# How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

Following the Jimmy Savile revelations, there seems to be a pattern emerging of evidence that there could well have been a network of high powered establishment figures, and officials involved in long running organised paedophile activity.

This has long been rumoured, but largely dismissed as conspiracy theory stuff. In the wake of the Jimmy Savile revelations, I seriously think this deserves some closer scrutiny outside of the JS focused threads.

There seem to be a number of hints and leads supporting the idea that this network has used childrens homes, approved schools, and similar state institutions for children to supply kids to members of the network, presumably because they're much less likely to be believed if they ever said anything, and can be easily punished by those running the institutions if they tried to speak out.

This thread is aimed at joining the dots of public domain evidence of locations, related prosecutions, witness / personal accounts, and related evidence (from reputable sources only please).

*This thread is *NOT* a thread for naming names of anyone still living who's not been found guilty in court. Anyone naming names is likely to get this thread closed, and / or potentially the editor being sued and the site closed down.*

There are a long list of institutions where long term systemic abuse has been proven in court over the last few decades, but these prosecutions largely seem to focus on individuals, and ignore or actually hide evidence of the involvement of wider networks of abusers, including for starters;

*North Wales - 70s-90s, Cartrefle and Bryn Alyn*

3 children's home staff / owner were found guilty in court between 1990-94 of various sexual abuse offences at 2 homes.

A wide ranging police inquiry apparently collected evidence against 365 people, and arrested 25, although only the 3 ended up in court.

The Independent reported on claims about wider involvement, and ended up being successfully sued by one, but a panel set up by the council to investigate the wider accusations seems to have largely supported them in their report. The council didn't publish the report, but the Independent got hold of a copy and published articles based on it that then forced a major public inquiry, which resulted in 650 children making accusations about abuse at 40 homes.

There have been questions raised about the methods used in the inquiry, particularly former residents being told that they'd be in line for compensation payouts (with £3 million eventually paid out) - something that has also been raised as an issue to discredit the findings of other investigations.

BUT there have also been serious allegations (Guardian) that the inquiry effectively acted as a smokescreen, and covered the involvement of multiple highly placed individuals by imposing a blanket ban on the press naming anyone named at the inquiry.



> * A man who bears the same surname as a prominent Conservative supporter. Two witnesses have told the tribunal of a rich and powerful man who belonged to the alleged ring.
> * The son of an influential peer who admitted to police that he had been having sex with an under-aged boy from one of the homes. Despite his admission, he was never prosecuted.
> * A powerful public official who has previously been cleared of abuse. Six different witnesses have given separate accounts to the tribunal of his alleged rape of young boys. Another has reported him attending parties in Wrexham which were supplied with boys from a children’s home.
> * Two social workers and two police officers, one of whom was accused of abuse on four separate occasions and exonerated each time, another of whom has since been jailed in another part of the country for gross indecency with a child.
> * More than a dozen other local men, including an executive with a local authority, a senior probation officer and a director of a major company.


[Nick Davies / Guardian - 1997]


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

​Haute De La Garenne in Jersey, and now through savile, Broadmoor and several girls schools, and seemingly the LGI and are fairly fresh in the mind, but there's a long list of childrens homes and residential care homes that have suffered from similar abuse cases over the last 40 years, some of which are listed here.





> Twelve paedophiles who preyed on hundreds of vulnerable youths in children's homes in Cheshire and Merseyside were exposed by one of the biggest investigations into child sex abuse ever mounted. Eleven have received lengthy prison sentences.


[independent]

____________________________________________________________________________​ 
This article makes fairly credible looking allegations about how a network of apparently interconnected abusers was able to develop from working together at one home in the late 60s, through the social services network to the point where members of this apparent network were in positions such as the principal of a boys school, staff at multiple homes several childrens homes (that were later the centre of widespread abuse), and interconnected on their career paths with others who became heads of schools, many having been lectured by a now convicted child abuser who went on to an influential position close to government decision making on child care.

Another ended running the panel of a council's child protection service, and another worked on an adoption panel.

According to this article, they all claim to have been operating alone, but with several of them having either worked together at the same time at the same home when abuse was later discovered to have been going on, and others having been lectured by the same abuser, or been given jobs by one of the others, this stretches credibility IMO.

The article also repeats an allegation that keeps cropping up surrounding the deaths of 2 related witnesses in the wales cases, along with the suicide of the person who'd admitted starting the fire in one of the 2 deaths.

I think I've checked most of the names out, and they do all seem to have been convicted, but to be on the safe side, I've not repeated the names here. I can't vouch for the credibility of the site or the links it makes between those involved, but all the points I have checked out have been supported. 

_____________________________________________________________________________


In the Haut De La Garenne case, specific allegations have been made about children effectively being swapped 'on holiday' from abusive childrens homes all over the country to HDLG and back.



> Liz Davies, the former Islington senior social worker who bravely blew the whistle on the scandal, said last night: 'It is becoming clear that children at Haut de la Garenne were sent on holiday to children's homes in England which were also notorious for abuse, while the children in the English homes they went to were sent to Haut de la Garenne. They literally swapped beds.'


[mail]
Again, this could be coincidence, but... and then Jimmy Savile just happens to chose to frequent HDLG as well. I just don't believe any of this was accidental, it's far more likely that those involved knew what was going on, who the kindred spirits were / are, and actively collaborated together in some form.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

_____________________________________________________________________________​ 
There are other hints coming out at the moment, such as an aside in the Panorama report on Savile last night by Merion Jones who's Aunt ran Duncroft girls school, which he apparently visited as a kid, describing it as.



> ‘a very strange place, full of celebrities and minor members of the Royal family


 
wtf were celebrities and minor royals doing hanging around at an institutional residential girls school, particularly one where it now turns out that Savile was routinely abusing probably dozens of underage girls in the same time period.

_____________________________________________________________________________​There are also persistent comments from multiple sources about either the involvement or knowledge of MI5 in some capacity.

This is alleged to have begun in Northern Ireland at Kincora boys school in the 70s when a worker at the school who was also a loyalist commander as well as being a child abuser (eventually convicted) is alleged to have been an MI5 informant, with MI5 effectively blackmailing him with the child abuse evidence to force him to act as their informant, as well as using the school as a honey trap to give them dirt on other targets to force them into informing for them as well.

These allegations continue into at least the welsh situation, essentially alleging that again MI5 either used these homes as honey traps to get them incriminating evidence against people they wanted to force to work for them, or at least being aware of what was going on and choosing to use the evidence to gain them informants instead of putting a stop to it.

I've not really found hard evidence against MI5 on this, but this is a persistent claim that's been going on for 3 decades, originating apparently with a security services source who was then forced out for revealing it - it's been reported on by Private Eye, Scallywag and I think Channel 4 news at various points. In light of some of the other stuff the security services got up to in Northern Ireland in the pursuit of gaining and keeping touts in both camps, I'd say this part of the allegation is pretty credible, and if they did it there, it's fairly likely they'd have repeated the same methods elsewhere IMO.

It's worth bearing in mind here that similar situations have been exposed in recent years elsewhere in Europe, so it wouldn't be without precedent.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

I'm not posting this up as definitive proof of anything, more as a starting point for discussion and a hope that others will add to the pool of evidence / information.

There just seem to be far too many coincidences going on here, far too much interconnection, and far too widespread activity that has gone on for decades, for there not to be more to the JS allegations than just another lone paedophile operating alone for 50+ years and just happening to stumble across all these handy places to abuse kids with inpunity IMO.

discuss.... (or tldr probably)


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 24, 2012)

will tin foil hats protect against nonce's


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

bugger, I meant to use the word 'network' in the thread title, as ring implies it's a relatively small closed group, whereas I suspect it's actually more of a loose network where word of places such as HDLG, Kincora etc are spread either via word of mouth, or possibly via some form of middlemen, or both.


or maybe I've just read too many books


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

Ax^ said:


> will tin foil hats protect against nonce's


age is your best protection


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

Also, to the best of our knowledge no small green spherical vegetables have been abused.


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 24, 2012)

free spirit said:


> This article


 
I think the guy who writes for that blog is fash and you should break the link.  As far as I know he collects newspaper articles and posts them, so find the original source and post that if possible.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

Fez909 said:


> I think the guy who writes for that blog is fash and you should break the link. As far as I know he collects newspaper articles and posts them, so find the original source and post that if possible.


I've removed the link as I can't see to break it as this forum software seems to keep remaking the broken link when I break it.

If anyone can find the original article while I still have editing rights I'll add that in instead.

eta - found it, it was Nick Davies again.


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 24, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I've removed the link as I can't see to break it as this forum software seems to keep remaking the broken link when I break it.
> 
> If anyone can find the original article while I still have editing rights I'll add that in instead.


 
I think one way to break it easily is to click the icon which has two 'A's on the top right of the editing window.  You should then see the full markup used to post your comment.  There'll be a bit representing the link's visible text, and a bit which is the link itself.  Do some magic in there and you're good to go.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

cesare said:


> Also, to the best of our knowledge no small green spherical vegetables have been abused.


arse, that too.

I blame google chrome's spellchecker, which kept telling me it was wrong when spelled correctly.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

I reckon this telegraph article from a few years ago belongs in this thread as well.



> Confidential papers, obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, have revealed that the BBC allowed MI5 to investigate the backgrounds and political affiliations of -thousands of its employees, including newsreaders, reporters and continuity announcers.
> The files, which shed light on the BBC's hitherto secret links with the Security Service, show that *at one stage it was responsible for vetting 6,300 different BBC posts - almost a third of the total workforce.*
> *The BBC's reliance on MI5 reached a peak in the late 1970s and early 1980s* at exactly the same time as millions of viewers were tuning into the fictional adventures of George Smiley in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and -Smiley's People.


 
It seems a wee bit unlikely that Jimmy Savile, one of the BBC's highest profile presenters in the 70s and 80s would have escaped MI5's attention.

This leads to the conclusion that either MI5 were completely incompetent, and missed JS's activities for decades while they were carrying out these background checks, or they knew about it and just chose to ignore it without any ulteria motive, or they knew about it and maybe used their evidence to force JS to become a tout for them or worse.

That'd certainly explain his ability to hide his activities in plain site, and the willingness of the BBC to not expect there to be any truth to the rumours about him (if he'd been cleared by MI5), as well as the willingness to hand over the running of Broadmoor to him - if MI5 had cleared him already.

It'd also potentially explain some of the odd stuff he hinted at in his theroux interview and elsewhere. It seems quite likely he'd have been an MI5 tout for decades.

That'd also put his apparent frequent chequers visits at Christmas with several different prime ministers into a different light - not just a quirky old entertainer, or even a paedo, but a long time MI5 tout having cosy fireside chats with the PMs of the day for 2 decades.


----------



## Dandred (Oct 24, 2012)

I hope that whoever it is, is brought to Justice by the State.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 24, 2012)

Dandred said:


> I hope that whoever it is, is brought to Justice by the State.


it actually seems vaguely possible that it could happen now, as savile was just too high profile and too prolific, which might make it harder to keep a lid on.

I'm sure they tried keeping a lid on it last year with the shelving of the newsnight item. I don't buy the idea that the newsnight editor would drop it over night just because the BBC were planning a JS christmas special.

Surely if there is any truth to the rumours then enough kids abused by other famous or less famous but still high level people will come forward publicly to name them alongside Savile. Then again, there'll no doubt be a lot of effort to discredit them / suppress their allegations with threats of suing for libel etc (or just the possibility that there could be a threat of this happening).

hopefully public outcry and the change of the generations at the top of these organisations will result in it all coming out now. There's a fair chance it won't though, at least not without being forced out - hence this thread, as my part in raising the wider questions now.


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 24, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I reckon this telegraph article from a few years ago belongs in this thread as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
This is all possible, but I'd be wary about making assumptions based on security vetting.  All security clearance means is that this person is not a liability to the state.  So, you can be a paedo, but still get security clearance. 

One of the purposes of SC is to check that you don't have any secrets hiding in your closet that you could put you in a position where you might be forced into revealing sensitive information to third parties in a blackmail scenario.  Now, JS was definitely is a position where he could be blackmailed, given the skeletons, but I doubt he had access to any secret information which could be damaging to the state.  Therefore, he would (I'm guessing here) be given security clearance regardless of his murky past.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 24, 2012)

Still waiting for the name of names and how many max clifford protected so we can nail his name to the post


----------



## dooley (Oct 24, 2012)

call me naive, but i see max cliffrd as being rather more principled than that - at least when i tcomes to kids


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Oct 24, 2012)

Kincora Boys' Home
sadly more




> *PRINCE Charles’s mentor Lord Mountbatten – murdered by the IRA more than 20 years ago – has also been sensationally linked to the notorious Kincora Boys’ Home scandal in east Belfast. *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 24, 2012)

cesare said:


> Also, to the best of our knowledge no small green spherical vegetables have been abused.


 
The Dutroux case implicated a good proportion of Brussels.


----------



## dylanredefined (Oct 24, 2012)

MI-5 were complete bastards in Ireland ,but,why would they need agents in wales?

  As Saville was not in CND I doubt MI5 did anything than tick in the boxes. If he had any lefty links they would have been all over him.


----------



## xes (Oct 24, 2012)

Watch the film "boys for sale", there is a high level peado network.


----------



## likesfish (Oct 24, 2012)

Why would js be investigated by  mi5?
 They might have a file because he met maggie and members of the royal family.
   But it would be not a commie. not political job done.
   He wouldnt have any security clearance because he had no access to secrets Mi5 dont investigate every celb.
Unless you want a revolution or hang outvwith dubious foreign types yourvnot on there radar.
   More likely 70s abuse scandals are finally coming to out.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 24, 2012)

AKA pseudonym said:


> Kincora Boys' Home
> sadly more


 
When the Provies killed him in Sligo, they also incurred some collateral damage - killing a 14 year old local boy who happened to be working on Lord M.'s yacht.

As for Kincora, I always thought it was more than just a case of allegations. . .


----------



## shygirl (Oct 24, 2012)

My brother, who is gay, told me about several high-profile figures involved in paedophile networks over 30 years ago.  Sexual exploitation and abuse of children and young people sadly seems always to have existed.  That the people who do this share 'info' with eachother is not the least bit surprising.  But what do we do with it?  Imagine calling the police to say, someone told me that MP joe bloggs abuses children and is part of a network, but that's all I have.  Its not going to go anywhere, is it?  Now we have CEOP (Child exploitation and on-line Protection Centre), who are prepared to take calls of this nature.  They may be powerless to act unless there's firm evidence, but they can monitor.  Its only a tiny drop in the ocean, but still reassuring to know that there is somewhere to report concerns to.  Its all very depressing and scary.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Oct 24, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> As for Kincora, I always thought it was more than just a case of allegations. . .


Was Kincora the one where in the fallout they went for homosexuals because they thought it was same as paedophilia?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Oct 24, 2012)

shygirl said:


> Now we have CEOP (Child exploitation and on-line Protection Centre), who are prepared to take calls of this nature.


I think the government are trying to get rid of CEOP, I'm sure I read summat about that a few months ago.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 24, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Was Kincora the one where in the fallout they went for homosexuals because they thought it was same as paedophilia?


 
In the stuff I've seen quoted it seems to be taken as read that one is a synonym for the other. I don't recall there being much fallout of any kind from the Kincora case, though, if by fallout you mean action of any sort!


----------



## smokedout (Oct 24, 2012)

theres a story floating around both right wing and liberal blogs that a cabinet minister sexually assaulted a former child actor in the 90s.  the minister in question has issued take down notices.  unfortunately the child actor is ben fellows, who also recently claimed to have infiltrated olympic security where he claims G4S and EU troops were secretly stockpiling bodybags and planning a mass evacuation of london due to a 'city defining' event which was going to take place during the olympics.  fellows was interviewed on infowars and suggested a 'false flag' operation was being planned.  he also has a youtube page where he posts pictures of chemtrails he's spotted.  this hasnt stopped a couple of reasonably well known bloggers giving credence to and reporting his story and claiming censorship due to the threat of libel action.

so be careful with this stuff.


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

smokedout said:


> theres a story floating around both right wing and liberal blogs that a cabinet minister sexually assaulted a former child actor in the 90s.  the minister in question has issued take down notices.  unfortunately the child actor is ben fellows, who also recently claimed to have infiltrated olympic security where he claims G4S and EU troops were secretly stockpiling bodybags and planning a mass evacuation of london due to a 'city defining' event which was going to take place during the olympics.  fellows was interviewed on infowars and suggested a 'false flag' operation was being planned.  he also has a youtube page where he posts pictures of chemtrails he's spotted.  this hasnt stopped a couple of reasonably well known bloggers giving credence to and reporting his story and claiming censorship due to the threat of libel action.
> 
> so be careful with this stuff.


Yeah, there's discussion along those lines on the Savile threads.


----------



## gosub (Oct 24, 2012)

D Notice on a lot of stuff relating to Dunblane...


think the Haute De La Garenne thing, where Savile also used to go could prove to be a really big can of worms


----------



## dylans (Oct 24, 2012)

There is no conspiracy. No "rings". The truth is more banal. Institutions and the authority and power structures inherent in institutions create conditions in which those with power can abuse their authority with relative impunity. This is true of institutions such as the Catholic Church, prisons and reform schools, and organisations such as the BBC or NHS.

It works on many levels. The most obvious is that victims of abuse are powerless and find themselves trapped in a system where their voices are not only silenced and ignored but worse where the structures of such institutions are organised in such a way that they face sanction and punishment for complaining. Victims are aware of this and this knowledge itself works to further silence their voices. Who is going to believe a Broadmoor patient, a "loony," over a nationally revered celebrity? Who is going to believe a reform school kid, a "criminal" over a charity fundraising saint? Who is going to believe a kid over a priest? Both abuser and abused know this, and this knowledge further works to facilitate abuse.

Organisations and bureaucracies are structured in such ways to mitigate responsibility, so those who see and know are made to feel its not their responsibility. Jobs and promotions and reputations and careers are at stake. So those who suspect are discouraged from following their instincts and also reassured that they bear no responsibility. Their roles within bureaucratic organisations are strictly limited and restricted and the structure of the organisation itself works to isolate their voices. Thus an admin employee witnessing suspicious behaviour by someone of higher authority is simply powerless to expose it. There is simply no structure for them to do so. Not only will they not be believed, they will be actively disbelieved and silenced and most importantly, they know that.

Power and authority are disproportionately dispensed within institutions, so those who exercise it are in a position to set the narrative themselves. Who is believed, who is listened to, who is ignored, who is disbelieved whose voice is respected, all these factors are themselves rigidly institutionally structured by the rules, hierarchies, functional specialisms and roles, impersonality etc of organisations themselves.

Control of such power structures is actively guarded and protected by those who exercise and abuse power. Thus the confidence with which they can abuse. They can literally laugh in the faces of their victims and say "no one will believe you" and both victim and abuser know this is true. Because it is they who ensure their voices are not even heard and if they are that it is the victim or the whistleblower who will pay.

There is no need for a conspiracy to explain these kinds of baffling events. Both Max Weber and Hannah Arendt discussed the dehumanising nature of bureaucracies and the way that responsibility for such acts can be dissipated by institutional structure. Weber called it the "prisonhouse of bureaucracy" and Arendt talked of the banality of evil. The structures of modern bureaucratic institutions themselves facilitate the abuse of power by those who exercise authority within such structures, and this is true whether it is the Catholic Church, the NHS, a girls reform school or the BBC.

I think this is why we are now seeing many people coming forward with complaints of abuse that are entirely unrelated to Savile or to any of the institutions involved in this scandal. We are witnessing a unique moment in which the window has opened a little allowing previously unheard voices to be raised in a new confidence that they may now be believed when previously they weren't. Unfortunately the nature and structure of bureaucracies and institutions means that such a window will not be open for long before it slams shut again


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

AKA pseudonym said:


> Kincora Boys' Home
> sadly more


TBF, most of the stuff about Mountbatten has been well-known for decades. His aides in India used to despair at the amount of catamites he went through. Not sure about Kincora though, because while there's a circumstantial link - Mountbatten liked young arse and visited Northern Ireland regularly - so far there's nothing tying him directly to visits to Kincora.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

shygirl said:


> My brother, who is gay, told me about several high-profile figures involved in paedophile networks over 30 years ago. Sexual exploitation and abuse of children and young people sadly seems always to have existed. That the people who do this share 'info' with eachother is not the least bit surprising. But what do we do with it? Imagine calling the police to say, someone told me that MP joe bloggs abuses children and is part of a network, but that's all I have. Its not going to go anywhere, is it? Now we have CEOP (Child exploitation and on-line Protection Centre), who are prepared to take calls of this nature. They may be powerless to act unless there's firm evidence, but they can monitor. Its only a tiny drop in the ocean, but still reassuring to know that there is somewhere to report concerns to. Its all very depressing and scary.


 
I've no doubt at all that some paedophiles are "networked". Back in the '70s there was P.I.E. and nowadays there are all sorts of opportunities to network provided by the internet.
I don't, however, think there's a "high-level UK paedophile ring". I suspect the truth is more prosaic: That there are many small networks of paedophiles that may *resemble* a "UK paedophile ring" when looked at from a certain perspective. Paedophiles appear to network in cellular fashion, i.e. separate small cells, rather than being members of the same overarching noncing club, but the fact that some paedophiles deliberately seek social and employment roles that place them in positions of relative power might reinforce the latter perception.


----------



## abstract1 (Oct 24, 2012)

dylans said:


> Power and authority are disproportionately dispensed within institutions, so those who exercise it are in a position to set the narrative themselves. Who is believed, who is listened to, who is ignored, who is disbelieved whose voice is respected, all these factors are themselves rigidly institutionally structured by the rules, hierarchies, functional specialisms and roles, impersonality etc of organisations themselves.
> 
> Control of such power structures is actively guarded and protected by those who exercise and abuse power. Thus the confidence with which they can abuse. They can literally laugh in the faces of their victims and say "no one will believe you" and both victim and abuser know this is true. Because it is they who ensure their voices are not even heard and if they are that it is the victim or the whistleblower who will pay.


 
Keith Laverack is a perfect example of this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/social-services-chief-jailed-for-20-years-abuse-1271615.html

Edited to add in another link: http://www.nickdavies.net/1998/04/01/the-sheer-scale-of-child-sexual-abuse-in-britain/


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

Is anyone watching PMQT today?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

> This is the question that @tom_watson asked in #pmqs about paedophile links to government.
> 
> "The evidence file used to convict paedophile Peter Wrigton, if it still exists, contains clear intelligence of a widespread paedophile ring. One of its members boasts of its links to a senior aid of a former prime minister, who says he could smuggle indecent images of children from abroad. The leads were not followed up, but if the file still exists I want to ensure that the metropolitan police secure the evidence, re-examine it, and investigate clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to parliament and number ten."


http://www.twitlonger.com/show/jokmc3


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Is anyone watching PMQT today?


it's got worse since the actors changed last


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Has Watson seen the file? How? The aide is obv Morrison.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/tv/bbc_news24/watchlive
> 
> starts 12:28


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

I think the name is Peter Righton not Wrigton - he ran the PIE as mentioned above.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I think the name is Peter Righton not Wrigton - he ran the PIE as mentioned above.


 
Is this the same children and families social work lecturer, who got fined (but no more) in 1992

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...d-over-photographs-of-naked-boys-1551820.html


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

A bit more about it here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/30/05/2000/21483/A-question-of-confinement.htm


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

sihhi said:


> Is this the same children and families social work lecturer, who got fined (but no more) in 1992
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...d-over-photographs-of-naked-boys-1551820.html


I believe that it is.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

I wonder if anyone is going through the Waterhouse report for names and links right now?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I believe that it is.


 
Director of Social Work Education, National Institute for Social Work and Assessor for the Bristish Journal of Social Work in the 1980s. His partner was involved in the New Barns school court case, reported in Community Care 

Cheers - Louis MacNecie


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 24, 2012)

I’m not too sure how many people constitute a "ring”. On the assumption that most paedophiles work alone, perhaps three or four is a sensible starting point.

If so, I’d be amazed if there wasn’t a high-level ring or indeed rings. They undoubtedly exist in normal society, so they’d also exist in the upper echelons.

Perhaps there are more likely to be “rings” at the highest levels (as opposed to high-profile individuals offending alone) as there are probably more opportunities to gain access to, for example, children’s homes and more chance of covering it up as not only are the individual ring members in positions of authority, they are more likely to know other influential people outside of the ring who may assist with hushing up abuse. 

I suspect that there will be a lot of rumours and allegations over the next days and weeks, especially when the papers really start digging around. The Sundays should be quite interesting. Quite a few celebs and other “worthies” must be shitting themselves.


----------



## articul8 (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Has Watson seen the file? How? The aide is obv Morrison.


who's Morrison?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

articul8 said:


> who's Morrison?


 Peter Morrison.


----------



## articul8 (Oct 24, 2012)

Ah, sounds likely then.  I did wonder whether it could be Bernard Ingham


----------



## elbows (Oct 24, 2012)

See this post and some later ones for the previous discussion about Morrison.

#1154


----------



## Wilf (Oct 24, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> TBF, most of the stuff about Mountbatten has been well-known for decades. His aides in India used to despair at the amount of catamites he went through. Not sure about Kincora though, because while there's a circumstantial link - Mountbatten liked young arse and visited Northern Ireland regularly - so far there's nothing tying him directly to visits to Kincora.


 If all that came out, he'd go to pieces.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 24, 2012)

WRT the stuff about the cabinet minister that some people are blogging about gleefully, I find it grotesquely sick. I get it, the person in question is intensely dislikeable, but attack someone for their record and what you know they've done - don't sit there and hope beyond hope that he did in fact abuse kids because it'd give you more fuel to use against him. Hoping kids were abused? Fuck off.

(Not suggesting anyone here is doing that - it's my reaction to the various things I've seen and heard from others elsewhere since last night.)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

Wilf said:


> If all that came out, he'd go to pieces.


 
And on top of all that, he had dandruff. I distinctly remember it being reported that his Head and Shoulders had been found washed up on shore!


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 24, 2012)

I think Jersey is the place to look. The banning of Leah McGrath Goodman from the UK following admitting she was a journlaist reporting on the Jersey Haute de la Garenne abuse was very interesting and strange.

Article here

and another

here


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> WRT the stuff about the cabinet minister that some people are blogging about gleefully, I find it grotesquely sick. I get it, the person in question is intensely dislikeable, but attack someone for their record and what you know they've done - don't sit there and hope beyond hope that he did in fact abuse kids because it'd give you more fuel to use against him. Hoping kids were abused? Fuck off.
> 
> (Not suggesting anyone here is doing that - it's my reaction to the various things I've seen and heard from others elsewhere since last night.)


 
I understand what you're saying. It's like some people just switch off their ability to empathise or sympathise, because it gets in the way of what they want to happen.  They seem to forget that the "outing" of a paedophile has repercussions on the victims too.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 24, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I understand what you're saying. It's like some people just switch off their ability to empathise or sympathise, because it gets in the way of what they want to happen. They seem to forget that the "outing" of a paedophile has repercussions on the victims too.


 
Yep. It's one thing to take interest in the news that does come out about this sort of thing, to express anger about what happened, and even to want to know more of the details. But what I was referring to specifically in this instance, was the gleeful rubbing of hands and mirthful smirking and excitement in some corners (one example of which I experienced face-to-face - not just online), of people hoping that that the rumours about this particular cabinet minister were true, because they don't happen to like him. That someone would let their hatred of a politician bring them to the point where _they hope he did abuse children_ - it's fucking grotesque.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> I think Jersey is the place to look. The banning of Leah McGrath Goodman from the UK following admitting she was a journlaist reporting on the Jersey Haute de la Garenne abuse was very interesting and strange.
> 
> Article here
> 
> ...


 
TBF, I think you can find stories based in fact just about everywhere. Haute de la Garenne is simply a more egregious instance. This stuff has always, in my lifetime, been here. Back in the '70s when I had my (thankfully short) run-in with the care system, it was well-known that there were certain childrens' homes that no-one wanted to end up at because the staff were either violent, perverted or violently perverted, as well as particular foster-parents being dodgy, and that was just in the Local Authority I was living in at the time, next door in Lambeth, things were even worse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Yep. It's one thing to take interest in the news that does come out about this sort of thing, to express anger about what happened, and even to want to know more of the details. But what I was referring to specifically in this instance, was the gleeful rubbing of hands and mirthful smirking and excitement in some corners (one example of which I experienced face-to-face - not just online), of people hoping that that the rumours about this particular cabinet minister were true, because they don't happen to like him. That someone would let their hatred of a politician bring them to the point where _they hope he did abuse children_ - it's fucking grotesque.


 
Sickening.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> WRT the stuff about the cabinet minister that some people are blogging about gleefully, I find it grotesquely sick. I get it, the person in question is intensely dislikeable, but attack someone for their record and what you know they've done - don't sit there and hope beyond hope that he did in fact abuse kids because it'd give you more fuel to use against him. Hoping kids were abused? Fuck off.
> 
> (Not suggesting anyone here is doing that - it's my reaction to the various things I've seen and heard from others elsewhere since last night.)


 
I hear ya. I have been struggling with the same idea/feeling myself. How do I RT something or like a comment/article/post/share info etc without feeling like I am liking the fact that these things have happened? 

I have been 'checking' my interest in these stories because of that.


----------



## articul8 (Oct 24, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Yep. It's one thing to take interest in the news that does come out about this sort of thing, to express anger about what happened, and even to want to know more of the details. But what I was referring to specifically in this instance, was the gleeful rubbing of hands and mirthful smirking and excitement in some corners (one example of which I experienced face-to-face - not just online), of people hoping that that the rumours about this particular cabinet minister were true, because they don't happen to like him. That someone would let their hatred of a politician bring them to the point where _they hope he did abuse children_ - it's fucking grotesque.


 
I think tbf that people are thinking "if they have done those things, then they ought to be publically named and shamed for what they are" - rather than "I hope they've abused some kids".


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I think tbf that people are thinking "if they have done those things, then they ought to be publically named and shamed for what they are" - rather than "I hope they've abused some kids".


 
Well yes, of course. However I do get VP's point about seeming to 'revel' in the fact it means trouble for some that we dislike.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Oct 24, 2012)

Well the cabinet minister being discussed elsewhere is not the same ex-cabinet minister that rumours were rife about before in this regard iyswim.
There's quite strong evidence that the previous rumours were started maliciously.


----------



## Garek (Oct 24, 2012)

snip


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 24, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I think tbf that people are thinking "if they have done those things, then they ought to be publically named and shamed for what they are" - rather than "I hope they've abused some kids".


 
It's very definitely the latter I'm talking about. The former, of course that's a reasonable thing to think. The latter, that's what I experienced last night when people started talking about this particular politician. As I said in my posts, it was a gleeful excitement hoping for more muck to be able to sling at a person they dislike. I am not conflating the two different things, but pointing to that specific sick hope.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 24, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Well the cabinet minister being discussed elsewhere is not the same ex-cabinet minister that rumours were rife about before in this regard iyswim.
> There's quite strong evidence that the previous rumours were started maliciously.


 
Absolutely. There are 2 politicians, one of them now dead, who are being talked about today, and that in itself is generating a big old rumour mill of confused speculation as people aren't quite sure who is being talked about.

But regardless, even if the rumours about the current cabinet minister were started maliciously, that doesn't negate the fact that some people who then heard those rumours were hopping around practically begging for it to be true. It's that disregard for anything other than their own opportunity to have more fuel to add to the fire of their hatred of this person that is so vile.

And to reiterate: I'm not suggesting there is anyone here who is doing this. And I'm also not suggesting that everyone elsewhere is doing this. I'm merely commenting on things I saw and heard last night from a few people that I found particularly distasteful - and I suppose I thought it worthy of mention because I think sometimes we - all of us - could do with stepping back a little bit, because it's very, very easy to get swept up in the tide when there is so much rumour and speculation and it's such a huge, shared experience when it's an 'event' on a scale such as this (the 'event' being the on-going revelations, speculation, and repercussions about the scope of the abuse that appears to have been going on for decades).


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

> *tom_watson* ‏@*tom_watson*
> A little more background on my question to the PM earlier today: http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2012/10/a-little-more-background-on-todays-pmqs …


 


> *tom_watson* ‏@*tom_watson*
> My blog has crashed again. We're working on it. Many apologies.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

More background? He just took it from the sunday times story last weekend surely ? The opportunist that he is.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 24, 2012)

I had no idea this article had been written:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...l-left-encouraged-sexualisation-children.html

Yuck...wish I still didn't know.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Link now working. He hasn't seen the file. 

I'll post the whole thing as the site may be unviewable again:



> I cannot give much more detail until the police have been given more time to investigate whether evidence still exists from the mid-nineties, but here is what I can say.
> 
> Last week I was contacted by a former child protection specialist who for some years, had been concerned that a wider investigation regarding the activities of convicted paedophile, John Righton was not fully investigated.
> 
> ...


----------



## Lock&Light (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> More background? He just took it from the sunday times story last weekend surely ? The opportunist that he is.


 
Is there anyone, anywhere that you have a good word to say about?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

> Within the material seized at Righton’s home were letters from known and convicted paedophiles. The contact, who has seen the letters, claimed that one paedophile in particular was of great concern. He said that the paedophile, who worked with children, boasted of a key aide to a former PM who could help get hold of indecent images of children. I am not naming the person for obvious reasons but for clarity it is not former MP, Peter Morrison.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> Is there anyone, anywhere that you have a good word to say about?


Quite like that mark e smith fell-ah. Now off you go.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> I had no idea this article had been written:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...l-left-encouraged-sexualisation-children.html
> 
> Yuck...wish I still didn't know.


The article is the expected crap - and a debate on it probably OT for this thread, but it does highlight a mirror image abrogation of responsibility on the part of what is now LIBERTY as the other institutions that turned a blind eye or did more at the time. Provided the facts are correct of course.



> Back in 1978, an organisation called the Paedophile Information Exchange affiliated itself to the National Council for Civil Liberties — known today as Liberty.
> PIE — whose members were reportedly attracted to boys and girls — set out to make paedophilia respectable.
> 
> It campaigned to reduce the age of consent and resist controls on child pornography. Until it excluded PIE in 1983, the NCCL thus backed this disgusting agenda of child abuse.
> ...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 24, 2012)

Detail aside, what will in the first instance be of interest is to see if Tom Watson's question is addressed very much at all.

I have read (though not checked) that his question has already been airbrushed from BBC and Sky coverage. 
TW has kudos for his tenacity over hacking. His credibility and credentials are pretty hard to knock. 

He has not named names, which is important at this point - I keep saying that principles and themes can be more important than salacious gossip and have been accused of opportunism for taking a broader view than just fixating on Savile and the BBC as (supposedly) relatively isolated cases
After weeks of the BBC being accused of "under the carpet" and years of plenty more stories of the same theme (press hacking, Hillsborough, bank regulation,  the Roman Church...) will parliament itself, in front of our noses, try and do exactly the same thing?


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

Hansard.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Airbrushed how? They have made a link to that specific question availible - they don't do that for every question. They chose to _highlight_ this one in fact.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> I had no idea this article had been written:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...l-left-encouraged-sexualisation-children.html
> 
> Yuck...wish I still didn't know.


 
Typical Melanie Philips ranting bollocks allocating blame to an ideology she dislikes rather than addressing the issue of adults sexually-molesting children - something that happened prior to "the permissive society" that she blames for just about every ill.


----------



## Louloubelle (Oct 24, 2012)

This is one of those threads where I really wish that I could share what I know, but sadly cannot do so.

eta

I agree with Dylans also.  We like to think of "rings" and networks but these things are loose knitted groups of disparate individuals who may or may not share other interests outside of abusing kids.   There are all kinds of networks that overlap, some benign and some evil.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 24, 2012)

What's the estimated proportion of paedophiles in the population? It must be about 0.5%? there are 650 MPs in the houses of parliament, so that would make what? three or four?


----------



## Louloubelle (Oct 24, 2012)

I prefer the term "child abuser" to paedophile.  Paedophile means someone who loves children and child abusers are not people who love children.  Also the word paedophile (as it is commonly used) describes someone who has a sexual interest in under age boys or girls.  It could be used to describe, say someone who has a crush on a 15 year old but who does not act on it out of concern for the 15 year old's welfare and out of understanding what is inappropriate behaviour on the part of an adult.  Child abuser describes someone who crosses that line of abusing a child, which is not a loving act at all.  

If you include in the category of paedophile or child abuser those people who would seduce teenagers if they thought that they would get away with it I think that the percentage must be higher than 0.5% (I base this not on research, simply on my own subjective experience of being a teenager so it may be way off).


----------



## gosub (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Airbrushed how? They have made a link to that specific question availible - they don't do that for every question. They chose to _highlight_ this one in fact.


Odd that Cameron isn't sure which prime minister he is referring to - what does that have to do with the question? There are accusations of abuse by an actual former PM (now deceased) swirling round bits of the internet, reckon that's whats on Cameron's mind.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

gosub said:


> Odd that Cameron isn't sure which prime minister he is referring to - what does that have to do with the question? There are accusations of abuse by an actual former PM (now deceased) swirling round bits of the internet, reckon that's whats on Cameron's mind.


Well, given that Watson says it's not Morrision - it can surely only be thatcher, heath or wilson (fact based). I don't know which - so Cameron does have some room.


----------



## gosub (Oct 24, 2012)

but why pick up on the employer? isn't the most important bit of the story. Though is worth remembering the supposed vetting which at the meant you couldn't get very far in say the Foreign Office if you were gay cos of the because of the blackmail risk.

But then again Andy Coulson was "vetted"

- eta that is not to imply anything about Andy Coulson 's sexual proclivaties


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

gosub said:


> but why pick up on the employer? isn't the most important bit of the story. Though is worth remembering the supposed vetting which at the meant you couldn't get very far in say the Foreign Office if you were gay cos of the because of the blackmail risk. But then again Andy Coulson was "vetted"


_Because_ of who the employer is - they are not your normal employers. So, precisely because of who are they employed by (despite not really being the employers).


----------



## gosub (Oct 24, 2012)

I'm not saying its not important, its just not what you focus on when asked that question, it is less important than dealing the individual in question for eample


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

gosub said:


> I'm not saying its not important, its just not what you focus on when asked that question, it is less important than dealing the individual in question for eample


It's very very important when you realise what their job is, what doors it opens, what access it offers and what power to avoid repercussions it allows.


----------



## stuff_it (Oct 24, 2012)

gosub said:


> Odd that Cameron isn't sure which prime minister he is referring to - what does that have to do with the question? There are accusations of abuse by an actual former PM (now deceased) swirling round bits of the internet, reckon that's whats on Cameron's mind.


At least we know he's not part of it, he'd never want to leave out all the over 16s when he was fucking the country.


----------



## gosub (Oct 24, 2012)

I stand by my point


when for example it came out certain kids tv presenters maybe paedophiles, the first thought wasn't -which tv company did they work for? How much the tv company knew and what did they do about it was about 4th or 5th on the list


----------



## elbows (Oct 24, 2012)

> In the aftermath of Mr Watson’s remarks, media outlets speculated that he was referring to the late former Prime Minister, Sir Edward Heath - who was the subject of unsubstantiated rumours about sex with under-age boys - or to Sir Peter Morrison, a former Downing Street aide who died in 1995.





> However,_ The Independent_ understands that Mr Watson’s comments were not aimed at either Sir Edward or Sir Peter, but at a living person associated with Margaret Thatcher’s administration.​They are thought to involve the activities of the Paedophile Information Exchange, a pro-paedophile group in existence between 1974 and 1984, which believed there should be no age of consent.​


​​http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...o-10-mp-tom-watson-demands-probe-8224702.html​


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Oct 24, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Absolutely. There are 2 politicians, one of them now dead, who are being talked about today


Well that means I don't know the dead one as the two mentioned, one with widespread rumours a few years ago and the one now, are both very much alive.


----------



## Edie (Oct 24, 2012)

.


----------



## elbows (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if anyone is going through the Waterhouse report for names and links right now?


 
I had a go earlier but its not obvious where to start and much of the point of that report seems to have been to present something to the public that didnt have a libel risk, unlike the suppressed council report. I doubt I'll be able to find much in the way of interesting links between people via the web, its going to take a journalist with contacts to do it and I sort of presume this would have been attempted when the report first came out.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

elbows said:


> I had a go earlier but its not obvious where to start and much of the point of that report seems to have been to present something to the public that didnt have a libel risk, unlike the suppressed council report. I doubt I'll be able to find much in the way of interesting links between people via the web, its going to take a journalist with contacts to do it and I sort of presume this would have been attempted when the report first came out.


You would hope/think so - but looking backwards from now might bring a few things into relief, things that may have appeared as just co-incidental or trivial. Might not of course, but i do hope some journo is making the effort.

(and yes, before anyone starts, i know we should be doing this ourselves and so on)


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

oops


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

*Cough* Link to Clegg. *Cough*


----------



## sunny jim (Oct 24, 2012)

Yikes! Is David Icke going to get a bit of credibility from all these allegations of former PM's and higher echelons of the establishment being involved in a peado network?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2012)

what a peadophile likes





what a paedophile likes


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 24, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Well that means I don't know the dead one as the two mentioned, one with widespread rumours a few years ago and the one now, are both very much alive.


 
The one who is dead is the one mentioned in the quotes by Tom Watson. Where he states that it is not him that he is referencing. Edwina Currie made allegations about this dead guy (who died in 95) at the weekend, which is perhaps why there was some confusion (and continues to be, on twitter at least) about who is talking about who at the moment. The one who Tom Watson was talking about, is the one that Garek not so delicately hinted the name of through his posting of pictures earlier in this thread.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> The one who is dead is the one mentioned in the quotes by Tom Watson. Where he states that it is not him that he is referencing. Edwina Currie made allegations about this dead guy (who died in 95) at the weekend, which is perhaps why there was some confusion (and continues to be, on twitter at least) about who is talking about who at the moment. The one who Tom Watson was talking about, is the one that Garek not so delicately hinted the name of through his posting of pictures earlier in this thread.


Just to clarify, the Currie stuff was from her autobiography from 2002, and Nick Davies had already written about it in the 90s. This wasn't new stuff so to speak.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 24, 2012)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...o-10-mp-tom-watson-demands-probe-8224702.html

Normally you'd expect a PM's response to be 'how very dare you' to Watson, 'if you have anything give it to the police'. They are all so keen to be 'responding' and not playing politics that he now has to be polite (though at one level Cameron wouldn't be _that_ damaged if anything came out about the Heath period, not massively even about the Thatcher era). To make an obvious point, he also doesn't want to get on the wrong side of Watson if this particular bit of the puzzle becomes his latest dog with a bone thing.

Again, without naming the living, we can expect a few 80s Tory+Rentboy stories re-emerging in the next few days (in the Mirror?). I'd be delighted if every fucking abuser gets caught and arrested - and any politician or similar who has exploited over 16s getting the treatment. However, just a chance somewhere down that particular track it could spill over into a degree of homophobia too.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 24, 2012)

From Nick Davies back in 98



> ...police now invest relatively little time in the surveillance of public toilets where gay men go cottaging. The one thing that is likely still to trigger such an operation is a complaint that under-aged boys are involved – unless, that is, the toilets in question happen to be those behind the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand, in which case, under the terms of a long-standing Metropolitan Police policy, the operation will take place only if it has the approval of an officer of the rank of commander or above. According to experienced London officers, the reason is that those toilets are used by High Court judges and barristers, and the Metropolitan Police have always said they do not want to encounter such a powerful offender without special authority.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 24, 2012)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 24, 2012)

From 3 days ago, via Twitter




> tom_watson‏@tom_watson
> 
> I've just taken a call. It lasted 10 minutes.Have a hunch it will be my next three year project. I thought I was immune to shock these days.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 24, 2012)

Watson needs to watch himself and not get carried away with all his crusading importance - he plenty of enemies who have stuff on him.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 24, 2012)

Has this particular female source been mentioned?

http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2012/10/a-little-more-background-on-todays-pmqs




> One person also contacted me to suggest that the Met held a vast quantity of material suggesting Jimmy Savile was a predatory paedophile. I do not know whether this is true but I do know the source and she has been 100% accurate in the past.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 24, 2012)

Ive a pretty good idea who the person Watson was referring to. 

*sits and waits*


----------



## kenny g (Oct 24, 2012)

Was interested in Savile's extreme pro-israel stance. In light of recent revelations - did Mossad know?

If Mountbatton was a paedo and best mate of Charles, how about Savile's connection with Mountbatton?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Was interested in Savile's extreme pro-israel stance. In light of recent revelations - did Mossad know?
> 
> If Mountbatton was a paedo and best mate of Charles, how about Savile's connection with Mountbatton?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 24, 2012)

I honestly don't know what to believe, but assembling what is irrefutable, leads me to the conclusion that there is too much, from too many disparate sources, to believe other than there is a great festering boil that needs to be lanced.

There is a huge problem though. Where are you going to find a ' clean ' organisation to bring all the evidence together, to make the links between individuals and ' rings ' or ' networks '?

Just from reading this thread, it is clear that some of those allegedly involved are in very high places indeed, people in a position to ensure that a few will go down, and the rest will not.

It sickens me to my stomach. It makes me ashamed to part of the same species as these people.

Probably the most sickening thing, is the feeling of complete impotence. I have no faith in this being resolved honestly.


----------



## sunny jim (Oct 24, 2012)

I'd be very surprised if Tom Watson hadnt sussed that some people might be giving him BS.


----------



## kenny g (Oct 24, 2012)

Sasaferrato said:


> I honestly don't know what to believe, but assembling what is irrefutable, leads me to the conclusion that there is too much, from too many disparate sources, to believe other than there is a great festering boil that needs to be lanced.
> 
> There is a huge problem though. Where are you going to find a ' clean ' organisation to bring all the evidence together, to make the links between individuals and ' rings ' or ' networks '?


 
The hive mind at work - the internet collective is slowly starting to pull the threads together. The amazing thing is that so much of this stuff has already been out there- from scandal sheets such as scallywag to long forgotten reports and rumours. The dangers of a witch hunt are real but it is becoming more and more apparent that some of the rumours are  true.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

sunny jim said:


> I'd be very surprised if Tom Watson hadnt sussed that some people might be giving him BS.


I'd be very surprised if he did.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

sunny jim said:


> I'd be very surprised if Tom Watson hadnt sussed that some people might be giving him BS.


Are you suggesting he has a filtering system that means that what he suggests is fact is fact?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 24, 2012)

Well he claims to trust the course as she has been correct before, and two other people have backed up what was said....who knows though.


----------



## sunny jim (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I'd be very surprised if he did.


 
What like the phone hacking scandal?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Well he claims to trust the course as she has been correct before, and two other people have backed up what was said....who knows though.


 
They haven't backed up what the 'she' said at all.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

sunny jim said:


> What like the phone hacking scandal?


What does that mean?


----------



## sunny jim (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Are you suggesting he has a filtering system that means that what he suggests is fact is fact?


 
No, I'm suggesting that he wouldnt make a claim like that unless he had hard facts. Just like the phone hacking scandal.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> They haven't backed up what the 'she' said at all.


 
What "he said".

Happy now sir?


----------



## little_legs (Oct 25, 2012)

eta link correction http://twitpic.com/b73azj
the story is already available online


----------



## treelover (Oct 25, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> The article is the expected crap - and a debate on it probably OT for this thread, but it does highlight a mirror image abrogation of responsibility on the part of what is now LIBERTY as the other institutions that turned a blind eye or did more at the time. Provided the facts are correct of course.


 
Was it the Ultra Blairite Patricia Hewitt who was director of the then NCCL, Sue Slipman, Harman even?


----------



## likesfish (Oct 25, 2012)

Well the cps dropped a case as witnesses refused to back it up.
 So there is a massive file but if you havnt anyone prepared to go into court.


----------



## where to (Oct 25, 2012)

Thatcher's father abused 15 year old girls. The independant reported this in 1997. He was widely known in Grantham as a serial  abuser.

Article is online but can't post link as on phone should be easily googleed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> I’m not too sure how many people constitute a "ring”. On the assumption that most paedophiles work alone, perhaps three or four is a sensible starting point.
> 
> If so, I’d be amazed if there wasn’t a high-level ring or indeed rings. They undoubtedly exist in normal society, so they’d also exist in the upper echelons.
> 
> ...


 
What the OP is talking about, though, isn't loads of small rings, but an over-arching "grand lodge" of child-molesting that nonces from all over the UK belong to/subscribe to, and that exerts influence on policy, over the criminal justice system etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2012)

where to said:


> Thatcher's father abused 15 year old girls. The independant reported this in 1997. He was widely known in Grantham as a serial abuser.
> 
> Article is online but can't post link as on phone should be easily googleed.


Anyone happen to have a copy of the novel mentioned in the article?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> What's the estimated proportion of paedophiles in the population? It must be about 0.5%? there are 650 MPs in the houses of parliament, so that would make what? three or four?


 
Impossible to know population prevalence, but operating on what we know from offences of child molestation (excluding downloading kiddie-porn or "internet grooming", which are arguably, as far as current research is concerned, not contact crimes, and therefore aren't categorised similarly) that your figure of one in two hundred, or 0.5%, is too small. If offences were extrapolated into statistics and the same under-reoprting percentages were taken as apply to adult rape, then it's more like one in eighty to one in a hundred.

Obviously, such extrapolations are usually wildly-inaccurate, but they at least give us a "base range".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2012)

Louloubelle said:


> I prefer the term "child abuser" to paedophile. Paedophile means someone who loves children and child abusers are not people who love children. Also the word paedophile (as it is commonly used) describes someone who has a sexual interest in under age boys or girls. It could be used to describe, say someone who has a crush on a 15 year old but who does not act on it out of concern for the 15 year old's welfare and out of understanding what is inappropriate behaviour on the part of an adult. Child abuser describes someone who crosses that line of abusing a child, which is not a loving act at all.
> 
> If you include in the category of paedophile or child abuser those people who would seduce teenagers if they thought that they would get away with it I think that the percentage must be higher than 0.5% (I base this not on research, simply on my own subjective experience of being a teenager so it may be way off).


 
So your main criterion would be contact offences? Fair enough.


----------



## elbows (Oct 25, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Anyone happen to have a copy of the novel mentioned in the article?


 
No, but there are some used copies floating around.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/0947795839/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Was interested in Savile's extreme pro-israel stance. In light of recent revelations - did Mossad know?
> 
> If Mountbatton was a paedo and best mate of Charles, how about Savile's connection with Mountbatton?


 
Charles actually, viewed neutrally, seems to have been a nexus for people with dubious sexual morality towards children, insofar as his two main influences - Louis Battenburg and Laurens Van der Post - have long been the focus of credible stories about child molestation.


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> What the OP is talking about, though, isn't loads of small rings, but an over-arching "grand lodge" of child-molesting that nonces from all over the UK belong to/subscribe to, and that exerts influence on policy, over the criminal justice system etc.


 
There clearly isn’t a Grand Lodge (ie, one single ring covering every prominent member of society) but it is highly likely that are several rings (possible based in specific localities), some of whose members may also be members, or have close associations with, other similar rings.

This creates a chain of inter-connecting rings, without a single over-arching network of abusers. In the case of Jimmy Savile, for example, he may have been a (very prominent) member of an alleged “ring” at the BBC, but also a member of another ring at HLG, or Broadmoor and so on.

The BBC are now reporting that the police are now actively investigating allegations of abuse by other “high profile” people and it is being suggested that arrests could be iminent. The police are due to give an update later today.

Time will tell if any of these people are inter-connected.


----------



## where to (Oct 25, 2012)

I think I know who the Tom Watson question relates to. 

The rumours associated with this person implicate a range of active public figures.


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 25, 2012)

where to said:


> I think I know who the Tom Watson question relates to.
> 
> The rumours associated with this person implicate a range of active public figures.


 
This is such a complex area. When we say a ring of prominent and/or influential people, what are we actually talking about, and at what level of society?

For example, a TV celebrity may be prominent by way of being in the public eye (say, Joe Bloggs in a popular soap) but he may be far less influential in terms of providing and/or enabling access to children than, say, a director of children’s services at a large local authority.

Clearly, there isn’t a separate “section” of abusers whose membership is solely confined to celebrities or to politicians, but they may constitute a large proportion of that particular “ring” simply because they are more likely to come into social contact with each other.

I’m certainly no expert, but it seems to be likely that the membership of rings is fluid, with different abusers being members (ie, active participants) at different times, dropping in and out of the abusive activity.


----------



## Louloubelle (Oct 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> So your main criterion would be contact offences? Fair enough.


I would consider also offesnes such as downloading film / photos of child abuse as actual child abuse 
I do not believe in thought crime or labelling anyone on the basis of what they think 
Just for clarification


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2012)

Louloubelle said:


> I would consider also offesnes such as downloading film / photos of child abuse as actual child abuse
> I do not believe in thought crime or labelling anyone on the basis of what they think
> Just for clarification


 
I asked because there's a persistent academic debate around what constitutes child abuse, and differentiation between contact and non-contact offences is one of the issues getting a lot of research attention, as (as far as the extant research can establish) a majority of downloaders/collectors haven't and don't go on to make contact offences. I just wondered which side of the debate you came down on. Now I know!


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 25, 2012)

sunny jim said:


> What like the phone hacking scandal?


 
The phone business, while distasteful, is nothing compared to this.

The Metropolitan Police announced this evening that they were about to make arrests.


----------



## cesare (Oct 25, 2012)

Sasaferrato said:


> The phone business, while distasteful, is nothing compared to this.
> 
> The Metropolitan Police announced this evening that they were about to make arrests.


The phone business was of far greater interest to the journalists and politicians than everyone else. Similarly the expenses scandal. Basically cos no-one expected any better from them.

This is a bit different though, eh.


----------



## where to (Oct 25, 2012)

Edit: double post


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I asked because there's a persistent academic debate around what constitutes child abuse, and differentiation between contact and non-contact offences is one of the issues getting a lot of research attention, as (as far as the extant research can establish) a majority of downloaders/collectors haven't and don't go on to make contact offences. I just wondered which side of the debate you came down on. Now I know!


 
Aye, but you have to think that every picture of an abused child is just that, an abused child. If there was no market for such material, it wouldn't be made.

I have had the rather horrible experience of nursing a child who had been raped. The details are sickening, and I am not going to post them. Enough to say, I remember the time with such clarity I could give evidence in a court of law. This from something that happened more than thirty years ago.

To me, people who do these things are either mentally unwell, or evil beyond normal comprehension. To remove them from circulation permanently, I would be content for them to be adjudged unwell, and detained in the easier regime  of a secure hospital. What I would like to do, is put them in prison, in the general population, however that would be tantamount to complicity in murder.


----------



## where to (Oct 25, 2012)

Cps no longer hold the evidence/ statements Tom Watson asked about in parliament yesterday, BBC journalist Ross Hawkins has tweeted. 

I believe this stuff would have taken things right into the heart of the Conservative party, historic and contemporary. Hopefully Watson keeps at it.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 25, 2012)

cesare said:


> The phone business was of far greater interest to the journalists and politicians than everyone else. Similarly the expenses scandal. Basically cos no-one expected any better from them.
> 
> This is a bit different though, eh.


 
Yes, it is. I dread to think who is going to be implicated in this.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 25, 2012)

It's quite unbelievable isnt it


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2012)

Sasaferrato said:


> Aye, but you have to think that every picture of an abused child is just that, an abused child. If there was no market for such material, it wouldn't be made.


 
Of course, but I still think it's sensible to differentiate between contact and non-contact offending, especially if examining non-contact offending offers the hope of finding treatment pathways for people early in their offending history.



> I have had the rather horrible experience of nursing a child who had been raped. The details are sickening, and I am not going to post them. Enough to say, I remember the time with such clarity I could give evidence in a court of law. This from something that happened more than thirty years ago.
> 
> To me, people who do these things are either mentally unwell, or evil beyond normal comprehension. To remove them from circulation permanently, I would be content for them to be adjudged unwell, and detained in the easier regime of a secure hospital. What I would like to do, is put them in prison, in the general population, however that would be tantamount to complicity in murder.


 
The sad truth is that most paedophiles aren't mentally-unwell or evil, they're either regressed (i.e. unable to relate to adults sexually, often due to their own experiences of abuse) or they're opportunists of the same type as any rapist (there's a fair amount of crossover in terms of opportunist offending in that offenders often offend on both sides of the age divide).
What they *do *could be classed as "evil", and the consequences are horrible, but simply imposing a dichotomy that says such offenders are mentally-unwell or evil lets them off the hook. It excuses their participation in and culpability for what happens.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 25, 2012)

Just one thought - while not wishing to detract from the unpleasantness of what's being alleged in some cases, it may be worth bearing in mind that until the mid 90s, a man of 20 was "under age" as far as gay sex is concerned...


----------



## Libertad (Oct 25, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> what a peadophile likes
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Can somebody help me out here pls?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 25, 2012)

Libertad said:


> Can somebody help me out here pls?


 
With what?


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 25, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> It's quite unbelievable isnt it


 
I would have thought that, at the time, entertainers (notably in the music business) sleeping with underage girls was pretty commonplace, and was regarded merely as a “perk” of the job.

It doesn’t appear that Savile went to any great lengths to hide what he was doing, and even strongly hinted at it in his autobiography. And I very much doubt band members asked to see girls’ birth certificates before shagging them at the back of the tour bus.

I guess if you had told the average man in the 1970s that Jimmy Saville liked, and had access to, schoolgirls the reaction would have ranged between “so what” and “lucky bastard”. Thankfully, times have moved on.

But if you’d have told the same person Jimmy Saville liked to shag schoolboys, their reaction would probably have been totally different.

Indeed, to my mind there is often a clear distinction between how men at that time viewed the sexual abuse of under-age teenage girls, and schoolboys of the same age. The former acceptable, and often enviable, the latter seen as a filthy perversion.

When MI5 wanted to smear politicians, it was often by association with the sexual abuse of boys, not girls.


----------



## stuff_it (Oct 25, 2012)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Just one thought - while not wishing to detract from the unpleasantness of what's being alleged in some cases, it may be worth bearing in mind that until the mid 90s, a man of 20 was "under age" as far as gay sex is concerned...


TBH I don't think there is about to be a massive morality sweep of people who boned 19-year-olds in the early 90s.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 25, 2012)

little_legs said:


> eta link correction http://twitpic.com/b73azj
> the story is already available online


 
Hang on there was a link to Basque terrorists as well?


----------



## Libertad (Oct 25, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> With what?


 
With Pickman's cryptic photo competition.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 25, 2012)

I remember hearing a story about two activists who broke into Lord Young's house during the Twyford Down protests and were amazed to find a life size portrait of Jimmy Saville above Young's four poster bed. And he's now chief whip. Sends shivers down your spine.


----------



## stuff_it (Oct 25, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> I remember hearing a story about two activists who broke into Lord Young's house during the Twyford Down protests and were amazed to find a life size portrait of Jimmy Saville above Young's four poster bed. And he's now chief whip. Sends shivers down your spine.


----------



## Nigel (Oct 25, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I think the name is Peter Righton not Wrigton - he ran the PIE as mentioned above.


Cases involving individuals in PIE run right up to 2006/7+

"Detectives found 3,000 drawings at Steven Freeman's home, where he held weekly meetings to view and trade images of child abuse. The images were described at the Old Bailey as "vile and disgusting" and were amongst the worst seen by police, they said. Some 14,500 pictures and films were found on computer discs there and at the address of two of his paedophile ring. Detectives believe tens of thousands more were stored on encrypted computer hard-drives they have been unable to access."
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...hange-David-Joy-Paedos-life-term-slashed.html
http://chris-ukorg.org/paedophile-party-members/p-i-e/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/15/paedophiles-jailed-child-abuse-drawings
http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/gay.left_issue.07.pdf


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 25, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> I remember hearing a story about two activists who broke into Lord Young's house during the Twyford Down protests and were amazed to find a life size portrait of Jimmy Saville above Young's four poster bed. And he's now chief whip. Sends shivers down your spine.


 
He's not called the boy sexing baronet for nothing*



*or for any reason libel lawyers


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Oct 25, 2012)

Libertad said:


> With Pickman's cryptic photo competition.


Spelling, I'm guessing some one misspelt it somewhere on the thread...paedophile/peadophile. American spelling is pedophile. I guess we would join up the ae if we knew the keyboard shortcut


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 25, 2012)

Libertad said:


> Can somebody help me out here pls?


 
It was ages before he posted the second photograph. How do you think I felt when there was just a picture of peas?


----------



## Libertad (Oct 25, 2012)

Thank you kindly.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 25, 2012)

pseudonarcissus said:


> Spelling, I'm guessing some one misspelt it somewhere on the thread...paedophile/peadophile. American spelling is pedophile. I guess we would join up the ae if we knew the keyboard shortcut


 
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords= pedometer&tag=googhydr-21&index=sports&hvadid=5947954496&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=570775359796955214&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&ref=pd_sl_l5zn1u901_b

Pedometers: exposed at last. I wonder if JS had one for use in charity marathons.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Oct 25, 2012)

UrbaneFox said:


> Pedometers: exposed at last. I wonder if JS had one for use in charity marathons.


sorry, just trying to help without being labeled a pedagogue


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 25, 2012)

paediatricians better watch out


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 25, 2012)

They've been living in fear for years.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 25, 2012)

http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/jeremy-hunts-main-donor-is-alleged-to.html


> *Thursday, 25 October 2012*
> 
> 
> *Jeremy Hunt's main donor is alleged to have been involved in the cover up of a paedophile ring.*
> ...


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 25, 2012)

Jeremy Hunt. Your kids are safe in his hands.


----------



## Nigel (Oct 26, 2012)

The Sparts seem to have taken a different line on this!
http://en.internationalism.org/forum/1056/baboon/5248/children-jimmy-saville-experience-and-bbc


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 26, 2012)

Nigel said:


> The Sparts seem to have taken a different line on this!
> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=547989491882292&set=o.261266100656442&type=1&theater


 
They always come out with that defend NAMBLA bullshit.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 26, 2012)

Having said that - that front cover has got to to be a joke


----------



## Nigel (Oct 26, 2012)

Was just skimming through Tramps & Vamps looking at Paglia's justifying NAMBLA.
An interview with her here justifying this and other 'misogynistic' views unconventional for someone who calls herself a feminist!
http://privat.ub.uib.no/BUBSY/playboy.htm


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 26, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> Having said that - that front cover has got to to be a joke


 
the whole thing is a joke


----------



## cesare (Oct 26, 2012)

Is it like the Proletarian Democracy?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 26, 2012)

cesare said:


> Is it like the Proletarian Democracy?


 
yes


----------



## cesare (Oct 26, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> yes


Maybe Workers Girder should run a feature on NAMBLA too.


----------



## Louloubelle (Oct 26, 2012)

UrbaneFox said:


> http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords= pedometer&tag=googhydr-21&index=sports&hvadid=5947954496&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=570775359796955214&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&ref=pd_sl_l5zn1u901_b
> 
> Pedometers: exposed at last. I wonder if JS had one for use in charity marathons.


----------



## BigTom (Oct 26, 2012)

cesare said:


> Is it like the Proletarian Democracy?


 
yes, except they are actually serious. There were some at the Tory conference demo arguing that there should be no age of consent and that what Assange did (as described by the women) didn't constitute rape. fucking loons. Obviously the Saville stuff hadn't come out at that point so didn't talk about that. I find it hard to believe that cover is real but they would definitely think what it says.


----------



## cesare (Oct 26, 2012)

BigTom said:


> yes, except they are actually serious. There were some at the Tory conference demo arguing that there should be no age of consent and that what Assange did (as described by the women) didn't constitute rape. fucking loons. Obviously the Saville stuff hadn't come out at that point so didn't talk about that. I find it hard to believe that cover is real but they would definitely think what it says.


Thanks Tom. I'm not good at keeping up with all these weird sects! Gawd


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 26, 2012)

http://chris-ukorg.org/uk-child-abusers-named-and-shamed/councillorspolitical-party-affiliated/

Both the list and the style of this blog are grim. :/


----------



## cesare (Oct 26, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> http://chris-ukorg.org/uk-child-abusers-named-and-shamed/councillorspolitical-party-affiliated/
> 
> Both the list and the style of this blog are grim. :/


I quickly scrolled down that list and there was a name I recognised. I didn't even know he was a councillor, I only knew him in the context of his business which this site doesn't mention. But when I separately searched for his name, business and councillor it brings his details up including his clear recognisable photo (which isn't there on your link). I'm a bit shocked, I had no idea.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 26, 2012)

http://victims-unite.net/2012/10/18...he-abolition-of-the-age-of-consent-in-the-uk/

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/child-abuse-linked-to-governments.html

Ah man...


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 26, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> http://victims-unite.net/2012/10/18...he-abolition-of-the-age-of-consent-in-the-uk/
> 
> http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/child-abuse-linked-to-governments.html
> 
> Ah man...


 
is there any other sources for that (the PIE thing that is)?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 26, 2012)

Nigel said:


> Was just skimming through Tramps & Vamps looking at Paglia's justifying NAMBLA.
> An interview with her here justifying this and other 'misogynistic' views unconventional for someone who calls herself a feminist!
> http://privat.ub.uib.no/BUBSY/playboy.htm


 
Camille Paglia never knowingly says anything uncontroversial. She'd out her mum as a lesbian nun if it got her some column inches!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 26, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> is there any other sources for that (the PIE thing that is)?


 
Not that I have seen tonight...PIE has come up before in this thread though saying the 'left' are to blame kind of thing. :/


----------



## ska invita (Oct 26, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> http://victims-unite.net/2012/10/18...he-abolition-of-the-age-of-consent-in-the-uk/
> 
> Ah man...


ive come across the stuff mentioned there about the murder/sex abuse in Canada, theres a guy called Kevin Annett who campaigns on this, but the waters are muddied by conspiracy theorists and I vaguely remember hearing some slurs against him so not sure what to make of it. Theres a documentary he made in this link http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/unrepentant-kevin-annett-canadas-genocide/


> Unrepentant documents Canada’s dirty secret – the planned genocide of aboriginal people in church-run Indian Residential Schools – and a clergyman’s efforts to document and make public these crimes.
> 
> First-hand testimonies from residential school survivors are interwoven with Kevin Annett’s own story of how he faced firing, de-frocking, and the loss of his family, reputation and livelihood as a result of his efforts to help survivors and bring out the truth of the residential schools.
> 
> ...


----------



## free spirit (Oct 27, 2012)

I thought I'd let this thread run its course for a bit, as I wanted to really pose the question and see what came back, as I don't see this is something that there is going to be conclusive evidence of either way - MI5 in particular not being party to the FOI act, so I don't know how anyone would get access to JS file to check that line of thinking for example.



Louloubelle said:


> We like to think of "rings" and networks but these things are loose knitted groups of disparate individuals who may or may not share other interests outside of abusing kids. There are all kinds of networks that overlap, some benign and some evil.


TBH this is more what I was getting at, and as I think I said in one of my posts, I'd not meant to use the word 'ring' in the thread title for this reason.

I do think though that there are almost certainly some fairly powerful people involved in some way in all this who've been able to keep a lid on multiple police investigations and other inquiries over 3 decades, so that only a few scapegoats get sent down, but the reports on the wider evidence of abuse get suppressed. Either that or the system is jus hopelessly broken, and there's some factor within it that has resulted in evidence of wider abuse being suppressed several times.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> What the OP is talking about, though, isn't loads of small rings, but an over-arching "grand lodge" of child-molesting that nonces from all over the UK belong to/subscribe to, and that exerts influence on policy, over the criminal justice system etc.


is it?

That's certainly the extreme end of the spectrum of possibilities, and I'm not entirely discounting it, but it's not really what I'd consider to be the most likely situation.

Most likely IMO is that there are mulitple interconnected lose networks of child abusers who're aware of other child abusers activities, and possibly some either act as pimps to those networks to give them access to which ever kids home etc is considered a safe bet at that time, or less likely this information is just spread for free via word of mouth.

I do however think that within any of these networks there will be many who amass evidence against others as an insurance policy, and many will have evidence against each other, so that a form of mutually assured destruction exists that ensures that if powerful members do exist then they must excercise that power to ensure that any wider ranging inquiries are prevented from exposing anyone who posed a serious problem if exposed.

Going one stage further though, I also think it highly likely that if these networks did involve relatively highly placed individuals, then MI5 would have certainly made it it's business to know about it, because this is the crime with the greatest potential for blackmail by foreign powers / criminal gangs etc.

I also think it highly unlikely that MI5 would just gain that knowledge then sit on it and do nothing with it for no reason. It's far more likely IMO that they actually did use that information themselves in order to build up their network of informants - this after all is pretty much what they do, people generally don't voluntarily become an MI5 tout within their chosen industry / organisation / political party, so MI5 need to find ways of persuading them both to do it, and to stay silent about having done it.

The problem with this approach for MI5 is I think it's likely to result in severe blowback after a decade or 2, as at this point someone like savile could then turn the tables on MI5 and threaten to expose the fact that they'd covered for him for a decade while he abused hundreds of young girls. I can easily see in this sort of situation how MI5 could then find itself essentially sucked into the web of mutually assured destruction, and therefore feeling that it needed to intervene in situations which threatened to expose its role in covering up for child abusing informants for years / decades. This would fairly convincingly explain how / why multiple inquiries were able to be prevented from being made public.

Essentially I can see a mechanism by which MI5 could have ended up being sucked into this situation over a period of decades, and finding itself knee deep in the shit and desperately covering it's own arse never mind it's informants. I actually genuinely consider it to be far more likely that MI5 (and / or special branch and others) were / are involved in this sort of way than that they had no clue about any of it going on under their noses for as long as it apparently has been going on. 

By MI5, I'm not really expecting the entire organisation to have been involved, it's more likely to have been a few case operators that started off using the technique at some point, then got sucked in so they had to cover their own arses, eg in N Ireland where the evidence and situation seems pretty credible, and by the time it got to the 80s & 90s they'd have been high enough up to be able to pull rank to get the worst of the welsh cases kept out of the public eye (and possibly to deliberately muddy the waters by ensuring the investigators dangled the carrot of compensation payouts in front of the potential witnesses when they first questioned them to make it harder to actually know what the truth of the situation was).

It's just basic arse covering really rather than any sort of principled child abuser ring conspiracy IMO.

We'll see I guess if they're still powerful enough to keep it covered up, or if they've actually now retired and lost most of their clout... that's if anyone actually starts asking the right questions.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

I had a PM from someone who wishes to remain nameless but gave me permission to paraphrase the PM onto this thread.




> Their mum was apparently in charge of hunting down paedophiles in council childrens homes, and other care facilities in the 80s.
> 
> They had their brakes tampered with on their care, followed home and had threats made against their family during this period.
> 
> Their mum always said that one day the house of cards would collapse, and it'd all come out, and that there are judges, MPs, senior police and all sorts involved, and that they're untouchable and protect each other.


 
This would be around the same time as all the abuse was going on in Wales, with police and council inquiries covered up. 

Not that they were working in Wales (afaik), but they're pretty much saying the same thing was going on where they were working.

I believe the PM to be genuine btw.


----------



## BigTom (Oct 28, 2012)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html

More stuff coming out about Peter Morrison, the aide to Thatcher that has already been mentioned in this thread (and is dead so therefore no libel issues).

Implicated in the Welsh Children's Homes scandal and also claims that William Hague would have known about this from the inquiry in the mid-90s, but that it may have been covered up - Hague denies any knowledge.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

BigTom said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html
> 
> More stuff coming out about Peter Morrison, the aide to Thatcher that has already been mentioned in this thread (and is dead so therefore no libel issues).
> 
> Implicated in the Welsh Children's Homes scandal and also claims that William Hague would have known about this from the inquiry in the mid-90s, but that it may have been covered up - Hague denies any knowledge.


 
Thats useful because it does tend to suggest that Morrison was indeed one of the people named in the suppressed Jillings report. It seems reasonable to assume that the Jillings report is what the Daily Mail are calling 'official documents', 'notes' and 'preliminary report'.

The Waterhouse report that came from the subsequent public inquiry was a whitewash when it came to high-profile names. Not only were living people mentioned in evidence not allowed to be named, but Waterhouse also prevented the publication of the name of at least one deceased person.

Its hard to believe Hague wouldnt have known all the details.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous _construction fusilier_ and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.


 
Went bust after being sued, I seem to recall. . . (not that I ever set eyes on a copy, I just remember this for some reason)


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

Nick Davies confirmed the existence of the specific ruling in the Guardian in 1997:



> However, Sir Ronald then ruled that the media could not report the name of any living person who was accused or likely to be accused of abusing children in the North Wales homes unless they had previously been convicted of such an offence.
> I know part of this article was posted before in sort of passing but that ruling is going to come in for some attention over the coming days i think


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> is it?
> 
> That's certainly the extreme end of the spectrum of possibilities, and I'm not entirely discounting it, but it's not really what I'd consider to be the most likely situation.


 
I'm not talking about the spectrum of possibilities, I'm talking about what the OP most likely meant in their opening post.



> Most likely IMO is that there are mulitple interconnected lose networks of child abusers who're aware of other child abusers activities, and possibly some either act as pimps to those networks to give them access to which ever kids home etc is considered a safe bet at that time, or less likely this information is just spread for free via word of mouth.


 
Which is pretty much what I said a few posts on. 



> I do however think that within any of these networks there will be many who amass evidence against others as an insurance policy, and many will have evidence against each other, so that a form of mutually assured destruction exists that ensures that if powerful members do exist then they must excercise that power to ensure that any wider ranging inquiries are prevented from exposing anyone who posed a serious problem if exposed.
> 
> Going one stage further though, I also think it highly likely that if these networks did involve relatively highly placed individuals, then MI5 would have certainly made it it's business to know about it, because this is the crime with the greatest potential for blackmail by foreign powers / criminal gangs etc.
> 
> ...


 
It's not just about asking the right questions, unfortunately, it's also about doing so within earshot of someone powerful enough and interested enough to disseminate the answers to your questions.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I had a PM from someone who wishes to remain nameless but gave me permission to paraphrase the PM onto this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
It very likely is.
You could go to any city or large town in the UK, look at local and regional papers for the '70s and '80s, and find inquiries (usually followed by cover-ups) into abuse rings in childrens' homes, prostitution rings in childrens' homes and drug dealing *in* childrens' homes. You can also, if you're unlucky, come across the dozen or so cases where HIV+ care workers who were abusing carees, were allowed to keep working with children (for what boiled down to "political reasons").
We remember Kincora etc because of the wealth of information the whistleblowers put in the public domain, but there's so much more still lurking there.

Of course, the most rancid thing is that many incidences aren't kept quiet for reasons of "national security", it's because of money, where municipal insurers and municipal authorities have colluded to gag victims. They learned a long time ago that stuffing a damaged person's mouth with money and getting them to sign a non-disclosure agreement is cheaper than abuse cases seeing the light of day in court, with the inevitable class action against the authority.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous _construction fusilier_ and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.


 
The famous "bag-carrying" _construction fusilier_, surely?


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous _construction fusilier_ and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.


 
I've not seen the issues but I've now read enough to ascertain that if there is any fanciful conspiracy stuff, it almost certainly came from the magazine at the time, rather than people lying about what the magazine said later.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

elbows said:


> I've not seen the issues but I've now read enough to ascertain that if there is any fanciful conspiracy stuff, it almost certainly came from the magazine at the time, rather than people lying about what the magazine said later.


Just noticed that it went bust _before the waterhouse inquiry was even announced_, so if it did mention anything it could not have been related to the findings or methods of the report - only to allegations.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Just noticed that it went bust _before the waterhouse inquiry was even announced_, so if it did mention anything it could not have been related to the findings or methods of the report - only to allegations.


 
Waterhouse was supposed to draw a line under things, it was the last chapter in a story that had some media attention for almost 10 years.

For example:



> *IN 1991 JOURNALISTS* on broadsheet newspapers began to publish stories claiming that Bryn Estyn, a home for adolescent boys on the outskirts of Wrexham, lay at the centre of a network of evil – a paedophile ring whose members included a senior North Wales police officer.


 
http://www.orwellpress.co.uk/brynestyn.htm

Also Scallywag continued online for some years after several legal actions killed the print edition. Sounds like they had a bit of legal trouble online too, and with the death of their main man Simon Regan in 2000, that was that.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

The wikipedia article for Simon Regan isnt the worst place to start for background info.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Regan


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

The best background & context for the Scallywag stories that I've been able to find was from Simon Regan himself, in a piece he wrote after the Waterhouse report was published. I dont like linking to most of the sites that have the full article, but if you google the following you should get plenty of results:



> In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed


 
Irrelevant comedy PS. Google search wants to turn Bryn Estyn into Brian Epstein!


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 28, 2012)

According to The Times yesterday (sorry, no link as behind a pay wall) Savile held a regular Friday “social club” meetings at his home with senior police officers, mostly from West Yorkshire Constabulary, at the same time as he was being investigated by other forces in relation to alleged sex offences.

The meetings were held over a period of 20 years. 

It adds credence to the suggestion in his autobiography that if he was exposed, he would take down a number of police officers with him.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 28, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> According to The Times yesterday...






> Jimmy Savile cultivated the friendship of a group of senior police officers through weekly meetings at his penthouse apartment, while being investigated over a string of abuse cases, a friend of the star has told The Times.
> 
> The broadcaster’s “Friday Morning Club” included up to nine serving and retired police officers. The meetings were held regularly for almost 20 years until shortly before his death.
> 
> ...


----------



## Louloubelle (Oct 28, 2012)

On a slight tangent

I like this



I am not for a moment suggesting that high level networks of child abusers do not exist. I believe that there are indicators that they do in fact exist. I believe that evidence free conspiracy theories regarding Satanic ritual abuse, lizards and jooz muddy the waters and may very well result in victims of genuine abuse not being taken seriously.

I also think that, IME, CTers tend to "join up the dots" far too freely, making connections between disparate situations and individuals and, as a result, draw conclusions that are false and fantastical. This is especially unhelpful in those situations in which truth is stranger and more shocking than fiction, Savilegate being one of those situations.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Most of the officers who attended the “club” at Savile’s home in Leeds were from West Yorkshire Police


Yorkshire police on the case again


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

_This is the North. We do what we want._


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> _This is the North. We do what who we want._


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

Guess who gets a mention


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

The Daily Star have gone after a different Tory angle:

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/279380/TORY-PAEDO-COVER-UP/




> *POLICE probing an underage sex ring at the heart of Maggie Thatcher’s government were warned: “Stop investigating if you want to keep your jobs.”*
> 
> ​Officers in London were inquiring into allegations made by a teenage rent boy that a Cabinet minister had been abusing him.​​The youth claimed to be one of a number of boys regularly having sex with rich and powerful men in the 1980s – some of whom would fly to the illegal orgies from Europe.​​As well as the Cabinet minister – who is still alive – he pointed the finger at judges, European bigwigs and senior civil servants.​​He told his story to detectives, who are understood to have received other allegations against the minister.​​But a former detective who worked on the case revealed they were suddenly told to halt the probe.​​The furious ex-policeman said: “It wasn’t that we ran out of leads but it reached a point where a warning to stop came.​​“It was a case of ‘get rid of everything, never say a word to anyone’. It was made very clear to me that to continue asking questions would jeopardise my career.”​


​​


----------



## biggus dickus (Oct 28, 2012)

I think a lot of small rings were probed


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 28, 2012)

biggus dickus said:


> I think a lot of small rings were probed


 
Oh do fukc off.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

Its a nightmare trying to get to truth when going down the road of Scallywag and its offshoots. Everything starts looping back on itself. But there was some actual journalism and people with contacts involved.

The main example of the loopback I mentioned:

One of their stories involved turning the 'cash for questions' scandal into 'cash for boys'.

Simon Regans half-brother Angus Wilson, who was also a founder of Scallywag, went on to setup a successor magazine called Spiked. Al-Fayed is said to have provided some finance to this venture at some point, which fits as by then he had it in for sections of the establishment and later rescued Punch.

Angus Wilson died in a car crash in Cyprus, apparently just after seeking finance for Spiked from Asil Nadir in exchange for printing his side of the Polly Peck story.

In the last years of his life Simon Regan was said to be especially interested in Diana death conspiracy theories.

I've hurt my brain staring at a screen too long this afternoon so I dont have all my sources for these details handy. But here is one that has pnety of the Angus Wilson details in it. Its a story following on from the John major Edwina Currie revelations, with most of the interesting stuff coming from surviving brother Robin Wilson. Its quite fascinating and stays well away from the loopy stuff.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Major's lies over affair destroyed our family; THE LITTLE MAG THAT...-a092484859


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

Another atory about the death of Angus Wilson:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/satirical-papers-editor-killed-1362529.html

(If you are wondering why he has a different name in that article, I believe he went by the name Angus James when writing, and his full name was Angus James Wilson.)


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Oct 28, 2012)

Ben Fellows' allegations about abuse

And also: http://21stcenturywire.com/2012/10/...tertainment-industry-says-former-child-actor/


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2012)

BTW did any/many Catholic priests/nuns/etc get prosecuted in Ireland and in other countries? I seem to remember not. Have I got that wrong?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

ska invita said:


> BTW did any/many Catholic priests/nuns/etc get prosecuted in Ireland and in other countries? I seem to remember not. Have I got that wrong?


If by 'not' you mean none, then yes you have - hundreds were.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2012)

thats good. not sure where i got that from.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 28, 2012)

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/james-bond-ian-fleming.html?m=1

Getting a touch _bonkers_ now...


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/james-bond-ian-fleming.html?m=1


Why have you posted that nonsense with no comment?


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Ben Fellows' allegations about abuse
> 
> And also: http://21stcenturywire.com/2012/10/...tertainment-industry-says-former-child-actor/


Credibility questions have been raised about this guy due to his running a CTers website / internet radio show.

Having said that, I personally tend to think that this shouldn't always mean everything the guy ever says must be complete fabrications. More take it with a bit of a pinch of salt stuff, but on balance I'd expect that he's generally telling the truth in that article.

It certainly would seem to support the statements made in the daily start article, and would also seem to link in with the apparent scallywag angle of cash for questions turning into 'cash for boys' angle that Elbows mentions, as it would explain his involvement as a 15 year old in the investigation by the cook report (that coincidentally? got shelved after the Guardian broke the cash for questions story before them).


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/james-bond-ian-fleming.html?m=1
> 
> Getting a touch _bonkers_ now...


that sort of crap is best left to the CT sites, could we focus this thread on more serious stuff please?

unless there's something I'm missing from that article.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not talking about the spectrum of possibilities, I'm talking about what the OP most likely meant in their opening post.


I've just seen this.

You do appreciate that I am the OP, and as such am probably a bit better placed to know what I meant?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Why have you posted that nonsense with no comment?


I did comment, in delay...you missed it.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> I did comment, in delay...you missed it.


I didn't miss it _as it didn't exist_ when i replied.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Credibility questions have been raised about this guy due to his running a CTers website / internet radio show.
> 
> Having said that, I personally tend to think that this shouldn't always mean everything the guy ever says must be complete fabrications. More take it with a bit of a pinch of salt stuff, but on balance I'd expect that he's generally telling the truth in that article.
> 
> It certainly would seem to support the statements made in the daily start article, and would also seem to link in with the apparent scallywag angle of cash for questions turning into 'cash for boys' angle that Elbows mentions, as it would explain his involvement as a 15 year old in the investigation by the cook report (that coincidentally? got shelved after the Guardian broke the cash for questions story before them).


 
On what basis?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 28, 2012)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Ben Fellows' allegations about abuse
> 
> And also: http://21stcenturywire.com/2012/10/...tertainment-industry-says-former-child-actor/


 
I googled him in Eastenders and Starlight Express but could find nothing on him.  He'd already been discussed a week earlier on here


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I've just seen this.
> 
> You do appreciate that I am the OP, and as such am probably a bit better placed to know what I meant?


 
And I'm talking about how you didn't elucidate what you meant too clearly to others, given that you hedged the OP with so many "seems to", "appears to", "could well haves" etc.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> And I'm talking about how you didn't elucidate what you meant too clearly to others, given that you hedged the OP with so many "seems to", "appears to", "could well haves" etc.


The fact I hedged it with those terms should have given you a bit of a clue of my thoughts on the matter though.

Anyway, I don't want this thread to digress into another one of those tit for tat threads, let's stick to the point.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

this is relevant




> The Sunday Telegraph has established that the civil servant behind Savile's appointment to take charge of Broadmoor, the high-security hospital, was subsequently prevented from working with children.


 



> Mr McGinnis, now 74, was prevented from working with children by Croydon Council in 2005, when he was stopped from running a children's church group.





> Three years earlier Bromley Council ended his involvement with services for children with learning difficulties.
> The interventions followed police investigations into his conduct during volunteer visits to children's homes.


 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journali...Saviles-relatives-speak-of-their-turmoil.html

So the guy who actually recommended Savile be put in charge of Broadmoor, who in 1987 was in charge of the mental health devision of the department of health and social services later turns out to have been either been a paedophile, or at least have had such strong suspicions about him that police investigations lead to him being banned from working with children.

That'd seem to be pretty high level to me.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> On what basis?


on the basis of my judgement after spending several hours researching his back story the other night.

For me enough of his back story checked out, and the bits that didn't were mostly the bits very early in his career from the 1980s which are very hard to verify on the internet. I'm of the opinion though that he wouldn't have got the parts he got in the films that are listed, and certainly wouldn't have received the funding he did for the films he made himself if he didn't have a backstory that was at  the very least similar to the one he gives.

If he's got to have a similar backstory to the one he gives to get that sort of funding and land those parts, then why would he make up an alternative backstory, and specifically why would he not mention the bit parts in the Bill that he does seem to be listed for if he was trying to establish his credibility rather than just giving the relevant bits of his history as a child actor?

If he's made the entire thing up, then he's spent a good 15 years living that same lie, so on balance of probabilities I'm inclined to the view that he's likely to be at least mostly telling the truth, though as I say, I'd take it with a pinch of salt  not immediately believe every single thing he said.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 28, 2012)

Not sure if any of this has been posted before:

Sun,Sea and Satan
The documentary made by Pie and Mash Films about Haut de la Garenne

If you can get past the main guy's manner...



> In March 2008, BBC television personality Jimmy Savile started legal proceedings against _The Sun_ newspaper which had, wrongly he claimed, linked him in several articles to the child abuse scandal at Haut. [19] Savile initially denied visiting Haut de la Garenne, but later admitted that he had done so, following the publication of a photograph showing him at the home surrounded by children.[20] The States of Jersey Police said that in 2008 an allegation of an indecent assault by Savile at the home in the 1970s had been investigated, but there had been insufficient evidence to proceed.[21]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haut_de_la_Garenne

Sister of film maker Dyana who alledged abuse in _Jersey_ and who part funded the documentary was found dead, and is listed as an unexplained death.

Blog with time line.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Oct 28, 2012)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Ben Fellows' allegations about abuse
> 
> And also: http://21stcenturywire.com/2012/10/...tertainment-industry-says-former-child-actor/





free spirit said:


> Credibility questions have been raised about this guy due to his running a CTers website / internet radio show.


Fair enough, I haven't seen any of his CT stuff.

The guy is clearly prepared to stick his neck out though - potentially a risky strategy for him. It's not something you'd do lightly.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> It certainly would seem to support the statements made in the daily start article, and would also seem to link in with the apparent scallywag angle of cash for questions turning into 'cash for boys' angle that Elbows mentions, as it would explain his involvement as a 15 year old in the investigation by the cook report (that coincidentally? got shelved after the Guardian broke the cash for questions story before them).


 
No, I would not leap to make that link at all. There are plenty of other cabinet members from that time who could fit the Star article, and no way I can see for us to narrow the list down substantially unless we are willing to give a lot of weight to old rumours. There is a human link between the old cash for questions related scallywag rumours and what Ben Fellows said, but the politician you are getting at is only present in the latter, no link involving him is established here at all. Although I am taking a Clouseau 'I suspect no-one, and I suspect everyone' approach, and I may use gossip to guide me through the murky depths, I expect to form no decent conclusions unless more new stuff emerges.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> on the basis of my judgement after spending several hours researching his back story the other night.
> 
> For me enough of his back story checked out, and the bits that didn't were mostly the bits very early in his career from the 1980s which are very hard to verify on the internet. I'm of the opinion though that he wouldn't have got the parts he got in the films that are listed, and certainly wouldn't have received the funding he did for the films he made himself if he didn't have a backstory that was at the very least similar to the one he gives.
> 
> ...


I didn't mention his backstory though - i asked on what basis you think he's telling the truth. Your answer seems to be because his backstory sort of checks out in parts. Why does that weigh heavier than his made up frankly insane CT stuff (the latest radio show he has on his site is with notorious anti-semite Gilad Atzmon for example - do have a look at the rest of them). Ignore the backstory for now and look at this stuff  - if you think this sort of stuff "about the Illuminazis, The New World Order, the Rothschilds and how we must take back our country and world from the global elite." doesn't damage his credibility then i think you're being a bit naive.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Oct 28, 2012)

< Brass Eye, animals. About 3 minutes in.

I had someone going on at me this weekend telling me this little segment, as the secretive minister for procuring wild animals, was meant to be a reference to the longstanding rumours that there was a secret government conspiracy to procure kids for sexual abuse.

I think it's bollocks myself but I thought I'd put it on here anyway.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

Basically the Ben Fellows stuff is not much good unless it is joined by evidence from other sources. The fact that old scallywag rumours involved a cash for questions angle is something, but its not the kind of quality link I'm looking for.

I would not attach it to the Star article I posted earlier in any way at this point.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> this is relevant
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
In terms of the Civil Service, yes, reasonably high-level. In terms of the British Establishment, not really. His influence would have been limited to his immediate field of speciality, and he'd have needed to have constructed or accessed an existing network in order to have made anything of his influence.
If an attempt is being made to find out whether there was/is a "high level paedophile ring", then you need to be looking at and/or for people whose professional and/or social position would have allowed them to act as "brokers" between cells of paedophiles, as opposed to people whose position allowed them to indulge their own paedophilia, such as Savile.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> if you think this sort of stuff "about the Illuminazis, The New World Order, the Rothschilds and how we must take back our country and world from the global elite." doesn't damage his credibility then i think you're being a bit naive.


I specifically stated that it does damage his credibility - I was the first to actually raise that on this thread.



free spirit said:


> Credibility questions have been raised about this guy due to his running a CTers website / internet radio show.


 
as far as I'm aware though, none of the other stories you posted were based on his own personal experience / history. IMO it's one thing to speculate on all manor of conspiracy theories, it's another to actually lie completely about your own personal experiences as a child - something that's likely to be read and questioned by your family, and to potentially cause them serious distress.

You may disagree, which is your choice, and it's likely to be impossible to prove one way or the other, but personally I'm inclined to believe he's not making the entire thing up/


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> In terms of the Civil Service, yes, reasonably high-level. In terms of the British Establishment, not really. His influence would have been limited to his immediate field of speciality, and he'd have needed to have constructed or accessed an existing network in order to have made anything of his influence.
> If an attempt is being made to find out whether there was/is a "high level paedophile ring", then you need to be looking at and/or for people whose professional and/or social position would have allowed them to act as "brokers" between cells of paedophiles, as opposed to people whose position allowed them to indulge their own paedophilia, such as Savile.


Presumably though he would have been in a position to influence or close down any internal inquiries, arrange for staff members who were asking awkward questions to be re-allocated and particularly to appoint people in management positions both within the institutions themselves, and within any bodies charged with investigating any abuse internally.

Ie he was in a position which would have specifically enabled him to construct and protect such a network if he wanted to do so.


----------



## Nigel (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder, has anyone seen the scallywag issues that apparently covered the north wales scandal and who named a famous _construction fusilier_ and one other as having their names removed from the waterhouse report on the specific grounds that their being named would force others involved to go underground (as opposed to having paedo on their business card). I'm not saying this is true, but given that it's tied to a specific claim in a specific publication at a specific time i thought maybe someone might remember it - it might of course be the usual conspiracy rubbish helped along by the fact that the mag went bust years back.


 
Larry O'Hara said on a previous thread on U75 that he has access to copies of Scallywag!


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I specifically stated that it does damage his credibility - I was the first to actually raise that on this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not much point in mentioning stuff that damages his credibility if you then go on to say that you feel he's credible - and on that this belief in his credibility is based on _parts_ of his background _appearing_ to check out (which itself ignores all the parts that don't). And i didn't post any stories about him at all so i'm not sure what you're on about. Maybe you were confused me for frogwoman and others pointing out the conspiracy side of his life two weeks ago when you last argued that he was credible on another thread?


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

elbows said:


> No, I would not leap to make that link at all. There are plenty of other cabinet members from that time who could fit the Star article, and no way I can see for us to narrow the list down substantially unless we are willing to give a lot of weight to old rumours. There is a human link between the old cash for questions related scallywag rumours and what Ben Fellows said, but the politician you are getting at is only present in the latter, no link involving him is established here at all. Although I am taking a Clouseau 'I suspect no-one, and I suspect everyone' approach, and I may use gossip to guide me through the murky depths, I expect to form no decent conclusions unless more new stuff emerges.


Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well, I wasn't meaning to refer to the actual cabinet members named in his article.

The point I was making related to a question I've had about his story, which is why the cook report would want to use a 15 year old boy to go undercover on a cash for questions investigation. This would only make any sense if there was another side to the story where they were targeting politicians with a liking for underage boys.

The Star article combined with the scallywag piece you mentioned would both seem to corroborate at least the idea that there were torys who were suspected of having a liking of underage boys at that time, which would then support his claim that he'd been working undercover on this story for the cook report as a 15 year old.

I'd also suspect that the scallywag article will have been sourced from that shelved cook report investigation, but as it's not available online it can only remain a suspicion unless someone can come up with a copy of the article.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Not much point in mentioning stuff that damages his credibility if you then go on to say that you feel he's credible - and on that this belief in his credibility is based on _parts_ of his background _appearing_ to check out (which itself ignores all the parts that don't).


I don't say he's credible in general, I'm saying that I think it's likely that this particular story is actually at least based on truth, but I'd still take it with a pinch of salt.



butchersapron said:


> And i didn't post any stories about him at all so i'm not sure what you're on about. Maybe you were confused me for frogwoman and others pointing out the conspiracy side of his life two weeks ago when you last argued that he was credible on another thread?


I was referring to these stories* you referenced in the post I quoted.



butchersapron said:


> Why does that weigh heavier than his made up frankly insane CT stuff (the latest radio show he has on his site is with notorious anti-semite Gilad Atzmon for example - do have a look at the rest of them). Ignore the backstory for now and look at this stuff - if you think this sort of stuff "about *the Illuminazis, The New World Order, the Rothschilds* and how we must take back our country and world from the global elite." doesn't damage his credibility then i think you're being a bit naive.


 

*stories as in articles, pieces.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

I deliberately didn't post up the ben fellows article on this thread specifically because of his CT links, and the fact that they meant that this thread would disappear into a protracted argument about his credibility and the truth or otherwise of his claims, which nobody can actually substantiate one way or the other anyway.

Now it had been mentioned, I thought it worth bringing up the point that the Star and scallywag points seem to provide some corroboration at least for the idea that the cook report might have considered it worthwhile employing a 15 year old for an undercover investigation into MPs as part of an investigation that was billed as being 'cash for questions'.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 28, 2012)

Nigel said:


> Larry O'Hara said on a previous thread on U75 that he has access to copies of Scallywag!


As it happens, I possess one copy of Scallywag. It has Portillo on the cover.


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 28, 2012)

I have a complete set of Scallywags in the loft kindly given to me by Angus in a Camden pub as an apology for not sending me an issue I had ordered. I’ll have to dig them out and re-read them.

The identity of the construction fusilier mentioned in Post 187 is very well known (I’m not too sure if I can name him as I think he’s still alive). I’m not even sure if I’m allowed to post links to the various allegations.

But he was very close to Mrs Thatcher, was a Tory (very) big-wig and a Member of the House of Lords. It is not Morrison, btw. The internet is full of allegations of child abuse against him and various associates.

As far as I know, he was never convicted of any offence, but he never sued about the allegations.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I'd also suspect that the scallywag article will have been sourced from that shelved cook report investigation, but as it's not available online it can only remain a suspicion unless someone can come up with a copy of the article.


 
I already posted something where the Scallywag man spoke of interviewing people who were apparently victims of the North Wales care home abuse, suggesting these were his source.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

elbows said:


> I already posted something where the Scallywag man spoke of interviewing people who were apparently victims of the North Wales care home abuse, suggesting these were his source.


oh. I thought there were 2 articles being referred to, one about the welsh situation and another referring to the cash for questions investigation.


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I'd also suspect that the scallywag article will have been sourced from that shelved cook report investigation, but as it's not available online it can only remain a suspicion unless someone can come up with a copy of the article.


 
If I do have a copy of the relevant article/s and had them scanned and put up on this thread would it cause a problem for the Mods as, IIRC, it names several prominent people who are likely to be alive, and not convicted of any relevant offences?

BTW, while Scallywag carried a lot of allegations regarding the sexual preferences of a number of high-profile people (including politicians) most of the magazine was actually quite turgid and boring.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> oh. I thought there were 2 articles being referred to, one about the welsh situation and another referring to the cash for questions investigation.


 
As best I can tell they ran more than a couple of stories, but the stuff I was reading about didnt actually suggest cash for questions itself was directly linked, just a person.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

elbows said:


> As best I can tell they ran more than a couple of stories, but the stuff I was reading about didnt actually suggest cash for questions itself was directly linked, just a person.


I may have got the wrong end of the stick then.

The fact that scallywag was publishing this stuff in London around this time though would still support the idea that there could have been justification for the cook report to think that employing a 15 year old actor as an undercover reporter as part of the investigation was likely to be worth doing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I may have got the wrong end of the stick then.
> 
> The fact that scallywag was publishing this stuff in London around this time though would still support the idea that there could have been justification for the cook report to think that employing a 15 year old actor as an undercover reporter as part of the investigation was likely to be worth doing.


given that teenage police cadets have for some years been used to catch out shopkeepers selling booze to underage drinkers it is no surprise that the cook report would at least consider employing a 15 year old.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> If I do have a copy of the relevant article/s and had them scanned and put up on this thread would it cause a problem for the Mods as, IIRC, it names several prominent people who are likely to be alive, and not convicted of any relevant offences?
> 
> BTW, while Scallywag carried a lot of allegations regarding the sexual preferences of a number of high-profile people (including politicians) most of the magazine was actually quite turgid and boring.


I'd expect it would get the board in trouble if it were actually hosted on the boards.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> given that teenage police cadets have for some years been used to catch out shopkeepers selling booze to underage drinkers it is no surprise that the cook report would at least consider employing a 15 year old.


Yes, but only if they were investigating something where the use of a 15 year old would be needed.

ie not just for investigating the cash for questions allegations that the Guardian published.


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 28, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I'd expect it would get the board in trouble if it were actually hosted on the boards.


 
In that case I certainly won't do it. But if I can lay my hands on it and scan it people can PM me with their email address and I'll gladly send them copies of the relevant articles.


----------



## happie chappie (Oct 28, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> In that case I certainly won't do it. But if I can lay my hands on it and scan it people can PM me with their email address and I'll gladly send them copies of the relevant articles.


 
Ahh - it has been pointed out that, for legal reasons, I should withdraw this offer and I have agreed to do so.


----------



## 1%er (Oct 28, 2012)

edit: I read the rest of the posts before I ask that


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2012)

Ian Bone has posted this (apologies if this has been gone over before)

HERE’S HOW AN ESTABLISHMENT COVER UP WORKS
Lord ‘Bob’ Boothby was a tory MP and cabinet minister in the 1950s with a well known (among the political class) liking for young boys – oh yes he was also having a long standing affair with Dorothy Macmillan the prime minister’s wife. In the 1960s the Krays provided orgies and young boys for him. the daily miror carried a story making these allegations which also included the Labour MP Tom Driberg. So it was in neither the Tory or Labour partys interest to have this exposed. 

Harold Wilson’s enforcer Arnold Goodman put heavy pressure on Cecil King the Mirror’s owner to retract the piece. Boothby won big libel damages and all the journalists and editor were sacked and boothby given an apology. The other papers were too scared ever to investigate Boothby again. the bulk of the population remained in ignorance of the whole affair which remained within the political elites. That’s how cover ups work.
http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/heres-how-an-establishment-cover-up-works/


----------



## 1%er (Oct 28, 2012)

who is fronting sky TV Christmas schedule? They are mentioned in a link in post 210


----------



## free spirit (Oct 28, 2012)

As names aren't named as such, I'm hoping this is ok to copy to here. It's an article written by Simon Regan, the editor of scallywag, prior to his death, which gives a good overview of their investigations, and the subsequent conservative party cover up operation.



> In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.
> 
> Two of these young men, who had been 14-years-old at the time, swore they had been not only introduced to the paedophile ring operating in the Crest Hotel in Wrexham but had later been escorted on three or four occasions to an address in Pimlico where they were further abused.
> 
> ...


 
So these are the accusations.

And this is what can only be described as a successful cover up operation in which the head of research at the conservative party central office is able to buy their entire office with contents, and remove those contents following a rent dispute (which a cter would point out would be fairly simple to manufacture as a pretext for the court action) .



> Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, Dr. Julian Lewis, now Conservative MP for New Forest (East) but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.
> 
> http://pebpr.blogspot.co.uk/p/scallywags-simon-regan.html


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Ian Bone has posted this (apologies if this has been gone over before)
> 
> HERE’S HOW AN ESTABLISHMENT COVER UP WORKS
> Lord ‘Bob’ Boothby was a tory MP and cabinet minister in the 1950s with a well known (among the political class) liking for young boys – oh yes he was also having a long standing affair with Dorothy Macmillan the prime minister’s wife. In the 1960s the Krays provided orgies and young boys for him. the daily miror carried a story making these allegations which also included the Labour MP Tom Driberg. So it was in neither the Tory or Labour partys interest to have this exposed.
> ...


 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ers-shed-new-light-on-Kray-twins-scandal.html


> Yet a newly-uncovered letter sent by Boothby to Kray shows that the two men were friends, and were making social arrangements, more than a year before the peer won his payout.
> On notepaper carrying his address in Eaton Square, Belgravia, Boothby wrote to Kray on June 6, 1963: "Thank you for your postcard. I very nearly went to Jersey myself, as I have never been there, and hear from so many people that it is quite delightful.
> "If you are free tomorrow evening between six and seven, do come round for a drink and a chat."
> The brief note is signed: "Ever sincerely, Boothby."


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2012)

That must be the delightful Haut de la Garenne...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 29, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Presumably though he would have been in a position to influence or close down any internal inquiries, arrange for staff members who were asking awkward questions to be re-allocated and particularly to appoint people in management positions both within the institutions themselves, and within any bodies charged with investigating any abuse internally./
> 
> Ie he was in a position which would have specifically enabled him to construct and protect such a network if he wanted to do so.


He'd have been unlikely to have been in such a position unless he'd suborned not only his departmental HR depth, but that of every hospital in his remit. Senior Civil Servants facilitate policy, they don't engage with middle management minutiae,  and any senior CS that did would be very noticeable.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 29, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> He'd have been unlikely to have been in such a position unless he'd suborned not only his departmental HR depth, but that of every hospital in his remit. Senior Civil Servants facilitate policy, they don't engage with middle management minutiae, and any senior CS that did would be very noticeable.


minutiae like the appointment of savile? that sort of thing?

I'll admit to not knowing exactly what he could and couldn't influence, but given that one key question in all this is exactly how Savile ended up being put in charge of Broadmoor, and how come he was allowed to have a flat there etc. and the references to saville having high up friends able to quash any complaints that were made, it'd seem fairly relevant that the person at the top of the civil service in charge of running the places later turns out to have allegations against him so serious that he's banned from working with children by 2 councils.

In doing a bit of digging on this, I stumbled upon 2 reports in the archives that were apparently sealed for 75 years on his watch in 1988 (I think).

Ill treatment and sexual offences against mental patients under Sections 126-128 of Act, 1959-1963
Reports on alleged incidents of illtreatment 1961-1962
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C209968
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C209969


I don't know if this would be standard practice or not, but this would presumably be the sort of thing that a head of department could influence if they wanted to.

I'd assume they could also have influence over such things as whether or not to launch an internal inquiry to find out if there was any child abuse going on in homes it ran.

Also the idea that it would stand out if the head did take a particular interest in a certain facility, or instructed the personnel department to put someone in charge of a certain facility is only really a problem for someone if they're scared of being found out / if there's a risk that someone's going to report them. If they're the head of department, would juniors really consider risking their jobs to report them because they'd taken an unusual level of interest in one of the facilities the department managed?

If the guy were operating alone, or he was the most powerful involved, then maybe they would. If on the other hand he wasn't operating alone, and wasn't the most powerful person involved then he'd be much more free to act with relative impunity.

It certainly goes some way to explain the feelings that there would be no point in anyone complaining because nothing ever got done about any complaints / they were hushed up, that run through a lot of the statements made by staff from some of these places that I've read in various articles following the savile revelations.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 29, 2012)

free spirit said:


> As names aren't named as such, I'm hoping this is ok to copy to here. It's an article written by Simon Regan, the editor of scallywag, prior to his death, which gives a good overview of their investigations, and the subsequent conservative party cover up operation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Ah, Dolphin Square, where a lot of dodginess took place that often involved "Polly" and his pal, Pete.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 29, 2012)

I suspect that as more and more of this comes out, the grim spectre of Lord Tom Denning will arise from his grave. . . 'twas Denning, you'll remember, who said it was better that the Birmingham Six remain in jail, even if they were innocent, if the alternative was that the "appalling vista" of a sea of bent coppers be confirmed as truth.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 29, 2012)

free spirit said:


> minutiae like the appointment of savile? that sort of thing?


 
Savile's appointment is more likely to have come from above his pay grade, i.e. from a ministerial office (which would mean a very senior Civil Servant or a Minister pulling the strings).



> I'll admit to not knowing exactly what he could and couldn't influence, but given that one key question in all this is exactly how Savile ended up being put in charge of Broadmoor, and how come he was allowed to have a flat there etc. and the references to saville having high up friends able to quash any complaints that were made, it'd seem fairly relevant that the person at the top of the civil service in charge of running the places later turns out to have allegations against him so serious that he's banned from working with children by 2 councils.


 
You're doing it again. Rather than dispassionately assessing the evidence and finding out the responsibilities of a Civil Servant of that grade, you're just sticking things together and seeing if the glue takes.
A few problems with your thesis, from the POV of the Civil Service and generally are:
Areas of responsibility: Acting by _fiat_ to impose personnel or even instructions is exceedingly difficult. The Civil Service, then as now, runs on paper, and on a chain of command. Stepping outside the chain of command and/or not committing actions to paper would place anyone, from an Executive Officer to a Permanent Secretary in a situation where they couldn't cover their arses from fallout, and Civil Servants learn very early to be arse-coverers _par excellence_.
Savile put in charge: This would have needed to come from a minister's office, not from a departmental head. Departmental heads facilitate and execute policy, they're not allowed to make it or break it.
Allegations so serious: While it's entirely possible that Savile and the Civil Servant knew each other as fellow paedophiles, what interest would it serve to facilitate Savile molesting adults and corpses in Broadmoor? Wouldn't it actually open the Civil Servant to unwanted scrutiny?



> In doing a bit of digging on this, I stumbled upon 2 reports in the archives that were apparently sealed for 75 years on his watch in 1988 (I think).
> 
> Ill treatment and sexual offences against mental patients under Sections 126-128 of Act, 1959-1963
> Reports on alleged incidents of illtreatment 1961-1962
> ...


 
Again, that's ministerial, not departmental.



> I'd assume they could also have influence over such things as whether or not to launch an internal inquiry to find out if there was any child abuse going on in homes it ran.


 
DoH didn't, as far as I recall, run childrens' homes. That's always been the responsibility of local authorities and (unfortunately) charities, right from the days of the workhouse (which was also used to house older orphans).
As to influence over internal inquiries, yes, a departmental head *could* influence them, from selection of the inquiry team right through to the editing of the final report.



> Also the idea that it would stand out if the head did take a particular interest in a certain facility, or instructed the personnel department to put someone in charge of a certain facility is only really a problem for someone if they're scared of being found out / if there's a risk that someone's going to report them. If they're the head of department, would juniors really consider risking their jobs to report them because they'd taken an unusual level of interest in one of the facilities the department managed?


 
From my own experience in the Civil Service, I'd say yes. First thing you learn is cover your arse. That doesn't mean necessarily reporting the person to a superior, but it does mean filing memoranda/leaving a paper trail. I know of plenty of instances from my own dept where people not only expressed concerns about our minister, but also about senior Civil Servants stepping outside the ambit of their role to facilitate demands she made (no, it wasn't Edwina Currie, and the demands weren't sexual!).



> If the guy were operating alone, or he was the most powerful involved, then maybe they would. If on the other hand he wasn't operating alone, and wasn't the most powerful person involved then he'd be much more free to act with relative impunity.
> 
> It certainly goes some way to explain the feelings that there would be no point in anyone complaining because nothing ever got done about any complaints / they were hushed up, that run through a lot of the statements made by staff from some of these places that I've read in various articles following the savile revelations.


 
But so does local management hushing up porblems because of the funds Savile raised. Occam's Razor.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 30, 2012)

> *Jimmy Savile caused concern with behaviour on visits to Prince Charles*
> 
> Former royal aide says TV presenter would greet young female assistants at St James's Palace by 'rubbing lips up their arms'


 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/29/jimmy-savile-behaviour-prince-charles?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## elbows (Oct 30, 2012)

From that article.



> Charles reportedly sent him a box of cigars and a pair of gold cufflinks on his 80th birthday with a note that read: "Nobody will ever know what you have done for this country Jimmy. This is to go some way in thanking you for that."


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 30, 2012)

free spirit said:


> _____________________________________________________________________________
> 
> There are other hints coming out at the moment, such as an aside in the Panorama report on Savile last night by Merion Jones who's Aunt ran Duncroft girls school, which he apparently visited as a kid, describing it as.
> 
> ...


 
The Telegraph is now reporting that girls at Dunford now claim that he had his own rooms on site.


----------



## elbows (Oct 30, 2012)

The police explanation for why the headmistress was never questioned is just great 

​


> A spokeswoman for Surrey Police said officers had spoken to 22 former residents of the home, and the charity Barnado's that ran the home at the time of the allegations.​She said: "Barnardo's informed us they had no record of any allegations of sexual abuse reported to staff during this period.​"A decision was made not to interview former staff unless there was evidence to suggest they witnessed abuse or were made aware of abuse at the time.​"None of the former residents spoken to during the course of the investigation indicated staff witnessed abuse and stated they had not reported abuse to any staff at the time."​


​​http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/entertainment/news/chance-to-catch-savile-was-missed-16231814.html


----------



## free spirit (Oct 31, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Savile's appointment is more likely to have come from above his pay grade, i.e. from a ministerial office (which would mean a very senior Civil Servant or a Minister pulling the strings).


As I say, I'm not particularly up on civil service grades etc. but from the telegraph article, I thought this guy was supposed to have headed up that division, and I find it a bit hard to believe that the head of division has no say over the make up of a task force to take over his divisions most high profile facility. I'm sure the minister would then have had to sign off on it.. though maybe it was just curry.



ViolentPanda said:


> You're doing it again. Rather than dispassionately assessing the evidence and finding out the responsibilities of a Civil Servant of that grade, you're just sticking things together and seeing if the glue takes.


tbh, I have tried to find out, but the division doesn't seem to still exist, neither does the department, and I couldn't find anything that told me what the structure of the department was back then, so I'm left with throwing shit at it and seeing what sticks.

As you seem to have insider knowledge from your career, if you can post up a synosis of what you think this guys actual role and responsibility and powers would be then it's assist my understanding, otherwise I'm going to be left with the impression that the head of division would have a reasonable amount of influence over the activities of that division (eta which I see you've started below thanks).



> A few problems with your thesis, from the POV of the Civil Service and generally are:
> Areas of responsibility: Acting by _fiat_ to impose personnel or even instructions is exceedingly difficult. The Civil Service, then as now, runs on paper, and on a chain of command. Stepping outside the chain of command and/or not committing actions to paper would place anyone, from an Executive Officer to a Permanent Secretary in a situation where they couldn't cover their arses from fallout, and Civil Servants learn very early to be arse-coverers _par excellence_.
> Savile put in charge: This would have needed to come from a minister's office, not from a departmental head. Departmental heads facilitate and execute policy, they're not allowed to make it or break it.


ok that helps a bit, but would the views of the head of division seriously not be taken into account at all in this process? I'd have thought the division head would have been making suggestions for the minister to rubber stamp rather than the minister actually coming up with the name themselves. TBH though whether he was the one making the suggestion or just the one accepting the suggestion without going 'hold on, you want Jimmy Saville to run broadmoor?' or the more civil service version of that.



> Allegations so serious: While it's entirely possible that Savile and the Civil Servant knew each other as fellow paedophiles, what interest would it serve to facilitate Savile molesting adults and corpses in Broadmoor? Wouldn't it actually open the Civil Servant to unwanted scrutiny?


dunno, but there are a fair few possibilities. I doubt it would have just been about helping Jimmy molest more of them for the sake of it. Maybe Savile had something on him, maybe there's more to it, or I guess, maybe if he was into this sort of thing himself he was just happy enough to turn a blind eye where others would have maybe asked some more serious questions.



> DoH didn't, as far as I recall, run childrens' homes. That's always been the responsibility of local authorities and (unfortunately) charities, right from the days of the workhouse (which was also used to house older orphans).


I might have been getting a bit mixed up, I thought some of the child abuse allegations were coming from broadmoor.



> As to influence over internal inquiries, yes, a departmental head *could* influence them, from selection of the inquiry team right through to the editing of the final report.


bingo - so some of the shit has stuck.



> But so does local management hushing up porblems because of the funds Savile raised. Occam's Razor.


maybe - I'd think that certainly would have helped provide cover.

I could see occam's razor coming down on that side in one place, one situation, but just have problems with the fact that it takes him across multiple facilities, in multiple organisations, and gave him cover from apparently up to 7 police investigations that got dropped over several decades.

I could see that sort of thing possibly happening, but then I come back to the fact that he was one of the highest profile BBC presenters at a time when the Telegraph has reported that MI5 were carrying out background checks on up to 1/3 of BBC staff, and was regularly mixing with the prime minister, and royal family, so I just can't see anyway at all that he wouldn't have been given a proper security check or several, and that these wouldn't have at least thrown up the multiple police investigations into him if not other allegations. This was the sort of stuff MI5 were supposed to be looking for (as I understand things) - anything that would make people easily blackmailable (along with political leanings etc).

Put that into the equation, and my occams razor comes back to the idea that at the very least, the BBC should have been warned by MI5 when they did their checks and found that a childrens TV presenter had multiple child abuse accusations against him. I view the fact that they apparently told nobody about this officially as fairly good evidence that MI5 at least had some sort of ulterior motive for not revealing this information.


----------



## elbows (Nov 1, 2012)

Anyone here familiar with the history of covert video footage of Max Clifford? There was a clip on youtube of him saying things about Alan Clark but its been made private since I first saw it. I was wondering what the origins of the clip were and whether this part was was known already.

Here is a different clip which also features some undercover video at points, including him going on about a groper and charity.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 1, 2012)

free spirit said:


> As I say, I'm not particularly up on civil service grades etc. but from the telegraph article, I thought this guy was supposed to have headed up that division, and I find it a bit hard to believe that the head of division has no say over the make up of a task force to take over his divisions most high profile facility. I'm sure the minister would then have had to sign off on it.. though maybe it was just curry.
> 
> 
> tbh, I have tried to find out, but the division doesn't seem to still exist, neither does the department, and I couldn't find anything that told me what the structure of the department was back then, so I'm left with throwing shit at it and seeing what sticks.
> ...


 

You're doing occam's projection. Connect all these dots properly.


----------



## elbows (Nov 1, 2012)

free spirit said:


> this is relevant
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journali...Saviles-relatives-speak-of-their-turmoil.html
> 
> ...


 
This is probably why McGinnis was banned from working with children:

http://archive.disabilitynow.org.uk/search/z06_07_Jy/arrested.shtml


----------



## elbows (Nov 2, 2012)

I have not attempted to make any judgement about the exact extend of the abuse in Jersey, but the ex-senator who made a lot of noise about it certainly raises some interesting thoughts in some of his blog posts. He might have gotten carried away for all I know, but the premise of some stuff seems reasonable if not pushed to the extreme.

For example:

http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/too-big-to-be-too-big-to-fail.html

​


> Naturally, when such a valuable “currency” exists – such powerful “dirt” to use the common phrase – it won’t only be the small, self-interested individual who will want ‘in’ on the racket; bigger, powerful entities too will want a piece of the action. Entire departments with something to hide? Suppressive police forces? Corrupt prosecutors? Politicised judiciaries? The security services? Powerful financial institutions? Organised crime? Media empires?​After all – if a person is worth being “owned”, the competition for rights of “ownership” may be intense indeed. ​
> This is why governments, oppressive regimes, security forces and mafias around the world love child abuse. They simply love it. No other criminal activity, no matter how bad, is as foul, or gives such “leverage”, such “ownership" – such control – over those who commit it. And once a person has acted so despicably, or shown an unhealthy interest in the under-age or those on the borderline, or has failed to prevent the crimes, and instead helped to conceal them – then that person is “owned”. Forever more.​Whoever holds the “currency” of your despicable secrets, owns you. ​


 
​


> Even the BBC has failed to wake up to the new reality of the internet age.​What that reality means, is that the former immense power of the media – namely, that of omission, which was always a greater power than publication – is dead. Now, any media still attempting to trade in that power only accelerates the destruction of its credibility.​


----------



## elbows (Nov 2, 2012)

http://theconversation.edu.au/jimmy-savile-gary-glitter-and-the-politics-of-paedophile-rings-10461


> My research on organised sexual abuse, in which multiple adults conspire to abuse multiple children, suggests that a culture of abuse can develop within some peer groups, institutions and even families.
> It is well recognised that commonly held views about masculinity, sexuality and power are used by offenders to legitimise child abuse. In some circumstances, the abuse of children and women can become a means of male bonding. This form of abuse is poorly understood by investigators.


----------



## ExtraRefined (Nov 2, 2012)

Newsnight reckon they've got something



> If all goes well we've got a Newsnight out tonight about a very senior political figure who is a paedophile.


https://twitter.com/iainoverton/sta...4308253033381888&tw_e=details&tw_p=tweetembed


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 2, 2012)

Weltweit - is that you?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 2, 2012)

elbows said:


> I have not attempted to make any judgement about the exact extend of the abuse in Jersey, but the ex-senator who made a lot of noise about it certainly raises some interesting thoughts in some of his blog posts. He might have gotten carried away for all I know, but the premise of some stuff seems reasonable if not pushed to the extreme.
> 
> For example:
> 
> http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/too-big-to-be-too-big-to-fail.html


 
An excellent piece i thought, even if what he says is wrong by degree, it is correct in its basic observations. Human relationships underpin all of this, even between people who are not at the pointed end of doing the abuse. We have to attempt to understand how all this works in some coherent, if not vague, structure.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 2, 2012)

free spirit said:


> As names aren't named as such, I'm hoping this is ok to copy to here. It's an article written by Simon Regan, the editor of scallywag, prior to his death, which gives a good overview of their investigations, and the subsequent conservative party cover up operation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I just realised that the conservative MP named in this article was the deputy director of the conservative party research department from 1990-96, and David Cameron worked for the same research department from 1988-93.

I'm not suggesting Cameron was involved in any cover up then, as apart from anything else, I don't think the timings match, but I do think this raises serious questions about his impartiality now when it comes to exposing the activities of someone he worked with directly for 3 years.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 3, 2012)

Cameron may not have been involved in a cover up but he almost certainly would have known about this...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 3, 2012)

This is a lady who I hadn't heard of till 5 minutes ago.

Andrea Davison.

Blew whistle on Iraq stuff and paedophilia. Has claimed asylum via Ecudor embassy for fear of her life.

seems to have known the spy who turned up dead in a suitcase.

Even the Kennedy / Stone case gets a mention in this piece.

Whatever's going on, and whoever is involved "weird" doesn't begin to cover it.

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/andrea-davison.html

This is one of things I scanned that took me there.

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/andrea-davison.html

How are we supposed to evaluate the credibility of any of this stuff? As with MSM, it's all just smoke and mirrors. Anyone could be lying through their teeth in a given instance. 

That's why we need to keep spotting out for the recurring themes - on average they are more likely to carry water.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 3, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Cameron may not have been involved in a cover up but he almost certainly would have known about this...


 
Perhaps some people have to be protected by not knowing too much, or at least not in a way that could ever be ascertained.

He could be informed of vagueries while other people do the political "wet work" (Hague has been mentioned more than once for this - NOT alluding to him as an abuser you understand, but as mentioned as complicit in cover up - for example laying down the law to a senior minister that he would be pensioned off to Europe and never work in UK politics again)

Of course, if it could be shown that some people knew too much there's always D notices for that, though it is more a judiciary thing (see Dunblane). not that the judiciary are thought to be involved in any of this either.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 3, 2012)

This is altogether fucking horrible innit


----------



## Ax^ (Nov 3, 2012)




----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

Oh I was wondering how long it would take before Andrea Davison came up. I stumbled on stuff about her the other week.

I wouldnt bother going there at all unless something more useful emerges. She has a potentially interesting past but she got done for fraud, has been described by a journalist who seems to have known her at the time of the Scott inquiry as vulnerable, seems to have a health condition which can cause mental problems, has more than one name, may have been on a leaked BNP members list, etc. So I've no intention of muddying the waters by bringing her into this picture, especially as it sounds like she only started 'whistle-blowing' when she had legal trouble involving abusing her mail dropoff service to make false passports etc.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 3, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> Cameron may not have been involved in a cover up but he almost certainly would have known about this...



Shh. That post might get you 100 hours community service


----------



## Corax (Nov 3, 2012)

I'd never heard of P.I.E. before this thread. Fucking horrifying.

Also deeply unpleasant to read that organisations like Liberty were on their side.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 3, 2012)

If anyone wants to read something that might explain the uniquely British upper and middle class attitudes to children and institutional care it might be worth reading "The Making of Them" by Nick Duffell.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Making-Them...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1351943294&sr=1-1

It helps explain the socially stunted nature of many adults that passed through these schools and institutions. There's a documentary of the same name from 20 odd years ago. This book has helped me come to terms with my childhood (and made me angry at he same time...)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Cameron may not have been involved in a cover up but he almost certainly would have known about this...


