Wednesday, 1 April 2015



Documents released by the Public Record office reveal that the UK navy is apparently bisexual.

In 1968, admirals came to the conclusion that at least half of the entire fleet had "sinned homosexually".

The admirals tried to cover up a series of scandals "including homosexual affairs on an aircraft carrier, transsexual prostitutes in the Far East and hundreds of men using a "male brothel" in Bermuda".

BBC NEWS | UK | How gay panic gripped 1960s Royal Navy
Sailors waltzing on deck, 1899. Photo: US Library of Congress

1. In 1968, a sizeable number of UK sailors were discharged for having homosexual relationships on the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle.

2. More than 400 UK sailors who had used a gay brothel on Bermuda were seen by the admirals as having been exposed to potential blackmail by foreign agents.

The Bermudan man who ran the brothel kept the names of the men and their ships, both in a special address book and on the back of compromising photographs.

3. In Singapore a sizeable number of UK sailors caught sexually transmitted diseases from local male or transsexual prostitutes.

Back in London, Admiral Sir John Fitzroy Duyland Bush, head of the Western Fleet wrote: "I have a strong (belief) that many of the men are not perverts but basically normal men whose standards of behaviour are thoroughly lax."


UK Admiral Sir Frank Roddam Twiss, the Second Sea Lord, warning commanders to be on the look out for "unnatural vice".

The Navy's chief lawyer noted: "It is not necessary to carry out a witch hunt for the more discreet offenders ... that it goes on discreetly and hidden away need not cause us too much dismay."

In 1981, 11 members of the crew of the Queen's yacht 'Britannia' were charged in connection with gay sex.

11 Britannia Crewmen Charged In Sex Scandal .


The US navy is pretty gay.

Senior Chief Petty Officer Michael Toussaint, assigned to US Naval Special Warfare Group 2 in Virginia Beach, reportedly abused young sailors.

A command investigation completed in January 2007 substantiated more than 90 instances of abuse, including sailors being forcing to simulate homosexual oral sex.

The woman who took his place, Petty Officer 1st Class Jennifer Valdivia, took her own life in Bahrain after she was notified that she had been implicated in the investigation.

In the UK, in 2014, ex-Marine Benjamin Herman was charged with three counts of indecent assault and one of attempted indecent assault on a child when he was Prince Philip's equerry - or personal attendant - at Buckingham Palace.

Duke of Edinburgh's ex-aide Benjamin Herman / ROYAL - paedophile ring 

Admiral of the Fleet Louis Mountbatten (above) liked boys in their early teens.

Beginning in 1919, the assistant secretary of the US Navy, Franklin Delano Roosevelt reportedly oversaw an 'anti-gay witch hunt' in Newport.

"Navy sailors were recruited to entrap other men to have sex with them, with the undercover 'operatives' engaging in sex to orgasmic completion - oral, and yes, some anal - with the men they entrapped, and logging all of this in their own reports."

John Vassall.

John Vassall worked with UK naval intelligence and had an expensive flat in the notorious Dolphin Square in London.

Reportedly, Vassall had sexual relationships with certain UK cabinet ministers.

Vassall was gay and reportedly had been photographed having sex with men in the Soviet Union.

In 1962 Vassal was arrested for spying.

Brendan Mulholland.

Brendan Mulholland of the Daily Mail claimed in an article that Vassall was known as 'Aunty' in the Admiralty.

Reg Foster of the Daily Sketch wrote that Vassall was in the habit of buying women's clothing.

When asked to reveal the sources of their information about the spy codenamed 'Miss Mary', both men refused, and both were jailed.

Brendan Mulholland and Reginald Foster (right) dailymail.

Historian Richard Davenport-Hines writes of Mulholland and Foster: "They were liars who had invented their stories. Everyone knew it."

After the Vassall affair came the Profumo scandal, which helped to discredit UK Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, and helped to bring Harold Wilson to power.

Historian Richard Davenport-Hines has a book about 'sex, class and power' in the early Sixties, published on the 50th anniversary of the Profumo scandal.

War Minister John Profumo was sleeping with Christine Keeler who was sleeping with the Soviet naval attaché Yevgeny Ivanov.

(Richard Davenport-Hines's son Cosmo committed suicide on a railway line in 2008. He was aged 21.)


Davenport-Hines claims that the Profumo affair was "made in Fleet Street and incited, publicised and exploited by journalists."

He believes that the journalists wanted revenge after Mulholland and Foster had been sent to jail for refusing to name their sources.

Davenport-Hines claims that journalists paid Christine Keeler to invent the story about sleeping with Ivanov.

For the record, Keeler has confirmed that she did go to bed with Ivanov.

