Page 2 of 15

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:49 pm
by guruilla
Searcher08 » Sun Mar 30, 2014 7:03 am wrote:My take-away from the above research is that there was a major effort, near the Labour to push a multi-channel (academic / political / media) to push a pedo agenda slipstreamed in as part of the nascent gay rights movement.

Nice summation. And it appears to be sourced in Fabian (Havelock Ellis, Edward Carpenter, Wilfred Trotter/Bion, Norman Glaister) ideas about socio-spiritual engineering via sexual interference/"liberation" - currently being promoted as "the evolutionary power of trauma" by LSE-grad Whitley Strieber and Esalenite Jeffrey Kripal, among others.

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 5:32 pm
by Plutonia
Re the "Home Office"/Pie connection: It looks like sympathetic Labour Secretary Roy Jenkins let them in and they stayed on, undercover. It's probably worthwhile working out the timeline, but I haven't done that yet, still here's this bit of hair-raising institutional collusion:

PIE was born in part from the reforms of Harold Wilson's home secretary, Roy Jenkins [Labour], who decriminalised homosexual acts between men aged 21 and over. "[Jenkins] created within the Home Office an atmosphere of excitement around liberal reform," [PIE Chair] O'Carroll said.

They felt a moment was coming when their desire for "mutual and loving relationships" between adults and children would shame them no more. But drumming up members was hard because so few publications would take their adverts and PIE sought affiliation with NCCL "to create a greater weight of opinion by joining together in a common casue", O'Carroll said. "It got me a platform or two." ... led-hewitt

Roy Jenkins is often seen as responsible for the most wide-ranging social reforms of the late 1960s, with popular historian Andrew Marr claiming 'the greatest changes of the Labour years' were thanks to Jenkins.[4] He refused to authorise the birching of prisoners and was responsible for the relaxation of the laws relating to divorce, abolition of theatre censorship and gave government support to David Steel's Private Member's Bill for the legalisation of abortion and Leo Abse's bill for the decriminalisation of homosexuality. Wilson, with his puritan background, was not especially sympathetic to these developments, however. Jenkins replied to public criticism by asserting that the so-called permissive society was in reality the civilised society. For some conservatives, such as Peter Hitchens, Jenkins' reforms remain objectionable. In his book The Abolition of Britain Hitchens accuses him of being a "cultural revolutionary" who takes a large part of the responsibility for the decline of "traditional values" in Britain.

Roy Jenkins' male lover Tony Crosland tried to halt his marriage

A new biography, Roy Jenkins: A Well Rounded Life, by John Campbell, reveals how the former Labour chancellor and Home Secretary had a homosexual affair with his close friend Tony Crosland, who he met at Oxford University ... riage.html

The Labour Party won the 1974 General Election and Jenkins once again became home secretary. He was responsible for two important pieces of legislation, the Sex Discrimination Act (1975) and the Race Relations Act (1976). He also led the successful "yes" campaign in the referendum on membership of the European Economic Community. When Harold Wilson resigned in 1976 Jenkins stood for the leadership of the party. However, he came only third behind James Callaghan and Michael Foot.

In 1977 Jenkins left the House of Commons to become president of the European Commission in Brussels. In this post he began to advocate the idea of European monetary union. This was considered to be too radical at the time and the result was the introduction of the European monetary system. However, he had laid the foundations for what was later to become the single currency in 2002.

The political views of Jenkins were unpopular in the Labour Party and in 1981 he joined Shirley Williams, David Owen and William Rodgers in setting up the Social Democratic Party (SDP). Jenkins became leader of the new party and in 1982 he returned to the House of Commons as MP for Glasgow Hillhead.

At the 1983 General Election the SDP-Liberal Alliance achieved 25% of the popular vote. However, the SDP won only 6 seats. After the election Jenkins resigned as leader and was replaced by David Owen. In the 1987 General Election Jenkins lost his seat at Glasglow Hillhead. Created Lord Jenkins of Hillhead he became the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords.

That is, I believe, this David Owen:

Jenkins had a penchant for hanging out with conservatives: ... ris-mullin
And, according to his bio, he didn't hold back his erm affections: ... iends.html

And here's the goings on at the Home Office:

Freeman/Smith [busted for child porn] was a former Home Office security guard and was described in court in 1984 as the, “powerhouse and engine room of P.I.E, and the life blood of contact which he edited and printed.

The members’ hotline for the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) rang, of all places, inside the Home Office. The phone would be picked up by Steven Smith, a paedophile and member of the group who worked in security in Whitehall, from where he would tell callers where to go for the next meeting to discuss issues including decriminalising sex with children as young as four. ... ove/p-i-e/

A former top civil servant who later went on to write academic articles on the love between men and boys in ancient Greece and in Benjamin’s Britten’s operas is at the centre of a Home Office inquiry into whether he sanctioned taxpayers’ cash to fund the Paedophile Information Exchange.

