Australia: Woman Claims to be Victim of "VIP Paedophile Ring" including THREE Former Prime Ministers

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
Australia: Woman Claims to be Victim of "VIP Paedophile Ring" including THREE Former Prime Ministers

Former prime minister paedophile claims: Survivor to speak out
A WOMAN claiming to be the victim of a “VIP paedophile ring”, which involved three former prime ministers, has alleged she was prostituted to “paedophile parties” at Parliament House in Canberra.

Speaking to media in Sydney, Fiona Barnett detailed her alleged abuse by the alleged elite paedophile ring 40 years ago.
The 45-year-old said she was abused by the ring, which included high-ranking politicians, police and members of the judiciary, at the age of five and claimed there were thousands of other victims. “My experiences were horrific beyond words,” she said. “But the way I’ve been treated for reporting the crimes I witnessed and experienced has been far worse than my original abuse experiences.” .....


Her claims have got a fair amount of publicity in Australia - and world wide - but my guess is she went too far by alleging that THREE former Prime Ministers were child rapists. If she had stuck to one PM - plus other selected VIPs- then the Australian police might have done an "Operation Midland"like the London MET police. The MET spent a year and a half investigating the claims of a fantasist that former PM Ted Heath, plus a former Home Secretary, plus a former head of the British army, plus former heads of MI5 and MI6 were members of a ring that raped and murdered boys.

My GUESS is that this woman has overdone it, but you never know. Since her claims have been reported in reputable newspapers world-wide they may become the subject of a major inquiry involving huge sums of money and massive police commitment. In the UK the Chairman of the Police Federation complained that police officers were being pulled from CURRENT MURDER investigations to deal with the fantasies of "Operation Midland"! Maybe the Aussie police will be stupid enough to go the same way.
 


Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,167
Former prime minister paedophile claims: Survivor to speak out
A WOMAN claiming to be the victim of a “VIP paedophile ring”, which involved three former prime ministers, has alleged she was prostituted to “paedophile parties” at Parliament House in Canberra.

Speaking to media in Sydney, Fiona Barnett detailed her alleged abuse by the alleged elite paedophile ring 40 years ago.
The 45-year-old said she was abused by the ring, which included high-ranking politicians, police and members of the judiciary, at the age of five and claimed there were thousands of other victims. “My experiences were horrific beyond words,” she said. “But the way I’ve been treated for reporting the crimes I witnessed and experienced has been far worse than my original abuse experiences.” .....


Her claims have got a fair amount of publicity in Australia - and world wide - but my guess is she went too far by alleging that THREE former Prime Ministers were child rapists. If she had stuck to one PM - plus other selected VIPs- then the Australian police might have done an "Operation Midland"like the London MET police. The MET spent a year and a half investigating the claims of a fantasist that former PM Ted Heath, plus a former Home Secretary, plus a former head of the British army, plus former heads of MI5 and MI6 were members of a ring that raped and murdered boys.

My GUESS is that this woman has overdone it, but you never know. Since her claims have been reported in reputable newspapers world-wide they may become the subject of a major inquiry involving huge sums of money and massive police commitment. In the UK the Chairman of the Police Federation complained that police officers were being pulled from CURRENT MURDER investigations to deal with the fantasies of "Operation Midland"! Maybe the Aussie police will be stupid enough to go the same way.
Salem witch trials come to mind. There has never been any evidence to suggest there have been paedophile parties any where in the Western world. It tends to be a furtive persuit.
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
" Crimes committed by the Most Powerful against the Most Vulnerable"

Her allegations seem to be directly against SECULAR VIPS but the very influential "Survivors of Those Abused by Priests" (SNAP) is also supporting her.

....Leader of child sex abuse advocacy group Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) Nicky Davis said Ms Barnett’s alleged experience was not unique. SNAP has heard from a number of survivors of very similar offences who have been raped, who have been tortured, whose perpetrators include the most senior people in Australia.” SNAP says allegations have been ignored by the Royal Commission and government officials. The group claims many survivors have spoken to police, the Royal Commission into Child Sex Abuse, politicians and government officials and had produced “considerable” evidence.“There are a large number who want to speak out,” Ms Davis told news.com.au. “These are some of the worst crime committed by the most powerful against the most vulnerable.” ...