Profumo met Keeler at the home of the 3rd Viscount Astor.

Keeler was one of the young prostitutes working for Stephen Ward.


Ward reportedly supplied girls to President J F Kennedy.

Mary Pinchot Meyer. aangirfan: KENNEDY BRAINWASHED?

Ward was working for the UK security service MI6, and possibly for other security services as well.

Who started the Profumo rumours?

According to Lord Victor Rothschild's journalist friend Chapman Pincher, "It was George Wigg (who was close to opposition leader Harold Wilson) who started it off."

Pincher says that Wigg: "got an anonymous telephone call from a voice who said: 'Never mind Vassall, you want to look at Profumo.'

"Wigg went to Harold Wilson (the then Labour leader) and it was soon discovered that Profumo was having an affair with Christine Keeler. The whole thing was concocted by Wigg and Wilson. It was only later that the Press found out."

Yes, politicians sleep with spooks.

Yes, this allows the 'Deep State', or factions within the 'Deep State', to topple politicians when required.

Lt Cdr Allan Waters, 57, worked with the Sea Cadet Corps in Britain for more than 30 years

In 2006, in India, Waters was jailed for child sex abuse.

Boys had been stripped naked and regularly caned.

"Information received by The Daily Telegraph ( Call for Sea Cadet inquiry after sex abuse case - Telegraph) said that Waters was caught in a compromising act with a young cadet while he was commanding the Clapton unit of the Sea Cadets in London in the early 1980s.
Reportedly, Waters was reassigned to another unit, and continued to rise up the ranks of the organisation.

Waters was appointed superintendent of the Sea Cadet training centre in Portsmouth in 1996.

Waters was a member of the Sea Cadet Council, the highest body of the corps.

The Sea Cadets confirmed that it was aware "that a report was made by a Sea Cadet officer who had concerns about Waters" in the early 1980s but said that allegations had "not been substantiated".

In 2006, Jersey Police, in the UK, were investigating child abuse by 'carers'.

The commanding officer of the Jersey Sea Cadets was arrested for downloading pornographic images including some involving sea cadets.

The attitude of the Sea Cadet authorities of that time 'caused great concern'. (Cached)

There were several convictions for sexual offences involving officers of Jersey Sea Cadets.

Police began noticing links between the victims in those cases and other institutions on the island, including Haut de la Garenne.
Police call off Sea Cadets abuse inquiry

It has now been announced, in September 2008, that the police investigation of alleged child abuse at the Jersey Sea Cadets has been abandoned.

The Jersey police claim there is insufficient evidence.

The Sea Cadet force used Haut de la Garenne, the child care home that acted as a child abuse and torture brothel.

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce and General Tommy Franks

Sir Jimmy Savile is known to have had dinner with Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, Chief of the UK Defence Staff at the time of 9 11. 


There is no suggestion that Boyce has done anything improper.


  1. I guess that's where the saying, 'Hello sailor', comes from and then you tilt your hand as you say it.

  2. I guess its all those long months at sea.


  4. For your files:

    Other related articles at bottom of that page.


  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. Hampstead Judgement.
    Fact No. 142. begins "As emerges from the interviews themselves, both P and Q did indeed withdraw their claims, all of them."
    I am extremely confident that this claim is factually incorrect and provably so and this is the one thread that causes the whole story to disintegrate, pointing to the greater truth, that in all her ho humming and tut tutting, the Judge did not investigate the allegations in any depth or with any sense of fairness whatsoever, she was simply Mrs. Fixit there to debunk the claims and defame those making them. So the poor Judge made a rather stupid mistake, she did not watch the interviews properly, because if she had she would have noticed the fact that in the September 17th interview of the male victim, the same"retraction" interview , during which the boy affirmed the dead babies story seven times before acceding to the police bullying and coercion and retracting. Later in the same interview the male makes a claim of abuse at the swimming pool that is never retracted. In this interview, the final police interview of the male to my knowledge, the boy is later asked about the allegations about abuse at the swimming pool, in the disabled toilets, "That happened" the boy said, so the policeman tried to talk him out of it, "But you weren't even in school then." To which the boy responded along the lines of "No but my sister was" Affirming again in a roundabout way, so the tired policeman just moves on, the whole thing is simply dropped and the policeman returns to previous retractions thinking presumably, "it's ok he thinks, I still did my job, the witnesses are destroyed"
    The swimming pool allegation is quite simply never retracted. It didn't happen. So the statement that "both P and Q did indeed withdraw their claims, all of them." cannot possibly be factually correct in my opinion. And it is one of the key, foundation facts that the judgement rests upon. This failure of the learned Justice to recognise this central fact that not all the allegations were in fact retracted surely renders the entire judgement essentially void and invalid.?
    This single fact, provable fact then leads to the character of the entire "investigation" from the learned Justice. It was very clearly an entirely one way affair, completely motivated apparently by her personal response to the Internet coverage of the story, largely ignorant apparently of it as she was. There was no attempt whatsoever to investigate the claims to test their veracity, merely to debunk and dispose of them as quickly as possible.
    The description of the police interviews is completely inaccurate, factually inaccurate. The characterisation of the Medical reports is factually inaccurate and clearly ,nakedly motivated by an attempt to discredit Dr. Hodes and her evidence.
    What on earth could possibly motivate such an obviously skewed and utterly one sided investigation?
    If their is no foundation to the claims why were the investigations so truncated and haphazard?
    Why did the learned Justice tender her findings before making herself adequately aware of the facts of the case?
    Surely an investigation into such grave matters should be taken with vigor and thoroughness in order to prove the allegations are without foundation rather than simply assuming so as the learned Justice appears to have done.