Clifford Hindley, who died some five years ago, was head of the Home Office’s Voluntary Services Unit from at least 1979 until 1983, which is now under investigation after a former civil servant has alleged there may have been a ” cover up ” over a grant re-application from PIE.
This has raised the question - as the whistleblower thinks it was a re-application -whether the Callaghan Labour and Thatcher Conservative governments actually funded PIE just at the time when the National Council for Civil Liberties was also supporting the organisation, ... -boy-love/

A more detailed account from Ian Pace
The extent to which the Paedophile Information Exchange established a thorough presence at the Home Office in the late 1970s and early 1980s is now becoming clear as more information becomes available. What transpires is alarming:

(a) Senior civil servant (Assistant Secretary) Clifford Hindley dismissed the objections of another member of staff to government money going to PIE, who received a total of £70 000 between 1977 and 1980. After early retirement in 1983, Hindley published a series of pro-pederastic articles on music and classical Greece in scholarly journals. whose arguments were scarcely-disguised PIE propaganda.

(b) PIE chair Steven Adrian Smith (who replaced Tom O’Carroll), also known as Steven Freeman, used a telephone number at the Home Office as the contact point for PIE, whilst he was working there as an electrical contractor, on behalf of firm Complete Maintenance Ltd. According to his own account, Smith stored file material in cabinets at the Home Office and received full security clearance from Scotland Yard, (Keith Dovkants, ‘Child sex ring’s ‘Home Office Link’, Standard, November 7th, 1984; Alex Marunchak, ‘Child-Sex Boss in Whitehall Shock’, The Sun, August 15th, 1982; Steven A. Smith, ‘PIE, from 1980 Until its Demise in 1985′, in The Betrayal of Youth: Radical Perspectives on Childhood Sexuality, Intergenerational Sex, and the Social Oppression of Children and Young People, edited Warren Middleton (London: CL Publications, 1986), pp. 215-245).

Smith claims he was provided with a furnished office as part of his contract, from which he could use the phone line, but another source connected to the Home Office informs me that it was unthinkable that such a contractor would be given access to a Home Office phone line. Smith was later said in court probably to have actually published the PIE magazine (which would then have been Minor Problems) in the Home Office itself (Sue Clough, ‘Paedophile jailed over child porn material’, Press Association, December 16th, 1991).

(c) PIE Secretary and Treasurer Barry Cutler was also employed in the Home Office in the early 1980s, until being discovered by the News of the World, whereupon he was sacked (Michael Parker, Stuart White and Alex Marunchak, ‘The Nasty Nine: Bosses who mastermind the secret web of filth’, News of the World, August 28th, 1983). Cutler was also highly active in the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, acting in 1999 as a spokesperson for the organisation on the abolition of Clause 28 of the 1988 Local Government Act (Graeme Wilson, ‘Fury at move to drop schools’ gay propaganda ban’, Daily Mail, August 23rd, 1999), and remaining on their Executive Committee at least as late as 2010.

(d) A civil servant at the Home Office received a series of slides with images of abuse of young boys and obscene letters delivered to his departmental address. When this was discovered, one colleague’s protests that these materials should be handed over to the police were ignored, and it was treated as a purely internal matter (‘Two-year cover-up on dirty pictures’, Daily Express, November 25th, 1983). It is not known whether this was one of the three individuals above.

(e) Adrian Fulford (now Lord Justice Fulford), who was named last week in the Mail on Sunday as a key organiser of the so-called Conspiracy Against Public Morals to support key PIE figures, and wrote an article defending PIE (Martin Beckford, ‘High Court judge and the child sex ring: Adviser to Queen was founder of paedophile support group to keep offenders out of jail’, Mail on Sunday, March 9th, 2014), also acted as Smith’s defence barrister in a court case concerning publishing obscene material featuring children in 1991. Smith had previously fled to the Netherlands to avoid trial, and was tried after being deported by Dutch authorities (Sue Clough, ‘Paedophile jailed over child porn material’, Press Association, December 16th, 1991).

The Prime Minister or at least the Home Secretary need to make a statement about this level of PIE infiltration (involving three, possibly four individuals directly linked to the organisation) into the very government department responsible for law and order. Also, to answer the following questions:

(i) who was responsible for their employment (and dismissal or delay thereof) these individuals?
(ii) which ministers (Labour and/or Conservative) would have been aware of these individuals’s presence in the department?
(iii) which would have authorised the payments to PIE?

During the period of PIE’s official existence, 1974-1984, the Home Secretaries were Roy Jenkins (1974-1976), Merlyn Rees (1976-1979), William Whitelaw (1979-1983) and Leon Brittan (1983-1985); Ministers for Home Affairs were Lord Harris (1974-1979), Alex Lyon (1974-1976), Brynmor John (1976-1979), Lord Boston (Jan-May 1979), Leon Brittan (1979-1981), Timothy Raison (1979-1983), Patrick Mayhew (1981-1983), and David Waddington (1983-1987); Junior Ministers and Parliamentary Private Secretaries were Shirley Summerskill (1974-1979), Lord Belstead (1979-1982), Lord Elston (1982-1984), David Mellor (1983-1986) and Lord Glenarthur (1984-1986).

We also know that senior diplomat and MI6 officer Peter Hayman was an active member of PIE, and that members of PIE (including Smith – see above) received active political and legal support from a current High Court Judge (see Beckford, ‘High Court judge’, above); a further judge, now Chief Coroner, Peter Thornton, was also involved with the provision such support (Martin Beckford, ‘Now Chief Coroner is exposed as paedophile apologist who wanted age of consent to be 14′, Daily Mail, March 16th, 2014). Leading PIE member Peter Righton managed to wean his way into the whole social work and child protection world, occupying senior and influential positions (see a whole range of articles here), and his name has been linked to networks operating in public schools (see Eileen Fairweather, ‘Paedophile ring alleged at top public schools’, Standard, September 19th, 1996) and children’s homes. Not to mention PIE being affiliated to NCCL, who would take out adverts in two different PIE publications, Understanding Paedophilia and Magpie; current senior Labour politicians, including Deputy Leader Harriet Harman and Shadow Minister for Policing Jack Dromey were involved at the heart of NCCL at this time. The names of other senior politicians, including late MPs Peter Morrison (Conservative) and Cyril Smith (Liberal Democrat) have also been publicly linked to organised abuse involving young children in homes.