I see she has also made murder allegations (as in "Operation Midland" in the UK) but but the SNAP spokeswoman only mentions "rape and torture" committed by "the most senior people in Australia". Are SNAP being slightly cautious here or was is just an oversight? (The murder claims were probably the most important factor that discredited "Operation Midland". Unlike decades old claims of "abuse", child murder is something that can be proved - or disproved- even many years later.)
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
Police in Australian Capital say No

ACT Police release a statement this afternoon after Ms Barnett’s press conference.

“The matter was thoroughly investigated by ACT Policing’s Operation Attest and there was no evidence to substantiate the complainant’s allegations,” the statement read. “The matter was finalised and the complainant was notified on April 30, 2015.”


ACT is "Australian Capital Territory" - a self-governing territory within New South Wales that includes the capital city of Canberra. To an extent, the ACT police would correspond to the Metropolitan Police in London, who disgraced themselves following similar allegations. So far so good but I wouldn't bet on sanity continuing for very long. The MAIN hope is not so much the idiot woman's claims of child murder, (the MET police swallowed that one) but the bit about THREE Prime Ministers. Of course if all three were Conservative types, she might still get away with it!
 

PlanetBertie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
739
Surely any claims have to come with some sort of evidence for any social worker, Doctor, Police officer or journo to take seriously. IE. times,dates,places and other victims, otherwise it's like the Trump case at the moment, it is only accusations. Hopefully to be found true.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,655
The report says that a Senator supporting these claims falsely accused a judge of procuring sex workers years ago.
 

Felixness

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
4,397
A very dangerous precedent was set when a person could be jailed for historical rape based on nothing more than the allegations of a person with no physical evidence, no witnesses and no proof. I've heard it said that it's better for a man's life to be destroyed by making his identity known when allegations are made on the assumption that other ''victims'' would come forward if they knew someone else had made allegations. I find it extremely dangerous and worrying because it's open to so much potential abuse. A person's identity should be kept private until a verdict of guilty is reached in Court, not trial by media and if it's found that a person has made a deliberately false allegation of rape then they should be jailed and their identity made known.
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
The report says that a Senator supporting these claims falsely accused a judge of procuring sex workers years ago.
Yes Indeed
http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/survivor-of-alleged-elite-paedophile-ring-including-former-prime-minister-speaks-out/news-story/219c1d581d9453b6baf45a0935af214a

Allegations of the elite paedophile ring surfaced in a Senate estimates hearing earlier this week, with Liberal senator Bill Heffernan claiming he had obtained a police list containing the names of 28 prominent people. Senator Heffernan wouldn’t name names on Tuesday but called on Attorney-General George Brandis to expand the child abuse Royal Commission to include the legal fraternity, as well as a former prime minister. He told the Senate estimates hearing in Canberra he had provided the Commission with documents, one naming the alleged paedophiles including “a whole lot of prominent people.”

Senator Heffernan is a vociferous campaigner against paedophiles, but in 2002 he used parliamentary privilege to falsely accuse a judge of using commonwealth cars to procure young men for sex.


That's probably why he didn't use Parliamentary Privilege this time to read out the names of the "28 prominent people". He seems to resemble Tom Watson the Deputy Leader of the British Labour Party who was linked to the slanders against Lord Alastair McAlpine in 2012 and then went on to slander Leon Brittan in "Operation Midland".

NOTE: Alastair McAlpine and Leon Brittan were prominent Tories and friends of Margaret Thatcher. That's why they were slandered. I would expect most of the "28 prominent people" to be conservative types.
 
