Charles, Prince Pedophilia Saville Ball, Peter
Laurens van der Post
When selecting a godfather for Prince William, heir to the British throne, Prince Charles chose his close friend and adviser Laurens van der Post. A pedophile.
At age 46, van der Post molested a 14-year-old girl during a sea voyage from South Africa to London. The girl had been entrusted to van der Post’s care by her parents. He then installed her in a flat in London as his mistress, but abandoned her when she became pregnant at age 15 (though he sent a monthly payment). The illegitimate child born from this hebephilic predation was also disowned by van der Post. The victim later stated that van der Post was “sick” and “he knew how to pick his victims”.
In addition to being a sexual deviant, van der Post was a self-aggrandizing bullshit artist and prolific author. As JDF Jones noted in his authorised biography Storyteller: The Lives of Laurens van der Post (2001), van der Post was “a fraud, a fantasist, a liar, a serial adulterer and a paternalist. He falsified his Army record and inflated his own importance at every possible opportunity.”
van der Post is often described as a “close” and “long-time” friend of Carl Jung. The famous Swiss psychoanalyst does not mention van der Post in his autobiography, Memories, Dreams, Reflections (1963).
At age 25, Charles sought out van der Post after reading his books, and van der Post became his spiritual guru. Charles continually sought his advice and absorbed his mystic teachings. In the mid-70’s, Charles began having psychoanalytic treatment with van der Post’s second wife Ingaret, who was a Jungian analyst, and then with van der Post’s friend Dr. Alan McGlashan.
Not only is van der Post William’s godfather, he gave marriage counselling to Charles and Diana and was a frequent guest at Highgrove, Sandringham and Balmoral. On his death Charles initiated the annual van der Post Memorial Lectures, held inside St James’s Palace.
In the 1970s and 1980s it was not public knowledge that van der Post was a pedophile. But Charles was not the public. Then as now, if somebody became very close to the heir to the throne with frequent access to Royal palaces, they were going to be under close investigation by the security services.
It is wildly improbable that the security services did not know about van der Post’s predilection for young girls and that he had been paying the expenses of an illegitimate daughter originally fathered on a young teenage mother.
There is also the question of van der Post’s wider lies. It is possibly neither here nor there that in fact van der Post had only ever spent a fortnight with The Bushmen of the Kalahari when he penned his famous book, full of lies and plagiarism.
But that he was actually a Lieutenant (and at times acting Captain) rather than a Lieutenant Colonel as he claimed, would have been instantly discovered. It is worth noting here that van der Post’s famous military memoir, which became the film Merry Christmas, Mr Lawrence starring David Bowie, was massively embellished, not just in terms of his rank.
The Royalist defence of Charles’ associations rests, rather peculiarly, on the claim that any huckster and pedophile can just get entry to the Palace inner circle without any checks. That is just not true. What appears to be true is that pedophilia was treated as a peccadillo.
van der Post was also a close friend of Margaret Thatcher, exerting an influence on her policy in South Africa. Again, it defies all logic to assume Thatcher was unaware of van der Post’s deviant behaviour.
Louis Mountbatten
Before van der Post, the man credited by all biographers as the greatest influence in shaping Charles’ character was his great uncle, Lord Louis Mountbatten. Born in Austria as Prince Louis of Battenberg, Mountbatten was a serial pedophile.
His pederasty was an open secret in upper class society – including the diplomatic service – long before his death. He benefited from the protection of the inner Royal circle, which was absolute in his lifetime. Mountbatten’s child sexual abuse has only become mainstream acknowledged in the past very few years.
There was not a Fleet Street editor in 50 years who did not know of Mountbatten’s deviancy; they just did not publish it.
Mountbatten’s pedophilia was fueled by his access to underprivileged children, from New Delhi to Rabat to Kincora Boy’s Home in Belfast.