This is an extremely serious situation which demonstrates that the PIE network was able to infiltrate some of the upper echelons of British government and society in the 1970s and 1980s, This needs to be thoroughly investigated with proper resources and funding.

I also have clear information on the extent to which PIE members or sympathisers were very influential in different branches of academia – sociology, social work, child protection and the study of child abuse, criminology, music and the arts, and gender and sexuality studies. Some of their work was published by reputable scholarly journals (as I have detailed in the case of Hindley), and many obtained senior positions in leading universities. Various of their students continued to develop their ideas. To this day, some of their publications are still cited or otherwise used as if they were reliable and trustworthy, to such an extent that I believe elements of these professions have been corrupted.

Clear documentary evidence points to a highly-organised network with PIE at its centre; a network responsible not simply for the advocacy of paedophilia, but the organisation international rings of abusers and for the trafficking in child pornography. The seriousness of this cannot be underestimated. All politicians should be supporting the work of Tom Watson MP in trying to bring to light this awful network (which cannot be assumed to be merely ‘historic’), and address honestly the ways in which its activities and ideologies may have infiltrated their own parties. ... hone-line/

Off topic here, but may as well connect the dots:

Searcher08 » Sat Mar 29, 2014 5:11 pm wrote:I felt drawn to do some quick Wiki research on those people
[ ... ]
S08: Astor reads like a very decent guy

He's also just a step away from the high-weirdness nexus of Puharich's "The Nine", being that he's the second cousin of seance attendant Ava Alice Muriel Astor Pleydell-Bouverie. Note that her father, John Jacob "Jack" Astor IV, was the wealthiest man to have died on the Titanic and that the seance was held on a farm owned by the Round Table Foundation: ... d-america/

He also corresponded with, and championed Myra Hindley: ... or-letters

And Puharich, of course, established a special school for "space kids" in rural New York.

So that brings us back to...

Harriet Harman is herself the niece of controversial peer, Lord Longford.

Longford notoriously befriended Moors Murderer Myra Hindley and was one of her strongest advocates.

Hindley had links to ked to Jimmy Savile who in turn had links to Longford and Cliff Richard:

” We were very interested to read this report about an enquiry , set-up by Lord Longford, to investigate pornography.

Lord Longford was a long-time supporter of child killer, Myra Hindley.

Myra Hindley apparently had links to Jimmy Savile.

Some people claim Myra Hindley is not really dead but is living under an assumed identity.

Lord Longford invited some special chums to help him find out about obscene publications.

Amongst the gang were none other than Jimmy Savile and the very Reverend Cliff Richard : ... 63#p537763

And lastly, maybe this thread would be better merged with the Pedophile File mega thread? Mod?

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 5:44 pm
by Plutonia
Oh and this. Notorious PIE paedo Tom O'Carroll mentions Jenkins in his treatise: Paedophila: The Radical Case
But PIE began to make its presence felt in other ways, notably by Keith's attendance at the 1975 annual conference of CHE at Sheffield, where he made an impassioned speech on paedophilia that was well received (and was covered at length in The Guardian) and also at a conference in the same year organized by MIND, the national mental health organization.

One outcome of the MIND conference was the suggestion to Keith that PIE should submit evidence to the Home Office Criminal Law Revision Committee on the age of consent. With amazing despatch Keith did exactly this, preparing and submitting the seventeen-page document discussed in Chapter 6 in a matter of weeks, without the benefit of research time or facilities at his disposal. What's more, we have it on reliable authority that his work caught the imagination of no less a figure than the Home Secretary of the time, Roy Jenkins. He is said to have been impressed (our informant did not tell us whether he actually agreed with anything proposed), but added words to the effect: 'Of course, it hasn't a hope in hell.'

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 3:22 am
by semper occultus
...please can we keep this un-merged...?

....I think for continuity it fully merits thread autonomy....

...some interesting material dating from the PIE "charm offensive" on the left wing / gay rights lobby....1978 somewhat later than I would have expected...

.....under the heading Chemical Castration some comment on the NCCL link in particular :

Image Image Image Image Image Image

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:52 pm
by guruilla
Original here per Der Spiegel - TRIGGER WARNING!! Graphic descriptions of goings on:

The Sexual Revolution and Children: How the Left Took Things Too Far ... 02679.html

Commentary here (Repeat TRIGGER WARNING):

Principled Pedophilia and the German Left
Der Spiegel is often accused of being anti-clerical. The Catholic sexual abuse scandal in Germany has given anti-clericals a vast amount of material to work with. But Der Spiegel is also willing to tell the truth about corruption in the liberal icons of society, in this case the revolutionaries of 1968 and their sexual abuse of children — of course abuse motivated by the purest ideological motives.