Last edited:

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
Australia's Paedophile WitchFinder-General

A very dangerous precedent was set when a person could be jailed for historical rape based on nothing more than the allegations of a person with no physical evidence, no witnesses and no proof. I've heard it said that it's better for a man's life to be destroyed by making his identity known when allegations are made on the assumption that other ''victims'' would come forward if they knew someone else had made allegations. I find it extremely dangerous and worrying because it's open to so much potential abuse. A person's identity should be kept private until a verdict of guilty is reached in Court, not trial by media and if it's found that a person has made a deliberately false allegation of rape then they should be jailed and their identity made known.
Agreed but in practice it works otherwise. Senator Bill Heffernan - paedophile WitchFinder-General and Australia's answer to the UK's Tom Watson - is retiring shortly aged 73 and his false allegation of child abuse in 2002 against a judge! is being treated as a minor mishap in a "colourful" career.
Nocookies | The Australian

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/bill-heffernan-retires-from-senate-rues-not-always-sticking-to-his-pledge/news-story/e3a129754523b00832e8fc363203a4cf

Liberal senator Bill Heffernan has concluded a colourful career of almost­ 20 years, admitting he may not always have adhered to his pledge to avoid swearing and “behave­ during Senate estimates”. ........

His greatest controversy came in 2002 when he lost his job as parliamentary secretary to John Howard and was forced to formally apologise after accusing then High Court judge Michael Kirby of using a government car to pick up ­under-aged male prostitutes.


It's not just a question of minimizing the good Senator's 14 year-old "mistake". The article makes it clear that he is retiring on the same note:

Senator Heffernan, who has for years campaigned on the issue of child sex abuse and last year called for an inquiry into an alleged paedophile ring in NSW, said that his parting appeal to parliament was for the creation of a federal judicial­ commission.....

NOTE: John Howard was Prime Minister of Australia at the time so Senator Heffernan is not some ignorant backwoodsman!
 
Last edited:

Prester Jim

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
9,977
Salem witch trials come to mind. There has never been any evidence to suggest there have been paedophile parties any where in the Western world. It tends to be a furtive persuit.
The Salem witch trials were aimed at an extremely vulnerable set of victims (mostly women) and the victims were variously abused and often executed.
Has any Ozy Politician (or British one for that matter) been as much as imprisoned yet? My memory was that they usually wait until the perpetrator has died or gone senile before they "persecute" them.
 

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
16,296
The Salem witch trials were aimed at an extremely vulnerable set of victims (mostly women) and the victims were variously abused and often executed.
Has any Ozy Politician (or British one for that matter) been as much as imprisoned yet? My memory was that they usually wait until the perpetrator has died or gone senile before they "persecute" them.
Except when they don't and then the whole charade is exposed as nonsense, and then libel suits and apologies from the police usually follow, eg, Harvey Proctor, Lord McAlpine, Cliff Richard.
 

sgtharper

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
10,750
Has any Ozy Politician (or British one for that matter) been as much as imprisoned yet?
For what exactly?
My memory was that they usually wait until the perpetrator has died or gone senile before they "persecute" them.
Your memory is faulty then, and you might at least wait until someone has been charged at least before you start demanding they be imprisoned. Given the number of perfectly innocent men in the UK whose reputations and twilight years have been ruined by the idiotic ramblings of a disturbed liar.
 

soubresauts

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2007
Messages
3,125
What exactly is Kilbarry1 up to? He opens this thread with a year-old article from Australia, and tries to pooh-pooh any reports about paedophiles, as if such people don't exist, or if they do, they are too few to worry about.

... That's probably why he didn't use Parliamentary Privilege this time to read out the names of the "28 prominent people". He seems to resemble Tom Watson the Deputy Leader of the British Labour Party who was linked to the slanders against Lord Alastair McAlpine in 2012 and then went on to slander Leon Brittan in "Operation Midland".

NOTE: Alastair McAlpine and Leon Brittan were prominent Tories and friends of Margaret Thatcher. That's why they were slandered. I would expect most of the "28 prominent people" to be conservative types.
The accusations against the litigious McAlpine were apparently meant for another member of his family, but it gave the Lord the opportunity to screw money out of various people, for "damages". Reprehensible behaviour.

As for Brittan... I would sooner pay attention to the account by celebrated English blogger John Ward who did a lot of work in Whitehall over the years:

"Lord Brittan is a special case for me because my familiarity with the case goes back to the early and mid 1980s….and because predictably – now he is an ex-Brittan – more details are coming out to dismiss at least some of the remaining doubts about his guilt.

"He is not, however, alone in his guilt.