Mountbatten spent more time with Charles in his childhood and early adulthood than Charles’ own parents did, including encouraging and coaching him to have as much sex with as many “non-marriageable” girls as possible, and providing a venue for it in his homes. After the IRA assassinated the privileged pedophile, Charles said, “Life will never be the same now that he is gone”.
A 1944 FBI dossier described Mountbatten as “a homosexual with a perversion for small boys”.
This was two years before his appointment as Viceroy of India, where the open debauchery of the Mountbattens was an open secret in high-level Indian society.
Chris Moore – who started covering the Kincora scandal as a young BBC reporter in 1980 – states MI5 covered up sex abuse at Kincora Boys’ Home to protect members of the British establishment including Mountbatten.
So at the death of van der Post in 1996, Charles had lost two men he viewed, exclusively, as guides and spiritual mentors, and from whom he took the most intimate personal advice. Both were extremely vicious and calculating pedophiles, shielded by class privilege from the consequences.
So, in 1996, to whom did Charles turn as his new “mentor”?
Jimmy Savile
Jimmy Savile was an incredibly evil and disgusting character. He was also Charle’s bestie for over two decades.
Savile was introduced to a 17-year-old Charles in 1966 by Mountbatten, who vouched for him. The official story is that Mountbatten met Savile through military veteran fundraising.
You can believe that was the primary shared interest of two prolific pedophiles, if you so please.
By the 1980s, Savile was corresponding assiduously with Charles, a close friendship that continued for over 20 years. Savile was yet another person to whom Charles turned for marriage counselling. In scores of letters, it is always Charles seeking Savile’s advice and adulating him. Diana stated that Savile was a “sort of mentor” to Charles.
Savile was throughout this period one of the most prolific pedophiles in British history. His sickening repertoire was not confined to pederasty; his ‘charity’ work endowed him with access to hospital morgues, where he reportedly engaged his fetish for necrophilia.
We’re supposed to believe Britain’s extensive and well-resourced surveillance network (including MI5 and Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)) remained pig-ignorant to his horrifically prolific abuse until after his death in 2011.
In reality, UK police had been made aware of Savile’s predation at least as far back as the early 1960s. The earliest known complaint about Savile dates from 1963, just as his television career “was really beginning to take off.”
It is widely believed the royal cachet helped to protect him from prosecution. A huge amount was known to the police, to BBC managers and to various other branches of the British establishment, but Savile was untouchable.
Bishop Peter Ball
In 2000, Charles constructed a chapel at his home at Highgrove, and a stained glass window in it commemorates Laurens van der Post. Before that window, Charles kneeled for long prayer vigils with his new spiritual guide, Bishop Peter Ball – who was also a friend of Jimmy Savile. It was Savile who introduced Ball to Charles.
Rather like Epstein, Ball was a known pedophile who escaped the first time without incarceration.
He had, in 1993, accepted a police caution for a ceremony in which he had forced a 17-year-old novitiate, Neil Todd, to kneel naked in the snow for hours, whipped him, and then forced him to perform a sex act. The police also investigated at that time numerous other allegations, including two very similar ones.
The decision to caution was taken on the advice of the Crown Prosecution Service. The Independent Inquiry into Child Abuse Report 2022, which of course ignored the serial pederasty of Mountbatten, repeats the tired old “mistakes were made” lie when explaining away the law’s willful blindness to serial pedophilia (p. 15):
“When cases were reported to the police, investigative mistakes were made and, on the rare occasions allegations were referred to the Crown Prosecution Service, the analysis of the evidence was sometimes deficient. Not until much later in time were the named perpetrators finally brought to justice.”
In plain English: The pedo-friendly legal and political system not only looked the other way but covered up child molestation. Wherever possible, it waited until after the perpetrators died before pretending to be concerned.
Despite the police caution, Charles provided Ball with rather splendid rent-free accommodation on his estate.
Ball was suspended by the Church of England as a priest and, astonishingly, Charles asked him to officiate at services and perform the Eucharist at his personal chapel in Highgrove, as reported in the Church Times.
