by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB
Australia’s Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse is not ready to finalize its mission, but it does show signs of winding down. As I reported on April 1, the Commission is holding some “overview” panel discussions.
Those are outstandingly good – such as the one on ripple effects of child abuse — but will there be an overview of major insights into the power behind the abuse? Is the Commission able to see the forest — or just the trees?
I have been an armchair participant in this Royal Commission for 18 months and hereby offer my overview. It is strictly about the “Forest.”
What I present here is highly prejudiced by my background (activist involvement with MK-Ultra survivors in the US) and my devotion to the “conspiracy” idea that a World Government has been in place for at least a century.
I found the RC (Royal Commission) absolutely thrilling, as a person who seeks confirmation of the role of that World Government. It was so obvious it couldn’t be missed. Sock you in the eye type thing. Cardinal Pell practically said: “Can’t you commissioners see that I am protected? And who the hell do you think is protecting me? Heh, heh, I don’t mean ‘hell’ as a pun.”
The trees that were revealed by the RC are identified as Case Studies. The Commissioners successfully “outed” the Church, the Child Protective Services, the Navy, the police, what-have-you. I’ll refer to those trees only when they aid my Forest presentation.
1. Navy/Army /Air Force
Case study 40 told of the beatings and rapings of recruits aboard the HMAS Leeuwin, off the Perth coast. At a June 21, 2016, hearing if the RC, “Testifier One described his life of misery on this ship where the older boys (“the top shits”) would wake him in the night, and terrify him.
“I made an appointment to see the chaplain. He said ‘It might be better if you don’t do anything. If it ever got around that you ratted on predators…’ He himself may have been scared.
“I witnessed others ‘milking the cow’ — one boy masturbated on all fours, undressed. I disappeared and hid in a small cave. Another junior came in and said the abuse was subhuman. We developed a plan to escape Leeuwin for just long enough to be considered a deserter and be given a court martial, so I could tell anyone who would listen.
“That April 29, 1968, the other boy and I escaped to Kalgoorlie. When we went to police and were locked up, and taken back, they locked me up and kept me in a cell for weeks. At night I was abused by the navy police orally and buggery. I had no choice but surrender.
Lt Commander Johnston visited me and said they could send a representative on my behalf if I wanted him to represent me…. He said he felt I would make a good sailor and academically was doing well. I said I couldn’t take the bastardization anymore.
He said I should let him do all the talking at the court martial. I wanted the world at large to know. … [But in his statement] he said I was a troublemaker and would never make a good seaman.
I was in total shock. I felt duped and my mind was reeling at the betrayal. The judge made his decision to discharge me, and all my back pay and leave pay were taken. He said I was a disgrace to my family.
In 1969, I met my wife; I needed a secure job. I joined the RAAF in September, and graduated at Edinburgh [near Adelaide].
There, I was told that a Judge Rapkee in Sydney was doing an inquiry into Leeuwin. I was escorted to the judge by shore patrolmen. They said “If you say anything you are going to pay a very dear price. We have people at the top in all services.”
And there you have it. The forest. If the shore patrol could boast of having “people at the top in all services” they are not just Navy, right? They are something higher than Navy. Did Justice McClellan look any further up the line? He did look to a Navy commander, but no higher.
2. Highton Housemaster at Geelong
The child sexual abuse at Highton boarding house of Geelong Grammar was much aired at the RC. Maybe the Commissioners go behind the scenes to do more than we were able to glean from the hearings, but I doubt they do.
As reported in GumshoeNews, I attended the relevant hearing on October 22, 2015 and found the testifier – Robert Bugg, house master of Highton House at Geelong to be arrogant and even contemptuous in his replies to questions. His main comment, of course, was “I don’t remember.”
So, OK, we could see he wasn’t going to spill any beans (just as Pellsie never did). But several Geelong students who had been abused committed suicide. Surely there is a legal way to trace responsibility to a higher level than that of housemaster. What about the Headmaster? He or she was never questioned.
Granted this is not a murder trial. The RC’s function is to INQUIRE into the way kids got abused and especially how the institutions refrained from reporting.
On the day I left Sydney after Bugg’s hearing I did not yet have the Forest pictured. It seemed enough to me that the RC clearly established that this official school authority turned a blind eye to the tragedy.
You may recall, however, that I was starting to theorize that there must be someone controlling that housemaster. And if the RC had grilled the Headmaster, I probably would have reckoned he, too, was obeying someone (not just looking to protect his salary or his standing in the community).
The Forest here is that the RC itself won’t open the question: who is really controlling these guys. Probably Justice McClellan does not yet see the point of this, but he ought to.
I’d like the Commissioners to knock down my claim (it is a ridiculous-sounding claim so it should be easy to demolish!) that the housemaster, bishop, navy commander, etc are participating in a deliberate scheme to harm these children.
What other explanation could there be? Have you seen my video about Bishop Little? He doggedly caused one of the priests (Fr Searson) to ruin the lives of children. It was NOT simply “failure to report.”
