Rhodes’s secret society ideal.

RIIA undemocratically influences world agendas: ALERT LEVEL 8

RIIA is the cover for Round Table society of one-worlders: ALERT LEVEL 3

Further Reading

Robert Gaylon Ross, Who’s Who of the Elite, 2002

http://www.riia.org/

Satanic Ritual Abuse

In 198 °Canadian Michelle Smith and her psychiatrist Lawrence Pazder published Michelle Remembers, in which she told of the physical and sexual abuse she had suffered as a child in the hands of a Satanic cult. She had even witnessed human sacrifice. By 1983 the neighbouring US was in a state of near hysteria over “Satanic Ritual Abuse” (SRA) after a mother at the McMartin Pre-School in Manhattan, California, accused a social worker there of abusing her child; hundreds of children were interviewed by psychotherapists, and it was discovered that 360 children had been abused by McMartin teachers who belonged to a “Satanic Church” whose practices involved drinking the blood of ritually murdered babies.

In 1987 US talk-show host Geraldo Rivera presented a series of TV shows on the phenomenon, claiming: “There are over one million Satanists in this country… From small towns to large cities, they have attracted police and FBI attention to their ritual child abuse, child pornography and grisly Satanic murders. The odds are that this is happening in your town.” It was estimated by Rivera and others in the media that thousands of children were disappearing every year into the hands of the cults.

Why was no one doing anything to stop it? Because in every city, every town, every settlement, the Satanists had co-opted local police officers and politicians into their conspiracy. Apocalyptic Christians proposed that the conspiracy ran to the top of the social pyramid, even unto the White House itself. Since in the end of times the Devil must establish himself everywhere, the SRA phenomenon spread abroad, notably to the UK; in 1993 children in the Orkney Islands were forcibly removed in dawn raids from their Satanic, abusive parents.

Sceptics claim that the only evidence for SRA comes from the victims themselves, usually through the technique of “recovered memory”, in which psychotherapists aid the subject to “recall” the abuse suffered. The technique has been demonstrated since to be badly flawed, and many of the subjects (including Michelle Smith herself) were mentally ill. Her book has been proven a hoax by several independent investigators. A four-year study of SRA headed by University of California at Davis psychology professors Gail S. Goodman and Phillip R. Shaver assessed more than 12,000 accusations; the researchers could find no unequivocal evidence for SRA in the US.

Believers in SRA point to the testimony of ritually abused children, suggesting they are unlikely to have invented stories of macabre sexual practices. This is correct: research has demonstrated over and over that investigating social workers, police officers and adult authorities suggestively encourage or badger children to tell stories of abusive behaviour. John Stoll of Bakersfield, California, served a 20-year prison sentence for child abuse until a judge released him in 2004; it transpired that, in assembling the original “evidence” against Stoll, the county’s Child Protective Services had informed child interviewees they could not go home until they admitted Stoll had abused them.

Typically of SRA cases, the evidence against John Stoll rested on testimony alone. The same was true of the McMartin trial, where the jury failed to make one conviction. Where medical evidence has been given in SRA cases of sodomy in Britain it has proven to be suspect.

The SRA panic has uncomfortable undertones of the medieval witch hunts.

Satanists ritually abuse and kill children: ALERT LEVEL 2

Further Reading

Elizabeth Loftus, The Myth of Repressed Memory, 1994

Debbie Nathan and Michael Snedeker, Satan’s Silence: Ritual Abuse and the Making of a Modern American Witch Hunt, 2001

7/7

At the height of London’s morning rush hour on 7 July 2005, a series of four coordinated bomb blasts hit the city’s public transport system. Three of the bombs exploded within 50 seconds of each other on Underground trains (at King’s Cross, Edgware Road and Liverpool Street/Aldgate); the fourth exploded nearly an hour later, at 9.47 a.m., on a Number 30 double-decker bus as it entered Tavistock Square. Altogether the explosions took 56 lives and injured 700 in what was the deadliest terror attack in Britain since the Lockerbie Bombing of 1988.

While ambulances were still rushing casualties to hospital, a flurry of conspiracy theories started on the internet concerning the attacks, but they boiled down to two main ideas:

the British security services had advance warning of the terrorist attacks, yet failed to take action, either because of incompetence or because they wished the attacks to occur to justify the introduction of draconian laws

the bombings were carried out by MI5 themselves as a false-flag operation to facilitate the implementation of those draconian laws

The evidence for the false-flag op centres on where the bombs were placed. According to the Metropolitan Police, which led the state’s investigation, the bombs were carried into London in back-packs by four British-born supporters of al-Qaeda: Mohammad Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Germain Lindsay and Hasib Hussain. Conspiracy blogger socialdemocracynow, however, asserts:

The most damning piece of evidence against the government is the testimony of one of the victims, dancer Bruce Lait, who, along with his dance partner Crystal Main, was nearest to the bomb when it exploded. When he was being assisted out of the carriage, Lait recalls, “The policeman said, ‘Mind that hole, that’s where the bomb was.’ The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train.”

MI5, in other words, laid explosive devices on the tracks. If the bombs were on the tracks it accounts for one