  8. Thanks to the efforts of Aangirfaan, Anonymous and many others, it’s clear this satanic cult, child-trafficking ring is vast. So vast that Pauffley was only allowed to come to the conclusion she was told to come to? Or maybe she’s directly involved, which would mean coming to the same conclusion.
    I think the most damning evidence - apart from the medical evidence - is contained in the “Distinguishing Marks and “Drawings” mobile-phone videos revealing the intimate identifying marks. No way could they allow those vids – their WORST POSSIBLE EVIDENCE - to get anywhere near an investigation.That’s why DC Rogers dutifully scuttled off to bury the vids somewhere in Chingford(Epping Forest?) so no other investigating police officers(read: decent, unintimidatable cops)were aware of their existence until they saw them on youtube several months after the case was closed. As of March this year,4 million plus evil fools had already seen the vids, so Judge Pauffley, now unable to deny their existence, was obliged to attempt to trash some of them in her report – but she makes NO mention at all of the dangerously untrashable “Distinguishing Marks” vids. She also tried to ridicule the medical evidence, by pathetically trying to ridicule Dr Hodes. All an attempt to hide the truth, deception being their strongpoint. I think their weakest point, which needs to be exploited, is where Pauffley actually tells the truth in paras 107 and 108 of her report. She makes known the fact of DC Rogers’ crime of concealing evidence, or fraud in para 107. This revealed fraud not only utterly demolishes the validity and credibility of the police and SS investigation, but as her “fact-finding” report was based largely on that investigation, it destroys the validity and credibility of her judgement too. Simply allowing the proceedings to continue while aware of DC Rogers’ fraud, is aiding and abetting fraud. Judge Pauffley’s claim that the police and SS investigation was “wide-ranging”(para 9) when it couldn’t possibly have been(as DC Rogers had hidden the entire evidence from the investigating officers before the investigation had even begun!) is fraudulent. The proceedings should have been stopped immediately the fraud was revealed, but that would have been contrary to Achieving Best Findings.
    I think the above proves the police/SS investigation and Pauffley’s “fact-finding”(invert: fact-concealing) hearing are nothing more than an operation in deception – a FRAUD - and therefore to be rejected as null and void. But what to do? This is just a suggestion: Instead of playing along with THEIR legal rules and appealing, petitioning, asking, demanding - all of which concede authority to these impostors who pretend authority over us - might it not be an idea to LAWFULLY affirm publicly we do not consent to this – that we entirely reject the mockery of the law that is Paffley’s “judgement”?

  9. James... Many of us had the same feeling as well about those retractions, thank you for being able to put them into words. As soon as P(G?) said that 'some of them' and not 'all of them' -"babies were killed", I knew the children were being pigeonholed. A competent lawyer will be able to make this fact glaringly obvious. I also appreciate your fervor on this case, after reading Pauffley's ruling and seeing the propaganda being pushed out the door by the DailyMail and Ham & High my blood was boiling as well and it took me a full week to be able to digest their vitriol to be able to respond. To anyone with just a bit more knowledge about this case it is easy to see that most of the writing during this case was simply to get those coming aboard to lose interest while 'they' deal with the rest. It's also very easy after the fact to want to label them ALL 'The PIGS' from Orwells 'Animal Farm' -Pauffley and all the rest of those dirty cops.


  10. Satanism is an OFFICIALLY recognised religion in the Royal Navy, and has been since 2004 when Chris Cranmer was allowed to register as a Satanist in Plymouth.see: If Navy Law= Admiralty Law=Law of the Sea=Legal Law, then everything the Satanist rapists, murderers, paedosadists do is perfectly legal ... but not lawful.

  11. This is horrible story,this persons is monsters from hell and create hell in world!!

  12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.