The 68ers wanted to get rid of all inhibition and repression, including the repression of sexual contact between adults and children. Sexual liberation was at the top of the agenda of the young revolutionaries who, in 1967, began turning society upside down. The control of sexual desire was seen as an instrument of domination, which bourgeois society used to uphold its power. Everything that the innovators perceived as wrong and harmful has its origins in this concept: man’s aggression, greed and desire to own things, as well as his willingness to submit to authority. The student radicals believed that only those who liberated themselves from sexual repression could be truly free.

To them, it seemed obvious that liberation should begin at an early age.

All bourgeois repression and prejudice had to be overcome:

“At the core of the movement of 1968, there was in fact a lack of respect for the necessary boundaries between children and adults. The extent to which this endangerment led to abuse cases is unclear,” Wolfgang Kraushaar, a political scientist and chronicler of the movement, writes in retrospect.

A lack of respect for boundaries is putting it mildly. One could also say that the boundaries were violently torn open.

In 1970 a kindergarten put leftist sexual enlightenment into practice.

The educators’ notes indicate that they placed a very strong emphasis on sex education. Almost every day, the students played games that involved taking off their clothes, reading porno magazines together and pantomiming intercourse.

According to the records, a “sex exercise” was conducted on Dec. 11 and a “fucking hour” on Jan. 14. An entry made on Nov. 26 reads: “In general, by lying there we repeatedly provoked, openly or in a hidden way, sexual innuendoes, which were then expressed in pantomimes, which Kurt and Rita performed together on the low table (as a stage) in front of us.”

Nor was this a fringe institution, but was sponsored and staffed by a university:

On April 7, 1970, the Berlin state parliament discussed the Rote Freiheit after-school center. As it turned out, the Psychology Institute at the Free University of Berlin was behind the center. In fact, the institute had established the facility and provided the educators who worked there.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit was a teacher during this time and described his sexual experiences with children.

In his 1975 autobiographical book “Der grosse Basar” (”The Great Bazaar”), Green Party politician Daniel Cohn-Bendit describes his experiences as a teacher in a Frankfurt Kinderladen. When the children entrusted to his care opened his fly and began stroking his penis, he writes, “I was usually quite taken aback. My reactions varied, depending on the circumstances.”

Danny the Red liked both little boys and little girls. He wrote:
«Mon flirt permanent avec tous les gosses prenait vite des formes d’érotisme. Je sentais vraiment que les petites filles, à 5 ans, avaient déjà appris comment m’emmener en bateau, me draguer [the lttle 5-year-old girls had already learned how to hit on me]. C’est incroyable. La plupart du temps, j’étais désarmé.» (L’Express)

In 1982 he continued enthusing about adult-child eroticism:
“At nine in the morning, I join my eight little toddlers between the ages of 16 months and 2 years. I wash their butts, I tickle them, they tickle me and we cuddle. … You know, a child’s sexuality is a fantastic thing. You have to be honest and sincere. With the very young kids, it isn’t the same as it is with the four-to-six-year-olds. When a little, five-year-old girl starts undressing, it’s great, because it’s a game. It’s an incredibly erotic game.”

The Leftists say it was all for the good of the children, unlike the nasty sexual activity that went on in the Catholic Church:

Does what happened in a number of the Kinderladen qualify as abuse? According to the criteria to which Catholic priests have been subjected, it clearly does, says Alexander Schuller, the sociologist. “Objectively speaking, it was abuse, but subjectively it wasn’t,” says author Dannenberg. As outlandish as it seems in retrospect, the parents apparently had the welfare of the children in mind, not their own. For the adherents to the new movement, the child did not serve as a sex object to provide the adults with a means of satisfying their sexual urges. This differentiates politically motivated abuse from pedophilia.

That of course is what pedophiles and pederasts say: it is for the good of the children.

Adult-child sex became part of the platform of the Green Party

At its convention in Lüdenscheid in 1985, the Greens’ state organization in the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia argued that “nonviolent sexuality” between children and adults should generally be allowed, without any age restrictions. “Consensual sexual relations between adults and children must be decriminalized,” the “Children and Youth” task force of the Green Party in the southwestern state of Baden-Württemberg wrote in a position paper at about the same time.

Leftist newspapers celebrated pedophilia liberation.

During this time, no other newspaper offered pedophiles quite as much a forum as the alternative, left-leaning Tageszeitung, which shows how socially acceptable this violation of taboos had become in the leftist community. In several series, including one titled “I Love Boys,” and in lengthy interviews, men were given the opportunity to describe how beautiful and liberating sex with preadolescent boys supposedly was. “There was a great deal of uncertainty as to how far people could go,” says Gitti Hentschel, the co-founder and, from 1979 to 1985, editor of Tageszeitung. Those who, like Hentschel, were openly opposed to promoting pedophilia were described as “prudish” — as opposed to freedom of expression. “There is no such thing as censorship in the Tageszeitung,” was the response.

Now the Leftists claim that anyone who brings this part of their history up is an anti-Leftist tool of the reactionaries (sounds familiar?).

“Such accusations are also part of an attempt to denounce social progress,” sexologist and 1968 veteran Gunter Schmidt wrote in the Frankfurter Rundschau. “On the whole, the social changes that are associated with the number 1968 were more likely to have led to the prevention of abuse.”

This is a very mild way of recalling the past. It is certainly not shared by everyone who was part of the leftist educational experiments of the day.

There were, as in the Catholic Church, a few brave, honest incorrupt people on the Left who were horrified by this sexualization of children.