 
Or his office would have.

At least, that's how the Tories will play it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

Corax said:


> I'd never heard of P.I.E. before this thread. Fucking horrifying.
> 
> Also deeply unpleasant to read that organisations like Liberty were on their side.


 
Much as I'm loath to give succour to Harman and Hewitt, I think people need to address the P.I.E. issue in the context of the time it was spawned, and also in the context that P.I.E. sold their paedophilia as being men who wanted to have sex with mid-teenage boys, which meant some misguided support from gay activists, and it was in this context that the Council for Civil Liberties supported them. People were a little more naive about the ambit of paedophilia back then. SOme didn't realise that for some paedophiles it was infants, toddlers or primary school-age children they wanted to have sex with.


----------



## Corax (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Much as I'm loath to give succour to Harman and Hewitt, I think people need to address the P.I.E. issue in the context of the time it was spawned, and also in the context that P.I.E. sold their paedophilia as being men who wanted to have sex with mid-teenage boys, which meant some misguided support from gay activists, and it was in this context that the Council for Civil Liberties supported them. People were a little more naive about the ambit of paedophilia back then. SOme didn't realise that for some paedophiles it was infants, toddlers or primary school-age children they wanted to have sex with.


Oh, I agree with that.  The fact that the homosexual age of consent was 21 at the time is also an important piece of context.  Something similar to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", iykwim.  Nonetheless, the product of that naivety and misjudgement leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Or his office would have.
> 
> At least, that's how the Tories will play it.


 
Indeed, but given the tight knit world and the speed at which rumours and information gets around there's no way he'd not have known.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Indeed, but given the tight knit world and the speed at which rumours and information gets around there's no way he'd not have known.


 
True, but as always in such situations, "plausible deniability" comes into play.


----------



## Libertad (Nov 3, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> That's why we need to keep spotting out for the recurring themes - on average they are more likely to carry water.


 
That would depend on the interests of those who wished themes to recur. "A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes."


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 3, 2012)

Libertad said:


> That would depend on the interests of those who wished themes to recur. "A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes."



"eye of the beholder" is an issue in just about everything, it can all get like those ink blot tests I suppose, but if we don't see pattern X there's no real need to pretend it is there when we can look for something else instead.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Much as I'm loath to give succour to Harman and Hewitt, I think people need to address the P.I.E. issue in the context of the time it was spawned, and also in the context that P.I.E. sold their paedophilia as being men who wanted to have sex with mid-teenage boys, which meant some misguided support from gay activists, and it was in this context that the Council for Civil Liberties supported them. People were a little more naive about the ambit of paedophilia back then. SOme didn't realise that for some paedophiles it was infants, toddlers or primary school-age children they wanted to have sex with.


 
Much as one could go along with that, calling yourself a "paedophile information exchange" is very daft at the least if you are not actual paedophiles, which according to the UN is to do with pre-puberty and not 14/16 to 18/21 year olds (whatever the law is from place to place)


----------



## peterkro (Nov 3, 2012)

This tweet raised a grim smile:

The senior Thatcherite accused by *Newsnight* of being a*paedophile* may sue for libel. "I've never been a Thatcherite," he told friends.


----------



## Corax (Nov 3, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Yes, but only if they were investigating something where the use of a 15 year old would be needed.
> 
> ie not just for investigating the cash for questions allegations that the Guardian published.


He was almost 18 at the time, but playing the part of a 15 year old.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Much as one could go along with that, calling yourself a "paedophile information exchange" is very daft at the least if you are not actual paedophiles, which according to the UN is to do with pre-puberty and not 14/16 to 18/21 year olds (whatever the law is from place to place)


 
Back then (you're talking about late '60s/early '70s when P.I.E. got started), paedophilia was understood by most people besides health professionals to mean "Adults wanting sex with people below the age of consent". It took a couple of decades of the subject being slowly unpacked and explored by social scientists, legislators and litigators before anything like nuance was brought to the subject, unfortunately. 

That isn't to say that society was innocent about sexual abuse of children back then, but if you trawl through the media it was very much projected as a working class vice, a minority of mostly drunken fathers raping their daughters, rather than a vice of the upper echelons, even though certain historical occurrences (W.T. Stead's campaign around child prostitution being one) showed otherwise.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 3, 2012)

Thanks VP. Might there have been a point through that passage of time where someone said "let's not call it Paedophile Information Exchange" anymore?

This stuff is really haunting Harman now, and though she aint my favourite poltician by a long shot she doesn't deserve the shit being flung at her.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 3, 2012)

> *Labour Left* ‏@*LabourLeft*
> Numerous Labour/Left Wing sites were attacked last night, including ours. We are fixing the problem, but thank you for letting us know


 


> *Gracie Samuels-Pleb* ‏@*GracieSamuels*
> @*tobyornot_* @*SoniaPoulton* I don't think you are wrong & my blog along with other lefty blogs was hit by hackers yesterday! Coincidence?


 
Just  a couple of many tweets from left leaning peeps reporting their blogs/websites hacked last night.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Thanks VP. Might there have been a point through that passage of time where someone said "let's not call it Paedophile Information Exchange" anymore?
> 
> This stuff is really haunting Harman now, and though she aint my favourite poltician by a long shot she doesn't deserve the shit being flung at her.


 
IIRC P.I.E. was wound up in the mid eighties, mostly because of the principal members being nicked for sex offences, so by the time public perceptions were such that paedophilia was widely understood as meaning "sex with pre-pubescent children", P.I.E. no longer existed.

As for Harman (and Hewitt), in my opinion they're both guilty of being grossly naive and perhaps of looking at the debate around paedophilia from a legalistic and civil liberties perspective rather than from a morality-based perspective, but that's all, and those Tories currently frottaging themselves at being able to cane Harman should remind themselves how the party rallied around the likes of Harvey Proctor and made excuses for him.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 3, 2012)

> *tom_watson* ‏@*tom_watson*
> It's 10 days since I raised child abuse with the PM. Here's my thoughts on what's happened since: http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2012/11/10-days-that-shook-my-world …


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 3, 2012)

Fucking hell. It's really difficult to know how to order your thoughts about all of this now.


----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Fucking hell. It's really difficult to know how to order your thoughts about all of this now.


 
Can you expand on that? Cheers.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 3, 2012)

elbows said:


> Can you expand on that? Cheers.


 
The more stuff that gets thrown around, when stuff you might have - in any other context - dismissed as fanciful conspiraloonery starts to look like there may be threads of truth in some of it, when there are newsnight programmes going out, hinting at this or that, when the Savile stuff continues to explode and look nastier and nastier, when more and more people are implicated, when people like Watson start blogging implying a fear for his own safety, and so on ..... I'm personally finding it difficult to do anything other than sit and stare at my computer or tv screen, completely confused and frustrated and astonished, trying to balance the in-built scepticism I have wrt blindly rushing headlong into speculation based on outright conspiraloonery on the one hand, and the knowledge of how dangerous it is to dismiss things out of hand, as happened for so long in the Savile case - and the range of feelings and positions that exist in between those two extremes.

Why did you ask me to expand on that? Did you think I was referring to something other than what I just explained?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

Watson mentioning "mysterious fires" reminds me of an abuse-related case back in (I think) the early '90s down in Brighton/Hove, where a guy who'd been through the care system, followed by the sadly usual round of substance use and incarceration, had straightened himself out, had spoken to a journo from a local paper (_Brighton Argus_, I think), and had got together with some other survivors of abuse at the same institutions, and set up a shared flat with them.
The fire that killed him and his flatmates was rumoured to have been the work of people who sometimes worked for Brighton's favourite slumlord, but Mr. Highstreet wouldn't have benefited from having a rentable property razed, whereas the abusers of a group of victims who'd decided to tell their tales, and who weren't looking to make mney through compo or through the media, had everything to gain by torching the place.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 3, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> The more stuff that gets thrown around, when stuff you might have - in any other context - dismissed as fanciful conspiraloonery starts to look like there may be threads of truth in some of it, when there are newsnight programmes going out, hinting at this or that, when the Savile stuff continues to explode and look nastier and nastier, when more and more people are implicated, when people like Watson start blogging implying a fear for his own safety, and so on ..... I'm personally finding it difficult to do anything other than sit and stare at my computer or tv screen, completely confused and frustrated and astonished, trying to balance the in-built scepticism I have wrt blindly rushing headlong into speculation based on outright conspiraloonery on the one hand, and the knowledge of how dangerous it is to dismiss things out of hand, as happened for so long in the Savile case - and the range of feelings and positions that exist in between those two extremes.


 
this is pretty much what I feel. The tom watson blog post is disturbing - this is not an internet fantasist. I have bcome ever more impatient with conspira-lunacy over the years and some of these sounds simialr in the scale and scope of the accusations - but then you look at who saying this - its not David Icke and Co - its Newsnight, Michael Crick, Tom Watson.

Then I think - Saville got way with committing systamatic abuse on a horrendous scale with the tacit complicity of many institutions. Saville was rich - but was not super wealthy, and he had nothing like the power and connections of the 'fusilier'. In addition the people involved in this are less visible than Saville - so harder to interest the media in their wrong doings. What _couldn't_ these fucks get away with?

This is very disturbing shit.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> The more stuff that gets thrown around, when stuff you might have - in any other context - dismissed as fanciful conspiraloonery starts to look like there may be threads of truth in some of it, when there are newsnight programmes going out, hinting at this or that, when the Savile stuff continues to explode and look nastier and nastier, when more and more people are implicated, when people like Watson start blogging implying a fear for his own safety, and so on ..... I'm personally finding it difficult to do anything other than sit and stare at my computer or tv screen, completely confused and frustrated and astonished, trying to balance the in-built scepticism I have wrt blindly rushing headlong into speculation based on outright conspiraloonery on the one hand, and the knowledge of how dangerous it is to dismiss things out of hand, as happened for so long in the Savile case - and the range of feelings and positions that exist in between those two extremes.
> 
> Why did you ask me to expand on that? Did you think I was referring to something other than what I just explained?


 
Frankly, I think that any balanced and rational person would "find it difficult to do anything other than sit and stare at my computer or tv screen, completely confused and frustrated and astonished".
Admittedly, I'm not *completely* confused, frustrated or astonished, but I'm extremely cynical, and I've been exposed to the viler side of life more than I wanted to be. That said, I am still startled and shocked at the seeming scope of abuse, although as I said earlier in this thread, I'm not convinced of there being *a* "high level UK paedophile ring", I believe that what there is more closely resembles cells overlapping like on a Venn diagram, IYSWIM.


----------



## Corax (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Watson mentioning "mysterious fires" reminds me of an abuse-related case back in (I think) the early '90s down in Brighton/Hove, where a guy who'd been through the care system, followed by the sadly usual round of substance use and incarceration, had straightened himself out, had spoken to a journo from a local paper (_Brighton Argus_, I think), and had got together with some other survivors of abuse at the same institutions, and set up a shared flat with them.
> The fire that killed him and his flatmates was rumoured to have been the work of people who sometimes worked for Brighton's favourite slumlord, but Mr. Highstreet wouldn't have benefited from having a rentable property razed, whereas the abusers of a group of victims who'd decided to tell their tales, and who weren't looking to make mney through compo or through the media, had everything to gain by torching the place.


One of the victims from Bryn Estyn I believe. A disproportionate number of the others have died as well, sometimes in unusual circumstances.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 3, 2012)

Also the media is handling this very very quitely - 'man accuses politican of sex abuse' is a (small) sub heading on the graun website. 'victim seeks abuse investigation' is the simarlly bland sub heading on the bbc site. Meanwhile none of print papers have it on their front page - the Sun has a splash on allegations about the long dead Leonard Rossiter.  

Seeing as this story would blow hackgate and saville out of the water - what is going on here?  I'm hoping that there is some very busy digging going on behind the scenes.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Watson mentioning "mysterious fires" reminds me of an abuse-related case back in (I think) the early '90s down in Brighton/Hove, where a guy who'd been through the care system, followed by the sadly usual round of substance use and incarceration, had straightened himself out, had spoken to a journo from a local paper (_Brighton Argus_, I think), and had got together with some other survivors of abuse at the same institutions, and set up a shared flat with them.
> The fire that killed him and his flatmates was rumoured to have been the work of people who sometimes worked for Brighton's favourite slumlord, but Mr. Highstreet wouldn't have benefited from having a rentable property razed, whereas the abusers of a group of victims who'd decided to tell their tales, and who weren't looking to make mney through compo or through the media, had everything to gain by torching the place.


 
RE: The fatal Fire in Brighton - I was watching an interesting Youtube documentary on this last night.
The Johns brothers (Adrian & Lee) both claimed they were abused in Bryn Alyn Community children's home and one of their testimonies (Lee, who had then changed his surname to Homberg) later convicted John Allen (head of Bryn Alyn). Some slight suggestion they might have been bribed by him or were blackmailing him. INot sure I believe the conspiracy theories about the fire though, a lot of the stuff about Hoogstraten was about failing to install fire escapes


more info - http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/jul/28/tonythompson.theobserver


----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Why did you ask me to expand on that? Did you think I was referring to something other than what I just explained?


 
I simply wasnt sure, and I didnt want to make assumptions about what you meant. Thanks for the explanation.

One of the reasons conspiracy theories have both interested and deeply annoyed me is that a proportion of them are based on rumours and theories which, whilst not being backed by cast iron evidence in the public domain, may have a little something to them.  I wont start going on about the wider subject right now, but when it comes to child abuse & associated coverups I wont be surprised if some of what the likes of Icke has been pedalling turn out to be true. This is mostly because of the original source of some of the material, its not stuff Icke has simply made up or deduced in a faulty manner. Its stuff that mainstream journalists could only hint at at the time, but surely gossiped about among themselves, and which a satirical publication dared to run with.

The same cannot be said for all the abuse-related stuff we read about online, a proportion of which is down to mental health issues, other agendas and also at times attitudes towards homosexuality, both historically and now.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Watson mentioning "mysterious fires" reminds me of an abuse-related case back in (I think) the early '90s down in Brighton/Hove, where a guy who'd been through the care system, followed by the sadly usual round of substance use and incarceration, had straightened himself out, had spoken to a journo from a local paper (_Brighton Argus_, I think), and had got together with some other survivors of abuse at the same institutions, and set up a shared flat with them.
> The fire that killed him and his flatmates was rumoured to have been the work of people who sometimes worked for Brighton's favourite slumlord, but Mr. Highstreet wouldn't have benefited from having a rentable property razed, whereas the abusers of a group of victims who'd decided to tell their tales, and who weren't looking to make mney through compo or through the media, had everything to gain by torching the place.


There are supposed links between that fire and the north wales Cheshire stuff - if you mean the one where 4 or 5 were people killed that is. I've not posted the links/story before as i haven't been able to find anything to back it up beyond what could well simply be paranoid sites leaping to conclusions (and i sort of forgot about it until now as well).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> There are supposed links between that fire and the north wales Cheshire stuff - if you mean the one where 4 or 5 were people killed that is. I've not posted the links/story before as i haven't been able to find anything to back it up beyond what could well simply be paranoid sites leaping to conclusions (and i sort of forgot about it until now as well).


 
Yeah, it was the one where 5 people were killed.


----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Also the media is handling this very very quitely - 'man accuses politican of sex abuse' is a (small) sub heading on the graun website. 'victim seeks abuse investigation' is the simarlly bland sub heading on the bbc site. Meanwhile none of print papers have it on their front page - the Sun has a splash on allegations about the long dead Leonard Rossiter.
> 
> Seeing as this story would blow hackgate and saville out of the water - what is going on here? I'm hoping that there is some very busy digging going on behind the scenes.


 
The mirror were running it quite prominently on their website earlier, not sure if thats still the case.

At best we might hope the lack of interest is just down to a lack of name. But the tories who came out and started going on about Peter Morrison didnt exactly cause the shitstorm we might have expected.

I dont know how much it matters that the stuff is historical, I have a fear it might matter quite a bit more to peoples interest levels than those hoping for the entire Thatcher era tory regime to be completely tainted presently anticipate. Having studied the twitter rumour frenzy a fair bit recently, there are a lot of people expecting a current name, and its not clear how much of a shit they will give if it turns out to be someone they've never heard of.


----------



## Corax (Nov 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yeah, it was the one where 5 people were killed.


Five abuse victims, and a health worker also.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 3, 2012)

Any idea why _Dunblane_ keeps surfacing too in the context of this investigation?


----------



## where to (Nov 3, 2012)

That seems to be the conspiraloon lot conflating two issues.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 3, 2012)

where to said:


> That seems to be the conspiraloon lot conflating two issues.


Okay, thanks.

I didn't know this though and seeing as it's on a wiki-page can't confirm it:


> There were complaints to police regarding Hamilton's behaviour towards the young boys who attended the youth clubs he directed. Complaints had been made of him having taken photographs of semi-naked boys without parental consent.[8]
> Hamilton had been a Scout leader with the 4th/6th Stirling and 24th Stirlingshire troops of the Scout Association. Several complaints were made about his leadership, including two occasions when Scouts were forced to sleep with Hamilton in his van during hill-walking expeditions. Hamilton's Scout Warrant was withdrawn on 13 May 1974, with the County Commissioner stating that he was "suspicious of his moral intentions towards boys".[9]
> 
> He claimed in letters that rumours about him led to the failure of his shop business in 1993, and in the last months of his life he complained again that his attempts to organise a boys' club were subject to persecution by local police and the scout movement. Among those to whom he complained were Queen Elizabeth and local Member of Parliament, Michael Forsyth. In the 1980s, another MP, George Robertson, who resided in Dunblane, had complained to Forsyth about Hamilton's local boys' club, which his son had attended. On the day following the massacre, Robertson spoke of having argued with Hamilton "in my own home".[10]
> ...


----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> I didn't know this though and seeing as it's on a wiki-page can't confirm it:


 
Wikipedia tends to have references at the bottom of the page. In this case its Hansard:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199596/cmhansrd/vo960314/debtext/60314-05.htm


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 3, 2012)

elbows said:


> Wikipedia tends to have references at the bottom of the page. In this case its Hansard:
> 
> http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199596/cmhansrd/vo960314/debtext/60314-05.htm


 
Err yes I know and I saw that Hansard reference thank you. I wasn't just refering to that link, I was talking about all of the info given.


----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

edit - never mind.


----------



## elbows (Nov 3, 2012)

Has this come up here before?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2000/feb/21/parliament.uk?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487




> Monday 21 February 2000 15.01 GMT
> 
> An MP yesterday threatened to use parliamentary privilege to reveal the names of at least six more suspected child sex abusers linked to the north Wales care home scandal.
> Martyn Jones, Labour MP for Clwyd South, believes that last week's Waterhouse report did not uncover the full extent of the crimes. He said there were still people named by known victims of the care home abusers who had not been properly investigated.
> ...


----------



## kenny g (Nov 3, 2012)

Shocked that Tom O'Carrol the former head of the paedophile internet exchange is now out of prison, publishing "Dangerous Books Ltd" https://www.duedil.com/company/06992707/dangerous-books-limited and is brazen enough to have his own website http://whois.domaintools.com/dangerousbooks.co.uk hxxp://www.dangerousbooks.co.uk/ The last arrest he was caught trying to supply child porn to an undercover policeman in association with a millionaire ex vicar. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventry_warwickshire/6196811.stm


----------



## free spirit (Nov 3, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I just realised that the conservative MP named in this article was the deputy director of the conservative party research department from 1990-96, and David Cameron worked for the same research department from 1988-93.
> 
> I'm not suggesting Cameron was involved in any cover up then, as apart from anything else, I don't think the timings match, but I do think this raises serious questions about his impartiality now when it comes to exposing the activities of someone he worked with directly for 3 years (if there was anything to be exposed).


 
I've done some more digging into this, and there's actually another explanation for why this person might have wanted to get hold of the scallywag files (taken from his own website so I assume it's ok to post, though prob best not to actually use his name still).



> In 1994, person x, who was later to become a Conservative MP, used his skills in strategic studies to put_Scallywag_out of business. He was understandably aggrieved by its wholly false accusations – that he was preparing a dossier on the (non-existent) homosexual activities of Tony Blair, then leader of the Labour opposition, and that he was himself a secret homosexual, transvestite and frequenter of male dens of iniquity who used women from escort agencies to accompany him to political events – but _Scallywag_'s editor, Simon Regan, who was living on income support and disability benefit, made it clear that neither he nor the magazine was worth suing.
> 
> However, when x denied these allegations, _Scallywag_ added insult to injury by accusing him of lying, leaving him with the problem of how to nail these demonstrably false claims to protect his prospects of remaining a parliamentary candidate. Either he had to tolerate them, running the risk of a whispering campaign, or he had to sue for libel without piling up huge costs that would be irrecoverable from an assetless libeller.
> 
> X decided to sue the printer, six distributors and two retailers and in the end he recovered £39,500 damages plus a much larger sum in costs. The printer and distributors could have been in little doubt as to the libellous content of _Scallywag_. x supplied details of the magazine's distributors and printers to former police superintendent Gordon Anglesea who, as we saw in Chapter 6, had also been libelled by _Scallywag_, and he too sued. x was in turn sued by "Scallywag Ltd" for malicious falsehood, but after he defended the action as a litigant in person without incurring costs that claim was not pursued. Shortly afterwards the assetless company was struck off the register of companies.


 
So Scallywag had actually made accusations against him, which he'd successfully sued for, and was actually the person finally responsibile for killing scallywag off.

This would potentially give him motivation for getting his hands on scallywags files, BUT it potentially also might give Simon Regan reason to embellish what he later says about X.

This from Regan's wiki page also gives me pause for thought when it comes to Regan's credibility


> In his final years Regan devoted himself to propagating his belief that Diana, Princess of Wales had been killed in a conspiracy.


 
I was struggling to explain a few things about this, not least of which is how come regan hadn't been sued again for that article given that it's listed as having been written on 2000.

This has led me to doing some digging on the web, and to me, it looks as if this entire PEBPR website was set up in September 2012, so just before the saville scandal broke, which to me means that either it was set up by someone aware that the saville scandal was about to break, and wanting to ensure all these old articles had a home and could be easily found when it all kicked off for legitimate reasons, or there were more nefarious reasons for it being set up. Check the earliest dates on these links, plus way back when machine has nothing at all on them.

http://worldblogofblogs.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=http://pebpr.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.alexa.com/site/linksin/pebpr.blogspot.co.uk

eta - also on that world of blogs post are links to the aangirfin blogspot site, but alexa gives links for that site dating back to earlier in 2012


----------



## free spirit (Nov 3, 2012)

I'm fucked if I know what to think here, other than that there's fuck loads of sculduggery going on, and nothing's quite what it seems to be.

Also this stuff's been going on for decades, and either simon regan was completely off his rocker, or there was something that made him pursue this until his death despite the fact that it had bankrupted him.

Him and several other journos who seem to have looked into this in a serious way in the 90s, and seemed pretty sure the allegations had a sound basis.


----------



## Louloubelle (Nov 3, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> The more stuff that gets thrown around, when stuff you might have - in any other context - dismissed as fanciful conspiraloonery starts to look like there may be threads of truth in some of it


 
The problem with a lot of conspiraloonacy as far as I see it is that _some_ of the conspiracy theories closely resemble actual phenomena in real life, only with added lizards, Satanists, UFOs, etc.  The worst problem to arise from them is that they throw people off the scent of some things that are really happening, while the perpetrators hide in plain sight and able able to dismiss any talk of impropriety by pointing and laughing at all the conspiraloons and their paranoid agendas.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 3, 2012)

I've just remembered some tales a mate of mine told me while he lived down there that had come from his lass who'd been working as a stripper in the area for several years, including at private events involving several members of the upper echelons of a neighbouring police force to the one related to the north wales kids homes abuse.

These girls were over aged, but late teens / early 20's at best, and IIRC there was a fair amount of open kinkiness involved.

So I can well believe that if any of them had been involved in anything involving under aged kids, then they'd have had enough dirt on all the others to ensure that it got covered up even if not all of them had been involved.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 3, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I reckon this telegraph article from a few years ago belongs in this thread as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


The secret state is not concerned about the welfare of children, remember Kincora ? Kids in homes are of no value.

Savile was an open secret.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 3, 2012)

North Wales Police/Gwynedd Constabulary.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 3, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Would it have been Dyfed-Powys police involved in the welsh abuse scandal and being accused of having high ranking members involved?
> 
> If so, I've just remembered some tales a mate of mine told me while he lived down there that had come from his lass who'd been working as a stripper in the area for several years, including at private events involving several members of the upper echelons of Dyfed Powys police.
> 
> ...


 

Where people have unlimited power over children, there will always be abuse. Abusers are attracted to such situations.  I was at an industrial school, I was the victim of much sadism and abuse. I still have the scars on my back where staff got older kids to beat me on my back with a belt while they jerked off and worse. It left me numb inside for many years, I had panic attacks, I could not deal with crowds, intimacy or trust anyone. Many turned to drink to help them get through their adult lives after a childhood that left them broken and then being cast out into the world with nothing.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> North Wales Police/Gwynedd Constabulary.


ta.

fwiw, I think I'd be remembering it right in saying that all this took place in a masonic lodge as well. 

It may not be directly related, but goes to illustrate the sort of things that were still going on in a neighbouring force not that many years ago.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

where to said:


> That seems to be the conspiraloon lot conflating two issues.


 
Yep, there have been consistent attempts to place Hamilton inside a paedophile ring made up of local and regional dignitaries, consistent attempts to construct a case for Hamilton having been able to do his "boy's clubs" untroubled by the police due to him being a Freemason (he wasn't, as far as can be ascertained) or "associated with powerful Masons" (he knew a few lodge masters, the lowest rung on the power ladder of regional Masonry). 15 years, and the Icke-ites and other members of the wibblehead tendency haven't been able to stand any of that stuff up, even though they've supposedly accessed private records.
Of course, the fact that the private records they've accessed don't contain evidence for their loonspud theories doesn't mean that they were wrong! Oh no, it means that the evil masons must have *hidden* the evidence and deliberately tried to mislead the courageous spongeheads into believing they were wrong!


----------



## free spirit (Nov 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> North Wales Police/Gwynedd Constabulary.


I just thought I'd better remove the name of the force involved, seeing as I've not had permission to make that public, and AFAIK she's moved on from that life now and may well not welcome having to go to court in order to stop me / urban getting sued for libeling a police force.

It's a proper minefield all this.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> The secret state is not concerned about the welfare of children, remember Kincora ? Kids in homes are of no value.
> 
> Savile was an open secret.


 
Pal, the overt state isn't concerned about the welfare of children, let alone the secret state.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Where people have unlimited power over children, there will always be abuse. Abusers are attracted to such situations. I was at an industrial school, I was the victim of much sadism and abuse. I still have the scars on my back where staff got older kids to beat me on my back with a belt while they jerked off and worse. It left me numb inside for many years, I had panic attacks, I could not deal with crowds, intimacy or trust anyone. Many turned to drink to help them get through their adult lives after a childhood that left them broken and then being cast out into the world with nothing.


I don't quite know what to say to this that won't sound completely trite, but I'm sorry you had to endure that as a kid.

Did any of the staff involved ever get done for what they got up to? I'm assuming not.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Also this stuff's been going on for decades, and either simon regan was completely off his rocker, or there was something that made him pursue this until his death despite the fact that it had bankrupted him.



It can be a bit of both. The question is whether any personal issues they have are simply making them willing to take risks other journalists wont, or whether it also affects their judgement when forming a picture of the truth. There is also a question about whether such people are used by others once their willingness to touch untouchable stories is well established.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> It can be a bit of both. The question is whether any personal issues they have are simply making them willing to take risks other journalists wont, or whether it also affects their judgement when forming a picture of the truth. There is also a question about whether such people are used by others once their willingness to touch untouchable stories is well established.


In his case it also looks like he was deliberately screwed at least once to divert attention from the real story


----------



## Corax (Nov 4, 2012)

Corax said:


> One of the victims from Bryn Estyn I believe. A disproportionate number of the others have died as well, sometimes in unusual circumstances.


Further to this, I _think_ all five of the abuse victims that died in that fire were from Bryn Estyn.  Not 100% though, as the wording of what I've read's slightly ambiguous.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 4, 2012)

c grade UK celebs being hunted down could be a distraction from the real or much bigger story.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> c grade UK celebs being hunted down could be a distraction from the real or much bigger story.


 
I know what you mean, but we do need to remember that when it comes to victims there is no A, B or C list.

All the same some were suspicious that the sun were up to this yesterday.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 4, 2012)

If Tom's into you know two things, it goes right to the highest parts of UK society, the story ain't going away.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 4, 2012)

Corax said:


> Further to this, I _think_ all five of the abuse victims that died in that fire were from Bryn Estyn. Not 100% though, as the wording of what I've read's slightly ambiguous.


Bryn Alyn rather than Bryn Esyn for one of the victims, another one who suvived the fire died of a drug overdose later. Watch the YouTube clip I posted last page. Also some info here - http://newsconfidential.com/FS/FS_Story.php?RequestID=32920


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> c grade UK celebs being hunted down could be a distraction from the real or much bigger story.


 
Exactly, so far we have had the arrest of Glitter and Starr, the two names that were already in the public domain. They are being thrown to the lions for consumption while the shredders are busy the length of Whitehall.


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2012)

When they throw us an MP or cabinet minister we will know that the police that streted to take this seriously.
Thing is, of this goes to the top, involves MI5 and their like turning a blind eye, then it is more than likely that we will never hear the truth even of there was a concerted attempt to discover it, which I doubt.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 4, 2012)

> *Chris Bryant* ‏@*ChrisBryantMP*
> Cameron won't be doing PMQs for three weeks - how convenient!


----------



## kenny g (Nov 4, 2012)

Precisely, I expect we will never find out the full story of the going ons in glencoe.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

Chris Bryants tweet is probably in relations to Leveson, phone hacking etc.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 4, 2012)

*tom_watson* ‏@*tom_watson* 
Words I never thought I'd say: Thank you Daily Star Sunday. Really appreciate you being so strong on this. http://www.dailystar.co.uk/starsays/view/


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Chris Bryants tweet is probably in relations to Leveson, phone hacking etc.


 
There is a lot going on at the moment, yes.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

> The children's commissioner for Wales has said a new inquiry should be held into allegations that a senior Tory was involved in a paedophile ring three decades ago in order to avoid suggestions of a cover-up.
> Keith Towler's intervention came after a victim of the north Wales care home scandal in the 1970s said he and others had been "swept under the carpet" despite a three-year inquiry in the late 1990s.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/n...oner-wales-abuse-inquiry?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20196086




> Mr Towler told the BBC News Channel "What Steve Messham is telling us are... there are things he wanted to say... that for one reason or another, he wasn't able to say... if there are issues there for the police to investigate, then that needs to be investigated."
> He said he would be writing to the first minister in Wales "as the children's commissioner to say... I'm concerned about what Steve Messham is saying and I want to make sure a full inquiry takes place to make sure that the evidence that he wants to give can be given."
> On the claims surrounding the politician, who has not been publicly named, Mr Towler said: "Sometimes when people move to protect individuals or institutions, they do so at the expense of victims and that is unacceptable."
> A Downing Street spokesman said: "Allegations of crimes should be reported to the police and fully investigated.
> "If someone is concerned that an allegation was reported in the past but not fully investigated, they should raise this with the police or relevant authority so that they can look again at what happened."


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2012)

I wonder if the independent report that Clywd Council commissioned but decided not to publish (due to their insurers Municipal Mutual/Zurich Municipal refusing to allow it) is ever going to get an airing? Is anyone pushing for this?


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if the independent report that Clywd Council commissioned but decided not to publish (due to their insurers Municipal Mutual/Zurich Municipal refusing to allow it) is ever going to get an airing? Is anyone pushing for this?


 
Interviews I've seen recently suggest it was pulped to protect the councils insurance. All copies were numbered.


----------



## Corax (Nov 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if the independent report that Clywd Council commissioned but decided not to publish (due to their insurers Municipal Mutual/Zurich Municipal refusing to allow it) is ever going to get an airing? Is anyone pushing for this?


Numbered copies were all pulped, so that would depend on the chance of someone having made a sneaky copy wouldn't it?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2012)

That or the independent investigators having kept a/multiple copies themselves before handing it over for publication.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That or the independent investigators having kept a/multiple copies themselves before handing it over for publication.


 
Or perhaps solicitors or insurers offices.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Or perhaps solicitors or insurers offices.


Yep, remember, this was the early 90s - it's not like computers and email etc didn't exist.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

I cant see how the present situation with certain names is sustainable, even the likes of Monbiot and Sally Bercow are bringing up a name on Twitter, albeit without mentioning the context.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

OK clearly the distribution of the Jillings report did not remain secure at the time:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/j...ns-homes-sex-case-may-be-shelved-1335761.html



> The Secretary of State for Wales, William Hague, last night denounced the saga of the report, a copy of which was obtained by the Independent, as "a botched exercise which has raised more doubts than it has resolved".


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2012)

Seems that there must be copies as judges previously ordered parts of it to be released after the original suppression in order to allow court cases to go ahead - i expect it was this sort of mess that led to the waterhouse report being established by Hague after he seemed to try to get a version published after this ruling.


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2012)

The Children's Commissioner for Wales is supporting calling for inquiry:

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.co...oner-for-wales-backs-calls-for-abuse-inquiry/


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2012)

Reading through this long and rather complacent piece by Richard Webster suggest that the Jillings report basically says there was no paedo ring, only two 'evil men' and that this backed up the previous police investigation which led to two (minor) convictions despite the reports authors being prepared through one failing or another to be only "inclined them to see evidence only of bad practice."


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> I cant see how the present situation with certain names is sustainable, even the likes of Monbiot and Sally Bercow are bringing up a name on Twitter, albeit without mentioning the context.


 
Bercow is mentioning more names than 1. and it is quite clear the context she is mentioning them when she lists them along side Savile, Glitter and Starr. She includes one name that I suspect is the name Davidson was alluding to last week, but isnt the person I thought he was alluding to!


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2012)

Sorry just reread and it wasnt Bercow mentioninbg those names it was someone who tagged her in tweet, but the names mentioned are bringing up a few mentions!!!!


----------



## where to (Nov 4, 2012)

The failed reality tv personality is being asked about this on Twitter and is dismissing the allegations. By engaging with the story I think he is leaving himself wide open to the press running a story on his comments, if not explicit then a vague denial article.

One way or another the genie is getting out of the bottle.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Reading through this long and rather complacent piece by Richard Webster suggest that the Jillings report basically says there was no paedo ring, only two 'evil men' and that this backed up the previous police investigation which led to two (minor) convictions despite the reports authors being prepared through one failing or another to be only "inclined them to see evidence only of bad practice."


 
I dont think he said that. From what I can tell the article does not say that the Jillings report said there was no ring and just a few evil men, it was the police investigation that said that.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

Corax said:


> Numbered copies were all pulped, so that would depend on the chance of someone having made a sneaky copy wouldn't it?


I thought the independent had a copy, which they'd then sourced a whole string of articles from that pretty much led to the later inquiry.

So presumably the independent could publish the report if they had some balls.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I thought the independent had a copy, which they'd then sourced a whole string of articles from that pretty much led to the later inquiry.
> 
> So presumably the independent could publish the report if they had some balls.


 
Given that they already lost a libel case years ago due to articles likely based on the report, I'm not really expecting that to happen.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Given that they already lost a libel case years ago due to articles likely based on the report, I'm not really expecting that to happen.


possibly not, but I'd expect they're now revisiting those libel cases to see if any new evidence might emerge that might help them get their money back

do you have links to those cases at all btw? It's really hard trying to pull up links from back then, and getting worse as google's getting more and more crowded out with more recent posts and threads like these around the web.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

Richard Websters stuff really should be consumed as part of a balanced diet, its a shame he wasnt much good at being concise.

Its interesting to note that the works of Normal Cohn dealing with conspiracy theories and persecutorial fanaticism seem to have inspired Webster. In this sense Richard Webster is approaching things from an angle that many of us on these forums have tended to share to one extent or another in the past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Cohn


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

free spirit said:


> see if any new evidence might emerge


 
Well thats the problem with the whole business really. I suspect the chances of new evidence emerging that goes beyond the sort of witnesses we already know about are rather slim. Evidence of a coverup at some level, or of particular peoples known lifestyles, character assassinations, etc are perhaps more likely. The golden egg would be a confession from someone involved at some level at some point, but such things are pretty rare unless a variety of powerful forces become realigned to expose a truth and someone is willing to sacrifice themselves for some higher cause.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 4, 2012)

Fellows did an vid/interview with UK Column on the 25/10.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

I've had a read through some of Richard Wbesters stuff, and he does seem to make some valid points, but also seems to have decided that basically a lot of the kids must have been lying because they were offered compensation.

From what I read this really is the essence of his argument, and it's a badly flawed thesis, as it misses the point that both those who had actually suffered abuse, and those who hadn't and decided to make it up to get a share of the compensation were apparently told about the compensation. He seems to assume that the vast majority of them were lying and only in it for the money, which is a massive assumption to make with virtually no evidence to base it on.

In light of what's now coming out, it seems increasingly clear that he called it wrong - or at least got the proportions very wrong.

I also think that mentioning of the likely compensation by the investigators was such bad protocol that for me it looks extremely dodgy - as in likely to have been done deliberately to provide a smokescreen of reasonable doubt behind which those who actually were guilty could hide.


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

Messhams been talking to the Sunday Express:

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/356021/Tory-rapist-will-be-named




> Steven Messham will tell Scotland Yard this week that one of his abusers was a key member of the Tory Party. He was contacted by detectives yesterday following a Newsnight report into allegations of an elite child sex ring that preyed on youngsters at a North Wales care home.
> The highly respected politician, who enjoyed close ties to Margaret Thatcher’s government, was not named in the programme because of legal constraints.
> However, Mr Messham told the Sunday Express the identity of his alleged abuser. He said the sexual assaults spanned 18 months from 1977 when he was 13.
> He said he was:
> ...


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I've had a read through some of his stuff, and he does seem to make some valid points, but also seems to have decided that basically a lot of the kids must have been lying because they were offered compensation.
> 
> From what I read this really is the essence of his argument, and it's a badly flawed thesis, as it misses the point that both those who had actually suffered abuse, and those who hadn't and decided to make it up to get a share of the compensation were apparently told about the compensation. He seems to assume that the vast majority of them were lying and only in it for the money, which is a massive assumption to make with virtually no evidence to base it on.
> 
> ...


 
I've said before that he err'd in the other direction, but I'd still be a fool not to pay attention to many of the points he raised.

As for the police, when someone broke my nose many years ago the police mentioned compensation to encourage me to give a statement, and when it initially happened they had a name of someone they were hoping had done it, and seemed a little sad that the actual perpetrator was a different person.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> I've said before that he err'd in the other direction, but I'd still be a fool not to pay attention to many of the points he raised.
> 
> As for the police, when someone broke my nose many years ago the police mentioned compensation to encourage me to give a statement, and when it initially happened they had a name of someone they were hoping had done it, and seemed a little sad that the actual perpetrator was a different person.


there is also the potential that it was just the usual cack handed police attempt to fit up the ones they thought were guilty, but given that there are allegations circulating that top local plod were among those named, I think it's fairly plausible that they'd use this as a method of ensuring the sufficient doubt was cast on all statements made for them to have little credibilty in court, and ensure that a couple of expendable scapegoats got sent down.

It's probably about the last approach available to them once something like this blows up to the extent where it can't just be swept under the carpet, the bonus being that they get away with it while being seen publicly to be doing everything possible, leaving no stone unturned, and even bending the rules in their efforts to ensure the dirty pedos get sent down.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Messhams been talking to the Sunday Express:
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/356021/Tory-rapist-will-be-named


 
His followers on Twitter have gone up to over 600.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

> The Bureau’s Angus Stickler reported on the case in 2000. In the BBC investigation he interviewed some of the victims and uncovered allegations of a paedophile ring involving businessmen, *police* and a senior public figure, which abused the children from the care homes.


 


> ‘If someone is concerned that an allegation was reported in the past but not fully investigated, they should raise this with the *police* or relevant authority so that they can look again at what happened.’


 
can anyone spot the flaw in downing street's statement?

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.co...oner-for-wales-backs-calls-for-abuse-inquiry/


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

free spirit said:


> do you have links to those cases at all btw? It's really hard trying to pull up links from back then, and getting worse as google's getting more and more crowded out with more recent posts and threads like these around the web.


 
Besides the various Webster articles, most of what I can find easily so far is from after the case.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/libel-case-witness-found-hanged-1571222.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/north-wales-police-chief-on-sex-charge-1283203.html

A failed attempt by Regan to go after a Solicitor acting for Anglesey who called Regan a lying criminal:

http://www.thelawyer.com/spawning-libel-actions/86513.article
http://www.thelawyer.com/litigator039s-view/77985.article
https://www.lawcareers.net/Courses/News/20032000-Licence-to-Libel-New-privileges-for-solicitors


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2012)

Dean Nelson, the journalist Webster was particularly scathing of, shows up as the star of this particular page. I've not done anything to work out what the following is a part of yet but am posting the link now before I forget:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmstnprv/89/8922.htm


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2012)

where to said:


> The failed reality tv personality is being asked about this on Twitter and is dismissing the allegations. By engaging with the story I think he is leaving himself wide open to the press running a story on his comments, if not explicit then a vague denial article.
> 
> One way or another the genie is getting out of the bottle.


 
Interesting what you find when you know the name of that failed reality personality and google it along with the word paedophile!

Much of the stuff coming out may be the work of the conspiraloons, but fuck me everyone connects with everyone else, this thing is far bigger tha we are being told.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Given that they already lost a libel case years ago due to articles likely based on the report, I'm not really expecting that to happen.


the libel case was in 1994, the council report was not published in 1996.

But I'm sure the earlier libel trial did result in the indy being a lot more careful in 96.

In the 94 libel trial several witnesses directly testified in court, but apparently were disbelieved by the jury. Can anyone find any evidence of them being prosecuted for perjury?


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 4, 2012)

free spirit said:


> possibly not, but I'd expect they're now revisiting those libel cases to see if any new evidence might emerge that might help them get their money back
> 
> do you have links to those cases at all btw? It's really hard trying to pull up links from back then, and getting worse as google's getting more and more crowded out with more recent posts and threads like these around the web.


 
There is a whole section on the Anglesea Libel trial in the report, including assessments of the witness evidence. I posted it on the other thread -
http://tna.europarchive.org/20040216040105/http://www.doh.gov.uk/lostincare/20111.htm



> *Assessment of the evidence of witness B*
> 9.32 It would be inappropriate to prolong this report by a detailed analysis of the credibility of each of these witnesses but it is necessary to deal specifically with B and C. We are satisfied that B has suffered a long history of sexual abuse before, during and after his period in care and, to a significant extent until he left care, of physical abuse. As a result he has been, and remains, severely damaged psychologically; he has been greatly affected also by the sudden death of his young wife in very sad circumstances on 1 April 1992, leaving B with a very young child to bring up. A major problem is that the damage is reflected in B's personality in such a way that he presents himself as an unreliable witness by the standards that an ordinary member of a jury is likely to apply. Thus, he is highly sensitive to any criticism and explosive in his reactions, particularly to any suggestion of sexual deviation on his part, although he told us frankly that there was a period in his youth when, because of the persistent sexual abuse to which he had been subjected, he began to question his own sexuality. He has been described also as manipulative and there are many matters on which he is particularly vulnerable in cross-examination.
> 
> 9.33 One of these matters, which inevitably leads to prolonged cross-examination, is the sequence in which his complaints of abuse have emerged. It is not unusual for a complainant of sexual abuse or a child complainant generally to deny at first that any abuse has occurred but in B's case we have had before us a plethora of statements. These included eight main statements made to the police between 30 March 1992 and 8 February 1993 but B alleges that the police have failed to produce six other statements that he made to them. Rightly or wrongly, he complains also of insensitive behaviour, and in some cases, downright misconduct on the part of a small number of officers involved in interviewing him. In view of the potential difficulties, B was permitted exceptionally to draft his own statement to the Tribunal rather than be interviewed by a member of the Tribunal's team. The statement runs to 48 pages, in the course of which B alleges that he has been sexually abused by 32 persons (eight of whom are not named) and otherwise physically abused by 22. It is not surprising in the circumstances that B's recollection, in a limited number of instances, was shown by contemporary documents to be incorrect.
> ...


 
If the CPS decided his evidence couldn't be used to prosecute an offender in 1993 then why would it be different now?

- and maybe why the BBC don't want to rely on him if it comes to their own libel trial

If anyone missed the Richard Webster link I posted on the other thread -
http://www.richardwebster.net/whatthebbcdidnottellus.html


> The next witness to appear on the programme was Steven Messham. He said that on one occasion, when he had been in the sick-bay with blood pouring from his mouth, he had been buggered by Howarth as he lay in bed. He said that on another occasion he was asked to take a hamper of food to Howarth’s flat, where he was buggered by Howarth over the kitchen table.
> 
> What the BBC did not tell us was that Messham claims he was sexually abused by no less than 49 different people. He also says he has been physically abused by 26 people. In 1994 the Crown Prosecution Service declined to bring his allegations against Howarth to court. None of his allegations has ever resulted in a conviction. In 1995 one of his most serious sexual allegations was rejected by a jury after barristers argued that it was a transparent fabrication.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 4, 2012)

Proper can of worms.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Dean Nelson, the journalist Webster was particularly scathing of, shows up as the star of this particular page. I've not done anything to work out what the following is a part of yet but am posting the link now before I forget:
> 
> http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmstnprv/89/8922.htm


 
OK I have determined that this was a result of Dean Nelson doing an investigation into the pay of some people by parliament when they may actually have been doing some Labour party campaign work. This lead him to complain to the Parliamentary Standards committee about John Reid and another MP. Part of Reids responses to the commissioner during the initial investigation involved attacking Nelsons conduct, and this included mentioning that Nelson was criticised by an inquiry into childrens homes in South Wales:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmstnprv/89/8953.htm

In the end the commissioner concluded that there was not evidence of a sufficient standard to uphold the complaint against Reid and the other MP.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/643832.stm



> Victims of the "appalling suffering" uncovered by the UK's largest child abuse inquiry have given its findings a guarded welcome.
> 
> Lost in Care - the report of the Waterhouse inquiry into abuse in north Wales children's homes - revealed "appalling mistreatment" of children in care and made over 70 recommendations for improvement including the appointment of a children's commissioner for Wales.


 



> But victim Timothy Williams gave the findings a guarded welcome.
> 
> "As long as the inquiry report isn't allowed to gather dust in Whitehall somewhere and they act on the implications of the report - and good comes of it - then it will have gone far enough," he said.
> 
> ...


 
edited to say that Im sure there is a good chance this article has already been mentioned in the past, and that I am in danger of going round in circles.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 5, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> There is a whole section on the Anglesea Libel trial in the report, including assessments of the witness evidence. I posted it on the other thread -
> http://tna.europarchive.org/20040216040105/http://www.doh.gov.uk/lostincare/20111.htm


ta.

So my reading of that would be that both the opinion of this inquiry and the Jury in the libel inquiry boils down to them arbitrarily deciding that the witnesses were unreliable because there were some minor indescrepencies in their evidence and they'd not presented themselves well, and had a bit of a dubious life story since leaving care, and that the copper's evidence was reliable because he was a copper who presented himself well, despite several indescrepencies in his evidence.

6 witnesses against one and the one is believed because he's a copper.

says it all really.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 5, 2012)

I can't find it now, but I read a legal article about the libel case making the point that the burden of proof the papers needed to win that case was at least as high as the CPS would have needed to gain a criminal conviction.

The papers however don't have the advantage of having any powers of arrest, powers to force an interview with a witness / suspect etc so have to produce the same burden of proof, but with one arm tied behind their backs.


----------



## Kippa (Nov 5, 2012)

The papers do have unofficial sources and means, which whilst not breaking the law, might be bending them ever so slightly.  As a point of contact some sources could possibly be more likely to talk unofficially off the record to a journalist, than a copper on the record, which could lead to new lines of enquiry.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 5, 2012)

Journalist  whistleblower in Mirror...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/opinion/news-opinion/eileen-fairweather-journalist-who-helped-1416666

She leaked the Jillings report which led to the Waterhouse abuse inquiry

'Victims say that a key figure in North Wales police was an abuser too and led a cover-up, while social services ignored complaints, victimised concerned staff, and aggressively suppressed 12 increasingly critical inquiry reports.

The outstandingly brave chairman of the council's social services committee, Labour councillor Malcolm King, was threatened by police, the council and their insurers with prison, bankruptcy, libel suits and forfeiting his home if he leaked the final devastating report by John Jillings to the Press.

Only 12 copies of the Jillings report were published and each was watermarked so the source of any leak could be identified. All were later pulped.

I wrote out the report's 300 pages by hand, to protect my source. It took me three days and, by agreement, I anonymously fed different sections to different papers. So did another whistleblower.

The resulting media firestorm led to the Waterhouse Inquiry.

Judge Waterhouse was horrified by the survivors' testimony, and his 1,000-page report is highly regarded.

Yet what people abused in these recurring care scandals really want is proper police investigation and arrests.

But to this day there has been no response to calls by the North Wales victims for a new investigation by an outside police force.

Steven's story makes clear why one is needed.'


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> RE: The fatal Fire in Brighton - I was watching an interesting Youtube documentary on this last night.
> The Johns brothers (Adrian & Lee) both claimed they were abused in Bryn Alyn Community children's home and one of their testimonies (Lee, who had then changed his surname to Homberg) later convicted John Allen (head of Bryn Alyn). Some slight suggestion they might have been bribed by him or were blackmailing him. INot sure I believe the conspiracy theories about the fire though, a lot of the stuff about Hoogstraten was about failing to install fire escapes
> 
> 
> more info - http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/jul/28/tonythompson.theobserver




I certainly find aspects of this more compelling than some of the other stuff thats been floating around. Thanks for posting it.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> Journalist whistleblower in Mirror...
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/opinion/news-opinion/eileen-fairweather-journalist-who-helped-1416666


 
Best article I've seen so far on this, gives me a little hope, puts things in context well.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

She wrote a bloody good article on Jersey a few weeks ago too, not sure if it was posted already.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...mmy-Savile-He-was-the-tip-of-the-iceberg.html


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Can see the front page of scallywag issue 19 here, not exactly classy.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Scallywag-I...=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1352077474&sr=1-6


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tom-watson-mp-a-top-minister-1417353



> A top minister in Margaret Thatcher’s government has become the latest senior Tory to be accused of child abuse.
> 
> Labour MP Tom Watson has revealed he has been contacted with accusations about “a former Cabinet minister who regularly abused boys”.
> 
> ...


 


> The latest allegations revealed by Mr Watson at the weekend are not related to the North Wales horrors.
> Nor are they connected to his claim that cops overlooked evidence linking a No.10 insider to child porn smuggler Peter Righton’s paedophile ring.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> I dont think he said that. From what I can tell the article does not say that the Jillings report said there was no ring and just a few evil men, it was the police investigation that said that.


My reading is that he says that the Jillings report reignited all the controversy and whispers that the police had legitimately put to bed in their early 90s investigation and that despite being predisposed to belief in a paedo ring they could only come up with same conclusions as the police investigation - that there had been abuse but that it was limited to a couple of now convicted people.

The difference was, and what ignited the thing again, was a) the decision not to publish then gave the impression of a high-level cover up and b) that the Jillings report contained the claims and names (proven or not) rather than just the proven claims and names of the police investigation. And this combined to force Hague's hand and order the Waterhouse Inquiry.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

I agree with what you said he said, except the bit about Jillings coming to the same conclusion as the police investigation. I dont see where he claimed this at all. He passes over Jillings quite quickly because I dont think it had many redeeming qualities in his eyes.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Seems I was right with my hypothesis that the tweet about newsnight that caused people to expect a name was not supposed to imply that at all:

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.co...tical-figure-in-our-investigation-is-unnamed/

Crick getting the wrong end of the stick is at least partially responsible for this.

So, no more barking about D-notices and super injunctions for now eh.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Seems I was right with my hypothesis that the tweet about newsnight that caused people to expect a name was not supposed to imply that at all:
> 
> http://www.thebureauinvestigates.co...tical-figure-in-our-investigation-is-unnamed/
> 
> ...


A lot of people still think that it was a crick investigation as well since they didn't see the original tweet - but also, if you go back to the original Crick tweets, i'm pretty sure that he also never openly said that person would be named. He simply said that the person told him they had not been contacted over the newsnight investigation.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 5, 2012)

So how did Crick know then.

Or is this person a well enough known (alleged) paedo in political circles that all the political journo's know the stories anyway.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> A lot of people still think that it was a crick investigation as well since they didn't see the original tweet - but also, if you go back to the original Crick tweets, i'm pretty sure that he also never openly said that person would be named. He simply said that the person told him they had not been contacted over the newsnight investigation.


 
I'll check, wont be surprised if you are right, but the line he took implied it more strongly than the original tweet.

Meanwhile:




> *steven messham* ‏@*smessham*
> The welsh sec has agreed to meet with me PM"s office have been intouch he is away for 7 days hope to meet him when he is back wish me luck.





> *steven messham* ‏@*smessham*
> I should have said the first minister for wales has agreed to meet not the welsh sec.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Dan U said:


> So how did Crick know then.
> 
> Or is this person a well enough known (alleged) paedo in political circles that all the political journo's know the stories anyway.


That's what it sounds like - or he obviously still has contacts on newsnight after being the big man there for so many years.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That's what it sounds like - or he obviously still has contacts on newsnight after being the big man there for so many years.


 
i hope it is the latter, but the cynic in me thinks the former. stinks.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Dan U said:


> So how did Crick know then.
> 
> Or is this person a well enough known (alleged) paedo in political circles that all the political journo's know the stories anyway.


 
Not just political journo's, anyone who read Scallywag back in the day or looked at certain websites over the years.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> I'll check, wont be surprised if you are right, but the line he took implied it more strongly than the original tweet.
> 
> Meanwhile:


 
Steve Messham's getting slated by someone else on Twitter


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Also note that Crick was at an event with Overton the night before the tweets.

 ‏@*MichaelLCrick*
Had great fun at Oxford Union, speaking w Stephen Dorrell, Michelle Stanistreet + Iain Overton v Roy Greenslade, Brain Cathcart + Mark Lewis


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Hmm, why am i starting to feel like i've had my strings pulled here?


----------



## cesare (Nov 5, 2012)

This was where it came from, I saw it via Guido:





Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 5, 2012)

> *steven messham* ‏@*smessham*
> @*JillyCL* @*antagonise* @*Independent* Richard webster is a nutter everyone should block him he is sick.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Does his ghost haunt twitter then?


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Does his ghost haunt twitter then?


 
Messham didnt know Webster was dead, someone had to tell him on twitter.

As for feeling like you may have had your strings pulled, that the problem with the entire subject isnt it really, long before this latest saga. The murky depths where reasonable certainty is hard to come by, and few sources of unblemished integrity are available. 'No smoke without fire' is an unsafe concept, and there are multiple potential murk multipliers at work here. The fact that some tories came out with stuff about Peter Morrison is enough for me not to run screaming from the entire subject though, but I do advise extreme caution and those looking for certainty should probably take a break at this stage.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Messham didnt know Webster was dead, someone had to tell him on twitter.
> 
> As for feeling like you may have had your strings pulled, that the problem with the entire subject isnt it really, long before this latest saga. The murky depths where reasonable certainty is hard to come by, and few sources of unblemished integrity are available. 'No smoke without fire' is an unsafe concept, and there are multiple potential murk multipliers at work here. The fact that some tories came out with stuff about Peter Morrison is enough for me not to run screaming from the entire subject though, but I do advise extreme caution and those looking for certainty should probably take a break at this stage.


Excellent general advice, i was talking specifically of this Crick meets Overton the night before Overton tweets something rather explosive which is shortly followed up by the vastly more followed Crick tweeting something else about it - and it concerning a program that Crick was political editor on and that Overton's investigation appeared on. All very cosy that.


----------



## Prole (Nov 5, 2012)

http://paulflynnmp.typepad.com/my_weblog/2012/11/the-whole-truth-for-12-dead.html


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Excellent general advice, i was talking specifically of this Crick meets Overton the night before Overton tweets something rather explosive which is shortly followed up by the vastly more followed Crick tweeting something else about it - and it concerning a program that Crick was political editor on and that Overton's investigation appeared on. All very cosy that.


 
Ah right. I wish I had said more about this aspect at the time, I sort of noticed it but instantly got distracted by the shitstorm on twitter it evoked, plus Guido Fawkes blog was probably responsible for a fair proportion of the attention it got to start with. Oh well, regardless of the 'BBC trying to save its own neck' and Panorama vs Newsnight rivalries, I expect there are quite a lot of journo's out there who would like this story to explode and recognise the power of twitter to make mischief.


----------



## cesare (Nov 5, 2012)

I imagine that it was the inclusion of GuidoFawkes that gave it the "get this out there, fast" appearance that it had.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Cameron had to react:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/05/tory-child-sex-ring-claim



> David Cameron has asked government departments to report to Number 10 urgently over allegations of a child sex ring involving former Conservative politicians three decades ago.
> It is understood the cabinet secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood is co-ordinating the inquiries involving the Welsh Office and the Home Office, as well as government records.
> The move follows a call from the children's commissioner for Wales for a new inquiry into abuse at north Wales care homes in the 1970s and 80s and claims that a senior Tory was involved in a paedophile ring.
> The prime minister's spokesman said: "We are clear that these allegations need to be properly investigated and we need to get to the bottom of what precisely happened.
> The spokesman added that the prime minister is taking a close interest in the allegations being made. It is likely that the quick internal inquiry will decide if something more formal and substantial needs to be launched, or whether such an inquiry would run across police investigations.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Cameron had to react:
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/05/tory-child-sex-ring-claim


 I'm sure he knows already - the secret service and the Whips office probably have all the info already


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Surprised no one has brought in the Leicestershire children's homes scandal yet.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 5, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Steve Messham's getting slated by someone else on Twitter


 
Indeed, and they posted this link -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/1915901.stm



> 7 April, 2002
> *Charity worker charged with theft*
> charity worker from north Wales has been charged with theft, deception and false accounting.
> Steve Messham, from Wrexham, was arrested and questioned after thousands of pounds allegedly went missing from a sex abuse victim support group.
> ...


 
Was he convicted? Another possible dent in Messham's credibilty as a witness.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

No he was cleared.

edit: hang on, that was on another charge of benefit fraud.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Surprised no one has brought in the Leicestershire children's homes scandal yet.


 
Matters relating to this, or something else?

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1991/dec/03/contempt-of-court


----------



## teqniq (Nov 5, 2012)

The whole thing's the main item on R4 pm atm.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Matters relating to this, or something else?
> 
> http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1991/dec/03/contempt-of-court


That, directly.



> In the course of that trial, one of the defendants, the major defendant, an evil man, chose to use the name of an honoured colleague in the House entirely for his own ends. He was determined, I think, to try to blackmail the—I almost put it in quotation marks—establishment.
> 
> I think that the defendant felt that, by naming persons who were in public life and putting them forward as people from whom children had to be defended—this was a child abuse case —he might frighten the authorities into not prosecuting or not pursuing the prosecution with the vigour that one might have expected. The defendant was wrong about that. He should have known that in Britain we conduct our prosecutions independently and fairly.
> 
> The defendant could not achieve his objective, but he sought to do so during the course of the trial, and anything said in the course of a trial is not subject to the laws of slander or libel when it is reported in newspapers. It was spread throughout the newspapers the length and breadth of the country, on the radio and on television.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No he was cleared.
> 
> edit: hang on, that was on another charge of benefit fraud.


 
Yeah, this was the outcome of the benefits one:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/I've+...olice;+Abuse+victim+cleared+of...-a0127698193


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Catching up with todays media, I see the Telegraph drew attention to whats happening on Twitter, and had another interesting bit near the end too:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...litician-in-North-Wales-child-abuse-case.html



> But yesterday his name was widely circulating on the internet including through hundreds of messages on the social networking site Twitter. However several other politicians not suspected of any involvement were also included in the messages.


 


> Mark Stephens, who represented around 15 of the children at the Waterhouse Inquiry, said: “I am convinced parliamentary privilege will be used to ask a question as to why this high-ranking politician who was named by a victim in the north Wales child abuse inquiry has been afforded protection.”


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Yeah, this was the outcome of the benefits one:
> 
> http://www.thefreelibrary.com/I've been vindicated - now I'll sue police; Abuse victim cleared of...-a0127698193


I think the lack of convicted/cleared stuff on this may say something.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 5, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Indeed, and they posted this link -
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/1915901.stm
> 
> 
> ...


 
Someone said he was cleared on all charges


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 5, 2012)

Hmm - two former tory cabinet ministers keep coming up in association with 'the fusileer' and the 'failed reality Tv peresenter' (who was named by tom watson in the commons) if you put the latter two names into google.

The sources are various blogs - some of them are conspiraloon bollocks - but others seem sensible as far as I can tell.

The story has got a lot bigger over the last 48hours with cameron announcing new enquiries and all the media leading on it. Yet there is really no more new details than what there was on friday night - which maybe suggests that the media and polticians know there is def a lot to this and that more will come out?


----------



## where to (Nov 5, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Hmm - two former tory cabinet ministers keep coming up in association with 'the fusileer' and the 'failed reality Tv peresenter' (who was named by tom watson in the commons) if you put the latter two names into google.
> 
> The sources are various blogs - some of them are conspiraloon bollocks - but others seem sensible as far as I can tell.


 
i've also _got them on my list._

these names were included in the original scallywag article way back. they're not new and in my view the allegations carry _some_ weight.

the allegation is that they the attended Pimlico parties hosted by the former tory advisor (who is also a failed reality tv star). these allegations strike me as being less clearcut however - the evidence that supports them doesn't appear to be as strong from my reading of the Scallywag articles. it is also unclear to me whether they took part in illegal activities or 'merely' attended the parties as observers (which sounds implausable now i've typed it, and which in itself would ruin their careers and possibly warrant criminal prosecution).

the key point is though, these names are not being thrown in retrospectively. they are a part of the original Scallywag allegations.

edit:  also, the names will be on conspiraloon websites for one simple reason: the conspiraloons have lifted the Scallywag articles wholesale and have tried to co-opt them, to fit into their wider and insane narratives.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

I'm not going to harp on for much longer about the Messham charges, but it seems the benefits stuff and the charity stuff were supposed to be handled in court at the same time:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...-group-leader-denies-stealing-91466-12313987/

A whole bunch of other articles relating to Messham, mostly but not exclusively detailing the stuff we've already covered in relation to fraud and theft charges, can be found here:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/search/Search.aspx?SearchBy=0&Word=Steven+Messham&Search=Search&By=0


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Also since I recently posted an article that suggested Messham was happy with the Waterhouse inquiry at the time, I should post this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/feb/17/davidbrindle.davidward




> Abuse victim Steven Messham, 37, who claims to have been sexually assaulted and physically abused in four different Welsh care homes, said he had been promised that no stone would be left unturned.
> He expressed disappointment over yesterday's announcement by North Wales police that there would be no new prosecutions.
> Mr Messham, chairman of Norwas (North Wales Abuse Survivors) said he had believed that Sir Ronald Waterhouse would name and shame the abusers.
> "He only named people we already knew about.
> "As far as I'm concerned, the fight will go on and one day we will get the justice we deserve."


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 5, 2012)

where to said:


> the key point is though, these names are not being thrown in retrospectively. they are a part of the original Scallywag allegations.


 
Ah - that explains where they come from and  - I agree - does give them more creedance. 

If that comes out - fucking hell! Anyone who was in the government at the time will have to answer questions about what they knew and why they did nothing. 

Did Hauge set the terms of the original enquiry?


----------



## where to (Nov 5, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Did Hauge set the terms of the original enquiry?


 
I think so

Meanwhile, from the Tom Watson letter to David Cameron:



> "Since sharing my concerns with you at PMQs, a number of people have come forward to say that they raised their suspicions with the police, but investigations were not carried out. One allegation involves alleged child abuse and a former cabinet minister. We both know that many untruths are told about politicians, but this allegation was specific, informed and appeared well corroborated."


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 5, 2012)

Hmmm - puts hauge in a difficult position if moe shit comes out. Why did he exclude investigating accusations agasint anyone outside the care home when he knew those accused included his cabinet collegue/s.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

The guardians report that absolves itself of keeping mouth shut:



> Cameron and the cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood, rushed to act as the media threatened to identify the senior Tory figure close to Lady Thatcher alleged to have been involved in the child abuse.


 
Threatened? You mean sat on it for two decades.


----------



## Jollity Farm (Nov 5, 2012)

A lot of people may use Mr. Messham's alleged crimes as proof that his account can't be trusted, but we know from countless other tales of abuse victims that "bad" youths are so often chosen by predators in this way precisely because they won't be believed. Plus, one won't find abuse victims always acting in the most restrained and sensible ways. Abuse ruins people, and even good treatment can't eradicate all the damage.


----------



## Corax (Nov 5, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Hmm - two former tory cabinet ministers keep coming up in association with 'the fusileer' and the 'failed reality Tv peresenter' (who was named by tom watson in the commons)


When did he name names? I only saw the clip of his question at PMQs, which didn't show that. Is it in Hansard?



where to said:


> the allegation is that they the attended Pimlico parties hosted by the former tory advisor (who is also a failed reality tv star). these allegations strike me as being less clearcut however - the evidence that supports them doesn't appear to be as strong from my reading of the Scallywag articles.


One fairly persuasive bit - although I can't recall if it was Scallywag or elsewhere - was that (reportedly) several victims were independently driven round the area and asked to point out the flat, and each pointed out the same one. In the days before Google Streetview, that wouldn't be so easy to orchestrate.



Kaka Tim said:


> Hmmm - puts hauge in a difficult position if moe shit comes out.


Even more so if the tale of his early morning Brighton beach rendezvous has any substance to it. Bang goes plausible deniability.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That, directly.


 
Argh, little else but a flood of anti-semitic horror when I try to find other articles about that.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Corax said:


> When did he name names? I only saw the clip of his question at PMQs, which didn't show that. Is it in Hansard?
> 
> 
> One fairly persuasive bit - although I can't recall if it was Scallywag or elsewhere - was that (reportedly) several victims were independently driven round the area and asked to point out the flat, and each pointed out the same one. In the days before Google Streetview, that wouldn't be so easy to orchestrate.
> ...


Hague wasn't old enough to be _involved_ - it's about his role in possibly covering it up that will come under the spotlight - as Minister for Wales. Nor can his career and **'s cross for one MP to meet another on Brighton Beach as fellow MPS _to sort shit out_ due to him not being an MP at the time. Crazy shit getting posted under a thin veil now. Sort it out, check it up before posting ffs.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Argh, little else but a flood of anti-semitic horror when I try to find other articles about that.


I'm not going to be much help on this for now. I can see a defence of the type that peck tried might be normal etc - but for now, can't say anything more.


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2012)

Audio interview of another abuse victim, Keith Gregory. He knows Messham and its not clear from this interview whether he suffered sexual abuse himself, although elsewhere on the net he is described as such. He is a local councillor these days.

http://audioboo.fm/boos/1042177-keith-gregory-talks-about-the-abuse-he-suffered-in-children-s-homes

I got his name from the end of this Guardian story:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/05/cameron-inquiry-north-wales-sex-ring


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 5, 2012)

this has some interesting bits and bobs

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/ This piece is maybe worth a look


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

*weeps*


----------



## Corax (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Hague wasn't old enough to be _involved_ - it's about his role in possibly covering it up that will come under the spotlight - as Minister for Wales. Nor can his career and LB's cross for one MP to meet another on Brighton Beach as fellow MPS _to sort shit out_ due to him not being an MP at the time. Crazy shit getting posted under a thin veil now. Sort it out, check it up before posting ffs.


As I said - *"if"*. I don't have the time to research everything I've read about this, and at present I have no idea which bits are true and which aren't. You've helpfully debunked the LB story for me, thanks. xxx


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 5, 2012)

Epetition for those who are interested: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/39312


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Corax said:


> As I said - *"if"*. I don't have the time to research every thing I've read, and at present I have no idea which bits are true and which aren't. You've helpfully debunked the LB story for me, thanks.


That's an offshoot of the ** theory - not the theory itself!


----------



## Corax (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That's an offshoot of the ** theory - not the theory itself!


Not sure I get you. The thing I'd read & was referring to had it that he was shunted to the EU by Hague as a result of an abuse cover-up. But as you've pointed, and wiki "confirms", the dates don't match.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

Remove hague from the picture, you still have a theory.


----------



## Corax (Nov 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Remove hague from the picture, you still have a theory.


Aaah.  Credible?  (as far as you can tell with the current state of information)


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2012)

No idea.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 5, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Epetition for those who are interested: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/39312


I'm not sure what good a public inquiry would do.

The only way anyone can end up behind bars is via a police investigation, as Tom Watson suggests led via an unrelated police force. One problem with that obviously being the question of whether the police force chosen would actually be one that had no involvement in this, or just one who's involvement hadn't yet had a public airing at all.


----------



## where to (Nov 5, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> this has some interesting bits and bobs
> 
> http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/ This piece is maybe worth a look


 
i concluded a while back that that site is on the unreliable/ bordering on loony fringe.

all the conspiraloon and attention seeker websites run by idiots are getting undue credibility from ripping off genuine investigation work by Scallywag, and by calling out Savile (again, not exactly a groundbreaking allegation even 10 years ago]. these people are then confusing matters by bolting their own agendas [anti-semitic; homophobic; naked self interest; naked egotism] onto the Scallywag story. anyone googling this stuff has to be alert to that reality, and avoid spreading the drivel further.

a website should not be taken seriously just because it latched onto this story five years ago.


----------



## Corax (Nov 5, 2012)

I know they're hardly the publication that they like to think/pretend they are, but I'm curious to see what PE do with this nonetheless.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 5, 2012)

Daily Star article featuring some quotes allegedly from a cop who was warned off investigating anything further

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/279380/TORY-PAEDO-COVER-UP/


----------



## where to (Nov 5, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Daily Star article featuring some quotes allegedly from a cop who was warned off investigating anything further
> 
> http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/279380/TORY-PAEDO-COVER-UP/


 
lots of new stuff in there:

Belgians coming over?  that takes this international. this will open up the Marc Dutroux stuff again for the Belgians i would imagine.
an 80s cabinet minister - presumably the man with the list?  this isn't the tory official who is getting mentioned elsewhere. its the first MSM source to talk about the man with the list (who is an ex-cabinet minister and current MP).
MI5 security checks - freespirit you will want to be reading this one.
security source: "Any weaknesses have to be disclosed to the Cabinet Secretary and Prime Minister"


----------



## where to (Nov 5, 2012)

you're on our list now you fucking scumbag.


----------



## Corax (Nov 5, 2012)

where to said:


> lots of new stuff in there


 
It's a week old.

[/pedant]


----------



## where to (Nov 5, 2012)

New in the long term sense of course.


----------



## Prole (Nov 5, 2012)

A Sunday Times article from 1981 describing how Sir Peter Hayman escaped conviction mentions a public figure regarded as 'a saint' and whose career would be ruined therefore no charges were brought against him. Is this how the DPP have always protected the establishment?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...EIwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xqQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5485,2777227


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Prole said:
			
		

> A Sunday Times article from 1981 describing how Sir Peter Hayman escaped conviction mentions a public figure regarded as 'a saint' and whose career would be ruined therefore no charges were brought against him. Is this how the DPP have always protected the establishment?
> 
> http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...EIwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xqQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5485,2777227



Where did you get this from?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 6, 2012)

Prole said:


> A Sunday Times article from 1981 describing how Sir Peter Hayman escaped conviction mentions a public figure regarded as 'a saint' and whose career would be ruined therefore no charges were brought against him. Is this how the DPP have always protected the establishment?
> 
> http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...EIwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xqQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5485,2777227


good spot.

That surely has to be referring to savile doesn't it?


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

I was doing some googling of Sir Peter Hayman after finding this on the P.I.E. entry on Wiki: "After the trial, it emerged that there had been a cover-up: Mr "Henderson" had worked for MI6 and been a high commissioner in Canada." Using Parliamentary Privilege MP Geoffrey Dickens named Hayman: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/written_answers/1981/mar/19/sir-peter-hayman-1 

Whether 'the saint' is Savile or not, hard to tell - but this would coincide with the Thatcher years.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 6, 2012)

for those not wanting to trawl the article, the quote potentially relevant to savile is 



> _'More recently, the police came to the DPP with a case concerning a highly respected public figure and his relations with young boys. The complaints against the young man were not serious and concerned conduct that could be interpreted simply as displays of excessive affection, for example. The DPP decided that although there was prema facia case against the man he would probably be aquitted - "*he was regarded almost as a saint"* - but the publicity would ruin his career. The man was warned about his conduct, he was not prosecuted."_


 
I've just found email addresses for 2 of the journos listed as co-writers, to see if either of them are in a position to confirm if this was referring to savile or not.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

I dont consider the young boys thing to be a very good fit for Savile, nor was he very likely to be associated with 'overly affectionate' behaviour given the sudden, cold groping style of his apparent abuse. He wasnt the only person who some might have though had a saintly image. Anyway the article is very interesting when it comes to decisions about whether to prosecute, havent seen too much else that looks at it from this important angle quite so bluntly.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 6, 2012)

I was thinking the licking arms, sticking his tongue down some lasses throat type stuff would fit with that sort of description, which from several accounts seems to be the sort of thing he'd regularly do.

but you may be right. 

re the 2nd part, yes it does seem pretty clear on how those decisions were made, and how the view on the 'public interest' test impacts on decisions to prosecute or not.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

http://tna.europarchive.org/20040216040105/http://www.doh.gov.uk/lostincare/20102.htm

The original Lost In Care report - the Waterhouse Report - in the National Archives.
Also linked from Dept of Health site.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

My uncle Ernie, a society sex scandal... and a lesson in courage | Mail Online

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Street_scandal


----------



## JimW (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> I dont consider the young boys thing to be a very good fit for Savile, nor was he very likely to be associated with 'overly affectionate' behaviour given the sudden, cold groping style of his apparent abuse. He wasnt the only person who some might have though had a saintly image. Anyway the article is very interesting when it comes to decisions about whether to prosecute, havent seen too much else that looks at it from this important angle quite so bluntly.


Savile wouldn't have been described as a 'young man' as the offender is there either, even back in the late 70s/early 80s - or am I misreading that?


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Messham interview with v deebyshire on five live now.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

JimW said:


> Savile wouldn't have been described as a 'young man' as the offender is there either, even back in the late 70s/early 80s - or am I misreading that?


 
He'd have been about 50 in 1980 (?)


----------



## JimW (Nov 6, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> He'd have been about 50 in 1980 (?)


Unless maybe it was one of those really crumbly old judges who thought anyone without a bus pass was young.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

free spirit said:


> for those not wanting to trawl the article, the quote potentially relevant to savile is
> 
> 
> 
> I've just found email addresses for 2 of the journos listed as co-writers, to see if either of them are in a position to confirm if this was referring to savile or not.


I'd be very surprised if it did - it also sounds like they were simply told the story by police or DPP when they investigated the Hayman case, which doesn't require the person to be named to them.

Really odd that such big hitters were used to write that story though - esp when it was, by then, a known case.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Crick now increasingly 'sceptical' of senior Tory's guilt as alleged, he has said on Twitter.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

I note he doesn't say why, what he's looked at, who he's talked to etc to come to that thinking.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

How much does Crick know about case? Has he ever investigated himself, in depth?


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

JimW said:


> Savile wouldn't have been described as a 'young man' as the offender is there either, even back in the late 70s/early 80s - or am I misreading that?


The transcription is incorrect and doesn't say 'young man' just 'man': http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...EIwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xqQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5485,2777227


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> How much does Crick know about case? Has he ever investigated himself, in depth?


I don't recall his name coming up in anything to do with this before the Overton tweet - not to say that he hasn't done his own digging, but it doesn't seem like it's something he was worked on.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

So possible responce to witness/ information circulated about witness.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> So possible responce to witness/ information circulated about witness.


Be interesting - if this is the case - to see if he's talked to the same people as BIJ and came to a different conclusion or if he's talked to others that BIJ haven't. Either way it would throw up a number of questions.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

This is one of the downsides of twitter, journalists that people take some notice of being able to drop one-liners without any compunction to provide more detail at that time. 

I suppose there are plenty of possibilities as to why Crick has said that. 

He may have read some of the stuff we have read here, some of which does make it hard to abandon all scepticism.

He may have been talking to people (eg journalists) who are familiar with the history of the allegations, thsoe who make them, inquiries, etc.

He may have been talking to loads of people who know the alleged perpetrator, and some things about the person are a poor fit for the story.

We know he talked to who he believes is the alleged perpetrator at least several times on Friday, and possibly since. We do not know how sympathetic he may be towards this character.

The way he worded his tweet does open the possibility that he has said this now in order to dissuade MPs from naming him in the house.

Either way I hope he plans to do a piece where he expands somewhat on this stuff, preferably today.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Of course his comments also only refer to one person, not to broader allegations of abuse and cover up. Or even other Tories. Which is also curious.


----------



## toggle (Nov 6, 2012)

Prole said:


> My uncle Ernie, a society sex scandal... and a lesson in courage | Mail Online
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Street_scandal


 
thankyou for that. interesting.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

May speaking on this in commons later.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> I know they're hardly the publication that they like to think/pretend they are, but I'm curious to see what PE do with this nonetheless.


 
They put the boot in to Cyril Smith in the most recent issue. Just a little reminder that our political class has known about noncery within it's own ranks before and covered things up.

I must admit I didn't know much about Mr Smith - PE alleges that Special Branch removed some files from Lancashire police relating to him in 1974 when the Libs were being courted by the Heath and those files then vanished

It was nice to read as well that he helped set up a and became a governer of a special residential school for children which then became mired in sexual abuse scandals and wasn't closed until the mid 90s and his use of lawyers in 1979 to kill of a story about his sexual abuse of boys in another placement he was a governer of.

'One of the most likeable politicians of his day' - Nick Clegg


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Have a read of this thread then Dan.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Have a read of this thread then Dan.


 
Thanks.

says it all really -



> Knowl View school records have been restricted from public view for 100 years


 
on what possible fucking grounds can shit like that stand?

does that Tooter person still post here. Reminded me of a LanceArmstrongbot


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 6, 2012)

*The moment Tom Watson MP confronts David Cameron in Parliament *

* *


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

May up in commons at half twelve.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Home Secretary Theresa May has warned MPs about naming anyone involved in abuse in North Wales, saying it could harm any future trials.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-11-06/may-warns-mps-not-to-name-those-involved/

Labour's Tom Watson says that the lesson from Hillsborough and hacking is that a narrow-down inquiry is a recipe for a cover-up. He says some paedophiles could remain protected by the establishment if the inquiry is now widened. The police should have the support of child protection experts. He talks about children being abused "from Wales to Whitehall" and says the media are transfixed with the prospect of "a cabinet minister abusing children". All abuse should be investigated, he says. He says that what May has announced amounts to "the next stage of a cover-up".

Some MPs protest at this point.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2012/nov/06/north-wales-abuse-inquries-live-blog


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

> Home Secretary Theresa May has warned MPs about naming anyone involved in abuse in North Wales, saying it could harm any future trials.


 
This was Waterhouse's mad logic for not naming names. The tories have jumped the wrong way on this - this is going to be incredibly politically damaging.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Watson has suggested May's announcement could be next stage of coverup. Strong stuff. Clearly doesn't concur with Crick at this stage. Knows this is the key moment and playing his hand hard.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Mark Durkin, sdlp mp, has asked if security services will be reviewing evidence.

Interesting angle and interesting he should be one to raise it.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> Mark Durkin, sdlp mp, has asked if security services will be reviewing evidence.
> 
> Interesting angle and interesting he should be one to raise it.


Yes, this is what we are after - did they vet people and come up with stuff that they passed onto the political side. Key as fuck.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 6, 2012)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...my-Savile-He-was-the-tip-of-the-iceberg.html#


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 6, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I'm not sure what good a public inquiry would do.
> 
> The only way anyone can end up behind bars is via a police investigation, as Tom Watson suggests led via an unrelated police force. One problem with that obviously being the question of whether the police force chosen would actually be one that had no involvement in this, or just one who's involvement hadn't yet had a public airing at all.


 
It'd allow abuse scandals large and small to be looked at while* limiting* the possibility of cover-up. Without a full public enquiry there's always the distinct possibility of cover-up.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

The _initial_ police investigation to report by april 2013 (which means later). And they had people asking questions to make sure that the police investigation will be given priority over the independent investigation - i.e that shit has to wait. They are going to force this beyond may 2015. They have their plan.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

There is a theory that the security service 
A) knew of the existence of the parties/proclivities and were required to cover up UK politician involvement in order to protect state from scandal, loss of public confidence in government etc
And 
B) went further and used covert filming at parties (or placed orders from targets requesting  tapes and pics from parties) from  foreign diplomats and others they wanted to have a hold over.

Anyone else heard of this theory?


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

And that this is why there was an amnesty on publicizing or prosecuting attendees and alleged abusers in Waterhouse.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

Meanwhile I think the DA notice wrt Ore was simply because Blair needed all bums on seats to get Iraq war vote through at the time. MPs being suspended at the time would have impacted his go to war vote.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> This was Waterhouse's mad logic for not naming names. The tories have jumped the wrong way on this - this is going to be incredibly politically damaging.


 particularly as most of the names being bandied about are Tories , they will probably delay the enquiry reporting until after the election


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

From Yes Minister

'"It is only totalitarian governments that suppress facts. In this country we simply take a democratic decision not to publish them."

"How to discredit an unwelcome report:

Stage One: Refuse to publish in the public interest saying
1. There are security considerations.
2. The findings could be misinterpreted.
3. You are waiting for the results of a wider and more detailed report which is still in preparation. (If there isn't one, commission it; this gives you even more time).

Stage Two: Discredit the evidence you are not publishing, saying
1. It leaves important questions unanswered.
2. Much of the evidence is inconclusive.
3. The figures are open to other interpretations.
4. Certain findings are contradictory.
5. Some of the main conclusions have been questioned. (If they haven't, question them yourself; then they have).

Stage Three: Undermine the recommendations. Suggested phrases: 
1. 'Not really a basis for long term decisions'.
2. 'Not sufficient information on which to base a valid assessment'.
3. 'No reason for any fundamental rethink of existing policy'.
4. 'Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice'.

Stage Four: Discredit the person who produced the report. Explain (off the record) that
1. He is harbouring a grudge against the Department.
2. He is a publicity seeker.
3. He is trying to get a Knighthood/Chair/Vice Chancellorship.
4. He used to be a consultant to a multinational.
5. He wants to be a consultant to a multinational."

"To suppress an internal government report, rewrite it as official advice to the Minister. Then it is against the rules to publish it, so you can leak the bits you want to friendly journalists."


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

> The senior Tory accused of child abuse has strenuously denied the allegations. He told The Daily Telegraph on Monday that he has only once visited Wrexham in North Wales, where the abuse took place.
> 
> He said: “Some guy said I was in the habit of taking young men from Wrexham in my Rolls-Royce.
> 
> ...



So he knew he was implicated? Shouldn't we know how and why.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

marty21 said:


> particularly as most of the names being bandied about are Tories , they will probably delay the enquiry reporting until after the election


They will - which is going to extend it and the association of kiddy fucking with tories until at least the election - big big gamble.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:
			
		

> Meanwhile I think the DA notice wrt Ore was simply because Blair needed all bums on seats to get Iraq war vote through at the time. MPs being suspended at the time would have impacted his go to war vote.



Blair won that vote with ease. Both tories and new labour supported it. Wasn't tight and wasn't going to be.

Edit: not seen anything solid on ore etc for the record btw.


----------



## gosub (Nov 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It'd allow abuse scandals large and small to be looked at while* limiting* the possibility of cover-up. Without a full public enquiry there's always the distinct possibility of cover-up.


But the term public enquiry is a misnoma, most of the submitions would have to be taken in camera


----------



## marty21 (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> They will - which is going to extend it and the association of kiddy fucking with tories until at least the election - big big gamble.


 true - but they'd be more fucked politically if it comes out before the next election - if the allegations against senior Tories are true


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

gosub said:


> But the term public enquiry is a misnoma, most of the submitions would have to be taken in camera


Not at all - the waterhouse inquiry, which was the most serious type of inquiry available, was carried out in public.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

marty21 said:


> true - but they'd be more fucked politically if it comes out before the next election - if the allegations against senior Tories are true


This is one of the interesting aspects - the new generation trying to cover their own back and that of the previous one at the same time and how those agendas might clash.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Chris Bryant ‏@ChrisBryantMP

Small point re May's announcement... the national crime agency doesn't exist yet. How can it run the investigation?


----------



## teqniq (Nov 6, 2012)

Into the ground, I suspect some are hoping.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> This is one of the interesting aspects - the new generation trying to cover their own back and that of the previous one at the same time and how those agendas might clash.


 Cameron will look stronger if he abandons the old tarnished tories and re-invents the party (again)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> Watson has suggested May's announcement could be next stage of coverup. Strong stuff.


 
Not "strong", sensible. You only have to look back on scandals not given full public enquiries for similar reasons to see that anyone who believes or states that a limited enquiry will be sufficient is either disingenuous, incredibly stupid or downright deceitful.


----------



## gosub (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Not at all - the waterhouse inquiry, which was the most serious type of inquiry available, was carried out in public.


  The idea of a victim possibly without corroborating evidence going "blah blah is a paedo" infront of Leveson style media cove ie live streaming and tweets, it wouldn't matter if blah blah later produced evidence that proves he was tap dancing live on national television to an audience of millions at the time, blah blah is still fucked. The trial by internet thats gone on already is bad enough. Then there is the victims who may not want every one knowing they grew up in care let alone were sexually degraded


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

gosub said:


> The idea of a victim possibly without corroborating evidence going "blah blah is a paedo" infront of Leveson style media cove ie live streaming and tweets, it wouldn't matter if blah blah later produced evidence that proves he was tap dancing live on national television to an audience of millions at the time, blah blah is still fucked. The trial by internet thats gone on already is bad enough. Then there is the victims who may not want every one knowing they grew up in care let alone were sexually degraded


That's all waffle - your claim was that public inquiries take evidence in camera as per norm - they don't.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not "strong", sensible. You only have to look back on scandals not given full public enquiries for similar reasons to see that anyone who believes or states that a limited enquiry will be sufficient is either disingenuous, incredibly stupid or downright deceitful.


Yep, it's really important that people like him keep going an about possible cover-ups whether there are cover-ups being prepared or not. It's one of the few decent roles they can play.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 6, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> There is a theory that the security service
> A) knew of the existence of the parties/proclivities and were required to cover up UK politician involvement in order to protect state from scandal, loss of public confidence in government etc
> And
> B) went further and used covert filming at parties (or placed orders from targets requesting tapes and pics from parties) from foreign diplomats and others they wanted to have a hold over.
> ...


 
That particular theory has been around for at least 40 years (Kincora Boys' Home), and while people like Colin Wallace have come forward, they've also been comprehensively "monstered" by the media and the security services, so that their evidence isn't seen as credible.

In fact, someone mentioned the Cleveland Street scandal earlier, which has had a lot of myth about a security service cover-up, and that was over 120 years ago!


----------



## gosub (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That's all waffle - your claim was that public inquiries take evidence in camera as per norm - they don't.


*No,* my claim was :that in wouldn't be a normal public enquiry because most of the evidence would have to be given in camera


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

gosub said:


> *No,* my claim was :that in wouldn't be a normal public enquiry because most of the evidence would have to be given in camera


But it wouldn't - going on the basis of the Waterhouse Inquiry. It's a cul-de sac for now anyway.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

@vp

Well yes.

It is a fairly established security service MO 101.
Set a thief to catch a thief, infiltrate networks,  blackmail, give us info or we will tell people what you are, where you go, who you hang out with etc.

They did it with teh gays, the lefties,  they do it with the jihadi wannabes...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 6, 2012)

gosub said:


> But the term public enquiry is a misnoma, most of the submitions would have to be taken in camera


 
*some* submissions are in most public enquiries, but most testimony is public, and may be reported as it is taken. A private enquiry doesn't allow that, it holds all testimony until the report is issued, and it is virtually impossible to find out what (if any) testimony has been excluded. BTW, anonymity/_in camera_ evidence is solely in a public enquiry's panel's gift.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> That particular theory has been around for at least 40 years (Kincora Boys' Home), and while people like Colin Wallace have come forward, they've also been comprehensively "monstered" by the media and the security services, so that their evidence isn't seen as credible.
> 
> In fact, someone mentioned the Cleveland Street scandal earlier, which has had a lot of myth about a security service cover-up, and that was over 120 years ago!





> And finally, with the whole secret structure of MI5 behind it, the Home Office should be well-informed about public figures involved in the sexual abuse of children. It is a standard intelligence tactic to use the threat of sexual scandal to bring someone politically into line. This is the sad reality of the British Establishment. Until that changes, the cover-up will remain and the scandals will continue.



AU - Whistle-blowers


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

Another Yes Minister quote

'the Official Secrets Act isn't to protect secrets, it is to protect officials'

God it's so depressing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 6, 2012)

gosub said:


> The idea of a victim possibly without corroborating evidence going "blah blah is a paedo" infront of Leveson style media cove ie live streaming and tweets, it wouldn't matter if blah blah later produced evidence that proves he was tap dancing live on national television to an audience of millions at the time, blah blah is still fucked. The trial by internet thats gone on already is bad enough. Then there is the victims who may not want every one knowing they grew up in care let alone were sexually degraded


 
You're aware that the enquiry chairman and panel can exclude ICT (mobiles etc) if they wish? That they can exclude journos (the enquiry will still have to have an audio-visual and written record of proceedings "for posterity")?
Leveson didn't exclude anything because it wasn't in the wider interest to do so. I suspect that an abuse enquiry would find a way of blunting propagation of rumour fairly easily, either through removal or (more likely) jamming of tech, or by getting journos to sign time-limited non-disclosure agreements.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Nick Davies describing the Waterhouse Inquiry:


> Now, finally, for the first time, the truth is pouring out. *In a former council chamber in a small village near Chester*, dozens of men and women are stepping forward to speak in public. Some are the grown-up survivors – nearly 300 of them – recalling childhoods of unmitigated violence and exploitation: “It was a completely different world… You could smell the fear… So cold, the place, so horrible”.  Others are the men and women who are accused of tormenting them – 148 of them, skewered to the truth by ranks of lawyers. It is a little Nuremberg.
> 
> This is the tribunal of inquiry into abuse in children’s homes in North Wales – a unique event. This kind of hearing is one of the most powerful investigative tools at the hands of a government. It has all the powers of the High Court, to compel witnesses and demand documents, it has a budget of more than £1 million and it sits in public. In 75 years it has been used only ten times – after Aberfan and Dunblane, for example – and never before for child abuse.* For eight months now, it has been unravelling one of the darkest scandals in Britain, day after day. And no one is listening.*
> 
> ...


Hardly public or well reported!


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Nick Davies again: 





> Fleet Street routinely nurtures a crop of untold stories about powerful abusers who have evaded justice. One such is Peter Morrison, formerly the MP for Chester and the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. Ten years ago, Chris House, the veteran crime reporter for the Sunday Mirror, twice received tip-offs from police officers who said that Morrison had been caught cottaging in public toilets with underaged boys and had been released with a caution.* A less powerful man, the officers complained, would have been charged with gross indecency or an offence against children.*
> 
> At the time,* Chris House confronted Morrison, who used libel laws to block publication of the story.* Now, Morrison is dead and cannot sue. Police last week confirmed that he had been picked up twice and never brought to trial.* They added that there appeared to be no trace of either incident in any of the official records.*
> 
> Nick Davies — The sheer scale of child sexual abuse in Britain


Just like Savile, and no doubt countless - protected - others, they have to die before anyone has the balls to name them.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> That particular theory has been around for at least 40 years (Kincora Boys' Home), and while people like Colin Wallace have come forward, they've also been comprehensively "monstered" by the media and the security services, so that their evidence isn't seen as credible.
> 
> In fact, someone mentioned the Cleveland Street scandal earlier, which has had a lot of myth about a security service cover-up, and that was over 120 years ago!


 
Jeremy Thorpe, MI5, Wilson, Straw etc...

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week...-about-his-role-in-the-jeremy-thorpe-scandal/

or the more wacky version:

http://dutroux.blogspot.co.uk/2006/03/jeremy-thorpe-stable-lad-jack-straw.html


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

Ciaran Jones, c4 news: third person says senior Tory involved in nortg wales abuse. Speaks to c4 news tonight.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Mrs Justice Macur - get digging.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Mrs Justice Macur - get digging.


Ooh, nasty hard woman but media friendly.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Mrs Justice Macur - get digging.



Keynote speaker at a conference on children and family law a month ago... in Jersey!  Gift for the conspiracy theorists that one.

Edit: wonder what she said. Think Savile story was out then and bound to have been subject of discussion. I may be dismissing relevance (in the broadest sense) of this too lightly.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Infinitely more credible than, for example, some old bloke with experience of the 'troubles' in Northern Ireland.

Prosecuting QC in the case where a couple killed a 3 year old boy with salt.

Certainly familiar with the relevant subjects, for example jailing a headmaster:

http://www.birminghampost.net/news/...or-sex-abuse-of-young-girls-65233-28439023/2/




> Jailing Moody, Mrs Justice Dame Julia Macur told him: “In 2002 a young woman made a complaint against you. You denied it, and your good standing in the community prevented any further investigation; she was disbelieved.​“You have now had the good sense to show your remorse by pleading guilty to that offence which was resurrected following the investigation of your further sexual offending.​“Both victims of your indecent assaults were very young girls, and they were vulnerable. You abused your position of trust​


​


> And Mrs Justice Macur pointed out that in a probation interview Moody revealed two previous occasions when complaints had been made against him in the course of his profession, and not proceeded with


​


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> Infinitely more credible than, for example, some old bloke with experience of the 'troubles' in Northern Ireland.
> 
> Prosecuting QC in the case where a couple killed a 3 year old boy with salt.
> 
> ...


edit: see next post


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

... and : 





> Australian ex-cop jailed in UK over abuse
> 
> Date: December 20 2011
> 
> ...


----------



## kenny g (Nov 6, 2012)

Knowing cameron's apparent ineptness I have a sense that he may well have opened yet another hornet nest. I trust the judge.


----------



## cesare (Nov 6, 2012)

Trust the judge to do what?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

I think that's what cameron and those involved said.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Morrison but, the locale
Exclusive: Eyewitness 'saw Thatcher aide take boys to abuse



> A former resident of the Wrexham care home at the centre of abuse allegations tells Channel 4 News that he saw evidence of abuse, and remembers seeing Sir Peter Morrison at the care home five times.


 


> "I saw him at Bryn Estyn, he turned up in a car, boy went off in his car, don't know if he was in it. It was definitely his car, I saw him arrive in it then we went to bed and we saw it drive off.
> 
> "We used to see a lot of people we didn't recognise, not staff. They couldn't have been there for the same reason the staff were there. They turned up at odd hours, early evening and the night. Really nice shoes, I always remember the shoes. And the cars, we were interested in the cars."


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

This means that crick and team are now at last/least digging.


----------



## scalyboy (Nov 6, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> There is a theory that the security service
> A) knew of the existence of the parties/proclivities and were required to cover up UK politician involvement in order to protect state from scandal, loss of public confidence in government etc
> And
> B) went further and used covert filming at parties (or placed orders from targets requesting tapes and pics from parties) from foreign diplomats and others they wanted to have a hold over.
> ...


 (b) sounds like what has been alleged (e.g. by Colin Wallace, amongst others) about the Kincora boys' home in Northern Ireland, don't know if it's been suggested this was policy on the mainland too, wouldn't be surprised.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

On that C$ piece:



> The resident said he did inform police: "I made a statement to *South Wales* Police with regard to* some alleged offences in SW area* - a statement was taken but didn't hear anything else about it."


----------



## Bedgewick3 (Nov 6, 2012)

What's Watson's game here?   Is he deliberately lying to embarrass the Tories or has the publicity he got over hacking gone to his head?

Nasty man.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

It's both - but what's the problem? Why nasty?


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> This means that crick and team are now at last/least digging.



Crick maybe thinks there has been a misidentification of the prominent Tory?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> Crick maybe thinks there has been a misidentification of the prominent Tory?


Quite possibly, but at least they are now in there.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

Bedgewick3 said:


> What's Watson's game here? Is he deliberately lying to embarrass the Tories or has the publicity he got over hacking gone to his head?
> 
> Nasty man.


 
he maybe a publicity hungry cheesepiece but he is at least standing up and saying this stuff in parliament.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

c4 now


----------



## magneze (Nov 6, 2012)

One name on C4 now.


----------



## magneze (Nov 6, 2012)

Sir Peter Morrison


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

helpfully dead.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Note the C4 news saying _grandee_ rather than _politician_.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Dan U said:


> helpfully dead.


Already done but not sure we had connected him with north wales. If that connection is solid we have real trouble.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Those photos were used in a prosecution - they existed.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Already done but not sure we had connected him with north wales. If that connection is solid we have real trouble.


 
good point. i do understand it is probably just the start.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

this inquiry limiting stuff is similar to Hillsborough ffs.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Those photos were used in a prosecution - they existed.


 
Can you remind me where this is mentioned?

Also I'm scratching my head slightly that a high-profile tory would allow themselves to be photographed, but I dont claim its impossible.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Paul Flynn ‏@Paulflynnmp

No need for new evidence. Publishing the past testimonies suppressed by powerful people will provide abudant evidence of North Wales abuse,


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 6, 2012)

People with better political memories than me, does this feel like a tipping point? A tsunami of filth that could engulf the Establishment? Or will it just go away and back to business as usual?  Am struggling to think of anything in the past that was quite so toxic and extreme as this...this story has run for over a month now and seems to be still just beginning...


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Already done but not sure we had connected him with north wales. If that connection is solid we have real trouble.


 
He had been connected before, both in the distant past and in the last week or so. It's one of the reasons I bothered to spend so much time on this stuff recently.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> He had been connected before, both in the distant past and in the last week or so. It's one of the reasons I bothered to spend so much time on this stuff recently.


Fair play, i'm having trouble keeping what and who is relevant to the forefront.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> People with better political memories than me, does this feel like a tipping point? A tsunami of filth that could engulf the Establishment? Or will it just go away and back to business as usual? Am struggling to think of anything in the past that was quite so toxic and extreme as this...this story has run for over a month now and seems to be still just beginning...


 
It's got immense potential, somewhat limited by a likely lack of direct evidence, and that a lot of the current tories are not from the Thatcher era.

One of the biggest problems they've got is that they are damned either way, in some ways it might be better for them if someone can be found guilty otherwise people will just assume its another coverup.

Whatever happens its only going to accelerate peoples distrust of the establishment and its minions.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Fair play, i'm having trouble keeping what and who is relevant to the forefront.


 
Tell me about it! I've mangled my brain on this stuff and will have to take a break at some point.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Great, someone who actually read the Jillings report and yet manages to add nothing to the debate, other than say this isnt about tories. (Karen Lumley MP on C4 news)


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Fair play, i'm having trouble keeping what and who is relevant to the forefront.


 
An example, as made reference to on C4 earlier.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html


----------



## kavenism (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> This means that crick and team are now at last/least digging.


 


Which is amusing given his own history of sexual improprieties. Not kids by the way, but he's still an unscrupulous fuck who I’ve had rather more to do with than I’d wish.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> An example.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html


God, i even posted about it myself.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

TV news has been very soft on William Hague so far, that didnt really change tonight.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:
			
		

> TV news has been very soft on William Hague so far, that didnt really change tonight.



Agreed , there were monents in c4 discussion that led directly into his setting up of review but they just didn't go down that road

Re earlier Crick text, I felt o'brien may not have been convinced by all of messham's answers. Anyone else get that or am I just reading him wrong? Discussion between them possibly where crick's text came from?


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> Re earlier Crick text, I felt o'brien may not have been convinced by all of messham's answers. Anyone else get that or am I just reading him wrong? Discussion between them possibly where crick's text came from?


 
Thats going to be a problem with Messham just as it has been in the past. But they are still willing to air interviews with him so they arent writing him off completely.

There are numerous possibilities when it comes to Cricks scepticism. It could be any number of details, but bearing in mind that Crick is a political journalist I would not be surprised if at least some of his doubts are based on talking to a range of political contacts.


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

Dan U said:


> helpfully dead.


Quite.  And his corpse stinks of decoy and scapegoat.


----------



## Dan U (Nov 6, 2012)

already a pic circulating on facebook about Hague, saying he shut the inquiry down when 'half the cabinet' was implicated.

not sure how helpful things like that are really when it is quite an extreme claim like that.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> Great, someone who actually read the Jillings report and yet manages to add nothing to the debate, other than say this isnt about tories. (Karen Lumley MP on C4 news)


She said the report didn't exist any longer - yet we know a copy was sent to the Independent (don't know if this is the one Eileen Fairweather took 3 days copying out by hand). Fairweather did say she sent pages of it to the media so there must be a lot of this that is well known.

The fusilier's wiki page has been locked btw!


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

Feeling much more pessimistic about it right now.  If there's truth to these stories, then there's absolutely fuck all chance of it coming out through an "inquiry".  Far too much to lose for that to happen.  I'm sure the gears are already spinning at breakneck speed - Crick's backtrack, and the sudden appearance of a witness to a dead man that can be made to fit the description, both stink of it.

The only faint hope I have of full exposure (whatever that may be) is through the intermaweb.  A very faint hope, given that it's already riddled with CTs that will make it easy to spin discredit on genuine accounts and discoveries.

If ever there was something useful and constructive that the anon/lulsec/whatever mob could be doing with their time, then this...


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

Dan U said:


> already a pic circulating on facebook about Hague, saying he shut the inquiry down when 'half the cabinet' was implicated.
> 
> not sure how helpful things like that are really when it is quite an extreme claim like that.


Pretty much the opposite of helpful, unless it can be properly substantiated. The more loony claims that can be justifiably ridiculed are out there and circulating widely, the easier that genuine things can be swept up into the same dustpile.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> Quite. And his corpse stinks of decoy and scapegoat.


 
Not really. Scapegoat doesnt seem appropriate really given his probable guilt, and I wouldnt say he is much of a decoy either, its not preventing the attention on others from continuing. The dead are going to be named first, and actually I think the stuff about him should be a bigger story than it is, nice to see channel 4 showing video of him sitting next to Thatcher.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> Crick's backtrack, and the sudden appearance of a witness to a dead man that can be made to fit the description, both stink of it.


 
I simply cant agree with this, leaves me wondering what you think the 'prize' at the end of this is.

Crick was never the one pushing things forwards in the first place.

Morrison isnt some sudden addition to the story designed to protect others. He was a major Tory, dont get much closer to Thatcher than that.

The appearance of witnesses is always a good thing. Just because they arent naming someone you have in your sights, so what?


----------



## savoloysam (Nov 6, 2012)

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/andrea-davison-jimmy-savile-serco-and.html


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> Feeling much more pessimistic about it right now. If there's truth to these stories, then there's absolutely fuck all chance of it coming out through an "inquiry". Far too much to lose for that to happen. I'm sure the gears are already spinning at breakneck speed - Crick's backtrack, and the sudden appearance of a witness to a dead man that can be made to fit the description, both stink of it.
> 
> The only faint hope I have of full exposure (whatever that may be) is through the intermaweb. A very faint hope, given that it's already riddled with CTs that will make it easy to spin discredit on genuine accounts and discoveries.
> 
> If ever there was something useful and constructive that the anon/lulsec/whatever mob could be doing with their time, then this...


Absolutely wrong - every media is straining at the leash. Their cowardice to this point is about to be broken. C4 _just fucking said it in front of your face._


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> If ever there was something useful and constructive that the anon/lulsec/whatever mob could be doing with their time, then this...


 
What do you think they are going to do, hack into Max Cliffords brain? Sadly such possibilities dont exist.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

If Tom Watson stays on this as he did with hacking and others have the courage to join him, then this thing isn't going away, inquiries or no, anytime soon. As the hounded and imprisoned whistleblower on Jersey,  Stuart Syvret wrote recently:


> And there can be fewer more pertinent examples than the corrupt concealment of child-abuse in Jersey – and the concealment of that corrupt concealment, by the traditional media – the BBC in particular.  The unacknowledged key, power of the traditional media – that of omission – has been both exposed, and rendered redundant by Jersey bloggers.
> 
> One of the things the media, even at a national level, still does not seem to have grasped, is that their major power (and perhaps their most serious cultural failing) namely the power of omission, is dead.
> 
> ...



Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret Blog


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> C4 _just fucking said it in front of your face._


The telly's_ just not fucking on_.


elbows said:


> Morrison isnt some sudden addition to the story designed to protect others. He was a major Tory, dont get much closer to Thatcher than that.
> 
> The appearance of witnesses is always a good thing. Just because they arent naming someone you have in your sights, so what?


I don't have anyone "in my sights".
Do you expect there to be a genuine, transparent and honest inquiry?  Or do you think that dead people will be found guilty, and many (if not all) of the living will be absolved?  My money's on the latter.


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> What do you think they are going to do, hack into Max Cliffords brain? Sadly such possibilities dont exist.


I'm sure there are a lot of emails flying around right now.


----------



## where to (Nov 6, 2012)

all very quiet from nick Davies, and guardian in general in last week. Wonder what is being prepared from them as we speak . Naming would be up rusbringers street I feel.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> I'm sure there are a lot of emails flying around right now.


 
I doubt it. Some of the important lessons for swine this century are: dont email, dont text.


----------



## Watchman (Nov 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Watson mentioning "mysterious fires" reminds me of an abuse-related case back in (I think) the early '90s down in Brighton/Hove, where a guy who'd been through the care system, followed by the sadly usual round of substance use and incarceration, had straightened himself out, had spoken to a journo from a local paper (_Brighton Argus_, I think), and had got together with some other survivors of abuse at the same institutions, and set up a shared flat with them.
> The fire that killed him and his flatmates was rumoured to have been the work of people who sometimes worked for Brighton's favourite slumlord, but Mr. Highstreet wouldn't have benefited from having a rentable property razed, whereas the abusers of a group of victims who'd decided to tell their tales, and who weren't looking to make mney through compo or through the media, had everything to gain by torching the place.


 


Just been reading these threads and thought this link might be helpful.
http://newsconfidential.com/FS/FS_Story.php?RequestID=32920
Details are accurate. I know, because I’ve been following this case from the beginning.
My interest? Tim Sharp was my nephew.
The recent Savile revelations make various links, that until now have been tenuous, most interesting.
Nicholas Hoogstraten had connections with several places and locations that are currently coming to light. It’s generally believed that he ordered the arson attack in Hove to cover up some dodgy aspects of his life and activities. At the coroners hearing, several of my family and the families of the victims were intimidated and feared for their safety.
(I’m choosing my words with care)
As an aside, I did some maintenance work at the Bryn Estyn home in Wrexham and its involvement was no surprise to me.
There are more revelations to come, I’m sure.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> The telly's_ just not fucking on_.
> 
> I don't have anyone "in my sights".
> Do you expect there to be a genuine, transparent and honest inquiry? Or do you think that dead people will be found guilty, and many (if not all) of the living will be absolved? My money's on the latter.


 
I expect that it will be very hard for evidence of what actually happened to live up to what some people already suspect happened.

I expect the length of time that has passed, the nature of the evidence, and other stuff suh as the work of the intelligence services to complicate any quest for the truth.

I have no idea what evidence of past coverups may exist. Stuff some people have implied has been shredded recently was probably shredded a very long time ago, if it existed in the first place.

I will have higher expectations of what may unfold if either a copy of the original Jillings report is found and published, or if a completely different line if inquiry, unrelated to the north wales stuff, yields fruit.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

where to said:


> all very quiet from nick Davies, and guardian in general in last week. Wonder what is being prepared from them as we speak . Naming would be up rusbringers street I feel.


 
I think what we're going to see is a real test of the MSM's metal. No doubt there will be lots of journalists doing some very serious digging around and uncovering of various stories which could blow everything wide open. The question is how far are they prepared to go to sever the heads of the political classes? How much pressure will they come under not to run stories and will _editors_ have the courage to name and shame what they uncover or already know?

To them this isn't just about 'the truth', it's potentially about driving a massive wedge into the widening gap that already exists between the people and their government. They really could not have a subject that unites so many peoples views on all sides of the political spectrum. The views of the Daily Mail readers are going to be as near as much identical as those of say, Guardian readers. 'Divide and rule' isn't an option.

If im being optimistic id say their 'news management' wont keep a lid on this one, if im being pessimistic id say they will limit it to a few sacrificial lambs that will satisfy the general public's need to be told 'the truth'. History tells us that the perhaps later is likely, but given everything else that has gone on over the last few years it might just be the straw that breaks the camels back.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Jimmy Savile 'quizzed over Yorkshire Ripper murders' | Mail Online


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

elbows said:


> I will have higher expectations of what may unfold if either a copy of the original Jillings report is found and published


There was a news story (Mirror?) linked earlier in the thread, where the author talked of copying the whole report out by hand (to protect the source, as all copies were numbered & watermarked) and leaking bit of it.  If you know the one I mean, can you remember who the journo was?  And have they made any noises recently?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Just been reading these threads and thought this link might be helpful.
> http://newsconfidential.com/FS/FS_Story.php?RequestID=32920
> Details are accurate. I know, because I’ve been following this case from the beginning.
> My interest? Tim Sharp was my nephew.
> ...


 
Thanks for that. I thought id heard Hoogstraten before, not exactly your average landlord is he....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_van_Hoogstraten


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> I think what we're going to see is a real test of the MSM's metal. No doubt there will be lots of journalists doing some very serious digging around and uncovering of various stories which could blow everything wide open. The question is how far are they prepared to go to sever the heads of the political classes? How much pressure will they come under not to run stories and will _editors_ have the courage to name and shame what they uncover or already know?
> 
> To them this isn't just about 'the truth', it's potentially about driving a massive wedge into the widening gap that already exists between the people and their government. They really could not have a subject that unites so many peoples views on all sides of the political spectrum. The views of the Daily Mail readers are going to be as near as much identical as those of say, Guardian readers. 'Divide and rule' isn't an option.
> 
> If im being optimistic id say their 'news management' wont keep a lid on this one, if im being pessimistic id say they will limit it to a few sacrificial lambs that will satisfy the general public's need to be told 'the truth'. History tells us that the perhaps later is likely, but given everything else that has gone on over the last few years it might just be the straw that breaks the camels back.


load of wank. say they them who do you mean?


----------



## kenny g (Nov 6, 2012)

I'm sorry, but the idea that there are stacks of skilled journo investigators out there doing "some real digging" is bullshit. Nothing that has come out in the past few days is anything more than what was already known - including the recent revelations about morrison which were in edwina curries book FFS.

You are not going to get much better than what people are finding out via the interwebs, - read the recent blogs from "real whitby" for some very interesting background to Jimmy Savile and co. In terms of politics await some more evidence of security service blackmail and I am sure "peripheral" royal links.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

Corax said:


> There was a news story (Mirror?) linked earlier in the thread, where the author talked of copying the whole report out by hand (to protect the source, as all copies were numbered & watermarked) and leaking bit of it.  If you know the one I mean, can you remember who the journo was?  And have they made any noises recently?


Eileen Fairweather: http://www.mirror.co.uk/opinion/news-opinion/eileen-fairweather-journalist-who-helped-1416666


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

kenny g said:


> I'm sorry, but the idea that there are stacks of skilled journo investigators out there doing "some real digging" is bullshit. Nothing that has come out in the past few days is anything more than what was already known - including the recent revelations about morrison which were in edwina curries book FFS.
> 
> You are not going to get much better than what people are finding out via the interwebs, - read the recent blogs from "real whitby" for some very interesting background to Jimmy Savile and co. In terms of politics await some more evidence of security service blackmail and I am sure "peripheral" royal links.


OMG i have the truth!! Grow up kenny,


----------



## kenny g (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Absolutely wrong - every media is straining at the leash. Their cowardice to this point is about to be broken. C4 _just fucking said it in front of your face._


 


butchersapron said:


> load of wank. say they them who do you mean?


 


butchersapron said:


> OMG i have the truth!! Grow up kenny,


 
Drinking?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> load of wank. say they them who do you mean?



I never had you down as someone who thought the government would get to the bottom of this,but maybe you're right? I'll be happy to be proven wrong.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Drinking?


Weird collection Kenny. But no, i haven't been drinking. If you think the first point is wrong then crack on with saying so and why.


----------



## kenny g (Nov 6, 2012)

Interesting how Hague gave Portillo the shadow chancellor position when he was leader of the opposition.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

kenny g said:


> I'm sorry, but the idea that there are stacks of skilled journo investigators out there doing "some real digging" is bullshit. Nothing that has come out in the past few days is anything more than what was already known - including the recent revelations about morrison which were in edwina curries book FFS.
> 
> You are not going to get much better than what people are finding out via the interwebs, - read the recent blogs from "real whitby" for some very interesting background to Jimmy Savile and co. In terms of politics await some more evidence of security service blackmail and I am sure "peripheral" royal links.



I'm sure there will be journalists digging about, maybe not hundreds, but perhaps more than your usual story might attract. Having said that I'm not impressed with their efforts so far, like yourself.


----------



## Corax (Nov 6, 2012)

Re Peter Morrison - Realised I was confusing him with Stephen Milligan.  Still entirely suspect the outcome I suggested though (dead condemned, living absolved, maybe a sacrificial lamb).


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 6, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Interesting how Hague gave Portillo the shadow chancellor position when he was leader of the opposition.



Portillo said a few days ago he thought there should be a full enquiry :-D


----------



## kenny g (Nov 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Weird collection Kenny. But no, i haven't been drinking. If you think the first point is wrong then crack on with saying so and why.


 
Fair enough. I'm throwing in the towel for the night. We need to get some kind of evidence map for all of this. There is a freeware software that can be used to get a decent over view of investigations as complex as this. If anyone can dig it out , let us know.


----------



## Prole (Nov 6, 2012)

> Wales child abuse inquiry in 2000 wrongly said Tory accused was dead
> 
> Waterhouse report into scandal has major discrepancies with recent Newsnight allegations against living ex-politician
> 
> ...



BBC - Historic Marchwiel Hall on the market for £2.5m


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Fair enough. I'm throwing in the towel for the night. We need to get some kind of evidence map for all of this. There is a freeware software that can be used to get a decent over view of investigations as complex as this. If anyone can dig it out , let us know.


 
To be honest if you did that at this point then it would probably end up as a much simpler picture than the meanderings of this thread and the media over recent weeks would suggest.

By this I mean that apart from a completely separate allegation from a former child actor who likes his conspiracy theories these days, everything we've heard so far goes straight back to the north wales stuff. I dont think we know how many victims gave tory-related evidence to Jillings at the time, but up until a couple of days ago the recent stuff in the media was pretty much from one victim, or people who had read the Jillings report. As of writing this I think I've now seen four victims speak to the media (I just saw another one on the BBC news) but perhaps only two of them are speaking first-hand about tories, its not entirely clear at this point. We've used the later Waterhouse report to explore some of the detail, but its confusing in places.

Until more emerges from that, its only the old Scallywag stuff that build further on the north wales stuff, throwing three or four more political names into the picture by linking it to events in London. The media havent gone down this route yet, and for all I know they may not do so.

Meanwhile on the carefree dot-joining internet sites, these things are joined by a bunch of historical examples, which we tend to know about because they were actually prosecuted at the time, or at least caused scandals. But they also throw in a few more names for good measure without actually getting into detail about what exactly they are alleged to have done, victims, etc. Add a couple of strange deaths. Then add some stuff about operation Ore, which are probably based on newspaper reports about 'several Labour figures' but never went further than that in the mainstream as far as I know. And then a few bits and bobs that may be sponsored by homophobia or antisemitism for all we know.

And of course the various disturbing establishment angles revolving around Savile himself. So far this leads to plenty of WTF moments, a bunch of people we probably think the police should talk to, and at least one civil servant who may have been involved with Savile's Broadmoor appointment and got in trouble later for non-Savile sex crimes.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2012)

Oh in that summary I missed some of the other lines of inquiry that Tom Watson has been getting at recently, eg Peter Righton.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 6, 2012)

Well its just one instance of WTF after another. I pretty much dont know who or why or what to believe on this anymore. Whats interesting is how the media are playing this very straight - just reporting the stories. I dont think I've seen one comment piece on this, or anyone in the MSM writing an article that paints an overall picutre of what this is all about.

(edited to add -  actually the gruan has an editiorial on this http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/06/child-abuse-committees-cruelty-editorial which does a great job of tip-toeing around the elephant in the room and keeping as bland as possible)

But we are essentailly talking about parts of the caresystem being used as a child-brothel for the rich and powerful with the police, judicary and political establishement, at best, turning a blind eye at worst actively facilitating it.

The surface calm surely hides furious activity going on below the surface within media organisations, the civil service and the government.

The revelations about peter morrison is big news - this was someone who was very close to thatcher and instantly raises the question about who knew about his activities. That is harldly going to put the story to bed. This is something the you would expect the media go apeshit over - but its wierd how its being mentioned almost in passing.

If we are seeing what we may be seeing than at least there may be several wealthy well connected men who thought they were untouchable who are sleeping far less easily in their beds.

Also - if the police and judiciary dont take action and the evidence continues to leak out - and is further fuled by wild speculation - then polular anger might start to make itself felt against those being accuesed - and agaisnt those seen as protecting them.

A powder keg?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 7, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Whats interesting is how the media are playing this very straight - just reporting the stories. I dont think I've seen one comment piece on this, or anyone in the MSM writing an article that paints an overall picutre of what this is all about.


 I was about to be a cheeky cunt and ask if anyone would do 2 paragraphs on were this is up to (I've not really followed much since the Savile phase)! But yeah, the absence of overview pieces and extrapolations are odd. Obvious legal anxieties, but as you say the reporting does seem pretty formal.




> Also - if the police and judiciary dont take action and the evidence continues to leak out - and is further fuled by wild speculation - then polular anger might start to make itself felt against those being accuesed - and agaisnt those seen as protecting them.
> 
> A powder keg


Hope it will blow up and take every last rapist cunt but, maybe it's just my natural pessimism on these things, I doubt it. In particular, I suspect the timetables of the different enquiries will be important, with it all coming out in bits and pieces. Tom Watson seems keen to avoid that with his interventions today - but also a letter he's just done to Cameron.
http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/

Whether he or one of the survivors does some sort of public naming, outside of parliament, might ultimately be what it takes to push the whole thing on.  Not impossible, but unlikely.


----------



## discokermit (Nov 7, 2012)

elbows said:


> Oh in that summary I missed some of the other lines of inquiry that Tom Watson has been getting at recently, eg Peter Righton.


there's also links from  broadmoor/krays/pimping for tory and labour politicians that might be considered.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 7, 2012)

A bloody brilliant, incredibly sad comment piece from one well placed to comment

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/06/inquiries-fail-abused-children


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

Those waiting for the Independent and journalist Roger Dobson to revisit the story need wait no longer. But it does not add much to the picture to be honest.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/a-nightmare-without-end-8290187.html

​


> The Jillings report had been expected to provide an overview and answer some of these questions, but it had been suppressed. The Independent and The Independent on Sunday gained access to some of the recommendations, and eventually were given unrestricted access to one of the numbered copies.​Its contents were explosive: "It is the opinion of the panel that extensive and widespread abuse has occurred within Clwyd residential establishments for children and young people. Our findings show that time and again, the response to indications that children may have been abused has been too little and too late." It condemned professionals: "There has been a conflict of interest between safeguarding professional positions versus the safety of children and young people. The interests of children have almost invariably been sacrificed.​"It is clear that in a significant number of cases the lives of young people who have been through the care system in Clwyd have been severely disrupted and disturbed. "​


​


> Clwyd Council was concerned enough to raise questions about a paedophile ring with the Chief Constable, and one of the internal reports, which was obtained by The Independent at the time, raised the issue, too: "There remain worrying current instances of conviction and prosecution for sexual offences of persons who are known to have worked together in child care establishments both in the county [Clwyd] and in other parts of the North-west," it said. "These suggest that abuse could have been happening unabated for many years and, that there could be operating a league or ring of paedophiles."
> And were prominent public figures involved? Allegations and rumours of abuse of children in care in North Wales have been rife for many years, and leading politicians are consistently alleged to be involved. Some have been named on the internet – repeatedly so, in recent days.


​


> Should we take them seriously? As a journalist who was deeply involved in the story for some time, I saw the allegations as being sincerely held, and they have persisted. But to publish them would have needed solid evidence. Sadly, the very nature of sexual abuse of this kind means that such solid evidence was and is very hard to come by.​Yet, despite two tribunals, 10 or so court cases, more than a dozen reports, and several internal inquires, there remain unanswered questions about exactly what happened in and around those children's home in North Wales over two decades.​Jillings, too, had encountered talk of the involvement of public figures. His report said he was unable to tackle some issues because of the lack of a mandate, adding: "This includes the suggestion that public figures may have been involved in the abuse of young people in Clwyd."​


​


> *Q Shouldn't there have been an inquiry at the time?*
> *A* There were several: 12 internal council reports; an inquiry for the Welsh Office, which concluded that a full judicial inquiry would not be in the public interest; the 300-page Jillings report, prepared for Clwyd council in 1996 but never published; and a £20m judicial inquiry under Sir Ronald Waterhouse QC, which reported in 2000.


​


----------



## Prole (Nov 7, 2012)

and Eileen is pointing us here (and Islington can't be ignored with the present focus on N Wales and is probably what Tom Watson meant with his accusations of  another cover-up): http://www.lizdavies.net/cpa/cpa-jersey.htm which includes this:


> In one of Islington's offices in reports written over a period of 18 months 61 children were named as possible victims of organised network abuse. Liaison with other professionals led to the names of a large number of children being considered as having possible links or connections. However both Islington police and Scotland Yard reported insufficient evidence to support these allegations of network or ritual abuse. This view was also expressed by SSI led by Herbert Laming. The allegations were investigated but not substantiated.
> 
> I know what I witnessed, I know the I heard the children's accounts I know what adult survivors told me and I know I didn't make anything up. Why should I invent child abuse? I was a professional being paid to protect children and that was the work I was doing.
> 
> ...


and further on: 





> One manager of an Islington home, Nick Rabet, was never properly investigated by Islington and went on to abuse 300 children in Thailand. He committed suicide but came from Jersey originally. I don't know yet if there are links between the investigations.
> 
> Some information I heard at that time remains on my mind. One girl spoke to me of her and her sister being sold from Islington to a millionaire and the parties that took place there when older children from care homes were gathered at their mansion and these returned each month but younger children were not seen again. A children's home manager who disclosed corroborative evidence to me about this was sacked and the whole situation was never investigated.


