Try to imagine waking up one morning to find out through a newly published book that you have been accused of child molestation and the murder of children.
It is impossible to gauge how such allegations would make an individual feel unless you yourself had experienced it. But we can still apply logic to what is a hypothetical scenario. So let’s assume that the content of this book is false. The book in question gives an account of what you are accused of, and states with absolute conviction that you are guilty of the crimes outlined. However, you have never actually come into sexual contact with a child, any child, let alone ever raised a hand to one.
The logic here comes from how you would react. Remember that this book has slandered you. It has defamed your character, painted you as something you are not. And, crucially, the content of these baseless accusations are now in the public domain. Anyone can access them. Society can take what this book says as fact and ruin your credibility within a matter of moments.
The rational response from your part then would be to sue the writer of this book for libel. Have him up before a court of law, demonstrate that everything printed in the book is false and without evidence. Given that you are innocent and the writer has little to go on, you would win the case, receive a sizable sum in compensation, and try and return your life to some degree of normality whilst repairing the damage done by these unfounded allegations.
So now let’s turn from the hypothetical to the real.
In 1998, author and researcher David Icke, who once worked as a presenter for the BBC, published a book called ‘The Biggest Secret‘. In it he accused Edward Heath, the former Conservative Prime Minister from 1970 to 1974, of the sexual abuse and murder of children. Exactly as with our hypothetical scenario. The details of the allegations are laid out in the book, and are significantly expanded on in later books written by the author.
Here is a brief passage from ‘The Perception Deception‘, written by David Icke and published in 2013.
I named Heath as a serial child abuser, killer and satanist in The Biggest Secret seven years before he died in 2005. A local newspaper reporter, or an excuse for one, contacted Heath days after the book was published in 1998 and read him the passage. He replied with the usual ‘Icke is crazy’ response and did nothing else.
This is a former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, accused of the most heinous crimes imaginable. And he did nothing to defend his honour. Instead, he shielded himself from the accusations by using David Icke’s reputation in the mainstream media against him, knowing that through that the majority would give no credence to the allegations presented.
To those who are unacquainted with David’s work – meaning those who have never read one of his books – he is a conspiracy theorist who thinks the world is run by lizards. This mainstream perception of him has been unyielding since he first documented his research on how he believes humanity has been infiltrated by archontic forces from beyond this realm.
But none of this is of any significance when it comes to judging Edward Heath. It is a simple formula. If you are accused of pedophilia and the subsequent murder of the children you abused, and there is no truth to it, then you sue the accuser for defamation. If what David Icke printed in 1998 had no validity, then he would not be publishing his work still, 18 years after the initial allegation.
This would have been a perfect opening for Heath to shut down David Icke and destroy his reputation as an author forever more. But it didn’t happen.
What we’re looking at here is a situation where had Edward Heath, knowing that what was alleged against him was true, taken David to court for slander, it would have laid the grounding for further allegations of abuse to come out. Not just against Heath, but against a legion of other prominent names within the political, entertainment and Royal establishments.
So the natural response from Heath was to say nothing, pass it off as the words of a fantasist, and move on. Because, remember, the wider perception of David Icke at the time and indeed now was one of a fantasist. The mainstream media and it’s audience were always going to trust the word of a former Prime Minister, or lack thereof in Heath’s case, over an individual such as David Icke. Propaganda from the media ensures it.
In death and by law, Edward Heath remains an innocent man. He has yet to be publicly recognised for what he was, despite the detailed accounts of both David Icke and former barrister Michael Shrimpton.
However, last year it was announced that Wiltshire police were under investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission over claims that it covered up allegations against Sir Edward Heath back in the 1990s.
Following on from that was the news that police were going to examine 4,500 boxes of Heath’s papers in relation to allegations of abuse. This was expected to take around a year to complete. We should hear something from this at some point in 2017.
Until then, just ponder on the fact that Heath chose not to defend the accusations leveled at him by David Icke. Heath died in 2005. He had 7 years to go after him. But it never happened.
What kind of person would allow allegations against them of child abuse and murder to pass without consequence? It is a simple answer. A person that knew his crimes were part of a much wider network that spans all corners of the globe.
Any attempt to sue David Icke would have run the very real risk of exposing the true nature of what Edward Heath was part of. Which is why he said nothing.
The fact that mainstream media did not question Heath’s silence at the time, and still do not question it to this day, demonstrates the absence of morality within the journalistic field. Where perpetrators, even in death, are allowed to roam free.
Thank you for reading.