One of the few leaders of the left who staunchly opposed the pedophile movement early on was social scientist Günter Amendt. “There is no equitable sexuality between children and adults,” Amendt said, expressing his outrage over the movement. Alice Schwarzer, the founder of the political women’s magazine Emma, also spoke out against the downplaying of sex with children and defined it as what it really was: outright abuse.

Amendt recalls how he was disparaged as a reactionary in flyers and articles. “There was an outright campaign against Alice and me at the time,” he says. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s that this horrific episode came to an end. In 1994, the Pedos appeared in Tageszeitung for the last time, and even that publication recognized that intercourse with little boys was no different than with little girls, who, thanks to the women’s movement, have long been deemed worthy of protection.

They were, like Tom Doyle in the Catholic Church, ostracized.

Although Der Spiegel has given extensive coverage to clerical failings, it also keeps raising the uncomfortable question: Why is it so bad if priests have sex with minors and OK if Roman Polanski and Daniel Cohn-Bendit have sex with minors? Is the fuss about child molestation in the Church simply a cover for anti-clericalism or anti-Christianity? Shouldn’t sauce for the clerical goose also be sauce for the artistic and political ganders? ... ft-342.htm

And here:

How the cultural Left paved way for pedophilia ... hilia.html

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:06 pm
by Wombaticus Rex
semper occultus » Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:22 am wrote:...please can we keep this un-merged...?

Absolutely; they are not the same thread.

I would like to state that, as a matter of general prejudice, I am opposed to "merge" initiatives of any stripe, I feel like anything which grows does so of its own merit and there is no greater synthesis to be gained.

If we wound up like Wikipedia, I'd be f'ing heartbroken.

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:14 am
by Plutonia
Wombaticus Rex » Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:06 pm wrote:
semper occultus » Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:22 am wrote:...please can we keep this un-merged...?

Absolutely; they are not the same thread.

I would like to state that, as a matter of general prejudice, I am opposed to "merge" initiatives of any stripe, I feel like anything which grows does so of its own merit and there is no greater synthesis to be gained.

If we wound up like Wikipedia, I'd be f'ing heartbroken.

Fair enough. Continuing then...

Thanks for those scans, semper. This stuff just keeps exceeding my expectations. :(

Here's a couple of related pieces. The first is the Ian Campbell Dunn Archive - someone named Ian Strang has compiled this handy record of the contents of the docs held at the SNA, which is great because, again, some of the records are sealed for decades - please note that I've stealth linked so as not to alert the sysop:

This is the reference # to search the SNA: GD467

I've looked to see if I could identify who recruited Ian Dunn and Michael Hanson to research adult/child sex contact as per this
Ian Campbell Dunn: In 1974, Dunn co -founded the Paedophile Information Exchange ( PIE) with Michael Hanson. It became the leading contact group for adults campaigning for the right to have sex with children. In an interview in 1997, Dunn admitted he and Hanson had agreed to facilitate research into sex with children. ... ove/p-i-e/

(also, semper, I haven't been able to find the 1997 Dunn interview, maybe you've come across it?)

So here are the possible research initiatives:

1. Minorities Research Trust
From the Ian Campbell Dunn archives - account of first meeting to discuss forming a gay activist group:


"ARENA 3" [Lesbian Journal] - April 1969



A small male group (a lady supporter was prevented from attending) has been formed in Scotland, "to consider the position of the homosexual in Scotland". Suggested title: The Scottish Minorities Committee. It is intended to hold another meeting, in Glasgow, on May 9 [1969], to which interested "A3" readers will be welcome.

This new group is currently emphasising the social welfare side, and has had discussions with a local social work agency and with the Church of Scotland. - Please write to Mr J. Halcrow, 15 Rossie Place, Edinburgh 7. Mr Halcrow has asked for our views on the proposed title. We think it is a good one, and hope that this new group, like the women's social groups, will be able to collaborate with the Minorities Research Trust, and of course with "Arena Three," for the general benefit of all homosexuals.


Minorities Research Trust is a defunct charity concerned with lesbianism and human sexuality:

it should focus on research and be inclusive of heterosexuals and supportive of lesbian individuals. As well as lesbians, its members included social workers, psychiatrists and writers such as Iris Murdoch.[4]

2. Albany Trust
From the Ian Campbell Dunn archives again:
The Chairman wrote to Douglas Allan, Secretary of the Church of Scotland's Moral Welfare Committee, on Dec 10 1969, asking for a measure of support in our efforts to publicise the Albany Trust's research. The matter was discussed at a meeting ... Jan 13 1970. The committee decided not to endorse publicity, but made it clear, however, that their representative, the Rev Ean Simpson, should continue to attend SMG meetings and should be generally available for counselling. The group's activities are being closely scrutinised.

4. British Sociological Association (BSA) Study Group on Sexuality 1951-
Date 1977
Description 'The Problematic Nature of Sexual Meanings; or 'You don't say 'Hello Sailor' to a Captain Morgan Drinker'' by Liz Stanley, BSA Study Group on Sexuality, LSE.
Access Status Open
Extent 1 file

Hold up! What's this?