Sickening abhorrent foul criminal stench - it all has to be exposed.


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> A bloody brilliant, incredibly sad comment piece from one well placed to comment
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/06/inquiries-fail-abused-children


 
Thats the third great article I've seen from her recently (mentioned others a couple of days ago)

The end is interesting: (edit - this is rather made obsolete by the much greater detail Prole just posted above)



> The child protection whistleblower who contacted the MP Tom Watson last month did so because he was once in a team of just the kind needed now. I was first in contact with his team and wrote about it 19 years ago, before it was abruptly closed down by orders from on high. It was a brilliant prototype, a joint police/social services investigation into the ring around childcare guru Peter Righton. It produced establishment names and revealed an alleged linked cover-up by Labour – let us never forget paedophilia is a cross-party crime – and was shut down as a result. Not one of the implicated men was prosecuted.


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

I would like to talk more about the Guardian article that brings up the possibility of confusion over the name, but cant see a way to discuss it properly at the moment. The alternative family member I have in mind so far has a very low profile in terms of whats ever been said about them on the net, but just enough nuggets to make me groan in horror.


----------



## BigTom (Nov 7, 2012)

Tweets from Sonia Poulton this morning:

Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton


> Talked with care home abuse victim. Used to be taken out by social workers to please MP. Victim was nowhere near Wales. #Countrywide


 
https://twitter.com/SoniaPoulton/status/266090574950572032

and yesterday



> Were you at a care home in Sunderland during the seventies, either as a worker (any capacity) or a child? If so, please get in touch


 
https://twitter.com/SoniaPoulton/status/265893374232502272 

Obviously no idea if the two are connected but seems likely (or at least possible). Anything about Sunderland come up at all yet? I don't remember anything. 





			
				kaka tim said:
			
		

> But we are essentailly talking about parts of the caresystem being used as a child-brothel for the rich and powerful with the police, judicary and political establishement, at best, turning a blind eye at worst actively facilitating it.


 
this


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 7, 2012)

It's really easy to imagine a situation where nothing in depth comes of this. Morrison becomes the sacrificial lamb, other names are discredited, or also dead or already convicted, or are social workers, care home workers, etc. The care system gets dragged over the coals, but any meaningful investigation into the way power is wielded by these people never happens.

I hope that's wrong. But it seems likely.


----------



## Prole (Nov 7, 2012)

^^ Sunderland: 





> Silencing a scandal – the story of Colin Smart
> The Guardian
> Published April 1998 One comment... »
> 
> ...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 7, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> I think what we're going to see is a real test of the MSM's metal. No doubt there will be lots of journalists doing some very serious digging around and uncovering of various stories which could blow everything wide open. The question is how far are they prepared to go to sever the heads of the political classes? How much pressure will they come under not to run stories and will _editors_ have the courage to name and shame what they uncover or already know?


 
As I've made clear in previous post on this subject (other Savile threads esp.), it's not about editorial courage, it's about whether the papers' lawyers will clear a story, and whether the owner (corporate or individual) interferes.  An example I gave on a thread was that stories about the late Terry Nutkins liking mid-teen girls were doing the rounds back in the mid-eighties, but because the evidence was testimony from young women who hadn't reported being abused to the police, the lawyers spiked the story, as because the paper had no physical evidence, Nutkins could have sued them for libel. As it's hard to estimate damages and costs in a libel case, most papers are averse to going to court, and keep _schtumm_ instead.



> To them this isn't just about 'the truth', it's potentially about driving a massive wedge into the widening gap that already exists between the people and their government. They really could not have a subject that unites so many peoples views on all sides of the political spectrum. The views of the Daily Mail readers are going to be as near as much identical as those of say, Guardian readers. 'Divide and rule' isn't an option.


 
The papers aren't interested in political action. Most of them are perfectly happy with the _status quo_, as long as it continues to provide them with fodder that they can spin to suit their readerships' prejudices.



> If im being optimistic id say their 'news management' wont keep a lid on this one, if im being pessimistic id say they will limit it to a few sacrificial lambs that will satisfy the general public's need to be told 'the truth'. History tells us that the perhaps later is likely, but given everything else that has gone on over the last few years it might just be the straw that breaks the camels back.


 
While it's to be hoped that a "critical mass" of abuse scandals and revelations about Establishment participants is reached, bear n mind the forces ranged against "the truth". I'm not just talking about "the security services", "the Establishment" and well-placed perverts, I'm talking about, for example, the municipal insurers (whom I've mentioned in previous posts and threads on the subject too) who put a chokehold on local authorities investigating abuse claims way back from the '80s on.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 7, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Interesting how Hague gave Portillo the shadow chancellor position when he was leader of the opposition.


 
Hmmm, let me guess. Members of The Sacred Band giving each other jobs?

Tenuous, Kenny.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 7, 2012)

It was all a witch hunt...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Secret-Bryn-Estyn-Making/dp/0951592246


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...t-be-fully-investigated-says-Theresa-May.html


> The senior Tory accused of child abuse has strenuously denied the allegations. He told The Daily Telegraph on Monday that he has only once visited Wrexham in North Wales, where the abuse took place.
> He said: “Some guy said I was in the habit of taking young men from Wrexham in my Rolls-Royce.
> “But I have only been to Wrexham once and I didn’t visit the children’s home, I made a speech to the constituency. I was with an official at all times. I never had a Rolls Royce.
> “When the inquiry was taking place I hired a lawyer to watch it in case there was any mention of my name. The point is that it is totally without any grounds whatsoever.”



Has anybody seen anything further on the net that explores the possibility that the wrong member of the extended family has been identified? Last time I checked twitter hadnt really picked up on it.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Nov 7, 2012)

John Jillings has just been interviewed on radio 4. He says he didn't hear the names of senior tory politicians (the ones which are circulating semi-publicly at the moment) at the time of his enquiry. Didn't catch all the detail. Should be on iplayer shortly.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 7, 2012)

Factual summary of the North Wales investigations here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/06/wales-child-abuse-scandal-questions

It's useful for people like me who aren't up to speed.


----------



## little_legs (Nov 7, 2012)

elbows said:


> I would like to talk more about the Guardian article that brings up the possibility of confusion over the name, but cant see a way to discuss it properly at the moment. The alternative family member I have in mind so far has a very low profile in terms of whats ever been said about them on the net, but just enough nuggets to make me groan in horror.


 
2 articles here mention some Lord and his son, both dead though


----------



## happie chappie (Nov 7, 2012)

This is a quite interesting satire:

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/...lly-admits-to-chip-abuse-during-thatcher-era/

As it says, it relates entirely to the good Lord's self-professed liking for egg and chips and nothing more. (Mods, please feel free to remove should you deem it appropriate).


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

Brixton Hatter said:


> John Jillings has just been interviewed on radio 4. He says he didn't hear the names of senior tory politicians (the ones which are circulating semi-publicly at the moment) at the time of his enquiry. Didn't catch all the detail. Should be on iplayer shortly.


 
Cheers. There is a bbc story based on the interview, including audio from Jillings and Messham. If anything it only adds to the confusion and Messham really doesnt help matters. That independent article I posted last night is better.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20234776


----------



## Dan U (Nov 7, 2012)

Mr Icke has named a particular person on his website but it appears to be incredibly slow and i can't access the actual articles.

he also seems to be calling out Mr Hague as well.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 7, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> It was all a witch hunt...
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Secret-Bryn-Estyn-Making/dp/0951592246


 
interesting reviews


----------



## free spirit (Nov 7, 2012)

free spirit said:


> for those not wanting to trawl the article, the quote potentially relevant to savile is
> 
> 
> 
> I've just found email addresses for 2 of the journos listed as co-writers, to see if either of them are in a position to confirm if this was referring to savile or not.


I've had a reply, but they unfortunately couldn't actually find the article I'd linked to. Hopefully I'll know the ID of the person referred to in the article tomorrow though.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 7, 2012)

Things getting unpleasant

https://twitter.com/smessham


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

Channel 4 news had Rod Richards on tonight, continuing the Peter Morrison angle. He said again that he had seen Peter Morrison named in a report, and that he thinks it was the Jillings report. He also says that the civil service/government had a copy and he doesnt have any particular reason to think this copy would have been destroyed. However he didnt seem to think he saw another political name in the report, which doesnt match what that Daily Mail article had him saying in late October. These inconsistencies are doing my head in.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 7, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Just been reading these threads and thought this link might be helpful.
> http://newsconfidential.com/FS/FS_Story.php?RequestID=32920
> Details are accurate. I know, because I’ve been following this case from the beginning.
> My interest? Tim Sharp was my nephew.
> ...


Hi - thanks for joining and posting. Unfortunately your link seems to be broken, so I'm not sure what the story is that you were wanting to link to.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 7, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Hi - thanks for joining and posting. Unfortunately your link seems to be broken, so I'm not sure what the story is that you were wanting to link to.


 
Works for me

http://newsconfidential.com/FS/FS_Story.php?RequestID=32920

eta:  Thanks for sharing your story Watchman.  Sorry to hear one of your relatives was a victim.


----------



## kenny g (Nov 7, 2012)

kenny g said:


> According to the Nick Davis's article Lord A's son was 25 in 1979 - giving a year of birth as 1954. The one Lord who looked a suitable candidate has sons born far later than that.


 


Prole said:


> BBC - Historic Marchwiel Hall on the market for £2.5m


 
http://www.cylex-uk.co.uk/reviews/v...rmaName=marchbrook-leisure&companyId=13642408

http://thepeerage.com/p50219.htm



> …..and so the extravaganza
> occurred at Lakeside Lodge
> with a large contingent of
> folk wishing his Lordship a
> ...


 Travelogue 87

ETA: looks like it is a different Lord.


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

There is going to be a new inquiry about Jersey:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nquiry-to-examine-claims-of-Jersey-abuse.html


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

at this story from February 2008

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bank-job-that-opened-the-door-on-a-royal-293740



> He gives a fascinating insight into the raid that netted £500,000 from 268 safety deposit boxes - worth about £5million today.
> Despite massive interest in the crime, details about the loot and the criminals responsible were immediately suppressed by MI5 and senior government officials.
> Speculation quickly arose that compromising sexual photographs of the Queen's sister, the late Princess Margaret, had been uncovered in the bank vault. It was rumoured they had been stashed away by well-known underworld figure Michael X. A drug dealer and Black Power leader, he was convicted of murder and hanged in Trinidad in 1975. A government file on him will remain closed until 2054.
> The Mirror can for the first time reveal that Fleet Street editors of the day were approached directly by senior government officials and told to drop the story.





> Now, one of the men, in his 70s, has spoken to the Mirror from his home in Europe. The ex-gang member said he was terrified to discover one box belonged to the-then head of the judiciary.
> He said: "It was owned by Quintin Hogg, the Lord Chancellor.
> When we opened it we dropped it on the floor like it was a time bomb. We didn't want to take anything that might give us extra trouble so we left it. All we wanted was cash and jewels."
> But the gang didn't have time to go through all of the stash and ended up taking some sensitive material.
> The ex-raider, who refused to be identified, said last night: "When we got out we realised we had a lot more than we'd bargained for."





> But when we asked the ex-raider he refused to deny the rumours. He said: "I can't talk about that. But we did find a lot of guns.
> And what was most disturbing was the child pornography we found.
> We were disgusted and left it in their open boxes so police could trace the owners."


 
edited to say that you should probably read the full article since the quotes I've chosen might create the wrong impression about box ownership.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 7, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Works for me
> 
> http://newsconfidential.com/FS/FS_Story.php?RequestID=32920
> 
> eta: Thanks for sharing your story Watchman. Sorry to hear one of your relatives was a victim.


oh, that's odd, it's working for me as well now.

I think I read that article a few weeks back, but wasn't entirely sure of its credibility.

Assuming Watchman is who he says he is*, then I'd now have to view the allegations and entire article as very credible.



*no offence Watchman, but the interweb can be an odd place where people sometimes do show up assuming entirely false personas, so it's usually best to keep a healthy degree of scepticism. I'm working on the assumption that you're exactly who you say you are.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 7, 2012)

> The Mirror can for the first time reveal that Fleet Street editors of the day were approached directly by senior government officials and told to drop the story.


 
hmm


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 7, 2012)

little_legs said:


> 2 articles here mention some Lord and his son, both dead though


 
Names mentioned here - http://www.rebeccatelevision.com/articles/mason_free_01


----------



## kenny g (Nov 7, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Names mentioned here - http://www.rebeccatelevision.com/articles/mason_free_01


http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/thomas-kenyon-son-of-lord-kenyon-was-a-paedophile/


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

Well done. I know some people are pissed off the only the dead are being named at this point, but I think its still useful. Just because they are dead doesnt mean they arent an important part of establishing the truth. And as this thread demonstrates there are a fair number of confusing articles and some uncertainty about who is who and how many different politicians, lords etc are being referred to. So its good to have loose ends tidied up.

Someone seems to think the Times named that dead son today, at least in their print edition. I cant confirm this.


----------



## Prole (Nov 7, 2012)

Jimmy Savile linked to North Wales child abuse scandal - Telegraph


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 7, 2012)

Has anyone got any idea what the story is with Messham and RyanTanner on Twitter besides what RT's already stating publicly?


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2012)

*Paraic O'Brien* ‏@*paraicobrien*
Fmr senior Waterhouse Inq official tells me the Polaroids (in yesterday's report) were destroyed & shouldn't have been.#*brynestyn*


----------



## Prole (Nov 7, 2012)

Perhaps these haven't been destroyed yet!


> Soon after his death police raided Lee's flat and removed, among other things, a video cassette thought to have been a compilation of porn films made by people - and involving children - Lee knew.
> 
> AU - Mystery Arson


----------



## little_legs (Nov 7, 2012)

Tom Kenyon is named in The Times today

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3DLdtjEG1FYRVlEbm9QRHk3ZDA


----------



## Prole (Nov 7, 2012)

> * A man who bears the same surname as a prominent Conservative supporter. Two witnesses have told the tribunal of a rich and powerful man who belonged to the alleged ring.
> 
> * The son of an influential peer who admitted to police that he had been having sex with an under-aged boy from one of the homes. Despite his admission, he was never prosecuted.
> 
> ...


So the 2nd is Kenyon, one of the others is Morrison and the 3rd?


----------



## Prole (Nov 7, 2012)

little_legs said:


> Tom Kenyon is named in The Times today
> 
> https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3DLdtjEG1FYRVlEbm9QRHk3ZDA


'A Freemason' - that's a first as far as I can recall, something is definitely shifting.


----------



## little_legs (Nov 8, 2012)

That link DJ Squelch provided re Lord Kenyon's pressure on the cops is corroborated by this Indy article. An article published a day earlier alludes to an accused ex-cop that I suspect Kenyon was shielding from giving the evidence.

Also ... it occured to me tonight that fucking hell, I live on the Paedo British Isles.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

little_legs said:


> That link DJ Squelch provided re Lord Kenyon's pressure on the cops is corroborated by this Indy article. An article published a day earlier alludes to an accused ex-cop that I suspect Kenyon was shielding from giving the evidence.
> 
> Also ... it occured to me tonight that fucking hell, I live on the Paedo British Isles.


 
The ex cop, cleared of charges might well have been Gordon Anglesea. His name shows up in Google (Rebecca TV has a youtube video about this ive not had time to watch, so cant verify if its worth looking at) plenty of times in relation to the charges, but going with the Freemason line for a minute...

http://www.rebeccatelevision.com/articles/mason_free_01


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

free spirit said:


> oh, that's odd, it's working for me as well now.
> 
> I think I read that article a few weeks back, but wasn't entirely sure of its credibility.
> 
> ...


 
Yes, the story is credible and accurate and I am who I say I am. I wanted to post the link to the reports in the Hove Argus newspaper but have lost the link. Dig a little deeper into some of the details and characters if you wish. Every time my family tries to move on, another connection is made and my file grows fatter as the years pass.  If i find the original link, I'll post it.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Yes, the story is credible and accurate and I am who I say I am. I wanted to post the link to the reports in the Hove Argus newspaper but have lost the link. Dig a little deeper into some of the details and characters if you wish. Every time my family tries to move on, another connection is made and my file grows fatter as the years pass. If i find the original link, I'll post it.


 
Welcome to the board. Im sure people will be more than happy to help on here if we can in any way.


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Yes, the story is credible and accurate and I am who I say I am. I wanted to post the link to the reports in the Hove Argus newspaper but have lost the link. Dig a little deeper into some of the details and characters if you wish. Every time my family tries to move on, another connection is made and my file grows fatter as the years pass. If i find the original link, I'll post it.


 
I have this link:
http://www.theargus.co.uk/archive/2002/07/29/Brighton+Hove+Archive/5127732.Bid_to_reopen_fire_probe/
Unfortunately, the original Argus article is no longer in archive


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

I found this:
http://chris-ukorg.org/cover-ups/north-wales-childrens-home/
Dreadful, sensation-seeking website, but some interesting links to follow up on...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Ive started work on a flowchart (or Infographic as i think the new term for these things is!) to try and link all of this together in a coherent fashion.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Just to repeat as per the linked article - Kenyon the alleged abuser died of AIDS. Did the report look into those he had had sex with, and/or offer organisations who could provide testing etc.?


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Ive started work on a flowchart (or Infographic as i think the new term for these things is!) to try and link all of this together in a coherent fashion.


Look forward to that BM


----------



## Prole (Nov 8, 2012)

HI Watchman and my deepest condolences to you and your family. We can only keep demanding the truth and justice for all the victims of this sick twisted cover-up.

Do you know if it is correct that John Allen set Lee & his brother up in the flat in Brighton as is maintained in this documentary: Bryn Alyn HTV Documentary PART 1 - YouTube

Would that suggest that Allen and Van Hoogstraten were linked? 

This article claims that new evidence would lead to Sussex police re-opening the investigation - now that the N Wales child abuse cover-up is being 'investigated' will you be asking for this to be included?

Families demand new probe into deaths at Hoogstraten flat | UK news | The Observer


----------



## Prole (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Just to repeat as per the linked article - Kenyon the alleged abuser died of AIDS. Did the report look into those he had had sex with, and/or offer organisations who could provide testing etc.?


There is this from the Brighton fire:


> Two people, AIDS counsellor Mabel Roberts, 48, and Andrew Manners, 29, died from multiple injuries trying to jump to safety.


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

Prole said:


> HI Watchman and my deepest condolences to you and your family. We can only keep demanding the truth and justice for all the victims of this sick twisted cover-up.
> 
> Do you know if it is correct that John Allen set Lee & his brother up in the flat in Brighton as is maintained in this documentary: Bryn Alyn HTV Documentary PART 1 - YouTube
> 
> ...


 


Prole said:


> HI Watchman and my deepest condolences to you and your family. We can only keep demanding the truth and justice for all the victims of this sick twisted cover-up.
> 
> Do you know if it is correct that John Allen set Lee & his brother up in the flat in Brighton as is maintained in this documentary: Bryn Alyn HTV Documentary PART 1 - YouTube
> 
> ...


 

Accuracy is a little wanting.. Tim’s father was named Geoff, actually. He died over a year ago now.
We shall have to have a family meeting concerning a reopening of the case.
Most of the victim’s families are unlikely to want this dragged up again and one never knows if the earlier threats would still be carried out. It’s a dangerous game when nobody really knows how high up this goes, not helped by the Masonic connections, of course.

I have no information about John Allen and Lee I’m afraid. Will look at the video though.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-inquiry-whitewash-judge-said-1424184



> *Paedophile inquiry 'whitewash': Judge said Tory child sex abuse claims were “best forgotten”, claims former government lawyer*
> 
> 8 Nov 2012 00:00
> *He said the judge who headed an inquiry thought the shock accusations were “too sensitive” to be made public*
> ...


----------



## happie chappie (Nov 8, 2012)

IMHO we’re approaching a tipping point where a cover-up will be all but impossible. There are too many survivors willing to come forward, too much media interest, and at least one politician prepared to name names under Parliamentary Privilege.  

The name of the senior (living) Tory politician is well known and is all over the internet. He was named in Scallywag almost 20 years ago, but didn’t sue. We are edging closer and closer to it being placed into the public domain.

The floodgates are about to open and the sordid truth will start to emerge. Perhaps not all of it - but enough to cause major repercussions.

Many abusers must be shitting themselves and I wouldn’t be surprised if one or more take the “bottle of whiskey and the pearl-handled revolver” way out.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Accuracy is a little wanting.. Tim’s father was named Geoff, actually. He died over a year ago now.
> We shall have to have a family meeting concerning a reopening of the case.
> Most of the victim’s families are unlikely to want this dragged up again and one never knows if the earlier threats would still be carried out. It’s a dangerous game when nobody really knows how high up this goes, not helped by the Masonic connections, of course.
> 
> I have no information about John Allen and Lee I’m afraid. Will look at the video though.


 
If I can ask, what sort of threats did people receive and in what form?


----------



## where to (Nov 8, 2012)

Schofield has just asked Cameron on this on ITV. Apparently handed him a list of tory paedos named on net. Cam squirming. Names, apparently , could just  be seen on screen (apparently by mistake, ahem.) according to Guido fawkes.

Matthew Wright / John Leslie moment.

That might be it.


----------



## sunny jim (Nov 8, 2012)

Theresa May has banned a US investigative reporter from the UK who was following leads on the Tory paedophile ring and its connection to Jersey

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/...eresa-may-barred-a-us-journalist-from-the-uk/


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 8, 2012)

http://order-order.com/2012/11/08/b...dentatlly-revealed-tory-paedo-list-on-screen/

Should be on ITV+1 shortly


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> The name of the senior (living) Tory politician is well known and is all over the internet. He was named in Scallywag almost 20 years ago, but didn’t sue. We are edging closer and closer to it being placed into the public domain..


 
The only problem with that particular avenue is that there is a mistaken identity/wrong family member angle which is not completely implausible. However attempts to get to the bottom of this are also complicated. Many people on the net who are looking at another possibility seem to be guessing based on little more than location, I'm looking at another possibility which admittedly is also based on location, but its been complicated even further by that Times article which gives a different first name to any of these. 

Much as I am extremely keen for truth to emerge, I am disturbed by the willingness of many to make too many assumptions, I dont like the idea of innocent people being falsely accused. People should explore this stuff, but as with conspiracy theories I dont like to see possibilities turned into 'facts' just because people seem to prefer certainty.

However I suppose one way that people may be compelled to reveal the truth is if the false accusations cause more harm than the truth, compelling them to set the record straight.


----------



## cesare (Nov 8, 2012)

sunny jim said:


> Theresa May has banned a US investigative reporter who was following leads on the Tory paedophile ring and its connection to Jersey
> 
> http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/...eresa-may-barred-a-us-journalist-from-the-uk/


She's been banned for ages now, hasn't she?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Phil Schofield - that came out of nowhere. Hero! lol


----------



## sunny jim (Nov 8, 2012)

cesare said:


> She's been banned for ages now, hasn't she?


 
For nearly one year.


----------



## cesare (Nov 8, 2012)

Didn't Schofield give Starr a bit of a grilling earlier in the week too? Until Starr pointed out an occasion when Schofield swore blind he'd never met someone and it later transpired that he had, and had forgotten


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> If I can ask, what sort of threats did people receive and in what form?


Hi BM..
Well, as it was common knowledge that Hoogstraten was involved, albeit from a safe distance, it was 'suggested' by sundry burly scallywags that something unfortunate may occur, should the coroner and families dig too deep. It is the general view that the coroner was 'got at' in some way but this would be difficult to prove.
If you've not already done so, check out Mr Hoogstraten and his connections. You may find it most interesting.
His attitudes to ramblers, or 'scum' as he referred to them, give a little insight.
Apologies if I'm reluctant to elaborate on some aspects of these matters for reasons mentioned previously, but I'm sure you'll understand...Plus I've become rather attached to my kneecaps!


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

> _Q: Here's a piece of paper with some names. Will you speak to these three people?_
> Cameron says this is what he's worried about. He does not want there to be a witch hunt against gay people.


 
eh?!


----------



## where to (Nov 8, 2012)

cesare said:
			
		

> Didn't Schofield give Starr a bit of a grilling earlier in the week too?



Very much so.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> eh?!


 
because of age of consent changes whatwould have been sex with an underage boy then is not now. Homophobic smearing etc.

Although from what I've read the victims were in care homes so its under 16s anyway?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 8, 2012)

where to said:


> Schofield has just asked Cameron on this on ITV. Apparently handed him a list of tory paedos named on net. Cam squirming. Names, apparently , could just be seen on screen (apparently by mistake, ahem.) according to Guido fawkes.
> 
> Matthew Wright / John Leslie moment.
> 
> That might be it.


 I always thought it would be _Gordon the Gopher_ who made it big as a whistle blower.  How wrong we were - it's always the quiet ones.


----------



## happie chappie (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> The only problem with that particular avenue is that there is a mistaken identity/wrong family member angle which is not completely implausible. However attempts to get to the bottom of this are also complicated. Many people on the net who are looking at another possibility seem to be guessing based on little more than location, I'm looking at another possibility which admittedly is also based on location, but its been complicated even further by that Times article which gives a different first name to any of these.
> 
> Much as I am extremely keen for truth to emerge, I am disturbed by the willingness of many to make too many assumptions, I dont like the idea of innocent people being falsely accused. People should explore this stuff, but as with conspiracy theories I dont like to see possibilities turned into 'facts' just because people seem to prefer certainty.
> 
> However I suppose one way that people may be compelled to reveal the truth is if the false accusations cause more harm than the truth, compelling them to set the record straight.


 
I tend to agree although with anything of this nature I suspect there will be at least some false accusations. It’s almost inevitable. That’s not to denigrate the survivors in any way. It’s just a fact of life.

The Scallywag article was based on more than just location and covered four full, closely-typed pages. I quickly skimmed through it again last night. It links him (and many others) to a paedophile ring in North Wales and claimed it had documentary and sworn witness evidence. It also mentions the allegations made by Steve Messham and others. There is now a consistent pattern of the same names (accusers and accused) coming up time and again.

This was 20 years ago and not one sued.

Anyway, have to pop out now.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Hi BM..
> Well, as it was common knowledge that Hoogstraten was involved, albeit from a safe distance, it was 'suggested' by sundry burly scallywags that something unfortunate may occur, should the coroner and families dig too deep. It is the general view that the coroner was 'got at' in some way but this would be difficult to prove.
> If you've not already done so, check out Mr Hoogstraten and his connections. You may find it most interesting.
> His attitudes to ramblers, or 'scum' as he referred to them, give a little insight.
> Apologies if I'm reluctant to elaborate on some aspects of these matters for reasons mentioned previously, but I'm sure you'll understand...Plus I've become rather attached to my kneecaps!


 
Hi, thanks that's more than answerd it


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> The Scallywag article was based on more than just location and covered four full, closely-typed pages. I quickly skimmed through it again last night. It links him (and many others) to a paedophile ring in North Wales and claimed it had documentary and sworn witness evidence. It also mentions the allegations made by Steve Messham and others. There is now a consistent pattern of the same names (accusers and accused) coming up time and again.
> 
> This was 20 years ago and not one sued.



Yes, my comments about location are only about speculation in recent days, not the historical allegations.

Although few of us here have seen the original Scallywag articles, the detail you mention there is known via stuff Simon Regan wrote on the internet some years later. What we need is some journalists to find some of the people Regan spoke to, other than the people that have already been talking to the press gain recently.

As for them not being sued at the time, I cant take that as evidence of much at this point. Not that many people in the country would have read the original Scallywag article, and no other publications went with it, so to sue would only have drawn attention to the story. Plus it seems that Scallywag relied on having no money in order to reduce the risk of anyone bothering to sue them.


----------



## Prole (Nov 8, 2012)

Philip Schofield Accidentally Reveals Tory Paedo List on Screen - YouTube


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 8, 2012)

Another interesting angle on this whole story, which was also investigated by Scallywag magazine was the Stephen Milligan aspect involving  a footballer and two cabiinent ministers. In the story Scallywag claims that Mr. MIlligan was approached by security services who initiated him to warn the footballer to keep quiet on a story he was trying to give to the papers back in the 90s, which implicated two cabinet ministers in something which the security services did not want to come out. The story goes Milligan threatened to go to The Sunday Times after he failed to silence the footballer, and the Security Services then told him the footballer would have to be "eliminated." Milligan later died, his death recorded as accidental asphyxiation from a sex act. At the time of reporting the incident, try as they may, there was no indication that pointed to any sort of interest by Milligan in explicit sex acts that had killed him. The full story, which is certainly fascinating can be found online, shouldn't be hard to find.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Phil Schofield - that came out of nowhere. Hero! lol


 
Actually i take that back - as frustrating as it is not getting any answers, this might prejudice a trial, which isnt good.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

*adds Philip Schofield to his flowchart*

Weird.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> Another interesting angle on this whole story, which was also investigated by Scallywag magazine was the Stephen Milligan aspect involving a footballer and two cabiinent ministers.


 
I've seen a front page story from the time where the footballer claimed to know stuff that may be of use to the Milligan death investigation. But it was then reported that the police were unimpressed when they questioned him, they said he knew nothing and was wasting their time. The reputation of the footballer was then sullied in the press, suggesting he was originally touting stories about gay MPs to the press simply because he was interested in making lots of money.

This leaves us none the wiser, as its impossible for me to judge whether this was a dodgy smear, or whether the footballer was indeed just after money, or a combination of all of the above. Either way the footballer is dead.

Cameron wasnt wrong to mention the gay witchhunt aspect, but this too can also be used to bury other stuff.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> *adds Philip Schofield to his flowchart*
> 
> Weird.


 
Not really, the press and media folks must be going nuts that they cant report on stuff thats all over the net.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2012)

blinsider coming from cuddly lightweight schofield eh.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Hi BM..
> Well, as it was common knowledge that Hoogstraten was involved...


 
Hoogstraten eh? That guy has always struck me as being a particularly odious scumbag.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> I've seen a front page story from the time where the footballer claimed to know stuff that may be of use to the Milligan death investigation. But it was then reported that the police were unimpressed when they questioned him, they said he knew nothing and was wasting their time. The reputation of the footballer was then sullied in the press, suggesting he was originally touting stories about gay MPs to the press simply because he was interested in making lots of money.
> 
> This leaves us none the wiser, as its impossible for me to judge whether this was a dodgy smear, or whether the footballer was indeed just after money, or a combination of all of the above. Either way the footballer is dead.
> 
> Cameron wasnt wrong to mention the gay witchhunt aspect, but this too can also be used to bury other stuff.


 
There is a possibility that his orginal story was aimed at making money and it seems in itself his allegations were moreso about his involved sexual encounter with mentioned ministers, but that it had ties to the subject we are now discussing, hence the manner in which the allegations may have been treated.. But as you say, unless more people have knowledge of this affair from perhaps the footballer or Milligan's inner circle at the time of the incidents, there is no way to find out,

The mentioning of the gay witchunt would seem to be diversionary tactic off a man that certainly from his composure and physical feautures since Watson first raised the prospect in the mainstream and to him directly is seen to be highly agitated and unnerving, same again in Scholfield interview. Of course an agenda can be abused by bigots to use homosexuality as a connection to pedophilia, but beyond that, rational and critical thinking people should be able to look past this. What he says has merit in one sense, but the cynic in me thinks it would be a rather more effective diversionary tactic to make the truth harder to obtain.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> The mentioning of the gay witchunt would seem to be diversionary tactic off a man that certainly from his composure and physical feautures since Watson first raised the prospect in the mainstream and to him directly is seen to be highly agitated and unnerving, same again in Scholfield interview. Of course an agenda can be abused by bigots to use homosexuality as a connection to pedophilia, but beyond that, rational and critical thinking people should be able to look past this. What he says has merit in one sense, but the cynic in me thinks it would be a rather more effective diversionary tactic to make the truth harder to obtain.



All the same I cant eliminate this aspect from some of the original stories, especially as Scallywag spent a fair amount of time making puerile jokes about a few closeted gay tories at the time.

This doesnt mean I write off any leads on this basis. But everything from press interest to coverups to legitimate concerns about underage rentboy activities and intelligence service & organised crime blackmail etc, public school culture and so on  are part of the mix, and add layers of murk.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 8, 2012)

When did This Morning become this country's foremost hard-hitting political programme?


----------



## Santino (Nov 8, 2012)

Nine Bob Note said:


> When did This Morning become this country's foremost hard-hitting political programme?


This morning.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2012)

maybe paxman has handed the torch of awkward questions onto the silver fox?


----------



## LoveMeDont (Nov 8, 2012)

Nine Bob Note said:


> When did This Morning become this country's foremost hard-hitting political programme?


 
I would hope that most hard-hitting political programmes would do more then spend about three minutes looking up names on the Internet.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 8, 2012)

And Schofield doesn't wear a tie either. Take notes, BBC.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

LoveMeDont said:


> I would hope that most hard-hitting political programmes would do more then spend about three minutes looking up names on the Internet.


 
Well we dont know what the names were at the moment, or where he got them from.


----------



## LoveMeDont (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Well we dont know what the names were at the moment, or where he got them from.


 
Philip Schofield says right at the start of the Youtube clip that he spent three minutes looking on the Internet last night.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Well we dont know what the names were at the moment, or where he got them from.


 
Apologies:  "Schofield said he had found the names after spending 'about three minutes' trawling the internet. "


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

LoveMeDont said:


> Philip Schofield says right at the start of the Youtube clip that he spent three minutes looking on the Internet last night.


 
Yeah, sorry im at work so had the sound down.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2012)

Everytime Cameron has been asked directly about this - by tom watson or by Phillip 'paxo' Schofield - he has the look of someone about to drink a bucket of cold sick.
Its also interesting that there has been no concerted effort by any part of the political establishment or the media to rubbish the claims of a padeo-ring involving senior people.
Basically it makes me think that these cunts know _exactly_ what the truth is and are frantically busy trying to find ways to limit the damage.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 8, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Basically it makes me think that these cunts know _exactly_ what the truth is and are frantically busy trying to find ways to limit the damage.


 They will certainly know everything was either discovered or suspected 20 years ago.  Today, I suspect they'll be playing catchup, checking with police and civil servants what the _Tom Watson and the internet might know._


----------



## Dan U (Nov 8, 2012)

*Paraic O'Brien* ‏@*paraicobrien* 
If you're even remotely interested in the North Wales Care Home Scandal watch #*c4news* tonight. #*brynestyn*


----------



## Prole (Nov 8, 2012)

> This child abuse crackdown comes too late for too many
> 
> The case of prolific paedophile Neville Husband is a tale of horrendous abuse and deplorable handling by officials
> 
> ...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> Hi BM..
> Well, as it was common knowledge that Hoogstraten was involved, albeit from a safe distance, it was 'suggested' by sundry burly scallywags that something unfortunate may occur, should the coroner and families dig too deep. It is the general view that the coroner was 'got at' in some way but this would be difficult to prove.
> If you've not already done so, check out Mr Hoogstraten and his connections. You may find it most interesting.
> His attitudes to ramblers, or 'scum' as he referred to them, give a little insight.
> Apologies if I'm reluctant to elaborate on some aspects of these matters for reasons mentioned previously, but I'm sure you'll understand...Plus I've become rather attached to my kneecaps!


 
Hoogstraten is such a rancid shitsack that even Bob Mugabe couldn't stomach him when he was living in Zimbabwe. Oh how the people of the south coast wept as Mugabe expropriated Hoogie's Zimbabwe landholdings!


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 8, 2012)

I've got a little list ...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 8, 2012)

Wilf said:


> I always thought it would be _Gordon the Gopher_ who made it big as a whistle blower. How wrong we were - it's always the quiet ones.


 
Gordon hates nonces. He's got a flick-knife just for carving up paedos!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> I've seen a front page story from the time where the footballer claimed to know stuff that may be of use to the Milligan death investigation. But it was then reported that the police were unimpressed when they questioned him, they said he knew nothing and was wasting their time. The reputation of the footballer was then sullied in the press, suggesting he was originally touting stories about gay MPs to the press simply because he was interested in making lots of money.
> 
> This leaves us none the wiser, as its impossible for me to judge whether this was a dodgy smear, or whether the footballer was indeed just after money, or a combination of all of the above. Either way the footballer is dead.


 
By a similar method to Milligan too, IIRC, minus the womens underwear and the orange.




> Cameron wasnt wrong to mention the gay witchhunt aspect, but this too can also be used to bury other stuff.


 
Yup.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2012)

Im half keeping up with this thread, but has this "FOI (Freedom Of Information) request about alleged peadophiles past and present with connections to the Halls of power" been posted? Lots of names:
http://cuthulan.wordpress.com/2010/...-sex-offenders-inside-the-british-government/

Its says its based on an FOI, but I cant see that verified. Seems legit.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 8, 2012)

ibilly99 said:


> I've got a little list ...
> [/media]


 Don't tell him Pike!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> All the same I cant eliminate this aspect from some of the original stories, especially as Scallywag spent a fair amount of time making puerile jokes about a few closeted gay tories at the time.


 
TBF, that was at a time when some closeted gay Tories (closeted to the public, not to the Westminster bubble) were still giving it large about "traditional family values". Highlighting hypocrisy isn't a crime, even if how you do it is childish.



> This doesnt mean I write off any leads on this basis. But everything from press interest to coverups to legitimate concerns about underage rentboy activities and intelligence service & organised crime blackmail etc, public school culture and so on are part of the mix, and add layers of murk.


 
Which is why the current upsurge of info is so interesting. We're seeing some linkages appear (or reappear) in a much more public manner than previously.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 8, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Everytime Cameron has been asked directly about this - by tom watson or by Phillip 'paxo' Schofield - he has the look of someone about to drink a bucket of sick.


 
Perhaps it reminds him of his times as "chief toast-rack" at Eton?



> Its also interesting that there has been no concerted effort by any part of the political establishment or the media to rubbish the claims of a padeo-ring involving senior people.


 
That's because the nature of modern-day communications technology makes it impossible to stop effectively stop information dissemination.



> Basically it makes me think that these cunts know _exactly_ what the truth is and are frantically busy trying to find ways to limit the damage.


 
Absolutely. Damage limitation, buck-passing and (if they follow standard practice) the shifting of blame onto people who are conveniently dead. Then the rest will be "lessons have been learned" and all that old bollocks.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> TBF, that was at a time when some closeted gay Tories (closeted to the public, not to the Westminster bubble) were still giving it large about "traditional family values". Highlighting hypocrisy isn't a crime, even if how you do it is childish.


 
True, I'm just explaining why I dont want to get too carried away with some of the names that are being speculated over, based largely on those historical whispers. Some of it is a leap too far for me at this point.

I had rather hoped we'd have greater attention on names that have come out so far, such as Peter Morrison. Being dead and not the highest profile of names as far as the broader public are concerned seems to have relegated this one to the margins for now.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Absolutely. Damage limitation, buck-passing and (if they follow standard practice) the shifting of blame onto people who are conveniently dead.


 
Although plenty of people are moaning about this already, it hasnt happened to the extent I was expecting. I expected more attention on Peter Morrison but its been a mere whimper so far. People on twitter and I suspect the press at large seem far more interested in the living. Which is quite understandable, but really the reputational damage to institutions, parties etc ought to still be great regardless of the person being dead. Given his close links to Thatcher I cant believe more is not being made of this.

Having said that I can see why the dead are less interesting to some people, and a safer bet for others, because dead men tell no tales.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Im half keeping up with this thread, but has this "FOI (Freedom Of Information) request about alleged peadophiles past and present with connections to the Halls of power" been posted? Lots of names:
> 
> Its says its based on an FOI, but I cant see that verified. Seems legit.


 
Plenty of the historical examples may well be accurate but that site starts ranting and drooling, I cant see what it has to do with FOI and if I click on a FOI link then it seems the person was banned from the relevant website for ranting and raving instead of using the system properly:



> Despite previous warnings this account has been banned for repeatedly making requests and follow ups which are not requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act, but are other correspondence intended for the organisation in question.


----------



## where to (Nov 8, 2012)

ibilly99 said:
			
		

> I've got a little list ...
> YouTube Video



I love the idea that Schofield used the "list" reference on purpose.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> Plenty of the historical examples may well be accurate but that site starts ranting and drooling, I cant see what it has to do with FOI and if I click on a FOI link then it seems the person was banned from the relevant website for ranting and raving instead of using the system properly:


Thanks elbows.....


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2012)

where to said:


> I love the idea that Schofield used the "list" reference on purpose.


 
As in a reference to a certain person's speech at a tory party conference?


----------



## Prole (Nov 8, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> As in a reference to a certain person's speech at a tory party conference?


No Tory grandee child-abusers on it though:


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> By a similar method to Milligan too, IIRC, minus the womens underwear and the orange.


 
Just worked out who this is now, thanks to that ^

Gosh.

That whole thing certainly could all be total bollocks, and of course we're all sensible folks here who are aware of this. Conspiracy theories often have one or two threads of verifiable truth running through them, which makes them all the more believable in the minds of the loonspuds*. But still.





*Incidentally, just looked up loonspud - first result: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=loonspud


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

teqniq said:


> Hoogstraten eh? That guy has always struck me as being a particularly odious scumbag.





teqniq said:


> Hoogstraten eh? That guy has always struck me as being a particularly odious scumbag.


A real charmer, to be sure!


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Hoogstraten is such a rancid shitsack that even Bob Mugabe couldn't stomach him when he was living in Zimbabwe. Oh how the people of the south coast wept as Mugabe expropriated Hoogie's Zimbabwe landholdings!


Don't hold back... say what you really think..


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 8, 2012)

There's been a few threads on here about him.

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/van-hoogstraten-in-jail.165688/

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/hoogstraten-arrested-in-zimbabwe.165613/

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/hoogstraten-arrested-couldnt-happen-to-a-nicer-man.165610/

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/van-hoogstraten-loses-civil-appeal.90679/

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/that-hoogstraten-guys-in-the-news-again.72996/

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/underground-britain-hotel-hoogstraten.65843/


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 8, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Just worked out who this is now, thanks to that ^
> 
> Gosh.
> 
> ...


 

And that's pretty much how I look at what JF was saying. Yes, he was obviously suffering from mental health issues when he talked to the media, but that doesn't mean he was making it up, just that his health issues made him dismissable. It's certainly the case that JF moved in the more "elite" closeted circles before he came out, because he'd managed to keep his private life secret from everyone - something it's hard to do if you're doing casual pick-ups or hiring rent-boys.
Always feel sad when I think of him. He was a massively-talented player, unlike his workaday bigoted older brother.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

I think there have been 2 investifations announced into North Wales Police failings a few decades back.

While understandably keen to highlight their current investigations in to JS relates crimes, I've seen no mention of current work looking at crimes themselves said toi have been committed to Bryn Estyn etc.

As Ian Bone said, it's inconceivable that security services won't have known details related to allegations, or that they wouldn't have told others.

Have such people been interviewed by police yet? If not, why not?


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

At this point, it's really impossible to know what's going on behind the scenes. Despite Cameron (I think?) recently saying that it's for the police to investigate, they will be working furiously, as suggested on the thread earlier, at all levels I expect, to work out who, what, where, how, not necessarily in terms of abuse, but in terms of who knew what. They are probably more concerned at this point about any political cover ups becoming publicly known - especially in recent years and by people in the current government or close to them - than they are with the details of the crimes themselves. But as I said, it's impossible to know what they are doing behind the scenes, but it certainly is going to be a hell of a lot more than we are told.


----------



## where to (Nov 8, 2012)

Schofield backlash on full swing. Jimmy Savile "how could it happen" questions already forgotten then.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> They are probably more concerned at this point about any political cover ups becoming publicly known - especially in recent years and by people in the current government or close to them - than they are with the details of the crimes themselves.


 
That horse has already bolted considering how much stick the original inquiry is getting.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ifled-1996-paedophile-report-says-victim.html




> A man who claims to have been abused as a boy by a senior Conservative has accused William Hague of "stifling" a 1997 paedophile inquiry by preventing it from examining claims beyond the care system in north Wales.


They will be able to pick at aspects of Messhams stories but even so, much of the damage is done.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> That horse has already bolted considering how much stick the original inquiry is getting.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ifled-1996-paedophile-report-says-victim.html
> 
> ...


 
True enough, but I think there is a difference between something getting reported, and it then having an impact. We've all seen it before, plenty of times - something shocking gets reported, everyone is aghast, and a little while later it all dies down and you forget to ask if anything ever came of it, which is because in fact nothing did and it just went away. At the moment, it feels like we're at a point where _some_ aspects of all of this could still be covered up or just fade away, while others take all the limelight. Some things might have more of a chance of being successfully covered up than others. And out of all the things, I'd say it's government involvement in any previous cover ups that is the prime candidate for what they'd want to quietly die down.

The real tipping point we need to reach is where every single piece of information is dragged up and exposed. But I'm not entirely sure we're near that point yet. I do hope I'm wrong though, and it does feel like we're inching towards it.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

Trouble linking from phone, but upthread is a Nick Davies article from just after names were hushed after original NW investigation

"Ronald has argued that his ruling will encourage paedophiles to come forward and to give honest evidence without fear of retribution. Critics say that this is unnecessary since he has the power to compel witnesses to attend and that those who have come forward have done so to deny the allegations against them and not to make a clean breast of their alleged offences."
So, an unconvincing really. Not as unconvincing as the swathe of Dunblane documents under 100yr D notice though.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Trouble linking from phone, but upthread is a Nick Davies article from just after names were hushed after original NW investigation
> 
> "Ronald has argued that his ruling will encourage paedophiles to come forward and to give honest evidence without fear of retribution. Critics say that this is unnecessary since he has the power to compel witnesses to attend and that those who have come forward have done so to deny the allegations against them and not to make a clean breast of their alleged offences."
> So, an unconvincing really. Not as unconvincing as the swathe of Dunblane documents under 100yr D notice though.


 
It's ridiculous really. How many paedophiles did he expect would say "hey, you know what, I'm going to tell you all about how I'm a vile paedo cunt"?


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Not as unconvincing as the swathe of Dunblane documents under 100yr D notice though.


 
Some people have been allowed access to those and didnt exactly start screaming about smoking guns once they read them. I'm not saying there was nothing there, but certainly wouldnt get carried away with the worst the internet has to offer on this.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

I went looking to see if anything esle has been said about Peter Morrison lately. Found almost nothing, except this.

http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/c...icated-in-child-abuse-inquiry-59067-32187741/

​


> Morrison’s immediate successor Gyles Brandreth, who served as the city’s Tory MP from 1992 to 1997, told The Chronicle he didn’t recollect more than was in his political diary Breaking the Code in which he wrote that he and his wife Michele had ‘been told several times on the doorstep – in no uncertain terms – that the MP is ‘a disgusting pervert’.”​However, in the same book, Mr Brandreth did refer to Sir Peter as ‘tall, fat, with crinkly hair, piggy eyes, a pink-gin drinker’s face’ in his description of his first meeting with the veteran politician.​


​


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> Some people have been allowed access to those and didnt exactly start screaming about smoking guns once they read them. I'm not saying there was nothing there, but certainly wouldnt get carried away with the worst the internet has to offer on this.


 
Who are the_ 'some people'_ who were allowed access to the Dunblane documents?

Surely the interpretation of what was contained in those documents is in the eye of the beholder, n'est pas?

Were you one of them?

If not, your point is puzzling... why the 100 year order on them if there's not much there?


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

framed said:


> Were you one of them?
> 
> If not, your point is puzzling... why the 100 year order on them if there's not much there?


 
No I was not one of them.

I'm not suggesting there was not much there, I was suggesting that whats there may not match what the most vocal people on this subject like to insinuate is there. It may very well be that there is stuff there which fits the theme of coverup, institutional failings and abuse of power, so the story is compatible with this thread. But thats not enough for some people on the net, they want to start throwing around names and turning vague possibilities into almost certainties. People can do that if they want to, but its not the way I look at things, and I certainly did not appreciate previous attempts to insinuate that I was trying to silence people. I'll not be branded a sheeple over my stance any more than others would put up with being called sheeple in some of the conspiracy threads on u75 over the years.

I am for example quite interested in whether any of the media bring up Dunblane again considering the growing shitstorm.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> It's ridiculous really. How many paedophiles did he expect would say "hey, you know what, I'm going to tell you all about how I'm a vile paedo cunt"?


 

Well exactly, but one leading investigator into the Jersey stuff has suggested there be an amnesty for paedos naming other members of rings (amnesty from prosecution, but not going on the register) He says that would blow the whole thing apart very quickly. I don't know if he's right but it's an interesting idea and he seems to know more than I do.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Well exactly, but one leading investigator into the Jersey stuff has suggested there be an amnesty for paedos naming other members of rings (amnesty from prosecution, but not going on the register) He says that would blow the whole thing apart very quickly. I don't know if he's right but it's an interesting idea and he seems to know more than I do.


 
I suppose if you look at it one way, it's no different than entering into a plea agreement in any criminal investigation. I suppose it depends what the details are. The way it's originally worded makes it sound like by saying "we won't tell anyone" they expect all these paedophiles - whose entire lives have been built around making sure they aren't found out - to wander down the nearest cop shop and say "I like little kids, but don't judge me, because I'm going to tell you who else does too." Really, what's in it for them? If they are pretty certain no one is on their trail anyway, and they haven't been approached in an investigation, who is going to offer it up willingly? But, of course, if they are already being investigated for it, there is more impetus - a la plea bargain.


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> No I was not one of them.
> 
> I'm not suggesting there was not much there, I was suggesting that whats there may not match what the most vocal people on this subject like to insinuate is there. It may very well be that there is stuff there which fits the theme of coverup, institutional failings and abuse of power, so the story is compatible with this thread. But thats not enough for some people on the net, they want to start throwing around names and turning vague possibilities into almost certainties. People can do that if they want to, but its not the way I look at things, and I certainly did not appreciate previous attempts to insinuate that I was trying to silence people. I'll not be branded a sheeple over my stance any more than others would put up with being called sheeple in some of the conspiracy threads on u75 over the years.
> 
> I am for example quite interested in whether any of the media bring up Dunblane again considering the growing shitstorm.


 

Elbows, I read your informed posts on these matters with interest.

You can get all righteous about it if you like, but I do think that you have a tendency to resort to_ 'legalese'_ at times in an effort to 'put manners' on the parameters of the discussion, even when no names are being mentioned.

I have no wish to 'out' alleged paedophiles without evidence and I take that inference in the same vein as you took my previous criticism of your attempts at guiding the discussion along your own preferred lines.

Other than that, carry on, dear chap...


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

The thing is a lot of what Im moaning about isnt really happening on this forum much, its on the wider internet.

And I certainly dont think I have any ability to guide the discussion, at all times I am mostly just voicing whats on my mind.

Some of the legalise you complain about is down to the legal constraints that we are all under on forums such as this one.  An unfettered conversation with me would be more colourful than my posts tend to suggest


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Channel 4 news are 'putting the past on trial' tonight.

Which brings me back to Crick, who has penned this:

http://blogs.channel4.com/michael-c...n-the-media-learn-from-previous-scandals/1887

Despite the fact that I often, as with my last posts, like to go on about balance and not getting carried away in possibly unfair directions, I cant help but wiggle my eyebrows at some of Crick's language. Mind you it fairly obvious from tweets we have commented on this week that this aspect is looming large in his mind for one or two very specific reasons.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 8, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> Another interesting angle on this whole story, which was also investigated by Scallywag magazine was the Stephen Milligan aspect involving a footballer and two cabiinent ministers. In the story Scallywag claims that Mr. MIlligan was approached by security services who initiated him to warn the footballer to keep quiet on a story he was trying to give to the papers back in the 90s, which implicated two cabinet ministers in something which the security services did not want to come out. The story goes Milligan threatened to go to The Sunday Times after he failed to silence the footballer, and the Security Services then told him the footballer would have to be "eliminated." Milligan later died, his death recorded as accidental asphyxiation from a sex act. At the time of reporting the incident, try as they may, there was no indication that pointed to any sort of interest by Milligan in explicit sex acts that had killed him. The full story, which is certainly fascinating can be found online, shouldn't be hard to find.


The footballer in question was Justin Fashanu.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 8, 2012)

framed said:


> Who are the_ 'some people'_ who were allowed access to the Dunblane documents?
> 
> Surely the interpretation of what was contained in those documents is in the eye of the beholder, n'est pas?
> 
> ...


 
Some of the bereaved parents have seen the whole thing. You know what was put under the 100-year rule? I'm guessing the details of the injuries suffered by the surviving children.


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Some of the bereaved parents have seen the whole thing. You know what was put under the 100-year rule? I'm guessing the details of the injuries suffered by the surviving children.


 
Exactly.  You're _"guessing"_ ... 

'Some of the bereaved parents' would also prefer full public disclosure rather than guesswork.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

framed said:


> Exactly. You're _"guessing"_ ...
> 
> 'Some of the bereaved parents' would also prefer full public disclosure rather than guesswork.


 
Thats not what I was moaning about though, it was the other sorts of guesswork and assumption, the sort you've been getting at. Why is that any better than the less sensational guesswork you are complaining about?


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> Thats not what I was moaning about though, it was the other sorts of guesswork and assumption, the sort you've been getting at. Why is that any better than the less sensational guesswork you are complaining about?


 
I don't quite see the conflict here... perhaps you can elaborate?


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

I was under the impression you were moaning at me for moaning about guesswork, and now you've gone on to moan at someone else for guesswork.


----------



## where to (Nov 8, 2012)

Alan Clark now. see Guido Fawkes website. Max Clifford interview clip from few years ago.  Underage girl(s) this time.

Thatcher was surrounded by paedophiles throughout her life.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

We don't have to name names to speak to the general issue, and in an ideal world we would trust the police to look into such specifics. 

But for murkiness alone, in view of thread question, we have Savile, jersey, bryn estyn, dunblane wirh degrees varying from whiff to rancid stench of both co-operation in abuse and cover up.

Leanne Wood also said she thought other care homes in England could need looking at. She aint alone.

So the brief answer to the OP would be: if not 100% compelling then far too chuffin' close.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Earlier in this thread the case of Sir Peter Hayman, and his naming using parliamentary privilege came up. I've done some research into this, and its consequences.

Have a read of the obituary of the MP who did the naming in parliament:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituaries--geoffrey-dickens-1619966.html



> He once told me that the proudest moment of his life came in May 1984, when the diplomat Sir Peter Hayman was sent to jail after being convicted of paedophiliac practices. Dickens had first named Hayman in the House of Commons, thereby making use of his parliamentary privilege: Hayman could not sue him for libel. The Foreign Office, naturally, defended their man. The Conservative Party leadership was unwilling to make itself an ally of so improbable a crusader. And most of the Labour opposition, however revolted by the practice and encouragement of paedophilia, did not care to offer themselves on the same side as an MP who wanted to end the ban on playing sport with South Africa, birch young thugs, and return immigrants to their countries of origin in a peremptory way. But, in the end, Dickens won, none the less.


 


> In March 1981 Dickens, a self-professed paragon of family virtues, a tireless critic of any sexual departure from the traditional norm, called a press conference to announce that he had had two extra-marital affairs, and that he was hopelessly in love with one of the women involved. "I have a skeleton in my cupboard," he said, "and I thought it best to be honest." He also announced a rather quaint liking for the the dansant. Floods of ridicule poured over him then; and even more arrived when, a fortnight later, he announced a reconciliation with his wife.


 


> He was also the first MP to show that it was possible to recover from being done in by the tabloid press - over the the dansant affair in 1981 - and become a popular member of parliament, with all parties.


 
I am of the impression that an important detail is missing from this account. An old front page story I read about this suggested to me that his press conference was actually supposed to be about Hayman, but something happened that day which caused it to turn into a press conference about his mistress instead. Funny that.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

Elbows

' I  am for example quite interested in whether any of the media bring up Dunblane again considering the growing shitstorm'

Though it could be worse overall,  there is a political and party political agenda at the more tawdry end of things. The right have gunned disproportionately at the bbc, and under gunned (so far anyway) at very similar appearing cover-up in the tories.

Dunblane might be expected to attract less digging up for being north of the border, but more should there be a desire to start having a go at Labour.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Channel 4 have a councillor who kept extensive files on the whole business.


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> I was under the impression you were moaning at me for moaning about guesswork, and now you've gone on to moan at someone else for guesswork.


 
No, I wasn't. I asked a question with regard to what you said about the Dunblane enquiry and the 100 year rule because I thought you might have further insight on it from an informed point of view. Despite what you may think, I actually do have a high regard for what you write on these matters.

The other fella just intervened with some blarney about how 'some of the parents' didn't want it published, to which I replied that 'some of the parents' actually do want all of the information to be placed in the public domain. 

He 'guessed' at what the actual contents might be, you did not.

As I said, I don't think we are in conflict here, Elbows.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Sorry if I overreacted, have read too much stuff that starts to bark on the internet recently and it distresses me when the murk is added to.

Anyway channel 4 news is doing a great job tonight, the credibility of the original inquiry was already damaged, now I believe its dead.

Masons now getting a mention.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> Channel 4 have a councillor who kept extensive files on the whole business.


 
What she had to say was absolutely astonishing. It felt to me like a very important moment.

It's also becoming more and more obvious where the BBC is lacking in all of this. So far 2 important moments have come from ITV (ITV!) and this from C4....


----------



## gabi (Nov 8, 2012)

So what were these 5 names then?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> It's also becoming more and more obvious where the BBC is lacking in all of this. So far 2 important moments have come from ITV (ITV!) and this from C4....


Philip Schofield was a very stage managed attempt to move the spotlight from the bbc by the bbc i thought


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Philip Schofield was a very stage managed attempt to move the spotlight from the bbc *by the bbc *i thought


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2012)

tufty79 said:


>


he didnt come up with it on his own did he...someone told him to do it

anyway, dont let me derail an excellent thread with my mumblings


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 8, 2012)

gabi said:


> So what were these 5 names then?


 
You can Google names from the previous Tory cabinet.


----------



## cesare (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> he didnt come up with it on his own did he...someone told him to do it
> 
> anyway, dont let me derail an excellent thread with my mumblings


Yebbut,he's ITV not BBC.

Just seen he's in trouble over it now: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...d-reported-to-Ofcom-over-paedophile-list.html


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> he didnt come up with it on his own did he...someone told him to do it
> 
> anyway, dont let me derail an excellent thread with my mumblings


 
ok, so you're saying that the bbc organised the whole schofield-on-itv-shenanigans this morning? or am i reading you absolutely back to front? (sorry, it's been a long day )


----------



## where to (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> he didnt come up with it on his own did he...


 
i think you're wrong on this. he is quite evidently angry about the recent scandals, as his previous interview with Freddy Starr demonstrated.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

It's sad that the argument can be made that by new allegations about one scandal coming out it must somehow be in order to cover up allegations from another scandal, or that it will automatically have that effect even if it was unintended.

Since when were we only allowed to have one scandal at a time? All of this is interrelated anyway. What is emerging as the overarching narrative is the question of what sort of power was involved in the cover ups of all these abuses (be it Savile or the care homes or wherever). Stories shift and change as more information comes out, and it's natural and to be expected that as this gets bigger people won't be spending all their airtime on things like C4 News or their column inches in beating the same drum about just one aspect of it (the BBC bullshit, for example). There's always a concern that the shift of attention from one part of the story to another could benefit those in involved in that first one, and it's wise to be aware of that. But the news working the way the news does - giving most coverage to new aspects as they emerge - isn't new, nor is it surprising, and it doesn't necessarily mean there's some inner conspiracy controlling what new information emerges.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 8, 2012)

framed said:


> The other fella just intervened with some blarney about how 'some of the parents' didn't want it published,


 
I didn't say that at all. Please try and read for comprehension.



> He 'guessed' at what the actual contents might be, you did not.


 
I clearly said that I was guessing, as I haven't read the full thing. I don't think it's me making shit up here.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Philip Schofield was a very stage managed attempt to move the spotlight from the bbc by the bbc i thought


 
The BBC would never have dared to pull a stunt like that on the PM. I doubt Scholfield would be willing to put his job on the line for his ex-paymasters, especially after their handling of the Savile scandal.


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> I didn't say that at all. Please try and read for comprehension.
> 
> I clearly said that I was guessing, as I haven't read the full thing. I don't think it's me making shit up here.


 
And I clearly intimated that there is a problem with 'guessing' about these things...




> Some of the bereaved parents have seen the whole thing. You know what was put under the 100-year rule? I'm guessing the details of the injuries suffered by the surviving children.


Making shit up? Hmmm, quite...


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 8, 2012)

framed said:


> And I clearly intimated that there is a problem with 'guessing' about these things...
> 
> 
> Making shit up? Hmmm, quite...


 
I stated in my post that I was guessing. It's hard to see how I could have been more clear. What do you think has been placed under a 100-year rule, *framed*?

I mean, it's fine if you just want to engage in the *nudge, nudge, wink, wink* rhetoric like some others in this thread. That's cool.


----------



## framed (Nov 8, 2012)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> I stated in my post that I was guessing. It's hard to see how I could have been more clear. What do you think has been placed under a 100-year rule, *framed*?


 
I have no idea, but unlike you I will not be 'guessing' at what it contains.

In line with 'some of the bereaved parents' I'd like to see the information fully disclosed and any necessary legal matters arising from it dealt with.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> Sorry if I overreacted, have read too much stuff that starts to bark on the internet recently and it distresses me when the murk is added to.
> 
> Anyway channel 4 news is doing a great job tonight, the credibility of the original inquiry was already damaged, now I believe its dead.
> 
> Masons now getting a mention.


 
I think posters with some caution or a laissez faire attitude are all useful in the discussion. Without either we might travel off down a path of nonsense, or miss something that we wouldn't otherwise have considered...


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 8, 2012)

It's about advocacy. Advocacy is not a decision at a particular point in time, it is a process and it depends on a relationship. Abuse and neglect will only take place within a culture of abuse and neglect. Paedageddon is about power and complicity. It will be challenged, it will be exposed and justice will be done....hopefully!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 8, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Im half keeping up with this thread, but has this "FOI (Freedom Of Information) request about alleged peadophiles past and present with connections to the Halls of power" been posted? Lots of names:
> http://cuthulan.wordpress.com/2010/...-sex-offenders-inside-the-british-government/
> 
> Its says its based on an FOI, but I cant see that verified. Seems legit.


 
It's based on the request, not the response to the request - in other words this bloke has sent a list of government paedos to the home office for reasons known only to himself - and at the bottom of the request there's a link to the TPUC freemen on the land loon site.

This is the request in question: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_safety_of_your_children_2#outgoing-42489

Just to re-emphasise - this information has not come from the government or civil service - it's not a response to an FOI request and it's not reliable info. It's about as reliable as the David Icke forums. It's only by luck that I noticed though to be fair - I saw the reference to Denis Nielsen, name linked to the SWP and ANL, who name wouldn't come up in a FOI request as he was never anything to do with government and thought "this looks more like the work of a far right loon than a FOI response". So I spent about 15 minutes looking for the request - the person who writes that blog has obviously linked to that in the belief that people won't check properly and assume it's part of a response to a FOI request.

It was sent by a bloke with an unhealthy obsession with falcons and the RSPB who seems to have fallen out with the RSPB after they confiscated a nest and some eggs that he'd stolen from an endangered bird. Since then he's been sending loads of FOIs asking about where the RSPB's authority for this comes from and asking whether RSPB officials who visit nests where children might be playing are subject to a CRB. He's since been banned from the what do they know site for wasting everyone's time with vexatious requests.


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

SpineyNorman said:


> It's based on the request, not the response to the request - in other words this bloke has sent a list of government paedos to the home office for reasons known only to himself - and at the bottom of the request there's a link to the TPUC freemen on the land loon site.
> 
> This is the request in question: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_safety_of_your_children_2#outgoing-42489
> 
> ...


Are you saying the David Icke forums are unreliable?   Good grief, is nothing to be trusted these days.. I'm shocked and disappointed.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

I'm going to return to the Sir Peter Hayman case yet again in order to explore attitudes from that era, and what happens when a government cover-up goes wrong due to Private Eye and an MP using parliamentary privilege.

Here are some press articles, mostly Canadian, from the time the story broke:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=nTkyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=vaQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1133,3738845&hl=en
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=RCNlAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UogNAAAAIBAJ&pg=1722,5595773&hl=en
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=xQdfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4Y0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=3910,4168097&hl=en
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=PWk1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=SO4FAAAAIBAJ&pg=6624,5129092&hl=en

At every stage the story has a variety of disturbing aspects, even without the detail I mentioned earlier today about what happened to the MP who named him.


----------



## Dowie (Nov 8, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Hoogstraten is such a rancid shitsack that even Bob Mugabe couldn't stomach him when he was living in Zimbabwe. Oh how the people of the south coast wept as Mugabe expropriated Hoogie's Zimbabwe landholdings!


 
Think he still lives there, has assets there and his falling out with Bob was only brief... AFAIK he's got a few houses in Harare, all next to each other in the same close, different girlfriend in each house. And,yes, he's a massive cunt.... hope next time he falls out with Bob he gets shot.


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 8, 2012)

The eyes of the PM when Philip Schofield confronts him with the now notorious 'list'.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 8, 2012)

I half expected it to be one of those Lizard eye videos.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 8, 2012)

ibilly99 said:


> The eyes of the PM when Philip Schofield confronts him with the now notorious 'list'.




That's great. Hope it goes viral. Tory paedo cunts.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

I watched the Channel 4 piece after recording it, just now. Some excellent work, even if a couple of moments fell into Brass Eye territory. However the studio discussion i felt missed the mark. Snow threw up the issue of 'conspiracy theories' and his guest agreed with him that they were 'not helpful' - yet only 5 minutes before their reporter spoke to Keith Gregory (abused as a child) and an ex police officer, who both agreed that the influence of Masons needed investigation as they had a lot of influence in the police (and probably judiciary - my insertion). 

If that were to be proven as being a fact through an investigation, then the issue of a conspiracy is proven. That is a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, to deny the trial of paedophiles, to fail to call witnesses who it was claimed had something to answer and a failure to investigate suspects by the police.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)




----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Some excellent work, even if a couple of moments fell into Brass Eye territory.


 
"How high would this stack of papers be?" was a very Brass Eye moment indeed.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> "How high would this stack of papers be?" was a very Brass Eye moment indeed.


 

Yes, that bit was so much like Brass Eye i lost touch with reality for a moment.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

> "There is a danger this could turn into a witch-hunt" ~ David Cameron


 
Im sure there's a translation of what he actually means, but im tired and words are failing me.


----------



## cesare (Nov 8, 2012)

No 10's statement on the earlier Schofield episode was that it was "a juvenile stunt that demeans the subject".


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 8, 2012)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Back to Max Clifford - PR Ambassador for Children in Need I hear.

Ridiculous then, and even more so now. 

WTF?


----------



## Prole (Nov 8, 2012)

Coincidence that Schofield waves his internet list on the same day that C4 are given an actual list.

Geoffrey Dickens (the Peter Hayman expose) also questioned Leon Brittan on paedophile rings in Buckingham Palace as well as the Civil Service: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...wADgU#v=onepage&q=geoffrey dickens mp&f=false

Dickens is given credit during this debate on the Sex Offenders Bill:


> The Bill covers not just paedophiles who take children's innocence away: it also covers those who entice children into prostitution. When I first entered the House, if we talked about paedophiles, people did not want to know. It was an unpopular subject and people thought that there were just one or two crazed individuals who might be interested in that kind of perversion. I pay tribute to the former hon. Member—now, sadly, deceased—Geoffrey Dickens, who represented Huddersfield, West when I represented Huddersfield, East. He introduced the subject to the House and made much headway in bringing the subject to our attention. I remember when he first spoke in the House; people were not interested, or found the subject amusing, but we have learnt more about paedophiles and their ghastly interests over the years and now we have the Bill.
> 
> Sex Offenders Bill (Hansard, 27 January 1997)


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2012)

tufty79 said:


> ok, so you're saying that the bbc organised the whole schofield-on-itv-shenanigans this morning? or am i reading you absolutely back to front? (sorry, it's been a long day )


is it on itv? shows how much ive been paying attention! I always thought of him as a bbc presenter. apologies - im way off the mark here.
By way of explanation my thinking was that an interview with cameron is a big thing that would be discussed at a higher level than the presenters, and a confrontation of the tory pm with a list of tory sex offenders was a bold move on a bbc channel at this time.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 8, 2012)

fwiw - the person referred to in the 1981 sunday times article wasn't savile, it was a singer who is still alive, and is yet to be outed.

so a singer famous in the early 80s as being 'almost a saint' is the latest guess who from the entertainment industry.


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 8, 2012)

free spirit said:


> so a singer famous in the early 80s as being 'almost a saint' is the latest guess who from the entertainment industry.


 
Not that one the old people like, and the Christians?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 8, 2012)

I've got no additional info either way on that, but that was my immediate thought at well.

We shall see, or maybe we won't as he's still alive. Long time friend of savile from before he was famous as well according to some savile interviews from the 90s.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> Not that one the old people like, and the Christians?


 
His name has been mentioned in an article possibly linked somewhere on this thread. If not ive certainly read it myself somewhere else. That is currently assigned 'conspiracy theory' however! 

edit: Google - kray twins paedophile cross dressing - 1st result.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> I suppose if you look at it one way, it's no different than entering into a plea agreement in any criminal investigation. I suppose it depends what the details are. The way it's originally worded makes it sound like by saying "we won't tell anyone" they expect all these paedophiles - whose entire lives have been built around making sure they aren't found out - to wander down the nearest cop shop and say "I like little kids, but don't judge me, because I'm going to tell you who else does too." Really, what's in it for them? If they are pretty certain no one is on their trail anyway, and they haven't been approached in an investigation, who is going to offer it up willingly? But, of course, if they are already being investigated for it, there is more impetus - a la plea bargain.


 
Good points, but perhaps it would only take a minor panic to get the snowball rolling down the hill. I dare say such panic could well be in the air.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

elbows said:


> Channel 4 have a councillor who kept extensive files on the whole business.


 
Another one who may need to make regular checks that the brakes haven't been seen to.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 8, 2012)

Wrong family member?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 8, 2012)

Of course if Cameron was really wanting to make a nuanced point he could have talked about the complexity of paedophilia and the fact that it is carried out by people of various sexual orientations. Instead what we got was "Let's not have a witch-hunt and blame the gays!"

*facepalm*


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Wrong family member?


 
Finally we dont have to stagger around this aspect anymore. Well not so much anyway.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 8, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> His name has been mentioned in an article possibly linked somewhere on this thread. If not ive certainly read it myself somewhere else. That is currently assigned 'conspiracy theory' however!
> 
> edit: Google - kray twins paedophile cross dressing - 1st result.


 
Fucking hell, that link drops in a tentative mention of Madeleine McCann. lol. That'd be a turn up, eh?


----------



## savoloysam (Nov 8, 2012)

Nice to see every panelist on question time shunting down "internet rumours" and Philip Schofield stating it's a police matter. Is this the same police that is guilty of helping cover virtually every scandal going including evidence of this one?

Then again what else would you expect from the BBC's filthy dirty hands?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 8, 2012)

> Of course if Cameron was really wanting to make a nuanced point he could have talked about the complexity of paedophilia and the fact that it is carried out by people of various sexual orientations. Instead what we got was "Let's not have a witch-hunt and blame the gays!"
> 
> *facepalm*


 
Now it's all Phillip's fault!

What was telling about DC response is that he know's already...again the gov tell us that they can't be honest about this because 'you/us' will be homophobic. We are too stupid/homphobic to handle the 'truth'. Yet again, we should leave it to them to take care of this.


----------



## gabi (Nov 8, 2012)

Is this why the weird dream team hosting team on This Week was broken up a year or so ago?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 8, 2012)

savoloysam said:


> Then again what else would you expect from the BBC's filthy dirty hands?


 
_All in this together_...apparently!


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

I really recommend reading the Guardian article that Butchers linked to before going any further with this. The story has moved on, get out of that cul-de-sac.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 8, 2012)

CH 4 News is indeed fantastic.

But says the councillor with reams of records is not a conspiracy theorist. She absolutely is. What has happened to our language?


----------



## gabi (Nov 8, 2012)

Can we link to this list on here? Or is that out of bounds.

Why isn't C4 naming these people?


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

Channel 4 news picked the wrong day to discuss important stuff, given that the internet names thing has now exploded in a direction that is both helpful and potentially unhelpful.

Newsnight just mentioned the Guardian story but still dont want to touch the names at the moment.

The danger now is that things like the Peter Morrison angle are lost, certainly has been on the BBC tonight.


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

link deleted by request.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 8, 2012)




----------



## frogwoman (Nov 8, 2012)

Watchman said:


> I’ll just leave this here, as my head is beginning to spin…


 
might be worth warning people about some of the pics on that link.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 8, 2012)

im not too sure about the content either.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 8, 2012)

> Was Guardian editor @*davidleigh3* harassing Wrexham victim @*smessham*? Read his timeline and make your own mind up. https://twitter.com/davidleigh3


----------



## gabi (Nov 8, 2012)

This Week's about to start, should be interesting to see how that cunt Andrew Neil handles it.


----------



## Watchman (Nov 8, 2012)

Good point, frogwoman.  (See previous post)


----------



## gabi (Nov 8, 2012)

Oh right, he's choosing to focus on Nadine Dorries rather than his former colleague


----------



## gabi (Nov 8, 2012)

Hmm.. Is this Schofield list bullshit then?


----------



## lefteri (Nov 8, 2012)

from hell


----------



## Favelado (Nov 8, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> might be worth warning people about some of the pics on that link.


 
Yeah. It's pretty distasteful. I wish I hadn't opened it.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 8, 2012)

aye id break that link if i were you there are some pics on there i am really not sure should be linked to. not pornographic but not good either way.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Nov 8, 2012)

gabi said:


> Hmm.. Is this Schofield list bullshit then?


 
I think it was a valid attempt by government controlled media to rubbish the internet. It may well work.


----------



## Raminta (Nov 8, 2012)

I smell of rat, can we trust gov and media?  I think some nasty laws will be impose, or other invasions.


----------



## elbows (Nov 8, 2012)

I saw Goodie Osburn with the devil!

Seriously, those concerned that the twitchunt might be used to bury the stuff that isnt rubbish, might want to consider their own reactions to events of the last week. Especially right now. Why isnt that Guardian article giving pause for thought?


----------



## little_legs (Nov 8, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> At this point, it's really impossible to know what's going on behind the scenes. Despite Cameron (I think?) recently saying that it's for the police to investigate, they will be working furiously, as suggested on the thread earlier, at all levels I expect, to work out who, what, where, how, not necessarily in terms of abuse, but in terms of who knew what. They are probably more concerned at this point about any political cover ups becoming publicly known - especially in recent years and by people in the current government or close to them - than they are with the details of the crimes themselves. But as I said, it's impossible to know what they are doing behind the scenes, but it certainly is going to be a hell of a lot more than we are told.


 
I am hoping William Hague will be naive enough to go on TV in the next couple of days and gets ambushed with a list too. He had the copy of the report and had no problems with supressing information for so many years.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

And please dont get me wrong, there has been some media bleating tonight that does have a whiff of establishment media attempting to define the spectrum of acceptable debate. But they also have some really valid points, and any steering tends to be done a little more gently than some are suggesting right now.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 9, 2012)

So it now looks likely that people have been calling for a probable innocent man to be publicly named a paedophile, Messham has lead you all a merry dance. Maybe you should read all the evidence before you start your next witch hunt.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 9, 2012)

gabi said:


> Why isn't C4 naming these people?


 
Because without evidence/conviction it's slander.


----------



## gabi (Nov 9, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> Because without evidence/conviction it's slander.


 
Well thank fuck for the internet then


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 9, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> im not too sure about the content either.


 
Looks like redwatch lol.


----------



## gabi (Nov 9, 2012)

This Week is surreal at the moment if the internet rumours are to be believed


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 9, 2012)

Well Cameron seemed to be panicking and didn't deny anything...


----------



## free spirit (Nov 9, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> So it now looks likely that people have been calling for a probable innocent man to be publicly named a paedophile, Messham has lead you all a merry dance. Maybe you should read all the evidence before you start your next witch hunt.


if you have all the evidence, please post it up and I'll happily read it. Kinda the point of this thread really


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 9, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> So it now looks likely that people have been calling for a probable innocent man to be publicly named a paedophile, Messham has lead you all a merry dance. Maybe you should read all the evidence before you start your next witch hunt.


 
David...is that you?


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> So it now looks likely that people have been calling for a probable innocent man to be publicly named a paedophile, Messham has lead you all a merry dance. Maybe you should read all the evidence before you start your next witch hunt.


Why is Messham being attacked? He is incredibly brave and was correct in saying that he gave polaroids of many of the abusers (and there were many) to the police, the C4 news report revealed they had been destroyed. The Guardian isn't necessarily correct on this and the fact that the other fusilier had his lawyers watching the Waterhouse Inquiry proves that he had been named and it should be the police interviewing him not bloody journalists!

Edit: Oh, and another dead one, move on nothing to see here.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 9, 2012)

His words may hasve been reported (he said that his abuser was dead and they all jumped to the conclusion it was the wrong guy)


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

The party that you brought you Section 28 - now worried about a gay witchunt. LOL.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 9, 2012)

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/354945/Sex-abuse-is-guilty-secret


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

Guardian article


> On Thursday Keith Gregory, the Wrexham councillor who has been an eloquent spokesperson for the victims of abuse this week, said* he believed *a different member of the McAlpine family who lived locally* may have been mistaken* for Lord McAlpine.
> 
> He said a man who children at the home believed to be a member of the McAlpine family would arrive at Bryn Estyn in an expensive car. "He was a right flashy thing," he said.
> 
> ...


But didn't Messham tell Newsnight that he was told he couldn't name them and that he wouldn't be questioned about them and that these names were removed from his statements? OTOH he was also abused by Kenyon who by then was dead  - is there obfuscation going on?


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Prole you might want to make it clear that you are quoting that Guardian article so that you aren't moderated in the way posts with those names have previously been, before the Guardian article came out.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

Tonight then, we've found a Tory who _isn't_ guilty of child abuse.   Truly, a corner has been turned.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 9, 2012)

Raminta said:


> I smell of rat, can we trust gov and media? I think some nasty laws will be impose, or other invasions.


 

Favourite typo of the week there.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 9, 2012)

I smell of monkey.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

I smell of twitter, or at least I would do if I were not tedious enough to have carefully washed myself with balancing fluids for more than a week.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 9, 2012)

Alfred 'Jimmie' McAlpine - liked his cars, and chaired construction company Sir Alfred McAlpine & sons, son of Lord Alfred McAlpine, and grandson of Sir Robert McAlpine. Now allegedly was a child abuser.







Lord (Alistair) McAlpine - Tory treasurer under Margaret Thatcher, and former(?) director of construction firm Sir Robert McAlpine & sons, and grandson of Sir Robert McAlpine. Now alleged by the Guardian *not* to be a child abuser but a victim of mistaken identity. 


I can see how someone could get the 2 mixed up tbh, so the Guardian could be right.

That said, it seems a little odd that tory lord McAlpine would claim to have only been to the place once, unless the family was totally estranged from each other / disowned, as they are cousins... having said that, I suppose I only really see my cousins at their parents houses, so maybe that is plausible.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 9, 2012)

If the Peter Morrison angle is submerged from now then it will come back.

One thing the Schofield list thing does is confirm to everyone that Cameron knows the names.  

Of course anyone who has thought it through would know that, but that aint really the point - 
Till today the post-savile stuff was still too much the preserve of people with an interest in politics. This is to MSM's shame, though not exclusively, either because CELEBRITY PAEDO mattered more or attacking the BBC did.

Now there has been a stunt and daytime TV added to the mix. Sadly but truly, these have made it more "newsworthy" than mere child abuse and cover-up in the political establishment, which for days has not been as important as IACGMOH, the Savile stuff and some other stories.

The stunt will, I think, say to the more general public "UNDER THE CARPET ALERT", probably only added to by Cameron trying on the blind alley "witch-hunt" thing. I'd love to know if that was his own off-the-cuff line or pre-prepared with the wonks. If the latter it's somewhat more desperate.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 9, 2012)

At one point I thought a certain someone was Roger Mcalpine the building magnate of the same family, because I hadn't rooted around on Twitter very much. 

Then I remembered that his name was up all over my community associated with some hideous eco-cide going under the guise of "development". The irony of seeing that name everywhere when no one was meant to be saying it all was pretty far out.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 9, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Tonight then, we've found a Tory who _isn't_ guilty of child abuse.  Truly, a corner has been turned.


allegedly not guilty.

Best to put that bit in as he may feel like the odd one out in the tory party soon and feel the need to take action against those responsible for his being ostracised by his mates for not being part of their gang.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

Maybe in Tory families one goes into the church, one enters Parliament and the other does the noncing.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 9, 2012)

so is it just the one and 2 child families where the kid is either both a politician and a nonce, or a priest and a nonce, or even all 3 at once?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 9, 2012)

The Sonia Poulton piece says "The government should announce an independent inquiry"

Aren't we going to be up to our ears in these?

How about just budgeting a separate pot of money to different police forces to crack on ASAP with interviewing people and working towards arrests and prosecutions as necessary? 

Given that the Police themselves are not above suspicion, in this or some other cases, perhaps oversight could be under a specially put-together independent panel of legal,  child welfare experts and similar.


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

^ The MacAlpine family estate was in Wrexham: http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/northeastwales/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8805000/8805496.stm



> 52.16  Similar difficulties arise about allegations made by witness B in a statement to the police, which he confirmed in part only when he gave oral evidence. The alleged abuser referred to by B, whom we will call X, *has the surname of a well known and large non-Welsh family and he is said to be dead now.* It has been suggested also (but not by B) that X was a friend or acquaintance of Howarth. According to B's statement to the police, X had several different motor cars and would wait for him at the bottom of Bryn Estyn Lane when he had a late pass. X would be accompanied by another paedophile now deceased and they would take B to various places. B alleged that he was buggered by X on four or five of these occasions, twice in the car in Moss Valley, once in the Crest Hotel at Wrexham and in the flat of Gary Cooke on the other occasions.
> 
> 52.17  Witness B was, however, very reserved about these allegations when he gave oral evidence,* saying that, after a particular press article had appeared, his house and his car had been destroyed and he had received numerous threats*: he was not taking any chances any more. He said, for example, that *he knew the christian name of X but that he was unwilling to disclose it.* His recollection in the witness box was that he had seen X three times, including once at the Crest Hotel. X had a young man who was his driver and this man liked people to think he was a member of X's family. B was unable to say who had told him X's name.
> 
> 52.18  Both Detective Superintendent Ackerley and Dean Nelson, a journalist to whom X had been mentioned, were asked about any further enquiries that they made to establish his identity. Ackerley said that it was difficult to identify which member of the family was being referred to: he never had anything tangible to get hold of. Nelson was more outspoken. He said that the name was mentioned to him but he never received any proper allegation about X. He added: "So far as I was concerned the X thing was a distraction. I wasn't looking into X and I never heard anything that made me think I should".


http://tna.europarchive.org/20040216040105/http://www.doh.gov.uk/lostincare/20154.htm
'he is said to be dead' - yes but by whom? If he wouldn't give the christian name who assumed it was the 'dead one' he was talking about? Doesn't make sense - would need to see the full transcripts.
Interesting McAlpine link to the Shrewsbury Pickets Conspiracy frame-up: 


> The Construction Industry’s Powerful Friends
> 
> Robert Alistair McAlpine became the Treasurer of the Conservative Party in 1975. The McAlpine family had great political influence in the North Wales area. The High Sheriff of Denbighshire, which is a large part of the county of Gwynedd, is the senior person responsible for law and order. Up to the 1970’s the past nine High Sheriffs had been members of the McAlpine family. The person appointed in April 1974 was Mr Peter Bell, a director of McAlpine and the son-in-law of the late Sir Alfred McAlpine, who was also Mr Bell’s predecessor as High Sheriff. McAlpines were the main contractors of the Brookside building site in Shrewsbury, which featured prominently in the charges against the pickets.
> 
> ...


The Employers And The Conservative Government - The Official Shrewsbury 24 Campaign | The Official Shrewsbury 24 Campaign


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 9, 2012)

Wilf said:


> The party that you brought you Section 28 - now worried about a gay witchunt. LOL.



We need a mass call-out for solidarity with gay witches.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

free spirit said:


> so is it just the one and 2 child families where the kid is either both a politician and a nonce, or a priest and a nonce, or even all 3 at once?


_*That*_ would be an ecumenical matter.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Ha ha, the media picked up on that youtube clip of covert footage of Max Clifford talking about Alan Clark, and he has had to respond.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...alan-clarks-underage-sex-scandal-8298532.html

They are wrong to think the clip was first posted on the net 'last night', as evidenced by my post in this thread on Novermber 1st, albeit that particular instance of the clip on youtube was made private after I saw it at the time.



elbows said:


> Anyone here familiar with the history of covert video footage of Max Clifford? There was a clip on youtube of him saying things about Alan Clark but its been made private since I first saw it. I was wondering what the origins of the clip were and whether this part was was known already.


----------



## editor (Nov 9, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> im not too sure about the content either.


It was on a computer repair company's site.

I've deleted the link and I wish I hadn't seen the content too.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 9, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> His words may hasve been reported (he said that his abuser was dead and they all jumped to the conclusion it was the wrong guy)



It's early and I may be half asleep, but where has Messham said something incorrect?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 9, 2012)

Someone upthread wondered if Dunblane would rear it's head, there was a bit of a discussion about the 100 year d notices.

Here's the problem: People here are probably motivated by concern for victims, justice and the stink of cover-up.

But there are more tawdry political agendas afoot as we know. The BBC deserves to be ripped to shit over Savile, but it has been ripped to shit by the right at least as much because it is the BBC.

Now the boot has been on the other foot, and the phrase "child abuse" could start to get linked to "tory" in a highly damaging way, the level that could even destroy the government once you factor in cover-up.

So there may well be an appetite in the press to level the party political playing field, and there may not be too much difficulty in doing so.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> It's early and I may be half asleep, but where has Messham said something incorrect?


 
I've no wish to start picking at a victim, but if you read that Guardian article, the Times article, Webster articles, and look back through this thread you will find various concerns and inconsistencies that go all the way back to the original investigations. I would hope thats all I have to say about the matter but I fear that wont be enough, however someone else will have to do the detail if thats the case, since as I said I dont want to focus my attention on picking on him.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 9, 2012)

Despite initially thinking this sounded like a major story, I've got to say I find Richard Webster's stuff on child abuse witch-hunts is starting to really resonate with all of this:

http://www.richardwebster.net/


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

I expect its still a major story, just not the one that has blown up to such extreme proportions in the last week.


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

There is still the aide to an ex-PM that is linked to the Righton evidence file and isn't Morrison. To start downplaying this is to ignore the fact that at the heart of the most vicious right-wing government were (at least) Morrison and Savile both of whom were protected by the establishment. Rather than Webster, who was some distance from all of this, I prefer the analysis of EIleen Fairweather and Liz Davies who are both closely linked to the victims and the evidence and who say this investigation hasn't even scraped the surface and for the victims there has been precious little justice.




			
				Tom Watson said:
			
		

> "The leads were not followed up but if the file still exists I want to ensure that the Metropolitan Police secure the evidence, re-examine it and investigate clear links of a powerful paedophile network linked to parliament and No 10."


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

The mirror picked up on the destroyed photo stuff that was discussed on channel 4 news yesterday:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/north-wales-paedophile-scandal-photographic-1426356


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

McAlpine issued a statement so the media that were still being cautious about naming him despite the Guardian article dont have to hold back anymore.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20267832


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

Hmmm, I'm reserving judgement about that Guardian article. The word that springs to mind is "diversion". And no, I am not a conspiraloon.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

I need fore time before judging that. Given how silly the twitter storm and related matters had become, this aspect urgently needed to be dealt with. I could easily argue that it had become a diversion in itself, and so I cant really call attempts to clarify it a diversion.

I can say that the way the BBC were using these issues last night was pretty diversionary, and if peter Morrison isnt looked at in greater detail then I will start to shout.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

Interestingly enough, Scallywag seemed pretty certain it was Alistair McAlpine.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Scallyway wasnt exactly the gospel. I believe publications such as that have a very useful role to play, and I mourn the lack of such things today (Private Eye is a bit limp) but only as part of a balanced diet.

We shall see, there may be other aspects of Scallywag stories that have more to them, not sure it will ever become clear though.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

Private Eye is an establishment journal that much is true. I knew a few people who worked for Scallywag, one of whom told me that he was not to ask questions about Julian Lewis's purchase of the contents of the magazine's office.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 9, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> Hmmm, I'm reserving judgement about that Guardian article. The word that springs to mind is "diversion". And no, I am not a conspiraloon.


 
haha, you are now! ;-)

I agree mind


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 9, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> Interestingly enough, Scallywag seemed pretty certain it was Alistair McAlpine.


 
Blame it on your dead brother, i like it


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> haha, you are now! ;-)
> 
> I agree mind


It seems the way to silence people is to accuse them of being "conspiracy theorists". If I am not mistaken, several Tories have accused Tom Watson of just that.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 9, 2012)

The memes have landed!


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> Private Eye is an establishment journal that much is true. I knew a few people who worked for Scallywag, one of whom told me that he was not to ask questions about Julian Lewis's purchase of the contents of the magazine's office.


 
An amusing aside from a Brutus column in the Express, Feb 4 1999:



> DR Julian Lewis, Tory MP for New Forest East, is a keen defender of his reputation and a formidable litigant. So he must have been disappointed by one aspect of a case which was brought by the Crown against his arch-enemy Simon Regan, former editor of the scurrilous Scallywag magazine, under the Representation of the People Act 1983, which enjoins prosecution of those who make false statements about election candidates. For although Dr Lewis won a court victory over certain homosexual slurs on Regan's website, Regan, nonetheless, proved that he had believed, and had had reasonable grounds to believe, that Dr Lewis was "a dirty little two-bit trickster who illegally bugged innocent people and created false evidence against them" and that he was a "cheating charlatan". How unfortunate!


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> An amusing aside from a Brutus column in the Express, Feb 4 1999:


Lewis, yeah, he's a dirty fucker. He used the courts as his weapon against the Labour left and CND in the late 70s/early 80s.

He also voted against lowering the age of consent for gay men on the grounds that gay men were all "AIDS carriers".


----------



## el-ahrairah (Nov 9, 2012)

Raminta said:


> I smell of rat, can we trust gov and media?


 
a witch!


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

Ali McAlpine's statement
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/09/lord-mcalpine-statement-full-text?CMP=twt_fd


----------



## ayatollah (Nov 9, 2012)

when I saw that Guardian headline last night:
*Lord McAlpine: abuse allegations 'wholly false and seriously defamatory'*
after all the "noone dares mention the Tory Toff's name stuff", I couldn't help recalling the immortal Dad's Army line " Don't tell him Pike !"  Innocent or not, he'll never get rid of the stain.. poor Tory bastard . What goes around comes around. 

One additional major benefit of the current massive re-examination/exposure  of sundry establishment child abuse coverups is that everyone in the UK has been forcibly reminded , after all the racist mass media nonsense around the Rochdale "grooming" scandal , which slimely tried to suggest that child abuse is a particularly "Muslim problem", that child abuse is as "British" as Yorkshire pudding. Some of the posters on Urban who have also slimely fallen into this demonisation of the entire Muslim community because of the sins of a few criminals, need to recognise that basic fact too. And be embarrassed and ashamed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Prole said:


> There is still the aide to an ex-PM that is linked to the Righton evidence file and isn't Morrison. To start downplaying this is to ignore the fact that at the heart of the most vicious right-wing government were (at least) Morrison and Savile both of whom were protected by the establishment. Rather than Webster, who was some distance from all of this, I prefer the analysis of EIleen Fairweather and Liz Davies who are both closely linked to the victims and the evidence and who say this investigation hasn't even scraped the surface and for the victims there has been precious little justice.


 
In my experience, the best way to treat stuff like this isn't to favour some analysis over others because of where it comes from, but to read *all* of it, and see which analyses best fit with the overall picture. That does, incidentally, point toward the likes of Davies and Fairweather, mostly because they don't rule out even the more bizarre claims (whereas the right-wing media have historically acted on the principle that "bizarre claims aren't true unless *we* make them"), although I'm a bit alarmed at Davies having shared a platform with Valerie Sinason, who I wouldn't want within a hundred miles of an investigation about child abuse, given her history.


----------



## Bedgewick3 (Nov 9, 2012)

The Guardian article by David Leigh et al seems to be top-notch journalism and Alistair McAlpine is totally in the clear.   

One of the people quoted in the Guardian is Keith Gregory, an ex care home resident and now a Plaid Cymru councillor in Wrexham.  Earlier this year he was reported as accusing some Labour goons, including Malcolm King, of intimidating him

http://wrecsamplaid.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/labours-politics-of-intimidation.html

Malcom King has long been prominent in Labour circles in north Wales and appears in Richard Webster's book.  It would be interesting to know if there any links between him, Messham & Watson.

And Radio 4 Today this morning was brilliant.   Firstly John Humphreys showed that Yvette Cooper had nothing useful to say on the subject and then David Aaronovitch suggested that Watson should read The Crucible.

The most significant thing to be published this week about children in care is probably this report

http://www.parliament.uk/business/c...on-committee/news/substantive-children-first/

but because of the witch hunt we haven't heard much about it.  Fortrunately not all MPs are like Watson, it would probably be too much like hard work for him to take an interest in it


----------



## gabi (Nov 9, 2012)

So besides this guy, how about the other 4 on the list? Cant be arsed reading the thread but have they been named? It's all over the web so why not.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 9, 2012)

I told you why yesterday ffs.


----------



## where to (Nov 9, 2012)

It's definitely time to pause for breath. the guardian piece carries weight given Leigh seems a proper journalist, albeit some of his points (eg both macalpines would have fancy cars) are weak.

The sudden backlash against Watson and Schofield et al is well over the top though. Neither named names in public domain. Both simply raised allegations directly with the PM.  As they should, its part of their job.

Two weeks on from Savile the people who asked how could it happen are answering their own question with their actions.

Unreasonably shutting down non defamatory discussion and silencing/ sneering at those asking questions is the responce that prevents people coming forward in the first place.


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

McAlpine family are/were extremely powerful and close to the Tories - an FT report has this: 





> The extent of the family’s influence over Mrs Thatcher’s Tory party, to which he was a substantial donor, is clear in the perhaps apocryphal but certainly plausible story that when there was a clash between one of the legendary McAlpine parties and a cabinet meeting, the cabinet was cancelled.


 so we can expect them to protect their own.
Unfortunately for many of the victims from the 1970/80s the investigations didn't start until the 1990s  - Alfred James (Jimmie) McAlpine died in 1991. Three victims named McAlpine (one disappeared, one dead and Messham) in their police statements. As Messham was in care 77 - 79, it would be easy enough to revisit those statements to ascertain whether the man he (or one of the others) identified was in his late 60s (Jimmie was born 1908) or mid-30s (Alistair b.1942).


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

> And Radio 4 Today this morning was brilliant. Firstly John Humphreys showed that Yvette Cooper had nothing useful to say on the subject and then David Aaronovitch suggested that Watson should read The Crucible.


 
With all due respect, Aaronovitch is a massive cunt.


----------



## Mapped (Nov 9, 2012)

Apols if this has been done before


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Bedgewick3 said:


> The Guardian article by David Leigh et al seems to be top-notch journalism and Alistair McAlpine is totally in the clear.


 
Not sure I'd ever accuse Leigh of "top-notch journalism", but the article does at least make its' case clearly.



> One of the people quoted in the Guardian is Keith Gregory, an ex care home resident and now a Plaid Cymru councillor in Wrexham. Earlier this year he was reported as accusing some Labour goons, including Malcolm King, of intimidating him
> 
> http://wrecsamplaid.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/labours-politics-of-intimidation.html
> 
> Malcom King has long been prominent in Labour circles in north Wales and appears in Richard Webster's book. It would be interesting to know if there any links between him, Messham & Watson.


 
To be fair, local politics in Wales has always been a shit-pit of intimidation, corruption and fiefdoms carved out and clung bloodily to by Labour.
As for Webster's book, it's interesting, but has to be read with knowledge of Webster's bias to the fore.



> And Radio 4 Today this morning was brilliant. Firstly John Humphreys showed that Yvette Cooper had nothing useful to say on the subject and then David Aaronovitch suggested that Watson should read The Crucible.
> 
> The most significant thing to be published this week about children in care is probably this report
> 
> ...


 
Well, Watson did vote for social services responsibilities to be extended beyond the age of 16 when Labour were in power, so I doubt he's unaware, ut it's one of those problems that's developed out of a much greater problem - the shift of social services away from direct provision to service commissioning - that removes money through extra bureaucracy, management and managerialist practices that could otherwise usefully be used to provide much closer scrutiny of and communication with their older client base.

There's somewhat of a "witchhunt" bandwagon starting to roll with reference to paedogeddon, with, in some quarters, the seeming intent of shutting down the wider debate. Cameron's "gays" comment yesterday is of a piece with this - we mustn't speak about it in case some people get hurt. That's a noble sentiment, except for a small minority, people are quite "at home" with queers nowadays. Even 20 years ago, when the media were trying to out Portillo and Lilley, and had outed a couple of Parliamentary gays, the public weren't particularly-bothered. If debate is shut down along one avenue, that sets a precedent, and that precedent would be/will be exploited to the full by the Establishment in order to attempt to achieve some form of new _status quo_ where things can continue as they were.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> With all due respect, Aaronovitch is a massive cunt.


 
A whale cunt, as it were.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

N1 Buoy said:


> Apols if this has been done before
> 
> View attachment 24938


 
No matter how many times I see pictures of Leon Brittain, I'm still stunned by his oleaginous creepiness. Yuck!


----------



## Mapped (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> No matter how many times I see pictures of Leon Brittain, I'm still stunned by his oleaginous creepiness. Yuck!


 
I hate to admit this, but I had to work for him over a decade ago in a financial organisation   Shit job, Shit Organisation, Shit people, Glad I got out of there.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

N1 Buoy said:


> I hate to admit this, but I had to work for him over a decade ago in a financial organisation  Shit job, Shit Organisation, Shit people, Glad I got out of there.


 
Is he as creepy as he looks?


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

Liz Davies Child protection guidance is under threat | Social care network | guardian.co.uk



> The revised version has removed all reference to the investigation of organised or institutional abuse.
> 
> In the absence of comprehensive national guidance, each local safeguarding children board will have to invent their own which will lead to chaotic work across authority boundaries. This proposal basically takes some of us back to the 70s before the first Working Together was published and when we remember the difficulties investigating networks of abuse across areas with different protocols.


----------



## Mapped (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Is he as creepy as he looks?


 
Fucking slimy bastard who liked to try to intimidate staff in their early 20's. That whole place was full of bullies though. Britton was really there for his political contacts, useful for deregulating finance here and in Europe


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> No matter how many times I see pictures of Leon Brittain, I'm still stunned by his oleaginous creepiness. Yuck!


Aye, he makes my flesh creep. Nasty man.


----------



## sunny jim (Nov 9, 2012)

An interesting aside to what happened to a US reporter investigating the abuse of children in the Haut de la Garenne home in Jersey and its possible connection to the higher echelons of the British establishment.
http://leahmcgrathgoodman.com/2012/06/29/anarchy-in-the-uk/

eta: She's still being refused a visa to enter the UK, maybe this investigation needs foreign reporters to investigate this matter. Also an EU wide police team might help too.


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 9, 2012)

Tom Watson is the Paedofinder General....


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

^ Shoot the messenger?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Prole said:


> ^ Shoot the messenger?


 
There does seem to be a attempt in some quarters to shift opinion in favour of "shutting down" certain people who're disseminating information.


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

Harrowing: Care Home Abuse Victim Tells Of Sex Parties

Hooray Henrys and Army barracks!

Edir: Becoming clearer why the terms of reference of Waterhouse were limited to just the Children's homes.


----------



## Blanche de Vere (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> No matter how many times I see pictures of Leon Brittain, I'm still stunned by his oleaginous creepiness. Yuck!


 
Sometimes our instincts are correct, and our reactions arise for good reason. 
Why was he hurriedly exiled to Brussels in the late 80's? To remove him from an investigation about to take place where he would feature highly?
Just questions...no accusations.


----------



## fractionMan (Nov 9, 2012)

So have you stopped beating your wife blanche?


----------



## Blanche de Vere (Nov 9, 2012)

Hahaha...very witty.  

However, since gay marriage is not as yet a reality I cannot have a wife, let alone beat one if I did. 

Or maybe you didn't notice my gender assignment on my account...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> No matter how many times I see pictures of Leon Brittain, I'm still stunned by his _*oleaginous*_ creepiness. Yuck!


 
Excellent wordsmithery!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Blanche de Vere said:


> Sometimes our instincts are correct, and our reactions arise for good reason.
> Why was he hurriedly exiled to Brussels in the late 80's? To remove him from an investigation about to take place where he would feature highly?
> Just questions...no accusations.


 
It's certainly the case that Brittan was appointed to Brussels at a time when a couple of high-profile inquiries were taking place, although to infer from that alone that he was deliberately shifted out of harm's way would be jumping the gun, somewhat. It is safe to say, however, that it *looks* suspicious, but until we have substantive evidence, or the creepy bugger snuffs it, we have to be tight-lipped, unless we want to line the greasy cunt's pockets.


----------



## Blanche de Vere (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's certainly the case that Brittan was appointed to Brussels at a time when a couple of high-profile inquiries were taking place, although to infer from that alone that he was deliberately shifted out of harm's way would be jumping the gun, somewhat. It is safe to say, however, that it *looks* suspicious, but until we have substantive evidence, or the creepy bugger snuffs it, we have to be tight-lipped, unless we want to line the greasy cunt's pockets.


 
We could ask William Hague for substantive evidence but I doubt he'll give it since he's got his sights set on No. 10 for the future.  Let's hope that any investigation is untouched by tainted interference and reveals the truth.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 9, 2012)

Blanche de Vere said:


> We could ask William Hague for substantive evidence but I doubt he'll give it since *he's got his sights set on No. 10* for the future. Let's hope that any investigation is untouched by tainted interference and reveals the truth.


 
You are joking?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Blanche de Vere (Nov 9, 2012)

Louis MacNeice said:


> You are joking?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


 
Why not?  Don't you think he'd make a good leader?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Blanche de Vere said:


> We could ask William Hague for substantive evidence but I doubt he'll give it since he's got his sights set on No. 10 for the future. Let's hope that any investigation is untouched by tainted interference and reveals the truth.


 
We can hope, but given that so far what we have is a parcel of disparate "inquiries" with markedly different remits, rather than a full-scale public enquiry with plenary powers of investigation and examination, what we're likely to see is truth that's been fitered, as usual.


----------



## Lock&Light (Nov 9, 2012)

Blanche de Vere said:


> Why not? Don't you think he'd make a good leader?


 
So you are joking.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Blanche de Vere said:


> Why not? Don't you think he'd make a good leader?


 
He might very well make a good leader if he's grown up a bit since his baseball cap days, but I'm not sure that rural Torydom would give him a second chance. They're more likely to embrace a right-wing Tory than a neoliberal Tory, which is what Hague is nowadays.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Louis MacNeice said:


> You are joking?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


 
Liam Fox had his sights set on No. 10 too.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 9, 2012)

C4 news 08/11


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 9, 2012)

Blanche de Vere said:


> Why not? Don't you think he'd make a good leader?


 
Why? Because he's no Alex Salmond that's why.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## happie chappie (Nov 9, 2012)

Some 30 pages into a fascinating thread. So back to the OP - is there evidence of a long-term, high-level paedophile ring in the UK?

Nothing conclusive, (as yet), certainly no smoking gun but IMHO it would be reasonable to assume, on the balance of probabilities and given the information available, that such a ring (or indeed rings) have operated and may still do so.

I want to know who the abusers are, particularly if the are Tories, admittedly partly out of a prurient interest and party because I want the party leadership to squirm

But in the end whether one or two individuals, however famous, are named, prosecuted and convicted isn’t the real issue.

The real victory will when survivors of past, current, and future abuse, come forward safe in the knowledge that they will be believed, their allegations taken seriously, and fully investigated without fear or favour. Something that has been woefully lacking in the past.


----------



## Blanche de Vere (Nov 9, 2012)

In today's Huffington Post we see our Chancellor Osborne castigating William Hague as unprincipled during his tenure as shadow leader of the Opposition Party.  As 'PM in waiting' it would seem that Osborne is doing his best to undermine any desires Hague has for the very position that he desires himself...but we digress...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Liam Fox had his sights set on No. 10 too.


So did the 'ra, once


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> So did the 'ra, once


 
Useless cross-eyed fucks!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Useless cross-eyed fucks!


They still got closer to the seat of power than liam fox will


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

happie chappie said:


> Some 30 pages into a fascinating thread. So back to the OP - is there evidence of a long-term, high-level paedophile ring in the UK?
> 
> Nothing conclusive, (as yet), certainly no smoking gun but IMHO it would be reasonable to assume, on the balance of probabilities and given the information available, that such a ring (or indeed rings) have operated and may still do so.


We await Cameron's response to Tom Watson's request for the Paul Pelham/Peter Righton evidence file to be disclosed for starters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

This all puts me to mind of the night charles and camilla were attacked, when the student demo went from chants of something like 'grants not fees' to 'kill the queen' in two minutes in trafalgar sq


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

This all puts me to mind of the night charles and camilla were attacked, when the student demo went from chants of something like 'grants not fees' to 'kill the queen' in two minutes in trafalgar sq


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 9, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> This all puts me to mind of the night charles and camilla were attacked, when the student demo went from chants of something like 'grants not fees' to 'kill the queen' in two minutes in trafalgar sq


 
Attacked?


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> although to infer from that alone that he was deliberately shifted out of harm's way would be jumping the gun, somewhat.


 
Especially as it was the fallout from the Westland affair that cost him his cabinet post.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

Was just thinking what a mess this all is - various inquiries announced, names almost in the public domain, sometimes mixed in with conspiraloonery, Cameron using the witchunt diversion etc. Whole thing doesn't have much sense of direction and isn't getting the traction of the Savile sage (largely because that was easier and more straightforward for the papers to process). Wonder what will firm it up or give the whole thing a sense of coherence? I'd guess - but haven't heard - that some of the victims would have put in new or reapeated names to the police by now?  Suppose what I mean is we seem to have inquiries into previous police inquires - but no current criminal investigation.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 9, 2012)

People are having a proper go at "the internet is full of lies" thing now. True of course, as any fule kno. 

But where are many of these people to be found? In the mainstream press.

People go the internet for news through credulous puriance, for variety and for a bunch of other good, bad and in between reasons.

But not least because mainstream media has become so much a festering pit of trivia, mis-info and dis-info itself. 

2 wrongs don't make a right, but much of what is being said is in the realms of beams in the eye.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Prole said:


> Harrowing: Care Home Abuse Victim Tells Of Sex Parties
> 
> Hooray Henrys and Army barracks!
> 
> Edir: Becoming clearer why the terms of reference of Waterhouse were limited to just the Children's homes.


 
Bloody hell, there was something very authentic about that. Not that other accounts arent authentic, but this one had a human 'normalisation' aspect to it that reeked of how life can be, especially for a youngster.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> But not least because mainstream media has become so much a festering pit of trivia, mis-info and dis-info itself.


 
The media has always been about direction, omission, attempting to gain a monopoly over the truth, etc. Not always, there are exemptions and things have happened in recent weeks that provide some kind of window of opportunity, not a fully open one but its there none the less. 

Part of the reason I was moaning last night was because people do overcompensate for this sometimes, and getting carried away in another direction can be used to reenable the narrow spectrum and legitimacy of the mainstream. To give way to hysteria and to cling to discredited things for too long makes it easier for the swine. Its fine to go out on a limb and to push things to an extreme on occasion, but knowing when to roll back somewhat is an important part of holding our gains. Knowing when to retreat and reapproach from a different angle is important.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> They still got closer to the seat of power than liam fox will


 
True!


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Whole thing doesn't have much sense of direction and isn't getting the traction of the Savile sage (largely because that was easier and more straightforward for the papers to process). Wonder what will firm it up or give the whole thing a sense of coherence?


 
I'm not at all sure I agree. Its been messy at times and of course the Savile stuff made for a simpler story that the press could get their teeth into effortlessly thanks also to the usual celebrity thang, but the political stuff hasnt gone away at all. It was hard to watch channel 4 news last night without concluding that it is going somewhere.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> Especially as it was the fallout from the Westland affair that cost him his cabinet post.


Good job, too.


----------



## framed (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> Bloody hell, there was something very authentic about that. Not that other accounts arent authentic, but this one had a human 'normalisation' aspect to it that reeked of how life can be, especially for a youngster.


 
I think that might be the most convincing piece of footage I've watched so far.

His description of the abuse as being almost 'normal' and that it came with 'privileges'; "great days out" to London, parties where kids were allowed to smoke and drink... was chilling. To reject the abuse was to give up the 'privileges'.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Nov 9, 2012)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20269114


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 9, 2012)

What I find weird is that he somehow hasn't googled the image in all this time to verify if it was him or not that way. Something doesn't ring true.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

framed said:


> I think that might be the most convincing piece of footage I've watched so far.
> 
> His description of the abuse as being almost 'normal' and that it came with 'privileges'; "great days out" to London, parties where kids were allowed to smoke and drink... was chilling. To reject the abuse was to give up the 'privileges'.


 
'Privileges' is the word. fucking hell. And yes it does look like there is evidence of a high level paedo ring/network/affiliation/complicity/cover up.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Nov 9, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> What I find weird is that he somehow hasn't googled the image in all this time to verify if it was him or not that way. Something doesn't ring true.


 
Strange indeed


----------



## ayatollah (Nov 9, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> With all due respect, Aaronovitch is a massive cunt.


 
I had the misfortune of being at Manchester University at the same time as this ghastly man, early 70's - he being the leading Communist Party hack /big wheel in the Broad Left. As a wee Trot in those days we seemed to spend a lot of time fighting the opportunist political shennanigans of comrade Aaronovitch and the Broad Left career politicians. It amuses me now as he retrospectively reinvents himself as always being in those days a "libertarian socialist"... he was in fact always a dreadful pro Soviet Stalinist apologist of the most hackworthy sort - combined with the usual insincere "Eurocommunist" reformist drivel. Not at ALL surprising he functions as one of the ideological attack dogs of the current status quo. Dave and the art of doublethink were always constant bedmates.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 9, 2012)

It's hardly a coincidence that he's done an about turn at the same time McAlpine is issuing legal threats.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 9, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> It's hardly a coincidence that he's done an about turn at the same time McAlpine is issuing legal threats.


Indeed, no one except those with fat wallets can afford a defamation suit. It's one of the things that makes this country so rotten.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

i wouldn't be surprised if mcalpine could, using his auld appointment diaries, give a fairly detailed account of his movements for the past 30 years or more.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> It's hardly a coincidence that he's done an about turn at the same time McAlpine is issuing legal threats.


 He has a thing about conspiracy theories but there is a difference between a conspiracy of people and a conspiracy of events, he is dancing on the head of a pin.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Time to watch channel 4 news again.


----------



## Fedayn (Nov 9, 2012)

The allegations against McAlpine are rapidly being dropped.....


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

mwgdrwg said:


> Strange indeed


 Channel four news now...asking the same question


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

Are they ignoring the fact that there was a dead McAlpine who lived in Wrexham?



> In a statement on Friday evening, Mr Messham said: "After seeing a picture in the past hour of the individual concerned, this [is] not the person I identified by photograph presented to me by the police in the early 1990s, who told me the man in the photograph was Lord McAlpine


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

Phew! New archbishop of Canterbury affirms beleif in physical resurrection of jesus christ and alleged victims of high level paedo network apologise for geting it wrong. Mysterious ways.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> I'm not at all sure I agree. Its been messy at times and of course the Savile stuff made for a simpler story that the press could get their teeth into effortlessly thanks also to the usual celebrity thang, but the political stuff hasnt gone away at all. It was hard to watch channel 4 news last night without concluding that it is going somewhere.


I didn't see it yesterday, but tonight's felt a bit like they were almost trying to reset a campaign, after acknowledging a setback (rather than straight news reporting).  Crick looked a bit sheepish, even if he did try and blame the beeb.

I hate to be doing some kind of 'PR analysis' on how this is playing out, but getting McAlpine wrong looks like it could damage the whole process of getting justice.  Meesshams gone through hell and it's hardly his fault - no doubt he correctly identified the right person from their photo.  However it did feel like a deflating moment. Can almost imagine lawyers going on about 'faulty memories', length of time etc.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Crick had no reason to be sheepish, he correctly anticipated how this might unfold from the start.

Although when I say start, thats not quite true. The start was many years ago, the allegations have been on the net for many years as well, what changed was the level of attention to them.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

And the same goes for the suggestions of gross inaccuracy regarding one individual in particular. These are as old as the original story, and people on this thread did a great job of covering this stuff well before the latest shitstorm. OK maybe great is overdoing it, but the problems have been apparent for years and its real bad that sections of the media didnt pay more attention to this before they rested so much of the story on that pillar.

Thats part of the reason people like me may be staring in disbelief at posts here over the last 20 hours.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> Thats part of the reason people like me may be staring in disbelief at posts here over the last 20 hours.


perhaps, but (once again) THIS IS URBAN 

you don't fucking come here to read things any old fuckwit might believe, like some virgin giving birth to the son of god 2000 years ago.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> And the same goes for the suggestions of gross inaccuracy regarding one individual in particular. These are as old as the original story, and people on this thread did a great job of covering this stuff well before the latest shitstorm. OK maybe great is overdoing it, but the problems have been apparent for years and its real bad that sections of the media didnt pay more attention to this before they rested so much of the story on that pillar.
> 
> Thats part of the reason people like me may be staring in disbelief at posts here over the last 20 hours.


 Don't know if that's aimed at me?  Anyway, I obviously don't know anything about the guilt of the respective McAlpines.  I was just making a comment on how whether this will get a sense of momentum - and ultimately whether there's a chance of any child rapists doing time.

Equally, I'm not sure which posts you are staring in disbelief at?   I'm more than happy to say you and others have done a lot of work on it and made links.  My view is that at the moment it's perched halfway between being an internet process involving the committed and a public issue.  I just hope there's a way of it ultimately getting some of the cunts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

imo the mcalpines should be condemned for their famously shit health and safety at work, as immortalised in the classick ballad, 'mcalpine's fusiliers'



after they've been fucked over for that, then let's turn to the more recent allegations.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Don't know if that's aimed at me?  Anyway, I obviously don't know anything about the guilt of the respective McAlpines.  I was just making a comment on how whether this will get a sense of momentum - and ultimately whether there's a chance of any child rapists doing time.
> 
> Equally, I'm not sure which posts you are staring in disbelief at?   I'm more than happy to say you and others have done a lot of work on it and made links.  My view is that at the moment it's perched halfway between being an internet process involving the committed and a public issue.  I just hope there's a way of it ultimately getting some of the cunts.




No it wasnt aimed at you specifically, and I wont be going back to see if I can make any of your posts fit my complaint.

My point includes that which Pickmans Model brought up, I've been using u75 as a shelter from the worst the internet has to offer, and whilst I expect this to slip quite frequently, I am used to numerous people quickly neutralising the wibblier stuff. So once the Guardian published their story last night, I was slightly shocked that this drove many people here at the time further down a path which I dont believe does justice to the wider issues. It really doesnt matter in the grand scheme of things, its just a longwinded version of a facepalm or 20 on my part, and hopefully things will gradually return to a sounder footing.


----------



## framed (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> And the same goes for the suggestions of gross inaccuracy regarding one individual in particular. These are as old as the original story, and people on this thread did a great job of covering this stuff well before the latest shitstorm. OK maybe great is overdoing it, but the problems have been apparent for years and its real bad that sections of the media didnt pay more attention to this before they rested so much of the story on that pillar.
> 
> Thats part of the reason people like me may be staring in disbelief at posts here over the last 20 hours.


 

Elbows, you've been pretty much on the ball with your observations on this issue throughout. I withdraw those earlier comments I made about you trying to control the parameters of this discussion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> I've been using u75 as a shelter from the worst the internet has to offer


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

Wilf said:


> I didn't see it yesterday, but tonight's felt a bit like they were almost trying to reset a campaign, after acknowledging a setback (rather than straight news reporting). Crick looked a bit sheepish, even if he did try and blame the beeb.
> 
> I hate to be doing some kind of 'PR analysis' on how this is playing out, but getting McAlpine wrong looks like it could damage the whole process of getting justice. Meesshams gone through hell and it's hardly his fault - no doubt he correctly identified the right person from their photo. However it did feel like a deflating moment. Can almost imagine lawyers going on about 'faulty memories', length of time etc.


 
Lawyers must be chuffed, it will go on for years and by discrediting some of the evidence the victims will be victims again and some people will be brought to justice of a kind and some won't. Abuse, Rigts, Sex, Human Nature, Business, Violence, Class, Power, Freedom and stuff...


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

framed said:


> Elbows, you've been pretty much on the ball with your observations on this issue throughout. I withdraw those earlier comments I made about you trying to control the parameters of this discussion.


 
Thanks. But all credit to those who placed the useful links in front of me, its not like much of my opinion stemmed from my own research. And Im sure I went wrong on this thread a number of times.

Anyways I've been lucky enough to have the luxury of spending vast amounts of time learning about all sorts of issues that we discuss here, and I dont expect everyone else to have as much spare time or be as geeky as me.

I regret that one of the downsides of having loads of time to learn about stuff, and the ability to drone on and on about my opinions, is that I might sometimes sound like I know what I am talking about. But I want to be challenged by people, I dont really want people to take my word for it, and I think you were right when you pointed out that the way I talk about stuff may give the impression of wanting to narrow the scope of discussion. I can be rather impatient when people arent in sync with the stage I think we've reached at a particular moment, and thats partly because I want to feel like I am sharing a voyage of understanding and discovery with people, in part because in real life I have found myself in something of a pit of isolation.

God what a load of navel gazing bollocks. In real life I'm something of a wisecracking goofball whose routine failings cause me to poke fun at myself, but I dont think I've ever figured out how to do this in print properly.

And now back to the advertised program. Channel 4 was pretty darn good again tonight, not too many moments where my blood boils which is probably all I can ask for. Unlike the BBC.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Which reminds me, the thing thats doing my head in in the media right now is people saying 'oh so the Tories were wrong to announce new inquiries then'. Arghghghgh!


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> Which reminds me, the thing thats doing my head in in the media right now is people saying 'oh so the Tories were wrong to announce new inquiries then'. Arghghghgh![/quotei don't get what you mean elbow


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

Whoever imagined that a fight against paedophile rings that reach into the highest echelons would be clean? Manipulation, dirty tricks, concealment, smears, distraction, misdirection - all to be expected really - they didn't get where they are nor stay protected and hidden without many people in positions of power and influence protecting them by foul means and fouler.

Back to Tom Watson's statement which was drowned out by the Newsnight piece. Where are the programmes and articles revisiting and examining the Righton case and the subsequent outing of Morrison?

Now this: North Wales child abuse inquiry pulls in police specialists from across UK | Society | The Guardian Why not just publish the Jillings report and read the statements that the welsh council worker has on her kitchen table!


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> _don't get what you mean elbow_


 
Some talking heads in the media have been using the Messham mess to suggest that Teresa May announced new inquiries prematurely, insinuating that there was no need for the 'abuse beyond the childrens home' stuff to be explored again. Peter Morrison alone is reason why this is a disgraceful concept, let alone what else may yet be lurking under rocks. Hell I dont even care if no politicians were involved, the police and other public officials are just as important a part of the establishment.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> Some talking heads in the media have been using the Messham mess to suggest that Teresa May announced new inquiries prematurely, insinuating that there was no need for the 'abuse beyond the childrens home' stuff to be explored again. Peter Morrison alone is reason why this is a disgraceful concept, let alone what else may yet be lurking under rocks. Hell I dont even care if no politicians were involved, the police and other public officials are just as important a part of the establishment.


Too true. It's all very thick of it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 9, 2012)

Yeah - the mac alpine fuck up and the Phillip Schofield list slip have been siezed on with lighting speed and great enthusiasm by many parts of the political/media establishment railing agasint internet driven witch hunts- after several days of deafening silence.

The peter morrison revelation is being completely ignored and the main thrust of the story is being discreditied - even though there is a significent amount of compellnig evidence.


----------



## savoloysam (Nov 9, 2012)

^Just what I was thinking. Then again need they have worried? Nobody I've spoken to this week has talked about any of this even when I started talking about it.

My guess is even if there is/was a high profile organised ring most people couldn't care less, not unless it's their children that suffering at the hands of it that is


----------



## savoloysam (Nov 9, 2012)

Camer face seems be coming in his pants at the latest turns in the story. I guess there's no bigger fear than fear of the truth eh David?


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 9, 2012)

savoloysam said:


> ^Just what I was thinking. Then again need they have worried? Nobody I've spoken to this week has talked about any of this even when I started talking about it.
> 
> My guess is even if there is/was a high profile organised ring most people couldn't care less, not unless it's their children that suffering at the hands of it that is


Sad but true.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

savoloysam said:


> Camer face seems be coming in his pants at the latest turns in the story. I guess there's no bigger fear than fear of the truth eh David?


Just saw him on the BBC news - very different demeanour today.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 9, 2012)

Seen Newsnight?

What clusterfuck is this?

The news isn't Schofield or Watson or Newsnight or people talking on the internet; the news is why children have had their complaints of abuse ignored, and are still having them ignored. The news is if, how, why and by whom investigations into these alleged crimes have been circumscribed. The news is what kind of power circulates in society in order to protect certain people no matter their crime.

This is nothing but distraction.

I felt like what happened yesterday with Schofield and C4 News was something of a tipping point, or at least it represented a very important moment where the power to question was put in the hands of regular people instead of just the powerful. Well it seems it was a very important moment, but for all the wrong reasons. It's been jumped upon by those it suits, so that they can regain control of the terms of debate, and start putting the media and the internet and the free flow of information on trial, instead of the people who will continue to exert their tight control on that information.

