“A conspiracy like this… a conspiracy investigation… the rope has to tighten slowly around everyone’s neck. You build convincingly from the outer edges in.” – Associate Director of the FBI Mark Felt (Deep Throat)
After two years of investigation since the Savile expose by many people, the noose is tightening.
Last night Exaro revealed that Sir Peter Hayman was the Deputy Director of MI6 – Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, PIE.
The suggestion was not entirely new. Hugh Muir in The Guardian had said much the same in February 2014:
When the police did get around to prosecuting PIE leaders for conspiring to send indecent material through the post, a strange thing happened. Evidence comprised masses of obscene material, but by far the most active and viciously minded member of PIE – one Mr Henderson – was never prosecuted nor produced as a witness. Who was this hideous fellow? After the convictions, a conscience-stricken member of the prosecution called Private Eye to say they had been ordered from the very top to perjure themselves over “Mr Henderson” – who was, in fact, Sir Peter Hayman, long-time deputy director of MI6.
However, that Guardian piece was only one article, Others had described Sir Peter Hayman variously as an MI6 operative, or someone with connections to the security services. The Exaro article is important in that it explicitly confirms Sir Peter Hayman as the Deputy Director of MI6 from around 1974.
Sir Peter Hayman was a paedophile and a member of PIE.
His tenure as Deputy Director of MI6 appears to coincide with Maurice Oldfield’s tenure as the Director of MI6 (1974-1979) – a man who has come under suspicion himself and not just for his ‘homosexuality’.
The Prime Minister– Sir Maurice Oldfield became Security Co-ordinator in Northern Ireland in October 1979. Subsequently reports were received which caused his positive vetting clearance to be reviewed. In March 1980, in the course of that review, he made an admission that he had from time to time engaged in homosexual activities. His positive vetting clearance was withdrawn. By this time he was already a sick man; he finally ceased to serve as Security Co-ordinator in Northern Ireland when a successor took over in June 1980; he died in March 1981.
There was a lengthy and thorough investigation by the Security Service, which included many interviews with Sir Maurice Oldfield himself, to examine whether there was any reason to suppose that he himself or the interests of the country might have been compromised. The conclusion was that, though his conduct had been a potential risk to security…
And so we face the very real possibility that from 1974 (the very year that PIE was founded) until 1979 both the Director and Deputy Director of MI6 were paedophiles and members of the Paedophile Information Exchange, PIE.
Over the last two years I’ve occasionally picked up tantalising indications that there is a different view within the security services regarding the ‘establishment paedophile’ issue, nothing firm, nothing that I could hang a story on, just the odd titbit here and there.
It now starts to make a little sense for if the foreign intelligence services(MI6) was headed by two paedophiles then the domestic intelligence service (MI5) would have known and would have been put in an impossible situation. One point I’d like to make is that it is not helpful to greater understanding to think of any of the UK’s security services as homogeneous organisations. These are organisations which depend entirely, and out of necessity, on compartmentalisation of roles and information.
This brings me to the PIE membership list. Over the last two years I’ve had two sniffs of this but have never been able to lay my hands on a copy. I’m told that there are 3 slightly different membership lists held by 3 different police forces in the UK. I’ve also been told that there is no legal reason why this list could not be published. PIE was a legal organisation from 1974 until 1984. Though many members of PIE were at some stage prosecuted, being a member of PIE was not illegal and the membership list is not subject to the Data Protection Act as it can not be enforced retroactively.
It had been suggested to me that some names on the list are not paedophiles themselves, they foolishly considered the PIE campaign as a equality and rights issue and they deeply regret having been a member. We’ll call this the NCCL PIE members for arguments sake, as it would not be unusual for executive members of an umbrella organisation like the NCCL to automatically receive membership of an associated organisation – as PIE was to the NCCL. Nevertheless, these NCCL PIE members would have received literature through the post just as every member of PIE would.
I’m afraid that it is no longer in the public interest to spare these individual’s blushes. With an increasing number of high establishment figures named as members of PIE it is essential that this membership list be put responsibly into the public domain.
At the very least, the CSA Inquiry panel members should not wait until a chair is appointed, they should demand copies of all three PIE membership lists without delay.