4. British Sex Research Institute HCA/ALBANY TRUST/14/7 1970s
These documents are held at London University, London School of Economics Library, Archives Division

1 folder
Outline proposals for development of Albany Trust, 1967-1978.
Study of Human Sexuality in Britain: proposals for establishing an institute of social behaviour (including letter from Brian Abel-Smith).
Proposal to SSRC [Social Science Research Council] concerning Dr. J.H.Gagnon.
http:// ... 4-7#1-14-7

Okay. So that's interesting. First I've heard of this group the British Sex Research Institute. Isn't the origin story about the Albany Trust that it was formed as a funding body for the Homosexual Law Reform Society and to provide counseling services?

And the Albany Trust is generally associated with Left-leaning Gay activism, but it may have been funding the Right too:

Elm Guest House:

This image from the ‘Mary Moss Images’ shows a newsletter from CHE, which appears to implicate the Conservative Group for Homosexual Equality in the promotion of the Elm Guest House and handwritten note above which talks of a ‘Dutch Adventure’ which could be construed as a reference, in the circumstances, of child sex tourism.

1975 - CGHE (Conservative Group for Homosexual Equality) is founded, by Professor Peter Campbell, of Reading University, and is chairman, or vice-president, through almost all the Thatcher years.

The group is affiliated to the Tory Party. Campbell also edits the newsletter. Peter Campbell is named as a visitor to the Elm Guest House. The minutes from the founding meeting clearly show that, despite being labelled as an organisation that promotes gay equality, it is in fact, from inception, a 'pro - paedophile organisation'.

This obituary link also suggests Campbell had links to the CHE, the Albany Society, and Reading University Conservative Association.
Peter Campbell will be a long-time researcher to Cameron, who helps to prepare him for Prime Minister's Questions - as he did former Conservative leaders. ... edophilia/ ... -campbell/

The Needle blog link ^^^ up there, offers this pdf which purports to be a record of the original minutes of the first meeting of CHE:

a)PUBLICITY WORK- to try to counter the outrageous lies against peds, and the conditioned prejudices.
b) CULTURAL WORK - to improve the availability of ped culture
c) OUTREACH WORK - the most difficult, perhaps only to be tackled later in the caucus's existence - to try to reach and organise as many peds as possible.
d) MOVEMENT WORK - to Keep in touch with the ped movement internationally, and promote communication between the ped and gay movements.

we can provide an alternative view of childhood. Peds are among the only adults who make practical efforts to relate to children as social equals, and so learn about the oppression of children (by parents, teachers and social workers) from children themselves. We can provide a positive & liberating link between the gay movement and children,
In order to show a better understanding of the political oppression of children, motion 1) paragraph a) should be amended so that it reads:

This organisation
a)Supports the right of children and young people to freedom of expression, association and to the relationships of their choice. OLGA recognises that these rights are currently restricted through the power structure of the family, and through lack of social and economic freedoms and supports all developments which lead to the great er empowerment of children and young people.

Of all the ways to attack and isolate gay pedofiles, the Management Committee has chosen the most amusingly contradictory way of doing it. In recognising young people's rights to relationships of their choice, it fails to recognise that when a child {ie under 16) chooses a relationship with an adult, that this is a pedofile relationship, which is put down the most severely by the state. (Gay pedofile relationships challenge the parental ownership of children, the sexual 'innocence'/ignorance of children, and the boy's (hetero)sexuality)

Paragraph (c) should be cut from the motion.
The subject of 'child abuse’ is only as relevant to discussions of gay pedofilia, as are the subjects of gay and lesbian rape to adult/adult relationships. The original para c) shows that the motion comes from victims of sexual assault. Child sex abuse is usually by heterosexual fathers within the family. Gay pedofilia, by definition is not 'heterosexual’ pedofilia. Ped politics are about gay liberation and youth liberation, both of which attack the nuclear family, the insitution primarily responsible for abuse of children.. ... 4/olga.pdf


Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:48 am
by Plutonia
Also about Ian Campbell Dunn, one of the founders of PIE, he claimed that he wasn't a paedophile publicly, but then joked privately about sexing up children. His position on age of consent was "No" and he even argued that there aught to be no criminal law for any sex events.

So here is a contemporary of his, a Scottish woman, activist, writer - Iona McGregor - and this is what she has to say about Dunn and PIE:
Ian Dunn, yes, who everybody was very fond of, of course, was a bit of a tearaway kid. And he decided it would be a good thing to bring PIE into SMG. And I felt this was an entirely a wrong move, ..., because, you know, bad luck for the members of PIE, but in the eyes of the tabloids and the public in general for such a sort of amalgamation between homosexuality and paedophilia that I thought it was absolutely crazy to encourage this perception. ... intIM.html

"Oh haha! That was dear old Ian for you - always up for a lark, sod him!"


Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:37 am
by semper occultus probs...there's an old issue of Gay News I wouldn't mind getting a look at with an article on PAL - that was subsumed into PIE - presumably as it had more juice in the corridors of power :

in the mean time - from 1983 - this is years after I thought this stuff had died down - although I'm sure it was around this time PIE started to go below the radar


....Peter Tatchell is also a "person of interest" to this enquiry....( ....who wrote a gushing eulogy about Dunn after his demise...)