"Three Conservative Cabinet Ministers on four separate occasions (in various combinations) told me between 1982 and 1985 that Brittan’s paedophilia bent was “an open secret” among senior Tories. They had nothing to gain in saying this, and no motive to influence me: I was a very peripheral communications supplier doing advertising work for the Central Office of Information (the COI) – later abolished by the Camerlot Coalition and transferred to the Cabinet Office. In truth, the subject was a matter for amusement and gossip rather than smear.

"For example, one high-profile Minister at the time remarked, “Leon isn’t interested in sex with anything over three feet tall” – a crack I took to be an accusation of bestiality until the civil servant involved in the project set me straight. I was told later (at a private dinner) that Margaret Thatcher banished the Peer to the EC when his proclivities were confirmed to her by the security services..."

https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2015/07/23/the-paedofile-why-cameron-and-clegg-must-have-known-the-truth-about-leon-brittan/

If you go for something from Australia last year, try this:

[video=youtube;JfNeB6Hx7N0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfNeB6Hx7N0[/video]
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
What exactly is Kilbarry1 up to? He opens this thread with a year-old article from Australia, and tries to pooh-pooh any reports about paedophiles, as if such people don't exist, or if they do, they are too few to worry about.



The accusations against the litigious McAlpine were apparently meant for another member of his family, but it gave the Lord the opportunity to screw money out of various people, for "damages". Reprehensible behaviour.

As for Brittan... I would sooner pay attention to the account by celebrated English blogger John Ward who did a lot of work in Whitehall over the years:

"Lord Brittan is a special case for me because my familiarity with the case goes back to the early and mid 1980s….and because predictably – now he is an ex-Brittan – more details are coming out to dismiss at least some of the remaining doubts about his guilt.

"He is not, however, alone in his guilt.

"Three Conservative Cabinet Ministers on four separate occasions (in various combinations) told me between 1982 and 1985 that Brittan’s paedophilia bent was “an open secret” among senior Tories. They had nothing to gain in saying this, and no motive to influence me: I was a very peripheral communications supplier doing advertising work for the Central Office of Information (the COI) – later abolished by the Camerlot Coalition and transferred to the Cabinet Office. In truth, the subject was a matter for amusement and gossip rather than smear.

"For example, one high-profile Minister at the time remarked, “Leon isn’t interested in sex with anything over three feet tall” – a crack I took to be an accusation of bestiality until the civil servant involved in the project set me straight. I was told later (at a private dinner) that Margaret Thatcher banished the Peer to the EC when his proclivities were confirmed to her by the security services..."

https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2015/07/23/the-paedofile-why-cameron-and-clegg-must-have-known-the-truth-about-leon-brittan/

If you go for something from Australia last year, try this:

[video=youtube;JfNeB6Hx7N0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfNeB6Hx7N0[/video]
"The accusations against the litigious McAlpine were apparently meant for another member of his family, but it gave the Lord the opportunity to screw money out of various people, for "damages". Reprehensible behaviour."

Absolutely incredible. You don't even pretend to believe child abuse allegations against the late Lord McAlpine. Yet you regard it as reprehensible that he sued those who slandered him.

You also appear to believe that the accuser Steve Messham was an honest person who unfortunately identified the wrong member of the McAlpine family. This gentleman was well known long before his accusation of Lord McAlpine was reported by BBC's Newsnight in November 2012. In an article in the New Statesman on 19 February 1999, Richard Webster criticized a BBC programme on child abuse broadcast the previous month.
What the BBC did not tell us

....The next witness to appear on the programme was Steven Messham. He said that on one occasion, when he had been in the sick-bay with blood pouring from his mouth, he had been buggered by Howarth as he lay in bed. He said that on another occasion he was asked to take a hamper of food to Howarth’s flat, where he was buggered by Howarth over the kitchen table.

What the BBC did not tell us was that Messham claims he was sexually abused by no less than 49 different people. He also says he has been physically abused by 26 people. [My Emphasis] . ...


Richard Webster died a few years ago but that article is still on his website and was in 2012 at the time the BBC slandered Lord Alastair McAlpine. Did they even bother to google the name of their informant? If ANY member of the McAlpine family had raped Messham would that make it the 50th person who raped him - assuming that he made no further allegations between 1999 and 2012?
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,182
Posted by Kilbarry1 in reply to soubresauts

"The accusations against the litigious McAlpine were apparently meant for another member of his family, but it gave the Lord the opportunity to screw money out of various people, for "damages". Reprehensible behaviour."


