From Savile to Mountbatten, Blair to Epstein — the open secrets Britain would rather bury — And How We Can Fight Back
What do you call a democracy where the elite within it are above the law?
What do you call a country where the rich and powerful can commit heinous and despicable acts — and not only will they never be prosecuted, but the security services will step in to bury the evidence, to smother the truth?
The Romans called it an aristocracy. Economists and historians might call it an oligarchy. Some argue, in today’s world, with unelected elites pulling the strings, it’s a technocracy. Others might say it’s a form of Apartheid, since the Plebs would be under a kind of occupation.
The one thing I know for sure is this: that’s the climate we live in right now.
The Open Secret of Savile
There are countless examples. Jimmy Savile springs to mind immediately. It was an open secret he was a deviant of gigantic proportions at the height of his fame. Even my mom knew he was a paedophile in the early ’80s — she loudly proclaimed it every time he was on TV. “Look at the way he’s grabbing that young girl!”, she’d say, “He’s a nonce for sure!” — but he never faced prosecution in his lifetime. Even though there were multiple allegations and testimonies from victims, all police investigations were quietly shelved. His awful past only became public knowledge years after his death. Another open secret buried until it was too late.
Blair the War Criminal
Tony Blair, of course, lied to the entire nation about weapons of mass destruction — a lie that cost the lives of a million Iraqis and billions of pounds. He’s a war criminal. Plain and simple. But rather than face consequences, he’s been propped up by the establishment, given a knighthood, treated like a hero by the media, and lauded as an “expert on peace” in the very region he helped destabilise and destroy.
And there are many more examples. The pattern never changes. The higher you climb in British society, the more depraved the behaviour becomes — safe in the knowledge that the higher you are, the less chance there is of accountability. The lower orders face the law; the upper orders live above it.
Mountbatten: A Monster Protected
Which brings me to the First Earl of Burma, Lord Louis Mountbatten.
Mountbatten was at the pinnacle of British aristocracy. He was the last Viceroy of India, the First Sea Lord, mentor to Prince Charles, godfather to the King. He was woven right into the heart of the establishment — and yet, behind closed doors, everyone in those circles knew exactly what he was.
A monster.
The FBI knew it too. Their declassified files describe him as “a homosexual with a perversion for young boys.” Baroness Decies, a close family friend, told American agents that Mountbatten and his wife were regarded in society as “people of extremely low morals.” In plain English: it was an open secret. And what did the British state do with this knowledge? Nothing. No charges. No investigation. No questions. Instead, they sealed his diaries, buried his correspondence, and fought tooth and nail in the courts to stop researchers from releasing what remains of his archive. To this day, large parts of the Mountbatten papers are still locked away on the grounds of “national security.”
That isn’t justice. That’s the state protecting itself — and protecting its own.
Think about that for a minute. Mountbatten and his wife were almost certainly predators if you look at the weight of evidence and the obsessive secrecy surrounding their alleged crimes. And if the FBI had files, you can bet your house the British security services knew too. Yet rather than investigate, expose, or prosecute him, the powers that be chose to cover it up.
Eventually, in 1979, karma caught up with Mountbatten in the form of an IRA bomb. But even in death, the authorities are still hiding his crimes. And he’s not the only one they’re protecting.
Epstein: The Operation
Fast forward a few decades, and the same script played out again with Jeffrey Epstein. Another monster. Another open secret. Everybody in New York high society knew what those “parties” really were. Everybody in London’s high circles knew who he was flying around the world.
The British press were sniffing around in the ’90s and early 2000s — stories asking where his money came from, what went on at those wild “parties,” and why he was so close to prime ministers, billionaires, Oscar-winning actors, and even presidents. They couldn’t prove it, but they could smell it. Another open secret.
And if journalists could smell it, then MI5, MI6, the CIA, the FBI — and the royals’ own protection teams — knew exactly who Epstein was. Of course they did. Which begs the question: why did those same intelligence agencies allow two of Britain’s most important public figures — Prince Andrew and Peter Mandelson — to become so close to him? Why were those meetings never flagged? Why were those friendships tolerated, even after Epstein’s 2008 conviction as a sex offender?
With Andrew, we’ve all seen the infamous Central Park photo, the trips to New York, the excuses that collapse under their own absurdity.
With Mandelson, we have the phone calls, the entries in Epstein’s orbit, and even a letter where he asks Epstein to check an Israeli contact with Ehud Barak. That isn’t casual acquaintance. That’s a political heavyweight leaning on a convicted sex offender for favours.
And yet both men were protected. Both were shielded. Just like Mountbatten before them.
And while there’s no evidence Epstein was ever a financier or a Wall Street wizard making billions in trades, the evidence that he was an intelligence asset — an Israeli/Western cut-out running blackmail and honeytrap operations against the global elite — is overwhelming.