"Silly people, down there flapping around gossiping on the internet; we important people know best, your moral judgements are flawed, stop talking about this, let us handle it in our own way, don't listen to the media...trust the power."


----------



## jakethesnake (Nov 9, 2012)

savoloysam said:


> ^Just what I was thinking. Then again need they have worried? Nobody I've spoken to this week has talked about any of this even when I started talking about it.
> 
> My guess is even if there is/was a high profile organised ring most people couldn't care less, not unless it's their children that suffering at the hands of it that is


I don't think it's that people don't care, it's more that most people just can't get their heads around it, cognitive dissonance causes them to just stop thinking about it... or not to want to think about it.


----------



## gosub (Nov 9, 2012)

Wilf said:


> I didn't see it yesterday, but tonight's felt a bit like they were almost trying to reset a campaign, after acknowledging a setback (rather than straight news reporting).  Crick looked a bit sheepish, even if he did try and blame the beeb.
> 
> I hate to be doing some kind of 'PR analysis' on how this is playing out, but getting McAlpine wrong looks like it could damage the whole process of getting justice.  Meesshams gone through hell and it's hardly his fault - no doubt he correctly identified the right person from their photo.  However it did feel like a deflating moment. Can almost imagine lawyers going on about 'faulty memories', length of time etc.


Meesham will never get justice now, any defending silk will crush his credibility. Saying it wasn't McAlpine was an honourable thing to do, defamation laws are only really a worry to the middling crowd, if you're rich, you can afford it, and if you're poor they can't take what you haven't got so the litigant will have to pay Carter Ruck et al out of their own pocket... 
Ain't seen the video without the blurring, but I presume Mr Schofield is having a sleepless night, as Lord McAlpine has to make an example out of someone


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Seen Newsnight?
> 
> What clusterfuck is this?
> 
> ...


 Very much what I felt about it.  Also, to state the obvious, if it had been properly investigated 20 years ago we wouldn't have the detail of Stephen Messhams allegations crumbling now.  Somebody would have already served time for it and he might have had some peace in his life. Wasn't going to happen then and it ain't now.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 9, 2012)

Posted yet? more than likely


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2012)

She said witch cunt didnt she?


----------



## Prole (Nov 9, 2012)

From this article:





> Mr Watson was contacted in October by one of the inquiry’s child protection experts, now retired. The coverage of the Savile scandal had awoken painful memories of how his evidence about Peter Righton, then a child care expert and children’s homes consultant, was destroyed. He told Mr Watson: “My unit was closed down almost overnight and a manager took my files and burned them.”
> 
> 
> The paedophile ring investigation that Mr Watson described to a hushed Commons centred on Righton. And the inquiry did involve names from the so-called establishment (though the Thatcher aide was linked by circumstances and hearsay). But what this inquiry also uncovered was the shocking attitude to child abuse of some on the liberal left and their involvement in it.
> ...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 9, 2012)

So, a bunch of (unspecified but probably existent) Tory child rapists are getting away with it under cover of a media smokescreen ...

"Quelle surprise", as they say in North Wales.

Edited for clarity.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 9, 2012)

elbows said:


> No it wasnt aimed at you specifically, and I wont be going back to see if I can make any of your posts fit my complaint.
> 
> My point includes that which Pickmans Model brought up, I've been using u75 as a shelter from the worst the internet has to offer, and whilst I expect this to slip quite frequently, I am used to numerous people quickly neutralising the wibblier stuff. So once the Guardian published their story last night, I was slightly shocked that this drove many people here at the time further down a path which I dont believe does justice to the wider issues. It really doesnt matter in the grand scheme of things, its just a longwinded version of a facepalm or 20 on my part, and hopefully things will gradually return to a sounder footing.


I've just reread that section twice and I really can't see what you're complaining about other than 1 link by Watchman that lots of people did object to - all I see is several posts from you complaining that people weren't taking note of the guardian piece interspersed with lots of other posts from people taking note of the guardian article.

I'd say that much of the MSM reaction has been shocking, as with a few exceptions they're entirely missed the point that this appears to have been mistaken identity in the form of the wrong McAlpine, not total fabrication, as the Guardian article itself states.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 9, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yeah - the mac alpine fuck up and the Phillip Schofield list slip have been siezed on with lighting speed and great enthusiasm by many parts of the political/media establishment railing agasint internet driven witch hunts- after several days of deafening silence.
> 
> The peter morrison revelation is being completely ignored and the main thrust of the story is being discreditied - even though there is a significent amount of compellnig evidence.


 
It's a very trite question to ask, but _cui bono_?
That's right, the same old scumbags, maggots and politicians.


----------



## gosub (Nov 10, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Seen Newsnight?
> 
> What clusterfuck is this?
> 
> ...


Didn't see newsnight beyond the desrved apology, but if was about emphising the shit people could get in for helping predudicing future trails then good. One victim may now have to get his justice vicariously having been oxidised to get this going, but I hope they get the sick cunts in the end, and that takes discipline. 

I would also take the time to praise this board for being quite mature about it,  in contrast to worried about witch hunt tweets from Paul Staines for example who simultaneously left links and and names in the comments on his site


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> Seen Newsnight?
> 
> What clusterfuck is this?
> 
> ...


 
A distraction that's not helped by the oscillation of expert opinion on child testimony between "children tell you what you want to hear" and "children tell the truth", which informs some peoples' view of the entire set of sagas.  Webster's writing being pushed so heavily haven't hurt the distraction any, either, by reducing everything to a question of revenge and greed.



> I felt like what happened yesterday with Schofield and C4 News was something of a tipping point, or at least it represented a very important moment where the power to question was put in the hands of regular people instead of just the powerful. Well it seems it was a very important moment, but for all the wrong reasons. It's been jumped upon by those it suits, so that they can regain control of the terms of debate, and start putting the media and the internet and the free flow of information on trial, instead of the people who will continue to exert their tight control on that information.
> 
> "Silly people, down there flapping around gossiping on the internet; we important people know best, your moral judgements are flawed, stop talking about this, let us handle it in our own way, don't listen to the media...trust the power."


 
Yep. I mentioned the other day that modern communications technology holes the longevity of most cover-ups below the waterline, and it's not as if the UK and other "first world" states aren't keen on establishing some kind of "Great Wall" of their own to filter the internet, so we can expect more attempts at legislation aimed at establishing the capacity to do so.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

jakethesnake said:


> I don't think it's that people don't care, it's more that most people just can't get their heads around it, cognitive dissonance causes them to just stop thinking about it... or not to want to think about it.


 
It's easy to accept that behind a single front door on a street or in a village, one sick fuck might be a child-raper, but getting your head around the idea of groups of men using kids already wounded by society as receptacles for their depravity and sexual violence is another thing altogether, and that's not just people here and now, but people in every decade of my lifetime too.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 10, 2012)

It seems too awful to be true, although it prboably isnt


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> It seems too awful to be true, although it prboably isnt


 
I'm damn sure it isn't too awful to be true, and I'm also damn sure that at a municipal level, there's been pressure brought to bear by municipal insurers (and we're talking the big companies here) on local authorities to basically dead-end investigations, so as to stop a "run" on the insurer by class actions by kids from the same local authority who were abused in homes that local authority sent them to.
Why am I damn sure? Because local authorities *have* to have municipal insurance, and heavy claims mean increased premiums, and my own local authority pretty much dead-ended investigations into a HIV+ paedophile youth worker in the late '80s-early '90s that would have meant their insurer (a big continental company) would (so they threatened) almost double the premium.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 10, 2012)

fucking cunts


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> fucking cunts


 
Yup.
At the end of the day, money matters more than people, for most institutions.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 10, 2012)

I expanded a bit on what I said earlier: rather than copy it all out here, it's here if you're interested.

OtherVP, you're absolutely right about the communications technology aspect. It's something I've been thinking about since I wrote ^. It's moments like this that we're experiencing right now that will ultimately help shape what the future of information sharing and the internet will look like. Back when the original stuff about the care homes was happening, and when Savile was in his prime, we didn't have the kind of mass public investigative power we do now. It's really clear how the internet poses a danger for regimes like China and Iran, and people in power over here are quick to defend it in that capacity; but it's equally as dangerous for our own regimes, not least because acknowledging it's dangerous for their continued unaccountability highlights the basic fact that they aren't the bastions of democracy and truth they would have us believe (especially when contrasting themselves to other countries).

As a society, we're embracing the technology of the internet and the breadth of things it allows us access to, but counter to that there is a struggle by the establishment to attempt to gain control over it. We see it in the various acts that have passed or been blocked, like ACTA and SOPA, among others. It's present in the increasing collusion between ISPs and government and law enforcement agencies around the world. And moments like this are crucial in mapping out how we respond to that. Not just in the tangible things we do about it, but also in the way we talk about it, and the ways in which we let people in power influence and control how we talk about it. Things that we've seen in the news today, scapegoating Schofield, vilifying people who talk about this stuff online, etc., shows how easy it is for us ('us' more broadly than people discussing it on urban, obv.) to have our focus diverted and influenced by the people it suits.

We need to be careful. And we need to learn to know what to look out for.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 10, 2012)

On the subject of prejudicing possible future trials, our laws and the way we approach prosecuting people is going to have to evolve as our technologies and access to information does. It's very difficult to argue what the balance should be between the ability to pursue information collectively and as individuals online or elsewhere, and the suppression of public discussion and dialogue in order to safeguard the possibility of future justice. Both are crucial. The law as it stands at the moment isn't adequate for the way we have evolved in accessing networks of information. And nor, for that matter, is our public moral framework.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

Vintage Paw said:


> I expanded a bit on what I said earlier: rather than copy it all out here, it's here if you're interested.


 
I shall have a butchers' tomorrow, as I'll be signing off in a bit (the painkillers are kicking in, praise the lard!).



> OtherVP, you're absolutely right about the communications technology aspect. It's something I've been thinking about since I wrote ^. It's moments like this that we're experiencing right now that will ultimately help shape what the future of information sharing and the internet will look like. Back when the original stuff about the care homes was happening, and when Savile was in his prime, we didn't have the kind of mass public investigative power we do now.


 
What we also have is the ability to collate and disseminate information much faster, on top of the mass public investigative power. Castells mentioned this as being a consequence of a truly "networked" society, and I reckon thatat least in the UK, we've had events like the student protests and the current paedogeddon that have really given the politicians (who usually have the political attention span of a goldfish) motivation for "doing something" about this lack f control over us. How can you govern a people properly if you're not in control of where their information comes from?



> It's really clear how the internet poses a danger for regimes like China and Iran, and people in power over here are quick to defend it in that capacity; but it's equally as dangerous for our own regimes, not least because acknowledging it's dangerous for their continued unaccountability highlights the basic fact that they aren't the bastions of democracy and truth they would have us believe (especially when contrasting themselves to other countries).


 
They want a Ministry of Truth scenario, and mass availability of ICT over an unsecured set of connections means they can't have it. Let's hope they *never* get it!



> As a society, we're embracing the technology of the internet and the breadth of things it allows us access to, but counter to that there is a struggle by the establishment to attempt to gain control over it. We see it in the various acts that have passed or been blocked, like ACTA and SOPA, among others. It's present in the increasing collusion between ISPs and government and law enforcement agencies around the world. And moments like this are crucial in mapping out how we respond to that. Not just in the tangible things we do about it, but also in the way we talk about it, and the ways in which we let people in power influence and control how we talk about it. Things that we've seen in the news today, scapegoating Schofield, vilifying people who talk about this stuff online, etc., shows how easy it is for us ('us' more broadly than people discussing it on urban, obv.) to have our focus diverted and influenced by the people it suits.
> 
> We need to be careful. And we need to learn to know what to look out for.


 
Absolutely.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I've just reread that section twice and I really can't see what you're complaining about other than 1 link by Watchman that lots of people did object to - all I see is several posts from you complaining that people weren't taking note of the guardian piece interspersed with lots of other posts from people taking note of the guardian article.



By feeling the need to respond I am only likely to make my beef seem even greater than I meant it to be at the time. That moment has passed, I'm not going to point out all the posts in that timeframe that made me rant, but they were on the other thread as well as this one. And it was the culmination of a pretty horrible day in multiple ways, from the Cameron comments and the failure to appreciate that there was a valid point buried in there somewhere, to cynicism applied in slightly the wrong places. I doubt I'm making complete sense right now, I've overloaded on these issues and need to take a break, and like I said things have already moved on past that moment. For example the media had barely begun to go into their obscuring mode back then, whereas today they have taken it to a level which makes some of the things I was rolling my eyes at more valid. All the same I have no regrets about getting slightly wound up that some seemed to think that the focus on dead people was some kind of decoy, when it actually seems to form a fair chunk of the truth that is still worth exposing.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

An additional thing that wound me up about much of the medias response in the last 24 hours or so has been the idea that people on the internet invented all the names and possible detail. Thats only true for a portion of it. The accusations that caused the biggest backfiring shitstorm were around before the internet took off. And I dont just mean the covered up stuff from the various inquiries, but also the accusations taht came from Scallywag - the mainstream 'respectable' world failed to deal with it at the time, leaving it to lurk and fester. Then they picked up on it all these years later, tried to be clever with it, and then blamed the rascal multitude when it blew up in their own face.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

well said Vintage Paw.

There's not a vast amount of point worrying about prejudicing a future trial by discussing the subject on the internet if that trial is never going to happen if we don't help force it to happen by continuing to discuss it on the internet and force it to stay in the public eye until it ends up in court.

ffs they've already had the testimony from many of these people on the record since the early 90s, yet the powers that be decided they weren't reliable enough witnesses to take their allegations to trial and risk them impuning the good names of respected members of the community.

This isn't a wild allegation either, this is public record from both the independent's libel trial in the early 90s, and the waterhouse inquiry, with 3 witnesses at the first, and 6 at the 2nd against one specific named copper, and who knows how many other allegations made and swept under the carpet or not even allowed to be made due to the terms of the inquiry.

They must not be allowed to do the same again*, and if the odd person get's named wrongly and has to exonerate himself in public then that's surely better than them having 2 decades of open rumors circulating about them and nobody being able to establish the truth one way or the other.





*and I'm not talking a big conspiracy here, but the legal system in this country is very badly rigged against kids like this and in favor of the high and mighty in terms of credibility, public interest, access to lawyers, and the council insurers / financial pressures on the councils etc to ensure allegations don't end up with big compensation payouts to victims. Though I do suspect there have been a few at high levels helping this process along through sly methods like the setting of the terms of the inquiry.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> By feeling the need to respond I am only likely to make my beef seem even greater than I meant it to be at the time. That moment has passed, I'm not going to point out all the posts in that timeframe that made me rant, but they were on the other thread as well as this one. And it was the culmination of a pretty horrible day in multiple ways, from the Cameron comments and the failure to appreciate that there was a valid point buried in there somewhere, to cynicism applied in slightly the wrong places. I doubt I'm making complete sense right now, I've overloaded on these issues and need to take a break, and like I said things have already moved on past that moment. For example the media had barely begun to go into their obscuring mode back then, whereas today they have taken it to a level which makes some of the things I was rolling my eyes at more valid.


I've now read all 3 threads on this from that time, and still can't see what you're talking about, but I do understand the bit about overloading on this, and think there's probably a degree of that in your posts and the reaction to them.

fwiw, IMO you're better to actually quote an example of the post you're concerned about instead of making loose blanket statements of pissed offness, as with the latter approach everyone then tries to interpret what you're complaining about to see if it fits their posts and it's hard to know what / who you're actually complaining about. Then it just gets the backs up of people you might not have even been talking about for points you may not have been making.



> All the same I have no regrets about getting slightly wound up that some seemed to think that the focus on dead people was some kind of decoy, when it actually seems to form a fair chunk of the truth that is still worth exposing.


Moving on, I entirely agree that the focus on the dead can actually be pretty illuminating. It may or may not be a bit of a diversion, in the same way that gary glitter etc almost certainly are, but there's a lot to be learned from the dead that have been named that starts to show the potential scale of the thing and the sort of networks that could be involved.

I mean if the allegations are right, then Jimmy McAlpine isn't exactly small fry, he was chair of one of the UK's biggest building firms, and a full on establishment figure, son of nobility etc. In that area he'd have been probably the top establishment figure.

Personally I can't help thinking that he has the potential to be a significant linkage between the homes in North Wales, the allegations of masonic involvement in the abuse and cover up in the area, and the allegations of boys being shipped out to London for regular sex parties with upper class 50-60 year old figures - just his peer group, and his homes geographic proximity to the homes gives a plausible route for him to gain access to the boys in the first place (particularly if there was masonic involvement, and some of the others involved were also masons (as the libelled copper from the early 90s admitted to being at the inquiry).


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> So, a bunch of Tory child rapists are getting away with it under cover of a media smokescreen ...
> 
> "Quelle surprise", as they say in North Wales.


 

Turkeys dont vote for Christmas.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

Prole said:


> Whoever imagined that a fight against paedophile rings that reach into the highest echelons would be clean? Manipulation, dirty tricks, concealment, smears, distraction, misdirection - all to be expected really - they didn't get where they are nor stay protected and hidden without many people in positions of power and influence protecting them by foul means and fouler.
> 
> Back to Tom Watson's statement which was drowned out by the Newsnight piece. Where are the programmes and articles revisiting and examining the Righton case and the subsequent outing of Morrison?
> 
> Now this: North Wales child abuse inquiry pulls in police specialists from across UK | Society | The Guardian Why not just publish the Jillings report and read the statements that the welsh council worker has on her kitchen table!


 


As many senior cops are freemasons, the Police are not in an impartial position to investigate. As North Wales proves.

Masonry opens doors if you are a cop or a crim or a builder. Or want to make connections if involved in anything from importation to grey areas of taxation. No coincidence Kenny Noye was a Mason. Its a great way to make connections with those who work in HM customs and excise, the Police, law etc. As well as for nonces.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 10, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> So, a bunch of Tory child rapists are getting away with it under cover of a media smokescreen ...
> 
> "Quelle surprise", as they say in North Wales.


 
"getting away with it"
Are you saying you think Lord McAlpine is guilty of the allegations?


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/in-a-small-town-where-the-tories-and-masons-hold-sway-1312466.html

Freemasons who sat on a council's planning committee have been found guilty of malpractice after a lengthy inquiry by the local-government ombudsman.
The investigation into their activities on the council at Canvey Island, Essex, began after complaints that they had given a fellow lodge member the go-ahead to build a leisure complex.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 10, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> "getting away with it"
> Are you saying you think Lord McAlpine is guilty of the allegations?


 
That would be a really fucking stupid thing to say, don't you think?


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 10, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> That would be a really fucking stupid thing to say, don't you think?


 
Seeing as there's absolutely no evidence towards him now, yes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Turkeys dont vote for Christmas.


That's only because they don't have the franchise. In addition, there has never been a vote on the issue of christmas.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 10, 2012)

Somehow I don't think trying to distract with talk of the internet and witchunts is going to brush it all away, nice try at a distraction though it is...


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 10, 2012)

Ian Bone trying to cover his tracks -
"Apologies, but the page you requested could not be found"
http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2012/1...-be-named-as-paedophile-on-newsnight-tonight/


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 10, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Ian Bone trying to cover his tracks -
> "Apologies, but the page you requested could not be found"
> http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2012/1...-be-named-as-paedophile-on-newsnight-tonight/


 

revisionism


----------



## Yelkcub (Nov 10, 2012)

self-deleted

Stupid, pointless joke not related to serious matter


----------



## Prole (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/in-a-small-town-where-the-tories-and-masons-hold-sway-1312466.html
> 
> Freemasons who sat on a council's planning committee have been found guilty of malpractice after a lengthy inquiry by the local-government ombudsman.
> The investigation into their activities on the council at Canvey Island, Essex, began after complaints that they had given a fellow lodge member the go-ahead to build a leisure complex.


Links to freemasonary and N Wales child-abuse are covered in detail here.

edit: Nick Davies


----------



## Prole (Nov 10, 2012)

Rob Wilson attacks Tom Watson on child abuse claims » Spectator Blogs


----------



## where to (Nov 10, 2012)

Daniel Finkelstein (neo liberal Tines editorialist) has tweeted that Tom Watson's allegations are different to Messham's, not LM but connected to Righton.


----------



## Prole (Nov 10, 2012)

Tom Watson is tweeting this:

The Shameful Truth


----------



## where to (Nov 10, 2012)

Still silence from Nick Davies..


----------



## where to (Nov 10, 2012)

Latest tweet from Watson confirms his PMQ was not related to N Wales. 

It's interesting what his tweet doesn't say.

It may be beneficial to file the statements of prominent persons now leading the charge to shut this matter down.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> ....the legal system in this country is very badly rigged against kids like this and in favor of the high and mighty in terms of credibility, public interest, access to lawyers, and the council insurers / financial pressures on the councils etc to ensure allegations don't end up with big compensation payouts to victims. Though I do suspect there have been a few at high levels helping this process along through sly methods like the setting of the terms of the inquiry.


 
The criminal justice system has, of course, had legislation dictating the disposition of vulnerable witnesses for almost 10 years now, and yet they're still not rigourously enforced. Lawyers are still able to intimidate and bully vulnerable witnesses; to flim-flam and otherwise confuse the young or cognitively-disorganised; to accuse witnesses of fiction.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/in-a-small-town-where-the-tories-and-masons-hold-sway-1312466.html
> 
> Freemasons who sat on a council's planning committee have been found guilty of malpractice after a lengthy inquiry by the local-government ombudsman.
> The investigation into their activities on the council at Canvey Island, Essex, began after complaints that they had given a fellow lodge member the go-ahead to build a leisure complex.


 
Okay. You've shown, anecdotally, how Freemasons at *a* lodge behaved corruptly. I could do the same with loads of examples of corruption in lodges.
Does that mean that *every* Mason is corrupt, that their organisation is one that suborns and corrupts its' members?  Only if you believe some of the wilder and wackier theories about Freemasonry, none of which have much evidence to support them that wasn't constructed through the application of hindsight and rose-tinted specs.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

Prole said:


> Links to freemasonary and N Wales child-abuse are covered in detail here.
> 
> edit: Nick Davies


 
Link between *freemasons* and child abuse, not Freemasonry.

And before you ask, no, I'm not a Freemason. People with shared interests acting corruptly is an unfortunate fact of life, and Freemasonry *can* add an additional impetus to corruption through the various Masonic pledges that members make, dependent on how the member interprets those pledges.
Not every lodge is a _Propaganda Due_, though.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> revisionism


 
The reactionary running-dog lackey and lickspittle!!!


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Link between *freemasons* and child abuse, not Freemasonry.
> 
> And before you ask, no, I'm not a Freemason. People with shared interests acting corruptly is an unfortunate fact of life, and Freemasonry *can* add an additional impetus to corruption through the various Masonic pledges that members make, dependent on how the member interprets those pledges.
> Not every lodge is a _Propaganda Due_, though.


 


My ex girlfiends oldman was a Mason for many years, he had a building firm and did property development, he done very nicely out of his connections.


The connection in the Masons between developers and getting planning permission via council connections is well known, there have been reports all over the place.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> My ex girlfiends oldman was a Mason for many years, he had a building firm and did property development, he done very nicely out of his connections.



And he was a paedo?


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Link between *freemasons* and child abuse, not Freemasonry.
> 
> And before you ask, no, I'm not a Freemason. People with shared interests acting corruptly is an unfortunate fact of life, and Freemasonry *can* add an additional impetus to corruption through the various Masonic pledges that members make, dependent on how the member interprets those pledges.
> Not every lodge is a _Propaganda Due_, though.


 

They put the secret oath and loyalty to the Lodge above the morality of the outside world.

Hence corruption in planning etc.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> And he was a paedo?


 

Not that Im aware of, but if you join a secret org with people in positions of power in everyday life then things will happen and people will join to further their own agendas.

There have been investigations into relationships between cops and organised crime members in the Masons going back decades.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> My ex girlfiends oldman was a Mason for many years, he had a building firm and did property development, he done very nicely out of his connections.
> 
> 
> The connection in the Masons between developers and getting planning permission via council connections is well known, there have been reports all over the place.


 
And that nullifies my point about it being *masons* rather than Freemasonry itself being corrupt how, exactly?


----------



## teqniq (Nov 10, 2012)

So a quick trawl through the MSM has the BBC being pilloried over the Newsnight debacle - however did they manage to fuck up this spectacularly?

Meanwhile there is little or no mention of the of the original allegations namely that there was abuse going on and that there were possibly highly-placed individuals involved. Is today a good day to bury unwelcome news?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> They put the secret oath and loyalty to the Lodge above the morality of the outside world.
> 
> Hence corruption in planning etc.


 
Who's "they"?
Some Masons put their pledge (it's not secret, by the way - every fucker knows about it) before anything else, others don't. You're extrapolating from examples of corruption that the *institution* of Freemasonry itself is corrupt. It may well be, but I've never seen convincing evidence that such is the case, and unlike some sceptics, I actually bother to read the evidence.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Not that Im aware of, but if you join a secret org with people in positions of power in everyday life then things will happen and people will join to further their own agendas.
> 
> There have been investigations into relationships between cops and organised crime members in the Masons going back decades.


 
Going back as long as there have been police services.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Going back as long as there have been police services.



Exactly. It's not like they needed the freemasons in order to become corrupt and form mutually beneficial relationships with undesirables.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

teqniq said:


> So a quick trawl through the MSM has the BBC being pilloried over the Newsnight debacle - however did they manage to fuck up this spectacularly?
> Maybe Kirsty Wark is a mason and she's orchestrated an ingenious plan to undermine any future investigations


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> And that nullifies my point about it being *masons* rather than Freemasonry itself being corrupt how, exactly?


 

You dont seriously believe most people join to do the Ocki-Koki or ride the Goat do you ?

At best its to further their careers, in other cases other agendas.

Once you are in you are in, hence Kenny Noye having roast beef on Sundays at the Parkhurst governors home.

Also connections between customs and excise and serious organised crime via membership.

If your a serious crim, joining is one of the best ways to make friends in positions such as customs and excise who you can seek to corrupt via bribery to further your agenda.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

Kirsty bloody Wark


----------



## Corax (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Who's "they"?
> Some Masons put their pledge (it's not secret, by the way - every fucker knows about it) before anything else, others don't. You're extrapolating from examples of corruption that the *institution* of Freemasonry itself is corrupt. It may well be, but I've never seen convincing evidence that such is the case, and unlike some sceptics, I actually bother to read the evidence.


I don't know anywhere near enough to have an opinion on the masons either way.  But don't many of us do the same thing you're talking about with the police, with the rationale that by not speaking out they're part of the problem?

I dunno - I'm asking a question/making a tentative observation, rather than making a decisive point really.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 10, 2012)

teqniq said:


> Meanwhile there is little or no mention of the of the original allegations namely that there was abuse going on and that there were possibly highly-placed individuals involved. Is today a good day to bury unwelcome news?


 
Actually I missed this though it is being somewhat swamped by the furore over Newsnight:



> Dozens of new allegations of sexual abuse have surfaced in Wales as child protection experts warned that the focus on mistaken allegations involving the Tory peer Lord McAlpine meant there was a danger the victims were being forgotten.
> 
> Thirty-six people have contacted the office of the children's commissioner for Wales, Keith Towler, since the north Wales residential homes abuse scandal broke last weekend.
> 
> ...



http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/09/wales-child-abuse-scandal-more-claims


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> You dont seriously believe most people join to do the Ocki-Koki or ride the Goat do you ?
> 
> At best its to further their careers, in other cases other agendas.
> 
> ...


 
1) It's the Hokey-Cokey. 

2) What you or I believe is irrelevant. What is relevant is what can be *proven*. Otherwise, all you're doing is re-circulating rumour and anecdote.

3) There are upward of 3,000 lodges in England alone. Are you implying that they're all linked via a giant web of corruption?

4) Bribery is a fact of human existence. It's been around a lot longer than Fremasonry, as have churches (a notorious and much worse vector for corrupt behaviour over a much greater period of time).


I know people like to have something to focus on, but focusing on Freemasonry as the be-all and end-all risks missing all the other possible vectors of corruption that are available and may have been used.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

Corax said:


> I don't know anywhere near enough to have an opinion on the masons either way. But don't many of us do the same thing you're talking about with the police, with the rationale that by not speaking out they're part of the problem?
> 
> I dunno - I'm asking a question/making a tentative observation, rather than making a decisive point really.


 
You have a point if you're referring to the way that some people make a blanket condemnation of the police, although in terms of institutional behaviour, Freemasonry is fairly clean, whereas policing isn't. Freemasonry does actually "police" lodges that are reported to have fallen into disrepute (and usually closes them down), whereas the Old Bill favour the cover-up and a bit of pensioning-off - behaviour that doesn't actually *solve* any problems, but does make them go away for a while.


----------



## Prole (Nov 10, 2012)

It would be naive to pretend freemasonary plays and played no part in the cover-up in N Wales as evidenced by Lord Kenyon, Tom Kenyon's father, being the grandmaster flash or whatever these characters are called:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3DLdtjEG1FYbWJVaWxPaGxJeHc/edit

It is the _power_ of freemasonary that is a problem, be it within the police, media, politics etc.

And it is the cover-ups that go on that need to be exposed.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> 1) It's the Hokey-Cokey.
> 
> 2) What you or I believe is irrelevant. What is relevant is what can be *proven*. Otherwise, all you're doing is re-circulating rumour and anecdote.
> 
> ...


 


Whats your opinion on the sectarian anti-Catholic side of it ?


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Perhaps it will be interesting to look at the timing of the last mainstream political thing about freemasons - I'm pretty sure that sometime in the last 10-20 years there was a bit of a commotion about it, in the press and parliament, with focus in particular on the police. But I've done nothing to look into this yet. Any ideas?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Whats your opinion on the sectarian anti-Catholic side of it ?


 
That it's mutable. Some lodges are sectarian, many aren't. Some lodges include people from all faiths and none, some are mono-faith. Of course, Catholics are injuncted by Papal Decree from becoming Masons anyway, so...


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

> *Ciaran Jenkins* ‏@*C4Ciaran*
> The family of a north Wales abuse victim who took his own life tell me he was also shown a photograph by police. More on #*c4news* at 1830


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Perhaps it will be interesting to look at the timing of the last mainstream political thing about freemasons - I'm pretty sure that sometime in the last 10-20 years there was a bit of a commotion about it, in the press and parliament, with focus in particular on the police. But I've done nothing to look into this yet. Any ideas?


 
Isolated instances of corrupt coppers attempting to use their lodge connections to stymie disciplinary action, with the City of London police taking the biscuit in that field. Last big scandal was them too, Operation Countryman, but they're still riddled. The Met and most provincial police services have fewer lodges nowadays than they used to (used to be at least one, sometimes more, at every Met station), as do the British military and the Civil Service.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Perhaps it will be interesting to look at the timing of the last mainstream political thing about freemasons - I'm pretty sure that sometime in the last 10-20 years there was a bit of a commotion about it, in the press and parliament, with focus in particular on the police. But I've done nothing to look into this yet. Any ideas?


 
There was always: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-of-secrecy-for-freemason-judges-1818043.html


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Ian Bone trying to cover his tracks -
> "Apologies, but the page you requested could not be found"
> http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2012/1...-be-named-as-paedophile-on-newsnight-tonight/


 

He's waiting for McAlpine's writ!
http://ianbone.wordpress.com/


----------



## Prole (Nov 10, 2012)

Some media are helping the recruitment drive - from a few days ago: Freemasons launch recruitment drive for young women - Home News - UK - The Independent stopped short of asking about the bare breast. With the BBC doing their bit to enhance the image earlier in the year.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Isolated instances of corrupt coppers attempting to use their lodge connections to stymie disciplinary action, with the City of London police taking the biscuit in that field. Last big scandal was them too, Operation Countryman, but they're still riddled. The Met and most provincial police services have fewer lodges nowadays than they used to (used to be at least one, sometimes more, at every Met station), as do the British military and the Civil Service.


 


The Vice Squad in the West End being brought by pornographers in lodges they both belonged to was not isolated.

Either was the corruption in Sussex Police in the 50s, the Chief constable was jailed.

http://www.finsburypublishing.co.uk/books/bent_cops.html


And dozens of other episodes.


The paedophile Mountbatten was head in Britain when he was alive, hes linked to child abuse in both Britain and Ireland. He was also close with Jimmy Savile and brought him into the Royal fold. Wonder why he was so generous ?


Its interesting the way they questioned Freddie Starr so quickly, but have not moved on the list of establishment figures.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

http://bobblackmanmp.info/masonic_public.html

List of people in positions of power who are masons.


Never knew Brian Paddick was.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Whats your opinion on the sectarian anti-Catholic side of it ?


As an aside, it's interesting to note that Gen Augusto Pinochet Ugarte was both a devout Catholic and freemason.

Make of that what you will.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> The Vice Squad in the West End being brought by pornographers in lodges they both belonged to was not isolated.
> 
> Either was the corruption in Sussex Police in the 50s, the Chief constable was jailed.
> 
> ...


 
Isolated behaviour as opposed to institutionalised behaviour.

You're talking about different cases in different forces as though they form part of a contiguous whole of corrupt practices. They don't, and treating them as though they do leaves the way open for every two-bob conspira-nutter to claim that Freemasonry = corruption, and thence on to the Illuminati and to Jews drinking the blood of Christian children, and every other fleck of fly-shit the nutters can come up with.

Freemasons as corrupt individuals colluding within a lodge soesn't equate to Freemasonry as an institution being corrupt. I'm happy to acknowledge that there's a long history of corruption within Freemasonry, usually tied to the membership of a specific lodge or group of lodges (Freemasons can belong to as many different lodges as they wish), but there's a long history of corruption in *every* institution whose membership forms a closed community, it's just that it's easier to look t the more obvious and blame them, rather than looking at the less obvious and exploring *their* structures and crimes.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> As an aside, it's interesting to note that Gen Augusto Pinochet Ugarte was both a devout Catholic and freemason.
> 
> Make of that what you will.


 
Pinochet in hypocrisy shocker!


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> 2) What you or I believe is irrelevant. What is relevant is what can be *proven*.


you don't think that the operation of a secret society who's membership lists aren't generally public domain might result in any discussion that's based only on what can be proven being an extremely short discussion, probably confined to links between the masons and the rotary club?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 10, 2012)

teqniq said:


> So a quick trawl through the MSM has the BBC being pilloried over the Newsnight debacle - however did they manage to fuck up this spectacularly?
> 
> Meanwhile there is little or no mention of the of the original allegations namely that there was abuse going on and that there were possibly highly-placed individuals involved. Is today a good day to bury unwelcome news?


 
Guardian Comment is Free is broadly supportive of the charges and are people are cynical about what's going on in the media. Good to see.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> you don't think that the operation of a secret society who's membership lists aren't generally public domain might result in any discussion that's based only on what can be proven being an extremely short discussion, probably confined to links between the masons and the rotary club?


 
It's hardly a "secret society" anymore. Most lodges "dine out" in public, so anyone with a camera and a pen and notebook can work out who local lodge members are. It's "quasi-secret" at best. The whole "secrecy" thing bit the dust around about an hour after the worldwide web became a reality. We also have the information and the tools to collate information about the practices and behaviour of Freemasons much more clearly and quickly than even 20 years ago. There's a bit of non-CT proof out there if you care to look for it (Lobster was historically quite good at the "no bullshit" approach to Masons), but a lot of people don't.  I'm personally more worried about the effectively-secret society comprised of "old boy networks" within the upper levels of the Civil Service. Their practices are much more pernicious, and more well-hidden.
BTW, there aren't many links between Masonry and the Rotarians - the two conflict, as they cover similar ground with reference to charity work, plus a lot of Rotarians think Freemasonry is too (titter) "radical", if you can believe that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> http://bobblackmanmp.info/masonic_public.html
> 
> List of people in positions of power who are masons.
> 
> ...


 
They've included people whose only link to Freemasonry is that membership has been attributed to them on the internet.


----------



## Prole (Nov 10, 2012)

Keith Gregory interview on R5l claiming masons were involved in the cover-up and also points the finger at senior policemen, judges and two MPs. I found this recording over a rather strange youtube video of a masonic ceremony in Turkey:

"Most of them were Freemasons": Keith Gregory elite paedophile ring abuse victim - BBC Radio 5 Live - YouTube


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> And that nullifies my point about it being *masons* rather than Freemasonry itself being corrupt how, exactly?


the masons individually may well still be corrupt / paedos etc but it's the connections they make through freemasonry, as well as potentially the activities and secrets that they witness at the lodge that can enable them to actually benefit from and get away with this corruption, particularly if it's widespread within a lodge, or other activities are that those masons wouldn't want to risk getting out.

eg in my example I gave earlier about the masonic lodge christmas party involving lots of the top coppers in the area, and a hired in group of strippers (story told to me by one of them a couple of years later), and lots of stuff going on that they'd not want getting back to their wives / public. This in itself didn't involve paedo activity, but nobody who was involved in that would be too keen on prosecuting any other members of the lodge who were there for anything they might get up to as it'd risk them making all the sordid details of their fetish parties public.

I don't think anyone's saying that all freemasons are evil, or all lodges are as bad as each other, but it absolutely is the freemasonry system that enables this to grow into a serious problem within lodges, rather than just being a few bad apples.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 10, 2012)

I was invited to a wedding held in a local freemason lodge. All in all, just your ordinary everyday sort of person attended. No odd handshakes were evident.

[/anecdote]


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> the masons individually may well still be corrupt / paedos etc but it's the connections they make through freemasonry, as well as potentially the activities and secrets that they witness at the lodge that can enable them to actually benefit from and get away with this corruption, particularly if it's widespread within a lodge, or other activities are that those masons wouldn't want to risk getting out.


 
You're making assumptions, though. You're assuming that Freemasonry is the vector, not any other common interest. I'm not against anyone going after Freemasonry if they've got a substantive argument, but IMO attacking on the premise that because they're Freemasons, and because Freemasonry is "secret" doesn't do the job - for example Freemasons have whistle-blown on their lodges and been upheld by Grand Lodge for doing so, with reference to corruption.



> eg in my example I gave earlier about the masonic lodge christmas party involving lots of the top coppers in the area, and a hired in group of strippers (story told to me by one of them a couple of years later), and lots of stuff going on that they'd not want getting back to their wives / public. This in itself didn't involve paedo activity, but nobody who was involved in that would be too keen on prosecuting any other members of the lodge who were there for anything they might get up to as it'd risk them making all the sordid details of their fetish parties public.
> 
> I don't think anyone's saying that all freemasons are evil, or all lodges are as bad as each other, but it absolutely is the freemasonry system that enables this to grow into a serious problem within lodges, rather than just being a few bad apples.


 
I said as much earlier. I said that *any* institution whose membership comprise a closed community will have a problem. You can't *not* have a problem. It doesn't make the institution corrupt, but it does make the membership easier to suborn. That's how Licio Gelli and Michele Sindona managed to construct _Propaganda Due_ from members of other lodges, and then corrupt them utterly.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> As an aside, it's interesting to note that Gen Augusto Pinochet Ugarte was both a devout Catholic and freemason.
> 
> Make of that what you will.


 


Catholics have a Catholic version in those countries, the most famous Lodge being P2, lots of Mafia and money laundering links.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> They've included people whose only link to Freemasonry is that membership has been attributed to them on the internet.


 


Thats for 2 or 3 out of 60 names.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Thats for 2 or 3 out of 60 names.


How many names did it take to turn/change the focus on thursday/friday?

This thread is slipping out of control.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> How many names did it take to turn change the focus on thursday/friday?
> 
> This thread is slipping out of control.


 
And we thought the paranoid strain couldnt happen here due to years of well-polished crushing of conspiraloons


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Thats for 2 or 3 out of 60 names.


 
Four out of 60, with 25 out of those 60 belonging to the *same* lodge. Castles built on sand.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> And we thought the paranoid strain couldnt happen here due to years of well-polished crushing of conspiraloons


 
Problem is, once people feel they're "clued in", it's virtually impossible to change their mind, evidence otherwise or not.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 10, 2012)

Right now, this masonry thing is just another distraction. Throw yourself into trying to prove links to shadowy organisations and you risk missing people who aren't in those organisations, and providing the people who would quite like to keep on covering all of this up with a handy stick to beat us all with.

Speculation is natural, and completely understandable, particularly when we are kept locked out of the processes of investigation and not told anything. But we should always take a moment, take a step back, and think about what we're focusing on and why.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> And we thought the paranoid strain couldnt happen here due to years of well-polished crushing of conspiraloons


 
I shouldnt have said we really, since I shouldnt make presumptions about what anyone else thinks.

Anyway, time for me to mangle the meaning of a song.


----------



## 1%er (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> They've included people whose only link to Freemasonry is that membership has been attributed to them on the internet.


Oh look at this "Mr Paddick *confesses* in his book "Line of Fire" 

If anyone wants to know about freemasonry go to your local lodge and ask. I am sure that you will be made welcome.

Freemasonry, is a distraction. I am sure that you will find peado's with-in freemasonry, as I'm sure you'd find peado's here on Urban75. If people understood the structure of freemasonry and Lodges I think you'd understand how difficult it would be to have a massive conspiracy running through masonry.

But to have corrupt lodges would be possible but difficult to run under UGLE.


----------



## Corax (Nov 10, 2012)

1%er said:


> Freemasonry, is a distraction.


This.

Boys have been abused by people of wealth and power, and such abuse has been covered up by people of wealth and power.
Amongst the wealthy and powerful, a significant proportion belong to the funny handshake brigade.
So it's highly likely that Venn will possess quite a large intersection.

But so what? It's not like it's bloody causal is it. I doubt the masonic initiation includes buggering a minor.
Or is the suggestion that the rich and powerful covered for each other just because they were fellow masons? That they would have sung like a canary if they weren't so connected? 'Cos that, also, is palpably bollocks.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 10, 2012)

All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit which, like naming people who haven't been convinced of relevant offences, acts as a serviceable distraction for any _actual_ child raping Tories who might feel threatened by public interest in their activities IMO.

Sure, no doubt some of them have engaged in a bit of corruption with their fellow funny-handshake merchants in the local plod, but that's only relevant _after_ a compelling case for them raping little kids has been established.

If you drag it in before that's proven, you might as well include lizards from outer space as well.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Excellent - some self-policing on this thread is desperately needed.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

I reckon there's a fair chance that the masonic connection to all of this is a significant component in both the abuse and how it has been kept under wraps for so long.

It's almost certainly not the entire cause of the situation, and I doubt that everyone involved was a mason, but I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't a significant factor.

This is north wales in the 70s and 80s we're talking about here.

fwiw, the copper that was first accused of child abuse at these homes by the independant, and accused of this in court by 3 boys from the homes, then 6 former residents in the inquiry, but is obviously innocent because none of these witnesses can be relied upon.... he admitted to being a mason on the record in the inquiry, though I think he denied it was of any relevance - he also denied he'd done anything wrong at all which he was also believed about.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I've now read all 3 threads on this from that time, and still can't see what you're talking about, but I do understand the bit about overloading on this, and think there's probably a degree of that in your posts and the reaction to them.
> 
> fwiw, IMO you're better to actually quote an example of the post you're concerned about instead of making loose blanket statements of pissed offness, as with the latter approach everyone then tries to interpret what you're complaining about to see if it fits their posts and it's hard to know what / who you're actually complaining about. Then it just gets the backs up of people you might not have even been talking about for points you may not have been making.


 
OK let me put it this way -I dont expect you to get my point because you are one of the people I would like to complain about. Your dot joining is sloppy.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I reckon there's a fair chance that the masonic connection to all of this is a significant component in both the abuse and how it has been kept under wraps for so long.
> 
> It's almost certainly not the entire cause of the situation, and I doubt that everyone involved was a mason, but I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't a significant factor.
> 
> ...


That's my guess as well, particularly as we are talking 30+ years ago. Freemasonry isn't the story - it's about rape, powerlesness and the contempt the victims were held in, right through the various non-inquiries and non-police investigations. Freemasonry might provide a set of relationships, people who simply knew each other, channels of influence. Given this was the 70s there's every chance those channels of influence were used. However freemasonry needs to be seen as just that and should never get into the foreground of the story (still less should it _become_ the story). If police or journalists focus on the real events, which police officers did what, which social services staff did what, which politician did what, that will be enough. I doubt that's ever going to happen, but starting with freemasonry only obscures it further.

Pedantic edit - rereading your post FS, I'd agree with you on 'component', but not _'significant component'_


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Please note that one of the reasons I moan is that one explanation for the powerful closing ranks and trying to keep a lid on exposure of 'one of their own' doing terrible things is that they fear all getting tarred with the same brush.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 10, 2012)

... and what I'd most guard against is an assumption that freemasonry was _inherently_ linked to abuse.  It's a framework, a set of relationships, like any organisation of the powerful, but I'm not sure it should ever be taken as read that it has an inherent purpose.  As always though, you get dragged in different directions - the last fucking thing I'd want to do is go anywehre near defending _freemasonry_, particularly the version that existed back then.  However, the need to stop conspiraloons making this into a story that it isn't at all is just as strong.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Take for example the title of this thread. A long term high level paedophile ring. The focus on 'high level' seems to do a potential disservice to possible realities, which are more about people who know each other but are not all on the highest of levels. I think I would prefer a terms such as 'people with some authority or standing in the community'. 

Its a tricky one to some extent though, since the higher up you go the more people have reason to get paranoid or carried away, and the more mechanisms are theoretically available to cover up. Or perhaps not, perhaps if you are too high up then you are also rather high profile and are therefore taking a bigger risk, eg of being recognised or exposed. Then again so much is about location and context, people who are not powerful in the grand scheme of things may have a scary degree of power within a certain limited realm.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I reckon there's a fair chance that the masonic connection to all of this is a significant component in both the abuse and how it has been kept under wraps for so long.


 
So, Freemasonry as opposed to any other reason like, oh..I dunno... the fact that they're degenerate perverts from various walks of life who'd conspire to cover up their deviance anyway?



> It's almost certainly not the entire cause of the situation, and I doubt that everyone involved was a mason, but I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't a significant factor.
> 
> This is north wales in the 70s and 80s we're talking about here.


 
Was north Wales in the '70s and '80s particularly rife with Freemasons?



> fwiw, the copper that was first accused of child abuse at these homes by the independant, and accused of this in court by 3 boys from the homes, then 6 former residents in the inquiry, but is obviously innocent because none of these witnesses can be relied upon.... he admitted to being a mason on the record in the inquiry, though I think he denied it was of any relevance - he also denied he'd done anything wrong at all which he was also believed about.


 
So, one admission of membership. many tens of thousands to go!


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> OK let me put it this way -I dont expect you to get my point because you are one of the people I would like to complain about. Your dot joining is sloppy.


well if you'd spat that out first time around it'd have saved me time trying to work out if that was what you were getting at.

as with you, I'm struggling to get my head around all of this, and joining multiple dots from reports and events of 20-40 years ago. If you spot something you disagree with please say, and say why, the sort of vague crap you pulled there, and butch tried earlier in the thread though is just fucking annoying tbh, and certainly doesn't help the situation IMO.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit which, like naming people who haven't been convinced of relevant offences, acts as a serviceable distraction for any _actual_ child raping Tories who might feel threatened by public interest in their activities IMO.
> 
> Sure, no doubt some of them have engaged in a bit of corruption with their fellow funny-handshake merchants in the local plod, but that's only relevant _after_ a compelling case for them raping little kids has been established.
> 
> If you drag it in before that's proven, you might as well include lizards from outer space as well.


 
Quite.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Wilf said:


> It's a framework, a set of relationships, like any organisation of the powerful, but I'm not sure it should ever be taken as read that it has an inherent purpose.


 
The inherent purpose is surely about the relationships you mention. People like to hang out with their peers. Some people love structures, formal or informal positions, routines, games, etc.

Anyway one who has been involved in an internet community may have witnessed modern forms of this, even the humble internet forum reflects some aspects of the way humans behave when there are structures, rules and a smaller subset of people who try to keep the whole thing running. I was quite amazed years ago when I was a moderator on a forum, how quickly an 'us and them' thing developed, how quickly cultures of secrecy and suppression of the full picture emerged.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Catholics have a Catholic version in those countries, the most famous Lodge being P2, lots of Mafia and money laundering links.


[Shrugs]


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> OK let me put it this way -I dont expect you to get my point because you are one of the people I would like to complain about. Your dot joining is sloppy.


 
No, it isn't, but that's all it is - joining one dot to another, without any logic beyond "x was a member of lodge A, and y was a member of lodge B, therefore...". None of the Freemasonry advocates have presented even a circumstantial case, just bits of info that *may* or may not be connected, depending on how much of a free pass you give the lack of actual evidence.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well if you'd spat that out first time around it'd have saved me time trying to work out if that was what you were getting at.
> 
> as with you, I'm struggling to get my head around all of this, and joining multiple dots from reports and events of 20-40 years ago. If you spot something you disagree with please say, and say why, the sort of vague crap you pulled there, and butch tried earlier in the thread though is just fucking annoying tbh, and certainly doesn't help the situation IMO.


 
My original complaint at a very specific moment in this thread wasnt aimed at you. I had ignored your earlier excesses because I saw how unwilling you were to engage with butchers earlier criticisms and I didnt really want to derail the thread. But since you decided to focus on my complaints I thought I would point out that I do not anticipate you getting the point. I dont think you are entirely barking up the wrong tree's, you just go a bit too far in almost everything you say for my tastes. Never mind, its hardly the big issue here.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 10, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit which, like naming people who haven't been convinced of relevant offences, acts as a serviceable distraction for any _actual_ child raping Tories who might feel threatened by public interest in their activities IMO.
> 
> Sure, no doubt some of them have engaged in a bit of corruption with their fellow funny-handshake merchants in the local plod, but that's only relevant _after_ a compelling case for them raping little kids has been established.
> 
> If you drag it in before that's proven, you might as well include lizards from outer space as well.


Don't forget the Illuminati!

Shit, I said it!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> [Shrugs]


 
Actually, as I'd already aid to him/her, many Catholics join Freemasonic lodges anyway. P2 was a para-Masonic lodge that sucked in members of influence from Freemasonic lodges in Italy.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Actually, as I'd already aid to him/her, many Catholics join Freemasonic lodges anyway. P2 was a para-Masonic lodge that sucked in members of influence from Freemasonic lodges in Italy.


Yep.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well if you'd spat that out first time around it'd have saved me time trying to work out if that was what you were getting at.
> 
> as with you, I'm struggling to get my head around all of this, and joining multiple dots from reports and events of 20-40 years ago. If you spot something you disagree with please say, and say why, the sort of vague crap you pulled there, and butch tried earlier in the thread though is just fucking annoying tbh, and certainly doesn't help the situation IMO.


What vague crap? I told one person that their defence of a link that was _only partly wrong_ was the sort of thing that those who might be guilty or might be looking to engage in a cover up love. They love that shit. And i pointed out the change in thursday/friday focus as the sort of result this brings. I named who i meant and what they had done that meant the thread was slipping out of control - where is my vagueness? I'll name also prole and all those not bothering to check up on his/her bona fides on this site alone before integrating their tidy links into the story.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 10, 2012)

Surely the best service that the victims of abuse can be afforded is the rigorous investigation of their claims; that should be the primary focus of the activity. The belief in and the desire to expose networks of corruption in high places, may be supported and satisfied by these investigations, but that shouldn't be their most compelling objective; it is in such a compulsion that the victims will be squeezed out and the guilty escape. So please please lets keep the conspiritorial speculation to a minimum and the hard evidence front and centre.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

Wilf said:


> That's my guess as well, particularly as we are talking 30+ years ago. Freemasonry isn't the story - it's about rape, powerlesness and the contempt the victims were held in, right through the various non-inquiries and non-police investigations. Freemasonry might provide a set of relationships, people who simply knew each other, channels of influence. Given this was the 70s there's every chance those channels of influence were used. However freemasonry needs to be seen as just that and should never get into the foreground of the story (still less should it _become_ the story). If police or journalists focus on the real events, which police officers did what, which social services staff did what, which politician did what, that will be enough. I doubt that's ever going to happen, but starting with freemasonry only obscures it further.
> 
> Pedantic edit - rereading your post FS, I'd agree with you on 'component', but not _'significant component'_


 
There's also one factor that the "Freemasons are paedos" tendency have missed - the heavy scrutiny Freemasonry underwent in the 1980s after Stephen Knight's "The Brotherhood" was published - loads of tales of corruption, from speeding tickets torn up to crimes covered-up were shone a light on, and yet hardly a whisper about *organised* paedophilia.
Component, yes. Significant component, not unless Freemasonry is far more occult (in the proper meaning of the word) than is commonly assumed.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> No, it isn't, but that's all it is - joining one dot to another, without any logic beyond "x was a member of lodge A, and y was a member of lodge B, therefore...". None of the Freemasonry advocates have presented even a circumstantial case, just bits of info that *may* or may not be connected, depending on how much of a free pass you give the lack of actual evidence.


 
Yes thats what I meant really, well put.

Personally I do a fair amount of dot joining myself, but I have no special desire to preserve the links I've pondered on. I am quite happy to leave them as thin dotted lines that are more likely to quickly be rubbed out in my mind than reinforced for no good reason other than a desire for certainty. And when talking with others about this stuff I leave out the most fanciful possibilities because of how quickly this stuff can spread and take on a life of its own.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Take for example the title of this thread. A long term high level paedophile ring. The focus on 'high level' seems to do a potential disservice to possible realities, which are more about people who know each other but are not all on the highest of levels. I think I would prefer a terms such as 'people with some authority or standing in the community'.
> 
> Its a tricky one to some extent though, since the higher up you go the more people have reason to get paranoid or carried away, and the more mechanisms are theoretically available to cover up. Or perhaps not, perhaps if you are too high up then you are also rather high profile and are therefore taking a bigger risk, eg of being recognised or exposed. Then again so much is about location and context, people who are not powerful in the grand scheme of things may have a scary degree of power within a certain limited realm.


 
Housemasters in boarding schools and childrens' homes, for example. Social workers, healthcare workers, local government bureaucrats...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> The inherent purpose is surely about the relationships you mention. People like to hang out with their peers. Some people love structures, formal or informal positions, routines, games, etc.
> 
> Anyway one who has been involved in an internet community may have witnessed modern forms of this, even the humble internet forum reflects some aspects of the way humans behave when there are structures, rules and a smaller subset of people who try to keep the whole thing running. I was quite amazed years ago when I was a moderator on a forum, how quickly an 'us and them' thing developed, how quickly cultures of secrecy and suppression of the full picture emerged.


 
All of which is pretty standard social dynamics. In every in-group or interest group you have a core and a peripheral membership, all of which has a potential for the formation of further internal groupings.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> All of which is pretty standard social dynamics. In every in-group or interest group you have a core and a peripheral membership, all of which has a potential for the formation of further internal groupings.


 
Indeed, and I suppose thats also where some of the paranoia and false accusations come from. Those left on the periphery have reason to be disgruntled and at times suspicious, but it so quickly goes out of control and ends up further encouraging the insiders to erect walls and barriers.

Meanwhile another great Eileen Fairweather article, which gets into some interesting detail about the Peter Righton stuff. Those interested in what started Tom Watson off should certainly take a look:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ice-requires-detective-work-not-hearsay-.html


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

We don't know how much evidence there is partly because of the limits and failures of investigations and the difficulty investigating crimes committed decades ago. As for 'High level', sadistic rapists don't need to be part of shadowy elites to commit crimes and cover their tracks....but it probably helps.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> So, Freemasonry as opposed to any other reason like, oh..I dunno... the fact that they're degenerate perverts from various walks of life who'd conspire to cover up their deviance anyway?


please consider the difference between 'a significant component' and 'the entire cause of the problem'



ViolentPanda said:


> Was north Wales in the '70s and '80s particularly rife with Freemasons?


Yes.


> Post war periods experienced an acceleration in that growth. During the Province´s long history three Provincial Grand Masters served for conspicuously longer periods than most, firstly Sir Watkin Williams Wynn, Bt., M.P. 1852 to 1885; Sir Herbert Lloyd Watkin Williams Wynn, Bt. C.B., T.D., 1914 to 1945 and Lloyd, 5th Baron Kenyon, C.B.E., D.L., 1958 to 1990.
> Under their respective periods of leaderships 16, 24 and 38 Lodges were consecrated. Prior to his assuming the leadership of the Province Lord Kenyon consecrated a further 8 Lodges as Deputy Provincial Grand Master.
> At the time of writing there are 113 active Lodges in the Province together with 36 Royal Arch Chapters but with another pause in the growth of Lodge numbers.


[source - north wales freemasons website]
the number of lodges in North wales grew by 50% between 1958-90 vs no new lodges since 1991



ViolentPanda said:


> So, one admission of membership. many tens of thousands to go!


you see that Lord Kenyan in the quote above, listed as being the Provincial Grand Master of North Wales?

that's the same Lord Kenyan who's son Thomas Kenyan who died of Aids in 1993 and is alleged to have been the son of a Lord referred to in the Nick Davies article in the first post of this thread. It's also alleged in this article and this book that he was also a member of the North Wales Police Authority, which I think included through the 70s and 80s.

So the Provincial Grand Master's son is implicated in involvement in all this, yet it's apparently not something worth discussing on this thread.

That article also alleges that Sir Walter Stansfield, the former Deputy Chief Constable of Denbigh Police Force (prior to it being amalgamated into north wales police), and then Chief Constable of Derbyshire police was an active mason... along with a fair few other allegations that are hard to substantiate, but they claim to have evidence of.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What vague crap? I told one person that their defence of a link that was _only partly wrong_ was the sort of thing that those who might be guilty or might be looking to engage in a cover up love. They love that shit. And i pointed out the change in thursday/friday focus as the sort of result this brings. I named who i meant and what they had done that meant the thread was slipping out of control - where is my vagueness? I'll name also prole and all those not bothering to check up on his/her bona fides on this site alone before integrating their tidy links into the story.


 


butchersapron said:


> You're doing occam's projection. Connect all these dots properly.


I was referring to this post of yours, but tbf that was a while ago and I probably shouldn't have brought it up as I've mostly found your contribution to this thread helpful, it just stuck out in my head as being similar to elbows post in terms of saying I'm not joining the dots properly, but not giving any indication of in what way, or which dots.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> They put the secret oath and loyalty to the Lodge above the morality of the outside world.
> 
> Hence corruption in planning etc.


to be honest it's not exactly like it's a secret oath. when i was 17 i had copies of masonick initiation rites i'd found in a library, and no i'm not a freemason.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 10, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> Don't forget the Illuminati!
> 
> Shit, I said it!


 
Mentions shadowy malevolent group, so can appear perceptive and clever. 

You didn't add the customary word "sheeple" to go with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> It's also alleged in this article and this book that he was also a member of the North Wales Police Authority, which I think included through the 70s and 80s.


a member of the north wales police authority?  you're right to use the word 'alleged' in connection with that sort of serious allegation.

even if it would in fact be a matter of publick record.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> a member of the north wales police authority?  you're right to use the word 'alleged' in connection with that sort of serious allegation.
> 
> even if it would in fact be a matter of publick record.


can you find the public record to prove he was or wasn't?

I've checked the NWPA website and they don't seem to list past members, and I've no idea how to go about verifying the truth or otherwise of this electronically.

I don't see it as being particularly unlikely though do you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> can you find the public record to prove he was or wasn't?
> 
> I've checked the NWPA website and they don't seem to list past members, and I've no idea how to go about verifying the truth or otherwise of this electronically.
> 
> I don't see it as being particularly unlikely though do you?


ask them http://www.nwalespa.org/freedom_of_information-11.aspx


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

*Lloyd Tyrell-Kenyon, 5th Baron Kenyon1*

M, #346062, b. 13 September 1917, d. 1993

Last Edited=8 Oct 2011
     Lloyd *Tyrell-Kenyon*, 5th Baron Kenyon was born on 13 September 1917.3 He was the son of Lloyd *Kenyon* and Gwladys Julia *Howard*.2 He married Leila Mary *Cookson*, daughter of Commander John Wyndham *Cookson*, on 3 June 1946.3 He died in 1993.3
     He was Ch Commissioner of for Wales Boy Scouts –66, Tstee Nat/l Portrait Gallery 1953–93 (chm 1966), chairman Wrexham, Powys and Mauddach HMC 1960–93, Friends of Nat Libraries 1966 Assoc 1948.3 He was memb: Advsy Cncl Educn –47, Standing Commn Museums and Galleries 1953–60, Welsh Hosp Board 1958–63, Cncl for Professions Supplementary to Medicine 1961–65, Royal Commn Historical MSS. 1966 Wales 1944.3 He was Doctor of Law (LL.D.) (Wales) 1958, Fellow, Society of Antiquaries (F.S.A.) Wales 1958.3 He gained the title of _5th Baron Kenyon._ He was educated Eton and Magdalene College Cambridge.3 He was Officer, Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem (O.St.J.).3 Baron of Gredington.3 He was Captain Royal Artillery (Territorial Army) (ret ) in 1943.3 He was Justice of the Peace (J.P.) in 1944.3 In 1946 CC Flints (chm 1954), pres: UCNW Bangor 1947, Nat/l Museum of Wales 1952–57.3 He was Deputy Lieutenant (D.L.) in 1948.3 He was Commander, Order of the British Empire (C.B.E.) in 1972.3 He was dir: Lloyds Bank, Nat/l Provident Institute for Mutual Life Assur, Felixstowe Dock and Rlwy County in 1973.3


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Getting ready to watch channel 4 news again.

Meanwhile I'm going to go back to Peter Morrison yet again, since despite a lack of new detail I dont want this angle to drop off the radar.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...osses-desperate-atone-humiliation-Savile.html

​


> Was one of them the late Peter Morrison, a former close aide to Margaret Thatcher? An unnamed former Bryn Estyn resident said he saw Morrison, MP for Chester between 1974 and 1992, visit the home several times in the 1980s and take boys away in his car. ​​The claim is not implausible. Why? Because it was common knowledge in Westminster circles that Morrison had an unhealthy interest in boys.​​Edwina Currie — a junior health minister in the Thatcher government — spelled it out, in black and white, in her diaries which were published in 2002. ​​‘One appointment in the recent reshuffle,’ she wrote, ‘has attracted a lot of gossip and could be very dangerous: Peter Morrison has become the PM’s PPS [Parliamentary Private Secretary].​​‘Now he’s what they call a “noted pederast”, with a liking for young boys. He admitted as much . . . when he became deputy chairman of the party but added: “However, I’m very discreet” — and he must be!’​​‘She [Thatcher] either knows and is taking a chance, or doesn’t; either way, it’s a really dumb move. It scares me, as all the Press know, and as we get closer to the election, someone is going to make trouble very close to her indeed.’​



​​


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> View attachment 24923
> Alfred 'Jimmie' McAlpine - liked his cars, and chaired construction company Sir Alfred McAlpine & sons, son of Lord Alfred McAlpine, and grandson of Sir Robert McAlpine. Now allegedly was a child abuser.
> 
> 
> ...


 
fwiw, I was thinking about this last night, and as far as I know the only actual allegations of abuse that could be attributed to Jimmie McAlipine come from Messham indirectly via Gregory who suggested in the Guardian article that it could be a case of mistaken identity for Jimmie McAlpine, BUT also said that he wasn't aware of any actual allegations against him, although he does link him to the homes themselves.

The evidence from Messham itself about any McAlpines being involved seems to have come from a couple of the police showing him a picture of one of his abusers in an interview and apparently telling him that this was Lord McAlpine.

Messham also says that he knew this person as Tom.

Given that there is another son of a local Lord already implicated by others in this who's name actually was Tom, I'm re-evaluating all this, and on second thoughts, the evidence against Jimmie McAlpine now seems pretty flimsy.

Unless Meesham is prepared to look at photos of both Tom Kenyan and Jimmie McAlpine, and say if it was either of these 2, I can't see that there's much in the way of evidence to support any allegations against either Jimmie McAlpine (or from this source alone Tom kenyan, as that link is more speculation on my part based on him being accused by others, having the same first name as on Messham gave himself, and also being the son of a local lord, which could possibly have resulted in the police getting mixed up about which lord he was the son of).


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> So, Freemasonry as opposed to any other reason like, oh..I dunno... the fact that they're degenerate perverts from various walks of life who'd conspire to cover up their deviance anyway?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


According to this councillor who was abused as a child in care homes in north Wales, all the abusers were Masons, so its highly relevant as are the claims of a cover up by masons in the police and judicary.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> According to this councillor who was abused as a child in care homes in north Wales, all the abusers were Masons, so its highly relevant.




How does he know then?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> *Lloyd Tyrell-Kenyon, 5th Baron Kenyon1*
> 
> M, #346062, b. 13 September 1917, d. 1993
> 
> ...


 
yes I saw that. If it had mentioned his police authority membership then it would have proven it, but the absence of it being mentioned doesn't prove that he wasn't.

It also doesn't list his being a freemasons grand master for north wales for instance, so it's obviously not an entirely complete list.

Him being listed as Deputy Lieutenant is also interesting, and does place him fairly high up in the local hierachy, as a deputy to the Lord Lieutenant, who according to Wiki has responsibilities including


> Leading the local magistracy as chairman of the Advisory Committee on Justices of the Peace;


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Lieutenant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Lieutenant


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I was referring to this post of yours, but tbf that was a while ago and I probably shouldn't have brought it up as I've mostly found your contribution to this thread helpful, it just stuck out in my head as being similar to elbows post in terms of saying I'm not joining the dots properly, but not giving any indication of in what way, or which dots.


 
Rather than striving to connect the dots, with or without the glue of freemasonry, (dots which may be unconnected or may make a rather different picture than the one you seem to be working on) why not concentrate on the actual detail of the dots; for example pursuing the issue of the apparent misidentification of the Lord's son rather than his lodge membership?

Louis MacNeice


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> How does he know then?


 

They publish a year book, which list members, so they can contact each other.

He must have got hold of a copy.

This investigator also got hold of a copy.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> They publish a year book, which list members, so they can contact each other.
> 
> He must have got hold of a copy.


Yes, that must be it. 

Self-policing.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Rather than striving to connect the dots, with or without the glue of freemasonry, (dots which may be unconnected or may make a rather different picture than the one you seem to be working on) why not concentrate on the actual detail of the dots; for example pursuing the issue of the apparent misidentification of the Lord's son rather than his lodge membership?
> 
> Louis MacNeice


this thread is aimed at the connection of the dots, hence the thread title.

the way I see it is that by illiminating potential connections we're actually moving forwards with being able to work out what actually did go on, and how multiple police, council and public inquiries and court cases were able to be nobbled (or potentially just corrupted by the processes involved) to the extent that despite dozens of witenesses testifying, pretty much nobody with any level of standing has been prosecuted.

It's actually quite a scientific approach IMO - hypothesise, test the hypothesis, discard it if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny, come up with a better hypothesis that better fits the known facts, test that hypothesis etc. Very different IMO to CT methods, which tend to forget to discard hypothesis that don't stand up to scrutiny.


----------



## Kippa (Nov 10, 2012)

Do you think that Newsnight was set up for a fall when they did that program last week?


----------



## ayatollah (Nov 10, 2012)

The current , much trumpeted, establishment line as they scrabble around to derail the emerging re-examination of ever more previous covered up or poorly investigated childrens home abuse cases across the country , is that we must at all costs avoid a "hysterical witchhunt" - particularly of course of spiffing pillar of the establishment types like Lord McAlpine.

This abhorrence of "witchhunts" of course has never included the witchhunting of militant trades unionists - particularly those working in the industry from which the mega rich (but academically extremely thick), Lord McAlpine draws most of his wealth:

Construction union Ucatt has accused the firm Sir Robert McAlpine of using blacklisting checks to vet workers building the 2012 Olympic stadium.
Ucatt leaders gave evidence last week to the Scottish Affairs Select Committee inquiry into the industry’s blacklist run by the now defunct Consulting Association (CA).
General secretary Steve Murphy told the committee, “Robert McAlpine was a big blacklister.” He revealed how during the CA’s final year of operation Sir Robert McAlpine paid £26,842.20 for background checks on workers.
Murphy drew the committee’s attention to the spike in Sir Robert McAlpine’s blacklisting activity in the third quarter of 2008. This corresponded with McAlpine’s building of the Olympic Stadium from late May.
From July–September 2008 McAlpine spent £12,839.20 making 5,836 checks—63 per day. “This figure was a lot higher than other quarters for any blacklisting firm,” Murphy said. McAlpine is currently subject to a legal claim by blacklisted workers.

Obviously the wrong sort of witchhunt !


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Channel 4 news remained on form tonight. I suppose the main thing was the same as the tweet I quoted earlier, that the widow of another abuse victim says that he was also shown a picture by police and told it was Lord McAlpine. 

Given that some of the old net stories we have read in recent weeks seem to make mention of a journalist showing quite poor quality photographs to victims, I do not rule out the possibility that these things have become conflated somehow.

As an aside, note the language near the end of an obituary of Lord Kenyon:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-lord-kenyon-2323831.html



> I suspect that these activities, which I knew, and all the many others which I did not know, were not only welcome in themselves but also as a distraction from troubles, which seemed to come to him unfairly often. He bore them without complaint, and with the same fortitude that he stood his own infirmities.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Some useful summarising in the Guardian, with extra detail about the history of the error:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/10/newsnight-mcalpine-scoop-rumour



> But the profoundly embarrassing truth was that the story about McAlpine the paedophile was false from the start. Not only was it a fairly straightforward case of mistaken identity, but this fact had been known about by veteran journalists for more than 15 years. Messham's claims, however well intentioned, had already been carefully examined and rejected by the official Waterhouse inquiry in 1997. Simple journalistic checking would have revealed this.
> 
> McAlpine's cousin, Jimmie McAlpine, a prominent local businessman, was the one originally named by Wrexham inmates as the object of rumours. There was no evidence of actual sexual abuse in any event. These rather devastating facts are explicitly recorded in transcripts of the Waterhouse inquiry.
> 
> ...


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

ayatollah said:


> The current , much trumpeted, establishment line as they scrabble around to derail the emerging re-examination of ever more previous covered up or poorly investigated childrens home abuse cases across the country , is that we must at all costs avoid a "hysterical witchhunt" - particularly of course of spiffing pillar of the establishment types like Lord McAlpine.


agreed.

he may not be a child molesting twat, but he is still a twat who deserves to take a lot of shit for stuff he has done IMO.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> As an aside, note the language near the end of an obituary of Lord Kenyon:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-lord-kenyon-2323831.html


you'll of course notice that most of the obituary is about his interest in books and the national portrait gallery. 'these other activities' which the obituary writer didn't know refers to everything before the final sentence in the paragraph beginning 'born on the border of england and wales'. are you intending to  make yourself look stupid despite your sterling contributions on this thread?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> agreed.
> 
> he may not be a child molesting twat, but he is still a twat who deserves to take a lot of shit for stuff he has done IMO.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Kippa said:


> Do you think that Newsnight was set up for a fall when they did that program last week?


I suspect they were just too keen to make amends for the savile broadcast being shelved and decided to take a gamble and 'shake the tree' to see what fell out.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Getting ready to watch channel 4 news again.
> 
> Meanwhile I'm going to go back to Peter Morrison yet again, since despite a lack of new detail I dont want this angle to drop off the radar.
> 
> ...


 

It is quite amazing how the Morrison slant has been ignored by the media. He has been implicated by two mps. One is Currie, the other Rod Richards. Rod Richards who helped establish the inquiry into the North Wales abuse, links Morrison to the home. This is quote “What I do know is that Morrison was a paedophile. And the reason I know that is because of the North Wales child abuse scandal.” That is stunning. Shocking. Further to this, Nick Davies reported that Morrison had received cautions, for being caught with underage boys, by the police. There is evidence that the police were unwilling to enforce the law. Why? Why did they protect Morrison? Richards also links another Tory grandee to the home. However the abuse inquiry failed to mention him in their final report... why? Morrison was close to Thatcher, if he was revealed to be involved, it would send the whole government crashign down, and shake the pillars of parliament

ETA: Then there is the involvement of Hague, and that he must have known the names and accusations of the time, considering his post, yet he did nothing

Let's not forget also, as was mentioned earlier by Eileen Fairweathers article, how the benches for the media in the Waterhouse enquiry were almost empty. A huge event, considering the subject material, and the media weren't interested.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> you'll of course notice that most of the obituary is about his interest in books and the national portrait gallery. 'these other activities' which the obituary writer didn't know refers to everything before the final sentence in the paragraph beginning 'born on the border of england and wales'. are you intending to make yourself look stupid despite your sterling contributions on this thread?


 
Perhaps I'll have to start using bold fonts. The bit I was trying to draw attention to was the way obituaries sometimes hint at stuff. In this case the bit of interest was supposed to be:

*distraction from troubles, which seemed to come to him unfairly often*


However its comforting to know that you will be there if I should ever soil myself in public.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

And just in case it still isnt clear, I was groaning that the obituary didnt see fit to mention what any of the troubles were. I assume at least one of them was his son.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> However its comforting to know that you will be there if I should ever soil myself in public.


yeh, with a camera to record the moment for posterity


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

And some suitable soundtracks I hope.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> And just in case it still isnt clear, I was groaning that the obituary didnt see fit to mention what any of the troubles were. I assume at least one of them was his son.


let's find out shall we? or didn't it occur to you to investigate?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

The Times
*May* 20, 1993, Thursday

*Lord* *Kenyon*

*SECTION:* Features

*LENGTH:* 822 words



*Lord* *Kenyon*, CBE, chairman of the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery, 1966-88, died in Gredington, Shropshire, on May 16 aged 75. He was born on September 13, 1917.
WITH his network of friends in the arts and politics, and his ability to charm money out of a reluctant Treasury, *Lord* *Kenyon* was the perfect choice to be, for 22 years, chairman of the fifteen Trustees of the National Portrait Gallery. Although prepared to call on private money, as when he launched a national appeal to raise Pounds 50,000 for Sir Joshua Reynolds's portrait of Laurence Sterne in 1974, he was a fierce opponent of the Heath government's proposal to introduce admission charges.


He was not scared of paying large sums to prevent national treasures (such as Gainsborough's Sir Benjamin Truman) from leaving the country, and hardly let a single work of note escape his grasp. During his time there, he saw the gallery grow to house one of the most distinctive of the national collections.
Despite his poor sight (in later years he was almost blind), his appreciation for art was matched by an equal love for the written word. He sat on the Royal Commission for Historical Manuscripts from 1966 until earlier this year, and was chairman of the Friends of the National Libraries for 23 years. An avid book collector, with a fondness for very rare early English liturgical works, he owned editions of Caxton, Wynkyn de Worde and Richard Pynson.
He was also something of a printer in his own right: in 1978 he helped to relaunch one of Wales's most celebrated presses, the Gregynog Press, which enjoyed a reputation for fine printing between the wars. Welsh poetry, Welsh literature and works on typography, all were produced in a series of limited editions, beautifully bound, illustrated with wood-engravings and printed by hand.
Lloyd Tyrell-Kenyon was the elder son of the 4th Baron Kenyon, a Lord-in-Waiting to Queen Victoria, King Edward VII and King George V. He grew up on the Welsh borders, and succeeded to the peerage at the age of ten. Educated at Eton and Magdalene College, Cambridge, he joined the Shropshire Yeomanry in 1937 and served in the Royal Artillery during the second world war, but was invalided out with the rank of captain in 1943.
Kenyon had first proved himself as a museum administrator when appointed curator to the Fitzwilliam Museum, shortly after coming down from Cambridge. He was president of the National Museum of Wales, 1952-57, and sat on the Ancient Monuments Board for Wales, 1979-87. He was also active in the field of local health administration, serving as chairman of the Wrexham Powys and Mawddach Hospital Management Committee, 1960-74, and of the Clwyd Area Health Authority. He was president of the University College of North Wales, Bangor, from 1947 to 1982.
One of his greatest contributions to cultural life in Wales had been the key role he played in establishing an exhibition of Victorian portraiture at Bodelwyddan Castle at St Asaph. This was one of the finest collections of Victorian portraits, furniture and sculpture in the world, and the castle, built in the 19th century by a local slate baron, seemed the proper home for it. Carpets and curtains were specially woven and new gilded plasterwork installed to recreate the opulence of high Victorian interiors. The Victoria and Albert Museum lent furniture and the Royal Academy donated sculptures.
Clwyd Council had bought and helped to restore the building in the mid-1980s but in 1991 the council, by now Labour-controlled, voted to sell the castle as a theme park, in the interests of council debt restructuring. Kenyon was livid and outspoken about the decision, predicting that no major gallery would ever trust a local authority again.
He was generous with his own property. Living in the family seat at Gredington, he had little use for another family house, Kenyon Peel Hall, one of the finest examples of Tudor architecture in Lancashire. In 1954 he let it on a 99-year lease for a peppercorn rent to the Church Army and the Canine Defence League. He was not, however, interested in preservation for its own sake. He had the impractically large Gredington pulled down, and smaller, family houses built on the site.
When not working, he lived the life of the typical country gentleman. His fondness for hare coursing brought him into conflict on more than one occasion with anti-blood sports campaigners. When in London he could be found at Brooks's or the Cavalry and Guards.
Despite a jovial exterior, and the undoubted usefulness of his life, Kenyon had his share of calamities in the family, and was never in the best of health. He bore everything with a quiet sense of humour.
He married, in 1946, Leila Mary, widow of Hugh Peel of the Welsh Guards. They had three sons, one of whom predeceased him, and a daughter. The title passes to his elder son, Lloyd Tyrell-Kenyon.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> And just in case it still isnt clear, I was groaning that the obituary didnt see fit to mention what any of the troubles were. I assume at least one of them was his son.


I'd say that was pretty much certain given that his son had died from aids 2 years earlier.

The question is whether this in itself was the only troubles his son gave him, but IIRC this is the guy who actually reported one of the boys he'd been sleeping with to the police for stealing from him, which I'd submit as evidence* that the troubles he'd given his dad went a long way further back than that.



*well, I would if I could remember where the link was for this.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

Separately, I also note how Rob Wilson MP has been quick from the get-go to squash and undermine the recent reports and investigations into the child abuse scandals in various ways. Is he doing somebody's bidding? I only lay across the facts and wonder why he has been so instrumental in trying to nonsense it from the get go.
If I am wrong in any of the following, please do correct me.

When Tom Watson first raised the matter of child abuse and it links to a senior govermental aide within No.10 in the parliament, was it not Wilson on Sky News almost immediately afterwards who instantly rubished the idea?

After the ITV reporting, involving the now infamous list that Scholfield handed to Cameron, Wilson wrote to Ofcom to complain and ask them to investigate. Once again, this would help undermine the investigations. Just on this note, and irrelevant to Wilson, Guido Fawkes led the charge, which later led Scholfield to apologize, that the list he presented was visible and some names were readable. This is uncorrabated bullshit as of present. There is not a single screen grab to indicate that names were revealed. Yes Scholfiled did allow the sheet to be in the cameras focus, but it was too far away  and too quick to be picked up. Unless there is some super technology, with the help of slow-motion that allows somebody curious enough to zoom in to read the names, But there is no screen grab. In the internet age this surprises me greatly.

Back on track, following the report by Newsnight, Rob Wilson, why always him, wrote to Ofcom once again, to complain about the report into a senior tory politician which is now the subject of much debate and has landed them in trouble.

His latest pursuit is against Tom Watson, warning him to be careful in the way he goes about using Parliament privledge. This is completely irrelevant to the Newsnight slant, as all Watson has done as of yet was to put it to the Prime Minister about investigating allegations of child abuse links to No 10. from the Thatcher era, based on evidence corrobated from the Righton case. His correspondance to Watson can be read here: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffee...lson-attacks-tom-watson-on-child-abuse-claims

His intervention into each detail of the investigation so far is revealing in any case.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

> _I suspect that these activities, which I knew, and *all the many others which I did not know*, were not only welcome in themselves but also as a distraction from troubles, which seemed to come to him unfairly often. He bore them without complaint, and with the same fortitude that he stood his own infirmities._


I also picked up on this bit, which presumably would include (and I assumed were directly alluding to) the 32 years he spent as Grand Master of the North Wales Freemasons from 1958-90, which presumably took up a considerable proportion of his time through that period.

And any other aspects of his life the author wasn't aware of or didn't see fit to mention in the obit.

http://www.nwmasons.org/history.html


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> There is not a single screen grab to indicate that names were revealed. Yes Scholfiled did allow the sheet to be in the cameras focus, but it was too far away and too quick to be picked up. Unless there is some super technology, with the help of slow-motion that allows somebody curious enough to zoom in to read the names, But there is no screen grab. In the internet age this surprises me greatly.


I tried and it's definitely impossible from the youtube footage.

Could be that it's doable from a Hi definition screenshot though.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I tried and it's definitely impossible from the youtube footage.
> 
> Could be that it's doable from a Hi definition screenshot though.


If anyone can prove it then fair enough, but I doubt it somehow. Things blew up majorly only when it was suggested that names could be read on the sheet. So says Fawkes, who else?


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> let's find out shall we? or didn't it occur to you to investigate?


 
Was my point that no obituary dared to even mention his sons death? No, it was that the specific obituary I linked to made passing reference to the troubles he had to endure, without expanding on the point.

It wasnt supposed to be a major point, it was a minor aside in part sponsored by the fact that much earlier in this thread we had looked at a few obituaries for innuendo, hints etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Was my point that no obituary dared to even mention his sons death?


there's no hope for you if you have to ask what your point was


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> If anyone can prove it then fair enough, but I doubt it somehow. Things blew up majorly only when it was suggested that names could be read on the sheet. So says Fawkes, who else?


 
I think it would still have blown up in about the same way even if that aspect hadnt been suggested.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> I think it would still have blown up in about the same way even if that aspect hadnt been suggested.


 

Maybe, but not as hysterically so. It feeds into the Newsnight angle of revealing names of suspected people and undermines the bigger picture.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> there's no hope for you if you have to ask what your point was


 
Yes, you've exposed me to the world as a hopeless cause, discredited and impotent. Now I'm even going to have to check whether I'm a mason, that might explain it. Just you wait till I'm mayor.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Yes, you've exposed me to the world as a hopeless cause, discredited and impotent. Now I'm even going to have to check whether I'm a mason, that might explain it. Just you wait till I'm mayor.


i think i'll just wait till you're sober


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

With investigative and intuitive powers like that I suggest you apply for the job of newsnight editor. I don't tend to drink and surf, and in any case I havent touched a drop for weeks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> With investigative and intuitive powers like that I suggest you apply for the job of newsnight editor. I don't tend to drink and surf, and in any case I havent touched a drop for weeks.


yes: but i've only your word for that. and i have yet to see any corroborative evidence for your assertion.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Shaken not slurred, Mr Bond.


----------



## dylans (Nov 10, 2012)

This whole BBC/newsnight "scandal" is beyond farce. As far as I am aware they didn't name anyone yet they are apologising for the name of a person they didn't name becoming widely known because the name of the person who they didn't name has been named by others on the web. Now it turns out that the person who they didn't name is innocent of the accusations that newsnight didn't make and so the BBC is to blame because he was named by others. Makes perfect sense.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

dylans said:


> This whole BBC/newsnight "scandal" is turning into a farce. As far as I am aware they didn't name anyone yet they are apologising for the name of a person they didn't name becoming widely known because the name of the person who they didn't name has been named by others on the web. Now it turns out that the person who they didn't name is innocent of the accusations that newsnight didn't make and so the BBC is to blame because he was named by others. Makes perfect sense.


 
There are many farcical aspects but the Guardian article I linked to on the previous page goes a long way to explaining why it isnt quite that straightforward. Past journalistic investigations, both sound and scurrilous, and the echos of them that lingered on the internet for years are what tinge the Newsnight stuff with the stench of editorial doom.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Newsnight have done everyone involved a favor IMO, albeit in a cackhanded way.

They've forced out into the open a persistent rumor that's been circulating for nearly 15 years or so precisely because the report tried to cover it up instead of just naming names but at the same time saying they'd believed the allegation not to be true for reasons x. y and z.

Lord McAlpine should be thanking newsnight for giving him the opportunity to clear his name in public instead of having to continue to live under that cloud IMO.

and for the rest of us, it removes that name and source of speculation from the picture.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Take for example the title of this thread. A long term high level paedophile ring. The focus on 'high level' seems to do a potential disservice to possible realities, which are more about people who know each other but are not all on the highest of levels.


 
I've found it helpful to think of it as analogous to the drugs scene - less a conspiracy than people held together by a shared interest in keeping things secret - I think networks are probably more fluid and expansive than people imagine


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

which just made me think of another factor which is where does money come into this, if at all?


----------



## LoveMeDont (Nov 10, 2012)

dylans said:


> Now it turns out that the person who they didn't name is innocent of the accusations that newsnight didn't make and so the BBC is to blame because he was named by others. Makes perfect sense.


 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/10/newsnight-mcalpine-scoop-rumour

I don't know how libel laws work, but the the Guardian is saying that people associated with Newsnight revealed his name with a nod and a wink before the episode was transmitted.

Even ignoring that though, journalists have apparently known for years that McAlpine was innocent, so why did Newsnight run the story at all?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

smokedout said:


> which just made me think of another factor which is where does money come into this, if at all?


yep - it seems fairly obvious that someone will have been getting paid for supplying young boys from welsh (and probably other) homes for sex parties for London toffs in London, which is one of the allegation that was made in the last couple of days by one of the boys who alleges he was a regular at these sex parties.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 10, 2012)

> “@*ChrisMasonBBC*: A spokeswoman for the BBC has told BBC News that there will be a short statement at 9 o'clock this evening. #*Newsnight*


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

LoveMeDont said:


> Even ignoring that though, journalists have apparently known for years that McAlpine was innocent, so why did Newsnight run the story at all?


that's a bit unfair.

AFAIK there's no centralised repository for things that journalists know but haven't published, so while some journalists may well have known this following their own investigations over the years, the newsnight journalists obviously didnt, and neither did 99% of the internet.

Look at this another way - how would it have looked if it had come out that newsnight had sat on a specific allegation against a someone like Lord McAlpine despite having a direct accusation by the alleged victim on tape? Following on from them sitting on the savile investigation they'd have been slaughtered.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Its all gone so pearshaped that I wouldnt even be surprised if they kill newsnight.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 10, 2012)

They (twitter world) are saying that G.Entwistle has resigned.

Statement outside Broadcasting house soon.



> Resignation of BBC DG is the main story on Sky News, but not on BBC News at 9pm.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

That wouldnt be surprising either.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> If anyone can prove it then fair enough, but I doubt it somehow. Things blew up majorly only when it was suggested that names could be read on the sheet. So says Fawkes, who else?


 
Fawkes posted the video and blurred out the text, suggesting of course that without the blurring you could read it. Fawkes is of course a cunt.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Newsnight have done everyone involved a favor IMO, albeit in a cackhanded way.
> 
> They've forced out into the open a persistent rumor that's been circulating for nearly 15 years or so precisely because the report tried to cover it up instead of just naming names but at the same time saying they'd believed the allegation not to be true for reasons x. y and z.
> 
> ...


 

Good point. Cackhanded but it clears the decks and begs the question 'If not him then who? and who else?' It puts pressure on new investigations to join the dots in public and present a big dotty picture of the whole sordid mess. Unless Newsnight are in on it too and that's a new mess. I've said it before, I'll say it again I think Kirsty Wark is a mason and there's Paul Mason. Join the dots.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Good point. Cackhanded but it clears the decks and begs the question 'If not him then who? and who else?' It puts pressure on new investigations to join the dots in public and present a big dotty picture of the whole sordid mess. Unless Newsnight are in on it too and that's a new mess. I've said it before, I'll say it again I think Kirsty Wark is a mason and there's Paul Mason. Join the dots.


I think I'll be avoiding those particular dots.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I think I'll be avoiding those particular dots.


 
Me too and I think I got that wrong. it doesn't really clear the decks at all. It just gets messier.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 10, 2012)

Peter Morrison - just to recap in all this. From the Fail on the 27th October




> A former Tory Minister last night made incendiary claims that one of Margaret Thatcher’s closest aides was implicated in one of the most harrowing child abuse scandals of recent times.
> Rod Richards, a former Conservative MP and ex-leader of the Welsh Tories, made the shocking allegation that he had seen evidence linking Sir Peter Morrison to the North Wales children’s homes case, in which up to 650 children in 40 homes were sexually, physically and emotionally abused over 20 years.
> 
> Mr Richards also linked a second leading Tory grandee – now dead – to the scandals at homes including Bryn Estyn and Bryn Alyn Hall, both near Wrexham.
> ...




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-preyed-boys-home--Hague-known.html


----------



## agricola (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Look at this another way - how would it have looked if it had come out that newsnight had sat on a specific allegation against a someone like Lord McAlpine despite having a direct accusation by the alleged victim on tape? Following on from them sitting on the savile investigation they'd have been slaughtered.


 
The rest of the media would perhaps have had a bit of a pop, but its fairly obvious that none of them would have ever run a story like that (where McAlpine or other people were named) anyway with the evidence that Newsnight had because of the overwhelming odds that they would lose the subsequent libel case.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

If I had a pound for every time they mentioned the word trust on BBC news 24 just now, I would have at least £7.

Incurious George bites the dust.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 10, 2012)

54 days in post...and it's all his fault. Here you go, eat these crumbs and forget all about it!

The BBC brand is safe for now...The acting DG is a marketeer.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> I've said it before, I'll say it again I think Kirsty Wark is a mason and there's Paul Mason. Join the dots.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 10, 2012)

Well, there he goes. Feel a bit sorry for him, baptism of fire is putting it mildly!


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> a member of the north wales police authority?  you're right to use the word 'alleged' in connection with that sort of serious allegation.
> 
> even if it would in fact be a matter of publick record.


There is also the Times article linked to earlier in this thread which states the following



> Tom Kenyon, the son of Lord Kenyon, *a leading Freemason and member of the North Wales Police Authority*, was an alleged abuser of boys in the area at the time. Both father and son have since died.


 
is that sufficient for you?

This effort to close down debate re the very obvious freemasons connection in this situation on the last few pages of this thread is like some sort of ill advised knew jerk reaction by those accustomed to assuming that all such allegations must be the stuff of conspiraloonacy.

It's absolutely right in this case that these links should be investigated, how much more evidence do people need than the fact that the father of one of the publicly named abusers was both the head of the regional free masonry, and on the board of the police authority, and was a deputy to the person who heads up the regional magistrates?

Plus the top local copper for the homes admitted to being a freemason on the record, while denying his involvement in the abuse of boys in the homes.

This deserves to be discussed properly, not dismissed by people assuming it's the masons so it must be CT crap.


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 10, 2012)

I've never ever seen a red alert on all index pages like this on the BBC website before, I guess that's usually reserved for the death of the monarch or US president or whatever.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> This effort to close down debate re the very obvious freemasons connection in this situation on the last few pages of this thread is like some sort of ill advised knew jerk reaction by those accustomed to assuming that all such allegations must be the stuff of conspiraloonacy.


 
Bollocks. Please dont confuse people debating your points, and making a fool of you in the process, with attempts to close down debate.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


>


 
What does that mean?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Bollocks. Please dont confuse people debating your points, and making a fool of you in the process, with attempts to close down debate.


what do you call this then?



1%er said:


> Freemasonry, is a distraction.





Bernie Gunther said:


> All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit.





Vintage Paw said:


> Right now, this masonry thing is just another distraction.


etc

also how the fuck do you work out that I've been made a fool of when I've just backed up my position?

or is it irrelevant that one of the abusers was the son of the regions top freemason (and member of the police board), as was the local copper with responsibility for the homes against whom multiple allegations were also made (though not proven)?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> This effort to close down debate re the very obvious freemasons connection in this situation on the last few pages of this thread is like some sort of ill advised knew jerk reaction by those accustomed to assuming that all such allegations must be the stuff of conspiraloonacy.


 
what bollocks, even if some freemasons were involved, which they doubtless were, the real conspiracy, which is that they were noncing children, far outweighs any invented freemason conspiracies.  allegiences and behaviour would be directed into covering up the abuse, not protecting freemasonry - thats why i mentioned the drugs scene, it doesnt need lodges for large numbers of people to act secretly and illegally - if anything the lodges are a hindrance, not a help to the real conspiracy being maintained and are no more important than the local golf club


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> or is it irrelevant that one of the abusers was the son of the regions top freemason (and member of the police board), as was the local copper with responsibility for the homes against whom multiple allegations were also made (though not proven)?


 
people from the same circles move in the same circles


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> What does that mean?


 
It means you are an idiot for suggesting that Paul Mason is a dot we should join.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

smokedout said:


> people from the same circles move in the same circles


 
Indeed. And in a way its like the conspiraloon drool which appears to be based on freaking out that powerful people have power, use it to do stuff, and talk to each other.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> It means you are an idiot for suggesting that Paul Mason is a dot we should join.


 
Seriously, you think I was suggesting anything?


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Seriously, you think I was suggesting anything?


 
Why say it then? Sloppy insinuation and shadow chasing goes with the conspiraloon territory, and it will not be ignored here.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

smokedout said:


> what bollocks, even if some freemasons were involved, which they doubtless were, the real conspiracy, which is that they were noncing children, far outweighs any invented freemason conspiracies. allegiences and behaviour would be directed into covering up the abuse, not protecting freemasonry - thats why i mentioned the drugs scene, it doesnt need lodges for large numbers of people to act secretly and illegally - if anything the lodges are a hindrance, not a help to the real conspiracy being maintained and are no more important than the local golf club


so we just ignore the evidence that's there in plain view of a connection because it doesn't fit some world view that the masons are always irrelevant?

fuck that.

I'm in no way saying that the freemason links are the be all and end all of this, but it'd be wrong to ignore them completely as well.

Or do you seriously think that the top mason in the area wouldn't use any influence or contacts made through his position in the masons to pull in favors to get his son out of trouble?

I suppose he could have gone in to the local police station and attempted to use his official position on the police board with the desk sergeant and hoped the desk sergeant would turn a blind eye instead of reporting him for abusing his position... or he could have used his masonic connection with a local copper who's admitted to being a mason to pull in a favor.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

smokedout said:


> people from the same circles move in the same circles


how is a local copper in the same circles as a member of the landed aristocracy?

the circle they were part of that gives them that connection was the freemasons


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> attempted to use his official position on the police board with the desk sergeant and hoped the desk sergeant would turn a blind eye instead of reporting him for abusing his position.


 
lol, what a grip on the nature of power and hierarchy you've got. No wonder you are having to look for more exotic explanations.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> how is a local copper in the same circles as a member of the landed aristocracy?


 
Several other ways this can happen. Work-related incidental meetings, charity work, golf.

I think I will probably start a thread covering more general discussions about masons so that I can look at the subject more broadly, and without adding fuel to the unhelpful parts of this thread.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Or do you seriously think that the top mason in the area wouldn't use any influence or contacts made through his position in the masons to pull in favors to get his son out of trouble?
> 
> I suppose he could have gone in to the local police station and attempted to use his official position on the police board with the desk sergeant and hoped the desk sergeant would turn a blind eye instead of reporting him for abusing his position... or he could have used his masonic connection with a local copper who's admitted to being a mason to pull in a favor.


 
you're missing the point completely.  the network is held together because if one person goes down then everyone is at risk - that makes it very strong, particularly as the risks are so great.  therefore the network is self-supporting, it doesnt want or need outsiders unless they join the shared risk and get involved.

sure on an individual level favours may be asked, but thats the same whether people drink in the same pub or use the same lodge.  for freemasonry to be more important than where they drank, and therefore not a distraction, there needs to be established some systematic behaviour by non noncing masons to protect the nonces - there hasnt been and isnt likely to be unless you buy into the idea that organisationally freemasons would protect a paedophile ring for freemasonic reasons


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

And on that front I'd rather look at why there are historical examples of MPs not seeming terribly keen to have one of their own named in relation to terrible crimes.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

woolyhat said:
			
		

> Separately, I also note how Rob Wilson MP has been quick from the get-go to squash and undermine the recent reports and investigations into the child abuse scandals in various ways. Is he doing somebody's bidding? I only lay across the facts and wonder why he has been so instrumental in trying to nonsense it from the get go.


 
Jesus. Throw everything away. This is it? Some pathetic cui bono, over and over.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> yep - it seems fairly obvious that someone will have been getting paid for supplying young boys from welsh (and probably other) homes for sex parties for London toffs in London, which is one of the allegation that was made in the last couple of days by one of the boys who alleges he was a regular at these sex parties.


Why must they be paid? Why not just be a paedo who can drive?


----------



## baffled (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Newsnight have done everyone involved a favor IMO, albeit in a cackhanded way.
> 
> They've forced out into the open a persistent rumor that's been circulating for nearly 15 years or so precisely because the report tried to cover it up instead of just naming names but at the same time saying they'd believed the allegation not to be true for reasons x. y and z.
> 
> ...


 
Didn't Scallywag publicly name him decades ago?, seems odd to threaten legal action now but not sue them then.
I don't know much about the magazine but did it have a large audience?, the way media is now these thing take on a life of their own so need shutting down quickly whereas a publication with limited readership may be best ignored.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Jesus. Throw everything away. This is it? Some pathetic cui bono, over and over.


 

It's not some pathetic cui bono, it's looking and anaylsing how a story develops, and I simpy drew to the vehemency of which Rob Green has issued his attacks, especially his letter to Watson in particular, that uses Newsnight as ammo to attack him. It could very well be the carrying out of a political amnionsity, all I'm doing is noting the profligacy in which Wilson has been sticking his oar in concerning this.... particuarly trying to rubbish any hints of involvement when it came to government, despite Watson just making a request for an investigation into one, which I saw nothing wrong with, and don't see why Wilson was so adamant on rubbishing such a request for one. It was disrespectful at best.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Why must they be paid? Why not just be a paedo who can drive?


anything's possible, but someone supplying regular minibuses full of underage boys for sex parties in London (which seem to be what is being alleged by one of those boys), is a bit much really just to be sorted out by a paedo doing a favor for fellow paedos.

apart from anything else, it's a hell of a risk to take when they could just as easily be noncing the boys back at the care homes.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

baffled said:


> Didn't Scallywag publicly name him decades ago?, seems odd to threaten legal action now but not sue them then.
> I don't know much about the magazine but did it have a large audience?, the way media is now these thing take on a life of their own so need shutting down quickly whereas a publication with limited readership may be best ignored.


 

Lord McAlpine has been named several times, predating internet rumours.
The slurs against his name have indeed existed for over a decade before this.

ETA: Stemming from the inquiries of the North Wales Abuse.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

baffled said:


> Didn't Scallywag publicly name him decades ago?, seems odd to threaten legal action now but not sue them then.
> I don't know much about the magazine but did it have a large audience?, the way media is now these thing take on a life of their own so need shutting down quickly whereas a publication with limited readership may be best ignored.


 
It was indeed considered best ignored on most of the occasions it tried to create a stink back in the day. And they had almost no money and tried to use that to make themselves less of a target. Because of this last point, when people in government finally went after them, they went for the printers and distributors.


----------



## baffled (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> It was indeed considered best ignored on most of the occasions it tried to create a stink back in the day. And they had almost no money and tried to use that to make themselves less of a target. Because of this last point, when people in government finally went after them, they went for the printers and distributors.


 
Thought that may be the case, ta.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> It's not some pathetic cui bono, it's looking and anaylsing how a story develops, and I simpy drew to the vehemency of which Rob Green has issued his attacks, especially his letter to Watson in particular, that uses Newsnight as ammo to attack him. It could very well be the carrying out of a political amnionsity, all I'm doing is noting the profligacy in which Wilson has been sticking his oar in concerning this.... particuarly trying to rubbish any hints of involvement when it came to government, despite Watson just making a request for an investigation into one, which I saw nothing wrong with, and don't see why Wilson was so adamant on rubbishing such a request for one. It was disrespectful at best.


No it's not - it's slinging mud at anyone who asks a question by asking what they have to hide and suggesting that they have something to hide. I can put you in this frame by two easy steps. Grow up.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> Lord McAlpine has been named several times, predating internet rumours.


Yes, by the person who has just cleared him.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Why must they be paid? Why not just be a paedo who can drive?


 
to be fair i'd find it hard to believe money hasn't changed hands in some of these scenarios - if only for reasons that it brings more people into the sphere of culpability (ie if you pay the care home workers off then they are also in the shit when/if it comes out)


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

smokedout said:


> to be fair i'd find it hard to believe money hasn't changed hands in some of these scenarios - if only for reasons that it brings more people into the sphere of culpability (ie if you pay the care home workers off then they are also in the shit when/if it comes out)


The currency was simple privilege according to the lad two nights back. Money elsewhere - sure.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> anything's possible, but someone supplying regular minibuses full of underage boys for sex parties in London (which seem to be what is being alleged by one of those boys), is a bit much really just to be sorted out by a paedo doing a favor for fellow paedos.
> 
> apart from anything else, it's a hell of a risk to take when they could just as easily be noncing the boys back at the care homes.


If you're saying the buses didn't go to london, then why? If the point is that other people wouldn't do what you do for sort of rational reasons, then yeah, say on.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No it's not - it's slinging mud at anyone who asks a question by asking what they have to hide and suggesting that they have something to hide. I can put you in this frame by two easy steps. Grow up.


 

I'm just drawing attention at the speed in Wilson came upon to undermine Watsons comments in parliament. There is nothing wrong with questioning it, and Wilson is very much within his right to continue in such a way. But what good does a mp attacking another on the basis of asking for an investigation into a very serious matter which still has stones left unturned do? What was his justification. Likewise against ITV. There were no names shown. Likewise with BBC... there was no name named....


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, by the person who has just cleared him.


 
That wasn't my point, the slurs against his name have existed for more than a decade, that is what I responding to.

I've edited the post to clarify.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> I'm just drawing attention at the speed in Wilson came upon to undermine Watsons comments in parliament. There is nothing wrong with questioning it, and Wilson is very much within his right to continue in such a way. But what good does a mp attacking another on the basis of asking for an investigation into a very serious matter which still has stones left unturned do? What was his justification. Likewise against ITV. There were no names shown. Likewise with BBC... there was no name named....


No you're not, you're openly saying  that he is covering something up as he was involved in it. wtf is wrong with you?


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No you're not, you're openly saying that he is covering something up as he was involved in it. wtf is wrong with you?


 
Ok fine, I am questioning his insistence to collude with a smoke and mirrors approach to the investigation, which helps to undermine the case.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> Ok fine, I am questioning his insistence to collude with a smoke and mirrors approach to the investigation, which helps to undermine the case.


Now, this post above means nothing

You are saying "that he is covering something up as he was involved in it"? Right.

How about, not dots, but _a methodology?_ Can we suggest the use of that on this thread? One we all subscribe to?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> The currency was simple privilege according to the lad two nights back. Money elsewhere - sure.


 
very true

i think the point im trying to make is that money, career, laziness, personal friendships, and in extremis things like blackmail or even violence, are the things that have held this shit together when it has come close to coming out - these are the reasons non-paedos might protect the paedos - not freemasonry or any other irrelevent bollocks


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Now, this post above means nothing
> 
> You are saying "that he is covering something up as he was involved in it"? Right.
> 
> How about, not dots, but _a methodology?_ Can we suggest the use of that on this thread? One we all subscribe to?


 

Fine.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> Fine.


Cool, any ideas what we should keep out? And on what basis?


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Cool, any ideas what we should keep out? And on what basis?


 

With criticism to my own posts perhaps, corrobration to more solid facts that have been supported and show a clear lind of inquiry in which we can work on.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> With criticism to my own posts perhaps, corrobration to more solid facts that have been supported and show a clear lind of inquiry in which we can work on.


Good start, links from posters like prole (i.e not with the name of newbie) checked out.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> If you're saying the buses didn't go to london, then why? If the point is that other people wouldn't do what you do for sort of rational reasons, then yeah, say on.


eh?

I'm saying that it seems far more likely than not to me that the people who organised those minibuses were doing so for financial gain.

why else would a paedo who's actually got as much access as they want to the boys in the care home where there's far lower risk of discovery take such a risk by driving a minibus full of the boys to london to participate in sex parties with assorted elderly toffs?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> eh?
> 
> I'm saying that it seems far more likely than not to me that the people who organised those minibuses were doing so for financial gain.
> 
> why else would a paedo who's actually got as much access as they want to the boys in the care home where there's far lower risk of discovery take such a risk by driving a minibus full of the boys to london to participate in sex parties with assorted elderly toffs?


Because they are the ones driving the bus - thus shortening the chain.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

elbows said:


> Several other ways this can happen. Work-related incidental meetings, charity work, golf.
> 
> I think I will probably start a thread covering more general discussions about masons so that I can look at the subject more broadly, and without adding fuel to the unhelpful parts of this thread.


I don't understand what the purpose is of you denying the most obvious direct link between them.

note, I'm not saying that this is definitely how and why it was covered up, I'm saying that there is enough evidence here for the possibility of the masonic connections to have been a significant factor in at least the cover up of the crimes if not the crimes themselves for it to be discussed on this thread without being instantly shouted down by a mob of posters trying to 'self police' this aspect of the discussion out of the thread.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Because they are the ones driving the bus - thus shortening the chain.


who are 'they' and what are you on about?

eta - ok, I assume you're indicating it could have been the paedos from London driving up to collect the boys etc.

even if this was the case, the point still stands - what benefit do the staff at the home who're allowing this to take place gain from it?

I suppose there is the alternative option of blackmail / offers of protection from on high, both of which may well have played their part, but I don't see why you'd exclude the potential that there was money changing hands.

there'd certainly be money changing hands for the provision of any other form of sexual partners at such events, so it seems a bit odd to think there wouldn't be when it involved groups of underage boys. I'd expect they'd fetch a far higher price than pretty much any other prostitute (not that I'm accusing the boys involved of being paid for it. though even if they were it'd not excuse the allegations).


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> who are 'they' and what are you on about?


I'm a paedo a) i want to go to b)

Maybe i'll hire someone else c)

Or maybe i'll use my own stuff to hide what i'm doing.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I'm a paedo a) i want to go to b)
> 
> Maybe i'll hire someone else c)
> 
> Or maybe i'll use my own stuff to hide what i'm doing.


you've definitely lost me.

the allegation I'm discussing is that boys were taken in organised groups from the homes in wales to sex parties in London then back to the homes in wales.

do you think it unlikely that money would have changed hands for the provision of these boys to those parties or not? If not why not?


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit - fwiw, i was reading your posts as asking about the transport specifics


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> you've definitely lost me.
> 
> the allegation I'm discussing is that boys were taken in organised groups from the homes in wales to sex parties in London then back to the homes in wales.
> 
> do you think it unlikely that money would have changed hands for the provision of these boys to those parties or not? If not why not?


 


> I'm saying that it seems far more likely than not to me that the people who organised those minibuses were doing so for financial gain.


 
No, more likely that are part of the chain, to keep the chain tight. Not through some random money out there.


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 10, 2012)

don't involve someone who isn't already involved, you mean?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

tufty79 said:


> don't involve someone who isn't already involved, you mean?


Well what would you do? You have some vans, you have a +B , would you go hire someone else to drive them?


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 10, 2012)

not disagreeing in the slightest - just checking i hadn't got you wrong


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2012)

A different kind of stranger danger.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 10, 2012)

Pretty sure in one of the interviews linked to here the guy said workers from the home would drive the mini bus to London.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No, more likely that are part of the chain, to keep the chain tight. Not through some random money out there.


that would seem to indicate that you're thinking of this as being a pretty big nationwide conspiracy  / network of paedos prepared to transport kids the length of the country just to satisfy those at the top of the chain.

A national altruistic brotherhood of paedos. It is of course possible, but I'm still struggling to see what those at the bottom of the chain who've got the access to the boys gain from this - if it was supposed to be high level protection, then it doesn't seem to have done them much good given that they were the ones that got sent down. 

If I'm understanding your position wrong, please explain what you're actually getting at more clearly.

I'll go with the idea that this is a possibility, but think it's more likely that there would be fixers / pimps getting paid well for making these arrangements and supplying the boys, just as they do for supplying high end prostitutes.

No doubt those involved in the parties themselves would all be protected in some way (potentially via something akin to smokedouts drug dealer / user network method, possibly via some more formal network).


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

**


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Well what would you do? You have some vans, you have a +B , would you go hire someone else to drive them?


I'm not on about the workers at the homes hiring someone else to drive the minibuses, I'm on about the organisers of the London sex parties paying the workers at the homes for supplying the boys to the sex parties.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> that would seem to indicate that you're thinking of this as being a pretty big nationwide conspiracy / network of paedos prepared to transport kids the length of the country just to satisfy those at the top of the chain.
> 
> A national altruistic brotherhood of paedos. It is of course possible, but I'm still struggling to see what those at the bottom of the chain who've got the access to the boys gain from this - if it was supposed to be high level protection, then it doesn't seem to have done them much good given that they were the ones that got sent down.
> 
> ...


 
No it wouldn't. It would require people in two areas having shared aims. This making transport between a and b an in-house job for reasons of keeping it quiet.

Sort yourself out before your next post.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I'm not on about the workers at the homes hiring someone else to drive the minibuses, I'm on about the organisers of the London sex parties paying the workers at the homes for supplying the boys to the sex parties.


Unlucky for you we are talking about those minibus drivers. Of course , if, as you say, it all went by gold then there must be records right?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> _No it wouldn't. It would require people in two areas having shared aims. This making transport between a and b an in-house job for reasons of keeping it quiet._


in this situation, person A has full access to a home full of young boys he can abuse with impunity with minimal risk of getting caught.

person B on the other hand is in London, doesn't have access to boys to abuse locally, is organising a party of a group of rich paedofiles and so asks person A to transport them to London for the party.

What's in it for person A? 



butchersapron said:


> _Sort yourself out before your next post._


fuck off.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

Hi, new here, been reading for last few weeks, hope I can add something to discussion



free spirit said:


> The evidence from Messham itself about any McAlpines being involved seems to have come from a couple of the police showing him a picture of one of his abusers in an interview and apparently telling him that this was Lord McAlpine.
> 
> Messham also says that he knew this person as Tom.


Actually he didn't say that, the Guardian included that rather misleadingly, Meesham was asked the name of his abuser by a Times journalist, and he said it was Tom, which we now know is Thomas Kenyon, but the Times journalist didn't know that at the time, and connected it to the Conservative figure allegation.



free spirit said:


> eh?
> 
> I'm saying that it seems far more likely than not to me that the people who organised those minibuses were doing so for financial gain.
> 
> why else would a paedo who's actually got as much access as they want to the boys in the care home where there's far lower risk of discovery take such a risk by driving a minibus full of the boys to london to participate in sex parties with assorted elderly toffs?


These trips were likely disguised as normal days out, the recent guy on Sky News stated that in the daytime they saw all the London landmarks etc., probably late afternoon or early evening they got taken to the big house or flat, got changed and 'ready' for the guests. The guests may have been paying and, or, being filmed for bribery or extortion purposes. Someone asked why these men wouldn't just go to the homes- then they would be seen going there rather to just any of many London parties. I imagine the boys arrived hours before the clients arrived, and the men left in the night, and the boys left the following morning so noone outside would see them together.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> in this situation, person A has full access to a home full of young boys he can abuse with impunity with minimal risk of getting caught.
> 
> person B on the other hand is in London, doesn't have access to boys to abuse locally, is organising a party of a group of rich paedofiles and so asks person A to transport them to London for the party.
> 
> ...


A load of kids. Simple. Let's hire someone to do that for us.

See?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Unlucky for you we are talking about those minibus drivers. Of course , if, as you say, it all went by gold then there must be records right?


why?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> why?


Why must it be? It isn't.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> A load of kids. Simple. Let's hire someone to do that for us.
> 
> See?


what's in it for person A is a load of kids?

they already have the kids and are supplying them to the party.

so again what's in it for person A?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> what's in it for person A is a load of kids?
> 
> 
> so again what's in it for person A?


They have to get them to b. "they already have the kids and are supplying them to the party." so why then hie a bus - let's call it c)? 

This is your own logic



> they already have the kids and are supplying them to the party.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

It's possible that Person A is given an monetary/or other incentive, yes.
It is also possible that it was simply part of their job and/or the incentive was access to other boys as the interviewee did say there were boys from other homes at the parties too.

Does it matter, really? Does it change anything?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

**


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> They have to get them to b. "they already have the kids and are supplying them to the party." so why then hie a bus - let's call it c)?
> 
> This is your own logic


butch, if you put down the wrong end of the stick it'd probably help.

This is my first post on this thread about this, the meaning of which is pretty clear IMO, and isn't specifically related to the transport arrangements or the need to pay a minibus driver.


free spirit said:


> yep - it seems fairly obvious that someone will have been getting paid for supplying young boys from welsh (and probably other) homes for sex parties for London toffs in London, which is one of the allegation that was made in the last couple of days by one of the boys who alleges he was a regular at these sex parties.


to which you responded


butchersapron said:


> Why must they be paid? Why not just be a paedo who can drive?


you're the one who unilaterally decided this discussion was about whether or not a minibus driver would be getting paid for driving the minibuses, could you just maybe let that largely irrelevant point drop.

It's like you're arguing over whether the driver who drives a few kg of coke from london to newcastle does it for cash or free coke, whereas I'm pointing out that the motivations of those actually running the operation is usually mostly down to making money, even if they might like the side benefits of a never ending supply of coke to snort. Obviously being partial to coke is probably a prerequisite for most involved in the trade, though not all, some are just criminals who'll make money from any lucrative illicit trade.


----------



## Prole (Nov 11, 2012)

Convicted North Wales care home boss is working in family-friendly hotel - Mirror Online



> Allen worked in the hotel industry before moving into the residential care business in North Wales in the mid-1960s. In 1969, he opened a children’s home at Bryn Alyn, near Wrexham.
> His company expanded and at one stage Allen ran up to 50 homes in North Wales, Cheshire and Shropshire providing specialist care for troubled children.
> It is estimated up to 500 children were put in his care during this time.
> It became an extremely lucrative business because, even in the 1980s, councils paid around £15,000-a-year per child.
> ...


Appalling how he only got 6 years (wonder how long he actually served?) - a FB post during the riots got 7 - says it all really.

(Not sure if this post/information meets with Butchersapron's approval as I've noticed a couple of obscure references to me).

We also need to take into account that at least 13 young men died before the Waterhouse inquiry, C4 news stated tonight that one of these had also been shown a photo of a man he recognised as his abuser and was told it was LM. Do the police still have the photos they showed to the men? edit: And if so, who were they identifying as LM?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

No photos left. They were apparently not good enough for an id to use as evidence either as they had been faxed.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> butch, if you put down the wrong end of the stick it'd probably help.
> 
> This is my first post on this thread about this, the meaning of which is pretty clear IMO, and isn't specifically related to the transport arrangements or the need to pay a minibus driver.
> 
> ...


 
The point still stands - to put a commercial relationship between people threatens the chain and works to ensures that only buses driven by a) go to b). So what's better for put paedo network?

This is not mad science. This is how they appropriated stuff to themself.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

Prole said:


> (Not sure if this post/information meets with Butchersapron's approval as I've noticed a couple of obscure references to me).


 
No you don't - name them. You're a piggybacking 7/7 weirdo prick. The people who've bought you better check you out sharpish (check the guys track record) You are poison.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 11, 2012)

I actually thought she was already banned. Didn't pick up on the name until just now.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> It's possible that Person A is given an monetary/or other incentive, yes.
> It is also possible that it was simply part of their job and/or the incentive was access to other boys as the interviewee did say there were boys from other homes at the parties too.
> 
> Does it matter, really? Does it change anything?


I think it does.

If money is involved, then it's probably organised criminal gangs of some description involved in sorting it out and making the connections.

If it's some sort of paedo swap club then there'd not be anything in it for organised criminal gangs (other than if it was actually them who were partial to the kids, but that doesn't really fit with the description of the toffs involved in the london sex parties).

If it's criminal gangs then it undermines the national network / conspiracy version of how these connections were made, and makes it a more straightforward if wide ranging criminal investigation that's needed. It'd also explain the levels of protection given, the fact that those jailed all seem keen to keep their mouths shut, and the allegations about threats, and intimidation of witnesses and family members, as well as possibly the deaths of witnesses.

Essentially it rationalises the entire situation and brings it out of the full on nationwide masonic paedo network territory and into criminal gangs facilitating paedo activity by rich paedos in exchange for large quantities of cash territory.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 11, 2012)

audiotech said:


> Mentions shadowy malevolent group, so can appear perceptive and clever.
> 
> You didn't add the customary word "sheeple" to go with it.


Oops! My bad.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I think it does.


Sorry, I wasn't that clear. When I asked does it matter it was more because the cryptic argument/exchange about this was going on forever above and none of this stuff can be checked/known for sure.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 11, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I actually thought she was already banned. Didn't pick up on the name until just now.



I didn't say anything...


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 11, 2012)

Anyway. Is there a vague timeline for when the inquiries are expected to report back? 
This story has gone on for weeks and the usual MO is to open an inquiry or multiple inquiries and thus kick it into the long grass.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

5 - initial April 2013. That's into police. Which stops all others.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> No photos left. They were apparently not good enough for an id to use as evidence either as they had been faxed.


That issue seems a bit confused as I understand it was the original polaroids that were ordered to be destroyed, the faxing might have been an earlier event by Meesham as he didn't trust the originals with the police, but they eventually seized them from him anyway?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> That issue seems a bit confused as I understand it was the original polaroids that were ordered to be destroyed, the faxing might have been an earlier event by Meesham as he didn't trust the originals with the police, but they eventually seized them from him anyway?


What you basing that on caesar?


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> 5 - initial April 2013. That's into police. Which stops all others.


Thanks.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> That issue seems a bit confused as I understand it was the original polaroids that were ordered to be destroyed, the faxing might have been an earlier event by Meesham as he didn't trust the originals with the police, but they eventually seized them from him anyway?


 
I read that Messham was shown a faxed picture by the police but after he Id'ed the person it was thought that the quality of the faxed pic was not good enough to use that positive ID as evidence.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

Unless my memory has gone wrong I thought the faxed photos were shown to victims by journalists. So either a totally different photo part of the story, or its going to turn out that the 'police showed me a photo' thing is also a mangled recollection by victim(s). As best I know the police wont comment at the moment though due to inquiries/investigations.


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> I read that Messham was shown a faxed picture by the police but after he Id'ed the person it was thought that the quality of the faxed pic was not good enough to use that positive ID as evidence.





> In his original investigation Angus Stickler also spoke to another victim who claimed to have been abused by the politician, as well as others.
> Newsnight/the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has been unable to track him down for this latest report....
> However, he said that the two police officers he showed the photograph to dismissed his claims, saying that since the pictures were faxed they were not sufficiently reliable evidence and no further action was take


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20182106


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

Thanks


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Sorry, I wasn't that clear. When I asked does it matter it was more because the cryptic argument/exchange about this was going on forever above and none of this stuff can be checked/known for sure.


oh, well yes I agree with that, I thought my initial post about it was fairly self explanatory and uncontroversial tbh.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

Two things: who did he see? Who did the police show him?  (assuming all real)


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> oh, well yes I agree with that, I thought my initial post about it was fairly self explanatory and uncontroversial tbh.


It's a bad thing if the theory just turns on its side and then involves someone else. Sort that out.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What you basing that on caesar?


Sorry got the story a little mixed up, clarified by elbows & tufty79 above , the faxed pictures were to id the suspects. Still not clear though whether it was a picture that the victims had obtained, from a journalist maybe, or a library, or it was one faxed to the police. Either way it seems a pretty rubbish reason to take "no further action" as if the mugshots weren't good enough, why didn't they just try and get better ones? If it is true it just sounds like the police didn't want to listen & just used any old excuse to ignore the claims. Which then leads to the polaroids, what on earth was the reason to have disposed of these, other than to conceal potential suspect's identities?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Essentially it rationalises the entire situation and brings it out of the full on nationwide masonic paedo network territory and into criminal gangs facilitating paedo activity by rich paedos in exchange for large quantities of cash territory.


 
actually this is where i thought the drugs metaphor broke down.  to most people this shit is unacceptable beyond even criminal norms - that doesnt mean no-ones made money, just that anyone who has was probably already involved and just took the initiative and organised stuff, or perhaps took a few quid to turn a blind eye


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Two things: who did he see? Who did the police show him? (assuming all real)


 
i'm wondering that too
e2a: wondering who messham was shown a photo of, and wondering who the unnamed victim's photo was of.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

OK so to be clear, there are four different photo-related aspects to the stories we have heard so far:

1) Photo shown by journalist to victim(s).
2) Faxed photo shown to police by victim(s).
3) Photo shown by police to victim(s).
4) Photos Messham says he stole from an abusers flat and gave to police.

1 & 2 may be the same photos. 3 might be a separate photo, might be one of the number 4 photos. Or might be a mangled memory of 2, with the story inverted.

edited to add that as per a story on channel 4 news earlier this week, a book of photos were destroyed by court order. The suggestion is that these are the photos I labelled as 4 above, although its always possible they were other ones obtained in another manner as part of the inquiry/police investigations.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> Sorry got the story a little mixed up, clarified by elbows & tufty79 above , the faxed pictures were to id the suspects. Still not clear though whether it was a picture that the victims had obtained, from a journalist maybe, or a library, or it was one faxed to the police. Either way it seems a pretty rubbish reason to take "no further action" as if the mugshots weren't good enough, why didn't they just try and get better ones? If it is true it just sounds like the police didn't want to listen & just used any old excuse to ignore the claims. Which then leads to the polaroids, what on earth was the reason to have disposed of these, other than to conceal potential suspect's identities?


Yeah. God.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> OK so to be clear, there are four different photo-related aspects to the stories we have heard so far:
> 
> 1) Photo shown by journalist to victim(s).
> 2) Faxed photo shown to police by victim(s).
> ...


*Read this people. Read it.*


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

Whom told messham  - that this  was macalpine? In what setting? A suite? By line up? They are going to kill the poor lad.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> It's a bad thing if the theory just turns on its side and then involves someone else. Sort that out.


thanks once again for your wonderful cryptic insight.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> thanks once again for your wonderful cryptic insight.


IT'S ALL TRUE!!! TA


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Whom told messham - that this was macalpine?


the police, according to messham. don't know about the setting though, only that i'd presume it wasn't in a line up, as he's solely talked about them naming a photo.


butchersapron said:


> They are going to kill the poor lad.


?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

tufty79 said:


> the police, according to messham. don't know about the setting though, only that i'd presume it wasn't in a line up, as he's solely talked about them naming a photo.
> 
> ?