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:43 pm
by Plutonia
Yes, I keep running across Peter Tatchell too. His public profile is remarkable, and nary a whiff of teh ped:

A couple of British, other-than-Magpie, pro-ped mags to look out for:
UP Understanding Paedophilia
Minor Problems

And Tom O'Carroll is now involved with an organization called International Paedophile Child Emancipation forum/movement (IPCE):
Terrible Google translation from German:
The organization was founded in 1987 "International Paedophile and Emancipation Movement" (IPCE), a kind of institutionalized exchange platform of pedophiles held approximately every two years from international meetings, most of which just took place on Dutch soil. The pedophile activism in the Netherlands was more institutionalized from the outset...
Pädophilie International vernetzt ... 11649.html

I would also like to see this issue of Gay Left, referenced in that article:
So O'Carroll expressed in 1978 and 1979 in the magazine "Gay Left" . The "Paedophile Action for Liberation" (PAL), which later merged with PIE , developed in close proximity to the "Gay Liberation Front" in London. This radical gay activists presented the family as the basis of the society in question and wanted to reduce the legally defined age of sexual self-determination.

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:28 pm
by semper occultus

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:44 pm
by guruilla
Three orgs mentioned above:

British Sociological Association Study Group on Sexuality (only 5 results on Google, either a very temporary org or very low profile)

Social Science Research Council, search leads to US-based org: ... ch_Council - partially backed by Rockefellers.

The SSRC was part of a wider Progressive Era movement to develop organizations of expertise that could dispense disinterested knowledge to policymakers.These organizations would tap leading thinkers in various fields to think creatively about how to rid the nation of the social and political ills brought on by the Industrial Revolution.

Could tie into the Agrarian/Quaker/Fabian/progressive schooling agendas discussed over at Occult Yorkshire thread.

Along with Merriam, two individuals were especially vital to the SSRC's early success. One was Wesley Clair Mitchell (1874–1948), one of the founders of the [Fabian] New School for Social Research . . . Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (1954-) is a former SSRC board member.

Then this:

Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). Founded in 1965 under the government of former Fabian Society chairman Harold Wilson and having as chief executive leading Fabian Michael (later Lord) Young, who alone was responsible for the creation of over 60 like-minded organisations.

The ESRC was originally known as Social Science Research Council (SSRC) and was clearly a clone of the US organisation of the same name. The latter was founded in 1923 by Charles E. Merriam, who was associated with the American Fabian League and the London Fabian Society, in collaboration with the American Economic Association, itself founded by Fabian Society founders Thomas Davidson and Sidney Webb (Martin, pp. 123-4, 281).

While the American SSRC has been bankrolled by the Rockefellers and associated interests, its British counterpart has been funded by the Department for Business. The two organisations have always maintained close links to each other and to the LSE.

British Sex Research Institute, only 4 results on Google, including the one cited above by Plutonia, three links at LSE, and a mention by "Anthony Grey" in his book, Quest for Justice: Towards Homosexual Emancipation, here.

I'm curious how these orgs/agendas link to the original(?) Fabian group, the British Society for the Study of Sex Psychology, whose founding members included Montague Summers, the first English translator of the notorious 15th-century witch hunter's manual, the Malleus Maleficarum:

The British Society for the Study of Sex Psychology (BSSSP) was founded in 1913, "to advance a particularly radical agenda in the field of sex reform, based on the writings of gurus such as [Edward] Carpenter and [Havelock] Ellis."[1] In 1931 the Society was renamed the British Sexological Society.[2] It seems to have continued until some point in the 1940s.

Despite his conservative religiosity, Summers was an active member of the British Society for the Study of Sex Psychology, to which he contributed an essay on the Marquis de Sade.


Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Sat Apr 12, 2014 6:18 pm
by semper occultus
a selection of high-lights from various of the 9 on-line issues of the radical gay/marxist publication :


feel like a bath after reading this stuff

moral illiterates on the one hand acting like outraged maiden aunts at the very notion of the great unwashed daring to conflate homosexuals with child molesters whilst publishing material drenched with apologia & justification for child-adult sex full of sneering “irony” quotes around the words paedophile & child molesters & spewing psuedo-marxist shit about liberating children……

the nadir has to be the platform offered for the truly revolting article by arch-paedo-prosleytiser O’Carol

Issue #8

Issue #8


Issue #8


Issue #1



Issue #2


Issue #10


Issue #9


Issue #5


…looking again at this….


….far from the author’s name check to the Uranians this “amusing” poem’s necrophiliac imagery seems immediately reminiscent & indeed a rather pale & derivative attempt several decades after the event to “ a Crowley…”

But let me come directly to the point: White Stains. This has been called "the filthiest book of verse ever written," so no historian of erotica can afford to ignore it; happily it also comes within the purview of homoerotica. White Stains was published in Amsterdam by Leonard Smithers in 1898 in an edition of 100 copies; most of these were destroyed by British Customs in 1924; a Limited Edition of 1000 copies was published in London by Gerald Duckworth in 1973, 118 pages, £7.00.

The very title immediately announces that the contents will be "perverse," and we soon discover that it is one of those books that invites itself to be banned. In the dedicatory poem the Beast is being buggered:

Lie close; no pity, but a little love.
Kiss me but once and all my pain is paid.
Hurt me or soothe, stretch out one limb above
Like a strong man who would constrain a maid.
Touch me; I shudder and my lips turn back
Over my shoulder if so be that thus
My mouth may find thy mouth, if aught there lack
To thy desire, til love is one with us.

And in the concluding poem, the narrator is wandering in the abyss of Hell, fierce with syphilis.
In between these poems are 34 others, describing "Th'extreme of pleasure and the worst of pain" via the major variations of buggery, pederasty, heterosexual sodomy, fellatio, cunnilingus, rimming, rape, sapphism, impotence, bestiality, coprophilia and necrophila. It is the poetic equivalent of Krafft-Ebing's sexological study Psychopathia Sexualis.