Jeffrey Epstein wasn’t some rogue pervert with a private jet. He was an operation. You don’t need to be a genius to see it. It’s been reported U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta admitted he was told to back off when prosecuting Epstein in 2008 because “Epstein belonged to intelligence.”
When he was convicted for sex offences with a minor, he got a sweetheart deal no normal man would ever get — thirteen months in “prison,” out on day release, free to do as he pleased. That’s not justice. I’ve stayed in hotels with stricter rules. That’s protection.
His houses were wired up with cameras in every room, according to victims and staff — not just voyeurism, but kompromat collection, classic honeytrap tactics. His partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, just happens to be the daughter of Robert Maxwell, long alleged to have operated as an Israeli intelligence asset.
Epstein’s Rolodex included everyone worth controlling — presidents, princes, prime ministers, billionaires, even scientists and cultural icons. And nobody can tell you where his money really came from. He had no legitimate business empire, no record of billion-dollar trades, just a bottomless pit of cash from shady sources like Leslie Wexner.
Even when journalists had the Epstein story — including his links to Prince Andrew — years before the details emerged, it was spiked under pressure. One ABC anchor later admitted on camera that the network had everything years before, and the story was killed after pressure, including from Buckingham Palace. Another open secret buried.
And when Epstein finally became impossible to protect, he ended up dead in a New York prison cell — guards asleep, cameras conveniently switched off, suicide watch removed. That wasn’t incompetence. That was a cleanup.
Democracy or Theatre?
So what does all this tell us? And what can we do about it?
From Savile to Blair, from Mountbatten to Andrew and Mandelson, right through to Epstein — the pattern doesn’t change. The people at the top of Western society can commit the most depraved acts, lie a country into a war that costs billions and millions of lives, or cosy up to convicted paedophiles, and they won’t face justice. Instead, the security services bury it, the media spin it, and the establishment shields them.
That’s not democracy. That’s theatre. Democracy comes from the Greek words demos and kratos — it literally means “people rule.” A government by the people, for the people. Everyone equal under the law. Leaders accountable. But here in Britain, the evidence shows the opposite. The law is for the little people. The great unwashed like you and me. The powerful don’t live under the law — they live above it.
So let me come back to my first question: what do you call a democracy where the elite are above the law?
Personally, I call it The United Kingdom.
I’m not saying all of this to depress you. I’m saying it to impress upon you the importance of fighting back. That all of us fight back. Because if democracy really means “the people rule,” then it’s not theirs to give or take away — it’s ours to demand. And we either claim it, or we live under a system where the powerful remain untouchable and the rest of us are expected to stay quiet.
The scandals may change names — Savile, Blair, Mountbatten, Epstein, Andrew, Mandelson — but the script is always the same. Until we tear that script up and write our own, nothing changes. And that’s why the fight matters. Not tomorrow. Not one day. Now.
Power never yields without a demand. It never has. It never will. The people at the top aren’t going to wake up one morning, feel guilty, and hand us back accountability. They’ll cling to their immunity for as long as we let them. That’s why it falls on us — not just to expose them, but to demand better, to refuse silence, to push back. Because if we don’t, nothing changes. If we do, everything can.
When I talk about this to my friends and family, their reactions are rarely the same. Some people say, “oh, I can’t handle thinking about this. It’s too depressing.” Others say, “there’s nothing we can do about it.” Others say, “We need to chop their heads off!” — and if you look at history, violent revolutions have sometimes been the way systems change. They have a point, but that isn’t the only path.
I, however, think there’s another way. And it’s one that takes little effort — just a little sacrifice by each of us — to change things for the many.
I believe that we should do nothing. Absolutely nothing. Not a thing. Don’t participate in a system that is destroying your futures and stripping you of rights and freedoms previous generations paid in blood to win. Stop feeding the machine they serve.
Don’t buy their products. Don’t hand over your cash to the Nestlés, the Starbucks, the McDonald’s of the world — companies that sit inside the portfolios of the same three giants: BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard.
Cancel the subscriptions that bankroll the people who shield these monsters — Disney+, Paramount, Netflix, the lot — and hit them where it hurts most: their bottom line. We’ve already seen how networks will yield to public pressure when their bottom line is hit. Just look at the Jimmy Kimmel affair. That tells you everything about how we can change the landscape.
The best way to hurt rich people is to make them poorer. We’ve all seen Trading Places — we’ve seen the U-turns and how quickly they panic when revenue dries up. All it takes is a little sacrifice, a little self-denial, to rob them of the only thing they truly worship: money.
BDS — Boycott, Divest, Sanction. There’s a reason politicians are trying to clamp down on it. There’s a reason some want to make it a crime.
That’s what I think would be most effective, anyway, given the current state of the country. Make them and their rich friends extremely poor. Although I do freely admit, chopping their heads off would affect change much faster.
Support the message? Share it.
One link. One friend. One moment.