Yeah, they are going to kill him. Now.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

The question to me is, what about the affidavits?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> OK so to be clear, there are four different photo-related aspects to the stories we have heard so far:
> 
> 1) Photo shown by journalist to victim(s).
> 2) Faxed photo shown to police by victim(s).
> ...


If I can venture an idea without you invoking godwins law again, I was thinking that a likely candidate for a journalist showing multiple victims photos would be simon regan from scallywag. Given that he's on the record saying that he met with 12 of them and had got signed statements off 10 of them, which he says backed up his allegations, one of which related to Lord McAlpine.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> The question to me is, what about the affidavits?


 
Which ones?


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> If I can venture an idea without you invoking godwins law again


 
I'm not going to put up with this bullshit from you. I mentioned nazis on the masons thread because of historical information about how Nazi Germany treated masons. And I setup another thread to stop all this side-drool from polluting this thread. So stop being a twat.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

> If I can venture an idea without you invoking godwins law again, I was thinking that a likely candidate for a journalist showing multiple victims photos would be simon regan from scallywag. Given that he's on the record saying that he met with 12 of them and had got signed statements off 10 of them, which he says backed up his allegations, one of which related to Lord McAlpine.


 

Where are the other statements? Have you seen them? Do you know who they are?


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> Which ones?


The ones Simon Regan said he got from ten of the boys from the Welsh care homes, two of whom had identified an address in Pimlico linked to a Conservative figure where they had been taken for parties.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

smokedout said:


> actually this is where i thought the drugs metaphor broke down. to most people this shit is unacceptable beyond even criminal norms - that doesnt mean no-ones made money, just that anyone who has was probably already involved and just took the initiative and organised stuff, or perhaps took a few quid to turn a blind eye


there are criminal gangs smuggling young girls into the UK on false pretenses then drugging them and forcing them into a life as a drug addicted indentured sex slave.

why do you think these sorts of immoral vicious bastards would give a toss about the morality of supplying kids to rich paedophiles prepared to pay through the nose for their service and discretion?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> The ones Simon Regan said he got from ten of the boys from the Welsh care homes, two of whom had identified an address in Pimlico linked to a Conservative figure where they had been taken for parties.


Does these exist? Have you seen them?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> there are criminal gangs smuggling young girls into the UK on false pretenses then drugging them and forcing them into a life as a drug addicted indentured sex slave.
> 
> why do you think these sorts of immoral vicious bastards would give a toss about the morality of supplying kids to rich paedophiles prepared to pay through the nose for their service and discretion?


Don't you care about **** line. Desperate


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Does these exist? Have you seen them?


Regan said they existed, and I think it's likely they did and he made it known to the Conservatives, which is why he was not sued, on that issue, at least.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

We should probably try to find more info about some of the one-liners in that Mirror article about Allen now working at a hotel.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/convicted-north-wales-care-home-1430164



> A report in 1996 suggested Allen had connections with senior establishment figures and was hiring out children as rent boys.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

I used to know Simon Reagan, at least a bit. He was a 'local character' in Camden when I used to live there. Or you might say, 'local nutter' generally to be found drunkenly haranguing random strangers about Prince Philip having Princess Di whacked and so on.

I wouldn't personally be inclined to build anything too substantial on him as a source.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> Regan said they existed, and think it's likely they did and he made it known to the Conservatives, which is why he was not sued, on that issue, at least.


On what basis?


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> On what basis?


As he had affidavits from 10 victims, if the people he named sued him, it would all be dragged out in a huge court case about sex abuse, which they absolutely would not want 2/3 years before a general election, especially with the cash for questions thing already going on.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> As he had affidavits from 10 victims, if the people he named sued him, it would all be dragged out in a huge court case about sex abuse, which they absolutely would not want 2/3 years before a general election, especially with the cash for questions thing already going on.


Cheers.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Where are the other statements? Have you seen them? Do you know who they are?


No I've not seen them.

I don't know where they are, all I know is what regan* wrote when he made those statements about having had these affidavits signed and filed in his office in case he needed to produce them in court.

He said that they went missing following a rent dispute with his landlord in which the entire contents of his office were then sold under court order by the landlord to a certain member of the conservative party research department who I'm trying to remember not to name due to his litigious history.

When he finally managed to get his records back he says all the files related to the welsh paedo investigation were missing, including the affidavits.


*Assuming the article credited to regan actually was written by regan, which is a bit hard to check given he's no longer with us. I'm making no claims for the veracity of his statements, just putting him out there as a likely candidate for being the journalist in question given his claims about having interviewed 12 of the victims and them having supported his claims, one of which was about McAlpine.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

The explanation given for why those files are unavailable is that Dr Julian Lewis got the entire contents of their office as a result of unpaid rent legal action.

However this may just be a convenient excuse.

As far as I know the closest thing we have to anything which substantiates some parts of the London story from Regan is the Sky interview with a victim the other day, which seemed like a reasonable fit but didnt go anywhere near detail on people or precise location.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I used to know Simon Reagan, at least a bit. He was a 'local character' in Camden when I used to live there. Or you might say, 'local nutter' generally to be found drunkenly haranguing random strangers about Prince Philip having Princess Di whacked and so on.
> 
> I wouldn't personally be inclined to build anything too substantial on him as a source.


 
One press report from the time had him as a self-confessed dipsomaniac, and another characterisation I read somewhere was that he slept in a caravan with one eye open.

The downing street caterer who was falsely accused of having an affair with John Major eventually decided not to bother going after them legally herself once she 'saw what kind of people they were'.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

These are the relevant quotes from this article

http://pebpr.blogspot.co.uk/p/scallywags-simon-regan.html



> In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.


 


> Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, xxx, now Conservative MP but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.
> 
> Subsequently, during a court case initiated by xxx, I was able in my defence to seek discovery of documents and asked to see the seized files. The paedophile papers were missing. This is a very great shame, because Sir Ronald Waterhouse certainly should have been aware of them.


 
I know the source is a bit suspect (in fact I've specifically stated my concerns about it earlier in the thread) but it would certainly seem to fit with the idea of a journalist showing them photos in the early 90s.

sorry about the formatting, I don't know how to sort it out.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

"i know"


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> No I've not seen them.
> 
> I don't know where they are, all I know is what regan* wrote when he made those statements about having had these affidavits signed and filed in his office in case he needed to produce them in court.
> 
> ...


It was Dr. Julian Lewis I think, so the Conservatives then got hold of the names of all these victims, including those two who alleged abuse in the Pimlico flat?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> One press report from the time had him as a self-confessed dipsomaniac, and another characterisation I read somewhere was that he slept in a caravan with one eye open.
> 
> The downing street caterer who was falsely accused of having an affair with John Major eventually decided not to bother going after them legally herself once she 'saw what kind of people they were'.


 
He was a nice enough bloke from what I could tell from buying him drinks a few times, but was generally found staggering around Camden at night, yelling stuff at random strangers (e.g. me) on the street about various establishment conspiracies. I have no doubt that the establishment (or at least the bits of it he'd accused of various dodgy stuff) was conspiring against him to some degree, but I still wouldn't take any of his assertions as fact without a whole lot of corroborating evidence from sources who weren't completely off their heads.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> It was Dr. Julian Lewis I think, so the Conservatives then got hold of the names of all these victims, including those two who alleged abuse in the Pimlico flat?


Name them.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> He was a nice enough bloke from what I could tell from buying him drinks a few times, but was generally found staggering around Camden at night, yelling stuff at random strangers on the street about various establishment conspiracies. I have no doubt that the establishment (or at least the bits of it he'd accused of various dodgy stuff) was conspiring against him to some degree, but I still wouldn't take any of his assertions as fact without a whole lot of corroborating evidence from sources who weren't completely off their heads.


 
Cheers for the personal accounts. Pretty damn consistent with what I had assumed really. Being such a character probably made it more likely that he'd be willing to touch dangerous stories, but less likely to be taken seriously. Which is a terrible contradiction to live with, albeit one that probably increases chances of survival, at least until they drink themselves to death.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I used to know Simon Reagan, at least a bit. He was a 'local character' in Camden when I used to live there. Or you might say, 'local nutter' generally to be found drunkenly haranguing random strangers about Prince Philip having Princess Di whacked and so on.
> 
> I wouldn't personally be inclined to build anything too substantial on him as a source.


all I'm suggesting is that he's a likely candidate for being the journalist who would have shown the victims photos in the early 90s.

given the number of articles he seems to have written on the subject, it seems reasonable to assume that he actually did get out to north wales to interview some of the victims before / while writing the articles.

Your description would also fit with the sort of journalist who might be able to show someone a picture and tell the person they were someone different to who they actually were, even accidentally. He'd certainly be someone who was chasing after the high level tories angle and might actually mention Lord McAlpine to them.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Name them.


Well that's exactly it, we don't know what they are, as the Conservatives likely have them or destroyed them, and both Regan, and his half brother Angus James (Wilson) have died, the latter in a car crash in Cyprus after going to see Asil Nadir to sell him compromising photos of a politician.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> after going to see Asil Nadir to sell him compromising photos of a politician.


 
Where did you get that detail from? The version of the story I read had Angus going there to seek funding for Spiked magazine, in exchange for letting Nadir tell his side of the Poly Peck story. However the version you give is not incompatible with that.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> Where did you get that detail from? The version of the story I read had Angus going there to seek funding for Spiked magazine, in exchange for letting Nadir tell his side of the Poly Peck story. However the version you give is not incompatible with that.


I found a link but I'm nervous about posting as it names the politician.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> Well that's exactly it, we don't know what they are, as the Conservatives likely have them or destroyed them, and both Regan, and his half brother Angus James (Wilson) have died, the latter in a car crash in Cyprus after going to see Asil Nadir to sell him compromising photos of a politician.


go away


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Name them.


well I was trying not to given that he's the guy that finally nailed scallywag by screwing their printers, distributor etc. and his website details other cases he's taken to court and won as well, so he's obviously quite partial to taking legal action against those who accuse him of stuff.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

Lets just assume any affidavits that may have existed are long gone, and therefore any hope of rebuilding this side of the story stems from any surviving victims. Hence my mentioning the sky interview with a victim the other day, it seems reasonable to assume that at least one of them is alive and prepared to talk to journalists. We can also assume that there are journalists out there who have remained aware of what Scallywag said at the time, and dont want this angle to go into obscurity again. Whether they can do anything about that though is questionable, they arent likely to name names especially given whats happened recently.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well I was trying not to given that he's the guy that finally nailed scallywag by screwing their printers, distributor etc. and his website details other cases he's taken to court and won as well, so he's obviously quite partial to taking legal action against those who accuse him of stuff.


What?


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well I was trying not to given that he's the guy that finally nailed scallywag by screwing their printers, distributor etc. and his website details other cases he's taken to court and won as well, so he's obviously quite partial to taking legal action against those who accuse him of stuff.


I think he meant the Wales abuse victims that gave affidavits to Regan, obviously we don't know them as Regan never gave their names, but presumably they were on the affidavits.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> go away


Uncalled for? I have a link of a letter posted by Regan, stating exactly that.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> I think he meant the Wales abuse victims that gave affidavits to Regan, obviously we don't know them as Regan never gave their names, but presumably they were on the affidavits.


oh ok, I thought he was referring to you naming the conservative guy I'd just deliberately not named.

you're probably right though.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> Hi, new here, been reading for last few weeks, hope I can add something to discussion
> 
> 
> Actually he didn't say that, the Guardian included that rather misleadingly, Meesham was asked the name of his abuser by a Times journalist, and he said it was Tom, which we now know is Thomas Kenyon, but the Times journalist didn't know that at the time, and connected it to the Conservative figure allegation.
> ...


 
Have you something to declare?


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Have you something to declare?


Like what? Just been reading the site since the Savile allegations came up, and wanted to correct a point.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> Like what? Just been reading the site since the Savile allegations came up, and wanted to correct a point.


just


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> Private Eye is an establishment journal that much is true. I knew a few people who worked for Scallywag, one of whom told me that he was not to ask questions about Julian Lewis's purchase of the contents of the magazine's office.


Wonder why that was?



free spirit said:


> Alfred 'Jimmie' McAlpine - liked his cars, and chaired construction company Sir Alfred McAlpine & sons, son of Lord Alfred McAlpine, and grandson of Sir Robert McAlpine. Now allegedly was a child abuser.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That photo of Alastair McAlpine is fairly recent, he is actually 34 years younger than Jimmie, so would have looked a lot different at the relevant time in the 70s.


----------



## discokermit (Nov 11, 2012)

i thought it was cesar. got well confused there.


----------



## albionism (Nov 11, 2012)

Why did Steve Messham feel the need to publicly apologies to **** ********, 
when in fact he had never publicly named him?


----------



## cesare (Nov 11, 2012)

discokermit said:


> i thought it was cesar. got well confused there.


Me? No, nothing to do with me.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

albionism said:


> Why did Steve Messham feel the need to publicly apologies to **** ********,
> when in fact he had never publicly named him?


He did to the BIJ/Newsnight people and they proceeded on that basis.


----------



## where to (Nov 11, 2012)

The Independent has confirmed it has a copy of the Jillings report. The one insurers insisted be pulped.


----------



## albionism (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> He did to the BIJ/Newsnight people and they proceeded on that basis.


But he did not name names publicly...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

albionism said:


> But he did not name names publicly...


If i talk to people making a TV program then i know that i'm publicly naming him whether the program goes ahead and names him or not. You can name people publicly without having a tv program as well.

Part of the BBC/newsnight shoddyness was then letting him front the apology for their lack of basic journalism.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

where to said:


> The Independent has confirmed it has a copy of the Jillings report. The one insurers insisted be pulped.


 


> *The Jillings report: How the truth about North Wales child abuse scandal was suppressed*
> 
> Council insurers demanded that the first full investigation into the care home scandal was pulped. Roger Dobson – who has one of the few remaining copies – details an astonishing cover-up


 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ild-abuse-scandal-was-suppressed-8303903.html


----------



## albionism (Nov 11, 2012)

Do you think he had never "googled" a pic of the person he thought to be his abuser for
some 15-20 years? He had only seen a pic that day? and then decided "nah, it ain't him, i got
it wrong"? It's all very iffy indeed


----------



## where to (Nov 11, 2012)

I agree. Something doesnt stack up right with all this.  It's possible he is just all over the shop, and the journalists wanted to believe a little too much. But even then.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 11, 2012)

Is there any information on Mark Humphries? He is mentioned in a report in The Independent as being one of the North Wales abuse victims. He killed himself aged 31. He apparently made serious claims to a freelance journalist about the abuse. There's not much I can find on him, so if anyone could post a link which is detailed on this, can't seem to find anything as of yet. Link to independent article mentioning Mark: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...on-waits-for-justice-30-years-on-8303901.html


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 11, 2012)

Another witness in the Anglesea libel trial.

The BBC made a drama in 2000(?) based on his story called "Care".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> please consider the difference between 'a significant component' and 'the entire cause of the problem'


 
I have been, it's you that hasn't unless it suits you.



> Yes.
> [source - north wales freemasons website]
> the number of lodges in North wales grew by 50% between 1958-90 vs no new lodges since 1991


 
Alongside what other factors? Here's a few - transition from an industrial to a post-industrial economy; demographic growth; improvement of transport infrastructure.
So, quite possible to attribute a growth in lodge numbers to more reasons than merely a paedophile conspiracy.



> you see that Lord Kenyan in the quote above, listed as being the Provincial Grand Master of North Wales?


 
Keny*o*n.

I also see that Freemasonry as an issue was being addressed 30 years ago.



> that's the same Lord Kenyan who's son Thomas Kenyan who died of Aids in 1993 and is alleged to have been the son of a Lord referred to in the Nick Davies article in the first post of this thread. It's also alleged in this article and this book that he was also a member of the North Wales Police Authority, which I think included through the 70s and 80s.
> 
> So the Provincial Grand Master's son is implicated in involvement in all this, yet it's apparently not something worth discussing on this thread.


 
No-one has said it isn't worth discussing. Amazing how often *you* see stuff that isn't there. What people have said is Freemasonry isn't worth *fixating* on. It's one vector among many.



> That article also alleges that Sir Walter Stansfield, the former Deputy Chief Constable of Denbigh Police Force (prior to it being amalgamated into north wales police), and then Chief Constable of Derbyshire police was an active mason... along with a fair few other allegations that are hard to substantiate, but they claim to have evidence of.


 
Evidence is useless unless it is produced.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

albionism said:


> Do you think he had never "googled" a pic of the person he thought to be his abuser for
> some 15-20 years? He had only seen a pic that day? and then decided "nah, it ain't him, i got
> it wrong"? It's all very iffy indeed


Maybe.  But do we know how internet savvy he is?  I know plenty of people that have never google image searched _anything_.  Just because we're all relatively heavy web users, it's easy to forget that not everyone is.


----------



## where to (Nov 11, 2012)

He's on Twitter.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

where to said:


> He's on Twitter.


He is now, but only since this all blew up.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

> A man in his 70s from Cambridgeshire has been arrested by officers investigating sexual abuse claims againstJimmy Savileand others.
> He is the third man to be detained under Operation Yewtree, the criminal inquiry being conducted by the Met police and the NSPCC.
> The Met said the man "falls under the strand of the investigation we have termed 'others'". He was arrested at 7.15am on suspicion of sexual offences and has been taken into police custody locally, Scotland Yard said.
> It comes nine days after the arrest and bail of the entertainer Freddie Starr, and two weeks after Gary Glitter was questioned. Glitter, 68, whose real name is Paul Gadd, was arrested at home and questioned at a London police station before being released on bail until mid-December.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/11/jimmy-savile-inquiry-man-arrested

Completely unfounded, but one dodgy character in his 70s living in the area comes immediately to mind. Unfair - but I'll be interested to see who it really is just in case my first thought happens to be a lucky guess.

ETA - how come Starr was named but this man isn't?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> They publish a year book, which list members, so they can contact each other.
> 
> He must have got hold of a copy.
> 
> This investigator also got hold of a copy.


 
It's not exactly difficult to "get hold of a copy". You can find UGLE's yearbook in any decent reference library, or buy a copy from UGLE themselves.
Oh, and by the way, it *doesn't* list members, it lists office-holders and lodge details for every lodge. There's *no* central register of members. Each lodge keeps its' own membership files.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 11, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I used to know Simon Reagan, at least a bit. He was a 'local character' in Camden when I used to live there. Or you might say, 'local nutter' generally to be found drunkenly haranguing random strangers about Prince Philip having Princess Di whacked and so on.
> 
> I wouldn't personally be inclined to build anything too substantial on him as a source.


 
came across this which is interesting and probably best posted without further comment

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/outed--portillo-is-one-of-the-good-guys-1277645.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> yep - it seems fairly obvious that someone will have been getting paid for supplying young boys from welsh (and probably other) homes for sex parties for London toffs in London, which is one of the allegation that was made in the last couple of days by one of the boys who alleges he was a regular at these sex parties.


 
Why does it seem "fairly obvious"?
Sure, you can make an *assumption* that someone, somewhere along the line was pimping those boys, but given that "the line" was made up of paedophiles, it's not *necessarily* an accurate assumption.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Why does it seem "fairly obvious"?
> Sure, you can make an *assumption* that someone, somewhere along the line was pimping those boys, but given that "the line" was made up of paedophiles, it's not *necessarily* an accurate assumption.


Whether someone was paid for supplying boys or not, I do think it's *probable* that there'll be a money trail of _some_ sort in amongst all this.  Greed is ubiquitous.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> What does that mean?


 
 means he's checking himself to see if he has a high temperature.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's not exactly difficult to "get hold of a copy". You can find UGLE's yearbook in any decent reference library, or buy a copy from UGLE themselves.
> Oh, and by the way, it *doesn't* list members, it lists office-holders and lodge details for every lodge. There's *no* central register of members. Each lodge keeps its' own membership files.


 

Wow, you seem very up on all that shit. Its creepy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

Corax said:


> Whether someone was paid for supplying boys or not, I do think it's *probable* that there'll be a money trail of _some_ sort in amongst all this. Greed is ubiquitous.


 
Yes, but free spirit was referring specifically to someone paying someone else for the boys, not to there being a money trail _per se_, which as you say, *is* likely, although given that banking records weren't fully-electronic until the late '80s, could be a big problem (although not necessarily insurmountable).


----------



## where to (Nov 11, 2012)

smokedout said:
			
		

> came across this which is interesting and probably best posted without further comment
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/outed--portillo-is-one-of-the-good-guys-1277645.html



Thanks. 

Would recommend this read to anyone following this story closely.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Wow, you seem very up on all that shit. Its creepy.


 
Here it comes, the insinuations that "this guy must be a Mason because he knows about Freemasonry".
Sorry, sport. I'm no Mason. My foster-dad was, though, so I know the difference between red lodge and blue lodge, the difference between the various orders and rites. All stuff you can also find out *really* easily with google, by the way.

You want to know what is *really* creepy? That you actually equate knowledge and creepiness. How bloody sad are you, eh?


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 11, 2012)

just a note on the google thing: even if messham's got/has had internet access for a while, i *would* be a bit surprised if he'd never googled lord mcalpine, but i wouldn't be surprised if he'd _never specifically google image searched_ him (the former doesn't always come up with pictures).

im o/wildly different e.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> It means you are an idiot for suggesting that Paul Mason is a dot we should join.


 
He was taking the piss, tbf.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Wow, you seem very up on all that shit. Its creepy.


See?


----------



## 1%er (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> or is it irrelevant that one of the abusers was the son of the regions top freemason (and member of the police board), as was the local copper with responsibility for the homes against whom multiple allegations were also made (though not proven)?


So guilt by association is it. I don't think his fathers golf club is relevant why should I think any other club his fathers was a member of is relevant


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

smokedout said:


> you're missing the point completely. the network is held together because if one person goes down then everyone is at risk - that makes it very strong, particularly as the risks are so great. therefore the network is self-supporting, it doesnt want or need outsiders unless they join the shared risk and get involved.
> 
> sure on an individual level favours may be asked, but thats the same whether people drink in the same pub or use the same lodge. for freemasonry to be more important than where they drank, and therefore not a distraction, there needs to be established some systematic behaviour by non noncing masons to protect the nonces - there hasnt been and isnt likely to be unless you buy into the idea that organisationally freemasons would protect a paedophile ring for freemasonic reasons


 
Not even because of their pledges. There's plenty of cases of Masons breaking their pledges to report corruption, and being taken into new lodges despite that. The majority of Masons do actually hold to the line that they must always act with honour to *all*, not just to fellow Masons.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> I'm just drawing attention at the speed in Wilson came upon to undermine Watsons comments in parliament. There is nothing wrong with questioning it, and Wilson is very much within his right to continue in such a way. But what good does a mp attacking another on the basis of asking for an investigation into a very serious matter which still has stones left unturned do? What was his justification. Likewise against ITV. There were no names shown. Likewise with BBC... there was no name named....


 
Frankly though, one only need ask "Who is Rob Wilson MP?" and then look up his Parliamentary history to conclude that he's a mouthpiece for someone else. The most likely puppet-master being the Whip's Office.  It's common for the whips to use someone of Wilson's lowly rank (Ministerial bag-carrier) to sow information/propaganda for them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> It's possible that Person A is given an monetary/or other incentive, yes.
> It is also possible that it was simply part of their job and/or the incentive was access to other boys as the interviewee did say there were boys from other homes at the parties too.


 
Or even some other form of _quid pro quo_.



> Does it matter, really? Does it change anything?


 
Nope.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> If I can venture an idea without you invoking godwins law again, I was thinking that a likely candidate for a journalist showing multiple victims photos would be simon regan from scallywag. Given that he's on the record saying that he met with 12 of them and had got signed statements off 10 of them, which he says backed up his allegations, one of which related to Lord McAlpine.


 
Simon Regan said a lot. What's been substantiated?


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Frankly though, one only need ask "Who is Rob Wilson MP?" and then look up his Parliamentary history to conclude that he's a mouthpiece for someone else. The most likely puppet-master being the Whip's Office. It's common for the whips to use someone of Wilson's lowly rank (Ministerial bag-carrier) to sow information/propaganda for them.


He's former a SDP member turned Tory... like Finkelstein.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> Regan said they existed, and I think it's likely they did and he made it known to the Conservatives, which is why he was not sued, on that issue, at least.


 
Like most journos, Regan was a good bluffer and blagger. He may have had those statements, or he may have had information that drew him to conclude the possibility of events occurring, which he them disseminated as being part of a sworn statement.  The only people who'd know one way or the other are the abuse victims and the notary.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes, but free spirit was referring specifically to someone paying someone else for the boys, not to there being a money trail _per se_, which as you say, *is* likely, although given that banking records weren't fully-electronic until the late '80s, could be a big problem (although not necessarily insurmountable).


Sure, I wasn't disagreeing with you, more exploring the idea.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

albionism said:


> Do you think he had never "googled" a pic of the person he thought to be his abuser for
> some 15-20 years? He had only seen a pic that day? and then decided "nah, it ain't him, i got
> it wrong"? It's all very iffy indeed


 
Why *would* a victim of abuse image-search for an image of one of the people who abused him? Why would he risk re-traumatising himself?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

Corax said:


> Sure, I wasn't disagreeing with you, more exploring the idea.


 
I know.


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> *Why would a victim of abuse image-search for an image of one of the people who abused him?* Why would he risk re-traumatising himself?


especially if he's got no reason to suspect that he's been lied to about who his abuser was...

i sometimes still keep tabs* on my abusive family member via googling 'em. it's never occured to me to google image 'em. i really don't want to see their face, tbh.

*where they're working, whether it's with kids, whether anything else's come up about them...

that is, of course, just me though. and a very different situation.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Like most journos, Regan was a good bluffer and blagger. He may have had those statements, or he may have had information that drew him to conclude the possibility of events occurring, which he them disseminated as being part of a sworn statement. The only people who'd know one way or the other are the abuse victims and the notary.


 
Just to follow up on my earlier comments, I asked the wife, who also knew Regan as a Camden character, but who, unlike me, had been an avid Scallywag reader in its heyday, before vengeful Tories fucked the unfortunate Mr Regan over irreparably.

Her take was that he very often was onto something, but on too many occasions tried to use what he had to bluff it and got key details wrong. Like the John Major case, where he was half-right, Major _was_ having an affair, but wrong about who with.

I felt really sorry for him to be honest. His heart was obviously in the right place, but he'd had his life and work trashed by vengeful Tory ratfuckers, presumably as an example to others and as a result was in a bit of a shit state when I encountered him.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

Whilst looking into the latest Saville arrest, I came across these quotes from Paul Gambaccini in a relevant article.


> I’ve been waiting for this to come out for 30 years, but then he did raise millions for charity.





> He was not all good, he was not all bad, he was an enigma.


Also producer Wilfred De'ath


> Wilfred De’Ath told ITV news last night: “I know for a fact that he spent a night in a rather squalid hotel with a girl who was at the most 12 or probably 10 and I said to him ‘Jimmy you are living dangerously.
> "Surely you must realise you’re living dangerously?’.


 
Fuckinell. 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sir-jimmy-savile-rumours-former-1355050


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

Apparently the producer mentioned wrote an autobiography (?) of sorts:


> Born in 1937, Wilfred De'Ath's outwardly conventional early life in suburban London was dominated by the overpowering puritanism and fanatical patriotism of his mother, the daughter of a German pastor. In the De'Ath household Hitler was idolised and every German victory heartily celebrated. This is a memoir by England's best-loved reprobate.
> 
> Born in 1937, Wilfred De'Ath's outwardly conventional early life in suburban London was dominated by the overpowering puritanism and fanatical patriotism of his mother, the daughter of a German pastor. In the De'Ath household Hitler was idolised and every German victory heartily celebrated. On shopping expeditions with his mother during the Blitz, young Wilfred had to endure the spectacle of his mother giving Nazi salutes and shouting 'Heil Hitler!' to her friend and compatriot, Mrs Maybury. This singular upbringing may account for De'Ath's subsequent ill treatment of his own family and the abandonment of a charmed career in journalism which brought him much acclaim for his interviews with figures as diverse as Mick Jagger, Margaret Thatcher, John Lennon, PG Wodehouse and the Archbishop of Canterbury and as a ground-breaking radio and television producer (one of his discoveries was Kenny Everett). Instead he chose a life of vagrancy and petty crime - totting up ten years behind bars in the process - not to mention his lifelong twin obsessions with sex and religion.
> 
> A self-confessed voyeur who was recruited by MI5 to befriend a Russian spy at an orgy, De'Ath was a sexual predator whose victims included Susanna York, Sarah Miles, Julie Christie, Julia Foster and Charlotte Rampling. A godless but enthusiastic churchgoer, he made a career out of exposing the peccadilloes of Anglican clergymen in Private Eye, whose editor, his Oxford contemporary Richard Ingrams, later commissioned a long-running column in the Oldie retailing his experiences at the hands of plodding policemen, mad magistrates, crazy criminals and sadistic screws. In "Uncommon Criminal", an unrepentant sinner looks back at his deplorable but colourful life with a candour bordering on relish which will disgust and delight in equal measure.


Sounds like a well-connected man.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just to follow up on my earlier comments, I asked the wife, who also knew Regan as a Camden character, but who, unlike me, had been an avid Scallywag reader in its heyday, before vengeful Tories fucked the unfortunate Mr Regan over irreparably.
> 
> Her take was that he very often was onto something, but on too many occasions tried to use what he had to bluff it and got key details wrong. Like the John Major case, where he was half-right, Major _was_ having an affair, but wrong about who with.


It's come out that story about the cook was deliberately fed to cover the Currie affair.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> It's come out that story about the cook was deliberately fed to cover the Currie affair.


 
Interesting if true. Do you have a source for that?


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> He did to the BIJ/Newsnight people and they proceeded on that basis.


I really think the truth may simply be as banal as Steve Messham didn't really understand the significance of what Lord meant, i.e. that it is an honorific applied to Peers, rather than just a generic term for any really rich landowner from an old family with a big country house, which is a description that would apply to Lord McAlpine's cousin Alfred James "Jimmie" McAlpine (1908-1991) who lived near Wrexham. We know from another victim, Keith Gregory, that the boys from Bryn Estyn were taken there to do gardening, and others have said Jimmie McAlpine drove to the home in his various cars. You can then see that when these victims talked to Scallywag, they would have mentioned this rich McAlpine, the Scallywag journalists then just assumed that it was Lord McAlpine they were talking about, and the victims were none the wiser.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

No, adding text doesn't change the pic.


----------



## caesar (Nov 11, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Interesting if true. Do you have a source for that?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2286916.stm



> Ms Latimer, the 10 Downing Street caterer falsely named as his lover, has also joined the fray.
> 
> She claims Mr Major used her as a "decoy" to prevent what would have been the more politically damaging exposure of the affair he had with Mrs Currie from 1984 to 1988.
> 
> ...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

> *Lorna Cooper* ‏@*Coops_tv*
> "The Mail On Sunday, over two pages, reveals this man is a weirdo." - Says David Mellor of Steven Messham. Just digest that for a moment...


 
Can someone check this...I think I might be sick.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Can someone check this...I think I might be sick.


Funny how rape and abuse victims can sometimes seem a little less happy and balanced than other folks isn't it.  You twat Mellor.


----------



## tufty79 (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Can someone check this...I think I might be sick.


on sunday politics apparently. not on i-player yet though...
the mail on sunday piece is *searches for words* unpleasant, to say the least.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

tufty79 said:


> on sunday politics apparently. not on i-player yet though...
> the mail on sunday piece is *searches for words* unpleasant, to say the least.


Written by David Rose, a paragon of accuracy http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2012/10/david-rose-rebuttal-of-dodgy-science-round-two
And Bob Woffinden, who's made his name by claiming that various people aren't guilty of stuff. And then sometimes changing his mind.

ETA: Oh, and looky here...



> I am now certain that the murderer was indeed Jeremy Bamber — and am convinced that, *with my co-investigator Richard Webster...*


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mber-says-crime-writer.html?ito=feeds-newsxml


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 11, 2012)

Corax said:


> Written by David Rose, a paragon of accuracy http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2012/10/david-rose-rebuttal-of-dodgy-science-round-two
> And Bob Woffinden, who's made his name by claiming that various people aren't guilty of stuff. And then sometimes changing his mind.
> 
> ETA: Oh, and looky here...
> ...


I wonder if he has any contacts inside the Conservative Research Department? Silly question really.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Nov 11, 2012)

So all the good things to come from the Savile stuff re: victims of abuse feeling able to come forward and be taken seriously is wiped out with one fucking shit article and another cunt of a Tory trying to discredit a victim of abuse by completely and utterly assassinating his character.

"Gosh, how did we let the Savile stuff happen?" Like this, you motherfucking cunts.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

caesar said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2286916.stm


 
Hmm, that just said she "believed" it to be the case without saying why. I mean, you can absolutely see why they'd want to spike Scallywag and the NS with a provably incorrect variation on the truth about such a story.

It's a known PR technique perhaps most famously used against to defend GW Bush's military record by spiking veteran US journo Dan Rather with a set of provably fake documentation (damning late 60's - early 70's documents, quite plausibly real ones, typed up on a demonstrably modern typewriter)

Entirely plausible that the recent BBC abuse report debacle is also such a case, just as it's entirely plausible that Scallywag was spiked with a deniable variant on John Major's affair, but both are _extremely_ hard to prove.

I think it's pretty clear in such an atmosphere why emphasising effectively unprovable conspiratorial aspects of such cases is a bad idea when it seems possible that there is actually some stuff here that's provable, but which could easily get buried in lizards.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> So, quite possible to attribute a growth in lodge numbers to more reasons than merely a paedophile conspiracy.


fucks sake, I never said the growth in Lodge numbers was a result of a paedophile conspiracy, you asked if North Wales was particularly rife with Freemasonry, that was the question I answered by pointing out that the number of lodges grew by 50% in the period in question, so yes it was a hot bed of freemasonry activity in that period relative to any other period at least.



> No-one has said it isn't worth discussing. Amazing how often *you* see stuff that isn't there. What people have said is Freemasonry isn't worth *fixating* on. It's one vector among many.


really? 


1%er said:


> Freemasonry, is a distraction.





Bernie Gunther said:


> All that stuff about freemasons is a bunch of conspiraloon bullshit.





Vintage Paw said:


> Right now, this masonry thing is just another distraction.


I've not said it should be fixated on, just that it is worth of discussion and investigation without being immediately shouted down as conspiraloon bullshit.

It seems at least one of the victims agrees, as Keith Gregory has specifically called for an investigation of the Masons activities in North Wales.



> Evidence is useless unless it is produced.


to an extent.

If the author of the article states that they've seen the evidence then whether or not this is credible relies on the credibility of the author themselves.

For example, when the Independent say they've got a copy of the Jillings report, but don't actually publish it, I'd generally tend to believe them. If david Icke said the same thing, then I'd be highly suspicious of them.

I'm not really clear where this Rebecca lot fall on that scale, but there research and writing certainly seems to be a step up from Icke and his ilk, and they do actually specify quite a bit what the source of their evidence was for each allegation.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

Corax said:


> Written by David Rose, a paragon of accuracy http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2012/10/david-rose-rebuttal-of-dodgy-science-round-two
> And Bob Woffinden, who's made his name by claiming that various people aren't guilty of stuff. And then sometimes changing his mind.
> 
> ETA: Oh, and looky here...
> ...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

Author of the DM article being called out as a 'fixer', who has form



> Who is he?
> *Oh what a can of worms that question turns out to be.*
> David Rose seems to be what is known by some people in the trade as a ‘fixer’.
> ‘Fixers’ obviously ‘fix’ things – in his case, Rose specialises in ‘fixing’ tricky problems which are inconveniencing parts of the more conservative parts of the establishment – by using spin, disinformation and pure lies.
> ...


http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/...s-just-who-is-daily-mail-reporter-david-rose/


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> fucks sake, I never said the growth in Lodge numbers was a result of a paedophile conspiracy, you asked if North Wales was particularly rife with Freemasonry, that was the question I answered by pointing out that the number of lodges grew by 50% in the period in question, so yes it was a hot bed of freemasonry activity in that period relative to any other period at least.
> 
> 
> really?
> ...


They say that the brief they had - the bloke keeping them legally up to date was a mason. They say this because they suggest that he was part of a masonic cover up.

You, and people like you, are going to dace this away.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Simon Regan said a lot. What's been substantiated?


well let's see.

he wrote a whole series of articles based on these interviews.

so either he made the entire thing up himself without ever having spoken with any of the victims, and allowed his pursuit of the abusers who's names he'd made up from his own imagination to then ruin him over the next decade as he refused to back down.

or he actually went to Wales and managed to interview a dozen or so victims of the abuse, and then wrote the articles about the people that the victims had named.

or do you think he was too much of a pisshead to even make it on to a train to wales or something.

I'm in no way saying that everything he ever wrote is to be believed (I've said from the off that it should be taken with a big pinch of salt), but I find his claims to have actually interviewed a group of the boys in the early 90s prior to launching his series of articles to be fairly reasonable claims, and the idea that he never interview any of them to be pretty unlikely.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well let's see.
> 
> he wrote a whole series of articles based on these interviews.
> 
> ...


You are saying everything he ever wrote is to be believed. Why? What material led you to this. Let us all see the trail.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes, but free spirit was referring specifically to someone paying someone else for the boys, not to there being a money trail _per se_


how do you get a money trail without someone being paid by someone else?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Author of the DM article being called out as a 'fixer', who has form
> 
> http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/...s-just-who-is-daily-mail-reporter-david-rose/


 
thats tom pride who was recently punting round the ben fellows shite just by the way


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> You are saying verything he ever wrote is to be believed


how do you work that one out then brainiac?

the only reason I've raised this now is because Elbows was trying to identify who the journalist might have been who was showing photos to the boys in the early 90s.

All I'm saying here is that Regan is a likely candidate for being that journalist given that he specifically claimed to have done so in the right period in time, and he was someone who's likely to have put 2 + 2 together and made 5 by mistakenly making the link to Lord McAlpine.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> how do you get a money trail without someone being paid by someone else?


By not having a money trail. By making sure there isn't one.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> how do you work that one out then brainiac?
> 
> the only reason I've raised this now is because Elbows was trying to identify who the journalist might have been who was showing photos to the boys in the early 90s.
> 
> All I'm saying here is that Regan is a likely candidate for being that journalist given that he specifically claimed to have done so in the right period in time, and he was someone who's likely to have put 2 + 2 together and made 5 by mistakenly making the link to Lord McAlpine.


I worked it out through your series of suggestions, the last of which means that you think that it is true.  That was the point after all.

Dots. Fading.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 11, 2012)

Don't mean to derail this thread, but just to note that blacklisted building workers have taken out a claim in the High Court against Robert McAlpine & Sons. I worked on a number of McAlpine sites in the late 60's, including one when a building worker fell to his death due to poor safety standards on-site. Here's some building workers stories and fascinating they are too.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> fucks sake, I never said the growth in Lodge numbers was a result of a paedophile conspiracy...


I haven't claimed that you had said that.


> you asked if North Wales was particularly rife with Freemasonry, that was the question I answered by pointing out that the number of lodges grew by 50% in the period in question, so yes it was a hot bed of freemasonry activity in that period relative to any other period at least.


 
So was most of the north-east and south-west of England, by that token.



> really?
> 
> 
> 
> I've not said it should be fixated on, just that it is worth of discussion and investigation without being immediately shouted down as conspiraloon bullshit.


 
Which of them said "it isn't worth discussing"? I took each of the quotes you posted as being aimed at "for fuck's sake don't fixate on Freemasonry, that way lies loonspud-dom", rather than "don't talk about Freemasonry at all".



> It seems at least one of the victims agrees, as Keith Gregory has specifically called for an investigation of the Masons activities in North Wales.


 
And in *his* case, he's right to do so if he perceives and can prove that what he claims is actually the case.
However, to build a case for Freemasonry being anything more than one vctor out of many with regard to paedogeddon, you, me and he would all need substantially more evidence than is currently available *or* has been intimated.



> to an extent.
> 
> If the author of the article states that they've seen the evidence then whether or not this is credible relies on the credibility of the author themselves.
> 
> For example, when the Independent say they've got a copy of the Jillings report, but don't actually publish it, I'd generally tend to believe them. If david Icke said the same thing, then I'd be highly suspicious of them.


 
As I said earlier with reference to regan, it's standard journalistic practice to exaggerate the extent of information you hold, because it's an excellent way of "shaking the tree", - convincing people with information that they've more to lose by not coming forward *now* and giving you information you can use to build your case.



> I'm not really clear where this Rebecca lot fall on that scale, but there research and writing certainly seems to be a step up from Icke and his ilk, and they do actually specify quite a bit what the source of their evidence was for each allegation.


 
Some of their stuff is very good collation of facts (probably the most important background process in an investigation), although some of it skims the CT world. That';s pretty unavoidable, though, given that most CTs are constructed around the misapprehension of selective facts.[/quote]


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

The masons, the wrong Lord, the Schofield list, the embarrassment of Newsnight - so many strands taking the focus away from the main issue that dozens, maybe hundreds of children have been abused over decades and that high profile people have been involved. It's incredible that the Mail is giving two pages to the trashing of Messham, with numerous other papers giving their column inches to criticising Newsnight, the BBC etc 
At the risk of sounding like a frustrated teenaged I want to scream HELLO WORLD has everyone forgotten that jimmy savile is accused of abusing dozens of young people and that he ws the close friend and confidante of govt, royalty and so many senior figures. What kind of alternate universe are we living in when an abuse victim whose life has been scarred from such an early age is being asked to make public apologies and being trashed publicly for the challenging events in his broken life???
You guys on this blog have been making soooooo many excellent connections and focusing not the real facts, please keep up the good work and use your knowledge, experience and connections to make sure this doesn't go away.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well let's see.
> 
> he wrote a whole series of articles based on these interviews.
> 
> ...


 
You're missing my point, which is that we can all speculate until the sun dies and the planet freezes, but we can't *know* what Regan had, we can only judge by what he claimed, and the degree of credence an individual gives to Regan's claims will likely vary according to what their position with regard to paedogeddon itself is. Some people will believe without a scrap of evidence, others will say "show me the money". It really is that simple.  Myself, I try to confine my speculation to the bounds of possibility and not place too much faith in unknowables. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> You're missing my point, which is that we can all speculate until the sun dies and the planet freezes, but we can't *know* what Regan had, we can only judge by what he claimed, and the degree of credence an individual gives to Regan's claims will likely vary according to what their position with regard to paedogeddon itself is. Some people will believe without a scrap of evidence, others will say "show me the money". It really is that simple. Myself, I try to confine my speculation to the bounds of possibility and not place too much faith in unknowables. Your mileage may vary.


ffs - The ONLY reason I raised Regan again at the point I did was specifically because he fitted the bill as being a likely candidate for being the Journalist showing photos of people he suspected to be abusers to some of the victims in the early 90s.

your further point on the reliabilty of the rest of his claims is irrelevant to the only reason I raised his name again.

Are we really incapable of actually focussing on a specific question without immediately expending that into the whole of everything else ever?

Let's just try to confine ourselves to that specific point for a brief period eh?

SO, do you think it unlikely that Regan actually interviewed some of these boys in the early 90s as he claims, if so why, and if he did, would you agree that he's a fairly likely candidate for being the journalist referred to as having shown some of the kids photos of suspected abusers in that period?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> ffs - The ONLY reason I raised Regan again at the point I did was specifically because he fitted the bill as being a likely candidate for being the Journalist showing photos of people he suspected to be abusers to some of the victims in the early 90s.
> 
> your further point on the reliabilty of the rest of his claims is irrelevant to the only reason I raised his name again.
> 
> ...


 
Practice what you preach, and I may pay heed.



> SO, do you think it unlikely that Regan actually interviewed some of these boys in the early 90s as he claims, if so why, and if he did, would you agree that he's a fairly likely candidate for being the journalist referred to as having shown some of the kids photos of suspected abusers in that period?


 
I'm sure Regan *did* interview them, and that he did so in order to establish whether any local, regional or national political figures were involved (given Scallywag's preference for material on politicians as opposed to merely "members of the Establishment"). As for whether Regan touted the photos at the victims, I think it's unlikely, purely because it would be very poor journalistic practice, while Regan was a pro. He'd know that showing pictures of potential abusers to victims would utterly queer any criminal investigation, in terms of giving any defence fair grounds for shrieking "suggestibility", and his _raison d'etre_ was pretty much to *nail* politicians, if he could.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> the only reason I've raised this now is because Elbows was trying to identify who the journalist might have been who was showing photos to the boys in the early 90s.


 
No I wasnt. Not sure if someone else was, all I remember about this from the last 24 hours is you repeatedly assuming it was Regan.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

fs take 6 hours.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm sure Regan *did* interview them, and that he did so in order to establish whether any local, regional or national political figures were involved (given Scallywag's preference for material on politicians as opposed to merely "members of the Establishment"). As for whether Regan touted the photos at the victims, I think it's unlikely, purely because it would be very poor journalistic practice, while Regan was a pro. He'd know that showing pictures of potential abusers to victims would utterly queer any criminal investigation, in terms of giving any defence fair grounds for shrieking "suggestibility", and his _raison d'etre_ was pretty much to *nail* politicians, if he could.


well maybe, but the accusation as I understand it is that there was a journalist who did this.

So if not regan, then which journalist who was investigating this back then was likely to have been less professional in their approach than him.

I'm getting a bit lost here tbh, on the one hand there's Bernie claiming that Regan was an unreliable drunk when he knew him, and on the other you seem to be suggesting that he's unlikely to be the journalist in question because 'was a pro'.

still, at least we're discussing the point I was making, so thanks for that at least.

I remain of the opinion that he's a likely candidate. Not that it's a particularly important aspect of the whole situation really.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2012)

> well maybe, but the accusation as I understand it is that there was a journalist who did this.


 
That's it?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> No I wasnt. Not sure if someone else was, all I remember about this from the last 24 hours is you repeatedly assuming it was Regan.





elbows said:


> OK so to be clear, there are four different photo-related aspects to the stories we have heard so far:
> 
> *1) Photo shown by journalist to victim(s).*
> 2) Faxed photo shown to police by victim(s).
> ...





free spirit said:


> If I can venture an idea without you invoking godwins law again, I was thinking that a likely candidate for a journalist showing multiple victims photos would be simon regan from scallywag. Given that he's on the record saying that he met with 12 of them and had got signed statements off 10 of them, which he says backed up his allegations, one of which related to Lord McAlpine.


 
ok, maybe it wasn't a question you directly posed, but it was a question implied by your post, and your post was the reason I raised the subject.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That's it?


well obviously there are a whole series of other accusations, but that was the point I was relating to when raising Regan as a candidate, as should be clear from my first post on the subject where that's what I specifically said.


----------



## cesare (Nov 11, 2012)

Always good to keep an eye on Ian Bone's blog, imo.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

Much as I dont want to defend the Daily Mail and their tone, I should point out that a chunk of whats in their article about Messham was known here a while ago, and the extra details they provide are not very surprising.

Anyway since some are interested in what journalist may have shown him photos (probably faxed ones) I should probably also mention this bit from the mail article:

​


> It was put to him in court that just days before he began making claims to reporters, he had approached police to complain he was being harassed by a journalist, who was trying to put words in his mouth.​​In a signed statement, he said: ‘At no time did [the officer] ever sexually abuse me,’ adding that a journalist ‘wanted me to say things that were not the truth’.​


​​
​


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well maybe, but the accusation as I understand it is that there was a journalist who did this.
> 
> So if not regan, then which journalist who was investigating this back then was likely to have been less professional in their approach than him.


 
Speculatively and on an informed hunch, if I were going to point a finger anywhere, I'd point at the journalists who worked the story for the _Telegraph_. Why? Purely on the basis that editors and journalists have served as a conduit for security service disinformation, and partook of the odd "dirty trick" with a regularity that could be described as "monotonous", whereas other journos seem to do so on a more _ad hoc_ basis (usually arm-twisting).



> I'm getting a bit lost here tbh, on the one hand there's Bernie claiming that Regan was an unreliable drunk when he knew him, and on the other you seem to be suggesting that he's unlikely to be the journalist in question because 'was a pro'.


 
I've known plenty of alcoholic journos who were still utterly professional. bThe two things aren't at all mutually-exclusive.



> still, at least we're discussing the point I was making, so thanks for that at least.
> 
> I remain of the opinion that he's a likely candidate. Not that it's a particularly important aspect of the whole situation really.


 
All pieces of information are important parts of the overarching puzzle. The trick is to not place too much faith in any piece, but to try and complete the puzzle.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

Wonder how many more will use this headline/defence before this scandal/expose is over?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-ex-BBC-producer-arrested-for-sex-abuse.html


----------



## teqniq (Nov 11, 2012)

I think this blog has been linked to either on this thread or one of the others. The post linked to here calls into question the motives of the journalist in the Mail concerning the article on Messham. It suggests, with links that he is a 'fixer'.

No litigious names or anything as far as I have looked.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

MadCatLady said:


> Wonder how many more will use this headline/defence before this scandal/expose is over?
> 
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-ex-BBC-producer-arrested-for-sex-abuse.html


 
As an aside, I wonder when the family decided to put that ' in the name. It still reads as 'Death'.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

cesare said:


> Always good to keep an eye on Ian Bone's blog, imo.


 


> In 1985 acting on behsalf of the Brixton police Commander Marnoch he [Rose] wrote a ludicrous piece in the Guardian saying the Brixton riot had been jointly organised by Class War and the NationalFront.


Fuckin lol.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> As an aside, I wonder when the family decided to put that ' in the name. It still reads as 'Death'.


Given his mother's fetishisation of Hitler, I'm surprised she didn't remove the apostrophe and suffix "head".


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Speculatively and on an informed hunch, if I were going to point a finger anywhere, I'd point at the journalists who worked the story for the _Telegraph_. Why? Purely on the basis that editors and journalists have served as a conduit for security service disinformation, and partook of the odd "dirty trick" with a regularity that could be described as "monotonous", whereas other journos seem to do so on a more _ad hoc_ basis (usually arm-twisting).


interesting theory.

what time period were they reporting this in?

I'd think this must have been around the time of the libel trial against the Independant, Scallywag etc at the start of the 90's, which is around when I understand that Scallywag first got involved. Were the Telegraph reporting this as far back as then in sufficient detail to actually have a reporter on the ground showing these photos around?



> All pieces of information are important parts of the overarching puzzle. The trick is to not place too much faith in any piece, but to try and complete the puzzle.


I agree, but you can't complete a puzzle by focussing constantly on the big picture, you have to chip away at it by focussing on individual pieces one piece at a time, then the big picture becomes clear and the remaining pieces start to fall into place more easily.

This is what I've been trying to do, but every time I start to focus on one specific part of the situation I get accused of all manner of stuff from posters who prefer to jump to conclusions and assume that every time I post about one aspect I must be making wild claims about it being the entire cause of the situation or something instead of actually reading what I've written where I clearly state that this is not what I'm doing.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

Oh well at least Mellors disgusting comments caused a backlash.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/11/david-mellor-steve-messham-weirdo


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> Oh well at least Mellors disgusting comments caused a backlash.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/11/david-mellor-steve-messham-weirdo


 
#mellor Been trending on Twitter most of the day along with widespread condemnation of the presenter for not challenging him untill aftr the twitter storm about Mellor's comments raged.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

*Shy Keenan* ‏@*ShyKeenan*
David Mellor! Your institutionalised Anti-Victim Prejudice is showing! Will be in touch about your 'weirdo' comment #*AVP*

*Dr Sara Payne MBE* ‏@*DrSaraPayneMBE*
@*ShyKeenan* Oh dear Mr Mellor you've just crossed the line, I'll be helping @*ShyKeenan* get in touch re; your #*AVP* 'weirdo' comment


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

Re author of DM article:



> David Rose's interesting career goes all the way back to 1985. http://www.searchlight.org.uk/o-hara/tricks.html … This is the man who smeared #*Messham* today


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 11, 2012)

Messham didn't need smearing by the Daily Mail.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> interesting theory.
> 
> what time period were they reporting this in?


 
From around the start of the 20th century-onward (hard to believe, I know). It's kind of a running joke with the rest of the print media that most political stories that cite "sources" but don't say "...close to" a key protagonist in the story have usually been laid off on the journo by a friendly spook.  _Private Eye_ too, throughout their history, have constantly taken the piss out of the _Telegraph_ for being such a willing, uncritical conduit.



> I'd think this must have been around the time of the libel trial against the Independant, Scallywag etc at the start of the 90's, which is around when I understand that Scallywag first got involved. Were the Telegraph reporting this as far back as then in sufficient detail to actually have a reporter on the ground showing these photos around?


 
They were as "interested" as any other paper, and they reported on separate abuse scandals from the '70s-onward, so it's entirely possible.  As I said, I only speculate in that direction due to the _Telegraph_'s well-known status as a filter for spook-created fictions (they were also the favoured dissemination point for propaganda by the likes of Brian Crozier during the Cold War because of their willingness to print stuff passed to them by the security services)



> I agree, but you can't complete a puzzle by focussing constantly on the big picture, you have to chip away at it by focussing on individual pieces one piece at a time, then the big picture becomes clear and the remaining pieces start to fall into place more easily.
> 
> This is what I've been trying to do, but every time I start to focus on one specific part of the situation I get accused of all manner of stuff from posters who prefer to jump to conclusions and assume that every time I post about one aspect I must be making wild claims about it being the entire cause of the situation or something instead of actually reading what I've written where I clearly state that this is not what I'm doing.


 
Possibly because you don't *appear* to be applying much scepticism (in the old-fashioned sense of the word) to those pieces you're  looking at.


----------



## tweeglitch (Nov 11, 2012)

Apologies if this is covered ground as i haven't read all of this thread and also for the length of this post but it does build to what seems to me at least a solid conclusion, well unless or until someone pulls it apart... asuming it's worth the attention.

The British security services knew. Anyone with access to Prime Ministers and royalty would have been vetted. A regular Christmas guest of Thatcher, a personal friend of royalty from Prince Charles to Mountbatten. He would have been vetted. And anyone who was broadcast live on the BBC was vetted. So given his crimes were an open secret to so many in the entertainment industry, anyone with the resources of mi5 whose job it would have been to investigate him would have known what he was.

So perhaps his personal sexual interests weren't considered a security issue and mi5 were only interested in rooting out commies? Well considering the people he mixed with, the blackmail potential from drawing such high powered people in to his activities would have been very marketable to other governments particularly during the cold war. So one way or another he most certainly would have been the business of mi5.

Then why wasn't anything done? Maybe because a large part of the British ruling elite are involved in the very same kind of thing he got up to with Jim in an ideal position to fix it for them - to supply the goods to satisfy their needs with his unusual access to children's homes and hospitals through out the land. And if he fell then he'd take these powerful clients of his down with him, hence the reason things are coming out now he's dead.

Ah but if it was simply the case that he got away with what he did for so long because he held too many powerful people to ransom then, well the likes of mi5 aren't above quietly bumping off anyone who's a problem in that way, anyone with a shred of decency shouldn't have been above bumping that one off! Or at least it would be an easily dealt with threat: one man (attempting to blackmail the state) versus the UK security apparatus. So there must have been a different kind of relationship between Savile and mi5 if he was allowed to get away with what he did for so long right under their own noses, royalty's noses and various prime ministers' noses through the ages.

So am I jumping to conclusions and putting 2 and 2 together here to make 5? If there's a fault in my reasoning please point it out but the only explanation i can think of for him to not have been considered a security threat and so dealt with is that Savile and what he did was part of the security apparatus.

And what might his work on behalf of the realm involve? Well he would have been in an ideal position to farm out kids on an industrial scale from the warehouses (children’s' homes and hospitals) he had the run of. Farmed out to those with power and wealth for their own gratification. Or to be used as blackmail fodder by the state to compromise then control politicians in the UK and diplomats and dignitaries from abroad.

And/Or. And this seems more likely given he's been such an integral part of the BBC for so long and given mi5 were so interested in the backgrounds of so many BBC employees, his job was to compromise BBC staff by honey trapping them with children so the BBC could be kept firmly under the thumb.

He was rich but not fabulously so i wonder what his reward was? The keys to hospitals and kids homes up and down the land with the freedom to fuck what/who/when he wanted for five or so decades perhaps? That might answer the question so many have been asking: 'how did he get away with so much for so long?'

Perhaps the subject of the conversations he would have had with Thatcher every Christmas visit to 10 Downing St 11 years on the trot was what politically useful dirt he had on who. Perhaps this is what Charles was referring to in the note he sent with Savile's birthday present of a pair of golden cuff links: "Nobody will ever know what you have done for this country. This is to go some way in thanking you for that". Maybe it's not too hard to work out what that was. The was name was Savile, James Savile.

So relating this to the thread title can we take it as read that there is a high level long term UK paedophile network and that mi5 are an integral part of it? Or at least the mi5 involvement is an investigative thread worth following? It's certainly something the mainstream media aren't interested in; bang in 'savile' and 'mi5' into google's news search and you don't get much in return. The mainstream media are currently interested in BBC bashing, questioning victims' credibility and whining about witch hunts when quite clearly there are witches who need to be hunted out.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 11, 2012)

Well ok then but the Jimmy Saville thread is thataway>>>


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/11/david-mellor-steve-messham-weirdo

Thank goodness someone is pointing out that this is about children being abused and disbelieved and not about the reputation or management of the BBC. Let us not forget that vulnerable children are being abused right now in 2012, so what message is Mellor's comment sending to them? Irresponsible, thoughtless and downright heartless. Let's hope he is pressured to retract/apologise for his (careless at best, malicious & harmful at worst) slur of Messham. 
Jeeeeezus do these people not realise or care about the implications of their words?


----------



## ayatollah (Nov 11, 2012)

MadCatLady said:


> The masons, the wrong Lord, the Schofield list, the embarrassment of Newsnight - so many strands taking the focus away from the main issue that dozens, maybe hundreds of children have been abused over decades and that high profile people have been involved. It's incredible that the Mail is giving two pages to the trashing of Messham, with numerous other papers giving their column inches to criticising Newsnight, the BBC etc
> At the risk of sounding like a frustrated teenaged I want to scream HELLO WORLD has everyone forgotten that jimmy savile is accused of abusing dozens of young people and that he ws the close friend and confidante of govt, royalty and so many senior figures. What kind of alternate universe are we living in when an abuse victim whose life has been scarred from such an early age is being asked to make public apologies and being trashed publicly for the challenging events in his broken life???
> You guys on this blog have been making soooooo many excellent connections and focusing not the real facts, please keep up the good work and use your knowledge, experience and connections to make sure this doesn't go away.


 
I think you've made a typo on the third to the last line , the actual word intended presumeably being "on" rather than "not", as in "focussing ON the real facts" .If so.. I agree.

The eternal willingness/predeliction of local and national press to simply make up entirely brass-necked bogus "evidence"  to fit the "news" into the pro establishment propaganda "narrative " , will be familiar to any Leftie or active trades unionist. Nothing to do with the abuse scandal, but I always chuckle at that news treatment of a lobby outside of Transport House during the 1975 ( ? thereabouts) Firefighters Strike. TUC bigwigs (and  some snydie national status  BBC reporter-- John Sissons ?) were being barracked for their usual treachery by a horde of uniformed Firemen. The BBC and press next day claimed it was all done by  " outside extremists simply  dressed up in Firemen's uniforms" !  Or the 1979 (thereabouts) anti NF riot in Leicester in which 80 anti fascists were arrested, but the fascists were bricked to fuck, and the anti fascists engaged in quite surprisingly successful hand to hand fisticuffs with the police at times. All just so surprising and worrying to the local Leicester News rag that it authoritatively asserted that the entire event had been organised in military fashion by "battle hardened especially imported French street fighters ! "  (See the real story in "No Retreat").

The entire capitalist press will be in full attack dog mode from now on to, muddy the water, sow confusion, and of course crucify the credibility of the witnesses/victims.  This story is too big, and exposes the rottenness of the entire ruling class and their state agents too vividly, for it to be allowed to  run on as it has been doing. It'll be interesting to see how far they'll go to get it back "under control" ,until Joe Public gets bored and moves on to another issue  more amenable to the  ruling class agendas.


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

teqniq said:


> Well ok then but the Jimmy Saville thread is thataway>>>


I posted about a Saville development on this thread too earlier.  That was a deliberate decision - there's a likelihood that all these things/people are interconnected.  Not in some 'vast conspiracy' way, just that the worlds of rich and powerful individuals cross professional boundaries.  Especially if those people have a shared interest in abusing boys from care homes.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

ayatollah said:


> I think you've made a typo on the third to the last line , the actual word intended presumeably being "on" rather than "not", as in "focussing ON the real facts" .If so.. I agree.
> 
> The eternal willingness/predeliction of local and national press to simply make up entirely brass-necked bogus "evidence"  to fit the "news" into the pro establishment propaganda "narrative " , will be familiar to any Leftie or active trades unionist. Nothing to do with the abuse scandal, but I always chuckle at that news treatment of a lobby outside of Transport House during the 1975 ( ? thereabouts) Firefighters Strike. TUC bigwigs (and  some snydie national status  BBC reporter-- John Sissons ?) were being barracked for their usual treachery by a horde of uniformed Firemen. The BBC and press next day claimed it was all done by  " outside extremists simply  dressed up in Firemen's uniforms" !  Or the 1979 (thereabouts) anti NF riot in Leicester in which 80 anti fascists were arrested, but the fascists were bricked to fuck, and the anti fascists engaged in quite surprisingly successful hand to hand fisticuffs with the police at times. All just so surprising and worrying to the local Leicester News rag that it authoritatively asserted that the entire event had been organised in military fashion by "battle hardened especially imported French street fighters ! "  (See the real story in "No Retreat").
> 
> The entire capitalist press will be in full attack dog mode from now on to, muddy the water, sow confusion, and of course crucify the credibility of the witnesses/victims.  This story is too big, and exposes the rottenness of the entire ruling class and their state agents too vividly, for it to be allowed to  run on as it has been doing. It'll be interesting to see how far they'll go to get it back "under control" ,until Joe Public gets bored and moves on to another issue  more amenable to the  ruling class agendas.



Yep, was typo/over enthusiastic auto spell thing, thanks for spotting.


----------



## kenny g (Nov 11, 2012)

is an amusing episode of Jim'll fix it where Cliff Richard hides with a girl in a telephone engineers tent whilst she had gone out shopping. Shows the real innocence of the age.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> From around the start of the 20th century-onward (hard to believe, I know). It's kind of a running joke with the rest of the print media that most political stories that cite "sources" but don't say "...close to" a key protagonist in the story have usually been laid off on the journo by a friendly spook. _Private Eye_ too, throughout their history, have constantly taken the piss out of the _Telegraph_ for being such a willing, uncritical conduit.


I meant what period did they start reporting the welsh abuse cases in, as in when would their reporter have potentially been in the area to show the kids these photos.

Unfortunately google doesn't go that far back, so I don't really know how to check, though they weren't parties of the original libel trial, which makes me think they're less likely candidates than someone who was.

I'm also struggling a bit tbh with trying to work out why the spooks would have wanted to put Lord McAlipe's name in the frame even if they were involved. It seems a bit of an odd thing for them to do at that stage in proceedings.

you could be right, but I'd find it hard to see this as the more likely scenario tbh.



> Possibly because you don't *appear* to be applying much scepticism (in the old-fashioned sense of the word) to those pieces you're looking at.


if you ignore all the bits where I make clear my scepticism about some of these sources, and explain the fact that it's virtually impossible to really verify them one way or another, but that I've tried to verify the bits that can be checked, then I'd entirely agree with your point. Perhaps I need to put the same disclaimer on every post, but from now on please take it as read that if I've made that sort of disclaimer about a source once, then it applies from that point onwards until I say otherwise.


> *Assuming the article credited to regan actually was written by regan, which is a bit hard to check given he's no longer with us. I'm making no claims for the veracity of his statements, just putting him out there as a likely candidate for being the journalist in question given his claims about having interviewed 12 of the victims and them having supported his claims, one of which was about McAlpine.


AFAIK I'm the only one who was sceptical enough about that PEBPR website that article is hosted on to bother trawling through internet records to determine that while the articles posted are mostly dated to a decade or more ago, the website itself almost certainly only went live towards the back end of September just days before the Jimmy Savile story broke.

It seems I'm the only one who thinks that's a wee bit suspicious seeing as nobody commented when I mentioned it.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

Looks like Mellor & the Mail's spiteful attack on Messham is getting panned across the MSM ad well as twitter. First he Guardian, now the Independent

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-victims-are--and-listen-to-them-8304858.html


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> AFAIK I'm the only one who was sceptical enough about that PEBPR website that article is hosted on to bother trawling through internet records to determine that while the articles posted are mostly dated to a decade or more ago, the website itself almost certainly only went live towards the back end of September just days before the Jimmy Savile story broke.
> 
> It seems I'm the only one who thinks that's a wee bit suspicious seeing as nobody commented when I mentioned it.


 
What exactly did you base that on?

Because if you look at individual articles on that site you will see that dates form part of the urls, eg /2010/05/whatever

Or taking a different approach, the blog archive sidebar seems to have the posts listed under July 2009.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

"Instead copies of the report were ordered to be destroyed because the council that commissioned it feared it might be sued, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. Only a handful remain, including one obtained by this newspaper" 

Has anyone heard anything else since this article? What the IoS intends to do with its copy of the supposedly all pulped reports? 
And whether  it can be used to corroborate victims claims? 
Strange the way no one has gone after the insurance company that demanded the report be pulped to find out how true that claim is.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 11, 2012)

teqniq said:


> Well ok then but the Jimmy Saville thread is thataway>>>


 
Well ok then but Saville was obviously high level in some sense but any connection to Wales, Wrexham or Waterhouse or that he was part of a singular network? Connected true too to other abusers and enablers but I don't think much of the idea that he was MI5 cleared in noncery in order to compromise BBC employees...but then I don't know anything because I'm an idiot.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 11, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Well ok then but Saville was obviously high level in some sense but any connection to Wales, Wrexham or Waterhouse or that he was part of a singular network? Connected true too to other abusers and enablers but I don't think much of the idea that he was MI5 cleared in noncery in order to compromise BBC employees...but then I don't know anything because I'm an idiot.


Lol I was being a tad facetious with that post, please ignore it.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 11, 2012)

Apols if we've had this, seems important and interesting.

It's a hit piece on the Blackshirt hitpiece on Messam's false accusations based on Police misinformation.

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/...s-just-who-is-daily-mail-reporter-david-rose/


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

@taffboy


> David Rose's interesting career goes all the way back to 1985. http://www.searchlight.org.uk/o-hara/tricks.html … This is the man who smeared #*Messham* today


----------



## audiotech (Nov 11, 2012)

ayatollah said:


> Or the 1979 (thereabouts) anti NF riot in Leicester in which 80 anti fascists were arrested, but the fascists were bricked to fuck, and the anti fascists engaged in quite surprisingly successful hand to hand fisticuffs with the police at times. All just so surprising and worrying to the local Leicester News rag that it authoritatively asserted that the entire event had been organised in military fashion by "battle hardened especially imported French street fighters ! "


 
They would have been extremely useful in assisting us in repelling an attack on our coach at an M1 service station, by a coachload of NF heavies, who were clearly severely pissed-off by the days events, but sadly nope. They must have been busy elsewhere. In France perhaps?


----------



## kenny g (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> [_David Rose's interesting career goes all the way back to 1985. __http://www.searchlight.org.uk/o-hara/tricks.html …__ This is the man who smeared __#*Messham*__ today [_/quote]


 
Good digging- I thought I recognised the name but couldn't find anything online to back my suspicions.

ETA Oh well - noticed it is on ian bone's blog


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> What exactly did you base that on?
> 
> Because if you look at individual articles on that site you will see that dates form part of the urls, eg /2010/05/whatever
> 
> Or taking a different approach, the blog archive sidebar seems to have the posts listed under July 2009.


no record in the way back when record, no links to the blog until september 2012 listed in Alexa, no google cache at the time I checked, though there is now.

It's a simple thing to fake the entry dates on a blog, virtually impossible to fake the dates of links in outside databases such as Alexa, and a site like that that was up since July 2009 would be incredibly unlikely to not have generated any links to it until september 2012 even from the conspiraloon sites IMO.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 11, 2012)

http://ricosorda.blogspot.co.uk/


----------



## 1%er (Nov 11, 2012)

kenny g said:


> is an amusing episode of Jim'll fix it where *Cliff Richard* hides with a girl in a telephone engineers tent whilst she had gone out shopping. Shows the real innocence of the age.


Careful now, that's another British institution you're talking about


----------



## Corax (Nov 11, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Good digging- I thought I recognised the name but couldn't find anything online to back my suspicions.


You may recognise the name for another reason too.  It was one of Hari's pseudonyms IIRC.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Re author of DM article:


 


> _David Rose's interesting career goes all the way back to 1985. http://www.searchlight.org.uk/o-hara/tricks.html … This is the man who smeared #Messham today_


 
Is that some fascist run site you've linked to? Try the home page and you'll see what I mean.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 11, 2012)

Good article here - *Media hysteria creates a new set of victims*
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/11/media-hysteria-child-abuse-savile



> Confronted with evidence of children being violated, even reputable newspapers, broadcasters and journalists often lose all sense of judgment and proportion. Lord McAlpine is not alone in being smeared over the abuse that undoubtedly took place in north Wales children's homes. In the early 1990s several publications (including the Independent on Sunday, where I held a senior position) named a senior retired police officer who later sued successfully for libel. The guilty media organisations are often precisely those who campaign assiduously against miscarriages of justice. Yet there is evidence that, in some cases, innocent people have received long prison sentences for child abuse.
> 
> Child abuse is a reality and, in the past, the full extent of it was often swept under the carpet. The guilty still at liberty far outnumber the innocent behind bars. In nearly all the instances I list above, children were abused, sometimes in large numbers. They suffered terrible trauma, and the effects were often lifelong. To point out that journalists – along with politicians and professionals such as social workers – strayed into wild fantasies is not to defend or trivialise abuse. Nor does questioning some convictions denote "support" for paedophilia, any more than questioning the Birmingham Six convictions denoted "support" for IRA bombers.


 
At last someone addressing the fact that the media led hysteria may lead to people being wrongly convicted. How many more like Messham are there out there making false allegations, whether maliciously or mistakenly, not against Lords or top policemen but ordinary care workers or teachers. People whose story won't merit a Newsnight investigation or yards of print media to see if the claims might be unsafe.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmhaff/836/2051404.htm


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

audiotech said:


> Is that some fascist run site you've linked to? Try the home page and you'll see what I mean.


 
Not purposely no! Was just adding a tweet that I saw today about the DM article author. :/


----------



## kenny g (Nov 11, 2012)

audiotech said:


> Is that some fascist run site you've linked to? Try the home page and you'll see what I mean.


 
http://searchlight.nfshost.com/o-hara/ is not fascist - it is a U75 poster, Mr Larry O'hara's site.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 11, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Not purposely no! Was just adding a tweet that I saw today about the DM article author. :/


 
Well the tweet included a link to some bizarre spoof site at least.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 11, 2012)

kenny g said:


> http://searchlight.nfshost.com/o-hara/ is not fascist - it is a U75 poster, Mr Larry O'hara's site.


 
Are you sure about that?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

'


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> no record in the way back when record, no links to the blog until september 2012 listed in Alexa, no google cache at the time I checked, though there is now.
> 
> It's a simple thing to fake the entry dates on a blog, virtually impossible to fake the dates of links in outside databases such as Alexa, and a site like that that was up since July 2009 would be incredibly unlikely to not have generated any links to it until september 2012 even from the conspiraloon sites IMO.


 
I think you overestimate how likely unknown sites are to be picked up by other sites, bloggers, crap stats websites etc. Alexa doesnt start to log stuff until the site has a certain amount of attention.

As for faking dates, depends on the system. Its a blogspot site, so the user doesnt have complete freedom like they would if it was, for example,a  self-hosted wordpress site.

I signed up to blogspot to see how it handles dates. You can change the dates for posts, but this only seems to be reflected in certain ways. From my research so far I think its quite likely that the dates were changed to 2009 by the blogger. However the urls still reflect the actual date the stuff was posted. So If I were forced to state a date that the posts were made, it would be May 2010.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

MadCatLady said:


> "Instead copies of the report were ordered to be destroyed because the council that commissioned it feared it might be sued, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. Only a handful remain, including one obtained by this newspaper"
> 
> Has anyone heard anything else since this article? What the IoS intends to do with its copy of the supposedly all pulped reports?
> And whether it can be used to corroborate victims claims?
> Strange the way no one has gone after the insurance company that demanded the report be pulped to find out how true that claim is.


 
Presumably insurance companies looking after shareholder value are immune from culpability for covering up child rape the exposure of which was considered bad for business, as this forms part of the normal workings of capitalism.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

kenny g said:


> Good digging- I thought I recognised the name but couldn't find anything online to back my suspicions.
> 
> ETA Oh well - noticed it is on ian bone's blog


 
It is sort of interesting that this guy is a disinformation specialist and smear artist aligned to the _secret state_, rather than the regular Tory party.

I am resisting the temptation to mention Kincora ... whoops ... oh well.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> I signed up to blogspot to see how it handles dates. You can change the dates for posts, but this only seems to be reflected in certain ways. From my research so far I think its quite likely that the dates were changed to 2009 by the blogger. However the urls still reflect the actual date the stuff was posted. So If I were forced to state a date that the posts were made, it would be May 2010.


as it happens, I have a defunct blogspot account I've barely used.

I just posted this post up now, but as you can see from the URL, it's a piece of piss to spoof it so that it looks like you made the posts on a different date to the one you actually made them on.

http://leeds-solar.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/blog-post.html

my point stands, and I do know how this works in terms of Alexa, google, links etc.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

At last someone addressing the fact that the media lead hysteria may led to people being wrongly convicted. How many more like Messham are there out there, making false allegations wheter maliciously or mistakenly, not against Lords or top policemen but ordinary care workers or teachers. People whose story won't merit a Newsnight investigation or yards of print media to see if the claims might be unsafe. 

"how many more like Messham are out there, making false allegations" DJ Squelch your postings are unnerving  me. First the one about Messham not needing the Mail to slur him and now this.  Rather than entering into the topics of this blog about evidence of high level involvement in child abuse you seem to be implying that victims are making it up. Care to elaborate on your thoughts?


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 11, 2012)

The first two thirds of my post above are quoting DJ squelch, the rest is my comment. Haven't quite got the hang of relying/ posting yet....


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 11, 2012)

Click on 'reply' in the post you want to quote MCL, or click " and c&p the part you want to quote.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 11, 2012)

We've seen hysterical witch hunts against alleged child molesters before though right? All the "satanic panic" stuff. US fundies running ideologically loaded courses for our police and social services, unleashing a witch hunt that wrongfully condemned hundreds of ordinary families to years of hell, based on a bunch of fundie nonsense. A certain amount of scepticism is therefore healthy in regard to these allegations.

However Saville was able to do what he did because he was privileged as a result of his 'star' status and his connections. He wasn't some poor sod on a council estate in Oldham being victimised by credulous fundies in social services. He was one of what appear to be a number of highly privileged individuals doing this stuff unchallenged for years.

This is about whether the very privileges that the Tories stand for are being used to facilitate child rape and whether the ruling class is now closing ranks and employing disinformation and intimidation, thereby keeping the rapists safe from prosecution.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

free spirit said:


> as it happens, I have a defunct blogspot account I've barely used.
> 
> I just posted this post up now, but as you can see from the URL, it's a piece of piss to spoof it so that it looks like you made the posts on a different date to the one you actually made them on.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for checking. There was an error in my methodology, although I have learnt a few things that may be of interest along the way. But since I already made one mistake, I will be doing some extra checking before I post more about this.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 11, 2012)

you might be able to fuck around with the urls as well, you can in wordpress.  and you're right, lots of smaller sites wouldnt fall under alexa's raider, or even necessarily be indexed by google although thats not likely for a blogspot site thats been up any length of time


----------



## free spirit (Nov 11, 2012)

elbows said:


> Thanks for checking. There was an error in my methodology, although I have learnt a few things that may be of interest along the way. But since I already made one mistake, I will be doing some extra checking before I post more about this.


no worries, I'm not 100% certain about it, but it'd be extremely unusual for a site like that to have been up for 3 years and have apparently left no digital footprint at all anywhere until the end of September 2012.

I've just run another check on backlinks via this site, and I think I've checked all the links listed and they all come up from October 2012 onwards. I might possibly believe that this was just because nobody was interested until after Savile, but Alexa lists one link from a few days before the ITV programme was broadcast. If anyone does find an older link then that would obviously blow this idea out of the water, but I can't seem to find one and I've tried quite hard.

Personally I think it's most likely to have been uploaded by someone linked in some way with the programme either on the production side, or the witness end, or who just knew one way or another that the programme was going to air and wanted to get those articles back up on the web where they could be found, but maybe without drawing attention to themselves.

There are also others who specialise in this sort of stuff who generally have less altruistic motives for their actions.

I don't think we'll be able to find out either way what the motives were for uploading the site and pretending it was done 3 years earlier than it was, but I just think it's worth drawing some attention to this and pointing out that all might not be quite what it seems with that site... because I actually am fairly sceptical and careful about this stuff, contrary to what some seem to think.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 11, 2012)

sorry have had a proper look now.  I don't know if you could fake that url structure but it suggests the post dates have been changed to 2009 rather than when they were posted in 2010 - this is a probably a fuck up -  but its very unlikely someone would change the post dates and the urls to a different date.  More likely they changed the post dates and didnt notice the urls.  there's loads of reasons the site may not have appeared on google etc before then, it could have been set to private/members only prior to being made public in september.

it doesnt strike me as a credible source, two of the links are to conspiraloon sites


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2012)

OK I can blow it out of the water now. If you search for the same site but ending in .com instead of .co.uk, you can find comments on dodgy forums including prison planet and various drooling blogs. The couple I've found are from May 2010, which is the same time period as the blog urls indicate. It would not surprise me if these posts are by the blogger touting their own site, and that may explain why after making the posts to their own blog they edited the posts to change the dates to 2009. By making the blog appear older than it was, it made it less likely to admins of other sites that this was a fresh blog and that the forum etc posts linking to the site were self-promoting ones. Shame they didnt know that permalinks on blogspot can be edited, if they had known that, or had set the 2009 date before making the posts, then they could have hidden the 2010 dates more effectively.


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2012)

If anyone else is crazy enough to be interested in this particular side-track, just do a google search for "He's dangerous and could still be harming children." and you'll find the self-promoter at work in May 2010 on a couple of sites.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 12, 2012)

blogspot appears to have added a new thingy which automatically adds international domains to each site - thats probably why the .co.uk site didnt appear till this year

why hasnt someone scanned in all the original scallywag articles somewhere  internet can be fucking slack sometimes


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 12, 2012)

Internet archive is a good place to check a site's history (apologies if that's what you were doing).

http://archive.org/web/web.php


----------



## where to (Nov 12, 2012)

Another group of investigative journalists, Exaro, is suggesting on Twitter that they are working on a story on two Tory ex ministers. Not n wales, and not clear if alleging they are abusers or otherwise.

Mark Watts is name of journo, along with David Hencke (cash for questions). The latter's previous work may give some clue as to where their story is going.

Nick Davies is a supportive fan of Mark Watts, and his book on journalism, so I'm tempted to speculate that he could be collaborating with them.  Exaro seem proper and got the student loans company tax arrangements story recently.

Incidentally, I get impression Davies and Leigh not fans of some figures at BIJ. Maybe why they didn't get involved in the BIJ project in the end, despite being early supporters. Suspect Leigh will have enjoyed putting boot in last week.  Crick no fan either I suspect.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 12, 2012)

Seems the blog went live in sep 2009.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 12, 2012)

elbows said:


> OK I can blow it out of the water now. If you search for the same site but ending in .com instead of .co.uk, you can find comments on dodgy forums including prison planet and various drooling blogs. The couple I've found are from May 2010, which is the same time period as the blog urls indicate. It would not surprise me if these posts are by the blogger touting their own site, and that may explain why after making the posts to their own blog they edited the posts to change the dates to 2009. By making the blog appear older than it was, it made it less likely to admins of other sites that this was a fresh blog and that the forum etc posts linking to the site were self-promoting ones. Shame they didnt know that permalinks on blogspot can be edited, if they had known that, or had set the 2009 date before making the posts, then they could have hidden the 2010 dates more effectively.


interesting.

They still seem to have opened the .co.uk site in september this year though, put a redirect to it from the .com site, dumped the old content and made it look old. And done it a few days / weeks before the Savile thing blew up.

So my point about treating it with caution's still valid as all still isn't quite what it seems with it, although it does look more like it's going to be someone in some way involved in or aware of the investigation that just decided it to clean up their site in advance of the media firestorm that was coming rather than anything more sinister.


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2012)

As per smokedout's post, the .com .co.uk thing is blogspots doing.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 12, 2012)

elbows said:


> As per smokedout's post, the .com .co.uk thing is blogspots doing.


ah right, yes that'd explain it. As you were then

appologies for the diversion, but it was an anomaly that stuck out for me and seemed worth checking out.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 12, 2012)

Where IS Nick Davies? I hope he is about to unleash something awesome because he, and Eileen Fairweather and Meirion Jones are about the only people who seem to have a proper grip on this thing.


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> Where IS Nick Davies? I hope he is about to unleash something awesome because he, and Eileen Fairweather and Meirion Jones are about the only people who seem to have a proper grip on this thing.


 
He did tweet earlier for the first time in a while.

*Nick Davies* ‏@*Bynickdavies*
Mail on Sunday say I’m with Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Untrue. They attack BBC for not checking but don't check themselves.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 12, 2012)

Oh good. <awaits killer splash whilst drumming fingers>

I hear Overton may have to jump.

A shame IMO.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 12, 2012)

I've been having a read through nick davies back catalogue and realising how many child abuse in care scandals there are that have been part of attempted cover ups by the councils involved, or just suffered due to official indifference and beurocratic incompetence with the whistle blowers almost always ending up sacked for their trouble.



> In North Wales, it was Alison Taylor, the manager of a children’s home, who spent five years banging on the door of her employers at Gwynedd Council, the police, the Welsh Office, the Department of Health, and the Social Services Inspectorate. All turned her away. Undaunted, she compiled a dossier of 75 separate allegations, won the backing of two local councillors and finally secured the conviction of four men for an orgy of abuse. As a result, the Government finally ordered the vast public inquiry which has now heard nearly 300 former residents of homes make detailed complaints of physical and sexual assault against148 adults. *By that time, however, Alison Taylor had been suspended and sacked*.





> In South Wales, several years later, it was *Karen McKaye who was thrown out of her job after demanding that children’s complaints be investigated*. Her refusal to be silenced finally provoked a major police inquiry into events at the Taff Vale children’s home in Cardiff. Now, 32 other homes in the area are also being investigated. Three men are awaiting trial over alleged incidents at Taff Vale. In relation to the other homes, in April, Robert Starr was jailed for 15 years for indecent assaults, and three others have been arrested.





> In Warrington, Elaine Bowerman spent a decade trying to persuade her union, Nalgo; her employers, Lancashire County Council; and the police to do something about the indecent assaults and violence which she said were being inflicted on children with learning difficulties at Massey Hall School where she worked. She complained, for example, of the occasion when she had seen brown fluff blowing across the lawn and discovered that it was a boy’s hair which had just been pulled from his head by a senior member of staff. Eventually, she went to the parents of some of the children to warn them – *and was sacked for gross misconduct.*
> 
> *By March 1996, Elaine Bowerman had apparently lost everything – the struggle to expose the truth as well as her job*. Then two boys from the school approached her at home. She put them in touch with police who re-opened their inquiry. In June 1997, they charged Robert Boyle, aged 50, with indecent assault on pupils at the school between 1982 and 1995. He was said to have handled boys’ genitals in the showers, although he claimed he was simply examining them for medical reasons. In April, he was acquitted by a jury at Warrington Crown Court.





> Having reached this point of despair, Smart had no moral alternative but to fight on. He took his long list of possible victims and abusers to the chief executive. He took, too, a short list of named individuals whose continued interference in council business, he argued, would mean that children in the city’s care would never be free of abuse – not because they themselves were child abusers but simply because they were playing politics with the welfare of the children.
> 
> And he issued an ultimatum: the council must re-investigate his long list of worrying incidents in the homes; they must expand his trawl through children’s files to ensure that they knew about all of these incidents; they must tackle the alleged abusers to ensure that none who were guilty continued to work with children; they must help the victims with therapy and counselling; they must set up proper inspections for the homes from now on. Smart wrote to the chief executive and offered him him a choice: either he supported Smart in his war against the council, or Smart would resign. A few days passed. *Then Smart got his answer: the chief executive accepted his resignation*.





> Colin Smart, of course, knows the whole story. However, he is not allowed to tell it, because shortly after he retired, his former employers at Sunderland City Council took him to the High Court where, under threat of losing his pension and paying out a fortune in damages, he signed an undertaking never to speak publicly about what he knew.


http://www.nickdavies.net/1998/04/01/silencing-a-scandal-the-story-of-colin-smart/


----------



## free spirit (Nov 12, 2012)

> On October 7 1994, Avon’s Child Protection Committee held a special meeting to discuss what they themselves described as “a potential paedophile ring” at 49 Churchill Road. Three social workers and a police inspector reviewed all the clues and agreed to check all their records and to interview the children they believed to be involved; the social workers sent a minute of the meeting to their area manager; the police inspector said he would talk to his superintendent and to the Crown Prosecution Service; the wheels all started to turn… and essentially nothing happened. The door stayed closed. Two years later, two more boys made allegations about the house. Again, the door stayed closed. The rape and seduction and all the rest of it continued unabated as it had done for years before.
> <snip>
> By the time the trials were over, John Gay and Lee Tucker had been arrested, and the Panorama team were ready to gather more evidence on them and to get to grips with the long queue of up to 60 other suspects. With the triumphant success of the the trials behind them, they hoped to be given a clear run. But the truth was that their time was running out. Avon and Somerset police had by now ploughed huge resources into the inquiry, on a scale that was unmatched by other forces and, crucially, that was unsupported by the Home Office. The Bristol detectives could pursue all the loose ends effectively only by setting up a full time paedophilia unit. *But the pressure from Whitehall was to focus resources on the 37 performance indicators. Senior officers regretfully told Rob Jones’ team that they must look for ‘an exit strategy’. In the meantime, the team was cut back. Six of their twelve officers were taken*. They were already short of admin staff. Now they lost another and had to use a constable, who happened to be able to type, to input information into the computer.
> <snip>
> ...


http://www.nickdavies.net/2000/10/0...ly-caught-up-with-a-network-of-child-abusers/

This all starts to give a bit of a different picture to things.

less conspiracy led, and more down to abject incompetence, extreme under allocation of resources, wanting to avoid scandal at all costs, and avoidance of compensation payouts.

If this really was the culture operating in child protection across such a wide area then it's maybe not that surprising that Savile and others felt so able to be brazen about what he was up to, as he knew the chances of anyone doing anything about it would be slim to none existent.

This doesn't prove there isn't anything else going on, but it seems to show that a significant proportion of the blame for all this should be laid directly at the doors of the politicians both local and national who starved the child protection teams of resources and preferred to sweep it all under the carpet and make a token effort at child protection rather than going after the abusers.

A common theme running through these stories is that nothing actually happens to the abusers until their early victims are old enough to force action against them one way or another.

I know things are supposed to have got better in this respect in the last few years, but does anyone know what the evidence of this is?





I suspect this may be the angle nick davies will be working on with the guardian.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 12, 2012)

there is also quite a lot that's come out on this thread and elsewhere that isn't just explained by incompetance, and if there were more paedophiles in positions of power than have already come out (which seems likely, as I doubt we've even scratched the surface yet), then they could also potentially be in a position to actually ensure that child protection services were starved of funds, and blocking effective measures such as effective inter agency working groups etc. as well as putting pressure on to prevent whistle blowers from coming forward in their organisations.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 12, 2012)

The Mail laying into Tom Watson today
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...se-rumours-fuelled-zealot-loathes-Tories.html


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 12, 2012)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> http://ricosorda.blogspot.co.uk/


Good blog that.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 12, 2012)

Overton has resigned.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 12, 2012)

Think Angus Stickler is about to go too, which pretty much means the outfit is busted.
Its sad because investigative journalism is needed now more than ever and is under more pressure than ever because ad revenues decline and cost cutting, production costs and bloated management costs and salaries means fewer and fewer resources put into it.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Nov 12, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> The Mail laying into Tom Watson today
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...se-rumours-fuelled-zealot-loathes-Tories.html


 
Rubbish article in terms of writing and argument construction, however the essential argument that Watson over-stepped the mark may be right and this could be the start of a backlash against him, lots of people journos, Tories, and Labour people don't like him and might smell blood in the water.

At the very least if he has any sense he needs to keep his head down and his mouth shut for a few months


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 12, 2012)

1%er said:


> Careful now, that's another British institution you're talking about


British Telecom?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 12, 2012)

audiotech said:


> Are you sure about that?


Larry's being libelled!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 12, 2012)

Another blog- voiceforchildren


----------



## teqniq (Nov 12, 2012)

Max Keiser interviews Leah McGrath Goodman on Jersey


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 12, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I meant what period did they start reporting the welsh abuse cases in, as in when would their reporter have potentially been in the area to show the kids these photos.


Must have been around '90-'91ish, as a mate doing background on the abuse story for the _Express_ passed away in September '91 (natural causes - mashed liver), and every daily and sunday had journos on the hunt for exclusive info.



> Unfortunately google doesn't go that far back, so I don't really know how to check, though they weren't parties of the original libel trial, which makes me think they're less likely candidates than someone who was.


 
Only current way to check is the newspaper's own archives, which for most papers is a pay service.



> I'm also struggling a bit tbh with trying to work out why the spooks would have wanted to put Lord McAlipe's name in the frame even if they were involved. It seems a bit of an odd thing for them to do at that stage in proceedings.


 
Perhaps because doing so would almost certainly lead to the story being discredited. If (and it's not a great stretch) the spooks knew that *a* member of the McAlpine family was fucking children, then labelling paedo McAlpine as Lord McAlpine to impressionable kids plants a seed that can later grow to discredit any and all claims by the victims.



> you could be right, but I'd find it hard to see this as the more likely scenario tbh.


 
I don't think it's any more or less likely that anything yet proposed. All it is, is a possibility given the _Telegraph_'s historic function as a conduit for disinformation.



> if you ignore all the bits where I make clear my scepticism about some of these sources, and explain the fact that it's virtually impossible to really verify them one way or another, but that I've tried to verify the bits that can be checked, then I'd entirely agree with your point. Perhaps I need to put the same disclaimer on every post, but from now on please take it as read that if I've made that sort of disclaimer about a source once, then it applies from that point onwards until I say otherwise.
> 
> AFAIK I'm the only one who was sceptical enough about that PEBPR website that article is hosted on to bother trawling through internet records to determine that while the articles posted are mostly dated to a decade or more ago, the website itself almost certainly only went live towards the back end of September just days before the Jimmy Savile story broke.
> 
> It seems I'm the only one who thinks that's a wee bit suspicious seeing as nobody commented when I mentioned it.


 
Perhaps some of us didn't think it was *worth* commenting on, given how many new sites full of CT stuff have sprung up in the wake of Savile?


----------



## caesar (Nov 12, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I meant what period did they start reporting the welsh abuse cases in, as in when would their reporter have potentially been in the area to show the kids these photos.
> 
> Unfortunately google doesn't go that far back, so I don't really know how to check, though they weren't parties of the original libel trial, which makes me think they're less likely candidates than someone who was.


1991 is when the first reports came in the Guardian. It was alleged in Scallywag that in 1990 Thatcher had already been informed about the allegations against McAlpine and that is why he left the country the same year for Australia.


----------



## caesar (Nov 12, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Only current way to check is the newspaper's own archives, which for most papers is a pay service.


If you have a library card many library services offer home access to a lot of online reference services i.e. Newspaper archives going back to the 18th C up to present day, OED, DNB, Who's Who, Groves, Naxos Music Library, Journals.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 12, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> Think Angus Stickler is about to go too, which pretty much means the outfit is busted.
> Its sad because investigative journalism is needed now more than ever and is under more pressure than ever because ad revenues decline and cost cutting, production costs and bloated management costs and salaries means fewer and fewer resources put into it.


He's going to get hamerred over why has either kept this in his pocket for 8 years or if he didn't, why he brought it up right now.


----------



## Flanflinger (Nov 12, 2012)

Well the truth is going to be well and truly buried now.


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2012)

elbows said:


> He did tweet earlier for the first time in a while.
> 
> *Nick Davies* ‏@*Bynickdavies*
> Mail on Sunday say I’m with Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Untrue. They attack BBC for not checking but don't check themselves.


 
I've moaned about the other stuff in this Mail article in the other thread, but thought I would point out their correction, it wasnt just Nick Davies that they wrongly associated with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, it was quite a list!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...astrophic-Lord-McAlpine-Newsnight-report.html



> An early version of this article posted on November 11 stated that certain journalists were involved with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. ​These were Nick Davies, Heather Brooke, Phillip Knightley, Martin Bright, Misha Glenny, Mark Hollingsworth, Andrew Jennings and David Leigh.​​We are happy to clarify that in fact none has ever been involved with, or worked for, the BIJ.​​In addition we stated that City University’s former head of journalism Adrian Monck was an adviser to the Bureau. This was not the case.​


​


​


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 12, 2012)

If you show someone a photo of their alleged living abuser and the alleged abuser is then nicked and the abuse case then goes to trial, would you then run the risk of contaminating witness evidence by suggesting to them the Identity of the attacker?

Is this why NN did not do the photo thing? Or have I got this completely wrong?


----------



## caesar (Nov 12, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> If you show someone a photo of their alleged living abuser and the alleged abuser is then nicked and the abuse case then goes to trial, would you then run the risk of contaminating witness evidence by suggesting to them the Identity of the attacker?
> 
> Is this why NN did not do the photo thing? Or have I got this completely wrong?


I did think that, maybe they could have had a virtual line up with a lot of random upper class types, pin the tail on the donkey time.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 12, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> If you show someone a photo of their alleged living abuser and the alleged abuser is then nicked and the abuse case then goes to trial, would you then run the risk of contaminating witness evidence by suggesting to them the Identity of the attacker?


 
Yes. As I said earlier, not only do you contaminate the witness's memory (memory is reconstructive in nature, the suggestion may "over-write" details into previous memories about the abuser), but you also make it likely that if the abuser is prosecuted, their defence is able to use the contamination to push the story that their client is not guilty.
This is why current police ID line-up practice in the UK is video-play of a line-up, with clips of people chosen to look like the suspect, with all clips recorded in the same light and shown to the witness for the same timespan. Nothing suggested, just a formula request to ID the suspect from the line-up.



> Is this why NN did not do the photo thing? Or have I got this completely wrong?


 
It may have been, or it may just have been slackness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 12, 2012)

caesar said:


> I did think that, maybe they could have had a virtual line up with a lot of random upper class types, pin the tail on the donkey time.


 
One problem that most of the media don't appear to have bothered to take account of (or perhaps they don't want to) is that a fairly common reaction to trauma is peri-traumatic dissociation. This isn't, as some advocates might wish you to believe, the victim entirely blanking out the trauma _a la_ people who "recovered memories" of being victims of Satanic abuse cults. It's the mind *blunting* the immediate effects of the trauma by effectively removing the victim one step from their abuse. It's also a reason why some assault victims aren't able to fully physically-resist.
What such dissociation can also do, unfortunately, is blunt memory detail, especially visual detail, which would mean that a line-up of generic middle-aged male toffs might trigger no recall, even if the line-up contained the abuser.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 12, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> One problem that most of the media don't appear to have bothered to take account of (or perhaps they don't want to) is that a fairly common reaction to trauma is peri-traumatic dissociation. This isn't, as some advocates might wish you to believe, the victim entirely blanking out the trauma _a la_ people who "recovered memories" of being victims of Satanic abuse cults. It's the mind *blunting* the immediate effects of the trauma by effectively removing the victim one step from their abuse. It's also a reason why some assault victims aren't able to fully physically-resist.
> What such dissociation can also do, unfortunately, is blunt memory detail, especially visual detail, which would mean that a line-up of generic middle-aged male toffs might trigger no recall, even if the line-up contained the abuser.


 
"Physically-resist"? You're right about dissociation but there is a difference between visual memory and episodic memory. The integrity of investigations are only as valid as the motivations of those doing the investigating. With hundreds of victims and several investigations it would be more surprising not to find inconsistencies which could be used to discredit victims and witnesses but the issue here is if a network of people used their power and connections to commit crimes and subsequently to cover them up. And that could mean anything from using legal shenannigans and media fixers to murder.


----------



## Corax (Nov 12, 2012)

> _An early version of this article posted on November 11 stated that certain journalists were involved with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism._
> _These were Nick Davies, Heather Brooke, Phillip Knightley, Martin Bright, Misha Glenny, Mark Hollingsworth, Andrew Jennings and David Leigh._
> 
> _We are happy to clarify that in fact none has ever been involved with, or worked for, the BIJ._
> ...


FTFT.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 12, 2012)

Not the slightest bit surprised that Nick Davies is keeping his investigative cards very close to his chest, it's only common sense for him for him to do so, given what Twitter, the net, other media would do if any elements of it leaked out in advance.

Agreeing strongly with free spirit's recent thoughts from those earlier ND articles -- incompetence rather than conspiracy. Again, that's only common sense really.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 12, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Not the slightest bit surprised that Nick Davies is keeping his investigative cards very close to his chest, it's only common sense for him for him to do so, given what Twitter, the net, other media would do if any elements of it leaked out in advance.
> 
> Agreeing strongly with free spirit's recent thoughts from those earlier ND articles -- incompetence rather than conspiracy. Again, that's only common sense really.


Incompetence or pressure not to be too competent?


----------



## Corax (Nov 12, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Not the slightest bit surprised that Nick Davies is keeping his investigative cards very close to his chest, it's only common sense for him for him to do so, given what Twitter, the net, other media would do if any elements of it leaked out in advance.
> 
> Agreeing strongly with free spirit's recent thoughts from those earlier ND articles -- incompetence rather than conspiracy. Again, that's only common sense really.


I see little difference from what's been posted to be honest. "Conspiracies" very rarely exist at all IMO, but cover-ups do. What was described sounded like cover-up to me. The motivation may be saving resources with a failure to prioritise the investigation adequately, rather than the deliberate protection of abusers. The form may be the neglect of evidence and investigation, rather than actively hiding it. But a cover-up it remains.


----------



## Lysdexia (Nov 12, 2012)

_Long time lurkio._ 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20302198

Council find 'missing' Jillings report. This could be a significant find if published


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2012)

Lysdexia said:


> _Long time lurkio._
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20302198
> 
> Council find 'missing' Jillings report. This could be a significant find if published


if they publish... they'll be sued to fuck by their insurers for fraud for suppressing the report i suspect, and thereby being charged lower premiums.


----------



## cesare (Nov 12, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> if they publish... they'll be sued to fuck by their insurers for fraud for suppressing the report i suspect, and thereby being charged lower premiums.


But once its continued existence is known, it's available to be be disclosed in litigation etc. All of a sudden, it exists again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2012)

cesare said:


> But once its continued existence is known, it's available to be be disclosed in litigation etc. All of a sudden, it exists again.


it will all end in tears


----------



## 1%er (Nov 12, 2012)

Corax said:


> I see little difference from what's been posted to be honest. "Conspiracies" very rarely exist at all IMO, but cover-ups do. What was described sounded like cover-up to me. The motivation for the cover-up may be a failure to prioritise it adequately rather than the protection of abusers. The form may be the neglect of evidence and investigation rather than actively hiding it. But a cover-up it remains.


This is an interesting point. People in power not saying anything to rock the boat is all part of the system.

If you cause trouble by bring this sort of thing into the public domain you are not likely to advance up the greasy pole, be that in politics, the police and many other institutions. Its cultural and will not change.


----------



## newbie (Nov 12, 2012)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2012)

newbie said:


> .


well i never


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 12, 2012)

Lysdexia said:


> _Long time lurkio._
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20302198
> 
> Council find 'missing' Jillings report. This could be a significant find if published




Erm, didn't the Independent say they had a copy yesterday?


----------



## Corax (Nov 12, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> well i never


It's all lies.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2012)

Lysdexia said:


> _Long time lurkio._
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20302198
> 
> Council find 'missing' Jillings report. This could be a significant find if published


 
I object to the following wording in that article:



> Although not named by the programme, this led to incorrect speculation on the internet that the man in question was former Tory treasurer Lord McAlpine.


 
There was some incorrect speculation on the internet but not in that instance - it was the accusation that was incorrect, not the internet speculation.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 13, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Not the slightest bit surprised that Nick Davies is keeping his investigative cards very close to his chest, it's only common sense for him for him to do so, given what Twitter, the net, other media would do if any elements of it leaked out in advance.
> 
> Agreeing strongly with free spirit's recent thoughts from those earlier ND articles -- incompetence rather than conspiracy. Again, that's only common sense really.


The thing is though, when taken over several decades, what starts as incompetence, budget restrictions etc will inevitably turn into conspiracy to at the very least keep that covered up, unless someone exposes it or you've got that rare breed of politician / management involved who cares more about truth and justice than their own careers.

This may just stay at a local level, but local politicians have a habit of ending up in westminster, so you end up with the daft situation of the leader of Islington council from 1982-92 at the time that a massive child abuse scandal was going on and being covered up (or at least not having the resources allocated to deal with it once it was reported) in its childrens homes, then ending up being appointed as the Children's Minister 10 years after she resigns from the council.

I don't think any of this starts with politicians having a meeting and deciding they're going to spend the next 30 years covering up child abuse, but I do think that they'll ignore complaints of child abuse and fail to allocate the resources needed, and get whistle blowers sacked to try to avoid there being a scandal that ruins their careers, then spend the rest of their careers conspiring to cover up for the fact that they allowed this to happen on their watch, and if that means that child abusers get to carry on abusing kids in the process... well that's just the price of a successful political career, and they're only scummer kids anyway, so it's all for the greater good eh what.

That's roughly how I see it working, and if they're involved in the masons or other clubs, then they'll use their connections within them to assist them in their arse covering.

That's just the politicians not doing their jobs properly then covering their arses side of things.

The paedophiles themselves have obviously got a hell of a lot more to hide, and from the sheer number of cases over the years that involve networks of (proven and alleged) dozens of paedophiles being active in an area / around a hub (or apparently in Savile and others cases several areas) for decades, there's got to be a fair old conspiracy of silence going on there. As paedophilia isn't confined to the working class, probability alone dictates that there almost certainly will be a fair number of paedophiles high enough up in society both in local government and judiciary terms, or central government and civil service to make active conspiracies from participants at those levels to be more likely than not IMO.

Essentially this whole idea of paedophiles generally being loners, which is / was the guiding principle on which child protection policy in this country has been based for decades, just doesn't fit with the evidence from the cases I quoted last night and the many others that have come out over the years. If these instances of long term endemic paedophile activity are to be tackled properly much earlier in future, then I reckon the starting point is to recognise this and then consider the changes in the scales of investigative resources and support this entails if it's to be tackled.

It's not enough to be reactive when investigating paedophile activity, they need to go after it as if they're taking down mafia organisations, using one paedophile to lead them through the network and take the entire network down - as they did in the Bristol investigation which resulted in 60 paedophiles being uncovered from the starting point of one building (which had basically been ignored for years before despite several reports being received about it).

eta - this is something that does seem to have been improving over the last 10-15 years, but is the exact opposite of what the government is now proposing to do as they're ripping up the current safeguarding protocol and replacing it with something much less detailed.


> The revised version has removed all reference to the investigation of organised or institutional abuse.


 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/social-care-network/2012/nov/09/child-protection-guidance-under-threat


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2012)

Looks like Cyril Smith is not going to be forgotten: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-the-truth-about-sir-cyril-smith-8306857.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> "Physically-resist"


 
Yes. In studies of victims of sexual assault including rape, some of those who displayed peri-and post-traumatic dissociation recalled reduced motor control/coordination.



> You're right about dissociation but there is a difference between visual memory and episodic memory. The integrity of investigations are only as valid as the motivations of those doing the investigating. With hundreds of victims and several investigations it would be more surprising not to find inconsistencies which could be used to discredit victims and witnesse


 
You and I know this, even a midway-sensible first year psych student knows this, but Joe and Josephine Juryperson tend to go with the lawyer when the lawyer insinuates that inconsistent recall is due to dishonesty.



> but the issue here is if a network of people used their power and connections to commit crimes and subsequently to cover them up. And that could mean anything from using legal shenannigans and media fixers to murder.


 
Hey, I don't disagree!


----------



## where to (Nov 13, 2012)

MadCatLady said:
			
		

> Erm, didn't the Independent say they had a copy yesterday?



What one person does with it another may not


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes. In studies of victims of sexual assault including rape, some of those who displayed peri-and post-traumatic dissociation recalled reduced motor control/coordination.


 
Quite literally 'pertrified'.



> *petrifiedpast participle, past tense of pet·ri·fy (Verb)*
> 
> Verb:
> 
> Make (someone) so frightened that they are unable to move or think.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Nov 13, 2012)

Does anyone know what is the position in reference to the insurance company of the council recommending they supress findings on the basis that their premiums will go up, should the report be released? A suppression based on monetary motives, is despicable, is it legal?

If investigative journalists like Watts have a clear trail, it looks like a lot of people could be implicated. There may have been those directly involved, those indirectly involved via collusion, i.e possible police suppression, in such issues as not giving all the files at the time of Waterhouse enquiry etc. Watts hints at investigations into police involvement could be huge. https://twitter.com/MarkWatts_1

Does anyone have the article in relation to the claim that not all files relating to abuse were given over to be examined at the Waterhouse enquiry?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2012)

Woollyredhat said:


> Does anyone know what is the position in reference to the insurance company of the council recommending they supress findings on the basis that their premiums will go up, should the report be released? A suppression based on monetary motives, is despicable, is it legal?


 
It's legal. It isn't a public document, so it *can* be suppressed.
Bear in mind too, that this isn't just about the report suppressed on the request of an insurance company, it's about however many cases of abuse weren't examined by local authorities because of coercion by their insurers too.


----------



## barney_pig (Nov 13, 2012)

The radio 5 news report of the arrested bishop calls him a close friend of prince Charles, whose name keeps coming up.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's legal. It isn't a public document, so it *can* be suppressed.
> Bear in mind too, that this isn't just about the report suppressed on the request of an insurance company, it's about however many cases of abuse weren't examined by local authorities because of coercion by their insurers too.


 
Really? Is it legal? Insurance? Coercion? My head is spinning, the plot thickens.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Really? Is it legal? Insurance? Coercion? My head is spinning, the plot thickens.


I was wondering about this too, if it's legal it fucking well shouldn't be.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's legal. It isn't a public document, so it *can* be suppressed.
> Bear in mind too, that this isn't just about the report suppressed on the request of an insurance company, it's about however many cases of abuse weren't examined by local authorities because of coercion by their insurers too.


Do you or anyone have any idea how this stands now we've got the freedom of information act?

I know you say it's not a public document, but it was commissioned and produced by a local council, so would it be worth someone making a FOI request now they've admitted to having a copy?


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Do you or anyone have any idea how this stands now we've got the freedom of information act?
> 
> I know you say it's not a public document, but it was commissioned and produced by a local council, so would it be worth someone making a FOI request now they've admitted to having a copy?


 
Thats exactly what has happened, so far as I recall.


----------



## where to (Nov 13, 2012)

The Ciaran c4 guy has foi'd it.

Don't think Watt story is N Wales related btw.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 13, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Do you or anyone have any idea how this stands now we've got the freedom of information act?
> 
> I know you say it's not a public document, but it was commissioned and produced by a local council, so would it be worth someone making a FOI request now they've admitted to having a copy?


Actually I was watching Wales Today last night which covered the whole scandal in Wales in more depth than the main news and I think they mentioned that someone has put/will put in a FOI request.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 13, 2012)

There had always been rumours about the 2 ton terror that was Cyril Smith. 



> Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Smith's former constituency in Rochdale, described him as a "29 stone bully" who "imposed himself" on his victims whom he "humiliated and terrified".
> The allegations were investigated by Lancashire Police in the 1960s but no action was taken.
> Mr Danczuk said some alleged victims had only now come forward in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal and it was time to find out "why was this allowed to happen".
> Smith's brother, Norman, said he was "staggered" the MP was blackening the name of Sir Cyril, who died in 2010, adding that the police found at the time that there was no case to answer.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...th-sexually-abused-boys-MP-tells-Commons.html


 
Smith also appeared on Savile's "Clunk Click".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Really? Is it legal? Insurance? Coercion? My head is spinning, the plot thickens.


 
It's a private document until it is published (which it wasn't. It was printed, but that's technically a different matter to publication), and as such is covered by confidentiality legislation.
And yeah, municipal insurers have pretty much coerced local authorities into not investigating child abuse in their childrens' homes by making loud noises about how massively the insurance premiums would increase - local authorities can't operate, in any of their functions - without municipal insurance.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 13, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> There had always been rumours about the 2 ton terror that was Cyril Smith.
> 
> 
> 
> Smith also appeared on Savile's "Clunk Click".


 
Any other connection between them?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Do you or anyone have any idea how this stands now we've got the freedom of information act?
> 
> I know you say it's not a public document, but it was commissioned and produced by a local council, so would it be worth someone making a FOI request now they've admitted to having a copy?


 
Which has already been done (by several interested parties, I believe). 
The issue with the report is that it was never published/released. It was commissioned and produced, as you say, and when that was done, the local authority had full rights to publish. That may not be the case now, or the local authority may *claim* that it isn't the case, in an effort to block having to accede to FoI requests for disclosure.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Any other connection between them?


 
Both Northerners?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Which has already been done (by several interested parties, I believe).
> The issue with the report is that it was never published/released. It was commissioned and produced, as you say, and when that was done, the local authority had full rights to publish. That may not be the case now, or the local authority may *claim* that it isn't the case, in an effort to block having to accede to FoI requests for disclosure.


we shall see then I suppose.

or maybe not if they then also decide they can't publish it because of the risk of libel actions, which seems pretty likely to be the case.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2012)

free spirit said:


> we shall see then I suppose.
> 
> or maybe not if they then also decide they can't publish it because of the risk of libel actions, which seems pretty likely to be the case.


 
I suppose it's possible they'll put out a redacted version.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's a private document until it is published (which it wasn't. It was printed, but that's technically a different matter to publication), and as such is covered by confidentiality legislation.
> And yeah, municipal insurers have pretty much coerced local authorities into not investigating child abuse in their childrens' homes by making loud noises about how massively the insurance premiums would increase - local authorities can't operate, in any of their functions - without municipal insurance.


 
Well that is insane! Fucking hell, fuck that! I can believe it but is there evidence of insurance companiies compromising investigations of abuse. Apologies if I've missed it.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Well that is insane! Fucking hell, fuck that! I can believe it but is there evidence of insurance companiies compromising investigations of abuse. Apologies if I've missed it.


 
Thats what caused a storm over this in the nineties and the subsequent inquiry which was an attempt to 'make up' for the unpublished report.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 13, 2012)

elbows said:


> Thats what caused a storm over this in the nineties and the subsequent inquiry which was an attempt to 'make up' for the unpublished report.


 
 OK. Right.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> OK. Right.


 
Actually did it? Not sure what you mean.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 13, 2012)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> [yesterday]Not the slightest bit surprised that Nick Davies is keeping his investigative cards very close to his chest, it's only common sense for him for him to do so, given what Twitter, the net, other media would do if any elements of it leaked out in advance.
> 
> Agreeing strongly with free spirit's recent thoughts from those earlier ND articles -- incompetence rather than conspiracy. Again, that's only common sense really.


 



			
				Corax said:
			
		

> I see little difference from what's been posted to be honest. "Conspiracies" very rarely exist at all IMO, but cover-ups do. What was described sounded like cover-up to me. The motivation may be saving resources with a failure to prioritise the investigation adequately, rather than the deliberate protection of abusers. The form may be the neglect of evidence and investigation, rather than actively hiding it. But a cover-up it remains.


 




free spirit said:


> The thing is though, when taken over several decades, what starts as incompetence, budget restrictions etc will inevitably turn into conspiracy to at the very least keep that covered up, unless someone exposes it or you've got that rare breed of politician / management involved who cares more about truth and justice than their own careers.
> 
> This may just stay at a local level, but local politicians have a habit of ending up in westminster, so you end up with the daft situation of the leader of Islington council from 1982-92 at the time that a massive child abuse scandal was going on and being covered up (or at least not having the resources allocated to deal with it once it was reported) in its childrens homes, then ending up being appointed as the Children's Minister 10 years after she resigns from the council.
> 
> ...


 
Interesting responses, thankyou.

I certainly wouldn't deny there've been cover ups, and yes the point at which a cover up becomes more or less a determination by those in charge to keep things swept under the carpet, or at least reluctant to open up too many cans of worms, is pretty moot in all this.

I suppose the fact that 'conspiracy' has become such a tainted concept on here (and correctly so often, what with so much in the way of crazy theorising on well dodgy sites being quoted) was why I posted as I did yesterday .... and we all know how much CTers are jumping on all these scandals and over speculating/over extrapolating from them.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 13, 2012)

Apologies if this has been mentioned before (i cant recall it but there's a lot of info on here!) but I noticed this from a Mirror article (mentioned elsewhere also)


> PIE, which is now outlawed, also had links with another BBC presenter who was investigated over child sex allegations in the late 80s.
> Like Savile, the unnamed star was accused of using a charity as a cover to abuse vulnerable children.
> The charity was set up by a PIE member in the 80s, offering yachting classes to vulnerable and underprivileged children.
> The BBC presenter was investigated after police became aware of allegations he was abusing boys during sailing trips.
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 13, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Interesting responses, thankyou.
> 
> I certainly wouldn't deny there've been cover ups, and yes the point at which a cover up becomes more or less a determination by those in charge to keep things swept under the carpet, or at least reluctant to open up too many cans of worms, is pretty moot in all this.
> 
> I suppose the fact that 'conspiracy' has become such a tainted concept on here (and correctly so often, what with so much in the way of crazy theorising on well dodgy sites being quoted) was why I posted as I did yesterday .... and we all know how much CTers are jumping on all these scandals and over speculating/over extrapolating from them.


 
Cover-up, conspiracy - same thing right?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 13, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Cover-up, conspiracy - same thing right?


 
Sometimes ... I'm not going to be the one to say when, though!

I started off agreeing with an earlier post by freespirit though, when he posted from older Nick Davies articles. Both Nick Davies and FS were as I saw it saying that huge levels of incompetence were highly important. And I was agreeing with that yesterday.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2012)

Wrexham.com have submitted a FOI request too:

http://www.wrexham.com/news/wrexham-council-copy-pulped-jillings-report-14109.html


----------



## Corax (Nov 13, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Apologies if this has been mentioned before (i cant recall it but there's a lot of info on here!) but I noticed this from a Mirror article (mentioned elsewhere also)


Hmmm.  Any googling that you've found illuminating?


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2012)

Buckaroo said:


> Actually did it? Not sure what you mean.


 
Well I was slightly simplifying the pciture of the time, but Im not sure which bit you are unsure about. The point was that there was public disquiet about previous reports not being published, and in the end they decided the only way to deal with it was to have an inquiry. And it was mentioned that it was insurers who scuppered the publication of the Jillings report, this isnt new info but obviously its getting more attention now than it probably did back then.

For example this article from 2000:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/642704.stm



> But the victims' hopes that the full story would come out were dashed when the Jillings Report remained under wraps following advice from the council's insurers.
> 
> That report named abusers and those considered negligent in failing to stop their activities.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 13, 2012)

Corax said:


> Hmmm.  Any googling that you've found illuminating?



I had a brief look but nothing jumped out.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> There had always been rumours about the 2 ton terror that was Cyril Smith.
> Smith also appeared on Savile's "Clunk Click".


I worked at Rochdale Town Hall in the early 80s and there was always said to be an inch thick file on him over the road in the police station (somebody told me earlier it was on the Manc news that it's now gone 'missing'  ).  The stories that circulated were pretty much a rehash of the piece that appeared in RAP (Rochdale Alternative Press).


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2012)

Incidentally, his brother Norman Smith who was, irony of ironies, Chair of the Social Services Committee, was one of the most unpleasant humans I've come across.  Petty bully who used to terrify council officers - whilst also being impressively thick.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes. In studies of victims of sexual assault including rape, some of those who displayed peri-and post-traumatic dissociation recalled reduced motor control/coordination.
> 
> 
> 
> You and I know this, even a midway-sensible first year psych student knows this, but Joe and Josephine Juryperson tend to go with the lawyer when the lawyer insinuates that inconsistent recall is due to dishonesty !



There are ways to work with this shutting down of the victim's physical and mental capacity during and after trauma when interviewing them. Apologies for getting personal but this seems relevant.

 After I was attacked I had rape trauma syndrome, basically disasociative amnesia following the attack during which I mentally and physically shut down. The police called in Professor Ray Bull who used a technique called cognitive interviewing on me, sitting behind a screen and giving the female police interviewer guidance through an earpiece to help me pull back what I had blocked out. It worked, amazingly - although it was a very slow and difficult process and I was able to recall things that I previously was unable to remember leading to a conviction. Without this technique I doubt we would have got one.

See http://www.freedomfromtorture.org/sites/default/files/documents/Ray final_0.pdf

Now,  cognitive Interviewing is  the complete antithesis of the typical police or journalist interview technique and requires a lot of time and skill and training to use. However, it could be a powerful weapon if there are to be further investigations and testimony taken into these historic abuse cases. Fractured memories and broken stories can be put back together to devastating effect.

What worries me though is that any victims thinking of coming forward now will be walking into a firestorm of media interest, political machinations and public near-hysteria and the chances of being heard calmly, supported through the secondary trama of giving evidence and the aftermath and then getting justice diminish all the time.

A fetid climate  has been created with a burning thirst for revenge and a tidy ending to years of horror. But this is not a narrative with a climax and a resolution, it is messy and painful and the wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow and small. It could take years but I would rather it DID and get done properly than rush the vulnerable onto the airwaves and Internet with no skilled, patient, properly resourced support behind them to get them justice or at least, peace.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2012)

I d not have a high degree of confidence in how the justice system may treat victims, but I hope victims realise that there is no reason why they have to be subjected to hassle from journalists at all, they can choose to keep out of that. I assume some only speak out to the media once they feel the justice system has failed them, and hopefully that will be slightly less likely to happen right now.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 14, 2012)

I hope so.
I really hope so.
If nothing else, the police must be taking historic abuse reports extremely seriously now and prioritising  them as there is so much public interest in this. That is at least one small positive.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> I worked at Rochdale Town Hall in the early 80s and there was always said to be an inch thick file on him over the road in the police station (somebody told me earlier it was on the Manc news that it's now gone 'missing'  ). The stories that circulated were pretty much a rehash of the piece that appeared in RAP (Rochdale Alternative Press).


The file went missing? How convenient.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 14, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> There are ways to work with this shutting down of the victim's physical and mental capacity during and after trauma when interviewing them. Apologies for getting personal but this seems relevant.


 
No need for apologies. Thank you for replying.



> After I was attacked I had rape trauma syndrome, basically disasociative amnesia following the attack during which I mentally and physically shut down. The police called in Professor Ray Bull who used a technique called cognitive interviewing on me, sitting behind a screen and giving the female police interviewer guidance through an earpiece to help me pull back what I had blocked out. It worked, amazingly - although it was a very slow and difficult process and I was able to recall things that I previously was unable to remember leading to a conviction. Without this technique I doubt we would have got one.
> 
> See http://www.freedomfromtorture.org/sites/default/files/documents/Ray final_0.pdf
> 
> Now, cognitive Interviewing is the complete antithesis of the typical police or journalist interview technique and requires a lot of time and skill and training to use. However, it could be a powerful weapon if there are to be further investigations and testimony taken into these historic abuse cases. Fractured memories and broken stories can be put back together to devastating effect.


 
I've read the literature on the technique. It is filtering into mainstream teaching at police colleges on interview techniques, which is a big improvement on being taught the Reid technique to cover all interviewing possibilities. 



> What worries me though is that any victims thinking of coming forward now will be walking into a firestorm of media interest, political machinations and public near-hysteria and the chances of being heard calmly, supported through the secondary trama of giving evidence and the aftermath and then getting justice diminish all the time.


 
While we supposedly, since 2002, have decent legislation about vulnerable witnesses, it is *still* more observed in the breach than anything else. Defence lawyers *still* use the standard examination techniques on vulnerable witnesses, and then excuse themselves to the Bench. Perhaps if their disciplinary procedures were slightly more effective...



> A fetid climate has been created with a burning thirst for revenge and a tidy ending to years of horror. But this is not a narrative with a climax and a resolution, it is messy and painful and the wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow and small. It could take years but I would rather it DID and get done properly than rush the vulnerable onto the airwaves and Internet with no skilled, patient, properly resourced support behind them to get them justice or at least, peace.


 
That "burning thirst for revenge" does seem to be most prominent in the same sort of people who a couple of decades ago were dismissing even the possibility of widespread sexual abuse in institutional settings out of hand, too. Quite pathetic how quickly the pitchforks get snatched up.
I don't have much faith that this will be managed correctly, though. It's already obvious that the government would much prefer to let this all sink into the background, and their resistance to any over-arching public inquiry isn't inspiring. As for the continued trauma of victims, it's always appeared to me that the victims, whether of this institutionalised abuse, or of child abuse generally, are the last to be considered with reference to either criminal justice practice or the manouvres of the wider Establishment.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 14, 2012)

I doubt Cyril Smith will turn out to have been tied in with Savile. Rochdale's the kind of place where corruption has been allowed to flourish as long as the ambitions of those involved don't extend beyond Rochdale. Smith was undoubtedly a wrong un, but the stuff involving Savile goes right to the top, whereas the situation in Rochdale was/is a load of third and fourth raters who'd sell the town out for a mess of pottage. Rochdale has always been a hotbed of civic corruption but, due to the paucity and tawdriness of the imaginations of those involved, any brown envelopes that may have changed hands would've been more likely to contain money off vouchers for a Berni inn or something equally small time rather than wads of twenties.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> While we supposedly, since 2002, have decent legislation about vulnerable witnesses, it is *still* more observed in the breach than anything else. Defence lawyers *still* use the standard examination techniques on vulnerable witnesses, and then excuse themselves to the Bench. Perhaps if their disciplinary procedures were slightly ....