Facetiously subtitled "The Literary Remains of George Archibald Bishop, A Neuropath of the Second Empire," the book attempts to trace the progress of diabolism in an unhinged mind.

To this end, each poem is successively more vile than the preceding, until we reach the penultimate "Necrophilia":

Yes, thou art dead. Thy buttocks now
Are swan-sort, and thou sweatest not;
And hast a strange desire begot
In me, to lick thy bloody brow;
To chew thy dainty testicles,

to rip open the hanged man's belly and wallow in his bowels, to cling, suck, rave, fuck, shriek, to eat the corpse's final stool, and to do some things so self-consciously unspeakable as to leave us more numbed than repulsed.

Some of the poems are deliberately "blasphemous"; in one, while he is in bed with a Jewess, the poet has a vision of Christ on the cross and imagines himself violating Him via the spear-wound. Most of the poems occur within a religious framework, albeit most of the imagery is satanic rather than seraphic. I find it a bit difficult to appreciate many of the poems, for they are melodramatic in the worst sense of Victorian music-hall entertainment, heavily sentimental, and dripping with the diction of the damned.

…..this may actually be highly relevant as we know :

PIE is alleged to have / had organisational connections into the satanic underground ( see attached from Blashpemous Rumours : Andrew Boyd )

Satanic organisations are known to advocate initiates to undertake “subversive and adversarial Insight Roles” involving joining extreme political movements



Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:22 am
by AhabsOtherLeg
This is a hell of a thread. Feels wrong to say thanks, considering the subject matter, but due credit to all of those who have supplied some excellent research here into this extremely murky area.

Hope this hasn't been posted before, but it's quite an incredible thing. A television interview with two members of PIE, courtesy of the BBC no less, which dates from 1983. It was shown on the flagship news programme NewsNight at that time. Somehow it managed to cause far less public controversy and outrage than the Sex Pistols saying a few swear words on TV had just seven years before.

Must say, the Beeb did a pretty good job of hiding this away among their masses of daily online content, but here it is anyway:

If you're using NoScript you might have to disable it to watch the interview, not sure if it'll be viewable abroad at all, but hopefully.

It's... quite something.

Re: P.I.E. and Magpie docs

PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:04 am
by AhabsOtherLeg
7. Sir Peter Hayman
(deceased) (aka Peter Henderson)
former UK envoy to Canada.

And MI6 agent.

14. Geoffrey Prime

Agent for GCHQ, who used his secret service skills to maintain a detailed database on the schedules of local children :

39. Roger Gleaves - Child rapist Roger Gleaves, who called himself the “Bishop of Medway”. Gleaves, of North London, has been in and out of prison for a series of child sex crimes he committed over a 40-year period. Links to several P.I.E members

There is far more to know about Gleaves than that brief account allows for. He was affiliated with far-right and Neo-Nazi groups in London, to the extent that he even designed and had made his own (crappy) paramilitary uniform. He was nicknamed the "Bishop of Medway" because he ran hostels for teenage runaways, purely out of the goodness of his heart.

These charitable endeavours turned out to be merely a cover for his numerous criminal enterprises (fraud, loansharking, slum-landlording) and a way to facilitate his ceaseless sexual predation on young boys - to the surprise of no one much, except the authorities and local community leaders, who always seem happy to offload problem children on any bumptious conman that happens to wander by. With his strong belief that boys need harsh militaristic discipline to "reform" them, which he was only too happy to apply, and his extremely litigious nature (he was declared a "nuisance litigant" by the courts many times during his life, but still kept winning cases) he had much in common with Thomas Hamilton, as I see it. But Gleaves probably only murdered one child, rather than 15.

EDIT: Come to think of it, he has even more in common with Colin Jordan, leader of the Neo-Nazi "British Movement", who also turned up on the Elm Guesthouse customer list. Jordan is often erroneously reported as being a National Front leader, but he never was.

Remarkably, Gleaves was featured in two documentary films made by Yorkshire television during his lifetime, and shown nationwide on British TV, back in the 70s. The docs were about teenage runaways and rent-boys, but in these films Gleaves was initially portrayed as a Good Samaritan, which many at the time believed him to be. The films were called "Johnny Go Home" and "The Murder of Billy Two-Tone", and Gleaves' true nature only became apparent as filming went on.

Gleaves was so prolifically and successfully litigious during his lifetime that even now (after his death) you still won't ever see these documentaries anywhere, neither on TV nor online, unless you go along to the British Film Institute and book a private screening. That's the kind of power this tosser ended up wielding, even from his lonely prison cell on the Isle of Wight.

During production, a murder took place in one of the local hostels. The crew realised they had filmed many of those involved. With police permission they began documenting the unfolding investigation: 'The Murder of Billy Two-Tone' became the second half of Johnny Go Home, screened after the ITV 10pm news bulletin. It forensically uncovers the facts behind the killing, centering on the hostel's owner.

His housing empire turns out to be based on sexual exploitation, religious cultishness, financial corruption - and bureaucratic ineptitude unable to see these behind his persuasively respectable front.

The hostel owner was Roger Gleaves, though even the BFI is still reluctant to say so.

Further info on Gleaves and the documentaries: ... 975-a.html ... ry.302231/