Absolutely incredible. You don't even pretend to believe child abuse allegations against the late Lord McAlpine. Yet you regard it as reprehensible that he sued those who slandered him. ..........



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alistair_McAlpine,_Baron_McAlpine_of_West_Green

....The decision to broadcast the Newsnight report without contacting McAlpine first led to further criticism of the BBC, and to the resignation of its Director-General, George Entwistle.[47] The BBC subsequently paid McAlpine £185,000 in damages plus costs, which he donated to charity.[48] He also won £125,000 in damages plus costs from ITV following a November 2012 edition of This Morning which linked Conservative politicians to allegations of child sex abuse, again donating the damages to charity.[49][50]

McAlpine expressed his intention to pursue twenty "high profile" Twitter users who had reported or alluded to the rumours.[51] He decided to drop the defamation claims against those with fewer than 500 followers in return for a £25 donation to the Children in Need charity.[52] One high-profile case was settled out of court: in March 2013, McAlpine's representatives reached an agreement with writer George Monbiot, who had tweeted on the case and had at that time more than 55,000 followers on Twitter, for the latter to carry out work on behalf of three charities of his choice whose value amounts to £25,000 as compensation. Monbiot described this settlement as "unprecedented" and "eminently decent", reflecting well on McAlpine.[53]....


So if somebody accused YOU of child abuse, having previously made rape allegations against 49 different people, then declared he had made a mistake and had intended to accuse a relative or yours you would

(A) Do nothing at all because you considered it "reprehensible behaviour" to sue OR

(B) Sue for libel and donate the money to charity.

Is that it?
 
Last edited:

Wagmore

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
13,181
ACT Police release a statement this afternoon after Ms Barnett’s press conference.

“The matter was thoroughly investigated by ACT Policing’s Operation Attest and there was no evidence to substantiate the complainant’s allegations,” the statement read. “The matter was finalised and the complainant was notified on April 30, 2015.”


ACT is "Australian Capital Territory" - a self-governing territory within New South Wales that includes the capital city of Canberra. To an extent, the ACT police would correspond to the Metropolitan Police in London, who disgraced themselves following similar allegations. So far so good but I wouldn't bet on sanity continuing for very long. The MAIN hope is not so much the idiot woman's claims of child murder, (the MET police swallowed that one) but the bit about THREE Prime Ministers. Of course if all three were Conservative types, she might still get away with it!
Tricky one-while starting off thinking these stories about global political pedophile rings were true, I've come to view this phenomenon as credible as alien abductions.
 

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
16,296
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alistair_McAlpine,_Baron_McAlpine_of_West_Green

....The decision to broadcast the Newsnight report without contacting McAlpine first led to further criticism of the BBC, and to the resignation of its Director-General, George Entwistle.[47] The BBC subsequently paid McAlpine £185,000 in damages plus costs, which he donated to charity.[48] He also won £125,000 in damages plus costs from ITV following a November 2012 edition of This Morning which linked Conservative politicians to allegations of child sex abuse, again donating the damages to charity.[49][50]

McAlpine expressed his intention to pursue twenty "high profile" Twitter users who had reported or alluded to the rumours.[51] He decided to drop the defamation claims against those with fewer than 500 followers in return for a £25 donation to the Children in Need charity.[52] One high-profile case was settled out of court: in March 2013, McAlpine's representatives reached an agreement with writer George Monbiot, who had tweeted on the case and had at that time more than 55,000 followers on Twitter, for the latter to carry out work on behalf of three charities of his choice whose value amounts to £25,000 as compensation. Monbiot described this settlement as "unprecedented" and "eminently decent", reflecting well on McAlpine.[53]....


So if somebody accused YOU of child abuse, having previously made rape allegations against 49 different people, then declared he had made a mistake and had intended to accuse a relative or yours you would

(A) Do nothing at all because you considered it "reprehensible behaviour" to sue OR

(B) Sue for libel and donate the money to charity.

Is that it?
And incidentally, there was never any evidence against Lord McAlpine's relative either, just the accusations of a serial accuser.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top