It seems that even when not allowed to discredit using sexual history, defense briefs now go for the jugular with mental instability. Any victim who has seen a GP for ADs or had counselling is discredited as being an unreliable loon in court. If victims are damaged psychologically they are not to be trusted and if they seem too unmoved and calm they are also not to be believed.

Rape myths abound wrt victim presentation and demeanour, whether the victim has been recently attacked or years have passed. The media - I am thinking of the foul Mail piece - and the politicians - I am thinking of David Mellor - and the public - I am thinking of numerous comments I have read online- all seem to collude in shaming and silencing victims who don't fit the mould. There is no mould in any case. There is no typical abuser and there is no typical victim.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 14, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> It seems that even when not allowed to discredit using sexual history, defense briefs now go for the jugular with mental instability. Any victim who has seen a GP for ADs or had counselling is discredited as being an unreliable loon in court. If victims are damaged psychologically they are not to be trusted and if they seem too unmoved and calm they are also not to be believed.


 
And yet that too is supposedly protected, so that the defence can't imply such things. The excuse currently deployed is that the "new" rules will eventually become commonplace, but how much sexual, mental and physical abuse will be swept aside before this happens? It's not like either the charge rate or conviction rate for sexual offences has changed for the better in the last decade. 



> Rape myths abound wrt victim presentation and demeanour, whether the victim has been recently attacked or years have passed. The media - I am thinking of the foul Mail piece - and the politicians - I am thinking of David Mellor - and the public - I am thinking of numerous comments I have read online- all seem to collude in shaming and silencing victims who don't fit the mould. There is no mould in any case. There is no typical abuser and there is no typical victim.


 
Well quite, just as no offender is typical. People who should know better (Mellor is no longer a politician, btw, he's a radio hack IIRC) deploy ignorant stereotypes because it allows them to sensationalise *and* to maintain a particularly outdated and outmoded _status quo_ around gender relations and roles. Such people should be, if not liquidated, at least repudiated by anyone with an ounce of decency.
Personally I favour liquidation, but then I'm comfortable with my darker self.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2012)

Not had the email myself but thought I would pass on this warning.

*Mark Williams-Thomas* ‏@*mwilliamsthomas*
Email circulating with a link asking recipient to see if they can identify person. DO NOT open link as it contains child abuse image.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 14, 2012)

> *Mike Sivier* ‏@*MidWalesMike*
> Please Read/RT: Nobody's fooled - but for Tories, the child abuse cover-up may still succeed http://wp.me/p262ZD-fK


Big claims about Daily Mail journalist.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2012)

Well I have no problem with people slagging off the Daily Mail or the media in general, but I think we've already seen that Messham is not the best foundation on which to build elaborate subplots. Perhaps I should laugh that the Mail are getting flak for an article that actually contains a fair amount of truth for once, but really you dont need to be a present or former MI5 man in order to point out some of the flaws in this whole side of the story.

Personally I feel the best bet for exploring the truth and ensuring that the important issues are not forgotten is not to persist with Messham-related lines of enquiry.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2012)

Also unless we have missed something important thats right under our nose, the potential for internet research to uncover much more of interest right now is pretty low. Happily there are clearly still various journalists beavering away at other stuff, which will hopefully lead to something. And the inquiries have been set in motion, even if they end up being something of a whitewash they will still have to touch on some things which may reignite the important issues.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 14, 2012)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> .


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 14, 2012)

elbows said:


> Well I was slightly simplifying the pciture of the time, but Im not sure which bit you are unsure about. The point was that there was public disquiet about previous reports not being published, and in the end they decided the only way to deal with it was to have an inquiry. And it was mentioned that it was insurers who scuppered the publication of the Jillings report, this isnt new info but obviously its getting more attention now than it probably did back then.
> 
> 
> Right thanks for that. Suppose we should get ready for another new 'full public' inquiry for when the latest efforts are found wanting or buried, lost on a bus etc
> ...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


>


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


>


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


>


 
What are you  at?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> What are you  at?


i can't say


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> i can't say


 
I blame Rutita


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 14, 2012)

Fine


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 14, 2012)

Poster on Mumsnet has just written this

I have just started a new discussion and this is the post that goes with it;
I have avoided posting on here for rather a long time. I have read ALL of your comments re the Jimmy Savile Expose, even ones including the blog by and ex duncroft girl fro the 1960's! 
Many many remember that you (as a group) gave me support when I needed it on MSPB threads relating to Roy Meadows.
What none of you know is that I am one of the five women in the origional ITV expose programme about Jimmy Savile. I do know a lot more than was shown but I have kept my silence and not spoken to anyone. I have been beseiged by the press, had notes pushed through my letterbox and even had my neighbours upset. I do not wish to upset anybody.
The whole purpose of the ITV expose programme was to expose JS for what he was. It took the programme makers a whole year just to find 5 women who would speak on camera. I was subjected to many indignities during this period of time. I even had to produce private documentation and see specialists in the field of child/adult abuse. I only ever expected very small percentage of the country to believe what we stated. There was no collussion between parties. No one was paid or is making a claim from his estate. The whole programme was about exposing JS for what he did to young girls.
I am shocked to be told that 97% of the country believe what we said. I always felt that the message should have been that Jimmy Savile, he may have done good deeds but he had a 'dark side' to his personality. I personally had to weigh up as to whether it was in the public interest to know anything, now he had died.
I have read that I lied, I only did it for money and a lot of other rather derogatory comments. I live in a free society and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I should however point out that I am not taking part in the follow-up programme on ITV (wed 21st Nov) at 10.35pm. My point was to expose Savile.
It seems that the main comment seems to be why now, he is dead. I agree, but many need to get closure and for that the country needed to know the truth. I have got closure, eventually but perhaps you, as a group should be aware that not everything you read, see or hear is true. I am personally aware of a 1975 report made to Staines police. I was interviewed by Newsnight but refused to go on camera. I was also interviewed by a tabloid newspaper and the police in 2007. I am tired of being told what I have said and done. It appears that if you do not talk to the ptress that they make up the story! 
I have kept my own counsel for months and it has got me knowhere apart from being a victim that is 'ripe' for public attack and ricicule. I do know others who were involved and I have not spoken of them but to read about Frank Carson, Earl Mountbatten or various other people has turned a simple expose about a man into a witch-hunt. My credability has been questioned. I have had to take lie detectors and produce qualification and employment documents all for the legal dept of the television company. 
My life is my own and I am responsible. My question now is WHY? How come so many knew and yet said nothing? This site even deleted a post of mine that broke no site rules, named no one but gave a personal opinion on a discussion thread about JS when he died. While you were all sad about his demise I wrote that I was not, I hoped that one day the truth would be known. This post was deleted by MN. So I did try to even say on this site, without naming him and yet my post was deleted. Now people accuse me of not saying.
I do suggest that you look closer to home before you start to critisize others, my life has been made very difficult for weeks, I knew this would not be an easy path, but one I personally felt I had to take.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> While you were all sad about his demise I wrote that I was not, I hoped that one day the truth would be known. This post was deleted by MN. So I did try to even say on this site, without naming him and yet my post was deleted. Now people accuse me of not saying.
> 
> I do suggest that you look closer to home before you start to critisize others, my life has been made very difficult for weeks, I knew this would not be an easy path, but one I personally felt I had to take.


 
Good for her


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 14, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> The file went missing? How convenient.



You cover-upaloon! Probably filed in the wrong draw :-D


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> You cover-upaloon! Probably filed in the wrong draw :-D


 
Shredded


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 14, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> Poster on Mumsnet has just written this
> 
> I have just started a new discussion and this is the post that goes with it;
> I have avoided posting on here for rather a long time. I have read ALL of your comments re the Jimmy Savile Expose, even ones including the blog by and ex duncroft girl fro the 1960's!
> ...



Someone I know went to the press re: JS. Gave an interview (not on camera)  to the BBC, signed an anonymity form and after it had aired had all manner of phone calls on his house number from tv, radio and newspapers. He complained to the BBC reporter who denied giving his number out. Eventually a sunday newspaper ran an extended version of what he had said that could only have come from the original BBC reporter. 

Oh plus they said they'd alter his voice and they didn't. Local landlord had to tell staff to report anyone asking questions to him after people started turning up asking where he lived.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Shredded



Wouldn't surprise me if someone somewhere kept a copy. As a small aside, last year we found in our archives a final year dissertation from a health care student who in the forward thanked a doctor for his "unfailing assistance and help" in writing his essay. The doctor he credited was Harold Shipman :-P


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 14, 2012)

elbows said:


> Well I have no problem with people slagging off the Daily Mail or the media in general, but I think we've already seen that Messham is not the best foundation on which to build elaborate subplots. Perhaps I should laugh that the Mail are getting flak for an article that actually contains a fair amount of truth for once, but really you dont need to be a present or former MI5 man in order to point out some of the flaws in this whole side of the story.
> 
> Personally I feel the best bet for exploring the truth and ensuring that the important issues are not forgotten is not to persist with Messham-related lines of enquiry.


 
Some of the worst criticism I've read online aimed at Messham has not come from Tories or the press but from other abuse victims from Bryn Estyn.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Some of the worst criticism I've read online aimed at Messham has not come from Tories or the press but from other abuse victims from Bryn Estyn.


 
That does not surprise me, although I've not read any of it myself.

The same was true with Duncroft girls, albeit not necessarily people who were abused themselves doing the attacking, just people who went there.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Wouldn't surprise me if someone somewhere kept a copy. As a small aside, last year we found in our archives a final year dissertation from a health care student who in the forward thanked a doctor for his "unfailing assistance and help" in writing his essay. The doctor he credited was Harold Shipman :-P


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Some of the worst criticism I've read online aimed at Messham has not come from Tories or the press but from other abuse victims from Bryn Estyn.


 
Got a bit heated early hours of this morning on Twitter


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 14, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Some of the worst criticism I've read online aimed at Messham has not come from Tories or the press but from other abuse victims from Bryn Estyn.


Does not surprise me at all.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


>



Not sure what happened to it, hope it wasn't shredded! Found by someone in our office randomly opening hard bound dissertations in the storage room


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 14, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Not sure what happened to it, hope it wasn't shredded! Found by someone in our office randomly opening hard bound dissertations in the storage room


 
I'd make a point never to register with that doctor.  Harold Shipman may have rubbed off on him


----------



## where to (Nov 14, 2012)

Rutita1 said:
			
		

> Big claims about Daily Mail journalist.



Come on people can we have a bit more scepticism and scrutiny of sources.

That guy is making basic errors and is wasting people's time.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> Does not surprise me at all.


 
There is more than one reason for that though. If I had been a victim myself then some of my thoughts on Messham would be unprintable, but I dont really want to go there, I want to focus on the wider issues.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 14, 2012)

Wilf said:
			
		

> I worked at Rochdale Town Hall in the early 80s and there was always said to be an inch thick file on him over the road in the police station *(somebody told me earlier it was on the Manc news that it's now gone 'missing'*  ). The stories that circulated were pretty much a rehash of the piece that appeared in RAP (Rochdale Alternative Press).


 


nino_savatte said:


> The file went missing? How convenient.


 
Can that story be sourced though Wilf? Not doubting that you heard it, and it is believable, but I'd like to see a link to the story ....


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 14, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Can that story be sourced though Wilf? Not doubting that you heard it, and it is believable, but I'd like to see a link to the story ....


 



> Several of the boys at the hostel later made formal complaints to the police but no action was taken. Police files intended for the Crown Prosecution Service seemingly went missing in the 1970s. Smith, who was in his mid thirties at the time of the alleged incidents, died in 2010.
> http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/65712/new_cyril_smith_abuse_claims.html


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 14, 2012)

OK thanks for that link.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 14, 2012)

No worries.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 14, 2012)

where to said:


> Come on people can we have a bit more scepticism and scrutiny of sources.
> 
> That guy is making basic errors and is wasting people's time.


 
That's why I said 'big' claims. I didn't say I believed them, nor that anyone else should.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 14, 2012)

where to said:


> Come on people can we have a bit more scepticism and scrutiny of sources.
> 
> That guy is making basic errors and is wasting people's time.


 
David Rose has publicly stated that he had connections to MI5/MI6, although he claims that it ended a few years ago.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/mi6-mi5-intelligence-briefings


> Spies and their lies Sept 2007 - David Rose
> ..at the end of the first week of May 1992.I was the Observer's home affairs correspondent, and at the other end of the line was a man we shall call Tom Bourgeois, special assistant to "C", Sir Colin McColl, the then chief of the Secret Intelligence Service. SIS (or MI6, as it is more widely known) was "reaching out" to selected members of the media.
> ...
> Over the eclairs and Darjeeling a day or two later, Bourgeois explained that while the service - "the Office", as it is invariably termed by insiders - had always had a few, very limited contacts with journalists and editors, it now felt the need to put these arrangements on a broader and more formal basis.
> ...


 
It is also true in 2002 he appeared before the Select Committee on Home Affairs into possible wrongful convictions due to police trawling of witnesses. He was in a room with Richard Webster and Bob Woffingden talking to, among others, David Cameron about police techniques for questioning possible abuse victims. Indeed it was him that raised the fact of police showing pictures of alleged abusers to victims. Tom Watson was also on the Committee although not present that day.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmhaff/836/2051404.htm


> But when it comes to taking statements from other kinds of witnesses or complainants, actually very little thought is given on how to do it. The problem is that in these cases, as far as there is a model of good practice, it is—as Richard has already mentioned—actually the very worst example, John Robbins of Merseyside Police, who, for a long time was held out to be the national best practice model. He toured the country talking to police training colleges, detectives and other forces who were thinking of doing this sort of inquiry and told how they had done it on Merseyside. What we know about how they did it on Merseyside is that they showed photographs to people; they told people about other people who had made allegations in an effort to generate further ones; they had this symbiotic relationship with solicitors. All of the kinds of bad practice that we have alluded to today happened on Merseyside. For a long time, the man responsible for those was the national best practice model. So may be that is part of the answer.


The Mail article was dreadful and unnecessary but if he wrote it on unbehalf of anyone it was probably FACT (Falsely Accused Carers & Teachers).


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 14, 2012)

87. Why do you think it is so difficult to mount an effective defence case?
(_Mr Rose_) I think defence lawyers are in a very difficult position and the less specific the allegation the more difficult it becomes. Also, there are a couple of other factors that make it even more difficult. Let us say the defence find a fact which appears to quash what a complainant says, for example the gap that somebody said he squeezed through is only three inches wide, the complainant will say, "Oh, yes, well it was twenty-five years ago. Maybe it wasn't in that room. Or maybe I got out through a door, maybe it didn't actually happen in that building at all. It is such a long time ago." In summarising the case in his closing speech the prosecuting counsel will say "Members of the jury, such a long time has gone by you can't expect this person's memory to be precise and anyway he is trying to blank out so much of it because it was so horrible". The second thing that makes it particularly difficult is that a lot of the witnesses in these cases are, by definition, people of bad character; they are people who were locked up because they had committed offences when they were children and they carried on committing offences. But the problem is that if you then counter this in cross-examination with the fact that an individual has, let us say, 62 offences of dishonesty on their record and perhaps (as in Shuttleworth's case) with an attempt to defraud the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in an earlier case, then the answer comes back: It would never have happened if he had not been sexually abused. There is one other notion I would like to plant with this committee and it is this: there is simply no basis at all anywhere in the scientific literature to suggest that a victim of sexual abuse is more likely to be dishonest. The biggest studies in America—and they are mostly American studies—suggest that there is no definable syndrome of behaviours which a survivor of sexual abuse in adulthood will exhibit. They are no more likely to be drug addicts, thieves, credit card fraudsters or, indeed, Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority fraudsters than anybody else. But, unfortunately, that belief is widely held in the courts, widely held by judges who make no attempt to quash this claim and so defendants are in an even more difficult position.

Widely held by cunts. No shit Sherlock.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 14, 2012)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...se-victims-step-forward-in-wales-8317070.html

*More alleged child abuse victims step forward in Wales*

Dozens more victims of alleged child abuse in North Wales
care homes have come forward since the unfounded Newsnight allegations against
Lord McAlpine.

Keith Towler, Children’s Commissioner for Wales is now handling 52 new cases including 35 relating to the original inquiry and a further 17 in connection with historic allegations elsewhere including two from England.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 14, 2012)

dp


----------



## Corax (Nov 14, 2012)

Sorry, I've missed something. Why is Messham now being painted as a complete fantasist by people?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Corax said:


> Sorry, I've missed something. Why is Messham now being painted as a complete fantasist by people?


name names


----------



## Corax (Nov 14, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> name names


Thomas, Richard, and Harold.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Corax said:


> Thomas, Richard, and Harold.


and were they supporting messham and have not changed sides?


----------



## Corax (Nov 14, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> and were they supporting messham and have not changed sides?


The use of 'sides' is perhaps related.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Corax said:


> The use of 'sides' is perhaps related.


you're all over the shop


----------



## Corax (Nov 14, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> you're all over the shop


Urbanite buzzphrase bingo.

Why won't you answer the question?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2012)

Corax said:


> Urbanite buzzphrase bingo.
> 
> Why won't you answer the question?


what question?


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> Sorry, I've missed something. Why is Messham now being painted as a complete fantasist by people?


 
I wouldnt go that far, even though I've not been afraid to post about the downside of Messhams words.

There are certain media entities and talking heads who would like to use the fact that Messham isnt exactly likely to win a 'most reliable witness' award in order to pour scorn on the whole thing. Their agenda ranges from being twats in general, to wanting to have a go at the BBC, to wanting to put a lid of child abuse allegations involving politicians, to wanting to prevent gossip or witch-hunts. There is also an anti-Leveson agenda but the Messham business may complicate rather than aid their points on that one.

There are other victims of abuse or people from wales who are aware of certain other incidents in Messhams past that make them unhappy but not terribly surprised at what has happened.

There are journalists, including some who covered the story years ago who are dismayed at other journalists for not doing their job properly when reporting on Messhams allegations.

There are people who thought the Messham apology was dodgy and want to weave this into some additional layer of conspiracy.

And there are people such as myself who, mostly as a result in particupating in the relevant u75 threads, were not exactly shocked when it turned out that some of what Messham said ended up backfiring. I cant speak for anyone else but this was not terribly clear when the story began, but it started to dawn on us as more past detail was uncovered. And its also possible that we expected the newsnight investigation had been done properly, and the fact they were reporting on it meant that past doubts must have been overcome and Messhams detail was more valid than it might have seemed when taking his past statements and behaviour into account.


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Fucking hell....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...il-Smith-sex-abuse-dossier-seized-by-MI5.html


> Tony Robinson, a special branch officer with Lancashire Police in the 1970s, said he saw a police dossier which was “thick” with allegations from boys claiming they had been abused by Sir Cyril.
> He said that after taking the file out of the safe at special branch headquarters in Hatton, Preston, he was contacted by an officer from MI5 who told him it needed to be sent to London.
> Mr Robinson also disclosed that the then Director of Public Prosecutions had examined the allegations but decided they were “not in the public interest”.





> Mr Robinson, who had a previous interest in the case, said he read Sir Cyril’s file. He said: “I looked through Sir Cyril’s file which was kept in a safe in our office.
> “It was thick full of statements from young boys alleging abuse. It had been prepared for prosecution.
> “Written across the top of it were the words: 'No further action, not in the public interest. DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions].’
> “Shortly after taking it out I was called by an MI5 officer. They asked if I had the file on Mr Cyril Smith, and said: 'Please have this sent down to London.”


----------



## free spirit (Nov 15, 2012)

elbows said:


> And there are people such as myself who, mostly as a result in particupating in the relevant u75 threads, were not exactly shocked when it turned out that some of what Messham said ended up backfiring. I cant speak for anyone else but this was not terribly clear when the story began, but it started to dawn on us as more past detail was uncovered. And its also possible that we expected the newsnight investigation had been done properly, and the fact they were reporting on it meant that past doubts must have been overcome and Messhams detail was more valid than it might have seemed when taking his past statements and behaviour into account.


I think that's hit the nail on the head.

I assumed that newsnight must have found supporting evidence to verify Messham's statements when they started tweeting about the programme, and then broadcast the programme.

I couldn't believe that they'd go ahead with that programme just on the basis of his evidence alone, as whether justified or not, it had already been found to be unreliable at the inquiry, so they'd have been nuts to just rely on that alone, as they'd get screwed instantly if it came to court and that was all they had.

I reckon that was the logic a lot of people were working on tbh, and they could well take a fair few into court with them who followed on their coat tails and went further.

Fair play to the mods on here for their caution, and instilling that caution into posters on this site, even if a few (possibly myself included) might have been sailing a bit close to the wind at times.


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Bit tired right now but would suggest that the 'not in the public interest' thing is just as much of a story as the MI5 bit, if not more so.

Much can be justified using such terms, eg not in the states interest to have political classes undermined by child sex abuse allegations.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Can that story be sourced though Wilf? Not doubting that you heard it, and it is believable, but I'd like to see a link to the story ....


There's a bit here on the original story (though not much more than the details that have been in the papers over the last day or two).
http://rochdaleraw.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/cyril-smith-to-be-hung-at-rochdale-town.html

There's also a bit here about the file itself:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...il-Smith-sex-abuse-dossier-seized-by-MI5.html

when I worked at the Town Hall (83-4 I think) there was a kind of mantra about a 'file an inch think in the police station' which was over the road. From the telegraph piece above it may well no longer have been there - but there was certainly general knowledge that there had been a police investigation. Whether that was simply an awareness of the 1979 RAP/Private Eye story - or whether council officers had other sources of info - I just can't remember.

I mentioned above detesting his arsehole of a brother, Norman Smith, as a petty bully. _Cyril_ Smith was loathed beyond compare for his attempts to sell himself as a people's saviour against the 'bureaucrats'. What that boiled down to was his ability to land even the most juior officers in it - as well as a truly obnoxious pesonal manner. Well remember looking down from the window at the front of the town hall at the post office and seeing him coming out on a really icy day. His little feet were sliding all over the fucking shop and there was a group of us in football crowd mode, willing gravity to take its course. Sadly the nonce retained the vertical.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 15, 2012)

elbows said:


> Fucking hell....
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...il-Smith-sex-abuse-dossier-seized-by-MI5.html


well this could be interesting then.

watch the attack dogs be let lose on this whistle blower. I hope he's not got too many skeletons.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Nov 15, 2012)

They keep throwing corpses to the media.

This so stinks.

Everyone knows it stinks.

They are banking on people getting bored and moving on.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 15, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> They keep throwing corpses to the media.
> 
> This so stinks.
> 
> ...



Thing is, they are scared shitless of going for living folk for still obvious reasons. 

It could be that "they" are just "throwing corpses" rather than "throw nothing", or it could be that they want to do that rather than ask questions of police (or CPS in cases such as Cyril Smith) rather than (especially) the BBC.  

Or maybe "they" think the demand is for PAEDO NEWS!!! over genuine investigation, it also being cheaper and less risky in many ways. 

Could be a bunch of stuff, but in any instance, cases against the living will take a long time and once arrests happen, and especially charges laid, there is an understandable blackout.

It's understandable that people are impatient after decades, but any pre-trial silence is understandable too.

It's like another contradictory dynamic that haunts all this - the correct procedure is to both believe the victim and assume the alleged is innocent. That's a logical impossibility from which much flows.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 15, 2012)

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_mindcon03.htm

May have been posted before, but probably worth doing again given length of thread.

This is not directly UK relevant at first sight but could well be, it is very long but the more pertinent stuff is in earlier sections. 

It was pointed to me by a UK citizen who says they were affected by such matters. I don't know the person very well and they discussed it very little. Some people know them better say they are inclined to believe them. 

Elsewise it speaks for itself. Aspects do read as if they are from the "Foil Hat" Folder and I daresay they are a plethora of debunks and counter-debunks online. Anyhow, judge for yourselves. Interested in thoughts.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 15, 2012)

free spirit said:


> well this could be interesting then.
> 
> watch the attack dogs be let lose on this whistle blower. I hope he's not got too many skeletons.


I was looking at the LibDem voice website last night and they're screaming "Labour smears".


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 15, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> I was looking at the LibDem voice website last night and they're screaming "Labour smears".



Any and all party politicisation of this issue is further exploitation of victims IMO. 

There's plenty wrong with any party if you look hard enough, so as not to pretend that there is decent  evidence of abusers being of one political stripe or another.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2012)

Blue plaque removed from Rochdale Town Hall (a 'neutral act' to avoid vandalism y'know):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20337495

We'll need a museum for all this redacted pervo-civic statuary.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 15, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> I was looking at the LibDem voice website last night and they're screaming "Labour smears".


 
Perhaps they should rename themselves "Tory echo chamber"?


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Perhaps they should rename themselves "Tory echo chamber"?


They've lost whatever identity they had and seem to have developed full-blown Stockholm Syndrome. Maybe I'm being too kind, they've always sided with the Tories. The Coalition Coupon ?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 15, 2012)

When they said earlier on the news that police had arrested 'a man in his 60s from Bedfordshire' I guessed correctly who it was. He has just been named on the news. 

eta..Ah! I see there is a thread already running on this. Its hard to know what to post on which nonce thread these days.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 15, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> They keep throwing corpses to the media.
> 
> This so stinks.
> 
> ...


 



The corpses should be prosecuted too but not in a Saville way, allegedly.

Think this has a momentum of its own, can't see a time when we say 'This is over, no more questions.'
They are being pragmatic but they're playing pass the parcel with semtex, some form of poetic justice, the ghosts of abuse are wreaking havoc. Good for them.


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Do we have any idea who the Cambridgeshire arrest was yet?  It's been very quiet on that front...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

I'm still trying to figure out what this argument is about between certain people on Twitter


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Badger Kitten said:


> They are banking on people getting bored and moving on.


What's the betting we have an unrelated but very big domestic news story via some leaked info shortly?


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I'm still trying to figure out what this argument is about between certain people on Twitter


What people?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> What people?


 
Messham, ryantanner, Angleseydrift, realjimmyjones etc.

I get what some of it's about re Messham, but a bit confused with what else is going on behind the scenes.


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Messham, ryantanner, Angleseydrift, realjimmyjones etc.
> 
> I get what some of it's about re Messham, but a bit confused with what else is going on behind the scenes.


Anglesey at least appears to be a bryn estyn boy.  But the implications from Messham's tweets could be read as meaning that he was more complicit than victim.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I'm still trying to figure out what this argument is about between certain people on Twitter


It's between some bitter twitter bullshitters no doubt


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Messham, ryantanner, Angleseydrift, realjimmyjones etc.
> 
> I get what some of it's about re Messham, but a bit confused with what else is going on behind the scenes.





Corax said:


> Anglesey at least appears to be a bryn estyn boy. But the implications from Messham's tweets could be read as meaning that he was more complicit than victim.


Have you seen this? http://renegadesblog.wordpress.com/

RJJ's blog. I may have misread the 'falling out', as the tone of that blog reads as more pissed off with the retraction, than the accusation.  Pissed off that he retracted it?  Pissed off that he didn't explain why Alistair McAlpine had been mistaken for someone else who _did_ abuse him/them?

On an entirely unrelated note - Jimmy's name seems to have dropped off the radar. Has that been shown as implausible too?


Several tweets stating that Steven Messham's in Wrexham hospital right now. Hope he's alright.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Nov 15, 2012)

A lot of grief seems to be over the setting up of NORWAS, from reading Laverty's blog & twitter.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> Have you seen this? http://renegadesblog.wordpress.com/
> 
> RJJ's blog. I may have misread the 'falling out', as the tone of that blog reads as more pissed off with the retraction, than the accusation. Pissed off that he retracted it? Pissed off that he didn't explain why Alistair McAlpine had been mistaken for someone else who _did_ abuse him/them?
> 
> ...


 
Yeah, a few of them have blogs going.  Jimmy Jones (if that's who you're speaking about) is still on there.  Messham went to hospital the other night, but it sounds like he's back in.

As for what's going on between them all, it's more than the McA stuff and Norwas I think.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> A lot of grief seems to be over the setting up of NORWAS, from reading Laverty's blog & twitter.


 
and Messham threatened to out him for something the other day, but then held back, although he did reveal his name, and so Laverty revealed himself

It's all very messy


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> As for what's going on between them all, it's more than the McA stuff and Norwas I think.


It looked pretty expected stuff given their shared backgrounds/experiences to me - but I've only been able to skim through stuff really.  What do you mean?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> It looked pretty expected stuff given their shared backgrounds/experiences to me - but I've only been able to skim through stuff really. What do you mean?


 
Well why they're slagging each other off other than the McA and Norwas stuff, and the possibility that SM may be making up stuff.  It's just all a bit off.  Not saying I disbelieve any of them, but it's got to the point where with this slagging each other off (especially in public), they're really not doing themselves any favours and people are going to get hurt all over again 

Can't really explain myself properly on a public board I'm afraid


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well why they're slagging each other off other than the McA and Norwas stuff, and the possibility that SM may be making up stuff. It's just all a bit off. Not saying I disbelieve any of them, but it's got to the point where with this slagging each other off (especially in public), they're really not doing themselves any favours and people are going to get hurt all over again
> 
> Can't really explain myself properly on a public board I'm afraid


I was putting most of that down to the situation and the scars.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> I was putting most of that down to the situation and the scars.


 
Well yes, that's understandable, but....


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 15, 2012)

elbows said:


> Bit tired right now but would suggest that the 'not in the public interest' thing is just as much of a story as the MI5 bit, if not more so.
> 
> Much can be justified using such terms, eg not in the states interest to have political classes undermined by child sex abuse allegations.


 


Makes you wonder how much other stuff like this MI5 suppress from becoming public.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> Anglesey at least appears to be a bryn estyn boy. But the implications from Messham's tweets could be read as meaning that he was more complicit than victim.


 
Gordon Anglesea was a Chief Superintendent who was cleared of abuse. He was allegedly also a mason. He was named as someone had visited Bryn Estyn. He took libel action and won several hundred thousand pounds IIRC.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 15, 2012)

The Original Scallwag magazine is now online - im not sure if it's wise to link to it given the names it names....suggestions?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 15, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Gordon Anglesea was a Chief Superintendent who was cleared of abuse. He was allegedly also a mason. He was named as someone had visited Bryn Estyn. He took libel action and won several hundred thousand pounds IIRC.


no alleged about him being a mason, it's on the record in the public inquiry report.


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Gordon Anglesea was a Chief Superintendent who was cleared of abuse. He was allegedly also a mason. He was named as someone had visited Bryn Estyn. He took libel action and won several hundred thousand pounds IIRC.


Thanks BM.    That certainly puts a rather different angle on Messham alluding to possibly blowing the whistle on him.

So much has been written by so many that it's hard to quickly pick out who's who if you've not time to read through it all in detail.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Gordon Anglesea was a Chief Superintendent who was cleared of abuse. He was allegedly also a mason. He was named as someone had visited Bryn Estyn. He took libel action and won several hundred thousand pounds IIRC.


 
You realise we're talking about a different Anglesey

(Well I *a*m!)


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Corax said:


> Thanks BM.  That certainly puts a rather different angle on Messham alluding to possibly blowing the whistle on him.
> 
> So much has been written by so many that it's hard to quickly pick out who's who if you've not time to read through it all in detail.


 
huh?  Is this a different one?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> The Original Scallwag magazine is now online - im not sure if it's wise to link to it given the names it names....suggestions?


 
PM address?  Or give people clue as to what to google?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 15, 2012)

pm sent. As it's so new i presume Google hasn't indexed the page.

Other names (other than Macalpine) are mentioned so id rather not post the link.


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

Icke will guide the way...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 15, 2012)

A name is surfacing in relation to having kept notes of interviews. This lady. 
All of this stuff linking her to saville et al is very recently posted because when I did a search a while ago for this name I could only find reference to her arrest and 'rumour' or her being in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Proof of that is on the Assange thread because I asked about her there.

Why? :/


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Because most of the sites that go on about her are pretty dubious, her history is dubious, and I cant find anything of useful substance she has said about these sex abuse cases.


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Given the point we have now reached, it would be rather unwise to link to the Scallywag article or discuss the detail of its claims.

However some people were rather interested in which journalist may have shown a photo to victims back in the day. I would suggest that the first part of the following Observer article from 1999 may be of interest.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/1999/sep/12/thatcher.uk2


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 15, 2012)

worth a read

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/tag/jimmie-mcalpine/


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 15, 2012)

DJ Squelch said:


> Some of the worst criticism I've read online aimed at Messham has not come from Tories or the press but from other abuse victims from Bryn Estyn.



Where? I haven't seen any of that online either.


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> worth a read


 
I didnt like that article to be honest. It's probably clutching at some unproductive straws, although I dont mean that absolutely every point they make is shit. Some are though, but I think I've already covered them with my excessive quantity of posts on this thread over the last few weeks.

I still want to hear more about the dead Peter Morrison and exactly how he is supposed to have been patched into the paedophile network in question. I want to know more about the London visits that the victim interviewed on Sky talked about (and I mean new details, investigations and journalistic endeavours, not a mere reheat of stuff that came from Scallywag). I want to know more about the Righton stuff, and the Cyril Smith file. And whatever else is out there that has been overlooked due to the narrow focus on certain north wales things.


----------



## Corax (Nov 15, 2012)

elbows said:


> I still want to hear more about the dead Peter Morrison and exactly how he is supposed to have been patched into the paedophile network in question. I want to know more about the London visits that the victim interviewed on Sky talked about (and I mean new details, investigations and journalistic endeavours, not a mere reheat of stuff that came from Scallywag). I want to know more about the Righton stuff, and the Cyril Smith file. And whatever else is out there that has been overlooked due to the narrow focus on certain north wales things.


I want to know more about this 'mistaken identity'.  If it wasn't AM (which it wasn't m'lud), then who the hell was it?  A theory was put forward even before the AM claim was debunked, but seems to have disappeared into the long grass...


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2012)

Well for that to happen I think more victims are required to provide new detail, or something else to be uncovered. Because whats out there already, even when removing the distracting mistaken identity stuff, is not good enough for a story to be told about that, at least not from what I've read.

Thats why I am expressing little interest at this point, if something new comes out then I'm all ears.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

MadCatLady said:


> Where? I haven't seen any of that online either.


 
Twitter


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 15, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> worth a read
> 
> http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/tag/jimmie-mcalpine/


 
I'm still reading the other stuff


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 15, 2012)

That hat4uk person is sailing pretty fuckin close to the wind IMO ...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 16, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> That hat4uk person is sailing pretty fuckin close to the wind IMO ...


 
Not looked at Barking's link but I'm wondering if that's the one I read yesterday but Lord A's picture's been removed?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 16, 2012)

This might interest someone if they can understand legalese

http://jackofkent.com/2012/11/lord-mcalpine-and-section-12/


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 16, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> The Original Scallwag magazine is now online - im not sure if it's wise to link to it given the names it names....suggestions?


If anyone wanted to find that _Scallywag_ article it really wouldn't be difficult to locate that article from _Scallywag_, using very obvious search terms to find that particular article from that particular _Scallywag_.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 16, 2012)

I'm surprised that archived article hasn't yet been suppressed/deleted


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 16, 2012)

I bet there's a load of Twitter users a bit worried now



> Lord McAlpine’s lawyers have hired a team of experts to collate the offending Twitter messages, *including those that have been deleted,* as well as so-called “re-tweets” in which one user republishes a message posted by someone else.


 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...-to-sex-abuse-as-BBC-pays-185000-damages.html

Can you retrieve deleted ones then?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 16, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm surprised that archived article hasn't yet been suppressed/deleted


 
It's appeared on a website (The Truthseeker).  Not sure if that's where BM got it from


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 16, 2012)

Lord McAlpine accepted a massive donation from Asil Nadir and then backtracked on it. I've been reading some news articles on Lexis Nexus and it seems Nadir was on the point of exposing how the Tories raised their funds.


----------



## Chook (Nov 16, 2012)

His autobiography is called Once a Jolly Bagman.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 16, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> It's appeared on a website (The Truthseeker). Not sure if that's where BM got it from


 
I made the mistake of only going directly to the relevant page with the article, and not checking the home page. Which now I've looked at it, makes the hoster and his site look a bit conspiraloon-ish ...


----------



## Chook (Nov 16, 2012)

Don't judge a book by the bookshelf.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 16, 2012)

Chook said:


> Don't judge a book by the bookshelf.


Why not? That should be standard procedure.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 16, 2012)

Chook said:


> Don't judge a book by the bookshelf.


 
Because the site only hosted a reproduction of the article then OK Scallywag's/the article's credibility or lack of it can still be judged on their own terms.

But fact remains that the host site, and its editor/some of its contributors, are just bound to shout 'conspiracy obsessives' at any passing visitor ..


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 16, 2012)

Mcalpine's wiki page from last year

http://twitter.com/Syn0nymph/status/269436171912900609/photo/1


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 16, 2012)

Barking_Mad said:


> Mcalpine's wiki page from last year
> 
> http://twitter.com/Syn0nymph/status/269436171912900609/photo/1


 
Not read the updated version but read that the last bit was deleted in December


----------



## where to (Nov 16, 2012)

Toby young sneered at some Twitter person raising concerns at this 'art' collection. School founder Toby young, yes.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 17, 2012)

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/282958/Malcolm-King-s-terror-as-perv-sex-ring-cuts-brakes/

*THE whistle-blower who exposed the Welsh children’s home sex abuse scandal has cheated death in a suspect car smash after his brakes failed.*


Police have seized care boss Malcolm King’s motor to see if it was sabotaged.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 17, 2012)

I have a few questions:

Why is Lord A suing now when;
-he was named before by others and did not sue them? (Icke and Scallywag)
-he had a lawyer during Waterhouse, but says he was surprised to be named now?


Also: Just a reminder to be mindful of the stuff that we are reading on the net and what impact it may have on us. I read an account a week ago of the sexual abuse of a young girl, amongst other things, which I can't get out of my head. I will go as far as to say it has disturbed me greatly.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 17, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> I have a few questions:
> 
> Why is Lord A suing now when;
> -he was named before by others and did not sue them? (Icke and Scallywag)
> ...


 
Simply put, Lord A is a bully (not to mention greedy as fuck). 

Yes, I know what you mean. When I watched that clip above of a victim recalling his abuse, it haunted me for days.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 17, 2012)

where to said:


> Toby young sneered at some Twitter person raising concerns at this 'art' collection. School founder Toby young, yes.


 
Utter Tory Toby Young, yes.

I'm sure not all Tories are programmed to react like this, but the stupider ones must be ...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 17, 2012)

*If anyone is interested*; This book is a good read and will definately provide some perspective, perhaps answer of the wider questions that are being asked about how this level of abuse can go on unchallenged for so long, what the fallout of abuse is in different contexts etc.
*Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence - from Domestic Abuse to Political Terror *

It is available in an ebook here.

At the very least I recommend reading the first section of Chapter 1 (pages 4 and 5 of the ebook linked to above) as it summarises the dynamics of abuse with regard resultant psychological trauma, and what 'we' as bystanders are engaging with when we acknowledge/focus on it existance and experiences of it.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 17, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/282958/Malcolm-King-s-terror-as-perv-sex-ring-cuts-brakes/
> 
> *THE whistle-blower who exposed the Welsh children’s home sex abuse scandal has cheated death in a suspect car smash after his brakes failed.*
> 
> ...


 
Yeah read that last night and it happened two weeks ago.  Meanwhile I found an interesting article on a certain person's views on twitter by @IstarsGate


----------



## elbows (Nov 17, 2012)

I think you are missing a h from the name of the new age astral magic wibbler. What were you referring to anyway, the Machiavellian stuff?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 17, 2012)

elbows said:


> I think you are missing a h from the name of the new age astral magic wibbler. What were you referring to anyway, the Machiavellian stuff?


 
Yeah, missing h, was in a rush



> *ANDREW MARR: *There was a lot of talk back in the Eighties and Nineties about sleaze and how the Labour Party was going to clean up the system of donations to political parties and yet you look at the last few days and some people would say it's dirtier than ever.
> 
> *Person who we shouldn't talk about 'cos he's innocent - *The Eighties, the sleaze wasn't just money - it was sexual and every sort of sleaze that anyone could lay their hands on.


----------



## where to (Nov 18, 2012)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Utter Tory Toby Young, yes.
> 
> I'm sure not all Tories are programmed to react like this, but the stupider ones must be ...



A cunt's cunt, for sure.


----------



## Corax (Nov 18, 2012)

Anyone else get the sense this is all running out of steam?

A job well done it seems.


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2012)

Momentum was never going to be sustained continually, it will come in fits and starts depending on what new angles journalists may find, what investigations & inquiries uncover, etc. And there were always likely to be problems in this regard due to the historical nature of the claims, and the relatively low chances of solid new evidence coming to light, at least at this point.

I dont really buy into the idea that the McAlpine stuff has shut stuff down, indeed I could make a case that the frenzy would have diminished more quickly if nobody had sloppily reopened that avenue in the first place. It has dampened down the speculation that was largely not based on any really new information coming to light, and I'm not sure thats as bad a thing as some would like to make out.

I concede that it is possible this stuff has put people off from exploring stuff that would have yielded more fruit, but there is really no way to be certain anything better would have emerged if this hadnt happened.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 18, 2012)

Corax said:


> Anyone else get the sense this is all running out of steam?
> 
> A job well done it seems.


 
Dunno.  Could all blow up in a different way if all the stuff on Twitter is to be believed


----------



## Corax (Nov 18, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Dunno. Could all blow up in a different way if all the stuff on Twitter is to be believed


Not been on there for a few days.  Relevant hashtags?


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2012)

Are you on about the same stuff as before Minnie, with some people who reckon they are in the know making allegations about a victim or two?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 18, 2012)

Corax said:


> Not been on there for a few days. Relevant hashtags?





elbows said:


> Are you on about the same stuff as before Minnie, with some people who reckon they are in the know making allegations about a victim or two?


 
Yeah, same stuff, same allegations but games being played, blogs written, all not very nice stuff


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2012)

Cheers. It is ugly, not terribly surprising, and I'm mostly trying not to pay too much attention to it. I'm not sure about it blowing up though.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 18, 2012)

Corax said:


> Anyone else get the sense this is all running out of steam?
> 
> I was thinking exactly that this afternoon. I'm a bit bemused that nothing has come from the discovered copies of the Jillings reports - the Independent has one and some of the councils said they 'found' their copies, yet I haven't seen anything at all reported about the contents. Does anyone know whether it's because there is nothing new, or it's being suppressed or because the paper is investigating people named?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 18, 2012)

elbows said:


> Cheers. It is ugly, not terribly surprising, and I'm mostly trying not to pay too much attention to it. I'm not sure about it blowing up though.


 
Suppose it'll depend on whose story journalists decide to believe


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2012)

I suspect many journalists wont want to touch either side of that story. It's a minefield and its far from clear what good will come from it, or what agendas could effectively be served by it without unnecessary risk of it backfiring.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 18, 2012)

elbows said:


> I suspect many journalists wont want to touch either side of that story. It's a minefield and its far from clear what good will come from it, or what agendas could effectively be served by it without unnecessary risk of it backfiring.


 
also true

Maybe they'll all just carrying on sniping at each other online


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Nov 18, 2012)

audiotech said:


> Are you sure about that?


Definitely not my site, I only have two: www.borderland.co.uk and www.borderlandmagazine.co.uk.  All other sites that might appear to be me are not.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2012)

An extra bit on Cyril Smith (apologies if already covered, I haven't been on here for a couple of days). I was in Rochdale at the weekend and the Rochdale Observer is running a story linking him to abuse at Knowl View Special School (school for kids with, I think, emotional and learning difficulties). OBserver's site with related stories:
http://menmedia.co.uk/rochdaleobserver/news/
Specific one:
http://menmedia.co.uk/rochdaleobser...l-smith-abused-boys-at-second-rochdale-school

He was chair of governors at the school and had keys made for all of the dormitories. _That is, someone who everyone knew had been investigated by the police for child abuse was given 24/7 access to vulnerable children - in their bedrooms_.  The School has featured in previous abuse allegations and was closed down in the 90s. Apparently one of the workers there complained to police about the abuse of children - inc. Smith. I don't know the details, but nothing at all seems to have been done about Smith's part in it - and this was in the 90s - a time when child protection policies were pretty much in place (at least the arrangements and awareness around child abuse were closer to the present than the 1960s).  The worker who complained - yes, you've guessed it, made redundant after the closure.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 19, 2012)

Wilf said:


> An extra bit on Cyril Smith (apologies if already covered, I haven't been on here for a couple of days). I was in Rochdale at the weekend and the Rochdale Observer is running a story linking him to abuse at Knowl View Special School (school for kids with, I think, emotional and learning difficulties). OBserver's site with related stories:
> http://menmedia.co.uk/rochdaleobserver/news/
> Specific one:
> http://menmedia.co.uk/rochdaleobser...l-smith-abused-boys-at-second-rochdale-school
> ...


 
The known paedo mentioned in this article wouldn't be Cyril would it?

http://menmedia.co.uk/rochdaleobserver/news/s/531340_school_sex_abuse_horror_revealed

I'm not saying Cyril wasn't involved, but I doubt he's the paedo mentioned.

I remember "town bogs" opposite the black box in Rochdale being notorious as a rent boy haunt - Most of them were probably from Knowl View. Poor souls.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2012)

Frances Lengel said:


> I'm not saying Cyril wasn't involved, but I doubt he's the paedo mentioned.
> 
> I remember "town bogs" opposite the black box in Rochdale being notorious as a rent boy haunt - Most of them were probably from Knowl View. Poor souls.


Sorry, I'm not much of a source on this. Rochdale Observer went mad on Smith this week - first 9 or 10 pages or so. I skimmed the first few pages and there was reference to a known paedo having access, other than Smith, so you are no doubt right in relation to the piece quoted. He did though, apparently, have access to the dorms. 

I'm from Heywood but was pretty involved in Rochdale politics in the 80s (Labour *). Since then when the abuse stuff has come up I've almost not wanted to know, I've found it so depressing when it's a place you know. Ditto in terms of the 'grooming' episode. Horrible, horrible, horrible. Poor fucking kids.

*Edit: on a thread about truly awful crimes, I wish to make it clear _I am no longer and have not been for many years, a member of the Labour Party_.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 19, 2012)

> *BBC Radio Manchester* ‏@*bbcradiomanc*
> The CPS says it's found a file relating to late MP for Rochdale Sir Cyril Smith dating from the 1960s. It DOES contain allegations of abuse


----------



## elbows (Nov 19, 2012)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20399632


> *Rochdale's MP has called for an inquiry into the role of MI5 in a potential "cover-up" of alleged abuse by former MP Cyril Smith in the 1960s.*
> Speaking in Parliament, Simon Danczuk also asked why the case was dropped, against advice, by prosecutors.
> An inquiry must "get to the bottom of what several former police officers are now referring to as a cover up", he said.





> Mr Danczuk said files from a Lancashire Police investigation in the 1960s, which the force had been unable to find, had now been uncovered by the Crown Prosecution Service.
> He asked: "Can the home secretary now look at whether it's true the director of public prosecutions at the time received a second opinion recommending Smith be prosecuted, and why he concluded it was not in the public interest?
> He also asked for an inquiry into "what role, if any, security services played".


----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2012)

Don't know owt about Danczuk, but he's also getting stuck into his fellow Labour member Colin Lambert (current Council Leader) about the wider Rochdale abuse issue. 
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/new...8/mp-danczuk-lays-into-council-leader-lambert

No idea about the background between them, what's going on in the Rochdale Labour Party, but on the face of it you have to be slightly impressed that Danczuk hasn't taken a simple partisan approach.  Of course it would be hard not to be critical of Rochdale Council on this.


----------



## elbows (Nov 20, 2012)

Danczuk is not amused.

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...rmer-rochdale-mp-sir-cyril-smith-abuse-claims



> Ministers have been accused of ‘sitting on their hands’ instead of investigating claims Sir Cyril Smith sexually abused a string of young boys.
> Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk said the government should be probing a possible cover-up of allegations against the Liberal.
> His criticisms came as the Crown Prosecution Service finally recovered its file on the case, dating back to the 1960s.
> Three more victims have come forward in the last 24 hours to say they were molested by Sir Cyril – taking the tally into double figures. Only one has so far gone to police.





> After mounting public pressure, the CPS confirmed it has now recovered the original allegations from the time.
> A spokesman said: “We have located a file in relation to allegations dating back to the 1960s and we are now looking into its contents.”
> Mr Danczuk has written to Keir Starmer, the current director of public prosecutions, demanding to know when the contents of the file will be published. He used a House of Commons debate to demand ministers investigate a range of allegations made by victims and former police officers. Home Office minister Jeremy Brown said victims should speak to the police, while anyone with concerns about the police should speak to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
> He did not address the question of a cover up or any potential government investigation.
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 20, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Don't know owt about Danczuk, but he's also getting stuck into his fellow Labour member Colin Lambert (current Council Leader) about the wider Rochdale abuse issue.
> http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/new...8/mp-danczuk-lays-into-council-leader-lambert
> 
> No idea about the background between them, what's going on in the Rochdale Labour Party, but on the face of it you have to be slightly impressed that Danczuk hasn't taken a simple partisan approach. Of course it would be hard not to be critical of Rochdale Council on this.


He hates lib-dems, really really hates them. That's pretty much all i know about him.


----------



## elbows (Nov 20, 2012)

Oh yeah, he is the one who lodged a formal complaint with Essex police over Chris Huhne's speeding ticket.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13404533


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 20, 2012)

another one for the lib-dems are shitthread


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> He hates lib-dems, really really hates them. That's pretty much all i know about him.


 Yes, Rochdale Constituency has been a Lib-Lab marginal ever since Smith.  The Council has also alternated between Lab control and a Lib-Con coalition (though from memory there was also some kind of Lab-Con period).  Perfect conditions for personal grudge politics.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 20, 2012)

I don't know much about Danczuk either, but what I did notice a couple of years ago when (I think) he first stood in Rochdale was there seemed to be a bit of a smear campaign concerning him leaving his wife for another woman or somesuch conducted against him by not only Lib Dems but a fair few from Labour as well. The impression I got was that it seemed to be because he was not a part of their glee club kinda thing. As yopu'll have probably noticed, Rochdale's a weird place with clandestine loyalties that go back to the days of mill owners and that.


----------



## Corax (Nov 20, 2012)

Now that they've "recovered" the file, I'm looking forward to the explanation for why it gathered dust in a safe instead of being used for investigation and prosecution.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 21, 2012)

Well the independent and the welsh councils have done sweet FA with their recently found Jillings reports so best not hold your breath.....


----------



## Diamond (Nov 21, 2012)

Just wondering, given that we're 56 pages into this compendium and I've only had a chance to refer to it occasionally, is the major high profile pimlico centred, reality-TV, slipper endowed, spider's web of a theory still holding water or have the population as a whole taken a step back from that rather totalitarian interpretation?


----------



## elbows (Nov 22, 2012)

It was never exactly watertight, and the only thing to emerge since that could possibly be linked is the interview a victim gave to sky a while back, but we dont actually know if its the very same story since there were no names or location hints in that.

I get the impression that my own stance on it isnt what quite a lot of people wanted to hear, there remains quite an appetite to see this stuff further explored. But I cant do anything with it without new stuff emerging, and I think its reasonable to treat the original media source with a reasonable amount of caution. Not least because there may have been several forces at work, and it is certainly an area where things are complicated both by issues relating to homosexuality and 'rent boys'.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 22, 2012)

Diamond said:


> Just wondering, given that we're 56 pages into this compendium and I've only had a chance to refer to it occasionally, is the major high profile pimlico centred, reality-TV, slipper endowed, spider's web of a theory still holding water or have the population as a whole taken a step back from that rather totalitarian interpretation?


I'd say that on balance there's a hell of a lot more smoke now than when the thread started, with multiple high profile examples coming to light (mostly the dead ones), and a recurent theme of long term cover ups happening whenever complaints have been made / investigations ordered either from central government or at a more local government level.

Despite the apparent Lord McAlpine red herring, there's a hell of a lot of the rumours that are turning out to have been true - eg Cyril Smith's long rumoured inch thick police file stamped with a DPP note 'prosecution not in the public interest', that was alleged to have been sent down to London and never been seen again... which has now been found by the CPS.

Or the 5-6 examples I gave from a nick davies article of the stories of the whistle blowers who'd tried to investigate allegations of widespread abuse, and had all faced massive institutional barriers to getting anything to happen about it, and been sacked for the privilige, despite uncovering dozens of abuse cases going back decades in most cases.

Common themes in many of these cases also seem to relate to masonic influence in the areas, though this is not to say that the masons as a whole are in on anything, but the connections people are able to make within such organisations would certainly aid significantly in any coverups. For example in the welsh situation, one of the main perpetrators seems to have been the son of a Lord who also happened to be the head mason in North Wales for 40 years, and several of the whistle blowers in Nick Davies article mention the local government, judiciary etc in that area being heavily Masonic, and them feeling or hinting at this being a major factor in them not being able to push an investigation through. Plus theres the welsh abuse victim and now councillor who's stated that he believes all the people on his list are also masons, and called for this aspect of the situation to be fully investigated.

As for the purves in pimlico. There have been allegations from a Welsh abuse victim about minibuses being used to take boys down to sex parties with upper class old men in London, as well as old scallywag statements about taking 2 boys individually to london and them both pointing out the same building as being the one they'd been taken to.

There's also several of the investigations into widespread abuse in various parts of the UK over the last 30 years that clearly show peadophiles acting in widespread networks, using central hubs to gain access to kids to abuse. Eg pretty much the first investigation that really chased down the networks in Bristol in the mid 90s resulted in the successful prosecution of 60 people all of whom were connected with one house that had been used as a central point for the abuse to take place over a couple of decades IIRC. That's 60 they were able to investigate before the investigation got shut down / had its resources withdrawn to the point where they couldn't then investigate the wider network beyond that 60, which could well have uncovered other networks.

http://mystoryaboutsocialservices.w...-story-of-colin-smart-copied-from-nick-davis/

There's certainly a lot of evidence of widespread long term cover ups of widespread abuse cases in many different areas of the country. What exactly the motivations for these cover ups is / was, and if they're linked or if it's just an institutional reaction to such allegations to attempt to cover them up and hope they go away is less clear.


----------



## exiledinwales (Nov 22, 2012)

The ruling class is guilty wholesale. let's just do em.


----------



## elbows (Nov 22, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> also true
> 
> Maybe they'll all just carrying on sniping at each other online


 
I had a quick look at one of the offending blogs this evening and I had to laugh out loud at the following snippet:



> I showed him Mr Ickes website and he asked "will you be that stupid if you stay on the computer dad?"


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 22, 2012)

MadCatLady said:


> Well the independent and the welsh councils have done sweet FA with their recently found Jillings reports so best not hold your breath.....


 
How do you know the independent aren't doing anything with the report? If they are I'm sure they want to get it right.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 22, 2012)

elbows said:


> I had a quick look at one of the offending blogs this evening and I had to laugh out loud at the following snippet:


 
I'm guessing that's DL's one?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 22, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/282958/Malcolm-King-s-terror-as-perv-sex-ring-cuts-brakes/
> 
> *THE whistle-blower who exposed the Welsh children’s home sex abuse scandal has cheated death in a suspect car smash after his brakes failed.*
> 
> ...



I don't see the fuss really. The idea that cars are fixed via the Boston Brakes or similar methods is a theory about conspiracies and therefore complete bollocks. 

It's good the matter has gone to the police though. There's no question marks over any of their behaviour in all these affairs. 
Imagine if someone like the car manufacture or had been asked to do an assessment. the mind boggles. I'm sure the police will report that nothing is wrong at all, and we will all sleep better for it.


----------



## elbows (Nov 22, 2012)

Nice headline.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...d-of-compounding-cover-up-over-sex-abuse.html


> *Sir Cyril Smith: Cameron accused of 'compounding cover up' over sex abuse*
> 
> *David Cameron and senior ministers have been accused of “compounding the cover up” over sex abuse allegations about Sir Cyril Smith, the late Liberal Democrat MP, by failing to produce a police dossier allegedly seized by MI5.*


----------



## Diamond (Nov 23, 2012)

I'm sorry but, on reflection, this story is starting to resemble the incrementally fantastical and paranoid satanic ritual abuse scare of the 1980s more than anything else.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 23, 2012)

Diamond said:


> I'm sorry but, on reflection, this story is starting to resemble the incrementally fantastical and paranoid satanic ritual abuse scare of the 1980s more than anything else.


 
Yep, must be really convenient for any _actual_ ruling-class child rapists who might otherwise have stood a faint chance of being brought to trial.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 23, 2012)

I suppose one of the really interesting aspects of this is that the proposed paedophile ring may have had one or more members of the Tory establishment in its midst.

The point being is that the curiousity of the public is animated principally by political concerns rather than the damage suffered by the victims. Consider this, which other grand child abuse conspiracy has predominated media attention to this degree in living memory?

Or to put it another way, why did many people feel they were let down by either Stephen Messham or the BBC when it was revealed that a fundamental mistake was made in their initial report?

Messham was abused. By tory or any other political stripe matters not a jot.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2012)

Diamond said:


> The point being is that the curiousity of the public is animated principally by political concerns rather than the damage suffered by the victims. Consider this, which other grand child abuse conspiracy has predominated media attention to this degree in living memory?


 
Only a subsection are motivated by the political dimension, so I would state the case more broadly as being powered by an interest in anyone famous, especially when they fall from grace and the scandal is dirty. This isnt a new phenomenon, although it has extra legs now due to the ubiquity of the internet compared to scandals from the pre-net era.

The fallout from operation Ore was the closest example, although it was pre-twitter there was certainly a fascination when celebrities such as rock stars were implicated. And of course there is the US example of Michael Jackson.


----------



## Corax (Nov 23, 2012)

Nor does it mean that people "don't care" unless it's someone famous*.  It's a simple case of desensitisation.  There's something about human psychology that exhausts emotive outrage for something that's been witnessed time and again - perhaps because it didn't do any good the first time around.  A new angle gives a new lever, and a new possibility for radical action.  Vocal protest then feels like it may not be barking into the wind.

*Not that anyone's claimed that on here


----------



## free spirit (Nov 23, 2012)

Diamond said:


> I suppose one of the really interesting aspects of this is that the proposed paedophile ring may have had one or more members of the Tory establishment in its midst.
> 
> The point being is that the curiousity of the public is animated principally by political concerns rather than the damage suffered by the victims. Consider this, which other grand child abuse conspiracy has predominated media attention to this degree in living memory?
> 
> ...


Do you think the victims just want the dead abusers to be investigated, or maybe that they'd like everyone and every institution involved in protecting their abusers and covering up for them over 3-4 decades to also be investigated?

IMO one of the major motivations in abuse victims coming forward is to attempt to prevent the same thing continuing to happen to others, and this can only be achieved by investigating, exposing and tackling the institutional mechanisms that existed that ensured these widespread abuses were allowed to carry on for so long in so many different areas of the country, and then be subject to a cover up of one form or another by the authorities once it is brought to their attention.

Just locking up a few scapegoated kiddie fiddlers can't be allowed to cut it this time. Those who covered up for it (for whatever reason) must be held to account as well.


----------



## caoineadh7 (Nov 23, 2012)

Ken Livingstone claiming MI5 filmed abuse at Kincora to blackmail politicians, I also heard this happened in North Wales with foreign diplomats brought there by undercover MI6 officers. I suspect in the cold war such things went on.



http://soundcloud.com/gypsumfantastic23/ken-mi5




Kincora, all the investigations were dropped.


!


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 24, 2012)

Louis MacNeice said:


> How do you know the independent aren't doing anything with the report? If they are I'm sure they want to get it right.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice





Louis MacNeice said:


> How do you know the independent aren't doing anything with the report? If they are I'm sure they want to get it right.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice







Ooh that sounds promising....


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 24, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Just locking up a few scapegoated kiddie fiddlers can't be allowed to cut it this time. Those who covered up for it (for whatever reason) must be held to account as well.


 
Won't happen though


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 24, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Ken Livingstone claiming MI5 filmed abuse at Kincora to blackmail politicians, I also heard this happened in North Wales with foreign diplomats brought there by undercover MI6 officers. I suspect in the cold war such things went on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 24, 2012)

caoineadh7 said:


> Ken Livingstone claiming MI5 filmed abuse at Kincora to blackmail politicians, I also heard this happened in North Wales with foreign diplomats brought there by undercover MI6 officers. I suspect in the cold war such things went on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Robin Ramsay put together a good synopsis of Kincora for Lobster, the para-politics journal. He was agnostic on the matter of filming,  though, mostly because it would have been technically difficult to get decently identifiable blackmail material without a multi-camera setup, which the boys' home had no room for.
What went on in local hotel rooms is sadly probably another matter entirely.


----------



## MadCatLady (Nov 24, 2012)

Lord Mcalpine - The New Machiavelli: The Art of Politics in Business 1999

“Another option is for the businessperson to learn the art of dealing with the media, using all the tricks that go with that trade – such as the false defeat: when a person seems to lose, in order to gain public sympathy, or the false triumph: where a person seems to win in order to appear strong – thus giving credibility to any number of dubious propositions that person may wish to make in the future. Neither of these ploys are examples of the use of true facts, rather of false facts given to the media to chew on, much as a dog chews on a bone. 

Another useful ploy is the false accusation. First, create a situation where you are wrongly accused. Then, at a convenient moment, arrange for the false accusation to be shown to be false beyond all doubt. Those who have made accusations against both the company and its management become discredited. Further accusations will then be treated with great suspicion. Always remember that people’s memories are very frail, remembering only both the high spots and the lows of a person’s career, and then seldom remembering accurately. People believe in the facts that it suits them to believe.”


Spooky.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Nov 24, 2012)

Have you got a link for that?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 24, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Have you got a link for that?


 
It's been posted all over the internet, including on this thread a couple of times


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 26, 2012)

All those feeling guilty please own up! 

Phishing Lord A lawyer/twitter spam.

http://www.rmpi.co.uk/uploads/documents/Twitter_Form.pdf


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 27, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> All those feeling guilty please own up!
> 
> Phishing Lord A lawyer/twitter spam.
> 
> http://www.rmpi.co.uk/uploads/documents/Twitter_Form.pdf


 
That's been floating around for a while now


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 27, 2012)

Clearly the river didn't flow my way till now!


----------



## free spirit (Nov 27, 2012)

well I'm fucked if I'm going to apologise for calling him a tory twat.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 27, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> Clearly the river didn't flow my way till now!


 
I hope you've sent your £5 to be donated to Children in Need


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 27, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I hope you've sent your £5 to be donated to Children in Need


What for? 

Also, I realise now why that pdf/letter hasn't floated my way before, there isn't much of a tide on the canal.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Nov 27, 2012)

Rutita1 said:


> What for?
> 
> Also, I realise now why that pdf/letter hasn't floated my way before, there isn't much of a tide on the canal.


 
Did you behave and not mention his name then?  Are you living on a canal boat?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 27, 2012)

CPS statement on the Smith file:

1.





> In March *1970*, some 16 years before the Crown Prosecution Service was formed and when Sir Norman Skelhorn was the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), a file of evidence was submitted to the then DPP’s Office.
> 
> The file, from Lancashire Constabulary, contained allegations made by eight men that they had been subjected to indecent assaults by Cyril Smith as teenagers. The allegations were very similar in nature, and were allegedly conducted on the pretexts of either a medical examination or punishment for misbehaviour. All the boys were either living at Cambridge House Children’s Home in Rochdale (six of them), or were dependent on Cyril Smith for either employment, financial support or some sort of guardianship. It is noted that 80 pages of evidence was supplied to the then DPP’s office with a covering note dated 11 March 1970.
> 
> The only documentation of the decision making is a one page letter to the Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary.


 
2.





> In April *1997* South Wales police began an investigation into sexual and physical abuse within care establishments in Wales, during which helplines were publicised by the media inviting potential victims to come forward. One man who rang the helpline alleged he was abused by Cyril Smith at Cambridge House Children’s Home in Rochdale between 1965 and 1968. This allegation was passed to Greater Manchester Police, who submitted a file of evidence, which also included the 1970 documentation, to the CPS in May 1998.
> 
> The request was to review the 1970 decision making and this was provided in a written advice from the CPS lawyer on 17 June 1998.
> 
> ...


 
3.





> The man who had rung the helpline was spoken to by Greater Manchester Police in October 1998, and confirmed he was one of the original complainants from 1970. During further police enquiries, two further complainants were identified through a local journalist who made allegations of indecent assault against Cyril Smith.
> 
> The reviewing lawyer (the same as provided advice in 1998) provided advice on 21 May *1999*. It concluded:
> 
> ...


 


> The decision made in 1970 would not be made by the CPS today.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2012)

I dont normally duplicate exactly what I've said on another thread but I think I'll make an exception in this case.

Well at least that confirms what we suspected rather than let this bit drag on without any answers, but still hard not to get very angry about this. Its the headline story on the Guardian website at the moment:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/27/cyril-smith-claims-decision-prosecute



> Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale who first raised allegations against Smith on the floor of the House of Commons, said the CPS has serious questions to answer over its failure to act in the past.
> "What has become clear today is that Cyril Smith should have been prosecuted for sexual abuse," Danczuk said. "We now know that the CPS failed to act on police officers' recommendations on three occasions.
> "In the last week I have met with senior police officers from both Lancashire and Greater Manchester police, who told me they had seen the files I had requested at [prime minister's questions].
> "They were in no doubt that Smith should have been put in the dock and they wanted the victims to know this."
> ...


Some pressure on MPs again:


> One alleged victim of Smith, who says he was 17 and had fallen out with his adoptive parents when he was first abused by the former Liberal MP in the late 70s, said the announcement was a relief, but asked MPs to now also say if they knew of the allegations but failed to disclose them.
> 
> "For years I have harboured a lot of pain and suffering but lacked the confidence to come forward. But the reason that I did not report this was because there was such an inequality of power. I would have been fighting a man who was a member of parliament. I am pleased to hear that the CPS has looked at the files but parliament now has to look at itself too. I think it has failed to protect me or any of his other victims," he said.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2012)

http://www.channel4.com/news/cyril-smith-sexually-and-physically-abuse-young-boys


> By all accounts, Cyril Smith was a power broker in Rochdale, placing people in positions of responsibility or care - like on boards of governors.
> The police investigation will now focus on whether or not he was part of, or ran, a network of abusers and placed some in such positions. To quote one senior source: “Cyril Smith was an ogre.”


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2012)

> @*MichaelLCrick*
> Interesting aspect of *Cyril Smith* story is what senior Liberals/Lib Dems knew or suspected at the time. Did they turn a blind eye?


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2012)

The Director of Public Prosecutions at the time had a few other controversies under his belt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Skelhorn




> Skelhorn became entangled in the row that erupted around the use of torture in Northern Ireland. Prime Minister Edward Heath had banned sensory deprivation in light of the report by Sir Edmund Compton into internment and interrogation techniques used by the British Army and the Royal Ulster Constabulary.[8] In October 1973, being questioned at a meeting of the Harvard Law School Forum, Sir Norman did not deny that torture had taken place, claiming that: _"when dealing with "Irish terrorists" any methods were justified."_[9]
> 
> On 9 April 1976, the leader of the Young Liberals Peter Hain was cleared of robbery at a branch of Barclays Bank. In the House of Commons that afternoon, six MPs led by Liberal David Steel, called for the resignation of Sir Norman Skelhorn, over the Hain case.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 28, 2012)

I wonder what wee David Steel has to say?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2012)

nino_savatte said:


> I wonder what wee David Steel has to say?


 
"Oh fuck, the chickens are coming home to roost"?


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2012)

Has Steel completely retired from public life? He doesnt seem to have anything in Hansard since 2005?

Although to be generous I should mention that Cyril Smith was a Labour councillor at the time of the offences.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> "Oh fuck, the chickens are coming home to roost"?


I don't think that sounds like david steel. He'd be more like 'crivens!'


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2012)

elbows said:


> Has Steel completely retired from public life? He doesnt seem to have anything in Hansard since 2005?
> 
> Although to be generous I should mention that Cyril Smith was a Labour councillor at the time of the offences.


Recent stuff, have to look for baron/lord etc Aikwood.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2012)

Ta very much, silly of me, brain not working properly at all today, think I will give it a rest.


----------



## magneze (Nov 28, 2012)

He's been trying to find out who runs the Internet.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Nov 28, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't think that sounds like david steel. He'd be more like 'crivens!'


 
jings ma boab


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> jings ma boab


Quite so


----------



## mack (Nov 29, 2012)

2 little boys indeed.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 29, 2012)

> *Sex offenders including paedophiles should be allowed to adopt, Theresa May told*
> 
> * Rules which bar sex offenders from working with children are ‘unfair’ and even convicted paedophiles should have the right to adopt, a leading legal academic has said.*
> 
> ...


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ld-be-allowed-to-adopt-Theresa-May-told.html#



> *Sex offenders should not be banned from looking after children*
> 
> 
> Sex offenders should not automatically be banned from adopting, fostering or working with children, according to new research which also backs government plans to relax strict vetting procedures introduced after the Soham murders.


http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2010/11/sexOffenders.aspx

Never seen either of these before


----------



## Treacle Toes (Dec 2, 2012)

> *'Paedo palace' file re-opened: Detectives probing historic sex abuse claims*
> 
> 2 Dec 2012 09:03
> A guesthouse where 30 years ago the rich and powerful are feared to have abused young boys is under police scrutiny again


 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-ring-a-paedo-palace-where-vips-1469127


----------



## elbows (Dec 12, 2012)

From a story about the latest Savile stats:



> Meanwhile, police have set up Operation Fairbank to investigate allegations by Labour MP Tom Watson of a paedophile ring in high places.


 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20697738 but no other info about it in this article.


----------



## elbows (Dec 13, 2012)

Channel 4 news have followed up on the north wales stuff:

http://www.channel4.com/news/north-wales-child-abuse-unanswered-questions



> As critics lined up to call for George Entwistle’s head, a handful of commentators pointed out that the real and serious issue of child abuse was in danger of being overshadowed by the media’s hysteria over the future of the BBC.
> And so it proved as we have heard little or nothing of this unsettling story since, writes Ciaran Jenkins. There are, however, many questions which remain unanswered:





> Clwyd County Council no longer exists but copies of the Jillings report are held by a number of its successor authorities.
> Legal advice has been sought by Flintshire, Wrexham and Denbighshire councils to establish whether they can release it under Freedom of Information legislation.
> However, Flintshire Council has informed *Channel 4 News* it is considering whether to exercise a number of exemptions which would prevent publication because disclosure could inhibit law enforcement, and because the report contains personal information and information provided in confidence.





> In her statement to the House of Commons, Theresea May announced a major new inquiry led by the National Crime Agency which would re-examine the allegations of historic abuse in north Wales and the original police investigations. It is codenamed ‘Operation Pallial’ and is still in the evidence-gathering phase.
> However, *Channel 4 News* has learned that the investigation is limited to the North Wales area and related allegations located in Cheshire are considered outside its terms of reference.


 


> Operation Pallial must ask difficult questions of the police if it is to be credible.
> It might begin by asking what happened to photographs depicting child abuse discovered in a flat in Wrexham in 1979? Much of the suspicion about outside involvement in the abuse of young boys stemmed from these images.





> The Children's Commissioner for Wales has now received information relating to 99 separate cases, 48 of which concern the original inquiry. Crucially, *Channel 4 News* has learned that Operation Pallial is actively investigating allegations from victims not previously known to the police. New evidence may yet emerge which could help clear up some of these mysteries once and for all.


 
There are some other bits of interest in the story but I didnt want to cut & paste the entire thing.


----------



## little_legs (Dec 13, 2012)

I know it's been said before that it's legal that the report had been supressed at the time. But am I being dense here? How can the state be the fiduciary of the public funds and the protector of those in its care? Why is it ok to fail the kids in its care as long as it protects the public money? I've been reading yesterday that following the insurer's recommendations not to publish the report, Clwyd Council was also advised by QC Michael Beloff not to publish the report _in case the council received some nasty libel writs_. Does this mean that it was presumed that some of those who gave evidence were unreliable witnesses?


----------



## elbows (Dec 14, 2012)

little_legs said:


> Does this mean that it was presumed that some of those who gave evidence were unreliable witnesses?


 

Probably. I'm not sure of the exact legal standing of the process by which witnesses were questioned for that report, but there are particular situations where witnesses can make claims without fear of libel, such as in a court.

Meanwhile I found a bit more about operation Fairbank:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...d-connections-to-escape-justice-16250028.html



> Scotland Yard detectives are looking into allegations that senior politicians abused children in the 1980s and escaped justice because they were protected by their powerful connections.​During past weeks officers from the Metropolitan Police’s child abuse investigation team have interviewed several adults who claim that they were sexually assaulted as children by MPs in a paedophile ring.​


​


> Until today when the Metropolitan Police confirmed its existence, the inquiry, Operation Fairbank, had been operating in secret at the headquarters of the Child Abuse Investigation Team at Empress State Building in Earl’s Court, London.​​Officers with the team, part of the Specialist Crimes and Operations Directorate, have spoken regularly to Mr Watson.​​The Metropolitan Police stressed that Operation Fairbank was a “scoping exercise” aimed at a preliminary assessment of the evidence rather than a formal inquiry.​​However, officers are understood to be taking the witnesses’s claims very seriously and are expected to make arrests in coming weeks.​


​​


----------



## elbows (Dec 14, 2012)

That investigation may well be centred on the Elm Guest House that is mentioned in the story Rutita1 linked to in post 1705 of this thread.


----------



## elbows (Dec 14, 2012)

Some on twitter are not exactly impressed with attendance in the house.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

Publication next week:

Pollard inquiry has not interviewed Savile abuse investigator



> Nick Pollard's inquiry into Newsnight's aborted investigation into child sex abuse by Jimmy Savile has failed to interview the former policeman turned broadcaster who worked on the never-aired film, raising questions about the thoroughness of its work as the resulting report nears publication next week.


 
he did work on the bottled newsnight prog - so even  under a strict BBC only focus should have been talked to.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

That piece is good example of what's wrong with the Guardian btw - it's BBC content topped and tailed by a few orginal words.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

Just in passing:

Cornish 'white witches' guilty of ritual sex abuse on girls


----------



## where to (Dec 14, 2012)

David Hencke and Exaro have been looking intothis London guest house story. He is saying the police dropped investigations.into it, ex ministers are implicated. Worth checking exaro website. On phone so can't link, sorry.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

Former pupils call for new investigation into abuse claims at Suffolk school

Again,in passing:



> A number of former pupils of a school for troubled boys who say they were victims of physical and sexual abuse are calling for a new investigation and a wide inquiry into care institutions.
> 
> The ex-pupils of Kesgrave Hall, near Ipswich, Suffolk, have described a culture of violence at the school in the 1980s.
> 
> The Guardian has spoken to 10 men who say they were victims of, or witnesses to, abuse while they were pupils, including three who were interviewed at length by Suffolk police during an investigation into the school in 1992, which was later dropped. They have described a spectrum of abuse, predominantly physical, and the use of disciplinary methods outlawed at the time as corporal punishment.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 14, 2012)

elbows said:


> Some on twitter are not exactly impressed with attendance in the house.


 

Have you only just seen that?  It's a month old


----------



## elbows (Dec 14, 2012)

Yeah I missed it at the time, or saw it and forgot about it. Probably because there was a lot of news and research to get my teeth into a month+ ago, not so much now. At least this thread isnt completely dead, so I can for now resist the temptation to start ranting about fickle news cycles being reflected as much by people on forums as the news organs themselves.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 14, 2012)

elbows said:


> Yeah I missed it at the time, or saw it and forgot about it. Probably because there was a lot of news and research to get my teeth into a month+ ago, not so much now. At least this thread isnt completely dead, so I can for now resist the temptation to start ranting about fickle news cycles being reflected as much by people on forums as the news organs themselves.


 
Yeah, I think someone on Twitter posted up that picture, along with one on Parliamentary expenses.  Needless to say, it was a lot busier for the latter


----------



## Corax (Dec 14, 2012)

elbows said:


> Yeah I missed it at the time, or saw it and forgot about it. Probably because there was a lot of news and research to get my teeth into a month+ ago, not so much now. At least this thread isnt completely dead, so I can for now resist the temptation to start ranting about fickle news cycles being reflected as much by people on forums as the news organs themselves.


No new revelations doesn't give much to comment on that hasn't been said before.  I'm hoping that Jillings is published by someone - whether officially or via a leak.  That should at least start increasing the pressure for justice again.  We've heard several times that x, y and z are seeking legal advice about it, but just how long does it take for the lawyers to thrash it out?

What does surprise me (or does it...) is how the Cyril Smith stuff seems to have blown over so quickly.  He was hardly a minor figure in public life.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

Watch the BBC running lots of _girl says peel didn't abuse her_ stories for the next week.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

**


----------



## Corax (Dec 14, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Watch the BBC running lots of _girl says peel didn't abuse her_ stories for the next week.


That would be a novel approach...

I wasn't abused by Saville.  I may contact them to see if they want an interview.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2012)

Yeah, but the BBC1 news _just did_ at 6-15.With the report out next week. Very odd.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 14, 2012)

I saw that as her volunteering to speak out because she didn't want her revelations about John Peel to destroy his reputation / get him tarred with the same brush as Savile. It did sound like she was saying that she never let on her age, and did the chasing, and was happy enough with the outcome and relationship she had with Peel to me, which would seem to be in a whole different ballpark to some of the accusations against other people.

I was only half watching though.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 15, 2012)

Being played i think FS

Doing the rounds:



> Exaro due to publish second part of its investigation into claims of child abuse in 1980’s by top Tories and other prominent people tonight.


----------



## elbows (Dec 15, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I saw that as her volunteering to speak out because she didn't want her revelations about John Peel to destroy his reputation / get him tarred with the same brush as Savile. It did sound like she was saying that she never let on her age, and did the chasing, and was happy enough with the outcome and relationship she had with Peel to me, which would seem to be in a whole different ballpark to some of the accusations against other people.
> 
> I was only half watching though.


 
Well there is no point in pretending that those with an interest in the pre-pubescent, consensual relationships that have an age of consent problem, groupies, gropers, etc, are all completely identical in every way. And I dont think there is anything wrong with people expressing their honest feelings about situations they found themselves in when they were young.

However having seen the piece about this on the BBC news, I cannot help but be rather cynical about the BBCs timing in picking up on this story. Especially as they merged it into some waffle about what a different time it was back then in the 1960's and 1970's. That too  has some truth to it but they only touched on a couple of aspects of this and given that the first of their reports into their own conduct is out next week, I was not amused. I saw it as one small piece of 'drawing a line under events' and stopping the stench from spreading or sticking too much, and although it wasnt 100% blatant I dont think it was terribly subtle either.


----------



## elbows (Dec 15, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Doing the rounds:


 
I hope its better than the headline that has appeared there today suggests. I havent bothered to sign up yet to find out for myself, but a lot of the stuff in these articles has already been talked about on other internet forums, eg that the guesthouse scandal was mentioned in a Jilly Cooper novel.


----------



## where to (Dec 15, 2012)

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...vestigation-into-london-political-paedo-ring/


----------



## elbows (Dec 17, 2012)

OK I signed up for 7 days free Exaro so I could read the stories. A lot of it is going on about the present police operation in a not very interesting way. But there is stuff about previous tip-offs and police operations involving the guest-house, including the suggestion that strands of the old investigations were closed down for improper reasons.

The juicy bit is of course who may have been involved. In one article it mentions several former senior conservative figures, a Labour MP who is now dead, a liberal MP who is now dead, and another Labour MP who is not dead. In another article the Monday Club is mentioned. Unsurprisingly none of them are named, the only name I saw in one of the articles was Anthony Blunt.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2012)

I was tempted to do that myself but they didn't really sell themselves to me. The stuff you mention about past activity may well be the best we can hope for from this direction. At least we know what there is there now.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2012)

Little updater, can't see new stuff.

North Wales child abuse: 105 people tell police they were victims


----------



## Corax (Dec 17, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Little updater, can't see new stuff.
> 
> North Wales child abuse: 105 people tell police they were victims


Coverage of that on R5/R4 (can't remember which) earlier.  Still ticking along at least.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2012)

Regarding the London guest house thing, Exaro have another story up. Deals with documents from the guesthouse which Exaro have seen. In addition to the political affiliations I mentioned earlier, there is:

Two former tory cabinet ministers, four other tory MPs, a now deceased leading NF figure, a Sinn Fein member, two Buckingham palace officials and two pop-stars. These are quite probably named in the documents but (obviously) not in the Exaro stories about the docs.

There is also some detail about a 'kings and queens' party to celebrate the Charles & Diana wedding with guests including a judge, senior civil servants, a bishop, and a leading banker, none identified by name in the docs.

From what I can tell potential complications with the story are the blurring of gay activity with underage activity, since the location was a well-known venue for gay men. And the source of the documents is NAYPIC, a defunct organisation whose old internet footprint is in my opinion slightly shambolic in nature. And its former London development officer Mary Moss wants to meet a cabinet minister rather than the police (as some police were said to be involved at the guesthouse at the time) and is seeking funding to revive the organisation. None of this means I am ultra-cynical about it all, just somewhat cautious.

I should point out for anyone who hasnt been following this particular story too closely in the past, that the sinister allegations about the guest-house revolve around the possibility that rather a lot of boys from council-run childrens homes were brought there.


----------



## framed (Dec 20, 2012)

Wasn't sure where to post this, but this thread seemed as good a place as any...

Some weird shit here about the Lost Prophets' frontman.

*Lostprophets release statement on Ian Watkins charges*


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 20, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Former pupils call for new investigation into abuse claims at Suffolk school
> 
> Again,in passing:
> 
> ...


 
Kesgrave Hall school: police files on alleged sexual abuse were 'destroyed'



> A spokesman for Suffolk police said on Thursday he could not say whether the investigation would be reopened. The force said in a statement: "Suffolk Constabulary no longer holds the files in relation to crimes occurring of this nature at Kesgrave Hall School due to the age of the offence and that review, retention and disposal guidelines at the time scheduled for its disposal."
> 
> The Guardian has been told that Vivian Davies, a former director of the private company that ran the school, destroyed the vast majority of records relating to Kesgrave Hall when he moved house before his death.


----------



## Favelado (Dec 21, 2012)

FRED TALBOT? It's anyone who had a wacky jumper.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 21, 2012)

Favelado said:


> FRED TALBOT? It's anyone who had a wacky jumper.


 
Or wacky tracksuit


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 21, 2012)

elbows said:


> From what I can tell potential complications with the story are the blurring of gay activity with underage activity, since the location was a well-known venue for gay men.


 
It's also worth bearing in mind that, at that time, a 20 year old was "under age" as far as gay male sexual activity was concerned.


----------



## elbows (Dec 21, 2012)

Puddy_Tat said:


> It's also worth bearing in mind that, at that time, a 20 year old was "under age" as far as gay male sexual activity was concerned.


 
I believe one of the Exaro articles mentioned that the police are taking this into account when looking at the guesthouse stuff and are only going for cases where someone aged <16 was involved.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 21, 2012)

elbows said:


> I believe one of the Exaro articles mentioned that the police are taking this into account when looking at the guesthouse stuff and are only going for cases where someone aged <16 was involved.


 
That's something.

Whether the press will do likewise...


----------



## DRINK? (Dec 21, 2012)

Favelado said:


> FRED TALBOT? It's anyone who had a wacky jumper.



Don't give him bail he might jump the country


----------



## Favelado (Dec 21, 2012)

Oh drink that's marvellous.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 21, 2012)

DRINK? said:


> Don't give him bail he might jump the country


 
I just choked on my tea


----------



## elbows (Dec 31, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Former pupils call for new investigation into abuse claims at Suffolk school
> 
> Again,in passing:


 
Police have decided to look at it again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/31/kesgrave-hall-school-abuse-police




> A spokesman for Suffolk police said: "Suffolk police has retrieved papers from our storage facility in relation to an investigation carried out in 1992 in relation to complaints of abuse at Kesgrave Hall boarding school and we are at an early stage of reviewing the information.
> "We encourage anyone who has been a victim of abuse to contact police and would like to reassure them that their complaints will be taken very seriously and investigated thoroughly."


----------



## Corax (Dec 31, 2012)

DRINK? said:


> Don't give him bail he might jump the country





Favelado said:


> Oh drink that's marvellous.





Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I just choked on my tea


 
I don't geddit.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 31, 2012)

Corax said:


> I don't geddit.


 
He used to do the weather on Northwest Tonight from this floating model of the UK & Ireland at Albert Dock or somewhere like that. Anyway, he used to jump from the mainland over to Ireland.

Anyway, there were persistant rumours about his time as a teacher at a grammar school in Altringham which (if true) would've involved boys of school age rather than lads underage only because the gay age of consent was a ridiculously high 21 in those days.

E2a - There's his map uptop.


----------



## Corax (Dec 31, 2012)

Frances Lengel said:


> He used to do the weather on Northwest Tonight from this floating model of the UK & Ireland at Albert Dock or somewhere like that. Anyway, he used to jump from the mainland over to Ireland.


Oh, _that_ guy!

Thank you.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 2, 2013)

Two new arrests in Scotland Yard sexual abuse inquiry


----------



## DJ Squelch (Jan 2, 2013)

teqniq said:


> Two new arrests in Scotland Yard sexual abuse inquiry


http://order-order.com/2013/01/02/police-gathering-evidence-at-jim-davidsons-house/


----------



## bi0boy (Jan 2, 2013)

DJ Squelch said:


> http://order-order.com/2013/01/02/police-gathering-evidence-at-jim-davidsons-house/


 
Couldn't happen to a nicer bloke


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2013)

An Independent story about Elm Guest House from mid-December that I think I overlooked at the time:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-grim-mystery-of-elm-guest-house-8420435.html


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> An Independent story about Elm Guest House from mid-December that I think I overlooked at the time:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-grim-mystery-of-elm-guest-house-8420435.html


 
Yes, it was good to see the MSM picking up the story broken by Exaro about "Operation Fairbank" and the reporters understood that:-

_"Whatever the outcome of their investigations in the past, the police seem convinced that a number of serious wrongs need to be righted."_​​This is, of course, the 'real' story here and it's all too easy to miss the Fairbank for the (Yew)Trees.


----------



## DogorKat? (Jan 3, 2013)

I haven't seen this posted here:
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/he...rnment-records-1-4630077#.UONuJwmI-ZR.twitter

It is an article about Kincora and documents released under the 30 year act.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 3, 2013)

DogorKat? said:


> I haven't seen this posted here:
> http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/he...rnment-records-1-4630077#.UONuJwmI-ZR.twitter
> 
> It is an article about Kincora and documents released under the 30 year act.


 
Not exactly an unexpected outcome, given that some of the grey eminences behind the curtain are still around, and it's entirely possible to (legitimately) extend the 30 year rule as far as 100 years.


----------



## savoloysam (Jan 4, 2013)

Has nobody has brought this up yet? Perhaps they have and it keeps getting deleted? 

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/Franklin/FranklinCoverup/franklin.htm


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 4, 2013)

savoloysam said:


> Has nobody has brought this up yet? Perhaps they have and it keeps getting deleted?
> 
> http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/Franklin/FranklinCoverup/franklin.htm


 

Haven't seen it here but then this is a thread about the UK.


----------



## savoloysam (Jan 4, 2013)

Buckaroo said:


> Haven't seen it here but then this is a thread about the UK.


 
How silly of me to think there may be any relevance at all to one in the UK and one in the US


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 4, 2013)

savoloysam said:


> How silly of me to think there may be any relevance at all to one in the UK and one in the US


 
Not silly but why would it keep getting deleted from here and if it is relevant, in what way?


----------



## elbows (Jan 5, 2013)

Such a story is not likely to be deleted from here.What it is likely to do is be given as an example of the blurring of lines between stories of abuse in high places, and blatant homophobic shit. That page is a disgrace, oh look what great evidence: George Bush in drag, and phrases such as sodomite. 

If you think that sort of thing gets us closer to the truth, rather than pandering to fear, hate, and prejudice, then no wonder you arent satisfied by the pace of inquiries in the UK.


----------



## savoloysam (Jan 5, 2013)

elbows said:


> Such a story is not likely to be deleted from here.What it is likely to do is be given as an example of the blurring of lines between stories of abuse in high places, and blatant homophobic shit. That page is a disgrace, oh look what great evidence: George Bush in drag, and phrases such as sodomite.
> 
> If you think that sort of thing gets us closer to the truth, rather than pandering to fear, hate, and prejudice, then no wonder you arent satisfied by the pace of inquiries in the UK.


 
Thanks David.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 5, 2013)

It's an atrocious link tbh. It starts badly:



> This was the biggest scandal in the history of the U.S.A history.


 
And then ends with:



> More top Republicans found to be Homosexuals. Mainstream media ignores it.


The stuff in the middle isn't a great deal better either. What on earth did you think that might add to the debate?


----------



## savoloysam (Jan 5, 2013)

Errr no it doesn't.

Instead of picking off the bones try looking at all of it including the watching the documentary.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 5, 2013)

savoloysam said:


> Errr no it doesn't.
> 
> Instead of picking off the bones try looking at all of it including the watching the documentary.


 
Watched the documentary, harrowing stuff but where's the link with the link?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 5, 2013)

savoloysam said:


> Errr no it doesn't.
> 
> Instead of picking off the bones try looking at all of it including the watching the documentary.


 
Link to the documentary (which isn't theirs - they've just embedded a youtube video) rather than the mental homophobic loon site then.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Jan 5, 2013)

savoloysam said:


> Errr no it doesn't.
> 
> Instead of picking off the bones try looking at all of it including the watching the documentary.


 
you fucking clown


----------



## elbows (Jan 6, 2013)

savoloysam said:


> Thanks David.


 
I didnt mind pointing out that Camerons comment about gay witch-hunts wasnt quite as irrelevant at the time as it may have seemed, and I dont mind doing so again. What this side of things must not be allowed to do is close down the inquiries into actual abuse, but that doesnt mean we have to keep silent when people pour homophobic bullshit into the mix. Quite a few of the conspiracy sites about abuse do this, I presume this is because some of them are grubby little right-wing biggot turds who have long woven the progress we have made in dealing with homophobia into some larger drooling narrative about liberal elites having an NWO agenda to make people gay or some other shit.

Dealing with that is actually the easy bit, compared to far more difficult is areas such as some rent boys ending up as rent boys because of prior exploitation or abuse. But if society is unable to even deal with the relatively easy stuff without some still descending into the demonisation of gays and then acting like theres nothing wrong with that so long as its tacked onto a story of actual abuse, I dont fancy our chances of being able to explore these tricky areas in a way that does justice to anyone.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 6, 2013)

Exactly. The irony is painful. And the audacity. When Vatican lawyers blame sixties, liberal sexual mores for child abuse and right wing politicians use homophobia as a defence against accusations of the same abuse we are left in a quagmire. Abuse is abuse is abuse.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2013)

Oh I only just noticed that loads of notes relating to the guesthouse were published to the net in a less than clear photo form. A bunch of people on twitter have commented, and the usual iffy blogs. I assume these are the rather shambolic NAYPIC notes from back in the day. Many of the details fit the descriptions in the Exaro articles from December. This is not exactly how I hoped to see justice proceed but I am not very surprised this has happened given the apparent attitude of at least one former NAYPIC person towards the establishment. The awkward gap between the internet version of reality and the legal mainstream one is back, albeit with far less attention so far.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 11, 2013)

elbows said:


> Oh I only just noticed that loads of notes relating to the guesthouse were published to the net in a less than clear photo form. A bunch of people on twitter have commented, and the usual iffy blogs. I assume these are the rather shambolic NAYPIC notes from back in the day. Many of the details fit the descriptions in the Exaro articles from December. This is not exactly how I hoped to see justice proceed but I am not very surprised this has happened given the apparent attitude of at least one former NAYPIC person towards the establishment. The awkward gap between the internet version of reality and the legal mainstream one is back, albeit with far less attention so far.


 
Are you talking about the list containing Monday Club members?


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2013)

There are many pages. One in particular, that lists many names and with various details matching what was said in the Exaro articles I talked about on the previous page of this thread, has probably received the lions share of attention.

Let us hope that the original source(s) and methodology used to compile the list were sound, and that the police can find something good to build a case with, or the twitter hammer of justice will again be flying off in unwarranted directions.


----------



## elbows (Jan 14, 2013)

Not sure if this already got mentioned on another thread or ages ago, but the old BBC documentary from 1994 about Peter Righton, 'Inside Story - The Secret Life of a Paedophile' seems to be on youtube since January 5th. I have not watched it yet.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 14, 2013)

BigTom said:


> Tweets from Sonia Poulton this morning:
> 
> Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton
> 
> ...


 
just as a heads up, I had an argument with Sonia Poulton on facebook this afternoon, she's working closely with david icke and appears to quite aggresively support him


----------



## BigTom (Jan 14, 2013)

smokedout said:


> just as a heads up, I had an argument with Sonia Poulton on facebook this afternoon, she's working closely with david icke and appears to quite aggresively support him


 
 that's sad, she's been a good and angry voice. thanks for the heads up


----------



## Jazzz (Jan 14, 2013)

Icke was right. He's been on about a paedophilia network at the highest levels for years particularly involving the entertainment industry. He may be a bit off with the lizard stuff but the rest of it is pretty damn close. And he's right about Operation Yewtree - it's a diversion tactic to divert attention by letting go of some little people. There's massive corruption protecting the people at the top of this.


----------



## BigTom (Jan 14, 2013)

stopped clock


----------



## sihhi (Jan 14, 2013)

Jazzz said:


> Icke was right. He's been on about a paedophilia network at the highest levels for years particularly involving the entertainment industry. He may be a bit off with the lizard stuff but the rest of it is pretty damn close. And he's right about Operation Yewtree - it's a diversion tactic to divert attention by letting go of some little people. There's massive corruption protecting the people at the top of this.


 
As a follower of but not much of a poster on this thread, I hope u75 collectively ensures you don't screw up this thread.


----------



## Combustible (Jan 14, 2013)

Well if you go round pretty much calling everyone a paedophile, then you will be right eventually.


----------



## Louloubelle (Jan 14, 2013)

elbows said:


> Not sure if this already got mentioned on another thread or ages ago, but the old BBC documentary from 1994 about Peter Righton, 'Inside Story - The Secret Life of a Paedophile' seems to be on youtube since January 5th. I have not watched it yet.




Just watching it now.  A shocking and important documentary that I think that, although about a situation in the past, reflects the current situation in a more realistic way than Icke's ramblings.  There may well be networks of high level child abusers here but the most likely scenario is of networks of teachers, academics, psychiatrists, social workers, charity workers, priests and other religious people.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Yes, it was good to see the MSM picking up the story broken by Exaro about "Operation Fairbank" and the reporters understood that:-
> 
> _"Whatever the outcome of their investigations in the past, the police seem convinced that a number of serious wrongs need to be righted."_​​This is, of course, the 'real' story here and it's all too easy to miss the Fairbank for the (Yew)Trees.


 


> *ExaroNews* ‏@*ExaroNews*
> Operation *Fairbank*: up to nine police officers raid London flat of witness holding records of Elm Guest House. http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4798/operation-fairbank-carries-out-raid-to-seize-files-naming-mps …


----------



## brogdale (Jan 15, 2013)

From Henke's own blog:-
​


> _Operation Fairbank, the Met Police investigation, started after allegations from Labour MP Tom Watson of an alleged paedo ring involving Westminster MPs, has taken a significant new turn._​_A report on Exaro News website ( http://www.exaronews.com ) today by ex Guardian journos David Pallister and myself goes into full details._​_Basically documents, including a list of Mps , Conservative, Labour and Liberal - some dead, some alive – and other prominent figures , which we have seen but are not naming, are now in the possession of the police. They also have the 16 names of the boys who could have been sexually abused._​_ The raid last week on the flat of *Mary Moss*, a former head of the now defunct National Association of Young People in Care, allowed police to look at documents relating to the Elm Tree Guest House in Barnes, west London, in the 1980s. Police obtained a search warrant after *she declined to co-operate* but she is now co-operating fully with the investigation._​_Another 19 box files , hidden in a neighbours shed, were voluntarily handed over to the police by Mary Moss after the raid._​_The police have also asked Richmond Council to hand over a full dossier of young people in their care at the time after being alerted by a source who came to Exaro._​​


http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/​​


----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2013)

Well thats one way to get her to cooperate! Although the usual suspects on twitter are continuing to paint this as a picture of police intimidation, attempting to silence people, etc. As per my previous rants on this subject I will be reserving judgement till we see what actions the law take, and in the meantime have low regard for the paranoid style of some of the bloggers and tweeters who are paying attention in rather hysterical fashion.

Back when I was reading the Exaro stories in December, I cant say I fully appreciated that the police hadnt got their hands on all the documents being mentioned, even though I knew Moss wasnt exactly cooperating normally with the powers that be.

Not sure I was aware of this particular bit of history either until I went looking to see if any other press had mentioned Moss recently:



> They complained in 2004 to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) about the Met’s handling of the case. But the IPCC dismissed the complaint after two years.


 
From the end of http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=30245


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2013)

More on Operation Fairbank

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4804/met-turns-operation-fairbank-into-full-criminal-investigation


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

Ta. Just looking at twitter it sounds like the proper criminal investigation into the guest house (as opposed to the earlier scoping exercise that Tom Watson triggered) is called operation Fernbridge. I've not seen other press stories about it yet but I expect there will be some.


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

​


> In a short statement tonight, the Metropolitan Police said: “The Metropolitan Police Service have today, Thursday 17 January, launched an investigation, Operation Fernbridge, into historic allegations of child abuse in the early 1980s at the Elm Guest House, Rocks Lane, Barnes, London.
> 
> “The investigation will be led by the Child Abuse Investigation Command. Anyone with information is asked to contact officers on 020 7161 0500.”​​It added: “The allegations under Operation Fernbridge were initially assessed under Operation Fairbank which was information passed to police by MP Tom Watson. Operation Fernbridge reached the threshold for a criminal investigation.​​“We will not be providing a running commentary on this inquiry.”​


​​http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...oliticians-operated-in-the-1980s-8456434.html​


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

Tom Watson has some brief words about the criminal investigation.

http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2013/01/response-to-the-metropolitan-police-announcement-that-a-criminal-investigation-has-been-launched …


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2013)

Surprising lack of coverage for this. Maybe too soon, not high profile enough yet, people being wary after newsnight  - they should all know damn well what's out there and appraising it.


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

The Guardian have a story now but mostly go on about the Peter Righton stuff that Tom Watson originally focussed on in parliament, and therefore come across as pretty clueless about what Elm the Guest House story is about.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/17/police-inquiry-child-sex-abuse

And ITV, again not much of a story mostly because they want to stick largely to what the police press release said, and that isnt much.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-01-17/met-probe-alleged-child-abuse-at-london-guest-house/

And Bloomberg.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...se-investigation-over-london-guest-house.html


----------



## Dan U (Jan 17, 2013)

a useful idiot speaks

 *Harry Cole* ‏@*MrHarryCole* 
“@*lucymanning*: .@*tom_watson* welcomes new police child abuse investigation." Brave given what is coming. Should keep his head down.

 *Harry Cole* ‏@*MrHarryCole* 
In the spirit of Watson's enigmatic style, if what I was told last night checks out I think I "just found my next three year project"

i may eat my words obv.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Surprising lack of coverage for this. Maybe too soon, not high profile enough yet, people being wary after newsnight - they should all know damn well what's out there and appraising it.


 
Looks like Fernbridge will offer the media precious little to report, but at least when the OB have to come clean about who's being arrested it should become quite interesting.
One concern I have is that the Peter Morrison* issue might fall, conveniently for the tories, between two (investigatory) stools.When Watson dropped the parliamentary 'bombshell' there was much speculation that he was referring to Morrison and the Righton case, but now it appears that Elm Guest House abuse only will be the remit of Fernbridge?

*As he is dead, I don't think this breaches the 'nonce thread' guidance?


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

You can mention Peter Morrison all you want, its not a libel problem. I am not happy at how little attention that aspect received in the media at the time.

If Morrison can be linked to one of the welsh childrens home scandals then he will be covered by operation Pallial. Channel 4 news made that connection at the time.

Failing that what is required is victims from somewhere to come forwards, or one of the inquiries to look at what offences he was caught doing and let off from at the time (such as the one that reportedly cost him his seat as an MP).


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

Dan U said:


> a useful idiot speaks


 
There are a number of people on the internet who I think are idiots or have dodgy agendas or worldviews, but who have been useful sources of info at times during the child abuse stories, so long as its properly filtered and placed in the context of the rest of their bile. But I'm not quite sure what you are getting at with this chap, I dont understand his potential use?


----------



## Dan U (Jan 17, 2013)

elbows said:


> There are a number of people on the internet who I think are idiots or have dodgy agendas or worldviews, but who have been useful sources of info at times, so long as its properly filtered. But I'm not quite sure what you are getting at with this chap, I dont understand his potential use?


 
he is implying that Watson will be discredited soon and potentially discrediting the investigation

he is a useful idiot, just not ours.


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

Ah right. His comments are slightly ambiguous to me at this stage.


----------



## Dan U (Jan 17, 2013)

elbows said:


> Ah right. His comments are slightly ambiguous to me at this stage.


 
he hates Watson.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2013)

elbows said:


> I am not happy at how little attention that aspect received in the media at the time.


 
Agreed.
Its all very well the Met asking people to come forward with evidence, but one huge problem is that they, (probably along with the spooks), have destroyed alot of the substantive evidence relating to Morrison, as Nick Davies highlighted in his prescient 1998 piece:-


> _Fleet Street routinely nurtures a crop of untold stories about powerful abusers who have evaded justice. One such is Peter Morrison, formerly the MP for Chester and the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. Ten years ago, Chris House, the veteran crime reporter for the Sunday Mirror, twice received tip-offs from police officers who said that Morrison had been caught cottaging in public toilets with underaged boys and had been released with a caution. A less powerful man, the officers complained, would have been charged with gross indecency or an offence against children._
> _At the time, Chris House confronted Morrison, who used libel laws to block publication of the story. Now, Morrison is dead and cannot sue. *Police last week confirmed that he had been picked up twice and never brought to trial. They added that there appeared to be no trace of either incident in any of the official records.*_


----------



## elbows (Jan 17, 2013)

The Evening Standard and Daily Mail have run the story and padded it with Tom Watsons original comments about Peter Righton like the Guardian did.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-links-paedophile-ring.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...child-abuse-by-expms-senior-aide-8456520.html


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 18, 2013)

...and more now on the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21068494


----------



## elbows (Jan 18, 2013)

BBC gets some points for picking up on the Mary Moss NAYPIC documents aspect. But in that piece they didnt pass on the Scotland Yard request for information and telehphone number.


----------



## elbows (Jan 19, 2013)

Exaro reports that 'Harry' (Haroon Kasir), the former co-manager of the guesthouse had his house raided, though he wasnt arrested.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 20, 2013)

elbows said:


> Exaro reports that 'Harry' (Haroon Kasir), the former co-manager of the guesthouse had his house raided, though he wasnt arrested.


Yes, note they also hinted at some indecent film type stuff he was in court for...

Anyway, Sunday People, today have this - obv sourced from you know here due to the mistake about the far-right politician being NF.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 28, 2013)

Henke has been digging some more and believes that he's now established a link between the tory party and Elm House;



> The Conservative Campaign for Homosexual Equality ” strongly recommended ” the Elm House guest house as a venue for its members in 1982 at  time of alleged suppressed paedophile scandal, Exaro News ( http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4816/tory-group-recommended-guest-house-in-met-paedo-probe ) and the Sunday People ( http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedo-brothel-elm-guest-house-1558001) reveal today.
> Investigations by me and former Guardian colleague David Pallister have uncovered an old Conservative  CHE newsletter which urged its membership from London and the Home Counties to use the facilities including the sauna and video room.


 
Messy.

More here.

E2A : Henke is also gunning for the LD members of Richmond Council who now claim not to have known anything of the activities at Elm House:-
http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...questions-for-the-london-borough-of-richmond/

Good work from Henke et al.


----------



## elbows (Jan 30, 2013)

Ta, will check that out later.

Meanwhile Tom Waton attempts to end the online drooling about D-notices.

http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2013/01/comprehensive-answer-on-the-use-of-d-notices


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 6, 2013)

First Operation Fernbridge arrest in St Leonard's this morning:



http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4833/operation-fernbridge-makes-first-arrest-in-paedophile-probe


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 6, 2013)

BBC (Danny Shaw) and Sky (Martin Brunt) both seem to be picking it up - two arrests now, according to Shaw.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 6, 2013)

> Danny Shaw @DannyShawBBC
> Scotland Yard confirm: Man aged 66 from Norfolk & 70-yr-old man from East Sussex arrested on suspicion of sexual offence re #Fernbridge.


 
https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC/status/299101642383581185


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2013)

DaveCinzano said:


> https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC/status/299101642383581185


 
Hope they 'sing like a bird'; might then be some arrests closer to WC1?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Feb 6, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Hope they 'sing like a bird'; might then be some arrests closer to WC1?


 
Wishful thinking


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Wishful thinking


 
Based upon establishment cover-ups so far that might be right, but I do wish the victims justice and if that brings down some tory (& other) nonces hiding behind their power...then all to the good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Hope they 'sing like a bird'; might then be some arrests closer to WC1?


what do you think's going on round bloomsbury?

do you instead mean sw1?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> what do you think's going on round bloomsbury?
> 
> do you instead mean sw1?


 
Yes.


----------



## elbows (Feb 6, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Wishful thinking


 
I dont know why you say that. The most cynical, vocal people on the net in relation to these cases didnt think things would even get to this point, so I wont be using them as a guide as to how far matters may now proceed. Its true that there are a number of not so sinister reasons why some people who have appeared on certain lists may not end up being touched by this investigation, and I expect there will be people who attribute this to sinister causes rather than other possibilities such as some of them having used the guest house without using anybody underage.

I think what the cynics may be missing is that its not actually in the interests of the state etc to protect a number of specific individuals involved in these old scandals any more. They actually need some prosecutions to restore some credibility and prevent people from building a fresh tale of coverup and power abuse that undermines the system as a whole. Whether they will actually find any suitable candidates or whether any other factors can still trump these concerns is open to question, but I have no reason to think I already know the answer to that question at this point. The only thing I'm reasonably sure of is that some people are never going to be satisfied - those who have developed the most extreme views about the extent of the abuse and coverups will never be satisfied because they have probably built up a plot in their minds that goes well beyond what actually happened, and therefore stands no chance of being exposed in full because some of it is fiction. Hopefully the prosecutable truth will still be big enough to satisfy most though.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Feb 6, 2013)

elbows said:


> I dont know why you say that. The most cynical, vocal people on the net in relation to these cases didnt think things would even get to this point, so I wont be using them as a guide as to how far matters may now proceed. Its true that there are a number of not so sinister reasons why some peoples who have appeared on certain lists may not end up being touched by this investigation, and I expect there will be people who attribute this to sinister causes rather than other possibilities such as some of them having used the guest house without using anybody underage.
> 
> I think what the cynics may be missing is that its not actually in the interests of the state etc to protect a number of specific individuals involved in these old scandals any more. They actually need some prosecutions to restore some credibility and prevent people from building a fresh tale of coverup and power abuse that undermines the system as a whole. Whether they will actually find any suitable candidates or whether any other factors can still trump these concerns is open to question, but I have no reason to think I already know the answer to that question at this point. The only thing I'm reasonably sure of is that some people are never going to be satisfied - those who have developed the most extreme views about the extent of the abuse and coverups will never be satisfied because they have probably built up a plot in their minds that goes well beyond what actually happened, and therefore stands no chance of being exposed in full because some of it is fiction. Hopefully the prosecutable truth will still be big enough to satisfy most though.


 
Still seems like only skimming the surface and considering how widespread and how many people are involved, not that many arrests


----------



## elbows (Feb 6, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Still seems like only skimming the surface and considering how widespread and how many people are involved, not that many arrests


 
An understandable stance to take, but I simply have to moderate my impatience for a number of reasons:

Police investigations do not exactly proceed swiftly. Look how spread out the arrests over phone hacking & public servants selling things to the press are.

Just because we've read a bunch of stuff that appears to build a compelling case, doesnt mean we are in possession of the facts or are well clued up about the truth. We've had glimpses of things, stuff that suggests that a closer look should be taken, but you saw how much more complicated and messy the North Wales stuff became on further inspection, including how fresh allegations from other sources on the net started to paint a victim as a perpetrator. We can poke at the detail of that all we like and I assume we would not reach a consensus, but I would hope we could at least share the conclusion that our initial confidence that were fit to judge and smell the detailed truth for ourselves based on what was placed before us on the net or in the press was misplaced. I am not one of the victims, I was not there. So I wont be deciding whether justice has finally been done or not. People have been waiting a disgusting amount of time for these matters to be adequately addressed, so Im not going to cynically write off the whole process now just because its going to take more months or years to look at it properly.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2013)

Pretty good report on C4 News.


----------



## elbows (Feb 6, 2013)

Ta. Channel 4 news have pretty consistently been the best tv news when it comes to covering all the abuse stories post Savile.

Thanks to a comment in the text of the channel 4 news story I did some digging and turned up some accounts from an apparent Elm Guest House victim in the Sunday People:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-victim-of-elm-guest-house-1572073

There is quite a lot of detail in the story so I wont attempt to quote all of the important stuff, but here is a sample which adds to detail I'm sure some here have already heard about but that I'm sure we cannot talk about properly just now for legal reasons, because the fat man isnt the dead one:



> One photograph is said to show a former Tory Cabinet minister in a sauna with a naked 14-year-old boy.
> Dave claims one man he met at the guest house arranged for him to visit his flat where he was groomed into performing sex acts, then handed a couple of pounds “pocket money” to keep him coming back.
> Dave said: “I can still see the guy’s face now. He was posh and I have since seen him on television.
> “He was very fat. He said he didn’t live far away and told me ‘If you’re passing by that way come and see me’.
> ...





> Two VIPs named as regular users of the Elm are MI5 traitor Anthony Blunt who died in 1983 and Cyril Smith, the former Liberal MP for Rochdale who died in 2010.
> On Friday, after studying a picture of Smith, Dave said the overweight politician was not the “fat man” who had abused him.


----------



## elbows (Feb 6, 2013)

The 'Spartacus' angle:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/latest-news/adverts-for-elm-guest-house-included-1571994


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2013)

elbows said:


> Ta. Channel 4 news have pretty consistently been the best tv news when it comes to covering all the abuse stories post Savile.
> 
> Thanks to a comment in the text of the channel 4 news story I did some digging and turned up some accounts from an apparent Elm Guest House victim in the Sunday People:
> 
> ...


 
I thought that the nearest that Paraic O'Brien came to giving a clue to the trajectory of investigation was the clear mention of the linkage to The Conservative Campaign for Homosexual Equality's leaflet extolling the virtues of Elm House, including its own video sweet.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2013)

elbows said:


> The 'Spartacus' angle:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/latest-news/adverts-for-elm-guest-house-included-1571994


 
Yes, the 10% reduction FFS.


----------



## elbows (Feb 6, 2013)

> *Paraic O'Brien* ‏@*paraicobrien*
> Both men arrested today as part of operation #*Fernbridge* have now been bailed pending further inquires to a date in April.


----------



## elbows (Feb 7, 2013)

A Daily Mail article on the subject which I have presently misplaced carried the suggestion, which I'm sure wont surprise anyone and isnt brand new, that the really incriminating photos were destroyed long ago, possibly when special branch got involved. And that therefore for justice to be done now, the police require multiple victims to talk to them with information that corroborates the allegations against specific people in detail.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2013)

elbows said:


> A Daily Mail article on the subject which I have presently misplaced carried the suggestion, which I'm sure wont surprise anyone and isnt brand new, that the really incriminating photos were destroyed long ago, possibly when special branch got involved. And that therefore for justice to be done now, the police require multiple victims to talk to them with information that corroborates the allegations against specific people in detail.


 
That certainly fits with the story about the Special branch/Met's cover-up of the Peter Morrison evidence, and might well expalin Fernbank's determination to get hold of the surviving documentation including Mary Moss' box files.


----------



## elbows (Feb 7, 2013)

Although I dont think they named him, I believe the Mails source for that part of the story (just a few lines in a rather long piece) is probably the other NAYPIC-connected person who has been openly talking to press etc for months. I'm quite surprised how very little new detail has still helped me get a better understanding of the allegations and the 'evidence' that was leaked. Until some of the stories mentioned above I hadnt realised that the word sauna next to someone on the list apparently meant there was a photo of him in the sauna with a boy, as opposed to simply being a user of the sauna rather than the other services the guesthouse provided.

As for Special Branch, I dont remember hearing much about them in connection with Morrison, off the top of my head they did come up in several stories about the files on Cyril Smith though. And I remain fascinated by what happened to Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens when he decided to have a personal mini-crusade against powerful paedophiles and named diplomat Peter Hayman in parliament. Revelations about affairs Dickens was having suddenly came out, causing him to have to turn a press conference he was about to give about Hayman into a statement about leaving his wife. And I've recently seen an old newspaper front page where he claims his flat was bugged after revelations of a second girlfriend emerged. I'll try to sort some links.


----------



## elbows (Feb 12, 2013)

The press are finally poking at past press stories. Geoffrey Dickens who I've mentioned several times gets a mention in this one, and much more could be made of that angle than this story touches on but hey, its a start.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/home-office-was-warned-by-top-tory-1647786


> A senior Tory MP handed an explosive dossier alleging VIP child abuse to the Government almost 30 years ago, the Sunday People can reveal.
> The 50 pages contained information about suspected paedophile rings, police misconduct and abuse of boys in a care home.
> There are suggestions the dossier contained links to the notorious Elm guest house in south-west London which is currently the focus of the Met Police’s investigation Operation Fernbridge.
> But the file has disappeared.
> ...





> Together they raise concerns that a cover-up – perhaps orchestrated by MI5 or Scotland Yard’s Special Branch – may have protected senior figures mentioned in the dossier.
> Mr Watson has now tabled a Parliamentary question asking Home Secretary Theresa May to track down the Dickens dossier and make it available to MPs.





> Mr Dickens, who died in 1995 aged 63, spent years collecting his evidence. The colourful MP was convinced he had solid proof of a VIP paedophile network with links to Parliament, Buckingham Palace and other areas of public life.
> It is believed he handed at least two dossiers to the Government.
> In 1981 he used Parliamentary privilege to name diplomat Sir Peter Hayman as a paedophile.





> In 1983, Mr Dickens said there were “big, big names – people in positions of power, influence and responsibility” and threatened to expose them in Parliament if no action was taken against PIE.
> The MP handed a one-million strong petition against the group to Home Secretary Mr Brittan.
> In 1984 he revealed he had called for Mr Brittan to investigate the allegations in his dossier.
> He added: “The dossier contained allegations of a child offence in a children’s home.”


----------



## elbows (Feb 12, 2013)

Oh dear.​​http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/297870/Boy-sex-pics-of-former-Cabinet-minister-is-stolen/

​


> And Operation Fernbridge, the police probe, has been told a snap of another Cabinet minister in a sauna with a naked 14-year-old boy was stolen from the home of Carole Kasir, the madam who ran the place.​​Two days after the burglary in 1990, diabetic Kasir died of an apparent insulin overdose – but pals say it was murder.​


​


> The lawyer, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity, said: “I was told this story in April 2004 from a man I knew, a former prisoner.​​“He told me about a career criminal who targeted the rich and famous.​​“After one raid he found he’d grabbed this envelope containing pics of an instantly recognisable man, a senior politician, performing oral sex on a boy.​​“Then, in the early to mid 90s, the burglar was caught and seemed to be looking at a couple of years behind bars.​​“So he showed the photos to his lawyer – who took it away. The next thing he knows, the judge throws the book at him. ​


​


----------



## elbows (Feb 12, 2013)

The latest Exaro stories focus on the reasons for the sacking of the head of Richmond social services. He claims to have known nothing of the scandal, despite headlines at the time.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4...ntrasting-reasons-for-louis-minster-s-sacking

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4842/police-examine-sacking-of-richmond-s-head-of-social-services


----------



## free spirit (Feb 12, 2013)

> Stamford died in prison of a heart attack aged 56 in Belgium in 1995 just before he was due to stand trial on child sex charges.
> Carole Kasir who died at the age of 47 in 1990 from an overdose in an apparent suicide.





> Two days after the burglary in 1990, diabetic Kasir died of an apparent insulin overdose – but pals say it was murder.


There do seem to be a fair few people end up dying conveniently just before they might start causing this ring / network serious problems.


----------



## Idris2002 (Feb 12, 2013)

elbows said:


> The press are finally poking at past press stories. Geoffrey Dickens who I've mentioned several times gets a mention in this one, and much more could be made of that angle than this story touches on but hey, its a start.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/home-office-was-warned-by-top-tory-1647786


 
Leon Brittain, you say?  Well, well.


----------



## Chook (Feb 12, 2013)

I wonder how many of the million petitioners are still alive ... 

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/.../sir-peter-hayman-1#S6CV0001P0_19810319_CWA_5

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/...19/sir-peter-hayman#S6CV0001P0_19810319_CWA_1


----------



## elbows (Feb 12, 2013)

> Today Wrexham.com and others who have requested copies of the document were given a formal reply to their Freedom of Information requests for the release of the Jillings Report into North Wales Child Abuse.
> We wrote last week how it had taken over 80 days for a decision to be made, with councillors taking it upon themselves to ask questions on the delay.
> Today’s reply states “_The Council’s commitment to wishing to publish the report remains, subject to advice on timing and what may be published. However, it has concluded that due to the ongoing Police investigation it is unable to release any of the report at this time._”
> It appears that the FOI has been paused pending an ongoing Police investigation. A timeline is hinted at saying that publication in the future depends on what occurs into Operation Pallial. The Council state “_Your current request for disclosure will be considered again at that time. There is no need to submit a further request._”
> Although this appears that the FOI is still ‘live’ , the accompanying documentation suggests otherwise stating “_The Council believes that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the interest in disclosure at the present moment in time._”



http://www.wrexham.com/news/wrexham...ngs-report-publication-foi-for-now-28861.html


----------



## Buckaroo (Feb 12, 2013)

_One of the current unknowns is what the shape of any future disclosures are yet to look like, and therefore in our opinion, it could be damaging to the judicial process, if that system was compromised in some way, by the public disclosure of relevant material now._

_Who knew?_


----------



## existentialist (Feb 12, 2013)

It may be a somewhat extremist position to take, but - in the light of the recent revelations about Chetham's music school and the now rather familiar litany of students reporting abuse but no action being taken - I am increasingly inclined to take the view that ANY attempt to delay or interfere with publication of already-existing information about child sexual abuse must almost certainly be an indicator that there are dark secrets hidden that need to be revealed.

From my own personal experience of how this _omerta_ seems to operate, I find it increasingly difficult not to speculate as to the prevalence of, if not an organised high-level ring, at the very least an informal network of child sexual abusers that is endemic enough that its members are to be found throughout society, from the lowest levels to the most exalted ranks. And it is in the interests of those more exalted types, who do - it would appear - have the power to suppress investigation into their activities to stifle any notion that this kind of sexual abuse isn't prevalent across the whole range.

We have seen enough evidence already, from the Jimmy Savile business, through Chetham's, to the more general investigations elsewhere, to suggest that there has been a huge reservoir of abuse that has somehow been able to remain hidden in plain view for three or four decades, sometimes longer. I think the time really has come to step back from all of these individual investigations and take a really broad and courageous view, and ask not so much how _high_ does this go as how *broadly* does it go?


----------



## elbows (Feb 12, 2013)

I have a little bit of trouble looking at it quite like that. It only takes a small minority of people to do great harm, and in percentage terms it seems unlikely to reach staggering proportions. So I'm not really sure what kind of answer to the 'how broadly?' question you are expecting. Whether we are talking about MPs, care workers, teachers, or any other group, it doesnt take very many to make for an ugly scene, and then just add coverup to magnify the horror and damage in the end.

What seems to me to be the most troubling question for society and institutions, is how terribly, terribly shit they are at dealing with abuse in a timely manner which prevents further harm from occurring. There are a number of reasons for that, long before we get to the spooky stuff. People not wanting to talk about it, and desperate attempts to avoid scandal and reputation damage of institutions etc are high on the list.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 13, 2013)

Kincora files to start coming out soon, apparently:

http://muckraker.me/2013/02/08/kincora-files-due-for-release-this-year/#more-1339


----------



## elbows (Feb 16, 2013)

Think I previously missed this late January story about Cyril Smith being one of the guest houses clients. This possibility isnt a new revelation but it hasnt received much mainstream press attention. This particular article includes details such as him breaking a toilet seat there and never paying for it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cyril-smith-named-in-barnes-abuse-case-8468370.html


----------



## Chook (Feb 16, 2013)

A postgrad Fijian student that I knew at the UEA in the eighties smashed the whole device to shards. Huge guy, nasty cuts. Turns out he started the Fiji Post which became a government mouthpiece. A rival paper takes up his story:

http://www.fijisun.com.fj/2012/03/13/ficac-case-against-bolea-to-go-ahead/


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2013)

David Henke has posted on his blog about the progress Exaro have made in beginning to expose the contemporary knowledge of child abuse at Elm guest house held by a prominent LB Richmond offical.



> The amnesia surrounding everybody at Richmond Council over the 1982 Elm guest house paedophile scandal is at an end.
> A dramatic interview by my colleague Mark Conrad published in Exaro News today ( http://bit.ly/Vesffe) with Terry Earland, the former assistant director in charge of children’s services, reveals that he knew that children at Grafton Close children’s home were sexually abused at Elm Guest House.
> 
> It directly contradicts what Louis Minster, (former social services director), told Exaro from Malta only days ago when he claimed he had never heard about the Elm Guest House in Barnes until Exaro and the Sunday People revealed the police investigation into the scandal. How can his head of children’s services know what happened and he didn’t know anything?


 
Henke highlights the discrepancy between the offical's admission that he knew children in the council's care were being abused at Elm Guest house and the apparent 'amnesia' of the then elected LD councillors:-



> Top Liberal Democrat politicians and the most senior official in charge of social services in the London borough of Richmond appear to have been struck dumb by an extraordinary outbreak of amnesia over the rapidly enfolding child abuse scandal 30 years ago.
> Contacted by myself and my colleagues at Exaro News prominent Lib SDP councillors at the time Lord Razzall, Baroness Tonge, Sir David Williams don’t seem to remember a thing about it.