I feel forced to believe that when Mr Bugg spoke arrogantly, he actually felt arrogant. I paraphrase Bugg (licentiously): “So what if kids were degraded? Why should I give a damn? I live in the social stratosphere and you, Judge McClellan [Oops I think it was only Justice Jennifer Coate who was there that day] are silly to worry about those boys.”
Hence I conclude that he belongs to a sort of club whose members are taught a culture that was designed by our hidden rulers.
3. Ryan Hears a Who
Now recall Denis Ryan, a detective in Mildura, who at age 83 is author of the book Unholy Trinity. He (whom I trust completely) raves on and on about the three members of the “trinity” that he had to contend with: the outrageous Monsignor Day (molester of hundreds – yes hundreds – of children, a clerk of court named Kearney, and a fellow cop named Babbitt.
In a December 2015 Gumshoe article I said:
Ryan tried for forty years – I repeat 40 years — to have bad priests removed from proximity to children. He couldn’t even get that much done!
John Howden, headmaster of St Joseph’s College in Mildura did report Monsignor Day’s raping of children (both sexes) to the police — but to no avail. So the blockage was the police. The justice system was completely tied up. And it took only the two low-level officials, Barritt and Kearney, to do it.
Many victims were threatened (such as “Your parents will lose their jobs if you tell”). And allegations were made against them!! They had to sign a gag order to qualify for the payment of compensation by the Church. I’m pretty sure that gag order can be overridden by the Royal Commission – they have a right to quiz anybody.
As for Monsignor Day’s record-breaking hold on children, two explanations that seem to satisfy Denis Ryan do not satisfy me.
One, which is repeated throughout the book (Unholy Trinity), is that the police let the criminal get away with child-rape because the Church needed to protect its reputation. Ryan thinks the cops joined in on this because they themselves were Catholic. I can’t buy it. Yes, I do recall the era myself, and the holiness of [my] Church, but it does not make sense.
His other explanation is that the cops were similarly trying to protect the reputation of the Force. That just does not jive with the fact that the upper levels of the Force were engaging in complete protection of the Church. They should have wanted to protect their cop-hood. They clearly had no pride, no sense of duty about their responsibility to protect children. Why?
Another thing that Ryan takes as a given – but to me it is a problem – is the fact that the trinity of men were bosom buddies. Day, Babbitt, and Kearney spent a lot of time together. Could it be, as I suspect, that they were engaged in some other task? At one point Ryan casually mentions, on page 195, that Babbitt was “covert ASIO.”
Ta-da! The Forest. ASIO, I believe, works for World Government. It’s no secret that the US’s CIA basically works for Rockefeller-types.
I have more to say about establishing a Forest from such case-study “Trees” as have been collected by the RC — but will save it for later.
For now, just to recap the above:
- Shore patrol told a potential dobber: “Don’t say anything about the abuse on the HMAS Leeuwin. We have people at the top in all services.” Who is the “we”?
- The House Master at Highton House in Australia’s most upper-crust grammar school couldn’t care less about being blamed for ruined lives; he showed contempt toward the Commission. Does he belong to a club that disregards the law with impunity? Does some entity above him praise him for this?
- Thanks to one particular cop — in Mildura of all places — we found out how the Force blocks any attempts to bring word of Church pedophilia to the place where it might be made to cease (i.e., the arrest of a priest). Translate: Victorian police are protectors and enablers of crime against children. Why? I suggest the Police leaders are following orders from above.
In many other ways, too, we can detect World Government performing its fabulously selfish mission: It holds the entire society in its grip, just so it won’t get knocked off the perch.
I recommend knocking them off the perch pronto.
What Her Maj Wants:
In the Letters Patent from the Queen establishing this Royal Commission, two phrases stick out:
1. The RC needs “to establish mechanisms … for the purpose of enabling the timely investigation and prosecution of offences”
Hello? There already are mechanisms for that. Seriously, we have no lack of ways “to investigate and prosecute offenses.” What prevents them being used is this very thing that I postulate – a secret bunch of overseers in our midst. They represent, or act as agents of, World Government.
Throw the bums out! Even the lowest ones on the rung. Without them, the upper ones wouldn’t last long.
2. The RC must find out “what should be done to eliminate or reduce impediments that currently exist for responding appropriately to child sexual abuse.”
Aha! You can’t “eliminate or reduce impediments” if you don’t say what they are. The impediments — as attested to by Denis Ryan, and the unnamed cadet on the Leeuwin (and maybe boys at Geelong who committed suicide, if they could speak from the grave) — have to do with the presence in our midst of covert operators. The “we” of the shore patrol and the “unidentified supporter” of Robert Bugg, House Master, and Detective Babbitt who double-dips as an ASIO man.
Follow my logic: You can’t BE IN DENIAL ABOUT WORLD GOVERNMENT and yet say you are earnest about fixing the problem that you are in denial about.
— Mary W Maxwell took 18 months to beat a path this far, but anyone reading it can acquire it instantly!
Photo credit: discovertheforest.org