Ball was frequently in his company and was a personal guest at Charles’ 2005 wedding to Camilla.
In 2015, Charles gifted Ball £20,000. This was said to be simply a friendly gesture – exactly why is unclear. Charles is very definitely not known for personal generosity.
In 2015, Bishop Ball was finally convicted of 12 horrific instances of sexual abuse of boys and young men, all under the guise of religious ritual. Prince Charles put out a public denial that he had interfered in the 1993 decision not to prosecute.
But he would say that.
The BBC reported:
Ball’s court case heard that a member of the royal family – who has never been named – was among a host of public figures who supported him when he avoided charges in 1993.
The article goes on to carry this extremely over-specific and narrow denial from the Crown Prosecution Service:
The Crown Prosecution Service has publicly stated that it had neither received nor seen any correspondence from a member of the Royal Family when Ball was under investigation in 1992–93.
Note this very deliberately does not rule out a word in the ear at a function, a phone call, or – as it would be done – getting a friend known to be close to Charles to give the message.
Charles in fact in 1997, two years after his police caution, told Ball that he would directly intervene against Ball victim Neil Todd. “I will see off this horrible man if he tries anything again,” Charles wrote to Ball.
Todd did not live to see Ball ultimately convicted. He committed suicide in 2012. This was convenient for Ball, but there were plenty of other victims who testified in 2015.
Uncle Louis had an official entourage and was plugged in to the system. The immediate civil servants and close protection officers always know everything.
While there is no doubt whatsoever Charles knew about Bishop Peter Ball, the latter’s royal circle protection appears to have broken the surface.
Another Crock Brought to You By the Coincidence Theorists
You can’t have your four closest non-official life guides as pedophiles by accident. You just can’t. It has been proffered that Charles, by nature of his role, knows vastly more people than ordinary folk. That may or may not be true (there is a counter-argument about privilege and protection). But it if were true, it does not improve things. If there is a much larger-than-normal pool from whom Charles could have chosen, it makes it even weirder he chose four prolific pedophiles.
Pedophilia appears prevalent among and attractive to politicians and the ruling class. People wielding much more power and wealth than the rest of us have the ability (rightly or wrongly) to get attractive adult consenting partners more easily. So why do they, apparently in disproportionate numbers, seek to prey on the young and defenceless?
It is more than time we got rid of the Medieval system of monarchy. That will not solve the corruption of corporate interests controlling the state, or redress the appalling inequality of wealth. It will not even do much to end elite class pedophilia. But as one clear demonstration of the rotten nature of British society, the tale of the King’s four pedophile mentors is extremely instructive.
Meet the World’s Biggest Landowner - a Man Who Consorts With Serial Pedophiles
The world’s biggest landowners are King Charles III and the British Royal Family, whose combined landholdings officially span an astonishing 6.6 billion acres.
Across the Commonwealth, especially in countries such as Australia and Canada, there are vast tracts considered ‘Crown land’ and technically held by the monarch. For example, Crown lands comprise around 23% of Australia’s land area and 89% of Canada’s land area.
In reality, the figure is much larger.
There is no mention of a third tier of government in the Australian Constitution; corrupt and wasteful local councils were legislated into existence by state Local Government Acts, and remain entrenched despite two failed referendum attempts to have them added to the Constitution. But try not paying your council rates, and you will quickly be disabused of any delusion that you, and not the ‘Crown’, are the ultimate owner of your property.
Australians spend much of their income paying off exorbitant rents and mortgage debt, while a guy who hangs out with serial pedophiles and has never done a day’s work in his life owns a large chunk of Planet Earth. For no other reason than his ancestors were successful thugs and swindlers.
But you keep blaming hard-working Indian migrants for your life woes. Because the easy targets always make the most convenient scapegoats, right?
This article was an expansion of The Four Mentors of King Charles, authored by Craig Murray, who has generously allowed his article to be reprinted. Please note I have edited some of Craig’s original content and added additional content from other sources.