 
This looks like a promising line of attack from Exaro, especially given what has now been reported in the MSM about Cyril Smith's fondness for the Guest House.

As Henke says:-


> It has all the hallmarks of the scandal in North Wales. Searching questions are needed of people in power at the time.


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

Here we go then:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-tory-faces-child-sex-1714162#.USASEa3O84k.twitter


> Police are preparing to arrest a former Tory Cabinet minister after a woman came forward to claim she had been raped by him as a girl.
> Detectives are also investigating claims that he abused boys.
> We can reveal that the former minister is suspected of being part of a VIP paedophile ring that was regularly handed boys by child rapist and killer Sidney Cooke for vile sex orgies.
> The former high-ranking MP, who we cannot name, is under investigation by Scotland Yard’s paedophile unit.
> ...





> The former officer said up to 16 high profile figures were due to be arrested. But the day before they were to be carried out detectives were told the operation had been disbanded.
> The revelation means Scotland Yard knew about allegations concerning the Cabinet Minister and Savile in 1986 but did nothing about it, instead choosing to cover up the claims.
> A source told Exaro last week that senior officers, including Commander Peter Spindler, the head of the Paedophile Unit, have had a secret briefing on preparations to arrest the ex-minister.
> It is understood that the investigation is at an early stage but there is a plan to arrest him in the next few weeks.
> ...


There is more in the story but I think I've quoted enough.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 17, 2013)

Well done the boys and girls at exaro - they didn't have a great start on this but they kept at it, doing proper sustained journalism. Now, where do the threads go?


----------



## free spirit (Feb 17, 2013)

Better late than never.

It looks like the police really are going to unravel this, unless it's a case of a few more sacrificial lambs being thrown to the wolves.

So, without actually speculating, I wonder who the tory is, and whether anyone will spill the beans on the rest of them or not.

That article also reads like the sort of thing that might be used to try to provoke them into incriminating themselves and others prior to arrest.... fingers crossed.


----------



## free spirit (Feb 17, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Well done the boys and girls at exaro - they didn't have a great start on this but they kept at it, doing proper sustained journalism. Now, where do the threads go?


agreed.


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

free spirit said:


> That article also reads like the sort of thing that might be used to try to provoke them into incriminating themselves and others prior to arrest.... fingers crossed.


 
Or they have been leaking to reduce the chances of investigations being shut down.


----------



## free spirit (Feb 17, 2013)

elbows said:


> Or they have been leaking to reduce the chances of investigations being shut down.


could be, but I like my version better as 16 high profile people between them could end up incriminating a lot of others. From what I remember of the article I posted about at some point in this thread re the Bristol investigation that ended up unravelling a network of 40+ paedophiles that's basically how they did it, starting with a few, then examining their contacts, getting them to rat on each other etc until they hit the 40 mark, before they basically got closed down due to budget constraints.

btw it occurs to me that 16 high profile people is starting to look like the sort of high level ring I originally asked the question about in the thread title.


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

The 16 were due to be arrested in the 1980's, thats not how many are due to be arrested this time around.


----------



## free spirit (Feb 17, 2013)

elbows said:


> The 16 were due to be arrested in the 1980's, thats not how many are due to be arrested this time around.


ah, so it is.

damn.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2013)

free spirit said:


> ah, so it is.
> 
> damn.


 
Yes, but if the former detective speaking to the Mirror is correct, the shape of the next investigation into wrong-doing within the Met. is already emerging. Added to the claims about the Peter Morrison cover-up, (already in the public domaine via Nick Davies' article), this impending case will surely produce evidence necessitating a wide-ranging inquiry into cover-ups. Let's hope Watson is ready.



> A former detective who worked on the original investigation into Cooke told the Sunday Mirror that the minister was among those alleged to have been photographed in a 1986 police surveillance on premises where boys had been dropped off. Others allegedly included Jimmy Savile, MP Cyril Smith and top judges – though none of them were ever arrested. The former officer said up to 16 high profile figures were due to be arrested. But the day before they were to be carried out detectives were told the operation had been disbanded. The revelation means Scotland Yard knew about allegations concerning the Cabinet Minister and Savile in 1986 but did nothing about it, instead choosing to cover up the claims.
> 
> The former officer said: “It was clear a cover-up had taken place.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2013)

'Interesting' timing from the Bar Council:-


> Suspects in sex cases should have their identities protected until they are convicted, a senior lawyer has said.
> Maura McGowan QC, chairman of the Bar Council of England and Wales, said defendants should get the same right to anonymity as complainants.
> She wants the change because sexual allegations carry "such a stigma".


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

It now seems likely that as Fernbridge focusses on the guest house, Fairbank continues to look into other stuff. They are apparently going after Charles Napier again:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vip-child-abuse-ring-cops-1713969


> Police are re-investigating notorious paedophile Charles Napier as part of their probe into a high-profile VIP child abuse ring, the Sunday People has revealed.
> The Sunday People first revealed the shameful past of Napier, ex-treasurer of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), after we tracked him down in a sleepy country town.
> Now officers from Operation Fairbank – set up to investigate historical allegations of a UK-wide paedophile network – are re-opening files on the 68-year-old.
> It is understood detectives have already interviewed at least one of his victims. They are said to be particularly interested in Napier’s role in the PIE.


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

As Sidney Cooke had not previous come up on this thread, I suppose I'll have to do some random trawling of the past to see if anything interesting emerges.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/feb/20/tonythompson.theobserver



> Four men belonging to the most reviled gang of child molesters in Britain were last night in fear of their lives after a second of their number was slain in an apparent revenge killing.
> Sidney Cooke, Robert Oliver and Stephen Barrell, believed to have murdered up to 20 young boys, and their friend, Brian 'Chickenmaster' Turner, a former scoutmaster convicted of abusing dozens of boys, fear their names are on a hit list drawn up by East End gangsters sympathetic to the victims' families.
> All four are known to have associated with Bill Malcolm, who was shot through the head with a single bullet when he answered the door at his home in Forest Gate, east London, last Thursday night. The killing bore the hallmarks of a professional hit and two white males were seen running away. Malcolm, 46, died on the way to hospital.
> The four men, along with Malcolm, were also closely associated with Leslie 'Catweazle' Bailey, the man convicted alongside Cooke, Oliver and Barrell of the murder of 14-year-old Jason Swift. Each of the men had paid £5 to have sex with Jason in a filthy flat in Hackney in 1984, but he died when the orgy when wrong.
> Bailey was found dead in his cell in Whitemoor prison in 1993. At first he was thought to have taken his own life, but a post-mortem examination showed he had been strangled. Two prisoners, Michael Cain and John Brookes, were convicted of his murder. They are believed to have acted in a bid to avenge Bailey's victims.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 17, 2013)

elbows said:


> As Sidney Cooke had not previous come up on this thread, I suppose I'll have to do some random trawling of the past to see if anything interesting emerges.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/feb/20/tonythompson.theobserver


 
Jesus, "murdered up to 20 young boys" - it's not often I find my sympathies stirred for East End gangs.

Brian 'Chickenmaster' Turner and Leslie 'Catweazle' Bailey just sound like something out of a bad 1970s detective story.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 17, 2013)

**sorry, thread doesn't need this**


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

two sheds said:


> Jesus, "murdered up to 20 young boys" - it's not often I find my sympathies stirred for East End gangs.
> 
> Brian 'Chickenmaster' Turner and Leslie 'Catweazle' Bailey just sound like something out of a bad 1970s detective story.


 
I doubt many people expected the 'high level paedophile' stuff to merge with arguably the most notorious sadistic child killer paedophile gang story of recent decades. But thats what has potentially happened with the recent story. I havent yet found any hints that the Cooke gang, the 'Dirty Dozen', would come to have the term VIP inserted into it. The only links I've seen in the past of this nature have been the paedo-obsessed websites that try to merge all stories together without even attempting to make real links between them.

I mean Cooke was the man 'sent into space with a child' in the Brass Eye special, such was the level of media frenzy over his crimes at the time.

Here is a documentary about his gang and the Jason Swift murder, which I just watched to see if there was even the vaguest hint of anything more. Its a bloody awful documentary in places, the language goes totally to shit in places, although at other moments its not that bad, dont let the atrocious narrative at the very start put you off. And no, there were no VIP hints in it that I could detect, its like a different world, at least in terms of the perpetrators but not so much the victims.


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

free spirit said:


> That article also reads like the sort of thing that might be used to try to provoke them into incriminating themselves and others prior to arrest.... fingers crossed.


 
The documentary I just embedded makes a brief reference to this technique.


----------



## elbows (Feb 17, 2013)

It reminds me of Boothby & The Krays in a way. And oh how badly equipped the mainstream is to acknowledge the realities when different form of power mix. We get 'the most sensational of scandals' or themes discussed mostly via fiction, with other aspects of the mainstream almost entirely unable to approach subjects where the compartmentalisation of society starts to leak badly. 

So we can have works of fiction where 'respectable businessmen' use the criminal classes for muscle and profit, but very few real examples come to light in the news.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 21, 2013)

Henke worried that (potentially) key witness is about to leave UK:-

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2013/02/20/will-elm-guest-house-man-quit-britain/


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 21, 2013)

elbows said:


> It reminds me of Boothby & The Krays in a way. And oh how badly equipped the mainstream is to acknowledge the realities when different form of power mix. We get 'the most sensational of scandals' or themes discussed mostly via fiction, with other aspects of the mainstream almost entirely unable to approach subjects where the compartmentalisation of society starts to leak badly.
> 
> So we can have works of fiction where 'respectable businessmen' use the criminal classes for muscle and profit, but very few real examples come to light in the news.


that's because people who are involved in criminal activity are often rather secretive about the matter. plus journalists are frequently averse to having their legs and arms broken.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Feb 24, 2013)

elbows said:


> Think I previously missed this late January story about Cyril Smith being one of the guest houses clients. This possibility isnt a new revelation but it hasnt received much mainstream press attention. This particular article includes details such as him breaking a toilet seat there and never paying for it.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cyril-smith-named-in-barnes-abuse-case-8468370.html



On similar lines. Did this make any news at the time? 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ful-paedophile-ring-30-years-ago-8507780.html


----------



## elbows (Feb 24, 2013)

He was often in the papers at the time, yes. Most notably when he named the diplomat Peter Hayman using parliamentary privilege. I found out about it and started ranting about it in this thread because I temporarily subscribed to a fairly crappy online press archive that only gave me access to a few of the more scurrilous papers. In particular I took note of the fact that a press conference he was supposed to be holding about Peter Hayman suddenly turned into a press conference about him having an affair and suddenly having to decide to leave his wife. It seems quite plausible that certain powers didnt like his powerful paedo outing activities and decided to dig for dirt, leaving him with just minutes to make a crap decision (he later went back to his wife). Other articles I have seen more recently suggest he was then outed for having another affair, at which point he started making noises about his flat being bugged.

The other technique other than poking into his own private life, appears to have been either to moan about misuse of parliamentary privilege, or to suggest that his entire anti-paedo campaign was just cheap self-publicity.


----------



## elbows (Feb 24, 2013)

You may find this twitter users collection of photos of old press cuttings rather interesting. Dickens is featured fairly often.

disclaimer: I do not vouch for the overall tone of this twitter users campaign and there may be certain insinuations which are unsuitable for u75 discussion at this point.

http://twitpic.com/photos/murunbuch?page=1


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2013)

With exquisite timing the Cyril Smith stuff is back:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/feb/26/liberals-cyril-smith-abuse-allegations




> Liberal party grandees including the former leader Jeremy Thorpe were aware of allegations that Cyril Smith was a serial abuser of boys throughout the 1970s but failed to launch a formal inquiry, according to a Liberal Democrat candidate who has passed his concerns on to the police.
> 
> Dominic Carman, who has represented Nick Clegg's party in two parliamentary elections, claimed that his father, the barrister George Carman, learned that concerns about the late MP for Rochdale's behaviour were rife within the party while successfully defending Thorpe in a trial for conspiracy to murder in 1979.
> 
> ...


Plenty more in the full article.


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2013)

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/new...dems-accused-of-denying-smith-victims-justice



> Lawyers demanded yesterday that the Lib Dems hand over any files it has on Cyril Smith, the late MP accused of a catalogue of sexual abuse of boys.
> 
> A lawyer for the alleged victims of Smith, the Lib Dem MP for Rochdale who died in 2010, said the party had failed to hand over its files and that the alleged paedophile’s victims were being “denied justice”.


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2013)

Another Smith story I missed earlier this month:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-21364579



> *Fears that Sir Cyril Smith was sexually abusing boys were reported to police four years before an investigation was opened, it has been claimed.*
> 
> Social worker Lyndon Price said he raised the issue with the chief constable of Rochdale in 1965.
> 
> Mr Price, director of social services in Rochdale from 1971 to 84, said that Chief Constable Patrick Ross later told him no action would be taken.





> "He was concerned that there were irregularities in the disciplinary practices being undertaken by Councillor Smith - I don't want to enlarge what they were, but they gave me considerable cause for concern because I thought the wellbeing of the young people in the hostel was in jeopardy," said Mr Price.
> "I made up my mind within a day or so to contact the chief constable."
> Mr Price said he received a "surprising" reply when he contacted Patrick Ross, chief constable of the now defunct Rochdale Borough Police.
> "I thought his words at the time were rather unusual: he said, 'It has been decided that we will take no further action' - not 'I have decided'," said Mr Price.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2013)

Adding to the multi-variate clusterfuck that is this month's news for the LDs, Henke and Exaro continue to pick away at the scab of a LD cover-up of the 1980's abuse of children in the care of LBoRuT:-

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...buse-in-richmond-childrens-director/#comments

This time specifically posing questions about  (LD Baroness) Jenny Tonge's knowledge of the abuse...



> The anmesia among politicians about  the child sexual abuse scandal in Richmond Council is looking less and less credible by the day. Now Terry Earland, the former assistant director of children’s services at Richmond, has told my colleague Mark Conrad that he held regular briefings with Jenny Tonge, Liberal social services chair and her deputy at the time – now believed to be dead- about child abuse problems. In article in Exaro News( http://bit.ly/WQQz7M) where Mr Earland gives a long interview. He makes it is absolutely clear that he briefed both senior politicians and officials in the social services department about the issue.


 
and



> Similarly he says he did tell Louis Minster,  social services director later prematurely retired by Jenny Tonge, about sexual abuse at Elm  Guest House  in 1982. This directly contradicts Mr Minster’s statement that he knew nothing about it. He also says it was well-known inside Richmond Council after 1983 that  sexual abuse of children was going on. This is when the Liberal Democrats took over from the Tories.
> When you consider that two boys have now told the police that one of the abusers was Sir Cyril Smith, the Liberal MP, whose death will mean he will escape prosecution, it is doubly tragic.


 
When, eventually, the Elm House victims see some justice, the fall out for the coaltion partners looks grave.


----------



## elbows (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm not surprised its gone quiet on this front for a while. Just looking back for any scraps of info during March I found this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...k-from-notorious-paedophile-ring-8518522.html



> Scores of children might have been protected from kidnap, rape and indecent assault if the police had smashed an alleged establishment paedophile ring operating at a suburban house in London in the 1980s.
> At least three men listed in documents as visitors to Elm Guest House in Rocks Lane, Barnes, were later convicted of multiple sex offences against children, The Independent can disclose.​





> Anthony Milsom, a paedophile from Hull, who is alleged to have stayed at the property, later moved to Newtown, Powys, where he was convicted of a string of sex offences dating back to the 1990s, including 21 counts of making indecent photographs of children and five counts of indecent assault on a girl when she was aged between 4 and eight. He was jailed indefinitely at Mold Crown Court in March 2011, but six months later appeal court judges reduced his sentence to three-and-a-half years. Another alleged visitor was Colin Peters, a Foreign Office barrister, who was jailed in 1989 for being part of a network which molested hundreds of boys. Reports at the time said the ring "was used by highly placed civil servants and well-known public officials".​​The most infamous alleged visitor to Elm Guest House was Warwick Spinks, a violent paedophile who in 1995 was jailed for a series of sexual offences on boys, including serious sexual assault at knifepoint, taking a child without lawful authority and taking indecent images of children. Lewes Crown Court heard that he had he drugged a 14-year-old boy and "sold him" to a gay brothel in Amsterdam.​
> According to documents kept by a former children's worker, visitors to the property included the Soviet spy Sir Anthony Blunt and the late Liberal MP Cyril Smith, who is now thought by Manchester police to have assaulted teenage boys.
> Another was Sir Peter Hayman, Britain's former High Commissioner in Canada.​


​


> In November 1983 Sir Leon Brittan, the Home Secretary, was given the dossier by the late Geoffrey Dickens, as part of his campaign against the Paedophile Information Exchange.
> 
> Asked by The Independent this week what the dossier alleged and what action, if any, he took, Sir Leon, a QC and later European Commissioner, replied by email: "I have no recollection of these matters. Sorry!"


​​


----------



## elbows (Mar 20, 2013)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vip-child-sex-ring-victims-1768956


> Those abused by a child sex ring linked to alleged VIP paedophiles last night blasted the “inadequate, ill-conceived” support offered since a fresh police probe began, the Sunday People reports.
> One said that after re-living harrowing memories of being molested three decades ago he was simply handed a list of charity phone numbers to call himself.
> The man, who we are calling Sam, told Exaro, the investigative website: “The trauma caused by the police contacting people over events that took place 30 years ago is worse than the event itself.
> “The police did conduct the interview with sensitivity. It is the system that fails. It is essential that support is put in place immediately after a historical trawl.”





> Sam told detectives six weeks ago how he had been molested while in a care home at the centre of abuse claims, reported by the Sunday People, which date back to 1982 but are now being re-investigated.





> Meanwhile a second victim, who asked not to be named, has spoken of the devastating effects of re-living his ordeal and the lack of support in place.
> He has told police how he was in care as a boy at Grafton Close and taken to the nearby Elm guest house – an alleged paedophile brothel used by public figures – to be sexually abused.
> He told Exaro: “I have had to obtain a victim support person myself. He phones me once a week to see how I am coping.


Bad to hear of victims not getting enough support, but at least we now know that at least two victims of the care home & guest house have been speaking to police this time around.


----------



## elbows (Mar 20, 2013)

The other week it seems the Manchester Evening News published the transcript of an interview Cyril Smith did with Rochdale police in 1970:

http://blogs.menmedia.co.uk/hiddena...mith-transcript-and-police-statement-in-full/

A slippery fishing expedition on Smiths part, where he wasnt prepared to make a proper statement and was warned about interfering with witnesses.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 20, 2013)

That's astonishing in so many ways. Thanks.


----------



## Corax (Mar 20, 2013)

Operation Yewtree have arrested Jim Davidson again.  Not much more info than that at the moment, but I thought it might raise a smile on a dark evening for some folk on here...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 20, 2013)

On 'fresh allegations'.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 20, 2013)

Ironically reported by the Times ...



> Police files on celebrities and politicians accused of sex assault were so heavily protected that officers investigating claims could not access them, it has been reported.
> 
> Information on high profile suspects was marked as "secret" or "restricted" and only available to a small number of officers - a system which may have helped prolific offenders such as Jimmy Saville escape prosecution, The Times has said.
> 
> ...


 
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/celebs-protected-over-sex-claims-040321152.html#KRKnSly


----------



## elbows (Mar 24, 2013)

According to Exaro, police have reopened their investigation into Kincora boys home.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4904/police-re-open-files-on-child-sex-abuse-at-kincora-boys-home

The Sunday People wrote a story based on this, mostly consisting of historical background info and a little bit about the public inquiry.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-re-open-child-sex-abuse-1781425

It appears to me that these publications have a far greater appetite to run stories about all of this stuff than they have fresh info to report in recent weeks. Fair play to them for keeping it up but dont expect to hear much of substance at the moment I'm afraid.


----------



## elbows (Mar 24, 2013)

Aaronovitch back to his old form on the issue by the looks of things ( I dont have access to the full article but I'm aware of some of his history of writing these sorts of articles):



> Beware the imperfect memory. Sometimes the real victim in a child abuse scandal is the person wrongly accused


 
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/davidaaronovitch/article3718746.ece


----------



## elbows (Mar 31, 2013)

The full Aaronivitch piece is available via a different publication:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...th-an-honest-lie/story-fnb64oi6-1226603683338

Some of what he is saying is not so very different from points I've sometimes made. But I dont trust him, and he has a pop at Exaro near the end of the article.


----------



## shygirl (Mar 31, 2013)

Interested to see Leon Brittan's part in not pursuing the allegations made by Dickens.  Why would he have?


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 1, 2013)

free spirit said:


> _____________________________________________________________________________​
> There are other hints coming out at the moment, such as an aside in the Panorama report on Savile last night by Merion Jones who's Aunt ran Duncroft girls school, which he apparently visited as a kid, describing it as.
> 
> 
> ...


 
a number of the kids who were abused at kincora claim they were brought to abuse parties in england attended by the high and mighty .

you can get an idea of how useful the kincora beast William Mcgrath was to the intelligence services here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McGrath

The british intelligence officer who tried to expose it was colin wallace . Wallace, a psychological warfare expert,  was then forced out of the British army accused of passing on confidential army info to journalists . The british government finally admitted some years ago he was authorized by army top brass to leak this info as part of his disinformation job, and that government ministers had misled parliament on the issue .He received financial compensation .
Kicked out of the army he was then framed for killing  an associate, something he was later cleared of by modern forensics . A home office pathologist admitted at his retrial that some of the evidence used to wrongfully convict wallace had been supplied by the US security services, making all this even murkier .
2 names that keep popping up around kincora are Ted Heath and Louis Mountbatten .


----------



## eoin_k (Apr 1, 2013)

Casually Red said:


> ... Ted Heath...


 
In 'Who framed Collin Wallace'  Paul Foot suggests that Heath was being smeared by his own spooks.


----------



## elbows (Apr 1, 2013)

A similar suggestion was made in Private Eye and probably elsewhere a very long time ago about a member of Thatchers government.


----------



## Idris2002 (Apr 1, 2013)

Casually Red said:


> 2 names that keep popping up around kincora are Ted Heath and Louis Mountbatten .


 
When PIRA killed Mountbatten, they also killed a 14 year old boy working on his boat at the time. . .


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 1, 2013)

The 14-year old was his grandson. The other lad was 15, according to this

One of the earl's twin grandsons, Nicholas, 14, and Paul Maxwell, 15, a local employed as a boat boy, also died in the explosion. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/27/newsid_2511000/2511545.stm

and



> Paul Maxwell was on the boat earning some pocket money by showing the party the best spots to catch fish.


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 1, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> When PIRA killed Mountbatten, they also killed a 14 year old boy working on his boat at the time. . .


 
local lore has it that whenever he took his Irish holiday in co donegal he always asked for a young chap to be supplied to him as a deckhand and sailing companion . Which the local protestant community dutifully supplied .
Dont know how much truth there is to that but its been commonly repeated ever since i was a kid . Bearing in mind it suited a lot of people here to portray him as a nonce as well as an imperialist shite I dont know what to make of it . But it wouldnt surprise me if he was .


----------



## Idris2002 (Apr 1, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> The 14-year old was his grandson. The other lad was 15, according to this
> 
> One of the earl's twin grandsons, Nicholas, 14, and Paul Maxwell, 15, a local employed as a boat boy, also died in the explosion.
> 
> ...





Casually Red said:


> local lore has it that whenever he took his Irish holiday in co donegal he always asked for a young chap to be supplied to him as a deckhand and sailing companion . Which the local protestant community dutifully supplied .
> Dont know how much truth there is to that but its been commonly repeated ever since i was a kid . Bearing in mind it suited a lot of people here to portray him as a nonce as well as an imperialist shite I dont know what to make of it . But it wouldnt surprise me if he was .


 
I don't know what to make of it either.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 1, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> I don't know what to make of it either.


 
I would imagine he'd say he wanted company for his grandchildren


----------



## Idris2002 (Apr 1, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I would imagine he'd say he wanted company for his grandchildren


 
You'd think that if he had been given to noncery, there would be a record of this in the local lore also. . .


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 1, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> You'd think that if he had been given to noncery, there would be a record of this in the local lore also. . .


 
Maybe someone needs to go and ask on some Irish forums


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 1, 2013)

his name has been frequently whispered surrounding kincora for a very long time . Not proof of anything at all and like i said it suits plenty of people here to portray him as a nonce . Except it seems the source of these rumours originated on the other side so to speak which lend them a bit more credibilty.

Its worth bearing in mind that although McGrath is commonly referred to as a paramilitary his shadowy TARA outfit werent actually involved in physical force stuff and was a mainly middle and upper class affair, more akin to Ross McWhirters ultra right sect . It sought to influence people, organisations and events behind the scenes . Not engaging in any rough stuff per se . McGrath was rubbing shoulders just as much with the upper crust landed gentry and MPs as he was with paisleyites and headbangers . And its believed he was an MI5 asset years before the troubles even broke out . It definitely appears that more than a few of those he rubbed shoulders with did indeed share his tastes for young boys and kincora was the ideal vehicle for compromising them politically .
Theres no doubt his fellow fascist , Red Hand commando leader John McKeague was a political and sexual sadist with an unending appetite for young men . One reason why theres an omerta is more than a few of the vulnerable young men there ended up as loyalist recruits . Michael Stone being one notorious example . And his own relationship with the intelligence services has long been pondered .


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 1, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> You'd think that if he had been given to noncery, there would be a record of this in the local lore also. . .


 
thats what was implied in the telling of the local lore..wink wink..nudge nudge


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 1, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> You'd think that if he had been given to noncery, there would be a record of this in the local lore also. . .


 
My paternal grandad, a career soldier who served in India and Burma before the war (European theatre during),  kept in touch with his armycontacts when he left in '52, disliked Mountbatten as a glory-hunter (always pushing combined-forces operations that would play well with the media, even if they had a heavy human cost), and what he heard from oppos who were there after VJ day until partition was that both Mountbatten and his missus were sexual predators whom the army and MI6 had to run around after, clearing up their messes. Both of them were into teenage boys, sometimes sharing them, and a lot of people had to be paid off.
For some strange reason, scarcely a mention of Mountbatten's numerous underage peccadiloes made it into Ziegler's monstrous biographical tome.


----------



## elbows (Apr 10, 2013)

I had missed the news from a few days ago that Peter Spindler, the police chief overseeing Yewtree, Fernbridge and Fairbank has quit, taking a two year secondment with Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-chief-peter-spindler-quits-1816009


----------



## happie chappie (Apr 19, 2013)

BBC reports that Rolf Harris has been questioned by police regarding historic allegations of sexual offences:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

(Breaking news ticker)


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 19, 2013)

A big glass wearer


----------



## yardbird (Apr 19, 2013)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22212131


----------



## brogdale (Apr 23, 2013)

Hello, hello, hello....

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...nquiry-into-ipcc-over-richmond-abuse-scandal/



> Operation Fernbridge – the criminal investigation into a paedophile ring centred round the London borough of Richmond and the shady Elm Guest House – is now turning to the role of Independent Police Complaints Commission over the whole affair.
> As reported by my excellent colleague for Exaro News, Mark Conrad,(see http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4936/met-investigates-police-watchdog-over-richmond-paedo-ring) in an amazing turn of events the  Met Police is now investigating the role of the police investigators.
> The turn of events is extraordinary. A former local government employee at Richmond and GMB trade unionist put a complaint into the police some 20 years after the police raid on the Elm Guest House. The police while taking down the details did not appear to investigate.
> So he complained to the IPCC who also appear to have dismissed the inquiry.He then used the appeal process to complain about the IPCC who again dismissed it.
> ...




also today...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/23/man-held-child-abuse-allegations


> A man has been arrested over historic child abuse alleged to have taken place in north Wales.
> The man was held in Ipswich, Suffolk, on Tuesday morning over "a number of serious sexual offences against a number of individuals", the Serious Organised Crime Agency said. He is being taken to a police station in north Wales where he will be interviewed over recent allegations of historic abuse.
> The man is the first person to be arrested under Operation Pallial, launched in November, which focuses on allegations of abuse in children's homes in north Wales in the 1970s and 80s.
> A report on the progress of the investigation is due to be published on Monday. In December officers revealed they had received information from 105 potential victims.
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Apr 24, 2013)

An interesting discussion has taken place in the comments section under Hencke's latest blog story:-



> Some time ago your name was associated with a story about the imminent arrest of a former cabinet minister on child sex charges. No such arrest has been reported. Can you shed any light on this?
> Anne  -  April 23, 2013 at 2:18 pm | Reply
> Reply
> 
> ...




hmmm


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 29, 2013)

North Wales child abuse: more than 140 people say they were victims



> More than 140 people have told police they were the victims of abuse at 18 children's homes across north Wales over a span of three decades.
> 
> The complainants, almost all men who were aged between seven and 19 at the time of the alleged offences, have identified 84 people as responsible for attacks said to have taken place between 1963 and 1992.
> 
> ...


 


> At a press conference in north Wales on Monday, detectives said the alleged offences ranged from serious physical assaults to rape.
> 
> They said that most of the 140 alleged victims had described a "clear element of grooming with a serious abuse of trust and dereliction of duty of care".
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Apr 29, 2013)

In the cases where the accused are deceased, I wonder if they are going to tell us about them.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 1, 2013)

Bill Roach now arrested


----------



## elbows (May 1, 2013)

Sorry for being a moaning git but can we put the celebrities with no links to the major non-media institutions of our country in one of the other threads? I'll go and look for the right one now as I seem to remember one wher I posted a story about the absolutely idiotic things Roach said about victims not so long ago, which will now gain an added dimension.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 1, 2013)

elbows said:


> Sorry for being a moaning git but can we put the celebrities with no links to the major non-media institutions of our country in one of the other threads? I'll go and look for the right one now as I seem to remember one wher I posted a story about the absolutely idiotic things Roach said about victims not so long ago, which will now gain an added dimension.


 
It's a bit like Atos threads, so many of them, never sure where to post


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

Oh I had missed the latest press story about the Elm Guest House.As usual I'm not going to quote the whole article and am likely missing out some sentences that are also of interest:

*Elm Guest House abuse scandal: "Paedo police ignored 16-year-old victim"*​ 
Claims of a cover-up are strengthened after detectives "ignored vital evidence" over alleged VIP paedo ring​ http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/elm-guest-house-abuse-scandal-1857494#ixzz2SAoMXuEf ​ 


> A boy who complained about sexual abuse by a VIP paedophile ring with alleged links to the political establishment was ignored after he spoke out.
> 
> The 16-year-old, who lived in a South West London care home, said he was attacked at the notorious Elm Guest House nearby.
> 
> And despite evidence backing his claim from a second boy, detectives failed to act, Exaro the investigative website and the Sunday People can reveal.


 


> Files held by Richmond Council show its then director of social services, Louis Minster, twice called up the file on the second boy.
> 
> He was interviewed at the age of 16 by a social worker and a Metropolitan Police detective chief inspector in 1983, a year after a raid on Elm Guest House.
> 
> ...


 
Just for clarity the cover-up they are referring to is from the time of the original investigation, not a fresh coverup happening now.​


----------



## free spirit (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> North Wales child abuse: more than 140 people say they were victims


as most of those accused seem to be dead, the most useful thing that could come out of this IMO would be for some detailed analysis to be done of the positions of those people that led to them having access to the boys, and if / how they are interlinked, and how they managed to keep this covered up for so long.

Or to put it another way, I'd like to see what some of the victims have publicly called for, an investigation into whether there were significant freemason links with those abusers, and if / how those links were used to enable this abuse, and facilitate a several decade long cover up of it, until most of those involved had died.

There's enough bits and pieces of freemason links, and longstanding rumours of them, plus the accusations of some of those abused to at least warrant a proper investigation into those links IMO - personally I'd probably be happier to see this being done by an academic, or independent group similar to the hillsborough panel, as I'd just not trust any official inquiry into it, and as most are dead, there's not really much point to the legal side of things.


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm.


----------



## free spirit (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm.


I'm not talking massive international conspiracy, but there are significant links in north wales just with the abusers who're already on the record, and that area of north wales was a hot bed of freemasonary activity in the period in which these abuses were taking place.

As a starting point, one of the key people who seems to have been involved in all this was the son of the guy who was the head of the freemasons in North Wales for several decades, was a member of the north wales police authority etc.

I'm really not a frequent conspiracy theorist type, and don't use those websites etc, it's just in this case there actually does seem to be a fair chance there's at least some truth to the rumours, and it's at least worthy of investigation as per several of the victims requests.

this has been discussed earlier in the thread, eg.



> Post war periods experienced an acceleration in that growth. During the Province´s long history three Provincial Grand Masters served for conspicuously longer periods than most, firstly Sir Watkin Williams Wynn, Bt., M.P. 1852 to 1885; Sir Herbert Lloyd Watkin Williams Wynn, Bt. C.B., T.D., 1914 to 1945 and Lloyd, 5th Baron Kenyon, C.B.E., D.L., 1958 to 1990.
> Under their respective periods of leaderships 16, 24 and 38 Lodges were consecrated. Prior to his assuming the leadership of the Province Lord Kenyon consecrated a further 8 Lodges as Deputy Provincial Grand Master.
> At the time of writing there are 113 active Lodges in the Province together with 36 Royal Arch Chapters but with another pause in the growth of Lodge numbers.​[source - north wales freemasons website]
> the number of lodges in North wales grew by 50% between 1958-90 vs no new lodges since 1991
> ...


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

All that stuff in your blue box is supposition held together with spiderwebs and sealing wax. The word 'flimsy' seems inadequate here.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm.


Do you consider the testimony of the alleged abused that mentioned freemasons as "gratuitous"


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

I've clearly missed this. It's a long thread and I'm not fully up to date. Could you provide a link please?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> I've clearly missed this. It's a long thread and I'm not fully up to date. Could you provide a link please?


 
(note, before you be silly and say that it doesn't prove it, it's not supposed to, it's supposed to indicate that the abused have testified that the abuse cover up was carried out by masons)


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

Yes, I remember seeing that when C4 News first broadcast it.

It's all smoke and no fire. The two interviewees talk about Masons in a suspicion-holding way, but there aren't any concrete allegations -- or even any generalised allegations. The closest anyone comes to pointing the proverbial finger is when Brereton says that there ought to be an investigation into possible Masonic connections -- but he doesn't give a reason.

Don't get me wrong, I don't personally doubt that the funny handshake brigade can be a social nuisance of the first magnitude, when they're not doing charity work, but your link doesn't back up your suggestions of victims implicating freemasons.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Yes, I remember seeing that when C4 News first broadcast it.
> 
> It's all smoke and no fire. The two interviewees talk about Masons in a suspicion-holding way, but there aren't any concrete allegations -- or even any generalised allegations. The closest anyone comes to pointing the proverbial finger is when Brereton says that there ought to be an investigation into possible Masonic connections -- but he doesn't give a reason.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I don't personally doubt that the funny handshake brigade can be a social nuisance of the first magnitude, when they're not doing charity work, but your link doesn't back up your suggestions of victims implicating freemasons.


Apart from the victim in the video clearly and publicly implicating masons. Maybe you need to have another look?


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

He says that a large number of the names he has on his list are Freemasons. 

He doesn't say he was abused by Freemasons, and nor does he make any specific or even general accusations.

He simply says what I have stated. 

And there's no way of knowing (a) whether his list is accurate or (b) how many of those on his list are guilty of abuse.

And that's just for starters.

Like I said: much smoke, no fire.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

His accuracy is irrelevant - i warned you not to do this - that his testimony involves masons is beyond doubt.

For starters? Well what else do you want to get wrong? Bring on the rest. What more have you been holding back on? Let's hear it.


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

In #1904 you referred to: "testimony of the alleged abused that mentioned freemasons"

That seems to have boiled down to one glancing reference in a TV interview, involving third parties, unspecified offences (well actually no offences), and a list that may or may not be accurate (with regard to Freemasonry or child abuse).

I'm going to be polite here, and say that you're building castles in the air.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> In #1904 you referred to: "testimony of the alleged abused that mentioned freemasons"
> 
> That seems to have boiled down to one glancing reference in a TV interview, involving third parties, unspecified offences (well actually no offences), and a list that may or may not be accurate (with regard to Freemasonry or child abuse).
> 
> I'm going to be polite here, and say that you're building castles in the air.


I did, and you challenged me to produce any. I did. I didn't say that it was the entirety of their testimony. Not that you've even yet understood what been offered. A Victim, with access to testimony of many others says that that they say masons were involved.  He says a lot of the abusers were masons. This equals, in your world: "He doesn't say he was abused by Freemasons". He said that many others were.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> In #1904 you referred to: "testimony of the alleged abused that mentioned freemasons"
> 
> That seems to have boiled down to one glancing reference in a TV interview, involving third parties, unspecified offences (well actually no offences), and a list that may or may not be accurate (with regard to Freemasonry or child abuse).
> 
> I'm going to be polite here, and say that you're building castles in the air.


 
You are not the one being polite here.


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

> I did, and you challenged me to produce any. I did. I didn't say that it was the entirety of their testimony. Not that you've even yet understood what been offered. A Victim, with access to testimony of many others says that that they say masons were involved. He says a lot of the abusers were masons. This equals, in your world: "He doesn't say he was abused by Freemasons". He said that many others were.


 
He didn't say that at all. What he said was that a lot of people on his list were Freemasons.

We don't know how accurate that list is, or how accurate his claims of masonry are, or ... well... anything much.

This is a very long way from: "There's enough bits and pieces of freemason links, and longstanding rumours of them, plus the accusations of some of those abused to at least warrant a proper investigation into those links IMO", which is what free spirit said in #1900 and which is what I was originally responding to.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> He didn't say that at all. What he said was that a lot of people on his list were Freemasons.
> 
> We don't know how accurate that list is, or how accurate his claims of masonry are, or ... well... anything much.
> 
> This is a very long way from: "There's enough bits and pieces of freemason links, and longstanding rumours of them, plus the accusations of some of those abused to at least warrant a proper investigation into those links IMO", which is what free spirit said in #1900 and which is what I was originally responding to.


His list is of people who were abused/abusers. Many of them were masons. That's exactly what he says.

It's a long way from you asking for a link from a victim mentioning masons to being given one then this  denial. You asked for a victim mentioning masons, you got one. Why can't you deal with it?


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

What I originally said was: "Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm."

I see no reason to revise that opinion, which I voiced in response to freespirit's exaggerated claims (as outlined).

Unless you are going to start providing evidence for freespirit's claims, which I doubt.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> What I originally said was: "Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm."
> 
> I see no reason to revise that opinion, which I voiced in response to freespirit's exaggerated claims (as outlined).
> 
> Unless you are going to start providing evidence for freespirit's claims, which I doubt.


It's almost like you said something afterwards, almost like you supported, then when challenged ,that the idea of all mentions of the masons was "gratuitous" - whilst denying the victims had ever suggested any such thing.


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

Almost ... but not quite.

I'm getting a bit tired of this.

If you have solid accusations against Freemasons, named or not, let's be having them.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Almost ... but not quite.
> 
> I'm getting a bit tired of this.
> 
> If you have solid accusations against Freemasons, named or not, let's be having them.


Don't have to. If you want to deny that the abused have named the mason as abusers...oh you just did that.


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

One abused man claims that he has a list of people, some of whom are Masons.

No more than that.

Again: This is a very long way from: "There's enough bits and pieces of freemason links, and longstanding rumours of them, plus the accusations of some of those abused to at least warrant a proper investigation into those links IMO", which is what free spirit said in #1900 and which is what I was originally responding to.


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

Anyway, enough of this. It's time for bed, or near enough.


----------



## two sheds (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm.


 
You mentioned Freemasons gratuitously there  .


----------



## existentialist (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm.


I think it's narrowing the focus unnecessarily, too. By all means, the Masonic connections should be looked at (assuming they exist), but so should all the others.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Sorry, but gratuitous mention of Freemasons sets off my loony alarm.


 
You're a loony and have an alarm, or you're attributing lunacy to people who "gratuitously" (who decides what is and isn't gratuitous?) mention Freemasons?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 3, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I think it's narrowing the focus unnecessarily, too. By all means, the Masonic connections should be looked at (assuming they exist), but so should all the others.


 
As I said on this and another thread many moons ago, the Masonic connections, if they exist, will likely point up just another method by which paedophiles in North Wales and elsewhere "networked" with one another. I've no doubt other "establishment" organisations were put to use too. We're all familiar with the paedophile scoutmaster trope.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 3, 2013)

two sheds said:


> You mentioned Freemasons gratuitously there  .


 
TBF, for most Freemasons, any mention of their organisation is gratuitous, especially by the profane (that's us "non-members", btw!  ).
They're great - the most unsecret "secret society" in the history of occult organisations!


----------



## existentialist (May 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> As I said on this and another thread many moons ago, the Masonic connections, if they exist, will likely point up just another method by which paedophiles in North Wales and elsewhere "networked" with one another. I've no doubt other "establishment" organisations were put to use too. We're all familiar with the paedophile scoutmaster trope.


This. I think it is vanishingly unlikely that any part of the formal structure of Freemasonry is in any way officially involved in these antics. The connection between Freemasonry and such things is no more significant than the connection between golf clubs, local pubs, sports clubs and them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 3, 2013)

existentialist said:


> This. I think it is vanishingly unlikely that any part of the formal structure of Freemasonry is in any way officially involved in these antics. The connection between Freemasonry and such things is no more significant than the connection between golf clubs, local pubs, sports clubs and them.


 
Which are significant insofar as being nexuses for people who engage in such things, but not, as you say, because the organisations *themselves* have any involvement.


----------



## existentialist (May 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Which are significant insofar as being nexuses for people who engage in such things, but not, as you say, because the organisations *themselves* have any involvement.


Child sexual abuse being such a taboo, the only organisations in which it is possible for it to thrive openly would be ones formed specifically for that purpose, or where the overwhelming majority of members are at least tolerant of such activity.

Certainly, there is a grey area in the middle, such as what we've seen with the BBC - it seems scarily possible for an organisation to simply fail to see the scale of a problem, particularly if there are well-protected and charismatic individuals involved. And, in theory, any organisation - including Freemasonry - could find itself in a similar position. But the difference there is that the BBC is an organisation that is in thrall to the charismatic individuals who are its "personalities", and by virtue of what it does - viz., entertainment - is in a position where it has been able to unwittingly provide opportunities for abusers and victims to come together.

Anything else is simply going to be a slightly specialised version of the same social networking that has people who are interested in similar sports or hobbies coming together, not necessarily as part of the organisation (let's be quite clear here that I am not considering child sexual abuse to be either a sport or a hobby!!!).


----------



## free spirit (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> All that stuff in your blue box is supposition held together with spiderwebs and sealing wax. The word 'flimsy' seems inadequate here.


which is why I'm not asking for all freemasons lodges in north wales to be immediately shut down / prosecuted, I'm suggesting that there should be an inquiry to determine what the truth of the situation actually is.

If there's no truth to the accusations then surely the freemasons would welcome the chance to be exonerated having been very publicly named as being complicit.


----------



## 1%er (May 3, 2013)

free spirit said:


> which is why I'm not asking for all freemasons lodges in north wales to be immediately shut down / prosecuted, I'm suggesting that there should be an inquiry to determine what the truth of the situation actually is.
> 
> If there's no truth to the accusations then surely the freemasons would welcome the chance to be exonerated having been very publicly named as being complicit.


I think you are correct.

Every freemason who honors the oath they took would agree that there should be an inquiry, if there is credible evidence.

Is there credible evidence?

The way lodges are set up, I could see a lodge of peados getting together. The difficulty would be identifying who to invite, you invite the wrong mason and its game over, but I think its possible,Grand-lodge only knows whats going on in any lodge because they get a copy of the minutes, but they would have get past the "visiting officer", I haven't been to a lodge for over 30 years, I only joined because i have an interest in ritual and had an easy way in.

It could be a group posing as masons to be able to book function rooms for "private" meetings. Lots of hotels have lodge rooms and wouldn't blink an eye at a request for the use of the Lodge. It wouldn't be the first time.


----------



## existentialist (May 3, 2013)

1%er said:


> I think you are correct.
> 
> Every freemason who honors the oath they took would agree that there should be an inquiry, if there is credible evidence.


OK, indulge me here. In terms of the "oath" Freemasons are supposed to be "honoring", why should we agree there should be an inquiry?



1%er said:


> The way lodges are set up, I could see a lodge of peados getting together.


Is that so? How much do you know about the process that is involved in setting up and consecrating a lodge? Just flying a kite here, but are you thinking that it's as simple as grabbing a few fellow-travellers, popping together a proposal for the "Death in Venice" lodge, and Bob's your uncle?



1%er said:


> The difficulty would be identifying who to invite, you invite the wrong mason and its game over, but I think its possible,Grand-lodge only knows whats going on in any lodge because they get a copy of the minutes, but they would have get past the "visiting officer", I haven't been to a lodge for over 30 years, I only joined because i have an interest in ritual and had an easy way in.


That would be the least of the difficulties. You really are talking complete bollocks, here. Trust me on this (not you, but the non-lunatics who are reading this).



1%er said:


> It could be a group posing as masons to be able to book function rooms for "private" meetings. Lots of hotels have lodge rooms and wouldn't blink an eye at a request for the use of the Lodge. It wouldn't be the first time.


Which wouldn't make it Freemasonry.

Lots of hotels have rooms. Some of them may - arguably - be used by Freemasons as lodge rooms, but that doesn't make them Masonic any more than the fact that the same room might get used to do bingo on Tuesdays makes it, er, "bingonic". I don't think you can conflate the idea that a hotel might hire out the same room that might - just might - get used by a Masonic lodge as an indication that, somehow, the room then magically has Masonic connections.

And I could just as easily pop up to my local hotel, book a room in the name of the Nether Scrotewrangler Owl-fancier's Club and spend the evening rubbing hazelnut yogurt into my scalp while fondling bowls of lime jelly and whistling "Edelweiss", without it having any kind of greater significance...


----------



## free spirit (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> Almost ... but not quite.
> 
> I'm getting a bit tired of this.
> 
> If you have solid accusations against Freemasons, named or not, let's be having them.


ffs is your search function broken? you could have just searched the thread and found the previous discussion in the time it took you to have an argument with Butchersapron.


----------



## 1%er (May 6, 2013)

existentialist said:


> OK, indulge me here. In terms of the "oath" Freemasons are supposed to be "honoring", why should we agree there should be an inquiry?


["if there is credible evidence"]Because the masons oath includes upholding the law and if I recall correctly, they have a duty to inform Grand Lodge [or someone] of any unlawful activity by other members.




existentialist said:


> Is that so? How much do you know about the process that is involved in setting up and consecrating a lodge? Just flying a kite here, but are you thinking that it's as simple as grabbing a few fellow-travellers, popping together a proposal for the "Death in Venice" lodge, and Bob's your uncle?


Many lodges are set up by people who have a common interest, just look at the UGLE site, there are lodges for everything from explorers to ex-members of the boys brigade. There are loads of special interest lodges and trade lodge lodges, there are tube and train drivers lodges, a taxi drivers lodge, estate agents lodges etc.....




existentialist said:


> That would be the least of the difficulties. You really are talking complete bollocks, here. Trust me on this (not you, but the non-lunatics who are reading this).


Why is it bollocks? Other than the minutes of a lodge meeting (the official record of the meeting), how does grand lodge know what is going on with-in a lodge? If the ritual was correct how would the visiting officer know someone was wrong?




existentialist said:


> Which wouldn't make it Freemasonry.
> 
> Lots of hotels have rooms. Some of them may - arguably - be used by Freemasons as lodge rooms, but that doesn't make them Masonic any more than the fact that the same room might get used to do bingo on Tuesdays makes it, er, "bingonic". I don't think you can conflate the idea that a hotel might hire out the same room that might - just might - get used by a Masonic lodge as an indication that, somehow, the room then magically has Masonic connections.
> 
> And I could just as easily pop up to my local hotel, book a room in the name of the Nether Scrotewrangler Owl-fancier's Club and spend the evening rubbing hazelnut yogurt into my scalp while fondling bowls of lime jelly and whistling "Edelweiss", without it having any kind of greater significance...


Lodge rooms in most hotels are not multipurpose


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 6, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Lots of hotels have rooms. Some of them may - arguably - be used by Freemasons as lodge rooms, but that doesn't make them Masonic any more than the fact that the same room might get used to do bingo on Tuesdays makes it, er, "bingonic". I don't think you can conflate the idea that a hotel might hire out the same room that might - just might - get used by a Masonic lodge as an indication that, somehow, the room then magically has Masonic connections.


 
Lots of pubs used to be used for Masonic meetings if my grandfather's papers are anything to go by


----------



## 1%er (May 6, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Lots of pubs used to be used for Masonic meetings if my grandfather's papers are anything to go by


They will have been for the "festive board" the meal and or drink after the lodge meeting, unless the pub had a working lodge room.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 6, 2013)

1%er said:


> They will have been for the "festive board" the meal and or drink after the lodge meeting, unless the pub had a working lodge room.


 
I dunno, it looked like these may have been monthly events


----------



## existentialist (May 6, 2013)

1%er said:


> ["if there is credible evidence"]Because the masons oath includes upholding the law and if I recall correctly, they have a duty to inform Grand Lodge [or someone] of any unlawful activity by other members.


Freemasons are supposed to *abide by the law *- there's no obligation on them to inform, AFAIK. I have seen situations where members have been criticised in no uncertain terms, though, for admitting to or boasting about naughty things they've got up to.



1%er said:


> Many lodges are set up by people who have a common interest, just look at the UGLE site, there are lodges for everything from explorers to ex-members of the boys brigade. There are loads of special interest lodges and trade lodge lodges, there are tube and train drivers lodges, a taxi drivers lodge, estate agents lodges etc.....


Indeed - my mother lodge was formed from a local Home Guard regiment. But I still think we are unlikely ever to see the Child Violinists Lodge of Unity any time soon -  overtly or covertly.



1%er said:


> Why is it bollocks? Other than the minutes of a lodge meeting (the official record of the meeting), how does grand lodge know what is going on with-in a lodge? If the ritual was correct how would the visiting officer know someone was wrong?


Sorry, maybe we're talking at cross-purposes here. Are you *seriously* suggesting that a gang of paedophiles could get together, form a Masonic Lodge, use it as a nexus for their nefarious deals, but go to all the trouble of holding and minuting meetings, etc., etc.?

Why would they bother? I mean, wouldn't they be better off all just going round to the house of one of their members and doing whatever it was they wanted to do there? Why bother paying all the dues and fees, having to go to all the trouble to falsify their Lodge records, document the fact that they had all been there and met on a regular basis for the handy use of law enforcement later, and so on?



1%er said:


> Lodge rooms in most hotels are not multipurpose


You seriously think a hotel is going to set aside a prime piece of floorspace for the occasional use of a Masonic Lodge? I can't speak with that much authority, only having spent the last 23 years in Freemasonry, but I have yet to attend a meeting in a hotel that has taken place in a dedicated Lodge room within the hotel. It just doesn't happen. I've been to meetings in hotels, and in pubs, where the lodge room has been set up using an existing function room, as well as attending many, many meetings in dedicated Lodge rooms in Masonic halls, but never in such a room in a hotel. Of course, I am more than happy to bow to your superior experience on the matter...


----------



## 1%er (May 6, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Freemasons are supposed to *abide by the law *- there's no obligation on them to inform, AFAIK. I have seen situations where members have been criticised in no uncertain terms, though, for admitting to or boasting about naughty things they've got up to.
> 
> 
> Indeed - my mother lodge was formed from a local Home Guard regiment. But I still think we are unlikely ever to see the Child Violinists Lodge of Unity any time soon - overtly or covertly.
> ...


 My understand was that Masons were obliged to report any wrong doing with-in Masonry and I can't think of any I knew who would not report such a matter to the police, it isn't like buying a TV off the back of a lorry.

No I am not saying a gang of peados can open a lodge, what I said was, if a group of masons who were also peados got together they could form a lodge, it is highly unlikely, but possible. I have no idea why they would bother, I had no idea why people bothered with ghost lodges, but I was invited to join more of them than I was real lodges  LOL

My mother lodge was in London and the hotel had 3 dedicated lodges, I guess in the provinces things are different. As I said above my interest was the ritual and I didn't go to other Lodges much.


----------



## free spirit (May 7, 2013)

it's not necessarily about an entire lodge of pedos, it's about the interwoven web of deceit that can form over time within a close knit organisation that can result in members having a hold over other members on top of the favors for fellow freemasons aspect.

Please consider that the head freemason in north wales for several decades at the time of this abuse was the father of one of the key suspects in that abuse - a guy who seemed to have somehow ended up actually managing to have one of the kids he was abusing arrested for stealing from him, and ensuring that the police did nothing about the kids accusations against him - not something that someone without some form of hold over the police could achieve IMO.

Another mason was the cop responsible for the area covering at least one of the homes involved and the main police contact for anything going on at the homes - now I'd not like to imply that he was guilty of anything being as his word as a copper (and a mason?) meant that the accusations of 6 allegedly abused kids counted for nothing in court... but anyway yeah, he was a mason.

Erm, from memory, the deputy chief constable of North Wales up to the early 70s was a high level mason, and I think I'm right in remembering that there were coppers groups at several lodges in the area - ie not an entire lodge of coppers, but the coppers met at the lodge one day a week / month or however it works.

Ah yes, then there was the mason on the inquiry team that found the other mason copper to be credible when he denied abusing kids and found the 6 kids testifying not to be credible witnesses.

etc.

None of this is proof of course, but it's a fair indication that the conspiracy to cover up these crimes apparently perpetrated by over 80 people over a period of several decades is likely to have had at least some significant masonic involvement IMO.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (May 7, 2013)

I know that the Orange Order isn't quite mainstream Freemasonry, but doesn't the career of William McGrath suggest ways in which dodgy fraternal organisations can benefit predatory far-right fruitcake paedophiles and their cop/spook facilitators?


----------



## elbows (May 9, 2013)

The latest couple of articles from Exaro on the subject:

As usual its a subscription service so only get the start of the articles and I havent checked to see if their partner newspaper for these stories has written related articles yet.

Detectives are investigating links between Elm Guest House and what became known as Britain’s biggest paedophile ring
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4956/elm-guest-house-linked-to-britain-s-biggest-child-sex-racket

​
Ex-Richmond boss Louis Minster denies being... Louis Minster
Listen to extraordinary conversation between ex-head of social services and Exaro reporter​http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4950/ex-richmond-boss-louis-minster-denies-being-louis-minster


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (May 9, 2013)

Claims that Stuart Hall had "help" / "mates" in Parliament were curiously removed from the Independent website, claims this blog signposted at The Needle

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/the-paedofile-stuart-hall-references-to-parliamentary-accomplice-add-grist-to-westminster-paedophile-mill/


----------



## brogdale (May 14, 2013)

This is rather disturbing, if unsurprising, news:-



> A report by my colleague Nick Fielding for Exaro News ( see http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4961/police-abandon-probe-into-cyril-smith-s-sexual-abuse-of-boys ) reveals *the former MP linked to child sex abuse cases at the Elm Guest House in Richmond,London to Rochdale where he was an MP is now off the hook.* Full details on the site.
> This is _*despite offers from the NSPCC  charity to provide a dedicated line for victims and growing evidence that Sir Cyril’s illegal activities involving young boys appear  to be on a similar scale to  the late  Jimmy Savile’s abuse of young girls which  are being vigorously pursued by the Met Police ‘s Operation Yewtree*_.
> _*Greater Manchester police’s decision will add to the considerable disquiet on the internet that there could be yet another Establishment cover up over child sexual abuse cases when it comes to senior politicians*_. It will probably also calm the nerves of at least three Liberal Democrat peers who started their political careers in the London borough of Richmond in the aftermath of the Elm Guest House scandal which they conveniently would like to forget.
> Public trust that the police will properly investigate these  historic scandals is paramount. _*Great Manchester Police have done people a grave disservice by letting off the hook someone whom they now acknowledge would have been prosecuted for a string of offences*_. It has been shown by the reactions of dismay, anger and suspicion to this post on Twitter.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 14, 2013)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I know that the Orange Order isn't quite mainstream Freemasonry, but doesn't the career of William McGrath suggest ways in which dodgy fraternal organisations can benefit predatory far-right fruitcake paedophiles and their cop/spook facilitators?


 
I've seen a couple of sites in Norn Iron where the local Orange Hall is right next door to the local Freemason's Lodge. Don't forget that NI is also a real "everyone knows everyone else" place, so covert networks of wrong 'uns are quite easy to organise, even without the assistance of fraternal organisations.


----------



## elbows (May 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> This is rather disturbing, if unsurprising, news:-


 
The police are denying it. But their words suggest that whatever the truth of the state of play right now, since he is dead and this isnt a public inquiry, the bulk of what they were going to do in the first place was acknowledge victims that came forwards.

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/new...olice-deny-dropping-cyril-smith-investigation



> DCS Doyle said: "To say that we have abandoned our investigation into allegations concerning the late Sir Cyril Smith is misleading and inaccurate.
> 
> "From the outset, we have always stressed that if anybody wished to come forward and make a complaint, GMP would record this to recognise the abuse that victim has suffered.
> 
> ...


 
Also since the GMP are nothing to do with the Fernbridge investigation, I wonder if the suggestion that he is now 'off the hook' is stretching things a bit. I guess we'll have to wait and see what Fernbridge actually achieves before coming to a conclusion.


----------



## elbows (May 14, 2013)

Also in regards to Cyril Smith, we do already have the admittance by the crown prosecution service that he should have been charged in his lifetime, so I will never consider him to be off the hook. The question for me is who else may be off the hook that helped to cover up his crimes. For example the Lib Dems have so far brushed away questions about this with little effort, and I have no clue as to whether any of the investigations or reports will get into the spooky side of things. Based on history and the nature of spook work, we should clearly not anticipate this side of things getting a proper airing without a significant struggle and outcry forcing it, and even then murk in this area is stubborn to shift to put it mildly.


----------



## brogdale (May 14, 2013)

Yes, I agree that using the term 'off the hook' for the deceased is rather redundant. But I remain concerned that this GMP investigation is being downplayed to the point that Exaro regard it as closed, (whatever the Police say themselves).
Its also concerning that there is apparently no coordination between GMP & Fernbridge when Smith was indentified as an alleged abuser at Elm Guest House.


----------



## happie chappie (May 15, 2013)

Contributor on Nicky Campbell's phone in on Radio 5 Live now saying that he expects imminent arrests relating to allegations of a sexual abuse ring in London - including a former cabinet minister.


----------



## brogdale (May 15, 2013)

happie chappie said:


> Contributor on Nicky Campbell's phone in on Radio 5 Live now saying that he expects imminent arrests relating to allegations of a sexual abuse ring in London - including a former cabinet minister.


 
Yep. I heard that too. He was, of course, speculating just as we have above. I would imagine that he has little or no more actual infomation than we do from Exaro etc.


----------



## treelover (May 15, 2013)

I have a older friend who was a foster mother to many many kids who had been in care who were telling her their experiences in North Wales, she helped break the story..


----------



## Psychonaut (May 19, 2013)

i dont know if this has been posted, but ben fellows has posted recordings of his police interviews on his youtube channel benfellows170.

The informal one shot in his frontroom is particularly disturbing, he talks about widespread child abuse in the entertainment industry, naming various celebrities as complicit and a hollywood filmstar outright as being a rapist. The responses of the detectives are very interesting in themselves like the ambiguous phrase 'if he does a mcalpine',  towards the end the police are venturing names unprompted - can you tell us about person x.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 5, 2013)

> We have been in contact with whistleblower Ben Fellows’ wife on the disappearance of her husband. Please read the following article and get this out to as many people as possible, we all want Ben to return to his family safely.
> At the recent UK Column conference, Ben was informed by Dave Eden, a former CID detective, that his wife was in immediate danger as a result of Ben’s work. It was made clear that Ben should have an “exit strategy”.
> On Thursday 23rd of May, after the attacks in Woolwich (approximately half a mile from the Fellows residence),  Ben and his wife returned home from visiting friends to find that their flat had been broken in to. Nothing appeared to be stolen.
> At 11:30pm that evening, the phone rang and an anonymous man told Ben to look outside his window to the other side of the street. A man in a black ski mask stood there on a mobile phone, the caller said “What happened to that soldier today is what is going to happen to you”
> ...



http://libertytactics.com/2013/06/urgent-ben-fellows-missing/


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 5, 2013)

Hmmm, attempting to drum up a bit of interest do you think?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Hmmm, attempting to drum up a bit of interest do you think?


 
Not wishing to come across as an unsympathetic bastard, but yes. This leech has been riding the whole issue for ages, forever coming out with barely-substantiable or unsubstantiable claims and putting himself forward as an "expert". So, milking an event to publicise himself is highly likely.


----------



## elbows (Jun 5, 2013)

Well his own attempts at internet radio shows, videos, twitter accounts etc seem to have fallen pretty quiet for months now, so I think he may have realised he wasnt going to get a mass following on his own channels. As far as I know he was still doing the rounds of other peoples crap conspiracy radio shows etc.

In any case he probably upped the ante more recently by posting long recordings of police detectives talking to him in his own home. I couldnt sustain enough interest to watch them because of his track record, the sound quality not being great and as usual for these types he totally failed to edit the video down to something that featured the salient points, eg some of the stuff various people claimed the police said. In any case I doubt it was a very good move, and a range of possibilities now exist ranging from him winding himself up into a state where persecution by the authorities is imagined, or to a certain limited extent could even really be happening.

Put it this way, as of a very tedious interview with his wife from a couple of days ago, she had not contacted the police to report him as being missing. Claims this is because she doesnt trust the police much because of what they said when they were round their house, that 'protected people' would not be investigated. Further claims that for now the best way to keep Ben safe is to get this story out. Nuff said eh, pretty transparent motivations at this point, though I dont utterly rule out further twists in future.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 5, 2013)

Ah ok thanks folks for some background. A mate posted it on FB and I thought wtf? and then posted it here...


----------



## elbows (Jun 5, 2013)

Basically he is into New World Order shit and his message is appealing to the web of politically dubious blogs that have been fixating on the child abuse stuff since it exploded post-Savile (and some long before that). Such blogs are sometimes able to stumble on some interesting stuff, usually historical, but they tend to be infested with homophobia, anti-semitism and the usual array of disempowering drivel and paranoia. There are exceptions to a certain extent but not many, especially since quality news on this front has mostly dried up.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 5, 2013)

at the same time though elbows, there is a serious danger in judging him a liar on the basis that he's ended up going very CTer in recent years.

Who's to say that he didn't become interested in that side of things as a reaction to the stuff he claims to have happened to him as a kid?

It all seems pretty off to me that in one part of the thread everyone's criticising the authorities for dismissing the claims of dozens / hundreds of kids re historic child abuse over a period of several decades on the basis that they lack credibility, then as soon as someone comes out and directly makes similarly unlikely sounding allegations about high profile politicians, actors etc many of the same people decide to judge his allegations on the basis that he lacks credibility as a witness.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 5, 2013)

also if even half of what he's alleged is true, and even half the stuff linked to and discussed in this thread is true, then it's entirely plausible that the guy could have been either threatened, or taken out entirely and will rock up as an apparent suicide in the not too distant future.

There are several examples over the years of people who were trying to, or in a position to expose these pedophile networks dying in pretty suspicious circumstances with allegations that they were killed to shut them up.

So while scepticism is healthy, I'd not be too quick to judge on this - while not discounting the possibility that the guy could have just wound himself up into a state of extreme paranoia, or as butch suggests is doing all of this entirely cynically to drum up interest in him / his site etc.


----------



## elbows (Jun 5, 2013)

I have made no claims as to whether in my opinion his allegations have any truth to them. His conduct does not help his credibility, but I am aware that a judgement about perceived credibility is not actually the same as whether there is any truth to some stuff he says. As an outsider who was not witness to the situation he described, what I require is evidence, investigation, other victims, etc. 

In the meantime I have no qualms about filling others in as to his apparent worldview and stuff he has said and done in recent years. 

Personally I have zero opinion as to the validity of his most spectacular claim, but I have little trouble in believing that certain aspects of a culture he describes as having experienced as a young actor are, or were, a real part of that world. And I do have some sympathy for those that try with wide-eyed earnest to expose that stuff and discover that people are less interested or less surprised than expected, that such exposures go nowhere. I also have sympathy with those who are damaged in a way that causes their worldview to go a bit wonky or a variety of personality issues to develop. But that doesnt mean I am going to withhold criticism about dodgy politics and stuff that hopes or claims to be an empowering struggle against dodgy forces but actually ends up a disempowering mess that fails to really promote a better world.


----------



## elbows (Jun 5, 2013)

As for his disappearance, I have considered a range of possibilities. I make no apology for judging which one I find most likely, especially given his wifes performance in an interview, but I would hope my earlier posts demonstrate that I am still open to the other possibilities.

I dont particularily recommend anyone waste their time listening to the interview, but as I've made reference to it several times I suppose I shall post the link.


----------



## elbows (Jun 5, 2013)

Oh surprise, surprise, according to the same website that did that video, Ben has 'made contact. Still in hiding but in good health'.


----------



## elbows (Jun 6, 2013)

I removed the video of the interview with her since he reported in anyway, and Im not comfortable linking to stuff that repeats his claims.


----------



## elbows (Jun 6, 2013)

I dont have access to full Exaro articles at the moment (saving the few credits I have for hopefully more dramatic turns to come in future as I am well poor at the moment). But according to this summary, Boris Johnson has said that Fernbridge is 'going well', and Operation Torva looking at abuse at Catholic Salesians order schools has expanded to include a Scottish highlands former boarding school.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4990/met-s-operation-fernbridge-is-going-well-says-boris-johnson


----------



## brogdale (Jun 6, 2013)

elbows said:


> I dont have access to full Exaro articles at the moment (saving the few credits I have for hopefully more dramatic turns to come in future as I am well poor at the moment). But according to this summary, Boris Johnson has said that Fernbridge is 'going well', and Operation Torva looking at abuse at Catholic Salesians order schools has expanded to include a Scottish highlands former boarding school.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4990/met-s-operation-fernbridge-is-going-well-says-boris-johnson


 
Thanks for that update; ditto on the access to Exaro issue.

Not sure that I'm very heartened by Johnson's description; it does rather beg the question  "for whom"?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 6, 2013)

elbows said:


> Basically he is into New World Order shit and his message is appealing to the web of politically dubious blogs that have been fixating on the child abuse stuff since it exploded post-Savile (and some long before that). Such blogs are sometimes able to stumble on some interesting stuff, usually historical, but they tend to be infested with homophobia, anti-semitism and the usual array of disempowering drivel and paranoia. There are exceptions to a certain extent but not many, especially since quality news on this front has mostly dried up.


For my own selfish and personal reasons, I get royally fucked off with these types who use issues like this to grandstand on. The least of those reasons is the fact that, by behaving like this, this cockend plays into the narrative of those who would have it that anyone disclosing abuse after so long is doing it only for attention/compensation/a way to settle a score.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 11, 2013)

*JERSEY:Children were loaned to rich paedophile yachtsmen*


Lots of information in here, some new, some old as far as I can see.


----------



## pissflaps (Jun 11, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> *JERSEY:Children were loaned to rich paedophile yachtsmen*
> 
> 
> Lots of information in here, some new, some old as far as I can see.


 
that site is tin foil hattery gold. and awfully written...



> *One former resident has claimed he was repeatedly raped at the children’s home by Krichefski (pictured below) in 1962 and 1963. He was the head of several Jersey government committees and in 1958 was made an OBE.*


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 11, 2013)

pissflaps said:


> that site is tin foil hattery gold. and awfully written...


 
Parts of the article originally from The Times/AFP and reproduced here on an Aussie News site




> A leading member of Jersey's political establishment was confirmed by police yesterday as among those named as an abuser.
> 
> Wilfred Krichefski, a senator in Jersey's Government and chairman of several committees on the British Channel island, was said to have regularly visited Haut de la Garenne to abuse boys until his death in 1974.
> Living members of the island's establishment, who cannot be named for legal reasons, have also been identified as suspects.
> ...


 
http://www.news.com.au/newstest2/ar...r-childrens-home/story-e6frfkyi-1111115704573


----------



## Celt (Jun 14, 2013)

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/document-believed-jillings-report-leaked-4309020

This from the "local" north wales newspaper seems rather curious.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Jun 14, 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Black_Book#Publishing_and_campaign_against_homosexuality

This is interesting. The Berlin Black Book, said to contain the names of 47,000 "perverts" in the British Ruling Class. Perverts in this instance is likely a synonym for homosexual. It came up in the libel action between Pemberton Billing and a dancer he accused of being a lesbian, on the basis of this book, called Maud Allan.

I mention it because even though it's clearly a piece of wartime black propoganda, being used by a right-wing demagogue to promote his career and ego, after the war it formed part of the basis of a folk tradition that the ruling classes of Britain were all peadophiles and that secretly there were lists of them and what they got upto hidden away. I've seen it mentioned in passing once or twice when I was reading up on the histories of all the uprisings and strikes that took place in the post world war 1 period, it's something bubbling away underneath all the formal grievances. AJP Taylor mentions it too:



> Among the names were those of Mr and Mrs Asquith (as also of Darling, the judge who conducted, or misconducted, the case); not, however, that of Lloyd George. The case, though no doubt trivial, was a striking illustration of the disrepute into which the governing class had fallen.


 
_The Oxford History of England Vol. 15: English History 1914-45 page 103_

I mention it just because is it fair to say these sorts of folk stories about peadophile rings in high places have a long history as a way in which to articulate a more vague set of greivances with the ruling class? And furthermore are these sorts of things more likely to take place in periods of recession and high unemployment, as is the case now and as was the case then?


----------



## elbows (Jun 14, 2013)

Well quite a few of the foul blogs I mention were around before Savile, and there was a pretty steady stream of specific accusations and more general conspiracy drool about this stuff to be found online dating back many years. Given that the post-Savile shitstorm and both related and unrelated investigations have provided new attention and a little new detail for these people to feed on, I find it hard to judge what role recession etc has had.

In much the same way I cannot grasp the exact extent to which the banking crisis has encouraged the wider spectrum of conspiracy theorists and their followers - there is clear narrative overlap potential and examples of career conspiracy theorists using this stuff to say 'told you so', but what proportion of people who were angry about banking in a manner that made them fodder for Icke etc is hard to judge. I suppose I can be reasonably sure that it hasn't had a huge and dramatic impact because over time the visible anger from people about both bankers and paedophiles has not been sustained at anything close to its initial volume, the 'public imagination' was titillated but not in a manner that appears to have changed the overall political equations, at least not in the conspiracy, non-mainstream manner that the darkest and most sinister of these paranoid world views require to feed off for massive political gain. So I am more tempted to see any wider-ranging implications being more along the lines of a slight addition to the cynicism that already existed and has built up over many years. That and some mainstream 'changes in attitude' towards child abuse etc that is handled in a distinctly non-conspiracy-minded manner, which the political classes recognise and are presently keen to at least be seeing to respond to properly, via policing and inquiries.


----------



## elbows (Jun 25, 2013)

Just had a little look to see if there had been any Fernbridge-related stories in the press this month. Unsurprisingly nothing substantial turned up but there were a couple of snippets that suggest things are still moving forwards and that my earlier assumptions about police being keen to avoid accusations of a coverup are at least somewhat valid:

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/319561/Stars-in-child-sex-warning/

​


> Mr Williams-Thomas said police are determined to avoid any accusations of cover-ups.​​He said detectives working on Operations Yewtree, about Savile and his associates, and Fairbank and Fernbridge, examining alleged child abuse by politicians at the former Elm Guest House, are pursuing multiple big names.​​The investigator tweeted: “I can tell you that where evidence exists Op Yewtree & Op Fairbank will pursue anyone – no matter who they are & this is being done.​​“Lots going on with all types of people being looked at.”​


​​http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ion-into-alleged-paedophile-ring-8651295.html​​


> Scotland Yard is pursuing more than 300 lines of inquiry in its investigation into allegations that a VIP paedophile ring abused children in care during the 1980s.
> 
> The figure suggests that Operation Fernbridge, the investigation centred on historic allegations of abuse at the Elm Guest House in Barnes, south-west London, is a bigger inquiry than previously acknowledged and could lead to the identification of dozens of potential victims.
> ​


​ 


> A Freedom of Information response containing the figure also reveals that seven officers are involved in the investigation – compared with 77 on Operation Weeting, the inquiry into the News of the World phone hacking scandal.
> 
> Operation Fernbridge, which according to the FOI has so far cost £25,000 compared with the £11.2m cost of Weeting, was launched in January as a full-scale criminal investigation following an earlier “scoping exercise” – a preliminary assessment of evidence concerning the alleged paedophile ring.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 26, 2013)

62 year old arrested in connection with the north wales abuse - result of operation pallial


----------



## elbows (Jun 26, 2013)

And according to Exaro, Charles Napier has been arrested as part of operation Fairbank.

Napier is half-brother of John Whittingdale MP, Conservative.

Further background of Charles Napier is mentioned in this Mirror article from last year for those struggling to recall who is who in the whole PIE angle. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-scandal-charles-napier-could-1430365


----------



## elbows (Jun 26, 2013)

As for a certain allegation by Ben Fellows:

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2013/06/22/an-unfounded-and-false-allegation/




> This weekend Exaro News  has published a story by me where a prominent figure has been falsely accused of indecently assaulting a teenage boy. Exceptionally in this case I had personal knowledge of the events surrounding the incident and knew enough about them to give a statement to the  Met Police Paedophile Unit. As a result of my statement and statements from others  the police cleared the person.
> 
> The full story is behind the pay wall at Exaro News (http://www.exaronews.com and http://bit.ly/11vfyOn). Like the false accusation against Lord McAlpine, this is  another case of mistaken identity.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 26, 2013)

elbows said:


> As for a certain allegation by Ben Fellows:
> 
> http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2013/06/22/an-unfounded-and-false-allegation/


 
Interesting and encouraging. One remove from Righton brings the OB closer to the 'senior figures':-



> Notorious paedophile Peter Righton boasted of links to powerful figures in government, according to new testimony from one of his victims, the Sunday People reports.
> Speaking out for the first time, *the man claims Righton’s evil network stretched to the top of the UK establishment*.
> As well as naming a senior UK politician, the victim also told us Righton – once the most respected childcare expert in Britain – brought him into contact with paedophile MP Cyril Smith.
> He said: “_*People have talked about a paedophile ring working in the UK.*_
> ...


 
e2a : in response to previous post about Exaro & Napier.


----------



## elbows (Jun 26, 2013)

Regarding the Ben Fellows mistaken identity thing. Guess who it might have actually been? Sir Peter Morrison.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 26, 2013)

elbows said:


> Regarding the Ben Fellows mistaken identity thing. Guess who it might have actually been? Sir Peter Morrison.


----------



## elbows (Jun 26, 2013)

Well the other possibility other than mistaken identity is one that has long existed, that Ben Fellows is totally full of shit. However as Peter Morrison was close to one of the people who was subject to the Cook Report investigation that was at the heart of Ben Fellows claims, I will be charitable towards Fellows for now, at least on this front.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2013)

My friends at the DM say that an MP's half brother is the latest (allegedly)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-VIP-paedophile-ring-1980s-guest-house.html


----------



## brogdale (Jun 26, 2013)

Hencke (Exaro) claiming that Napier's arrest unconnected with Elm House, and constitutes a separate strand of Fairbank...



> However unlike reports today in the Telegraph and Mail on line today the arrest has NOTHING to do with events at the Elm Guest House, please see Exaro for an accurate account.
> The Met police said: “This arrest is part of a new strand of Operation Fairbank entitled *Operation Cayacos*, which has now reached the criminal threshold.”
> Tom Watson said :” I am extremely grateful for the dedicated team of officers of the Met Police who are investigating a number of allegations regarding child abuse. I am sure people will appreciate that we should let them continue with their forensic and comprehensive inquiries into this area.”
> http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...ice-arrest-half-brother-of-prominent-tory-mp/


"Operation Cayacos", eh?


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2013)

A redacted version of the Jillings report is coming out today.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-23199905


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2013)

I have read or semi-skimmed through about a quarter of the report so far. (via pdfs at http://www.wrexham.gov.uk/english/council/news/jillings.htm). The amount of redaction is a disgrace, but the report is still something. The vast bulk of what I have read so far deals with all manner of bureaucratic failings on pretty much every level. Its the usual stuff, ranging from social services being crap to all manner of staffing inadequacies and those who are paid to be responsible shirking those responsibilities.

I've only just got to the section on Bryn Estyn but in any case I have low expectations for anything of substance being included in the full report shedding substantial light on the most dramatic themes of this thread, let alone what is available in this redacted version. So I wouldn't try to make a compelling case out of anything I will be quoting from the report, but I offer up these ones anyway, and nor are all of them specifically about the sexual abuse aspects of the care failings. Also I cannot copy and paste so am having to retype these quotes, making errors possible and reducing the number of paragraphs I can be bothered to quote.




> The impression gained by the Independent Panel of recruitment procedures is a cause for grave concern. Many appointments, at Bryn Estyn and indeed throughout Clwdy Social Services Department, seem in the past to have been made via informal contacts - in the case of Bryn Estyn, through the local rugby club.


 


> In addition residential staff were said to be "stuck in the institution". It was common practice for staff to take residents home at weekends, which was felt by some staff to be an opening for bad practice and an opportunity for abuse to occur.


 


> Local connections between police and Bryn Estyn staff, and shared activities such as golf and rugby, meant that, while informal contact between agencies was frequent, making allegations of abuse against colleagues was fraught with difficulty.


 


> We were told that Bryn Estyn was very unpopular with the local police. There was a significant amount of crime. This meant that reporting staff to the police for physical assaults on residents was felt by some staff to have been unlikely to elicit a sympathetic response. (This situation is echoed in the Police Complaints Authority review of the Leicestershire (Beck) inquiry.)


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2013)

Given what then happened to the Jillings report, this paragraph is especially poignant, especially as even now it comes straight after numerous redactions.



> This serves to heighten the concerns of the Independent Panel over the conflict of interest that is apparent. On the one hand, the duties of the County Council require a commitment to open local government. They impose clear legal obligations on elected Members and local government officers in context of their statutory duties to children. On the other, the representatives of Clwyd County Council were confronted with expectations stemming from the interests of their insurers which, if followed, could, in our view, subjugate the best interests of children in case, and affect the normal course of the democratic process.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 8, 2013)

elbows said:


> Given what then happened to the Jillings report, this paragraph is especially poignant, especially as even now it comes straight after numerous redactions.
> 
> 
> > This serves to heighten the concerns of the Independent Panel over the conflict of interest that is apparent. On the one hand, the duties of the County Council require a commitment to open local government. They impose clear legal obligations on elected Members and local government officers in context of their statutory duties to children. On the other, the representatives of Clwyd County Council were confronted with expectations stemming from the interests of their insurers which, if followed, could, in our view, subjugate the best interests of children in case, and affect the normal course of the democratic process.


 
Well, in a way, it's the insurers who are the real victims here.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2013)

Just to remind people, this was  Municipal Mutual/Zurich Municipal. And it was Royal and Sun Alliance who refused to release key documents and other evidence to the Independent Hillsborough Panel.


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2013)

There is quite a section in the 2nd pdf where the panel complain about a variety of insurance-related matters, but I have run out of quoting oomph for tonight.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 21, 2013)

*Elm Guest House investigation: Former senior cabinet minister faces rape investigation *

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...estigation-8723115.html?origin=internalSearch


----------



## elbows (Jul 26, 2013)

In other Fernbridge news from July that I'm just catching up on:

Former Elm Guest House manager 'Harry' Kasir was arrested on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-manager-vip-paedophile-ring-2051971

And the two previously arrested, the children's home deputy and the priest, have been charged:

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/...toric_child_abuse_under_Operation_Fernbridge/



> Mr Stingemore, who lives in East Sussex, will face eight counts of indecent assault, two of taking indecent images of a child and one of conspiracy with persons unknown to commit buggery.
> 
> Mr McSweeney, a Roman Catholic priest from Norfolk, has been charged with three counts of indecent assault, one of taking indecent images of a child, three of making indecent images of a child and one of possessing indecent images of a child.
> 
> The charges relate to seven victims, all aged between nine and 15 years when the alleged offences took place during the 70s and 80s.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 1, 2013)

Thatcher Cabinet stifled Kincora child sex abuse inquiry 30 years ago 



> The minutes of the Cabinet meeting (see http://bit.ly/19zxFqT ) reveal on 10 November 1983 Jim Prior, then Northern Ireland Secretary, proposed not to have a full Tribunal of Inquiry – the same mechanism, used to investigate  the Bloody Sunday atrocities, the North Wales child abuse scandal and the Dunblane massacre.
> 
> The minutes reveal the Cabinet – who included the now all ennobled Leon Brittan, then home secretary, Michael Heseltine,defence secretary and Norman Fowler, social services secretary, bought the Royal Ulster Constabulary line that there was nothing in it. He said he was being “pressed to hold an inquiry under the Tribunals of Inquiry”. But he didn’t believe Parliament would buy it.
> 
> ...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 1, 2013)

Thanks Butchers. That should be dynamite, but what attention seems to show is that child abuse is much less important when celebrities aint in the frame.

 "_The question is were Thatcher’s Cabinet in 1983 hopelessly naive or were they covering up something they did not want to be ruthlessly exposed in the public domain."
_Given one particular name that has come up on this thread with rather unpleasant, if far from conclusive evidence, and given how frequently that name gets mentioned elsewhere, at least part of the answer would appear to lurk in the latter given suggestion.


----------



## elbows (Aug 2, 2013)

Any cover up was likely to go well beyond personal motivations, and although that could be one aspect there would likely be a range of both political and state intelligence related motivations, especially in that particular case.

Most of the press seem really uninterested in reporting this stuff. In some cases its likely because there isn't enough to say and their hands may be somewhat tied by ongoing investigations and other legal considerations. But even so I do not find the level of interest shown to be anything approaching acceptable, though I'm not exactly shocked that its panning out this way.


----------



## gawkrodger (Aug 4, 2013)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/jimmy-savile-celeb-arrests-could-2097740


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 5, 2013)

> *Australian entertainer Rolf Harris arrested by Operation Yewtree police over further allegations of sexual offences*


 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23581847#TWEET845745


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 5, 2013)

Mr.Bishie said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23581847#TWEET845745


 
Just seen that.  Good


----------



## elbows (Aug 11, 2013)

There have been some posts on the usual conspiracy sites in recent days that suggest Ben Fellows was recently arrested, questioned and bailed on suspicion of perverting the course of justice. This is not terribly surprising, although I know of no details about exactly which of his antics may have landed him in hot water. The fake drama of the 'he's gone missing' shit and the articles about probably mistaken identity regarding his most sensational claim appear to have somewhat eroded the level of support for him among some of those who continue to pay attention to sex abuse stories in sloppy and conspiracy-laced fashion, although he still seems to be a welcome guest at some destinations on the conspiracy circuit.


----------



## elbows (Aug 12, 2013)

David Hencke decides it's worth exploring a post on another blog by Chris Faye who worked for NAYPIC back in the day. Those interested in possible links between Elm Guest House and Kincora, people like Sir Anthony Blunt, cabinet interest in the investigations and the nature of the police raid and special branch questioning about Elm Guest House should take a look.

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/kincora-a-small-footnote-to-history/

As for the blog he links to, its one of the more interesting ones on the subject, but still has the odd iffy moment if memory serves me correctly. Note that there is more than one contributor to that blog, which may explain the variable quality.


----------



## elbows (Aug 12, 2013)

Just for the sake of completeness I should probably point out that two characters who come up when looking at the establishment, spies and historical cases of abuse, Anthony Blunt and Geoffrey Prime, get discussed in the Adam Curtis blog post about MI5 being crap which got its own thread on u75 recently.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/BUGGER

Curtis does not dwell on that side of Blunt at all, just the media attitude towards his homosexuality, but does focus on the abuses carried out by Geoffrey Prime.



> Prime was a paedophile - and had used spying techniques to monitor the activities of thousands of young girls around Cheltenham. He had created a vast set of index cards which showed when the girls were most likely to be alone at home. He then went round to their houses in his two tone Cortina and sexually assaulted them.
> Despite this Prime had been positively vetted six times.
> Even the Russians got worried about his paedophile activities and seemed to want to dump him. In 1980 Prime had gone to Vienna to meet the KGB. Instead of meeting him secretly as they normally did, the Russians took him openly to the best restaurants where they knew Western intelligence agents would recognise them as KGB agents.
> But even then noone noticed them - or Prime.
> Prime's wife Rhona wrestled with her conscience - and in the end went to the police and told them everything about Prime. He was sent to jail for 35 years for spying and 3 years for the assaults on young girls - which says a lot about the priorities of the British establishment at that time.


----------



## elbows (Aug 12, 2013)

This blog has been publishing historical media articles related to child abuse for ages:

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com

I post it now because in recent weeks, skimming past a range of tabloid stories about various abuse cases over multiple decades that also feature on the site, there are to be found a bunch of articles from the likes of Private Eye and Lobster. The most recently posted private eye ones are a range of Paul Foot articles about North Wales abuse coverups and government inaction, originally published in 1996 and 1997. And then some Kincora ones from 1987 and 1988. And a Clockwork Orange one from 1990. Scrolling further past some unrelated articles shows a few more Kincora ones here and there, with Anthony Blunt coming up a few times. Scroll considerably further past other stuff and a bunch of retyped Kincora articles from Lobster issues 1-6 (1983-1984) will show up.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 12, 2013)

Do look people.


----------



## elbows (Aug 12, 2013)

Oh and even further back on that blog there is this:



> In a November 1989 interview with Community Care, a social work magazine, Edwina Currie revealed that *many MPs* *didn’t believe in the existence of child sexual abuse*.
> *“She describes conversations with colleagues in the House of Commons tea-room – “really nice, decent colleagues, members of parliament” – who would scoff at the suggestions that adults can and do abuse children. For them, it was all nonsense dreamt up by silly social workers*.”
> Edwina was speaking out about this disgraceful state of affairs because she had a book to sell. A few years later she had another book to sell, and to help shift more copies she had saved up revelations about Sir Peter Morrison MP being a paedophile, or in her words “a noted pederast”. She also said that *“there was a culture of sniggering” *about child rape, which had stopped her or any of her colleagues from reporting Morrison’s crimes to the police while he was alive.


Note that the blog is prolific in its postings, and jumps around between many different stories, so even though I keep going on about scrolling even further back that Currie one was only posted there on July 11th. I've not been able to keep up with it at all, especially as a lot of the detail in the tabloid stories are repetitive once you are familiar with the people in question and how stuff was reported at the time. But just going crazy with the scrollbar a moment ago I note another batch of Kincora related stories posted on that blog around April 22nd, mostly from the Irish Times over a period in the first half of the 1980's. And then shortly after a bunch of Elm Guest House stories from Capital Gay in 1982 which I haven't looked at yet.


----------



## elbows (Aug 12, 2013)

The Capital Gay articles make it clear that the Elm Guest House stuff was seen, at least by that publication, as an unfair police attack on a gay business, with a subsequent feeding frenzy by the 'straight press'.

This is not exactly surprising and illustrates a complication we've talked about before. Indeed scrolling a little further shows some of the tabloid articles from 1982 with headlines which illustrate not just that aspect of the reporting but also that the sort of names featured in the guestbook were probably known at the time.

eg a Daily Star headline from August 1982 'MPs signed in at the gay house'. Or a Daily Mail article from the same day which included this bit:




> 'Yesterday a teenager who used to work at the building known as the Elm Guest House said : 'Police took away the visitors' book when they came round on the raid.'
> 
> 'It had all the names and addresses of all the people who came here. I know there was talk about MPs and other important people who came here, though I can't say I recognised or knew any of them myself.'


 

The Sun on the same day went quite a bit further with a headline of 'MPs on vice charges soon?' and allegations about a 10 year old being 'on offer'. Customers are alleged to include three MPs, a member of the Buckingham Palace staff, lawyers and doctors'. It then discusses high-level coverup claims by detectives closely linked to the case.

A day earlier the Sunday Times went with a 'Gay security threat denied' headline, and the News of the World also went with cover-up and child sex stuff.

At least one of the stories from the time also mentions that Spartacus publication.

Anyways I will stop trying to summarise these articles now since its not a revelation that newspapers ran with this stuff at the time, and mostly any useful impact comes from being able to see the actual articles from the time in full. If you want to check them out for yourself then they appeared on that blog on dates such as April 11th and 12th.


----------



## benedict (Aug 13, 2013)

Don't have time to keep up with the news these days, so thanks elbows for your efforts in compiling all this. Very much appreciated.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 14, 2013)

benedict said:


> Don't have time to keep up with the news these days, so thanks elbows for your efforts in compiling all this. Very much appreciated.


 
ditto


----------



## scalyboy (Aug 14, 2013)

Yep, me too, wot they said. Cheers elbows


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2013)

Thanks . Not much actual news though, mostly decades old news but it still helps build a picture I guess.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 21, 2013)

Of interest to people on this thread: Exaro News is now free.

https://twitter.com/ExaroNews/status/370165946469449729


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2013)

Thank god for that!  Excellent news.


----------



## elbows (Sep 9, 2013)

Just to try to keep vaguely up-to-date with the legal situation:

Operation Pallial (North Wales abuse) has arrested 8 so far, and one charged: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-23956090
John Allen (charged) just got released on bail: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-24022779

The Operation Fernbridge priest and the children's home manager appeared in court earlier in September: http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5082/priest-and-ex-manager-of-richmond-children-s-home-in-court

Former head Richard Alston was arrested on August 20th under Operation Cayacos.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/richard-alston-ex-headteacher-arrested-2258612

(That operation is the newer strand that arrested Charles Napier in June.)


----------



## elbows (Sep 9, 2013)

So for anyone who read about Peter Righton or watched that 'secret life of a paedophile' documentary, Operation Cayacos seems to be the most relevant one.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2013)

Note the offences:

Two men arrested in north Wales care homes abuse inquiry 



> Police arrest 69-year-old man in Wrexham and 61-year-old man in Nottinghamshire on suspicion of child cruelty offences


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Sep 11, 2013)

A reminder that "Cyril Smith - The Paedophile MP" - airs tomorrow, 11.05pm, Channel 4.

It gets less attention because he was only a politician (yawn), not a CELEBRITY!!!!11!! Nor does he present much opportunity to smack the BBC about.

Yet more trivial is the fact that MI5 helped the cover up by removing files. How supremely dull. No fuss, no bother, Ch 4 are doing "better than nothing" but still sticking it out late at night. When it was Savile we never heard the last. With Smith we barely hear the beginning.


----------



## scalyboy (Sep 14, 2013)

BBC - "Police have begun a major investigation into the sexual exploitation of children and young people who have gone missing from care in Northern Ireland.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 25, 2013)

> *steven messham* ‏@*smessham*
> I have decided I have given the police and the NCA long enough I will be putting names on here from next week of lots of abusers
> 
> 8:47 AM - 25 Sep 13



https://twitter.com/smessham/status/382773314986311680


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2013)

That is going to get messy. Messier.

Something from Hencke:

Paedophile MP Cyril Smith: Possible Questions for Jenny Tonge and Tim Razzall



> The Met Police’s official acknowledgement to Channel Four’s Dispatches programme that Cyril Smith visited the notorious Elm House guest house in Barnes in south-west London – which is alleged to be used by paedophiles raises serious questions for the Liberal Democrats.
> So far attention has been centred on former Liberal leaders, David Steel. Nick Clegg and Sir Menzies Campbell,the latter who was shown (possibly unfairly) to be heaping praise on Cyril Smith at his funeral.
> 
> But the real Liberal Democrats who should be quizzed are Baroness Tonge, Lord Razzall and Sir David Williams on the scandalous affair that allowed Cyril Smith to sexually assault young boys.
> ...


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

One walks among us
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...ome-photos-thread.297491/page-6#post-11429624


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> One walks among us
> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...ome-photos-thread.297491/page-6#post-11429624



Stop fucking spamming across every fucking thread


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Stop fucking spamming across every fucking thread



 One walks among us - people have a right to know.

Unless you sympathise with the perverted twat?


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> One walks among us - people have a right to know.
> 
> Unless you sympathise with the perverted twat?


Take it up with the mods


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> Take it up with the mods



Obviously, but why aren't more people rushing foreward to condemn the filthy nonce?


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Obviously, but why aren't more people rushing foreward to condemn the filthy nonce?


You've already got one thread about it in the dustbin. It looks like noone much cares about the throwaway comment in question - it isn't really clear what it meant anyway. If you think a post should be removed or someone should get banned then take it up with the mods. It doesn't have any relevance to this thread however.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> You've already got one thread about it in the dustbin. It looks like noone much cares about the throwaway comment in question - it isn't really clear what it meant anyway. If you think a post should be removed or someone should get banned then take it up with the mods. It doesn't have any relevance to this thread however.



Paedo/hebephile apologist.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Paedo/hebephile apologist.


What the fuck are you talking about?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Paedo/hebephile apologist.


This is just fucking silly.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> This is just fucking silly.



So let's have it right - You think it's ok for a middle aged guy to make throwaway remarks about wanking over twelve year olds?


----------



## free spirit (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> So let's have it right - You think it's ok for a middle aged guy to make throwaway remarks about wanking over twelve year olds?


nope, but please don't derail this thread / risk getting it binned with your accusations.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> So let's have it right - You think it's ok for a middle aged guy to make throwaway remarks about wanking over twelve year olds?


No.

But I think calling someone out as a paedo apologist for question your methods is fucking silly.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> No.
> 
> But I think calling someone out as a paedo apologist for question your methods is fucking silly.



Maybe but if it wasn't for "my methods" as you call them, a_chap would've slipped under the radar. An explaination from him could still make it all alright. Though I don't see how he or anyone could explain that.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Maybe but if it wasn't for "my methods" as you call them, a_chap would've slipped under the radar. An explaination from him could still make it all alright. Though I don't see how he or anyone could explain that.


Why has your thread been put into the dustbin?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Maybe but if it wasn't for "my methods" as you call them, a_chap would've slipped under the radar. An explaination from him could still make it all alright. Though I don't see how he or anyone could explain that.


I've looked at the photo you're getting so excitable about, and - while it's not exactly to my taste - I'm not sure if I can see what all the fuss is about.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> Why has your thread been put into the dustbin?



Dunno, ask whichever mod saw fit to put it there. But _you_ seem to be sticking up for a middle aged guy who makes throwaway remarks anout wanking over twelve year olds. Good on you, sport.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I've looked at the photo you're getting so excitable about, and - while it's not exactly to my taste - I'm not sure if I can see what all the fuss is about.



It's not the photo, it's the comment.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Dunno, ask whichever mod saw fit to put it there. But _you_ seem to be sticking up for a middle aged guy who makes throwaway remarks anout wanking over twelve year olds. Good on you, sport.


No nothing I said was sticking up for anyone:

I said:

"You've already got one thread about it in the dustbin. It looks like noone much cares about the throwaway comment in question - it isn't really clear what it meant anyway. If you think a post should be removed or someone should get banned then take it up with the mods. It doesn't have any relevance to this thread however."


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> It's not the photo, it's the comment.


I didn't see any comment on the link you posted. 

Anyway, one of the refreshing things about this thread has been its focus on facts over pitchforks and flaming brands. I think your concerns about an Urban poster don't really belong here.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I've looked at the photo you're getting so excitable about, and - while it's not exactly to my taste - I'm not sure if I can see what all the fuss is about.



I thought you were an ok guy, but on the Kevin Webster thread you bent over backwards to defend those who would besmirch the name of an innocent man. And here you are saying you don't see what the fuss is about regarding a middle aged bloke talking about wanking over a twelve year old. Shown your true colours there, big guy.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I thought you were an ok guy, but on the Kevin Webster thread you bent over backwards to defend those who would besmirch the name of an innocent man. And here you are saying you don't see what the fuss is about regarding a middle aged bloke talking about wanking over a twelve year old. Shown your true colours there, big guy.


If your opinion is quite so easily swayed, it isn't worth a lot to me. I am not sure exactly what is going on, because you haven't made it clear, but I am not going to be taking your slurs too seriously on the current showing.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I didn't see any comment on the link you posted.
> 
> Anyway, one of the refreshing things about this thread has been its focus on facts over pitchforks and flaming brands. I think your concerns about an Urban poster don't really belong here.





existentialist said:


> I didn't see any comment on the link you posted.
> 
> Anyway, one of the refreshing things about this thread has been its focus on facts over pitchforks and flaming brands. I think your concerns about an Urban poster don't really belong here.


The fact is, under that pic of a kid is a comment from a_chap saying "Is there an inapropriate wank button too" - It's there, do you think that's alright?


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

This is the comment you are going on about:

"Is there an innapropriate wank button too?"

This *could* be taken as condemning the photograph. I am not saying I know what is meant by this comment, but why is it relevant to this thread? Take it up with the mods and/or keep it in that thread.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> The fact is, under that pic of a kid is a comment from a_chap saying "Is there an inapropriate wank button too" - It's there, do you think that's alright?


I assumed he was making a critical comment about the posting of the image - has anyone actually bothered to ask HIM what he meant, rather than getting into a frothing rage on an assumption?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> This is the comment you are going on about:
> 
> "Is there an innapropriate wank button too?"
> 
> This *could* be taken as condemning the photograph. I am not saying I know what is meant by this comment, but why is it relevant to this thread? Take it up with the mods and/or keep it in that thread.



This thread's about nonces & it seems one walks among us. I'm calling him out on it. You're defending him.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> This thread's about nonces & it seems one walks among us. I'm calling him out on it. You're defending him.


You're coming across as a bit hysterical, frankly.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I assumed he was making a critical comment about the posting of the image - has anyone actually bothered to ask HIM what he meant, rather than getting into a frothing rage on an assumption?



Yes, I've asked him. His silence speaks volumes. Honest to god, you make me sick - wrong un, you.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> This thread's about nonces & it seems one walks among us. I'm calling him out on it. You're defending him.


How have I defended him?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> You're coming across as a bit hysterical, frankly.



My dander is mildly up, I'll give you that - Because there's a guy on this board who jokes about wanking over twelve year olds. Soz if I can't see that as cool.


----------



## fogbat (Sep 25, 2013)

Did a_chap spill Frances's pint or something?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> How have I defended him?


In the same way I have, I imagine: by not joining in the cries of "hang the paedo"


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Paedo/hebephile apologist.


Wow


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> My dander is mildly up, I'll give you that - Because there's a guy on this board who jokes about wanking over twelve year olds. Soz if I can't see that as cool.


How do you actually know what "Is there an innapropriate wank button too?" means?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> How have I defended him?



Here 





> it isn't really clear what it meant anyway.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> My dander is mildly up, I'll give you that - Because there's a guy on this board who jokes about wanking over twelve year olds. Soz if I can't see that as cool.



Should we burn him, boss?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> How do you actually know what "Is there an innapropriate wank button too?" means?



What does it mean then? - Give it your most charitable interpretation. I have asked him to explain himself & yet he never did.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances, get a sense of proportion, FFS


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Here


Seems like I am not the only person who thinks the comment could have more than one meaning


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Should we burn him, boss?



No just let him explain himself - And do _you_ think his comment was appropriate?


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> What does it mean then? - Give it your most charitable interpretation.


It could mean 'I don't like this creepy photograph'


----------



## fogbat (Sep 25, 2013)

My penis is filled with so much self-righteousness right now.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> It could mean 'I don't like this creepy photograph'


That was my immediate assumption.


----------



## free spirit (Sep 25, 2013)

right well if we're doing this in here, I'll just make the point that there are 2 photos quoted in that post, and the formatting of the post has fucked up, but the actual post quoted isn't the post with the photo of the girl in it, so it's not clear to me which of the 2 photos the comment was intended to be aimed at.

One's a photo of a young girl, the other of an old painting of naked / partially clothed women of hard to determine age.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No just let him explain himself - And do _you_ think his comment was appropriate?



Like pretty much everyone else responding to this thread I'm going to keep my powder dry on this one. What I do know is that running around banging bin lids and screaming 'PEEDOOH' is unlikely to end well.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Frances, get a sense of proportion, FFS



Fuck ya mam. Crossways - Sense of proportion. Oh yes let's take comments about wanking over pre pubescent girls in proportion. Yeah like David Steel said of Cyril Smith back in the day "It's only a few spanked bottoms". That's the like of  whom you're allying yourself with existentialist


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Like pretty much everyone else responding to this thread I'm going to keep my powder dry on this one. What I do know is that running around banging bin lids and screaming 'PEEDOOH' is unlikely to end well.



Which is what I'm not doing - I'm asking a_chap to explain himself.


----------



## fogbat (Sep 25, 2013)

I really hope Frances trawls my posts for nastiness. I've said _horrible_ things on here


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Just in case anyone wants to read the thread in the dustbin:
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/whys-this-gone-un-noticed.315367/


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Fuck ya mam. Crossways - Sense of proportion. Oh yes let's take comments about wanking over pre pubescent girls in proportion. Yeah like David Steel said of Cyril Smith back in the day "It's only a few spanked bottoms". That's the like of  whom you're allying yourself with existentialist


I think it's unlikely that I would be knowingly allying myself with apologists for child sexual abuse,  Frances, don't you?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

A picture of a pre pubescent girl. And a comment about wanking over her. Inappropriatley. I mean _come on._


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

"Is there an innapropriate wank button too?"

this photo is wank
this photo is inappropriate
this photo was taken by / appeals to someone who wants to wank over it, and this is inappropriate

erm, any more anyone?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I think it's unlikely that I would be knowingly allying myself with apologists for child sexual abuse,  Frances, don't you?



I'd have thought not, but here you are.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> "Is there an innapropriate wank button too?"
> 
> this photo is wank
> this photo is inappropriate
> ...



Well you've bent over backwards far enough that you've got a promising career as a limbo dancer ahead of you.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Well you've bent over backwards far enough that you've got a promising career as a limbo dancer ahead of you.


What do you think the comment means? Does anyone else on u75 agree with you?


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Fuck ya mam. Crossways - Sense of proportion. Oh yes let's take comments about wanking over pre pubescent girls in proportion. Yeah like David Steel said of Cyril Smith back in the day "It's only a few spanked bottoms". That's the like of  whom you're allying yourself with existentialist



Oh my fucking lord.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> What do you think the comment means? Does anyone else on u75 agree with you?



Dunno, I'm just throwing it out there. So far it seems the consensus is that a U75 dodgy seeming twat will be protected at all costs.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Oh my fucking lord.



What? Fatso, what?


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> What? Fatso, what?



That I'd spent so many years on this forum without realising what a bellend you are. And before you ask, yes, of course I'm a paedo. We all are. All of us.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> That I'd spent so many years on this forum without realising what a bellend you are. And before you ask, yes, of course I'm a paedo. We all are. All of us.



Are you?I'd never have thought that of you. 

But you are sticking up for a guy who makes throwaway remarks about wanking over pre teen girls. Have a word with yourself you disgusting beardfaced twat.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Dunno, I'm just throwing it out there. So far it seems the consensus is that a U75 dodgy seeming twat will be protected at all costs.


Rubbish. You didn't call them a 'dodgy seeming twat' you called them a 'nonce' and called me a 'paedo/hebephile apologist'.

So what exactly do you think the comment means?


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> disgusting beardfaced twat.



You remind me of another poster, one who is now banned...


----------



## Humberto (Sep 25, 2013)

Er you do have to wonder where he got that photo from.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> Rubbish. You didn't call them a 'dodgy seeming twat' you called them a 'nonce' and called me a 'paedo/hebephile apologist'.
> 
> So what exactly do you think the comment means?



I took the comment at face value - He's thinking about having a pull over the kid AFAIC. _Maybe_ if you perform some olympian feats of semantic contortions, you'd be able to squeeze another meaning out of his "inappropriate wank" phrasing.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> You remind me of another poster, one who is now banned...



who's that then cockchops? Cards on the table.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Er you do have to wonder where he got that photo from.



Nah don't muddy the waters - JC3 posted the pic and that's cool. a_chap made a comment about wanking over it though. The filthy bastard.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Paedo/hebephile apologist.


Stop this nonsense now please.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Are you?I'd never have thought that of you.
> 
> But you are sticking up for a guy who makes throwaway remarks about wanking over pre teen girls. Have a word with yourself you disgusting beardfaced twat.



Ummm. Do you actually think I'm Adam Jones?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

editor said:


> Stop this nonsense now please.



Ok, it stops now but jesus do you think his "Inapropriate wank" comment was/is in any way alright?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Ummm. Do you actually think I'm Adam Jones?



No, I think you're raw sex. On toast.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No, I think you're raw sex. On toast.


And I think you're a desperate cunt out for a brief, phosphorescent moment of Urban notoriety.


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Ok, it stops now but jesus do you think his "Inapropriate wank" comment was/is in any way alright?


Well it was spelt wrong for a start.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> And I think you're a desperate cunt out for a brief, phosphorescent moment of Urban notoriety.



I don't wear phosphorescent briefs and certainly not lemon yellow ones. Unlike your dad. Apologise now


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> Well it was spelt wrong for a start.



And spelling mistakes are obviously much more henious than child sex. Well done, big guy.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I don't wear phosphorescent briefs and certainly not lemon yellow ones. Unlike your dad. Apologise now


You're doing great, champ. Just great.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> And I think you're a desperate cunt out for a brief, phosphorescent moment of Urban notoriety.


I think he's just gone off on one, and is going to realise that he's stepped rather heavily on his own dick soon enough. 

I shall wait patiently for the retraction and apology, which I am sure he will be decent enough to offer in good time.


----------



## fogbat (Sep 25, 2013)

This stuff needs moving on to a separate thread. 

Titled "nobend has breakdown".


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I think he's just gone off on one, and is going to realise that he's stepped rather heavily on his own dick soon enough.
> 
> I shall wait patiently for the retraction and apology, which I am sure he will be decent enough to offer in good time.



I certainly hope so.


----------



## tufty79 (Sep 25, 2013)

fogbat said:


> This stuff needs moving on to a separate thread.


maybe we should have a 'breakdown' forum in community


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> You're doing great, champ. Just great.



Leave it now, I've been told off by editor so I can't really reply to this thread any more so your continuing to peck at me is a bit low hanging fruit. Mind you, I can't really expect much better from a guy who _sticks up for a noncebeast._


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Leave it now, I've been told off by editor so I can't really reply to this thread any more so your continuing to peck at me is a bit low hanging fruit. Mind you, I can't really expect much better from a guy who _sticks up for a noncebeast._



I've already outed myself as the noncebeast, you dim cunt.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I think he's just gone off on one, and is going to realise that he's stepped rather heavily on his own dick soon enough.
> 
> I shall wait patiently for the retraction and apology, which I am sure he will be decent enough to offer in good time.



You'll be waiting a long time - _How the fuck_ is it alright for a guy to go on about wanking over a twelve year old?


----------



## Humberto (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> _noncebeast._



k thanks


----------



## classicdish (Sep 25, 2013)

Back on topic: #2017



butchersapron said:


> That is going to get messy. Messier.
> 
> Something from Hencke:
> 
> Paedophile MP Cyril Smith: Possible Questions for Jenny Tonge and Tim Razzall





> The Met Police’s official acknowledgement to Channel Four’s Dispatches programme that Cyril Smith visited the notorious Elm House guest house in Barnes in south-west London – which is alleged to be used by paedophiles raises serious questions for the Liberal Democrats.
> So far attention has been centred on former Liberal leaders, David Steel. Nick Clegg and Sir Menzies Campbell,the latter who was shown (possibly unfairly) to be heaping praise on Cyril Smith at his funeral.
> 
> But the real Liberal Democrats who should be quizzed are Baroness Tonge, Lord Razzall and Sir David Williams on the scandalous affair that allowed Cyril Smith to sexually assault young boys.
> ...


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> You'll be waiting a long time - _How the fuck_ is it alright for a guy to go on about wanking over a twelve year old?



What if he's eleven?


----------



## bendeus (Sep 25, 2013)

classicdish said:


> Back on topic: #2017



Good call. This was a good thread until the Noncefinder General turned up.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 25, 2013)

bendeus said:


> What if he's eleven?



Christ knows, but ace retort - Child sexual abuse though, it's all a laugh isn't it? Hang your head, worst cunt.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

noncebeasts everywhere?


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Christ knows, but ace retort - Child sexual abuse though, it's all a laugh isn't it? Hang your head, worst cunt.



Show your evidence. Anything better than you have, which is an apocryphal comment that the poster hasn't yet had chance to answer to. You're banging binlids, shouting and looking like a real Rupert. Do you think I'm laughing at child abuse or do you think I'm laughing at you?


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Humberto said:


> noncebeasts everywhere?



Frances Lengel doesn't seem to realise the purpose of this site.


----------



## free spirit (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Show your evidence. Anything better than you have, which is an apocryphal comment that the poster hasn't yet had chance to answer to. You're banging binlids, shouting and looking like a real Rupert. Do you think I'm laughing at child abuse or do you think I'm laughing at you?


tbf, they have had chance to answer, as they were looking at this thread half an hour ago.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

free spirit said:


> tbf, they have had chance to answer, as they were looking at this thread half an hour ago.



I invited him to explain himself months back TBF.


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Er you do have to wonder where he got that photo from.



If I were them I'd wait until the pantomime star has gone to bed before responding.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

free spirit said:


> tbf, they have had chance to answer, as they were looking at this thread half an hour ago.



Clearly a paedo, then.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Show your evidence. Anything better than you have, which is an apocryphal comment that the poster hasn't yet had chance to answer to. You're banging binlids, shouting and looking like a real Rupert. Do you think I'm laughing at child abuse or do you think I'm laughing at you?



You're laughing in the dark. Your own pig ignorant shit-thickness prevents you from having even the slightest clue about whatever bullshit you're laughing at. And there's all dribble down your chin.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> You're laughing in the dark. Your own pig ignorant shit-thickness prevents you from having even the slightest clue about whatever bullshit you're laughing at. And there's all dribble down your chin.



And you're the cunt who accused an abuse victim of being an apologist for abuse.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Clearly a paedo, then.



Maybe he is, maybe he isn't - I don't see him leaping forth to defend his good name though. Fuck knows why you've taken it upon yourself to carry his mantle.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> And you're the cunt who accused an abuse victim of being an apologist for abuse.



I'm not having that - Elaborate or retract.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 26, 2013)




----------



## free spirit (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Clearly a paedo, then.


fuck me this is a shit turn for this thread - shouty bloke shouting nonce at someone, other shouty blokes shouting them down, then everyone sniping at each other.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

free spirit said:


> fuck me this is a shit turn for this thread - shouty bloke shouting nonce at someone, other shouty blokes shouting them down, then everyone sniping at each other.



Dunno it was almost convincing at first.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I'm not having that - Elaborate or retract.


 
Penny dropping? Sudden sense of shock? Well fuck me! Have a look back over the steam of bile you've shat out and have a think, why don't you?


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Maybe he is, maybe he isn't - I don't see him leaping forth to defend his good name though. Fuck knows why you've taken it upon yourself to carry his mantle.


See the above post.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> Penny dropping? Sudden sense of shock? Well fuck me! Have a look back over the steam of bile you've shat out and have a think, why don't you?



Piss off dick -I doubt anyone's arsed about your bullshit. You're the one sticking up for him. And you spew out bile, not shit it out. _Do_ try to keep up. Worst cunt.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

When you've sobered up have a look back at this thread. Consider who you've accused of what, how they've responded, and ponder why I may have got involved. You've come across as an absolute dick, tbh, but feel free to carry on your rantings.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

Fuck off nob head


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

@ Francis


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> When you've sobered up have a look back at this thread. Consider who you've accused of what, how they've responded, and ponder why I may have got involved. You've come across as an absolute dick, tbh, but feel free to carry on your rantings.



I've accused a_chap . I stand by that. I've then had to defend myself from your strident nonsense. If I look a dick in your eyes I'd take that as an endorsement TBH. Worst cunt.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Fuck off nob head



Suck it, runty.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I've accused a_chap . I stand by that. I've then had to defend myself from your strident nonsense. If I look a dick in your eyes I'd take that as an endorsement TBH. Worst cunt.



You're putting in an Olympian performance, champ. Everyone's real proud of you, particularly those vulnerable children. Have you called the philth regarding a_chap, btw?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> You're putting in an Olympian performance, champ. Everyone's real proud of you, particularly those vulnerable children. Have you called the philth regarding a_chap, btw?



No but I've reserved space on the plinth for my magnificence. Honest to god , wierdo, look who you're sticking up for. Seriously.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No but I've reserved space on the plinth for my magnificence. Honest to god , wierdo, look who you're sticking up for. Seriously.



A poster on here who deserves better. Anyway, that's me done; I'll leave you to wallow in your own ordure if that's ok with you.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> A poster on here who deserves better. Anyway, that's me done; I'll leave you to wallow in your own ordure if that's ok with you.



A guy who masturbates over prepubescent kids is a poster who "deserves better"? Twisted logic there our kid.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

Heres a flamethrower Frances. Go nuts.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> A guy who masturbates over prepubescent kids is a poster who "deserves better"? Twisted logic there our kid.



Brilliant.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

I aim to please.

Though it seems you're lacking an argument.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I aim to please.
> 
> Though it seems you're lacking an argument.


I'm very comfortable with my position. You, in the cold light of morning, may be less so (unless you're Firky)


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> I'm very comfortable with my position. You, in the cold light of morning, may be less so (unless you're Firky)



Nah, I'm not The Runt cheap shot that was though, he never even liked me anyway - Skinny cuntchya.

Why are you defending a guy who made a crack about wanking off over prepubescent girls though? You've never satisfactoraly answered that.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

Attention whore


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

Attention, whore.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Nah, I'm not The Runt cheap shot that was though, he never even liked me anyway - Skinny cuntchya.
> 
> Why are you defending a guy who made a crack about wanking off over prepubescent girls though? You've never satisfactoraly answered that.



You're asking the wrong question about the wrong person. You've dragged your wormy dog arse along the carpet of this thread and in so doing have accused a bunch of people, without backup, of being apologists for paedophilia, or paedophiles in the flesh. A_chap has very little to do with this; the fact that you're a twat, everything.


----------



## editor (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Piss off dick -I doubt anyone's arsed about your bullshit. You're the one sticking up for him. And you spew out bile, not shit it out. _Do_ try to keep up. Worst cunt.


Last warning for the evening. Wind your neck in please.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 26, 2013)

Fucks sake Frances.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

bendeus said:


> You're asking the wrong question about the wrong person. You've dragged your wormy dog arse along the carpet of this thread and in so doing have accused a bunch of people, without backup, of being apologists for paedophilia, or paedophiles in the flesh. A_chap has very little to do with this; the fact that you're a twat, everything.



I'm not asking any questions of a worthless trumpet such as you - Anyone who's stuck up for a_chap is suspect in my book - Let him clear the air if he can. The backup is there in the form of a_chap's decidedly dubious comment - You're an apologist - Have you got a beard coz I dunno how you could look yourself in the eye in the shaving mirror?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

editor said:


> Last warning for the evening. Wind your neck in please.



Ok, I'm leaving it now - THe last comment was made before I saw this.


----------



## bendeus (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I'm not asking any questions of a worthless trumpet such as you - Anyone who's stuck up for a_chap is suspect in my book - Let him clear the air if he can. The backup is there in the form of a_chap's decidedly dubious comment - You're an apologist - Have you got a beard coz I dunno how you could look yourself in the eye in the shaving mirror?



You fucking desperate wanker!


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Sep 26, 2013)

and much fun was had by all


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Sep 26, 2013)

Internet J'accuse are always handled with delicacy and tact.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 26, 2013)

free spirit said:


> tbf, they have had chance to answer, as they were looking at this thread half an hour ago.


Given the way in which those of us who have merely questioned the possibilities that this was an innocent comment have been spoken to, I wouldn't blame the poster for not wanting to put himself in harm's way. 

Frances has given the DM a bloody good run for its money in terms of incoherent frothing rage on this one.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I'm not having that - Elaborate or retract.


I have no idea if he's referring to me, but I certainly found it rather ironic to find myself being accused of being a apologist for noncery. And not, I have to say, particularly pleasant - that's the point at which I reported a post.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> A guy who masturbates over prepubescent kids is a poster who "deserves better"? Twisted logic there our kid.


I should have thought that you were starting to sail extremely close to the wind, defamation-wise, by now.


----------



## andysays (Sep 26, 2013)

Oh dear, Frances Lengel, you really have come across as an incoherent, self-righteous idiot.

I can only hope that you now get back and make some pretty grovelling apologies to the many and various people you've accused of shit here, TOTALLY unjustifiably, as far as I can see


----------



## existentialist (Sep 26, 2013)

andysays said:


> Oh dear, Frances Lengel, you really have come across as an incoherent, self-righteous idiot.
> 
> I can only hope that you now get back and make some pretty grovelling apologies to the many and various people you've accused of shit here, TOTALLY unjustifiably, as far as I can see


I think he has form for this, and I think that, IIRC, in the past he _has_ come back and retracted extreme comments he's made.

I hope so - because I would like very much for him to withdraw his allegations against me, just for starters.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

classicdish said:


> How do you actually know what "Is there an innapropriate wank button too?" means?



To be scrupulously fair to Frances, given JC3's usual bent for humour, those familiar with his posting style would most likely take it as him in effect saying "I've just had a wank over this photo, and I *know* it's inappropriate".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

classicdish said:


> It could mean 'I don't like this creepy photograph'



If that was the intention, then why mention wanking *or* inappropriateness?

Ockham's razor.


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> To be scrupulously fair to Frances, given JC3's usual bent for humour, those familiar with his posting style would most likely take it as him in effect saying "I've just had a wank over this photo, and I *know* it's inappropriate".



JC didn't make the comment though, this is nothing to do with him.


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> If that was the intention, then why mention wanking *or* inappropriateness?
> 
> Ockham's razor.



Not everyone who mentions the word "wank" is referring to an actual incident of masturbation.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> JC didn't make the comment though, this is nothing to do with him.



Fair point.  I misread the mangled post because JC3 posted the picture in question (so not *entirely* "nothing to do with him", is it?).  a_chap posted the inappropriate comment.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Not everyone who mentions the word "wank" is referring to an actual incident of masturbation.



You're so sharp that I'm surprised you haven't bled to death.


----------



## Dan U (Sep 26, 2013)

well this thread certainly went weird.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

Dan U said:


> well this thread certainly went weird.



Wanker!


----------



## Dan U (Sep 26, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Wanker!


----------



## existentialist (Sep 26, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> If that was the intention, then why mention wanking *or* inappropriateness?
> 
> Ockham's razor.


Even if that were the case, a line got crossed when he started to cast aspersions against people for not joining in with his histrionics...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Even if that were the case, a line got crossed when he started to cast aspersions against people for not joining in with his histrionics...



Agreed.


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> You're so sharp that I'm surprised you haven't bled to death.



Following your logic, and given that here a leap was made from a use of the word "wank" to "this person wanks over pictures of 12 year olds" then Frances Lengel is as sharp as a rather runny dog turd.


----------



## Fez909 (Sep 26, 2013)

For what it's worth, the picture is hosted on the Tate Modern website. It's apparently a famous photographer's picture.


----------



## Smyz (Sep 26, 2013)

It was a comment about a picture of a prepubescent girl so that does seem fair enough.

What I don't understand is why he is upset with the poster who made the comment but not with the poster who put the picture up. The comment could be ambiguous but is there an innocent explanation for posting the picture?


edit --that was a reply to Bioboy


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2013)

Smyz said:


> The comment could be ambiguous but is there an innocent explanation for posting the picture?



It was a thread of good photographs, and this image was a photograph from an internationally acclaimed art exhibition

The Editor has deleted the image now, not sure why.

Info about the artist:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=rineke-dijkstra-a-retrospective


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 26, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I think he has form for this, and I think that, IIRC, in the past he _has_ come back and retracted extreme comments he's made.
> 
> I hope so - because I would like very much for him to withdraw his allegations against me, just for starters.



Have I? Don't think so - AFAIC, I've said my thing on this subject and that's it. No regrets or aplogies though. In a similar manner to how Katy Perry kissed a girl and she liked it, I _denounced_ some clown. And I liked it. That's all from me on this one though, it's all been said now.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 27, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Have I? Don't think so - AFAIC, I've said my thing on this subject and that's it. No regrets or aplogies though. In a similar manner to how Katy Perry kissed a girl and she liked it, I _denounced_ some clown. And I liked it. That's all from me on this one though, it's all been said now.


Well, you should be ashamed of yourself, then. You have made some deeply offensive remarks to a number of people, that IRL could well have resulted in a smack in the chops. Perhaps more significantly, you've made a complete idiot out of yourself, and I for one won't be taking seriously anything else you write. 

Nice work, chump.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2013)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24314111

Tory Vice chairman arrested on sus on historical rape.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 28, 2013)

I'm a bit concerned by all this talk of wanking cocks and dicks and sucking and stuff on a thread about paedos


----------



## elbows (Sep 28, 2013)

not-bono-ever said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24314111
> 
> Tory Vice chairman arrested on sus on historical rape.



The Mirror call him one of Camerons closest allies. They also say he wasn't due to be arrested till after the party conference but police moved it forwards for operational reasons.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/alan-lewis-arrest-conservative-vice-chairman-2313388


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 28, 2013)

Are Asda going to start selling Francis Lengel costumes?


----------



## andysays (Sep 28, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Are Asda going to start selling Francis Lengel costumes?









Paedofinder General...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2013)

andysays said:


> Paedofinder General...



More interested in Privates than Generals, I thought...


----------



## andysays (Sep 28, 2013)

DaveCinzano said:


> More interested in Privates than Generals, I thought...



But mostly interested in self-righteous attention seeking


----------



## existentialist (Sep 30, 2013)

andysays said:


> But mostly interested in self-righteous attention seeking


TBF, he's wound his neck in since. We didn't see an apology, but I'm not sure there's much mileage in continuing the kicking.

OTOH, if *he *decides he wants to give the issue another airing...


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2013)

DaveCinzano said:


> https://twitter.com/smessham/status/382773314986311680



Later that day he said he had decided not to wait till next week (now this week), but he hasn't posted since that day and I won't be surprised if he either fails to reappear for a good while, doesn't name names, or doesn't name any that are high-profile enough to gain much interest. And sadly anything he tries to achieve is almost bound to backfire, and I would have very little hope of any strands of inquiry that were relying mostly on him going anywhere.

Meanwhile I'm not much closer to knowing whether any 'high profile, powerful, living' perpetrators from the political sphere will face justice. Not just because of potential coverups, but because the realities of how many offenders of that type there actually are/were is still murky. For example names associated with the guest house did not necessarily abuse underage boys there, and may have only used other services. With that in mind sections of the internet are almost bound to be dissapointed, although its still too early to say for sure or to rule out such prosecutions. It will be at least another 6 months before I vent any frustration, and even then it will be very hard to judge whether anyone has gotten away with shit again.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 2, 2013)

Will be interesting to see how (if) Gerry Adams rides out the conviction of his child-rapey brother Liam.

Outline of GA's problems here:

http://sluggerotoole.com/2013/10/02...olitical-leader-on-this-island-would-survive/

(Posted here as it's the nonce über-thread, let's not get hung up on the 'UK' bit of the title)


----------



## elbows (Oct 7, 2013)

Not high profile or high ranking, but a cop who had previously evaded justice for decades finally got prosecuted and plead guilty to a string of indecent assaults against boys over several decades:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-police-officer-daniel-bryant-2341683


----------



## existentialist (Oct 7, 2013)

elbows said:


> Not high profile or high ranking, but a cop who had previously evaded justice for decades finally got prosecuted and plead guilty to a string of indecent assaults against boys over several decades:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-police-officer-daniel-bryant-2341683


I note that he pleaded guilty.

I hope that those who were claiming, some while back, that it is a pointless waste of money to continue to pursue such cases are paying attention to this. I imagine he pleaded guilty because he was aware that the allegations were - belatedly - being taken seriously, and that he stood a real chance of conviction. Not taking seriously such allegations, or not pursuing them because it's too expensive, will convey the impression to historic offenders that it's worth denying the charges all the way down the line.

I hope that the survivors of this policeman's abuse gains some comfort from this outcome.


----------



## elbows (Oct 10, 2013)

Historical news/documentary stuff about that Azumith trust yatching charity abuse:


----------



## elbows (Oct 10, 2013)

Eleventh arrest as a result of operation Pallial (north wales)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24476059


----------



## brogdale (Oct 11, 2013)

This *is* encouraging stuff from Exaro:-

I could only C&P from Henke's own blog


> The Metropolitan Police’s Operation Fernbridge is following new leads in their investigation into sexual abuse allegations involving a former Tory Cabinet minister.
> The investigation is now looking at new allegations involving links to gay brothels in Amsterdam and a now closed residential school with some special needs children in the North of England near Bradford. It is also looking at allegations from a boy in care in London who was taken out of town to a house where he was sexually abused by the same minster.
> The full story by me and Mark Conrad is now on the free to view *Exaro News* website .
> The disclosure should quell unfounded rumours that Operation Fernbridge is being run down and closed.
> ...



"...six former Conservative MPs..."


----------



## elbows (Oct 11, 2013)

Good. I've said before that I reckon various elements of the establishment will actually want to secure some high-profile political convictions if possible, because the perception of another cover-up now is more damaging than seeing some formerly powerful individuals face justice.

I've seen some of the false rumours Exaro refer to in regards the investigation being shut down. They are understandable given the damage done to individual victims in the past, damage that was magnified by past cover-ups. but it was pretty clear they were largely fact-free fears that were not terribly rational or reflective of the 'new mood'. Lets hope it stays that way and something comes of these new investigative strands.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2013)

Messham is saying he's naming names later today one he gets a few more followers.


----------



## 1%er (Oct 12, 2013)

elbows said:


> Historical news/documentary stuff about that Azumith trust yatching charity abuse:


One of the most disturbing things in this video is how professional bodies and local government kept this in house and seem to have given the "guilty parties" further opportunities to continue to abuse.


----------



## elbows (Oct 12, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Messham is saying he's naming names later today one he gets a few more followers.



He's started. Reckons he has 89 names that he has put into a 'lucky dip bag' and will pull one out and post it to twitter approximately every 2 hours.

He has posted one name so far. I'm not really expecting to have heard of any of them, and I somehow doubt he will get through all 89 before something happens.

For obvious reasons I'm not going to repeat any names and I don't expect this to go down well with the justice system.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 12, 2013)

elbows said:


> He's started. Reckons he has 89 names that he has put into a 'lucky dip bag' and will pull one out and post it to twitter approximately every 2 hours.
> 
> He has posted one name so far. I'm not really expecting to have heard of any of them, and I somehow doubt he will get through all 89 before something happens.
> 
> For obvious reasons I'm not going to repeat any names and I don't expect this to go down well with the justice system.


This really, really troubles me. Just because someone is a victim/survivor of abuse does not mean they should assume they have carte blanche to take all kinds of dangerous/actionable steps. I am somewhat frustrated at the system, the justice process, and so on, in regard to my own experiences, but throwing caution to the wind and just deciding to "name names" makes me little better than the perpetrators, *and* offers them the opportunity to colour themselves as victims, neatly blurring any moral/ideological boundaries that might have been there.

Bad move.


----------



## elbows (Oct 13, 2013)

Well there is plenty I would like to say about Messham that I shall resist for a few reasons, including the inability of me to sufficiently check some facts.

He has named a few more today but just to make matters worse the quality of the info is shit, no real context. And at least one of those named was convicted years ago anyway.

The icing on the cake is that he has made no secret of the fact he is doing it for attention, wants more twitter followers, says he won't release any more names unless he sees a lot more interest. I promptly unfollowed him.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 13, 2013)

elbows said:


> Well there is plenty I would like to say about Messham that I shall resist for a few reasons, including the inability of me to sufficiently check some facts.
> 
> He has named a few more today but just to make matters worse the quality of the info is shit, no real context. And at least one of those named was convicted years ago anyway.
> 
> The icing on the cake is that he has made no secret of the fact he is doing it for attention, wants more twitter followers, says he won't release any more names unless he sees a lot more interest. I promptly unfollowed him.


Thing is, there's almost a pathology here. Person gets abused, feels (rightly or otherwise) that they can't disclose/be heard. Most will give up - the taboo of sexual abuse has tended to be so huge that going public has been a high risk strategy, but some will go for the "go out in a blaze of glory" approach. I have no idea about this one - I haven't read much about him or his stuff, but it does rather sound a bit like that.


----------



## exiledinwales (Oct 15, 2013)

New interview



Nightmares at Elm Guest House. Bill Maloney interviews Chris Fay


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 15, 2013)

exiledinwales said:


> New interview
> 
> 
> 
> Nightmares at Elm Guest House. Bill Maloney interviews Chris Fay




Very frustrating - Maloney just isn't a very good interviewer, constantly interrupting, not listening to the answers etc.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 17, 2013)

Ben Fellows appears to have been arrested over his Ken Clarke allegations:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...n-against-kenneth-clarke#.Ul_UBwB1gyo.twitter


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2013)

Interesting charge: perverting the course of justice. Given there's been no trial i would guess this relates then to fabricating evidence?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 17, 2013)

As as someone who dallies with theories about conspiracies more than many urbanites, Fellows blotted his copybook for me when he "disappeared" for quite a few days earlier this year.

BEN FELLOWS DONE GONE MISSING!!! went up the cry in the land of Conspiranoia and it all looked possibly worrying. 

Then TA-DA, he turns up right as rain to a heroes welcome at the BBerg protests.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2013)

Apparently, Stuart Hall's just been re-arrested over new allegations.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Apparently, Stuart Hall's just been re-arrested over new allegations.



Now ain't *that* a shame?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Apparently, Stuart Hall's just been re-arrested over new allegations.


Jeunes Sans Frontières?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 23, 2013)

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ws/former-bbc-broadcaster-stuart-hall-6228990




> Disgraced former broadcaster Stuart Hall was arrested today to be questioned over new allegations of sex offences.
> 
> The development comes a day after he was stripped of his OBE.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2013)

DaveCinzano said:


> Jeunes Sans Frontières?



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24639266


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 23, 2013)

DaveCinzano said:


> Jeunes Sans Frontières?



Bastard, you made me choke on my tea!


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2013)

I had to google translate it


----------



## Corax (Oct 23, 2013)

Steve Messham at the end of his tether and blowing whistles in the last hour or so:



> *steven messham* ‏@smessham2h
> Either the NCA are pushing me to the wire or they think its a bluff. IT IS NO BLUFF NAMES START IN 14 MINS.Its such a shame they ignore me





> *steven messham* ‏@smessham2h
> BK Cheshire.GC Wrexham former PC PS.Flint,Bagillt,Wrexham and Chirk.JT Wrexham TF Wrexham





> *steven messham* ‏@smessham1h
> Think i have been more than good to the NCA and North wales police so far but if i do not get an answer from them within the hour more names



Haven't been following the thread as closely recently so no comment from me on credibility, just reporting it as seems potentially relevant.


----------



## Corax (Oct 23, 2013)

elbows said:


> For obvious reasons I'm not going to repeat any names and I don't expect this to go down well with the justice system.


Should I not have done?  Simply reporting what's been claimed in the public domain is perfectly acceptable I'd have thought.  As I said - no comment on credibility, as I literally have no idea either way on that front.

Tagging editor and FridgeMagnet in case not.


----------



## laptop (Oct 23, 2013)

brogdale said:


> This *is* encouraging stuff from Exaro:-
> 
> I could only C&P from Henke's own blog
> 
> ...



Interestingly, the Exaro piece linked from the blog says "Police have also taken very seriously an allegation from a woman who came forward to claim that the ex-minister raped her in the 1960’s."

I invite readers to draw, but not to post, their own conclusions, given a recent arrest.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2013)

Corax said:


> Should I not have done?  Simply reporting what's been claimed in the public domain is perfectly acceptable I'd have thought.  As I said - no comment on credibility, as I literally have no idea either way on that front.
> 
> Tagging editor and FridgeMagnet in case not.





> @smessham
> I HAVE JUST BEEN TOLD TO DELETE THE NAMES I PUT ON BY NORTH WALES POLICE I COULD BE IN TROUBLE IF I DONT AND MANY OTHER THINGS WERE SAID


----------



## Corax (Oct 23, 2013)

Yeah, just saw that too.  In all honesty though SM's state of mind is clearly not great, so what the police actually told him remains a question.  As does the veracity of his claims tbh.  It's all a bit of a Catch22, as if his claims are all true then his state of mind is completely understandable, but it's impossible to know from a distance which is chicken and which is egg...

Anyhow, I've edited it to initials to be on the safe side.  No names that I recognise as public figures there anyway - so it makes no difference in is some respects - I expect a 192 search wouldn't narrow each down to fewer than a couple of dozen possibilities anyway.  Locations are probably largely irrelevant - people move.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2013)

He's definitely not in a good place mentally. I saw a tweet earlier suggesting he was on the move - ie, to avoid being pulled in by plod. Who knows. Tragic all the same


----------



## Corax (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr.Bishie said:


> He's definitely not in a good place mentally. I saw a tweet earlier suggesting he was on the move - ie, to avoid being pulled in by plod. Who knows. Tragic all the same


Aye.  Can't help thinking he needs someone to just take him under their wing for a bit, tea and sympathy.  Someone not wearing a uniform of any sort though.  Won't make things right for him I know, but just a bit of respite.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Oct 29, 2013)

This probably belongs here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24722248



> A former BBC driver accused of sex offences has been found dead.
> 
> David Smith, 67, from Lewisham, south-east London, had been due to stand trial at Southwark Crown Court for allegedly abusing a boy, 12, in 1984.
> 
> Smith was the first person to be charged under the investigation into historical cases of abuse, which was originally set up in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 7, 2013)

Oh god:

*Mark Watts*@MarkWatts_1
More documents uncovered by @ExaroNews reveal how #CyrilSmith hoped to help take direct control of school.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...h-hoped-to-help-take-direct-control-of-school


----------



## brogdale (Nov 7, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh god:
> 
> *Mark Watts*@MarkWatts_1
> More documents uncovered by @ExaroNews reveal how #CyrilSmith hoped to help take direct control of school.
> ...



Gove's 'reforms' would have made all that so much easier.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 12, 2013)

Back to the police and Savile:


More police officers to be investigated over link with paedophile Jimmy Savile



> But today we can disclose further officers from* West Yorkshire *– Savile’s local force – may be quizzed.
> 
> We have learned that, as well as passing the Starkey allegations to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), the force has made another referral.
> 
> The IPCC told us it involves “a number of different officers” who had contact with the prolific child sex offender.





> Last week the IPCC asked *Sussex Police* to refer the conduct of two detectives over their handling of an indecent assault claim against him in 2008.
> 
> It is claimed police told Savile’s victim his lawyers would make “mincemeat” of her in court.
> 
> The probe – Operation Baseball – ended with Savile evading justice.






> The IPCC said it has requested further information from the *Met and Surrey Police* about their dealings with Savile.
> 
> Surrey’s two-year investigation into Savile also ended in him escaping justice over three claims.


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2013)

I had missed these serious claims against special branch by Chris Fay (of NAYPIC) a few weeks ago, probably because they were in the Express.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/43...-paedophiles-says-ex-child-protection-officer



> Mr Fay, 67, of south London, said: “It became very dangerous. People seem to forget that Special Branch could do what they liked, they were a law unto themselves.
> 
> “At one point they had me up against a wall by my throat with a gun at my head telling me in no uncertain terms that I was to back away if I knew what was good for me.





> “A colleague of mine had the same treatment, as did a number of the volunteers. Victims who were actually abused at Elm House were also physically stopped from coming to speak to us at the NAYPIC office in north London.
> 
> “I witnessed Special Branch officers manhandling them and turning them away with a warning to keep their mouths shut. It was blatant, it was open, they were acting like gangsters.





> However, Mr Fay said: “I was told by the police implicitly, ‘We do not want you to come to us with big names’.”
> 
> In a sinister twist, he said his kitchen window was shot at, leaving three bullet holes in the glass, although he never found out who was responsible.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 13, 2013)

elbows said:


> I had missed these serious claims against special branch by Chris Fay (of NAYPIC) a few weeks ago, probably because they were in the Express.



It was all in the Pie & Mash bloke's video interview with him linked to upthread - probably even more nuggets buried in that, it was a long one (I certainly didn't make it through to the end).


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2013)

Aha, cheers. I did try to watch that video just days ago but I guess I didn't make it that far.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2013)

Tom Watson writing in the Mirror:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tom-watson-after-30-years-2824776



> The retired insider told me that he recalled raising his concern that the Volunteer Services Unit of the Home Office was directly funding the work of PIE.
> 
> His recollection was that he raised his fears with superiors but was left in no doubt that he should drop the matter.
> 
> I’ve written to the Home Secretary asking her to initiate an inquiry.





> Sadly, Geoffrey Dickens died before the leader of PIE and former Home Office employee Stephen Freeman, was finally jailed in 2011, for possession of thousands of indecent images of children.
> 
> I’ve asked the current Home Office to publish the Dickens dossiers but guess what? The files have gone missing, prompting Theresa May to hold an internal inquiry.
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2013)

elbows said:


> Tom Watson writing in the Mirror:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tom-watson-after-30-years-2824776



Those missing files are probably lying just on top of the missing files relating to Peter Morrison.

All very 'co-incidental', eh?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2013)

What was that Volunteer Services Unit of the Home Office? Would that be something connected to things like this set up by someone mentioned in the Watson article?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2013)

"Volunteer Services Unit" "home office" brings up nothing but the watson article and something about the Tennessee govt.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2013)

I reckon it was probably the 'voluntary services unit' which has more references to it on the internet, although may well have been rebranded since.

e.g. the following which don't contain directly related info but do suggest the existence of such a unit:

1979: The National Association of Victims Support Schemes was created as an ‘umbrella body’ for the local schemes. Funding comes from private trusts and the Home Office's Voluntary Services Unit.

(from http://www.victimsupport.org.uk/about-us/history-and-achievements/key-events-and-achievements )

Drafting documents within Voluntary Services Unit, Home Office for written parliamentary question from David Alton MP

(from http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/repository/HOM000003480001.html )


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2013)

Or slightly more usefully:

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/details?Uri=C11689468



> This series deals with the role, contribution, functions and expansion of the voluntary sector and deals with a mix of operational and policy matters. It includes subjects such as committees set up to look into the role of the voluntary sector in the field of social services, community work and development, government support and review of funding of local projects, urban programmes, research into victims of crime, rehabilitation of drug users, race relations and support for displaced refugees from overseas.





> The Voluntary Services Unit was responsible for the co-ordination of government action in relation to voluntary services.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2013)

Cheers, appreciated.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2013)

Found a bit about its formation:





> The final report of the Aves Commission, published in 1969, recommended the establishment of a new national, independent membership organisation or ‘Volunteer Foundation’. The report called for any such organisation to be funded by a‘generous initial grant from public funds’.3 In this the Commission found themselves in tune with Ted Heath’s government, elected in June 1970, which was keen to support the development of infrastructure to help voluntary bodies operate more effectively. For example Lord Windlesham, Minister of State at the Home Office, was given responsibility for ‘co-ordinating the Government’s interests in the field of voluntary social services’ and a Voluntary Services Unit formed.



(taken from http://lib-161.lse.ac.uk/archives/digital/Volunteering_England.pdf )


----------



## elbows (Dec 7, 2013)

Exaro have recently run several stories that have not been promising regarding the Elm Guest House / Fernbridge stuff.

eg: http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5154/operation-fernbridge-releases-elm-co-manager-without-charge

Harry Kasir not facing any charges presently, and some of the charges against Stingemore and McSweeney.

But I note that a tweet holds the promise of something more positive later tonight:



> Mark Watts @MarkWatts_1
> Setbacks and breakthroughs re Ops #Fernbridge and #Fairbank. On@exaronews late tonight, a major breakthrough. exaronews.com


----------



## elbows (Dec 7, 2013)

Here we are:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...unit-seizes-video-of-ex-minister-at-sex-party

The police have video of a former tory minister at a sex party. A party where a victim the police are in contact with was present. Other parties where there is also photo evidence of the same victim being present were possibly organised by Sidney Cooke. The ex-minister confirmed he was at the one party for which there is video evidence and 'knew of' the victim but denied any sexual abuse claims.

The video etc evidence was obtained as part of Operation Fairbank but Exaro sources think this strand will spin off into its own enquiry in the new year.


----------



## elbows (Dec 8, 2013)

The Mirror version of the story:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ex-tory-cabinet-minister-caught-2903907

Details and careful wording pretty much identical to the Exaro piece. They just dwell on the Cooke connection a little more near the end:



> Detectives believe that some of the sex parties – some of which are believed to have been attended by paedophiles Jimmy Savile and MP Cyril Smith – were organised by Britain’s most notorious child abuser, Sidney Cooke, as we revealed in February.
> 
> Cooke led the ring of four jailed for killing Jason Swift in Hackney, East London, after gang-raping him in 1984.
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2013)

elbows said:


> I reckon it was probably the 'voluntary services unit' which has more references to it on the internet, although may well have been rebranded since.
> 
> e.g. the following which don't contain directly related info but do suggest the existence of such a unit:
> 
> ...


Mail confirms it was the VSU - investigation started apparently.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 18, 2013)

Anyone seen this and have views on it? http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/

Names a fair few names though I don't know if any of them are new. I have only been following this stuff out the corner of my eye so interested in what people think of the article.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

the sources seem to be this white supremacist blog and this conspiracy theorist


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Dec 19, 2013)

I've seen that kind of thing thrown around at the likes of Needle and Exaro for some time, no need to bring white supremacists into it really, though they love to hijack the issue generally.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2013)

The article doesn't say much that hasn't been said in this thread over the year+, with the main difference that we don't name names or get too carried away with the dot joining.

Personally I reserve judgement until we see whether anything ends up going through the justice system. Attitudes at the time, how long ago it was, the nature of some of the evidence and the potential range of activities at the guest-house that did not involve underage victims are all complicating factors. Methods and motives of intelligence services doesn't help, especially in some specific instances, and further reduces the chance of getting to the whole story.

In my book nothing has come out which really justifies the over-simplistic narratives that have so easily been spun and repeated in so many places on the internet. Very much including by those who have agendas which favour sweeping generalisations targeting a specific group, which depending on the site in question has at times included gays, jews, politicians etc.

Even if every case people have speculated about on the internet somehow gets proven and dealt with, which is very unlikely to happen, the sheer scale of offending and number of famous or powerful people implicated is not enough for me to justify the sloppiest narratives that get bandied around. Real victims have been failed in so many ways, things have been brushed under the carpet, etc. But I don't see anything that can't be explained by attitudes at the time combined with the usual human factors along the lines of networking, institutions and their weaknesses, and power in its broadest sense. i.e. the sort of power that even 'normal' people can find they have over other specific people in a particular circumstance. Obviously the potential for abuse and subsequent coverup is worse when institutions are involved, such is the nature of institutions, especially before decades of scandals made people aware of the shortcomings of such things and attempts (sometimes feeble, sometimes not) to get to the bottom of things/remove institutional blindspots.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 19, 2013)

Thanks - sounds a reasonable viewpoint. I didn't think Kerry-anne Mendoza (author of that blog) would have gone into full on conspiraloon mode (she has built a decent following among people who want openly leftist journalism and she wouldn't want to blow that I think) but at the same time I could see some logical leaps were being made.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2013)

Well one of the problems is that the 'evidence' that ended up on the internet in this case is really just a worthy starting point for fresh investigation. For example I'm pretty sure even Chris Faye from NAYPIC would caution strongly against using a certain list of names to draw conclusions instead of as a starting point.

Another problem which easily leads to certain blogs etc being labelled as conspiracy theorists in their approach to this subject, is the history of writings and conspiracy theories around this subject. There was an existing template for sloppy writing & conclusion drawing about this kind of abuse involving politicians, with varying degrees of actual fact involved. Some of them were based on clear cases of abuse & coverup, but others were mostly sponsored by a desire to lump all the powerful offenders together in some other way (party affiliation, sexual orientation, whether they were jewish or a member of the new world order or whatever). 

Certainly back in the day on this thread and other related ones, those of us who were interested enough to attempt some of our own basic internet research had rather mixed results. There were signs of some people getting away with bad shit. Of ranks closing, of intimidation, and of networks of abuse only being partially dealt with. And I don't think there was anything wrong with tentatively joining some dots, but in pencil not permanent marker. 

But the problems were numerous. Psychologically damaged victims sometimes struggling with the quality of their own evidence. Attitudes and laws regarding homosexuality in the past. A historical tory gay closet that has been described (I forget by whom) as having been the largest in Europe some decades ago. And not just the potential of the security services to cover-up or otherwise make use of abuse committed by persons of interest, but also to create smear stories, sometimes carried in the fringe press but sometimes countered by them, suggesting specific rumours of the day were really unfair smears done for other political reasons.

And there is certainly an appetite to find some powerful guilty people. I don't know if any of the inquiries about abuse at various institutions will manage this, partly because its really unclear how many 'noteworthy' perpetrators were involved, as opposed to those who were in more local positions of power. And the couple of dead MPs implicated isn't enough. At least one really high-profile case involving a politician needs to be brought through the justice system with an outcome that will get the press to dwell on it and tell more of the story about the case in question. Thats a bare minimum really to even begin to satisfy all of the people who have been let down in the past and are very cynical about the prospects of anything being different this time. 

In terms of what the various inquiries (as opposed to police investigations) may achieve, I suppose it may be the politicians and the police who get forced into greater reform of the way they handle this stuff as a result of inquiry recommendations. Because a lot of the stuff about other institutions failings that we would normally expect such inquiry reports to dwell on in tedious detail, have already been done or are obsolete. We've already had decades of awareness that large institutions were a bad place to put vulnerable people including the young, which actually got acted on in part because it coincided with changed government economic agendas that favoured or demanded the gutting of many public institutions.


----------



## Dan U (Dec 19, 2013)

How do the blogs that name living names get away with it? At least one name on that recently posted link has - i am sure - access to very expensive lawyers (not saying it for obvious reasons) 

I don't want to say I enjoy this thread as that is the wrong word but I appreciate the persistence of elbows and others


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 19, 2013)

.
[quote="Dan U, post: 12787360, member: 24336"
I don't want to say I enjoy this thread as that is the wrong word but I appreciate the persistence of elbows and others[/quote]

Persistence and analysis and everything. Thanks elbows.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2013)

> How do the blogs that name living names get away with it? At least one name on that recently posted link has - i am sure - access to very expensive lawyers (not saying it for obvious reasons)
> 
> I don't want to say I enjoy this thread as that is the wrong word but I appreciate the persistence of elbows and others



I expect obscurity is one of their main shields against legal action. People either don't know about them, don't want to draw attention to them by going after them, or don't want them to start going on about how the legal action is an attempt at intimidation and burying the truth. And since much of the info is repeated on so many of these obscure blogs, and some of them are probably overseas, it would be hard to put the genie back in the bottle anyway.

Twitter storms are a fine example of some of the above. We can have bizarre periods where lots of people are talking about a story, the detail of which the uk press will not run with at that moment in time. Sometimes the gap is closed when the buzz about the story reaches critical mass, or some legal milestone happen to be passed, but other times nothing happens, and the gap between what is acknowledged on parts of the net and that in the mainstream press remains wide and somewhat ludicrous.

Anyway the internet certainly exposes the gap between what people say casually and how things are 'allowed to be said' in the eyes of the law etc. It gets a bit messy sometimes, including when we are talking about blog-posts that we probably wouldn't repeat ourselves in writing.

Thanks for the kind words about my posts. Not very much new thats really worth all these words of mine has happened fro some time, but I tend to stick with a subject for the long-haul so I won't leave this one alone for a few more years yet.


----------



## jakethesnake (Dec 19, 2013)

Came across this and thought of this thread... http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/


----------



## 1%er (Dec 20, 2013)

I haven't seen a link to these documents on this thread (I may well have missed it)

Mary Moss papers

Mary Moss was the development officer for London "national association for young people in care", these documents appear to have been posted shortly after her house was raided,  "after she refused to cooperate with police".


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 20, 2013)

1%er said:


> I haven't seen a link to these documents on this thread (I may well have missed it)
> 
> Mary Moss papers
> 
> Mary Moss was the development officer for London "national association for young people in care", these documents appear to have been posted shortly after her house was raided,  "after she refused to cooperate with police".



Without wishing to comment in a way that repeats anything potentially libellous, then can i just say fucking hell.


----------



## antibalas (Dec 20, 2013)

elbows said:


> Well one of the problems is that the 'evidence' that ended up on the internet in this case is really just a worthy starting point for fresh investigation. For example I'm pretty sure even Chris Faye from NAYPIC would caution strongly against using a certain list of names to draw conclusions instead of as a starting point.
> 
> Another problem which easily leads to certain blogs etc being labelled as conspiracy theorists in their approach to this subject, is the history of writings and conspiracy theories around this subject. There was an existing template for sloppy writing & conclusion drawing about this kind of abuse involving politicians, with varying degrees of actual fact involved. Some of them were based on clear cases of abuse & coverup, but others were mostly sponsored by a desire to lump all the powerful offenders together in some other way (party affiliation, sexual orientation, whether they were jewish or a member of the new world order or whatever).
> 
> ...



Written like a true apologist.  You have to being paid well to spout this. 

I like how institutions are to be blamed for the systematic abuse of children over decades, this will not wash. 

Do you think the Lord that was arrested today is just being smeared and is innocent?  The MSM won't report the story, Google is restricting searches.


----------



## elbows (Dec 20, 2013)

Institutions are to be blamed for failing in their duty of care, caring more about their own reputation than victims, etc. Obviously the abusers themselves are guilty of the actual abuse. 

Nobody is paying me anything to speak my brains you deluded little shit. Take your twisted and paranoid worldview and stick it. Meanwhile I shall be here to cheer when (or if) people are brought to justice.


----------



## elbows (Dec 20, 2013)

As for the rumour about the arrested lord, I will wait till it can be substantiated. If true, and if it leads to prosecution, then its a welcome development that will tidy up one instance of a well-placed individual getting away with it. But as of this moment we are a long way away from being able to say that.


----------



## laptop (Dec 20, 2013)

antibalas said:


> Written like a true apologist.  You have to being paid well to spout this.



Written like a True Believer with no interest in how the world works. David Icke forums are over there ==>. Bye!


----------



## unrepentant85 (Dec 20, 2013)

Brainaddict said:


> Anyone seen this and have views on it? http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/12/18/uk-establishment-closes-ranks-as-organised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/


 
Its pretty similar to this blog entry from April

http://cigpapers.wordpress.com/tag/sinn-fein/


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 20, 2013)

antibalas said:


> Written like a true apologist.  You have to being paid well to spout this.
> 
> I like how institutions are to be blamed for the systematic abuse of children over decades, this will not wash.
> 
> Do you think the Lord that was arrested today is just being smeared and is innocent?  The MSM won't report the story, Google is restricting searches.



Interesting.

Anything to substantiate any of your claims, or are people supposed to take it on trust?


----------



## ibilly99 (Dec 20, 2013)

Just breaking in the MSN

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...t-of-child-sex-investigations-say-police.html


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 20, 2013)

Which is going to lead us straight to Franck Beck and the Leicestershire Care Homes abuse scandal.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 20, 2013)

Brainaddict said:


> Thanks - sounds a reasonable viewpoint. I didn't think Kerry-anne Mendoza (author of that blog) would have gone into full on conspiraloon mode (she has built a decent following among people who want openly leftist journalism and she wouldn't want to blow that I think) but at the same time I could see some logical leaps were being made.



she's a conspiraloon, was bigging up the zeitgeist stuff recently as well


----------



## Corax (Dec 21, 2013)

The alleged Elm House guest list linked to earlier.  One of those names is independently credible from my PoV.  A girlfriend I was with about 10 years ago had a deep dislike for one of those people, and when I asked why I was told it was because he was a "perve", having groped her at the age of 14 at a tennis event.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 21, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's a conspiraloon, was bigging up the zeitgeist stuff recently as well


You're right, I hadn't noticed those zeitgeist links before.


----------



## antibalas (Dec 22, 2013)

laptop said:


> Written like a True Believer with no interest in how the world works. David Icke forums are over there ==>. Bye!


Nope, I don't frequent the Icke forums at all.  Good to see that anyone arguing against the narrative that is being spouted here is immediately Icke'd, strange that.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> Nope, I don't frequent the Icke forums at all.  Good to see that anyone arguing against the narrative that is being spouted here is immediately Icke'd, strange that.


After your first post you have no credibility here. You're used to being turned away for your truth-seeking, so save us all some time and go. Or present some credibility establishing work.


----------



## antibalas (Dec 22, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Anything to substantiate any of your claims, or are people supposed to take it on trust?



I would suggest you take some time out over at the spotlight on abuse blog, check out of some of the reporting over the years, also the Needle blog will provide you with some good insight.  

You will soon find out that some of our most senior politicians are there for very specific reasons, look into Keith Vaz being the solicitor for Richmond council during the Elm Guest House raid, he denies any knowledge of it.  Harriet Harman and Jack Dromney whilst at NCCL pushing the pro PIE line of consent being lowered to 4 years old.  How about Margaret Hodge overseeing more then a decade of abuse in Islington care homes, to then get the nomination of the safe Barking seat and to go on to come Minister of Children.  

Why don't we ponder the arrest of Peter Righton, who was the 'expert' helping to define Govt policy on Childrens Care homes whilst buggering as many children as he could get away with (which he did as he was only found guilty for the photographs).

What about Operation Ore being D-noticed? I especially enjoy the puff piece the BBC released not long after the Savile revelations.

Ohh, why don't we all wait until the Kincora investigation kicks in, will the Secret Services have to admit in facilitating the abuse of children in the national interest due to security?

Have a look into the Waterhouse report, check out the terms of reference and why names of senior politicians were kept out of the reports.   

Hey, I would keep on and on and on.  But Elbow wouldn't like that, it is not in keeping with the faceless/disconnected/random propagation of Child Sexual Abuse that has been rife in this country for decades, no centuries.   

As you were.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 22, 2013)

That's some hard hitting truth you got there mate _*tips fedora_


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> Nope, I don't frequent the Icke forums at all.  Good to see that anyone arguing against the narrative that is being spouted here is immediately *Icke'd*, strange that.



That's nearly an anagram of dicked.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 22, 2013)

Amazing that everything he (is that you pie and mash?) mentions has been covered in non-hysterical detail on this very thread. Often by elbows. Righton, for example, mentioned on this thread october last year. Save us from the savers.


----------



## antibalas (Dec 22, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> After you first post you have no credibility here. You're used to being turned away for your truth-seeking, so save us all some time and go. Or present some credibility establishing work.


I have no interest in establishing anything here, i have seen a link to Elbow's rubbish a couple of times and it is very obvious the line that is being pushed. 

Go do your own research rather than rely upon the sponsored crap that is being peddled.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I would suggest you take some time out over at the spotlight on abuse blog, check out of some of the reporting over the years, also the Needle blog will provide you with some good insight.
> 
> You will soon find out that some of our most senior politicians are there for very specific reasons, look into Keith Vaz being the solicitor for Richmond council during the Elm Guest House raid, he denies any knowledge of it.  Harriet Harman and Jack Dromney whilst at NCCL pushing the pro PIE line of consent being lowered to 4 years old.  How about Margaret Hodge overseeing more then a decade of abuse in Islington care homes, to then get the nomination of the safe Barking seat and to go on to come Minister of Children.
> 
> ...


This is actually an astonishing confused silly post. It says that it was only individuals that took part in individual or organised child abuse. Whilst highlighting the structural ways in which it was facilitated. And at the same time, _look at the report those same structures made into themselves, that's where the key to truth lies.
_
Joker. Is it you pie and mash?


----------



## free spirit (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I have no interest in establishing anything here, i have seen a link to Elbow's rubbish a couple of times and it is very obvious the line that is being pushed.
> 
> Go do your own research rather than rely upon the sponsored crap that is being peddled.


what the fuck do you think this thread is about?

2256 posts of various people doing precisely that. Well, ok not exactly, but a few hundred posts along those lines, with admittedly a lot of more sceptical posts as well - but that's also needed to force a bit of rigour into the investigations rather than people being allowed to get away with posting up unsubstantiated allegations.


----------



## benedict (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I have no interest in establishing anything here, i have seen a link to Elbow's rubbish a couple of times and it is very obvious the line that is being pushed.
> 
> Go do your own research rather than rely upon the sponsored crap that is being peddled.



This is thin gruel indeed. 

The aggression you're displaying towards Elbows combined with the classic conspiracist mode of reasoning* suggests you have little to contribute to a rational discussion of this topic, unfortunately.  

*X worked at Y council as an F
Y also worked at S as a D
S went to the elite public school Z
where P, convicted of Q, was in the year above
etc ad nauseum (complete with pics)


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I have no interest in establishing anything here, i have seen a link to Elbow's rubbish a couple of times and it is very obvious the line that is being pushed.
> 
> Go do your own research rather than rely upon the sponsored crap that is being peddled.



If you have no interest in establishing credibility for your views, then don't be surprised if people here treat them with derision.

You even started out by rubbishing someone who has consistently demonstrated a willingness to produce credible supporting evidence.

I'd also, given that you don't seem to want to support your theories with evidence, refer you to the following FAQ.

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/conspiracy-threads-policy.179530/


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I would suggest you take some time out over at the spotlight on abuse blog, check out of some of the reporting over the years, also the Needle blog will provide you with some good insight.



I lived some of the shit.  I had friends in care who were brutalised.  I don't need to check blogs to garner facts I've known about and investigated myself for the last 30 years.



> You will soon find out that some of our most senior politicians are there for very specific reasons, look into Keith Vaz being the solicitor for Richmond council during the Elm Guest House raid, he denies any knowledge of it.



Because a borough solicitor is always informed about every legal undertaking across a council, aren't they? Vaz's claim is plausible.  It's plausible because a dept that deals with hundreds of legal issues every day only pass the most important stuff up to the head honchos.  



> Harriet Harman and Jack Dromney whilst at NCCL pushing the pro PIE line of consent being lowered to 4 years old.



His name is Dromey, and while he was on the NEC of the NCCL, he wasn't part of the structure, he sat on the board.  You're thinking of Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt, who were and they didn't "push the PIE line", they allowed the Paedophile Information Exchange to become an *affiliate member* of the NCCL, mostly on the strength of the police and state treating all homosexuals as potential paedophiles, and because some of PIE's gay members were indeed pursued by the police for their homosexual predelictions, not because of any commitment to lowering the age of sexual consent.



> How about Margaret Hodge overseeing more then a decade of abuse in Islington care homes, to then get the nomination of the safe Barking seat and to go on to come Minister of Children.



What about it?
If you exclude every former councillor; council executive; council worker or local politician from government, what are you left with?  A bunch of lawyers and accountants.  

You're pumping hyperbole, when what you should be doing is looking to the actual facts.  Hang Hewitt, Dromey and Harman for being gullible; do the same to Hodge for being an overbearing cunt who missed many opportunities to minimise abuse of children in her council's care, but don't shit out this crap about Hodge "overseeing abuse" or about Harman and co "pushing the PIE line", because anyone with an ounce of sense knows it's hyperbolic bullshit, and that you don't *need* hyperbolic bullshit to nail those implicated.



> Why don't we ponder the arrest of Peter Righton, who was the 'expert' helping to define Govt policy on Childrens Care homes whilst buggering as many children as he could get away with (which he did as he was only found guilty for the photographs).
> 
> What about Operation Ore being D-noticed? I especially enjoy the puff piece the BBC released not long after the Savile revelations.
> 
> Ohh, why don't we all wait until the Kincora investigation kicks in, will the Secret Services have to admit in facilitating the abuse of children in the national interest due to security?



We already know all we need to know about Kincora.  Any intelligence admissions (if that happens) only fill out what Wallace and Holroyd reported more than 30 years ago.



> Have a look into the Waterhouse report, check out the terms of reference and why names of senior politicians were kept out of the reports.
> 
> Hey, I would keep on and on and on.  But Elbow wouldn't like that, it is not in keeping with the faceless/disconnected/random propagation of Child Sexual Abuse that has been rife in this country for decades, no centuries.
> 
> As you were.



You really haven't bothered to read this thread, have you?
If you'd actually made the effort, you'd know that the attributions you make of elbows are about as valid as a three day old bus ticket, and that most of what you've spewed in this post has already been discussed and analysed to a much greater degree than your hyperbolic efforts.

Try again, this time with something less sensationalist and more fact-heavy, eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 22, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> That's nearly an anagram of dicked.



Nearly an anagram of balanitis, except for an errant "a".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 22, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Amazing that everything he (is that you pie and mash?) mentions has been covered in non-hysterical detail on this very thread. Often by elbows. Righton, for example, mentioned on this thread october last year. Save us from the savers.



I don't mind people believing that they're crusading knights for truth.  What I do mind is when they piss out hyperbole and pretend that the hyperbole is fact.  They actually shit on proper investigation by giving those (who may or may not be the state) who are defending the paedophiles ammunition - allowing them to say "well *that* is complete bollocks, so the rest could be too".
Fucking self-righteous idiots looking to score, and scoring fucking own goals.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 22, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I don't mind people believing that they're crusading knights for truth.  What I do mind is when they piss out hyperbole and pretend that the hyperbole is fact.  They actually shit on proper investigation by giving those (who may or may not be the state) who are defending the paedophiles ammunition - allowing them to say "well *that* is complete bollocks, so the rest could be too".
> Fucking self-righteous idiots looking to score, and scoring fucking own goals.


And if others were doing it their response would be -_ i wonder who gains by doing that_ - i,e suggesting that they're paedos looking to muddy the waters.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I have no interest in establishing anything here, i have seen a link to Elbow's rubbish a couple of times and it is very obvious the line that is being pushed.
> 
> Go do your own research rather than rely upon the sponsored crap that is being peddled.


I'll just repost this part of my opening post on this thread.


> This thread is aimed at joining the dots of public domain evidence of locations, related prosecutions, witness / personal accounts, and related evidence (from reputable sources only please).
> 
> *This thread is *NOT* a thread for naming names of anyone still living who's not been found guilty in court. Anyone naming names is likely to get this thread closed, and / or potentially the editor being sued and the site closed down.*
> 
> There are a long list of institutions where long term systemic abuse has been proven in court over the last few decades, but these prosecutions largely seem to focus on individuals, and ignore or actually hide evidence of the involvement of wider networks of abusers



There's a fine line needing to be trodden on this thread between discussing the latest developments and ending up potentially naming innocent people, or those not proven to be guilty, who could potentially end up suing this site / having the site taken down. Or more likely, ending up with the thread being locked by the moderating team here if the line is being crossed.

If you've got useful, credible information to add to the thread, then please do, but please don't come steaming in with wild allegations and end up getting the thread locked.


----------



## elbows (Dec 22, 2013)

antibalas said:


> What about Operation Ore being D-noticed?



Operation Ore was an interesting case. The sheer scale of the thing was a challenge, one that the authorities did not exactly rise to. I believe they mostly targeted people who were in contact with children, at least at first, and that out of the 7000ish names, they only prosecuted a fraction of them numbering in the low thousands at most.

Various press were certainly given lists of names. This lead to articles talking about how many city people were named, for example. There were rumours about 2 senior labour politicians, but there are contradictory reports in the press about the quality of such rumours. I assume the conspiracy theory about a D-notice stemmed from this. Specifically a Sunday Herald article from January 2003 said that a senior source in british intelligence confirmed to them that a former high-profile Labour cabinet member was on the list of Ore suspects. The Herald said they could not name the person for legal reasons, and that the rumour about another Labour person was still unsubstantiated. I doubt anything else of note ever came out about this, and the conspiracy theorists simply took this stuff and turned it into their D-Note 'facts' about 2 labour politicians. I'd like to know the truth of the matter, but that requires access to the information, or people in the know speaking out. Not idiots distorting stuff and filling in the gaps in a sloppy way.

We have certainly seen historical examples of politicians and well-connected people being let off lightly or shielded from publicity to varying degrees. The way Operation Ore was handled certainly had the potential to enable similar phenomenon. The extent to which it did is unknown.

Thanks to everyone for the kind words and the attempts to deal with the buffoonery.


----------



## fogbat (Dec 22, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Nearly an anagram of balanitis, except for an errant "a".



Anal baits.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 22, 2013)

Its banal

Not it's not.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 22, 2013)

elbows said:


> Operation Ore was an interesting case. The sheer scale of the thing was a challenge, one that the authorities did not exactly rise to. I believe they mostly targeted people who were in contact with children, at least at first, and that out of the 7000ish names, they only prosecuted a fraction of them numbering in the low thousands at most.
> 
> Various press were certainly given lists of names. This lead to articles talking about how many city people were named, for example. There were rumours about 2 senior labour politicians, but there are contradictory reports in the press about the quality of such rumours. I assume the conspiracy theory about a D-notice stemmed from this. Specifically a Sunday Herald article from January 2003 said that a senior source in british intelligence confirmed to them that a former high-profile Labour cabinet member was on the list of Ore suspects. The Herald said they could not name the person for legal reasons, and that the rumour about another Labour person was still unsubstantiated. I doubt anything else of note ever came out about this, and the conspiracy theorists simply took this stuff and turned it into their D-Note 'facts' about 2 labour politicians. I'd like to know the truth of the matter, but that requires access to the information, or people in the know speaking out. Not idiots distorting stuff and filling in the gaps in a sloppy way.
> 
> ...



Wasn't there also a "contamination" issue with the dataset mined (pardon the pun) by Operation Ore? Something about it being mixed in with legitmate website subscriptions for "normal" porn sites?


----------



## benedict (Dec 22, 2013)

Yes, and additional problems with fraud. Good stuff on this is the work by Duncan Campbell, especially this lengthy piece.


----------



## elbows (Dec 22, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Wasn't there also a "contamination" issue with the dataset mined (parden the pun) by Operation Ore? Something about it being mixed in with legitmate website subscriptions for "normal" porn sites?



Not had a chance to check out the pc pro article yet, but claims about widespread credit card fraud have been used to attempt to clear peoples names since then. I'm not sure what the appeal outcomes were though.

eg:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jul/02/web-child-abuse-inquiry-challenge

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/nov/10/child-pornography-accused-could-be-cleared

In particular there is some useful detail in there that tends to suggest different charges were brought if, for example no child porn evidence was found on their computers.



> A lesser charge than possession, incitement was used in those cases where someone's details were on the Landslide database but there were no images found on the suspect's computer or in his home.
> 
> O'Shea's home was raided in 2002 but no images were found. Saltrese said his case was that he accessed adult pornography but that his legal team would produce evidence that his credit card had been fraudulently used to access a paedophile site within Landslide.
> 
> ...



Plus lets not forget Del Naja from Massive Attack, police took away his stuff to look at but he was not charged:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2003/apr/11/artsfeatures.popandrock



> On February 25, two weeks after the release of their fourth album, 100th Window, and on the eve of their first world tour for four years, Del Naja was arrested in his home town of Bristol as part of Operation Ore, a crackdown on child pornography on the internet. As is usual in these cases, the police raided his home, removing videos and computer equipment. A month later, on March 25, his property was returned: Avon and Somerset police had dropped the investigation.





> Del Naja says he was "caught in the sweep" of Operation Ore, the investigation into internet paedophilia founded on a list of 7,300 UK-based credit card numbers passed on to the national crime squad by the FBI. Del Naja's credit card number was among them. In 1999, his card had been charged $3 by a website - he doesn't remember which one, he says, but probably some porn site.
> 
> "The company that it's attributed to owns hundreds of websites, all different, some of which are absolutely vile, hideous. I was away in London and somebody phoned up and told me they'd been let into my house by a mate of mine. They took everything, every video, every memory stick, every hard drive, spent a month analysing it and found absolutely nothing."


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 22, 2013)

benedict said:


> Yes, and additional problems with fraud. Good stuff on this is the work by Duncan Campbell, especially this lengthy piece.



Interesting tidbit from the pcpro article w/r/t the dataset: "Landslide only operated one SQL database, so subscribers to the adult verification service were lumped in with those who had paid for or requested Keyz sites, of whatever kind."
Keyz being the portal for the child porn site.


----------



## elbows (Dec 22, 2013)

Operation Pallial (North Wales) updates from recent weeks:

18th Arrest: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/operation-pallial-police-make-18th-6399541

Yet more charges for John Allen: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-25467366



> The court heard he has been charged with 14 extra offences, including nine indecent assaults, one rape and two serious sexual assaults, bringing the total to 49.
> 
> The judge was told the charges follow allegations by eight more complainants.
> 
> Mr Allen, the ex-head of the Bryn Alyn Community which ran homes in north Wales, will next appear at Mold Crown Court on 7 February, 2014.



Also I can't remember if we mentioned it at the time, but back in November there was an update from the police which revealed the number of victims who had come forwards has surpassed 200.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24833667



> Chief crown prosecutor for CPS Wales Ed Beltrami said: "We are now very clear that the focus must be on the overall credibility of an allegation, rather than the perceived weakness of the person making it."


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Dec 22, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Interesting tidbit from the pcpro article w/r/t the dataset: "Landslide only operated one SQL database, so subscribers to the adult verification service were lumped in with those who had paid for or requested Keyz sites, of whatever kind."
> Keyz being the portal for the child porn site.



Plus it looks like at least some of the credit cards details used were hacked.



> More than half of the money Landslide took from credit cards was paid to their ring. The gang was supplying extremely unpleasant pornography over the internet, some of it depicting young children being raped and abused. But the undisclosed computer evidence shows they were also in the simpler and less risky business of card fraud.
> 
> And every time a stolen British card was used, its owner's name was added as a potential suspect for the future Operation Ore. On Landslide websites which computer records show were simply vehicles for fraud, 90% of the people cheated never noticed or complained. The total level of fraud was probably well over 50%.
> 
> ...


 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/apr/19/hitechcrime.money

That's something that can happen to _anyone _very easily unless they're totally paranoid about who they do e-commerce with and how.

See e.g. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/12/non-us-cards-used-at-target-fetch-premium/ and a ton of similar stories on his site.

From which it follows that _anyone _can find themselves getting nicked as a cyber-nonce (and on past form their details leaked to the press) by a bunch of gung-ho coppers who haven't done their homework properly.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 23, 2013)

antibalas said:


> Nope, I don't frequent the Icke forums at all.  Good to see that anyone arguing against the narrative that is being spouted here is immediately Icke'd, strange that.


You're doing a bit more than "arguing against the narrative". You seem to have a personal hard-on for ripping into, most specifically, elbows' posts, but not actually providing any evidence for your objections.

My experience of elbows' postings are that he seems at great pains to distance his personal opinions from the facts he is reporting, and whenever I've had cause to check what he has said, it's been unimpeachable.

So when someone comes on, straight out of the traps, firing invective all over the place and insisting that elbows has some kind of Dark Agenda, I for one am going to be coming over a bit  about it. And nothing you've said beyond that has made me any less suspicious.

So, for all your spluttering, it's no wonder that quite a few people are starting to mark you down as a loon. You may want to put up, or shut up, if you don't want that to continue.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 23, 2013)

antibalas said:


> I have no interest in establishing anything here, i have seen a link to Elbow's rubbish a couple of times and it is very obvious the line that is being pushed.
> 
> Go do your own research rather than rely upon the sponsored crap that is being peddled.


You may not realise this, but this kind of demand - "go and find out for yourself" - is straight out of Conspiraloon 101. If you are remotely interested in persuading people that a respected and authoritative poster is posting rubbish, you are at least going to match his attention to detail when citing your sources. Attacking a poster who is quite careful to tell you where he gets his information from with a few broad-brush claims - which, as butchersapron points out, have already been dealt with on the thread anyway - isn't going to get you very far, except perhaps onto a few people's ignore lists.


----------



## elbows (Dec 27, 2013)

Some Kincora stuff in freshly released papers from NI.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-25436738



> Following these convictions, a meeting was held on 9 February 1982 between NIO Parliamentary Under-Secretary John Patten and RUC Deputy Chief Constable Michael McAtamney to discuss the forthcoming Committee of Inquiry.
> 
> The minister asked Mr McAtamney informally "whether any major revelations of a criminal nature might still emerge" that might warrant a judicial inquiry.
> 
> The senior RUC officer said he did not think so, although he feared that if McGrath was called to give evidence, "he might, for malicious or other reasons, make fresh allegations".



Lots of other bits and bobs in the article, I can't be quoting it all. 

One aspect the BBC story doesn't go into any detail about is picked up by the Belfast Telegraph:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...incora-suspect-preacher-to-walk-29868826.html



> According to the memo, Mr Havers learned that the RUC was investigating three separate aspects of the Kincora affair.
> 
> "The first concerned a man... who in 1972 was falsely acquitted on the basis of perjured evidence; the file on his case has subsequently been destroyed by a bomb," the memo reports.
> 
> ...



Sounds like plenty of stuff was redacted. The press coverage of this release also suggests the politicians etc were well aware at the time of 'rumours and gossip' but didn't seem to think it would go away and they didn't seem too keen on trying that hard to make it go away via honesty and transparency.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

Exaro is reporting that the Sidney Cooke branch of the investigation has turned into a murder investigation. This is not surprising given other crimes he is associated with.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5174/met-s-vip-paedophiles-probe-turns-into-murder-investigation


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

Found another mainstream press thing from December that I'd missed. It's a strand we've heard much about before, and where expectations of an arrest have been raised several times without a result yet.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...abinet-minister-over-child-sex-abuse.23015992



> A former Cabinet minister in Margaret Thatcher's government is being investigated in connection with historic child sex offences and is facing arrest in the near future, the Sunday Herald has learned.
> 
> The former Tory politician is being investigated by detectives leading Operation Fernbridge, which is investigating claims that political figures and others sexually abused boys at various locations in England.
> 
> ...





> Last night, a source close to Operation Fernbridge said: "Police and MI5 knew about the allegations involving [the former Tory Cabinet minister] years ago. He's already been spoken to by police. I'd expect an arrest in the near future.
> 
> "If the arrest happens - and I trust it will - it means that there has been a massive cover-up for decades at the heart of British politics. An arrest would blow this apart. We're at a watershed moment. The public must know."
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

And a most disturbing update at the bottom of the Exaro story from December about footage showing a cabinet minister attending a related sex party.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...unit-seizes-video-of-ex-minister-at-sex-party



> January 11th 2014:
> 
> The Security Service, MI5, and Scotland Yard's Special Branch are understood to be taking a close interest in the investigations by the Met's paedophile unit.
> 
> ...





> Exaro has established that one section of the Met has been tapping the witness's telephone.
> 
> It is also understood that a Special Branch officer has been posing as a journalist in an attempt to contact several witnesses in Operations Fernbridge and Fairbank. One officer falsely claimed to the key witness to be a reporter from the Sunday People.
> 
> The developments have raised alarm because of the intelligence services' track record to help cover up evidence of child sex abuse by senior politicians and other prominent people, such as Sir Cyris Smith, the former Liberal MP who was exposed as a paedophile following his death in 2010.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

Also see this December 14th Exaro article about the police investigating why the police previously twice closed down the guest house investigation. Includes the police successfully requesting Exaro delay reporting on this aspect, the suggestion that the IPCC's role is being investigated, and the idea that police have already concluded that the 1982 investigation was not closed down for proper reasons.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4765/police-twice-failed-to-probe-paedophile-ring-at-guest-house


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> And a most disturbing update at the bottom of the Exaro story from December about footage showing a cabinet minister attending a related sex party.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...unit-seizes-video-of-ex-minister-at-sex-party


 Hmmmm.....seems that this "_source close to the investigation_" has been busy briefing journos...


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

Exaro have been well briefed for a long time.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> Exaro have been well briefed for a long time.



Yep, I'm just hoping it's all been in good faith.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

Given that Exaro are one of the only sources that give us information which will be of great use in the event of further cover-ups and failure to prosecute, I have no particular reason to doubt the quality of their info and the motives of their sources.

Sounds like the most recent stuff will get some more attention tomorrow:



> @ExaroNews26m
> It seems that at least two Sunday newspapers will tmrw follow up on our reports (one murder, one on spooks) re #*Fernbridge* and #Fairbank.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> Given that Exaro are one of the only sources that give us information which will be of great use in the event of further cover-ups and failure to prosecute, I have no particular reason to doubt the quality of their info and the motives of their sources.
> 
> Sounds like the most recent stuff will get some more attention tomorrow:



I _really _hope that you're right.

Just taking so long for this to come to fruition that I'm suspicious that the sppoks are still on top of this.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

I have less faith in the investigation proceeding properly than I did. I'm just confused as to why you think the Exaro reporting may be part of the problem rather than the opposite. They are the ones who are telling us about CPS decisions being changed, spook involvement, etc. Without them, and directly related Sunday People/Mirror articles, we'd have no clue as to what was going on with the investigation at all.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> I have less faith in the investigation proceeding properly than I did. I'm just confused as to why you think the Exaro reporting may be part of the problem rather than the opposite. They are the ones who are telling us about CPS decisions being changed, spook involvement, etc. Without them, and directly related Sunday People/Mirror articles, we'd have no clue as to what was going on with the investigation at all.



I've no problem at all with exaro; they're certainly the good guys. I just got a nasty feeling when I saw that same phrase ("_a sourse close to the investigation"), _in both the Herald and exaro pieces. It was the good faith of the source I was worrying about, not the journos.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

The impression they've given in the past is that investigation sources have briefed them in an attempt to make stuff public that makes it harder for investigations to quietly be closed down or sidetracked. Given the stuff that such sources come out with, I have trouble working out how it could play into the hands of those who would rather this stuff went away quietly.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> The impression they've given in the past is that investigation sources have briefed them in an attempt to make stuff public that makes it harder for investigations to quietly be closed down or sidetracked. Given the stuff that such sources come out with, I have trouble working out how it could play into the hands of those who would rather this stuff went away quietly.



Again, I really hope you're right; maybe i was just 'having a moment'?

It's just been such a 'jam tomorrow' story....and all the time it remains unresolved I'm suspicious......nothing solid; you know just a nasty feeling. Nothing more.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2014)

May be a good time to link to The Boy Business as a number of people who seem well informed are making a public show of mentioning it this weekend.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> May be a good time to link to The Boy Business as* a number of people who seem well informed* are making a public show of mentioning it this weekend.



Who dat BA?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> May be a good time to link to The Boy Business as a number of people who seem well informed are making a public show of mentioning it this weekend.


Here's some production & transmission details:

http://ftvdb.bfi.org.uk/sift/title/570467


----------



## existentialist (Jan 11, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Again, I really hope you're right; maybe i was just 'having a moment'?
> 
> It's just been such a 'jam tomorrow' story....and all the time it remains unresolved I'm suspicious......nothing solid; you know just a nasty feeling. Nothing more.


I do agree. But I think that, as with Savile (and the rash of other high-profile celebs who've found their activities under the microscope since Savile), the wind is now blowing in the right direction. Whether they were actively complicit or not in the past, the police, and "authorities" are increasingly realising that there is no public appetite any more for "nothing to see here, move along now". In many ways, I think that's been the most significant outcome of the Savile business: for decades, most of us have been quite happy to be reassured that something we thought was too awful to contemplate wasn't really happening, and those doing the reassuring have been able with our tacit approval to carry on maintaining that situation, including failing to investigate allegations and in some cases actively discouraging people from making allegations.

That's no longer the case, and I think a lot more people (though by no means all) are sceptical about such reassurances. The police acted with uncharacteristic speed in turning things around and actually being prepared to listen to allegations (as I know from personal experience), and that, along with the publicity surrounding the high-profile abusers like Savile and Hall, has resulted in many more people coming forward. I think there is a general recognition now that the problem of child sexual abuse was far, far worse than anyone thought. There's work to be done: I think there is still a perception that it's a problem of the past, rather than a current ongoing one, and I suspect that there is still a belief in certain quarters that Very Senior People can still be protected by the same stonewalling and cover-ups that kept the likes of Savile safe for so long. 

But I think that belief is a mistaken one, and I think that it can only be a matter of time before these claims are out in the open, and the lid truly off the can of worms. And I imagine that anyone, even at the highest echelons of society, who is in the child sexual abuse game right now is going to be feeling extremely uncomfortable and very worried.

Good.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Who dat BA?


Ian Puddick mostly.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2014)

Here Nick Davies on the Amsterdam connection - from 2000.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Here Nick Davies on the Amsterdam connection - from 2000.


His preceding article is also of interest (especially to those of us in Bristol):

http://www.nickdavies.net/2000/10/0...ly-caught-up-with-a-network-of-child-abusers/


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

existentialist said:


> I do agree. But I think that, as with Savile (and the rash of other high-profile celebs who've found their activities under the microscope since Savile), the wind is now blowing in the right direction. Whether they were actively complicit or not in the past, the police, and "authorities" are increasingly realising that there is no public appetite any more for "nothing to see here, move along now". In many ways, I think that's been the most significant outcome of the Savile business: for decades, most of us have been quite happy to be reassured that something we thought was too awful to contemplate wasn't really happening, and those doing the reassuring have been able with our tacit approval to carry on maintaining that situation, including failing to investigate allegations and in some cases actively discouraging people from making allegations.
> 
> That's no longer the case, and I think a lot more people (though by no means all) are sceptical about such reassurances. The police acted with uncharacteristic speed in turning things around and actually being prepared to listen to allegations (as I know from personal experience), and that, along with the publicity surrounding the high-profile abusers like Savile and Hall, has resulted in many more people coming forward. I think there is a general recognition now that the problem of child sexual abuse was far, far worse than anyone thought. There's work to be done: I think there is still a perception that it's a problem of the past, rather than a current ongoing one, and I suspect that there is still a belief in certain quarters that Very Senior People can still be protected by the same stonewalling and cover-ups that kept the likes of Savile safe for so long.
> 
> ...



Thanks for that considered and insightful post.

I hope you're right too.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> May be a good time to link to The Boy Business as a number of people who seem well informed are making a public show of mentioning it this weekend.



And here an earlier Nick Davies piece from 1997 which covers in detail that program. For those that don't/can't watch the program, I think reading this is just as informative (I just did both).

http://www.nickdavies.net/1997/03/01/a-paedophile-ring-in-amsterdam/

By the way I think Warwick Spinks is back in prison at the moment, though will probably be let out later this year. He broke his original terms of early release by leaving the country many years ago, and was finally caught again at Heathrow airport in November 2012.

I haven't seen any links between any of the people mentioned in these stories and any of the VIP investigations, since the Exaro death angles revolve around Sidney Cooke. Really unclear where these aspects are going.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 11, 2014)

Nothing to see


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

The Sunday Express appear to have a front page headline 'Female MP abused boy in care'.

I don't have any other details yet, other than that she is described as a 'former MP'.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> The Sunday Express appear to have a front page headline 'Female MP abused boy in care'.
> 
> I don't have any other details yet, other than that she is described as a 'former MP'.



Odd?

Certainly not to do with the former minister stuff, then?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)




----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2014)

I can't say its odd without being able to read their full story. Exaro didn't claim that sunday followups of their stories would be front-page either.

On another theme that I've talked about before, the Sunday Times has a story on its front page about '20 private schools face ruinous child sex abuse claims'. It appears to relate to compensation claims for abuse already documented and/or dealt with by the legal system, rather than new stuff.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> I can't say its odd without being able to read their full story. Exaro didn't claim that sunday followups of their stories would be front-page either.
> 
> On another theme that I've talked about before, the Sunday Times has a story on its front page about '20 private schools face ruinous child sex abuse claims'. It appears to relate to compensation claims for abuse already documented and/or dealt with by the legal system, rather than new stuff.



It's difficult to read, but it appears to say "...was involved in a paedophile network at the heart of government..."

I wonder if this is anything to do with Watson's claims and the Peter Morrison stuff?

e2a : the BBC site says this under the frontpage...



> The Sunday Express carries a claim by a man who says he was abused while in care by _*two unnamed MPs*_ in the 1980s.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

Its possible the Express has interviewed the same victim that some of the Exaro stories relates to, but went with a different angle for its headline.


----------



## laptop (Jan 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> e2a : the BBC site says this under the frontpage...
> 
> 
> 
> > The Sunday Express carries a claim by a man who says he was abused while in care by _*two unnamed MPs*_ in the 1980s.



Not any more it doesn't, at that address (flagged as "Last updated at 23:56")


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

laptop said:


> Not any more it doesn't, at that address (flagged as "Last updated at 23:56")



It does, but its a caption under the relevant graphic of the front page, which you have to navigate the slideshow to get to.


----------



## laptop (Jan 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> It does, but its a caption under the relevant graphic of the front page, which you have to navigate the slideshow to get to.



Gotcha. (I didn't read it, I searched it  )


----------



## kraepelin (Jan 12, 2014)

Given how much of this evidence spread far and wide. Do people think that there will be justice on this issue


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 12, 2014)

_Sunday People_ via Exaro:


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

The Express story is on their website. It does indeed appear to overlap heavily with some Exaro pieces, although in this story the victim is named and gives details.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/453381/Female-MP-abused-boy-in-care


----------



## teqniq (Jan 12, 2014)

This is dodgy as fuck, it looks as if MI5 and SB maybe interested in damage limitation or maybe even protecting people who are possibly guilty.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

teqniq said:


> This is dodgy as fuck, it looks as if MI5 and SB maybe interested in damage limitation or maybe even protecting people who are possibly guilty.



Maybe?


----------



## teqniq (Jan 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Maybe?


I am trying to be circumspect and give them the benefit of the doubt but upon reflection, fuck knows why.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 12, 2014)

teqniq said:


> This is dodgy as fuck, it looks as if MI5 and SB maybe interested in damage limitation or maybe even protecting people who are possibly guilty.



I always got the impression re: Kincora at least, that spook complicity in organized child-rape was all about leverage and blackmail rather than simply protecting politicians and other "players" being an end in itself.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I always got the impression re: Kincora at least, that spook complicity in organized child-rape was all about leverage and blackmail rather than simply protecting politicians and other "players" being an end in itself.



Hmmm....I think there's fairly well established grounds for believing that the spooks deliberately 'lost' significant evidence in the case of Morrison, and that protection bordered some very significant 'players'.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

Where have you heard that about the Morrison stuff? There has been a depressing lack of anything regarding him beyond the comments by Currie and the brief media interest that followed.

Cyril Smith is the main example cited of spooks/special branch causing evidence and files to go astray.

Beyond that we just have a few strands of the Elm Guest house initial investigations and raids that may have been influenced by spook activity. And there were some moments where the 'anti-paedophile' crusading by MP Geoffrey Dickens may have been messed with via dirty tricks, e.g. a press conference he planned to talk about this stuff suddenly turned into one about his own personal life (marriage/affairs) after the press magically obtained lurid details at just the right time.

That and Kincora stuff.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> Where have you heard that about the Morrison stuff? There has been a depressing lack of anything regarding him beyond the comments by Currie and the brief media interest that followed.



I was thinking of this...



> Fleet Street routinely nurtures a crop of untold stories about powerful abusers who have evaded justice. One such is Peter Morrison, formerly the MP for Chester and the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. Ten years ago, Chris House, the veteran crime reporter for the Sunday Mirror, twice received tip-offs from police officers who said that Morrison had been caught cottaging in public toilets with underaged boys and had been released with a caution. A less powerful man, the officers complained, would have been charged with gross indecency or an offence against children.
> 
> At the time, Chris House confronted Morrison, who used libel laws to block publication of the story. Now, Morrison is dead and cannot sue. Police last week confirmed that he had been picked up twice and never brought to trial. They added that there appeared to be no trace of either incident in any of the official records.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

Ah yes, and I don't doubt that Morrison was given special treatment. It's just unclear as to what level this was done at, i.e. whether special branch and spooks even needed to do much in his case, as opposed to other parts of the system shielding him by default.

For example the paragraph above the one you quoted:



> For example, police now invest relatively little time in the surveillance of public toilets where gay men go cottaging. The one thing that is likely still to trigger such an operation is a complaint that under-aged boys are involved – unless, that is, the toilets in question happen to be those behind the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand, in which case, under the terms of a long-standing Metropolitan Police policy, the operation will take place only if it has the approval of an officer of the rank of commander or above. According to experienced London officers, the reason is that those toilets are used by High Court judges and barristers, and the Metropolitan Police have always said they do not want to encounter such a powerful offender without special authority.



By the way that same article has a follow-up to one aspect covered by 'The Boys Business' tv program. That the child abused in a particular video featured in the program was tracked down.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

Plus it says something that Nick Davies was able to write that about Morrison in 1998 without, as best I can tell, any resulting wider press etc attention towards Morrison at the time.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> Plus it says something that Nick Davies was able to write that about Morrison in 1998 without, as best I can tell, any resulting wider press etc attention towards Morrison at the time.



The fact that nothing has come of the Rod Richards (warning : Mail link) statement and this C4 report (http://bcove.me/i2qbaijf), suggests that there might well have been a large amount of effort put into covering up the Morrison cover up(s).

e2a : I wonder what became of the tory party promise to investigate the reports about Morrison?


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> The fact that nothing has come of the Rod Richards statement and this C4 report (http://bcove.me/i2qbaijf), suggests that there might well have been a large amount of effort put into covering up the Morrison cover up(s).



There is no way I could say that until the fresh north-wales investigations are complete and info made public. Depending on various details, very little effort may have been required this time.

Certainly I would not expect anything else to have come from the Rod Richards statement or the channel 4 report yet, especially as Morrison is long dead so there isn't going to be an arrest. We'll just have to wait for official reports.

In the meantime any attempts to find out what is going on or whether there were any VIP abusers in North Wales is not likely to be possible by just using public/victims internet utterances. And not just because of all the complications stemming from what Steve Messham said, but the various wars that have broken out between victims & others who went through the north wales care home system back in the day. There has been plenty of cases of these people attacking each other online and all manner of accusations flying. And one of those who said a lot online, and may or may not have been the anonymous victim interviewed by channel 4, may himself have been arrested in November. I would like to go into more detail, but it is not easy for numerous reasons and the quality of info is not great. But certainly one possibility is that he was questioned by police for campaigns of internet verbal abuse against other victims, and that some of his statements contradict what he said to channel 4 (if it was even him in that piece).


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

I should probably point out that I am keeping a very open mind about the sort of shit I described in the last paragraph of my previous post. At best there have been many horrible incidents in the last year+ of people who were badly damaged by their time in care, turning on each other on the net for a multitude of reasons. At worst there have been people with dodgy agendas stirring this stuff up even more. Some of the phenomenon at work are the same as when conspiracy theorists turn on each other, with a deeply paranoid worldview not offering a solid foundation for rational enquiry and reasonable trust between people who should have shared interests and motivations.


----------



## Casually Red (Jan 12, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I always got the impression re: Kincora at least, that spook complicity in organized child-rape was all about leverage and blackmail rather than simply protecting politicians and other "players" being an end in itself.



theres probably been a bit of both going on . Most of the characters believed to have frequented kincora werent at the centre of power . However William McGrath, the paedophile who set up and  ran the place, is thought to have been  one of their agents since the mid 60s .
Its most likely , particularly with senior politicians, theyre protecting some of their own agents as well as those others they had leverage over .


----------



## existentialist (Jan 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> I should probably point out that I am keeping a very open mind about the sort of shit I described in the last paragraph of my previous post. At best there have been many horrible incidents in the last year+ of people who were badly damaged by their time in care, turning on each other on the net for a multitude of reasons. At worst there have been people with dodgy agendas stirring this stuff up even more. Some of the phenomenon at work are the same as when conspiracy theorists turn on each other, with a deeply paranoid worldview not offering a solid foundation for rational enquiry and reasonable trust between people who should have shared interests and motivations.


You'd expect some of that, perhaps, particularly from victims of violent abuse. Sexual abuse survivors often do not come over as very appealing, particularly if their abuse was violent, drug-facilitated, or took place over a long time - they may well have significant personality disorders, drug problems or other associated issues, and be extremely angry and hostile people who take any kind of scepticism about their story very badly indeed.

Like the victims in the Rochdale case, whom it was very easy for the police to see as criminals/perpetrators in their own right, these people may well not come over at all well, and the danger is that they get filed in the category marked "wrong 'un" and are taken less seriously, with the result that an investigation which is reliant on them as witnesses is hampered. It's probably stating the obvious, too, but someone who may well have ended up (or perhaps even started out) living on the street, dealing/using drugs, getting involved in petty crime, just to survive, may well have plenty of experience of the police already, not much of it very positive, and that isn't exactly going to help rapport, particularly if they may have already tried to get the police involved in their abuse and felt that they've been let down.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

existentialist said:


> You'd expect some of that, perhaps, particularly from victims of violent abuse. Sexual abuse survivors often do not come over as very appealing, particularly if their abuse was violent, drug-facilitated, or took place over a long time - they may well have significant personality disorders, drug problems or other associated issues, and be extremely angry and hostile people who take any kind of scepticism about their story very badly indeed.
> 
> Like the victims in the Rochdale case, whom it was very easy for the police to see as criminals/perpetrators in their own right, these people may well not come over at all well, and the danger is that they get filed in the category marked "wrong 'un" and are taken less seriously, with the result that an investigation which is reliant on them as witnesses is hampered. It's probably stating the obvious, too, but someone who may well have ended up (or perhaps even started out) living on the street, dealing/using drugs, getting involved in petty crime, just to survive, may well have plenty of experience of the police already, not much of it very positive, and that isn't exactly going to help rapport, particularly if they may have already tried to get the police involved in their abuse and felt that they've been let down.



All very good points, most of which have the potential to be exploited by any agency seeking to confuse, obfuscate or generally disrupt the process of genuine inquiry.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> All very good points, most of which have the potential to be exploited by any agency seeking to confuse, obfuscate or generally disrupt the process of genuine inquiry.


Or which just can't be arsed. That Nick Davies thing about 49 Churchill Road is telling on the subject of Home Office stats and policing priorities, where it is clear that paedophile activity really doesn't have the priority that one would have expected it to have.

I think that policing-by-statistics is dangerous, in that it not only encourages a "low hanging fruit" type of strategy, but also offers the perfect excuse for other agencies to have an enquiry scuppered if they want to.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

existentialist said:


> Or which just can't be arsed. That Nick Davies thing about 49 Churchill Road is telling on the subject of Home Office stats and policing priorities, where it is clear that paedophile activity really doesn't have the priority that one would have expected it to have.
> 
> I think that policing-by-statistics is dangerous, in that it not only encourages a "low hanging fruit" type of strategy, but also offers the perfect excuse for other agencies to have an enquiry scuppered if they want to.



Yes, I'd imagine that has been much the most common response, but in certain cases, like Morrison's, it does appear that more proactive attempts at concealment have, thus far, been effective.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

I still don't think any new claim of attempts at concealment regarding Morrison can be made just now. At the time he was alive, yes. But this time around we have no way of knowing, not yet anyhow. It's not like the north wales investigations have concluded yet, we don't have any fresh whitewashes to point at.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> I still don't think any new claim of attempts at concealment regarding Morrison can be made just now. At the time he was alive, yes. But this time around we have no way of knowing, not yet anyhow. It's not like the north wales investigations have concluded yet, we don't have any fresh whitewashes to point at.



I'm not really in a position to argue with that, nor do I particularly want to....but....I'm not really attempting to make any new claims about the concealment of Morrison's activities. It's just the fact that, thus far, nothing has been officially conceded or exposed despite the claims from two former ministerial colleagues, journalists like Davies and, of course the victims themselves. Add that to what Davies claimed as cover-up in 1998, and the overall picture looks like one of successful concealment. Such concealment was also ensured by the no-names policy of the Waterhouse inquiry.

I have tried to find any evidence of thr report/inquiry that the tories promised back when C4 aired their report, but I very much doubt that any such exercise was conducted; there is rather too much at stake for the tories on this one. If the truth about Morrison does ever reach the MSM, such reports will quickly be followed by the usual 'who knew what?' and 'what did they do about it?' stuff , and the reputation of their dead queen might be at risk. 

As such, I very much doubt that Morrison's victims will get justice.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> and, of course the victims themselves.



To the best of my knowledge we have not actually heard publicly from any victims of Morrison. The person interviewed by channel 4 did not claim to have been a victim themselves. And the victim who they also interviewed, who did not seek anonymity, was abused by staff rather than outsiders.



> I have tried to find any evidence of thr report/inquiry that the tories promised back when C4 aired their report, but I very much doubt that any such exercise was conducted; there is rather too much at stake for the tories on this one. If the truth about Morrison does ever reach the MSM, such reports will quickly be followed by the usual 'who knew what?' and 'what did they do about it?' stuff , and the reputation of their dead queen might be at risk.
> 
> As such, I very much doubt that Morrison's victims will get justice.



They can't promise such things and simply not deliver at all. There are at least two investigations that centre around the north wales care home stuff.

There is operation Pallial, which has, as of the last time I checked in December, resulted in 18 arrests so far. It came out with an initial public report much earlier in 2013, but I expect the sort of detail people clamour for is not going to be forthcoming until any criminal proceedings have been dealt with. 

And there is an investigation into the original terms of the Waterhouse inquiry. This inquiry is being headed by Julia Macur.

It is certainly true that the conservative party said they were also looking into matters surrounding this stuff, and I don't know what has happened to that. At a minimum I doubt it will result in anything public until these other investigations/inquiries have done their work.


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

By the way the Macur Review will report to the government and it will be up to them whether to make the findings public.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> It is certainly true that the conservative party said they were also looking into matters surrounding this stuff, and I don't know what has happened to that. At a minimum I doubt it will result in anything public until these other investigations/inquiries have done their work.
> 
> _*They can't promise such things and simply not deliver at all. *_




Hmmm...I wouldn't be so sure.

At the height of the news stories surrounding the Bryn Estyn abuse, Cameron did confirm that a tory party investigation into the specific claims made about Morrison would take place. ITV reported it thus...



> _The Conservative Party says it will carry out *a full investigation* into the claims._



With hindsight, that looks exactly like the classic 'kick into the long grass' tactic of attempting to close down a damaging story. Now I've no doubt that Dave probably tasked a few trusty advisors to scope the extent of the damage and how the effects might be mitigated, but I'd be very surprised if any formal, internal inquiry took place, certainly not one with findings that might one day be made public. I'd say that cameron pretty skillfully killed the Morrison angle for a while.

I suppose what I'm saying is that I think they did promise in the full knowledge that they'd simply not deliver. I accept that there are dangers with that strategy for the party, especially _*if*_ any of the Morrison details do become public, but it looks as though the spooks are doing their level best to make sure that doesn't happen. If the story did blow open properly, then the journos might remember Dave's Nov 2012 promise of an investigation, but I'm not hopeful.

As it stands, I think you're right, if pressed for any info on this 'investigation', they'd blah on about not wishing to compromise on-going inquiries, national security bollox or somesuch.

I suppose really an email to C4 News might be a good idea?


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2014)

All inquiries & police investigations inevitably lead to angles being killed for a while.

I certainly don't place any faith in internal party inquiries, just look at how the liberals/lib-dems handled accusations about Cyril Smith over the years, truly pathetic.

I would suggest an email to the conservative party might be a better starting point, to ascertain what their official line is regarding their own inquiry. It would not surprise me if their present line is along the lines of deferring to the police & other investigations for now.

I'm still clueless as to the basis for your claim that the spooks are doing their level best to make sure Morrison details do not become public. The recent revelations about spook interest in Elm Guest House investigations are disturbing, but even there we do not know quite how they plan to deal with any revelations or potential criminal proceedings that may arise. At a minimum we can assume that they want to be fully informed about how its going, but its too early to say they are scuppering things.

Certainly we could make some assumptions about possible motive. e.g. that even if they no longer care about protecting/blackmailing/whatever the individuals involved, or the historical reputation of the parties & governments involved, that some dodgy justification along the lines of protecting the state image, and public faith in mainstream parties, institutions and law enforcement bodies could be conjured up. That and their own historical role in prior cover-ups.

Frankly though I'm not sure the outcomes would be so very different even if they don't bother to do anything this time around. The length of time that has passed since the abuse occurred, the nature of any evidence, and the likely scale of the abuse by powerful people make it hard to anticipate an almighty shitstorm and true justice being the most likely outcomes. By this I mean that there is nothing in the public domain which would lead us to believe that abuse on the scale that Savile is accused of is likely to be exposed in relation to any MPs. Nor have there been any reports that lead us to believe that a sufficient number of victims of any particular political VIP have been found that would enable a relatively easy prosecution to be made as was the case with Stuart Hall. (i.e. strongly demonstrating a pattern of abusive behaviour).

I have suggested previously that it would actually be in the interests of the current status quo, institutions and todays politicians for at least one living political figure of the past to be brought to justice over these abuses. Mostly in order that the present suspicions of fresh coverup, and associated loss of faith in the system and those who man it be somewhat reduced. This is not a safe assumption on my part though, especially if such a prosecution opened a large can of worms.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2014)

elbows said:


> All inquiries & police investigations inevitably lead to angles being killed for a while.
> 
> I certainly don't place any faith in internal party inquiries, just look at how the liberals/lib-dems handled accusations about Cyril Smith over the years, truly pathetic.
> 
> ...



I don't think any of us can actually make any 'claims' that the spooks are doing their best to keep the Morrison case under wraps; we obviously don't have any evidence to prove it. I'm merely supposing that this is the case based upon things like the 1998 Davies article, the revelation by 'The S. People' that cops are posing as reporters and the fact that the political class, and their parties have much to lose. It's not hard to imagine what the public reaction would be if/when it emerges that senior politicians were abusing children and that this was known to others within the system, possibly at the very highest levels.

I really don't think it is too conspiraloon to speculate that many ex, and serving ministers must have at least known of Morrison's paedoplhilic activity; Rod Richards himself said as much of William Hague. Nor do I think it is going OTT to suppose that Morrison's seniors were made aware of the efforts to keep his activites under wraps; I very much doubt that the spooks would have done so with no reference to their political masters. I strongly suspect that preserving Thatcher's reputation is paramount in tory party thinking on this matter.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 14, 2014)

Female MP 'abused care home boy aged 13 as part of paedophile network at heart of government' 
 Jan 12, 2014 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/female-mp-abused-care-home-3015744



> He said he is speaking out now because he is frustrated by the lack of action after being interviewed for 70 hours by the Met Police’s Paedophile Unit.
> 
> He says he was abused by the male MP on another occasion too, saying: “I remember being filmed with this MP, who was abusing me in a garage of a very prominent building behind a Rolls-Royce.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 18, 2014)

McAlpine joins the deathpool for 2014. Would have saved Sally Bercow a few bob if he'd gone earlier.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 18, 2014)

Wilf said:


> McAlpine joins the deathpool for 2014. Would have saved Sally Bercow a few bob if he'd gone earlier.



I wonder who will get his collection of Ovenden paedo pics.


----------



## gosub (Jan 18, 2014)

Wilf said:


> McAlpine joins the deathpool for 2014. Would have saved Sally Bercow a few bob if he'd gone earlier.



Think being wrongly publicly outed as a paedophile can't have done much for his health.  Its quite a largeextended  family though, with a lot of connections round Wrexham


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I wonder who will get his collection of Ovenden paedo pics.


He sold them.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 18, 2014)

Wilf said:


> McAlpine joins the deathpool for 2014. Would have saved Sally Bercow a few bob if he'd gone earlier.



Little cherubs watch out!


----------



## Dandred (Jan 18, 2014)

Ding dong the nonce is dead.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 24, 2014)

ska invita said:


> Female MP 'abused care home boy aged 13 as part of paedophile network at heart of government'
> Jan 12, 2014 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/female-mp-abused-care-home-3015744


Some exaro stuff today:

1)  Key witness in Op #Fernbridge tells us, that contrary to reports, he did not tell police that he was sexually abused by a female MP.

2) @MarkWatts_1
 2/2 Since that update [not the one above], more witnesses in Operation #Fernbridge have reported suspicious interference to us


----------



## benedict (Feb 3, 2014)

Some Yewtree news. The alleged name of this "beloved pop star" is doing the rounds of course. If true, I had expected him to turn up via Op. Fernbridge.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 3, 2014)

benedict said:


> Some Yewtree news. The alleged name of this "beloved pop star" is doing the rounds of course. If true, I had expected him to turn up via Op. Fernbridge.


I thought "I'll just google this, but I bet it's going to be **** **** being put in the frame", and lo and behold.
Not sure I believe it though, 'cos he's had plenty of digging into his background by the media in the last 50 years or so.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I thought "I'll just google this, but I bet it's going to be **** **** being put in the frame", and lo and behold.
> Not sure I believe it though, 'cos he's had plenty of digging into his background by the media in the last 50 years or so.



Is the person you're thinking of someone who's remained a batchelor?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 3, 2014)

SpineyNorman said:


> Is the person you're thinking of someone who's remained a batchelor?



Yes.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 3, 2014)

Most of the people who have been arrested under Yewtree (with a few exceptions), not to mention Savile himself, have tended to be people one might have thought "uh-huh, that figures" about. I suspect that "beloved" might be careful language to describe someone that a lot of people would be quite horrified to find out was involved.

Which is sad. Not that I think that illusions should be preserved at the cost of justice, but it is quite disheartening to see just how much of the youth culture of so many of us of a Certain Age has been tainted by what is beginning to look like an endemic, if not systematic, catalogue of sexual misconduct amongst those behind that culture.

Not to mention the - now obvious - fact that so many people can have been abused, not just by celebrities, but weren't able to disclose it at the time. The society many of us grew up in was clearly very broken indeed.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes.



Hope it's not true then - and not just for the obvious reasons. My old dear would be absolutely devastated!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 3, 2014)

SpineyNorman said:


> Hope it's not true then - and not just for the obvious reasons. My old dear would be absolutely devastated!



As would my m-i-l, who thinks that the sun shines out of his arse (to give you some clue to her taste, she's also a Daniel O'Donnell fan  ).


----------



## laptop (Feb 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I thought "I'll just google this, but I bet it's going to be **** **** being put in the frame", and lo and behold.
> Not sure I believe it though, 'cos he's had plenty of digging into his background by the media in the last 50 years or so.



A depressingly predictable prediction, indeed. And rick pickings for xxxxx's lawyers out there...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 3, 2014)

laptop said:


> A depressingly predictable prediction, indeed. And rick pickings for xxxxx's lawyers out there...


If it is him, then his lawyers have done a damn good job over the years, because aside from him cuckolding a member of his backing band, he doesn't seem to have put a foot wrong in public.


----------



## quiquaquo (Feb 3, 2014)

?


----------



## andysays (Feb 3, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> ?



You might want to consider the wisdom of making that post, before someone else does it for you...


----------



## quiquaquo (Feb 3, 2014)

andysays said:


> You might want to consider the wisdom of making that post, before someone else does it for you...



Fair enough, I blame the cat.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 3, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Fair enough, I blame the cat.


It was a bloody stupid thing to do.

I can see you're new, so do make it your business to look at the stickies about this kind of thing, and acquainting yourself with the FAQ wouldn't be a bad move, either.

Pulling that kind of stunt can get boards like this into extremely serious hot water - and anyway, don't you think that dozens of us wouldn't have thought of playing the same kind of clue games, but thought better of it?

There is a sticky about naming suspects in these cases, but I can't find it, so I am reporting my own post so that any mods tripping gaily by can oblige by sticking the link in here somewhere...

Edit: http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/ is the thread - stuck in the "UK Current Affairs..". Not sure what else we can do to make it more obvious - Lazy Llama (tripping gaily by)


----------



## Wilf (Feb 3, 2014)

Chuckle Brothers give evidence in the DLT trial: 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/chuckle-brothers-live-updates-comic-3107369


----------



## andysays (Feb 3, 2014)

existentialist said:


> It was a bloody stupid thing to do.
> 
> I can see you're new, so do make it your business to look at the stickies about this kind of thing, and acquainting yourself with the FAQ wouldn't be a bad move, either.
> 
> ...



TBF, a few others have dropped hints, but not quite as blatant as the last one.

Even I was able to work out he was referring to 



Spoiler



no, I'm not going to name anyone


----------



## existentialist (Feb 3, 2014)

andysays said:


> TBF, a few others have dropped hints, but not quite as blatant as the last one.
> 
> Even I was able to work out he was referring to
> 
> ...


Yeah, I know. I just facepalmed slightly at the earlier ones, but that one was pretty damn blatant! Anyway, it's gone now (in fact, it went while I was fulminating, but I CBA to go and edit my post back to a dot, and I'm sure it won't be the last one...)


----------



## existentialist (Feb 3, 2014)

Link to the sticky, for the benefit of the hard-of-understanding (which, incidentally, includes me - I have no idea why I couldn't find it the first time I looked )

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/important-a-note-about-the-nonce-threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/


----------



## laptop (Feb 3, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Chuckle Brothers give evidence in the DLT trial:
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/chuckle-brothers-live-updates-comic-3107369




It's postmodernism gorn mad!!!111!


----------



## elbows (Feb 3, 2014)

Latest Elm Guest house stuff from Exaro:

Details of a 'staging post' some victims were taken too before the guest house.

Some details from a former worker at the Richmond care home.

At least 4 children abused at Elm Guest house.

A source close to the police investigation says that none of the victims that have come forward have been able to identify any of the perpetrators. Other victims won't co-operate as they don't trust the police.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...igate-use-of-staging-post-for-elm-guest-house

So as things stand I now have low expectations of any VIPs being charged in direct connection with the Elm Guest house stuff. I suppose that could change, but it seems more likely that if any VIP charges are eventually brought, it will be the result of branches off of that investigation rather than direct events at Elm Guest house itself.


----------



## benedict (Feb 3, 2014)

.


----------



## benedict (Feb 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> If it is him, then his lawyers have done a damn good job over the years, because aside from him cuckolding a member of his backing band, he doesn't seem to have put a foot wrong in public.



There is that visitor list from Elm Guest House though... I'm not sure of its provenance (maybe from someone from a defunct national child protection organization?) or when it dates from. I'm sure *elbows *knows the details.


----------



## elbows (Feb 3, 2014)

Yes that list was written long ago by NAYPIC people. From what I can gather I would describe NAYPIC as somewhat unconventional, which is both good in that they could go where highly 'professional' orgs wouldn't, but bad in terms of their organisation, the fact they went defunct, etc.

Chris Faye from NAYPIC has, I believe, cautioned against taking the list too literally or reading too much into it on its own. Its really a starting point for investigation, and because that guest house was also a 'standard' gay brothel, it is certainly not at all safe to assume that all visitors mentioned were guilty of abusing underage people.

The list itself was created many, many years ago, using some source material from the guest house, and some accounts from involved parties and the attempts at investigation that NAYPIC people did at the time. It sat for several decades, along with a volume of other material collected in the same way, at the property of Mary Moss who is the other name associated with NAYPIC. She has some issues, which I won't dwell on now, but the bottom line is she didn't trust the police, and rather than hand the evidence over to them she (or people associated with her) took photos of the material and put it on the internet at some point (forget right now) over the last 12-18 months. The police then came and took the evidence away to use themselves, despite her unwillingness to co-operate fully.


----------



## free spirit (Feb 4, 2014)

elbows said:


> *She has some issues, which I won't dwell on now, but the bottom line is she didn't trust the police,* and rather than hand the evidence over to them she (or people associated with her) took photos of the material and put it on the internet at some point (forget right now) over the last 12-18 months. The police then came and took the evidence away to use themselves, despite her unwillingness to co-operate fully.


rightly so mind given the intimidation they (allegedly) suffered at the hands of special branch at the time of compiling that list and investigating further from it.


----------



## benedict (Feb 4, 2014)

free spirit said:


> rightly so mind given the intimidation they (allegedly) suffered at the hands of special branch at the time of compiling that list and investigating further from it.



Can you give some more detail or a link for that freespirit?


----------



## elbows (Feb 4, 2014)

benedict said:


> Can you give some more detail or a link for that freespirit?



Chris Faye's special branch allegations: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/43...-paedophiles-says-ex-child-protection-officer

The police raid to get the evidence off Mary Moss: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-seize-vip-list-in-dawn-1546351


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 24, 2014)

Corke continues his excellent work at the Daily Star of all places:

Liberal party leader David Steel put sex beast MP Cyril Smith forward for a knighthood



> A document obtained by this newspaper reveals it was longtime Liberal party leader David Steel who put Smith forward for a knighthood in 1988.
> 
> Nine years earlier, the now Lord Steel had been made aware of allegations that Smith had abused several children in the 1960s.
> 
> At the time, his office dismissed the claims, which were published in a magazine, saying: "All he seems to have done is spanked a few bare bottoms."


----------



## laptop (Feb 24, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Corke continues his excellent work at the Daily Star of all places:
> 
> Liberal party leader David Steel put sex beast MP Cyril Smith forward for a knighthood



And they had to appeal to the Information Commissioner to get confirmation...


----------



## stowpirate (Feb 25, 2014)

DM Comic possibly suggests a conspiracy of sorts? Reading this the question is why and how did this happen?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 1, 2014)




----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2014)

butchersapron said:


>



 hmmm.....what they running, then?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 1, 2014)

Exaro running this which appears to be suggesting the civil servant in charge of VSU and so possible PIE funding was himself worthy of investigation - just skin read for now, going through properly now.

edit: yes, that seems to be it all.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 1, 2014)

The _Sunday People_ has its own version up now.



> A total of £70,000 is said to have been given to the Paedophile Information Exchange between 1977 and 1980 under Labour and then Margaret Thatcher’s first Tory government.
> 
> That’s worth more than £400,000 in today’s money.
> 
> ...



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-information-exchange-taxpayers-cash-3197625


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 2, 2014)

Lies, lies and more lies. 


> Because in its article, the Mail writes that the police found documentation at Prime’s home which showed he was a member of PIE.
> 
> But Thatcher clearly states that no such documentation was found.
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 2, 2014)

That's an daft article from Tom. First off, quite possible thatcher wasn't told about the PIE magazines found in his garage - and we don't even know if nay were, we just have the mail 32 years later saying that they were - maybe they were but this didn't come out in the trial as he pleaded guilty. Secondly, Harman isn't accused of anything at all to with Prime beyond the Mails bizarre attempt to tie him to her.


----------



## 1%er (Mar 2, 2014)

None of this stuff is new news, is it?

This is just more hypocrisy by the press, why don't they go after the people they know are [were] involved in abusing children. The press knew about Savile while he was alive yet seem to have done little to expose him. Before people say "but they need evidence", I'd say they have gone after loads of people with little or no evidence for years when it suits their agenda, they always talk about the "public interest", well I'd say this is something that is at the top of the list when it comes to the public interest.

What interests me are the names I've heard mentioned, going back over years who have not yet drawn much attention, from politicians, DJ's, musicians and others.

(there are lots of posters here over 50 years old who I am sure must have heard this stuff with names attached since the 70's, is there a list circulating in PM's?  )


----------



## laptop (Mar 2, 2014)

1%er said:


> None of this stuff is new news, is it?



There *is* a difference between "allegations that some people know about" and "published, documented, accusations". "Gossip" and "news" in other words.



1%er said:


> This is just more hypocrisy by the press, why don't they go after the people they know are [were] involved in abusing children. The press knew about Savile while he was alive yet seem to have done little to expose him.



*Part* of that difference is: how sturdy does the documentation need to be? In other words: how vicious are the accused's lawyers? How long can the accused afford to keep them vicious?

It is easier to explain to people who dealt with a media lawyer... 

"I _know_ this is true."

"But if you run it as it is, the paper closes. Don't."​


----------



## 1%er (Mar 2, 2014)

laptop said:


> There *is* a difference between "allegations that some people know about" and "published, documented, accusations". "Gossip" and "news" in other words.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is what they do now when it suits their agendas, most of the stuff they put in their "entertainment" sections is just gossip.

There are ways and means of getting this stuff out.

I'm not saying I agree with how the papers work, I'm just pointing out that for many of their stories they have little or no evidence, but will publish if it suits their political agenda.


----------



## laptop (Mar 2, 2014)

1%er said:


> I'm not saying I agree with how the papers work, I'm just pointing out that for many of their stories they have little or no evidence, but will publish if it suits their political agenda.



*And* if the lawyers will let them.

The agenda is there, but it's quite a long way from the newsdesk. Mostly, hard news (as in news that's expensive, particularly if contestable in court) is _what the newsdesk can get away with_.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 2, 2014)

It would be extremely brave, or foolhardy, to publish articles accusing public figures, or well known entertainers, of being paedo's without extremely strong evidence.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 2, 2014)

Bloody hell! This clip ends with a real quote!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26372280


----------



## 1%er (Mar 2, 2014)

kenny g said:


> It would be extremely brave, or foolhardy, to publish articles accusing public figures, or well known entertainers, of being paedo's without extremely strong evidence.


But it seems they can insinuate support for it, looking at Google news page.

They only need to give it to the police and then report the police are looking into claims etc....... (as has been done for years in the UK press)

There are many ways including publishing it outside the UK so UK law doesn't apply.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 2, 2014)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McGrath is worth a read.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 3, 2014)

kenny g said:


> Bloody hell! This clip ends with a real quote!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26372280


 Wonder how that interview would run today?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 3, 2014)

The return of Patrick Rock

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100082741/the-return-of-patrick-rock/


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 3, 2014)




----------



## goldenecitrone (Mar 3, 2014)

Just what kind of advice was he giving the PM? This is a good one...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2014)

On 'Newsnight' Kuennsberg was alluding to pre-existing (un-related) accusations of harassment against Rock (presumably made by No.10 underlings)....sounds like a disgruntled SpAD might have just tipped off plod about his on-line activities?


----------



## laptop (Mar 3, 2014)

1%er said:


> But it seems they can insinuate support for it...



Every insinuation negotiated word-by-word with the lawyers...



1%er said:


> They only need to give it to the police and then report the police are looking into claims etc....... (as has been done for years in the UK press)



Not an effective guard against anyone with the wealth to use good lawyers. Just a deterrent to the lower class of accused kicking up - and sometimes a reminder of the Wilde Principle.



1%er said:


> There are many ways including publishing it outside the UK so UK law doesn't apply.



That has very little to do with libel. _Repeating_ a libel can be as serious as being the first to publish. Are you thinking of Official Secrets in the 1960s?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 4, 2014)

Chris Langham, life imitating life.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Chris Langham, life imitating life.


 Innit....






Spooky.

I see that it's taken the best part of 3 weeks for the press to publish the fact of Rock's arrest, and only then did No.10 feel the need to comment. Is this a reflection of press restraint or the reality of the NI - Met channels being taken down?


----------



## Dan U (Mar 4, 2014)

re that last comment brogdale 

*tom_watson* ‏@tom_watson  11m
I've spoken to @jameschappers of the Daily Mail. He says the first time the paper was made aware of the Downing Street arrest was yesterday.

taking him at face value obviously. the more cynical might be wondering if the Mail has spent the last week softening up Labour before dropping this story...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2014)

Dan U said:


> re that last comment brogdale
> 
> *tom_watson* ‏@tom_watson  11m
> I've spoken to @jameschappers of the Daily Mail. He says the first time the paper was made aware of the Downing Street arrest was yesterday.
> ...


 Hmmm....yeah, difficult to see anything near the truth here. But, on the face of it, it appears that No.10 have deliberately kept 'radio silence' on this story which tends to indicate that No.10 were more concerned with limiting further evidence of Dave's poor record of judgement of those close to him, than releasing this public interest story. 

But the 'Mail' behaviour of the last week or so does smell, don't it?


----------



## Dan U (Mar 4, 2014)

brogdale said:


> But the 'Mail' behaviour of the last week or so does smell, don't it?



It does, fwiw Guido Fawkes is following that line as well.

http://order-order.com/2014/03/04/why-are-we-only-hearing-about-rock-arrest-now/#comments


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2014)

Dan U said:


> It does, fwiw Guido Fawkes is following that line as well.
> 
> http://order-order.com/2014/03/04/why-are-we-only-hearing-about-rock-arrest-now/#comments


 Which, if correct, sees the tories brokering an exclusive deal with Dacre on condition that he prepared the ground with the Harman et al smear campaign....thus cutting out the usual channels of the filth?

Would they really be that dumb?


----------



## Dan U (Mar 4, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Which, if correct, sees the tories brokering an exclusive deal with Dacre on condition that he prepared the ground with the Harman et al smear campaign....thus cutting out the usual channels of the filth?
> 
> Would they really be that dumb?



'They' probably wouldn't be. Would an individual though?

Fairly sure Campbell used to pull shit like that with the media.


----------



## elbows (Mar 4, 2014)

I must admit that when the Mail started its PIE stories, I did wonder about the timing and whether something Tory-related was about to happen. But since I had no clue as to what it could be, I decided that I was just being cynical.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 4, 2014)

elbows said:


> I must admit that when the Mail started its PIE stories, I did wonder about the timing and whether something Tory-related was about to happen. But since I had no clue as to what it could be, I decided that I was just being cynical.



you weren't the only one.


----------



## 1%er (Mar 4, 2014)

laptop said:


> Every insinuation negotiated word-by-word with the lawyers...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


what a law abiding bunch the British press appear to be


----------



## laptop (Mar 4, 2014)

1%er said:


> what a law abiding bunch the British press appear to be



We seem to have a basic misunderstanding.

The law is a poker game.

Especially the civil law.

Most especially the civil law of defamation.

Losing your shirt is a bad plan.

Losing your boss's shirt is an especially bad plan.

Therefore, those with pockets deep enough to keep raising the stakes get handled with care. Everyone else may get libelled at any time.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 4, 2014)

laptop said:


> We seem to have a basic misunderstanding.
> 
> The law is a poker game.
> 
> ...



Setting fire to your boss's shirt while they're wearing it, on the other hand...


----------



## frogwoman (Mar 4, 2014)




----------



## exiledinwales (Mar 21, 2014)

Better but not as funny...



Shows you can have quite an impact when you confront the ruling Oxbridge clique.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 22, 2014)

WTF is all that shite about the £ Sonia is on about?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 22, 2014)

Seemed like a bunch of crank economic stuff?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 28, 2014)

Grim:



> Police investigating sexual abuse at a Durham detention centre say they believe they have uncovered an organised paedophile ring operating in the 1970s and 80s with more than 500 potential victims.
> 
> The head of a 70-strong major inquiry into historical abuse at the Medomsley detention centre, near Consett, told the Guardian the inquiry was triggered by mounting evidence about isolated individuals. However, they were now investigating a complex paedophile ring, with many more victims than previously thought.
> 
> ...Nearly 100 men who had come forward were already receiving therapy via a local sexual assault referral centre and others had sought support from the children's charity NSPCC.







> ...In 2009, the then Labour government paid out a total of £512,000 in compensation to 12 Medomsley victims. For six years, the Home Office had fought compensation claims, using the statute of limitations to avoid payment in a costly legal fight that went all the way to the House of Lords, and even suggesting that one victim was "genetically predisposed" to being abused.
> 
> Those who were compensated hoped for an apology from the government, but the then home secretary, Jack Straw, told them "the terms of the agreement did not include an apology"...





http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...uncover-paedophile-ring-500-potential-victims


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 28, 2014)

I daren't dig further for that "even suggesting that one victim was "genetically predisposed" to being abused."


----------



## andysays (Mar 28, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I daren't dig further for that "even suggesting that one victim was "genetically predisposed" to being abused."



There is a lot about this unfolding saga to which my response has been "What the Fuck?!?", but that just plumbs new depths of WTFness


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 28, 2014)

That's uber-nazi stuff. Really.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 28, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...uncover-paedophile-ring-500-potential-victims



That's going to be tomorrow's big Saturday Guardian story I'm taking it?

Grim as fuck agreed


----------



## elbows (Mar 28, 2014)

The horror of the genetically predisposed court claim was mentioned in a 2012 piece.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/13/abuse-teenage-boys-detention-centre-crime



> The Home Office fought every allegation. At one point, Steve says, a doctor was brought forward in court to claim that Kevin Young was genetically predisposed to being abused. Young received £94,000 to compensate for his suffering and lost fortune. He reckons he spent £40,000 fighting his case. Steve received compensation in 2009 – £40,000.


----------



## laptop (Mar 28, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I daren't dig further for that "even suggesting that one victim was "genetically predisposed" to being abused."



I'm left wondering what the fuck the witness actually said or believed...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> The horror of the genetically predisposed court claim was mentioned in a 2012 piece.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/13/abuse-teenage-boys-detention-centre-crime


Thanks.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 29, 2014)

i remember that 2012 article now. Vile, disgraceful stuff


----------



## elbows (Mar 29, 2014)

A former customs officer is the source for the latest story about the tory ex-cabinet minister.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...eo-of-child-sex-abuse-and-ex-cabinet-minister

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ex-tory-minister-pictured-child-sex-3300248



> A former Tory cabinet minister was pictured in a video allegedly featuring child sex abuse, it has been claimed.
> 
> The tape is believed to be among a batch of films seized by customs officials and handed over to MI5, reports the Sunday People.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 30, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Seemed like a bunch of crank economic stuff?



Here : http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity


----------



## Celt (Mar 31, 2014)

http://www.real-whitby.co.uk/savilejaconellicorrigan-paedo-ring-investigation-update

if this has already been posted apologies


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2014)

Exaro continue to do good work to keep the Cyril Smith case open...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...council-files-on-cyril-smith-s-special-school


----------



## fjydj (Apr 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Exaro continue to do good work to keep the Cyril Smith case open...
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...council-files-on-cyril-smith-s-special-school



and its in the mail too -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...yril-Smiths-industrial-scale-child-abuse.html


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2014)

Danczuk's book says that Smith was mates with Peter Righton.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2014)

According to ace investigative report Johnathon Corke there's another challenge to the cover-up of Smith and accomplices going through the courts as we speak.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Apr 12, 2014)

I find it interesting that 'some tories' are now loudly calling for a higher threshold of evidence following the acquittal of Nigel Evans, just when the Cyril Smith stuff is about to blow up. 

I don't have any evidence for it or anything. Just an interesting coincidence.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 12, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> I find it interesting that 'some tories' are now loudly calling for a higher threshold of evidence following the acquittal of Nigel Evans, just when the Cyril Smith stuff is about to blow up.
> 
> I don't have any evidence for it or anything. Just an interesting coincidence.



it struck me that at its intensity, schofield handing Cameron a List live on This Morning etc, it seemed nobody was untouchable, then the wrongly accused man (apparently) can't recall his name. Wanted to sue everyone on twitter. McAlpine. After that the inquiries higher up than light entertainment stars and carehomes seemed to fizzle out with only the ex deputy speaker (now aquitted) and the dead cyril still in the frame (so to speak). Convenient.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 12, 2014)

Personally I don't think it was helpful or appropriate to view the Nigel Evans stuff in really the same range of cases as many others discussed here. The alleged victims were adult and the incidents far more recent.

But if there is a lingering sense of cover up on some cases it's no surprise. The evidence is in - secret services were part of a conspiracy of silence in at least The Smith case and (IIRC) the other much talked about case involving a 1980s minister. The establishment has absolutely and irrefutably facilitated the rape of children. Very little of consequence has visibly happened as a result. From their point of view, why should it?


----------



## Dan U (Apr 14, 2014)

Radio 5 right now is about Cyril Smith and what the lib dems knew. Am about to get out of my car but thought I would flag it if anyone is interested


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2014)

I can't remember if this has been posted or not - a quick search doesn't show it up, but here's the private eye story _from 1979_ on the Rochdale Alternative Press story on Smith:


----------



## elbows (Apr 16, 2014)

Cheers for that. I can't remember if I read it before or not, mostly because the details that emerged in 1979 are the same ones that re-emerged recently and were usually presented as if they were previously untold.


----------



## elbows (Apr 16, 2014)

I have to say that I am most upset that almost all of the answers to the 'why did Savile not get done at the time?' questions of recent years have since been vividly demonstrated in court cases, underlining the point that most of these factors are still in strong effect despite the outrage. Charity work, famous witnesses giving glowing character references, alleged victims credibility being questioned, etc etc.


----------



## laptop (Apr 16, 2014)

And the _Eye_ today:




			
				Lord Gnome said:
			
		

> 5 Number of supposed "victims" of Nigel Evans MP who did not complain to police, two of them actively opposing his prosecution, which critics claim was pushed through because of his high-profile status
> 
> 144 Number of victims of Cyril Smith MP who did complain to police, with his prosecution blocked by Crown Prosecution Service due to his high-profile status



A bit disingenuous, Lord Gnome, since some of the 5 still hope for careers in the Conservative Party...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 16, 2014)

Good article on paedophile Cyril Smith and Rochdale in the latest Private Eye.

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=news&issue=1363


----------



## brogdale (Apr 18, 2014)

Telegraph running more Danczuk claims...



> An “influential” politician who is *still sitting in Parliament* allegedly visited a guest house at the centre of a child sex investigation, the Labour MP who exposed Cyril Smith has claimed.
> 
> Simon Danczuk last week published a book on Cyril Smith which reignited the scandal over the former Liberal MP, who used his power and influence to abuse hundreds of boys for over four decades.
> 
> ...





> Mr Danczuk said he is convinced that there was a “network of paedophiles” operating in the Commons who helped to protect Smith.
> 
> He said: “I think some of these people are still in Parliament. I don't think it's substantial, but everything would indicate that ring has existed for some time."


----------



## laptop (Apr 19, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Telegraph running more Danczuk claims...
> 
> 
> 
> > An “influential” politician who is *still sitting in Parliament*



On a careful reading that would include the House of Lords. Which doesn't rule out it being one of those already named.


----------



## miktheword (Apr 20, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Telegraph running more Danczuk claims...




Daily Mail  going with it today as well


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 28, 2014)

A Blair minister suggested and a Brixton link 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-blair-minister-former-pms-3468050


----------



## brogdale (Apr 28, 2014)

GMP confirm they are now investigating evidence of *a cover-up* of Smith's sexual abuse.



> However, the BBC understands that Greater Manchester Police are now reviewing whether there is evidence of a cover-up at Rochdale Council, which was one of the local authorities that ran the Knowl View school.



...and I seem to have missed this gem from Clegg last week...



> Sir Cyril Smith *should be stripped of his knighthood *Nick Clegg has said, as *he failed to offer a Liberal Democrat investigation* into decades of child abuse alleged to have been carried out by the former Liberal Democrat MP.





> Mr Clegg said when he heard about the allegations he ordered his party whips to *question every Liberal Democrat MP and peer who was in the party when Smith l was an active politician*. N*o Liberal Democrat politician admitted to knowing anything about the allegations sexual abuse* before 2012, Mr Clegg said.
> 
> The Liberal Democrat leader said his party had also checked through old documents relating to the Liberal party that are stored in a warehouse outside London but *found no evidence.*



Yeah, right. This will all look really good when the truth does emerge.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 28, 2014)

brogdale said:


> GMP confirm they are now investigating evidence of *a cover-up* of Smith's sexual abuse.
> 
> .


Links to Paul Flowers being made today (alleged suppression of a report).  Must admit I'm surprised Smith's brother Norman hasn't come under more scrutiny.  He was mayor of Rochdale mid 80s and a senior councillor throughout much of this period. Have a feeling he was actually Chair of the _Social Services Committee_ ffs (though my memory might be fault and a quick search doesn't help).  Just to be clear, for the legalities, I'm not suggesting he covered anything up or intervened in any way for his brother - even if I did find him deeply unpleasant. It's just you'd have thought journalists would have focused on him as a matter of course.


----------



## elbows (Apr 28, 2014)

You won't see much scrutiny of living people in the press, not until they've been investigated, arrested or charged by authorities. Norman Smith has stuck his head above the parapet by criticising the allegations against Cyril very strongly, but I really doubt anyone in the press will throw anything at him unless investigations lead in that direction.


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 28, 2014)

deleted old footage


----------



## Wilf (Apr 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> You won't see much scrutiny of living people in the press, not until they've been investigated, arrested or charged by authorities. Norman Smith has stuck his head above the parapet by criticising the allegations against Cyril very strongly, but I really doubt anyone in the press will throw anything at him unless investigations lead in that direction.


I probably didn't put it very well, I'm not expecting them to come out with speculative accusations, I just thought it was interesting he hasn't had more of a buffeting or been doorstepped too much. Anyway, we'll see where it goes (and again, I'm not suggesting or hinting there's anything there to be found).  Suppose the press are in a post-Savile era - but also a post-McAlpine era.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Apr 29, 2014)

David Steel about to be interviewed re. Smith on Radio 4's lunch time news.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## brogdale (Apr 29, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> David Steel about to be interviewed re. Smith on Radio 4's lunch time news.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


 Let me guess....."I knew nothing"?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 29, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Let me guess....."I knew nothing"?


Odd that he chose to go on given that he was the only one who was shown to know in public.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 29, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Odd that he chose to go on given that he was the only one who was shown to know in public.


 Indeed. I didn't hear it myself...perhaps Louis MacNeice did?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 29, 2014)

The package is online here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01y61cr


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 29, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> The package is online here:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01y61cr



(Steel from 7m35s)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 29, 2014)

“I don't remember... It was the press office wot dunnit... It was a long time ago... Everyone knew about it...That's all I knew about it...They never asked me...It was a different era...” etc, etc, etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 29, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> “I don't remember... It was the press office wot dunnit... It was a long time ago... Everyone knew about it...That's all I knew about it...They never asked me...It was a different era...” etc, etc, etc.


Press office - let's pull that string.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Apr 29, 2014)

He only knew what was in Private Eye; he didn't acknowledge that he'd read the material from the Rochdale Alternative Press...which seems a little odd/remiss in the circumstances. He asked Smith about the Eye allegations. Smith told Steel that the police had investigated and found no case to answer; so Steel took it no further.

Several times he said that of course back then corporal punishment was legal; he was picked up as to what a local politician was doing administering it. Mostly he came across as being concerned to defend himself, rather than express any regret over Smith's apparent actions and his own inactions; at one point he raises his voice to make the point that the Liberals were a political party not a detective agency.

He also made sure to say a number of times that he had no locus of control regarding Smith at the time the original offences were alleged to have taken place.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 29, 2014)

Ta Louis.


----------



## Dan U (Apr 29, 2014)

Danczuk said something interesting on Today as well yesterday. The Rochdale "Independent" Inquiry is looking at a period from 1961 - 1995 but Danczuk said that he knows of victims who approached the council well in to the 2000s and he felt it was still looking to cover up what Officers etc knew (the implication I guess being that current officers could be picked up in a longer time frame)

Martin Digan was interviewed on WATO yesterday as well and was very damning of GMP, essentially saying they have had significant amounts of info he gave them in 1994 which they did nothing with and they are now effectively investigating themselves which he clearly had no faith in.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 29, 2014)

Steel is a fucking shit. 'I had no locus in the matter' - despicable.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 29, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> He only knew what was in Private Eye; he didn't acknowledge that he'd read the material from the Rochdale Alternative Press...which seems a little odd/remiss in the circumstances. He asked Smith about the Eye allegations. Smith told Steel that the police had investigated and found no case to answer; so Steel took it no further.
> 
> Several times he said that of course back then corporal punishment was legal; he was picked up as to what a local politician was doing administering it. Mostly he came across as being concerned to defend himself, rather than express any regret over Smith's apparent actions and his own inactions; at one point he raises his voice to make the point that the Liberals were a political party not a detective agency.
> 
> ...


 Guardian running with this now...



> Smith said..."The accusation in the [1979] Private Eye version of the report *was simply that he was administering corporal punishment to these boys which he should not have been doing*."



and then reportedly said..


> "*Not a single story emerged, not even a rumour emerged, about him misbehaving as an MP.* If that had happened of course we would have enquired."


----------



## Wilf (Apr 29, 2014)

If someone was ever asked 'what are the power relationships that exist in local politics?', my answer would be 'they are the relationships that allowed Cyril Smith to rape children and get away with it'.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 29, 2014)

Don't suppose we'll be seeing much of this image on any campaigning literature...



One year into his leadership (2008) Clegg wrote to the paedophile Smith on the occasion of his 80th...


> "*You have been a towering figure* - not only in the political advancement of the Liberal Party, but also in the wider cause of liberalism.
> "*You were a beacon for our party in the 70s and 80s and continue to be an inspiration for the people of Rochdale* and many others.



and then 2 years later, on the occasion of the peadophile's death eulogised....


> Cyril Smith was a larger-than-life character and one of the most recognisable and likeable politicians of his day.
> I am deeply saddened to hear the news of his death today, and offer my sincere condolences to his family and friends.
> *Everybody in Rochdale knew him not only as their MP but also as a friend.*
> He was a true Liberal, dedicated to his constituency, always showing great passion and determination.
> ...



In true LD tradition Clegg has subsequently said...



> “I would never have dreamed of saying the things that I said about Cyril Smith on his 80th birthday and when he died *if I was aware of the truly horrific nature of the actions* which he is alleged to have undertaken over a long period of time.”


----------



## brogdale (Apr 29, 2014)

Steel thinks this represents a description of "..._*administering corporal punishment..." *_which "..._*was not illegal..." *_and is/was excusable because *"You have to remember that this was a different era."
*
FFS.
*
*


----------



## Dan U (Apr 29, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> A Blair minister suggested and a Brixton link
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-blair-minister-former-pms-3468050



Saw this on twitter today. A load of clippings about abuse at a children's home in Lambeth 

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/category/lambeth/


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 29, 2014)

There is a name being banded around on the lesser loon conspiraloon sites - a huge name in New Labour no less - but will probably in time just be another of those big names that inhabit the fringes and never see the light of day.


----------



## Dan U (Apr 29, 2014)

Pm it?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 29, 2014)

Dan U said:


> Pm?





But which one?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 29, 2014)

The mail are quoting this from Danczuk's book, making it plain something more than 'spanking bare bottoms' was known about in the Libs/SDP before the 83 election:


"In the 1980s Smith’s car was pulled over on the motorway near Northampton and traffic officers discovered child porn in the boot. Local police wanted to press charges but a phone call was made from London and the MP was released without charge.

One young Liberal activist was sexually assaulted in Smith’s office in the House of Commons in the 1980s as other MPs, including Labour leader Michael Foot, walked by.

Smith’s alleged abuse of boys was publicly raised during the 1987 general election by his Labour opponent David Williams. ‘Everyone in Rochdale heard rumours about him, and I believed they should be properly investigated,’ he said. ‘Perhaps it was dirty politics on my behalf , But Cyril Smith was a dirty politician, so I decided to do it.’

A former campaigner for the Social Democratic Party, then in an alliance with the Liberal Party, said senior party officials panicked during the 1983 election through fear that Smith would be exposed as a child abuser. Charles Baker, an SDP activist in Hertfordshire, said: ‘There was a kind of an alert, an alarm that one of the other parties had got hold of the fact that Cyril Smith had interfered with boys yet again.’

Smith was a visitor to the notorious Elm Guest house in south-west London, now the focus of a Scotland Yard investigation into an alleged VIP paedophile ring in the 1980s.  "
I was in the Labour Party in the next door constituency in 87.  I (very) vaguely remember the issue of the Rochdale Party raising the accusations against Smith in the election, though I can't remember whether it was 'just' the original RAP allegations or something wider.  It was seen as controversial and possibly counter productive, particularly as the story hadn't really gained traction at that point.  Interestingly, the mail are saying George Carmen had been engaged to kill the story. Anyway, Steel is a lying shit.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 29, 2014)

Has anyone read the Danczuk book?  Glanced at a few free pages on amazon, where it was weaving Smith with the history of the town, but I'm not great at reading stuff on screen so gave up.  A bit of me baulks at giving money to an MP (unless of course he's donating profits somewhere or other?).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 30, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> There is a name being banded around on the lesser loon conspiraloon sites - a huge name in New Labour no less - but will probably in time just be another of those big names that inhabit the fringes and never see the light of day.



There have been a few names doing the rounds since the '90s.  One I don't give much credence to is a prominent New Labour figure who's gay, as the allegations were very much made before he'd "come out" (the usual "nudge and a wink" stuff in the media, and the more scurrilous stuff on the net), and pretty much dead-ended after he did come out, not least because the rumours had him noncing children of both sexes, and his coming-out merely confirmed what his close friends and associates had always known.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 30, 2014)

Dan U said:


> Saw this on twitter today. A load of clippings about abuse at a children's home in Lambeth
> 
> http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/category/lambeth/



The _Mirror_ piece reflects a lot of "folk knowledge" from this neck of the woods 20-30 years ago, although I'd go further and say it wasn't happening at just one children's home (as reflected in the "spotlight" clippings"), and that it was still going on into the '90s at the least.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 30, 2014)

Wilf said:


> A former campaigner for the Social Democratic Party, then in an alliance with the Liberal Party, said senior party officials panicked during the 1983 election through fear that Smith would be exposed as a child abuser. Charles Baker, an SDP activist in Hertfordshire, said: ‘There was a kind of an alert, an alarm that one of the other parties had got hold of the fact that Cyril Smith had interfered with boys yet again.’



This bit prompted me to have a quick look through the Crewe/King book on the SDP, which reminds us that Smith was very much against getting into bed with the ex-Labour turncoats, and that he was openly defiant against his party leader's wishes, particularly in 1983 (that is, four years after Steel ineffectually “challenging” him over the allegations).

Nothing of any real interest apart from this, though there is this - with hindsight - unpleasant metaphor out of the mouth of Tom McNally (who was a former Callaghan advisor, briefly a Labour MP before defecting to the SDP, came third in his constituency in the '83 election, and subsequently made a Lib Dem peer):



> Big Cyril said he would have liked to strangle us at birth. Being smothered by him at three years of age would be no less disagreeable.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 30, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> This bit prompted me to have a quick look through the Crewe/King book on the SDP, which reminds us that Smith was very much against getting into bed with the ex-Labour turncoats, and that he was openly defiant against his party leader's wishes, particularly in 1983 (that is, four years after Steel ineffectually “challenging” him over the allegations).
> 
> Nothing of any real interest apart from this, though there is this - with hindsight - unpleasant metaphor out of the mouth of Tom McNally - a former Callaghan advisor, briefly a Labour MP before defecting to the SDP, who came third in his constituency in the '83 election, and was subsequently made a Lib Dem peer:


Cheers.  The bit from the Danczuk book you quoted, along with the stuff already in the public domain via RAP/Private Eye together suggest there was open discussion in the political class about him. When you add in the file M15 got their hands on in 1974 it's almost certain there was knowledge of wider accusations than the original Cambridge House story.  All of which makes Steel's emphasis that he had no knowledge of wrongdoing 'in his role as an Mp' more galling.


----------



## laptop (Apr 30, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> [Steel] only knew what was in Private Eye; he didn't acknowledge that he'd read the material from the Rochdale Alternative Press... which seems a little odd/remiss in the circumstances.



I seem to recall that _Private Eye _(eventually) ran a rather full summary of the _RAP_ allegations revelations.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2014)

Linked to a few weeks back on here. Didn't really go into much detail though.


----------



## laptop (Apr 30, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Linked to a few weeks back on here. Didn't really go into much detail though.



That was just the one _Eye_ story, wasn't it? There were scads. When the _Eye_ eventually summoned the nerve...


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2014)

laptop said:


> That was just the one _Eye_ story, wasn't it? There were scads. When the _Eye_ eventually summoned the nerve...


Don't know, don't read the thing! Would expect so though.


----------



## ibilly99 (May 1, 2014)

Cyril Smith was a right bastard all round - it seems he even tried to cover up his activities for an asbestos firm that was in his constituency. I think we are getting closer to a 'Savile Grave Skip' scenario.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...yril-there-was-no-cover-up-on-asbestos-965742

That said in old age he started to resemble Mark E. Smith.


----------



## brogdale (May 9, 2014)

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  7h
6/6 Leics Police is, basically, seeking advice from CPS as to whether it should arrest Lord #Janner under ‘Operation #Enamel’ .




*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  7h
3/6 ‘Operation #Enamel’ last month passed a file of evidence to CPS re Lord #Janner, formerly a prominent Labour MP.





*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  7h
2/6 Last December, Leicestershire Police confirmed to us that it had raided London home of Lord #Janner for probe into historical claims.





*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  8h
1/6 Leicestershire Police confirms to us: investigation into claims of child sex abuse against Lord #Janner is called ‘Operation #Enamel’.


----------



## elbows (May 9, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> The _Mirror_ piece reflects a lot of "folk knowledge" from this neck of the woods 20-30 years ago, although I'd go further and say it wasn't happening at just one children's home (as reflected in the "spotlight" clippings"), and that it was still going on into the '90s at the least.



I hadnt realised till just now how many follow-up articles they have done already. Probably most notable for its detail is this one:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/politician-suspected-child-abuse-would-3468158



> The retired social services boss told detectives how the politician suspected of child abuse would spend evenings with the convicted paedophile who ran the home.
> 
> The witness said the man would arrive alone and then join Michael Carroll in an annex where the beast is known to have attacked a string of youngsters.





> Carroll was the only person convicted of abuse linked to the home, despite a number of children claiming they were attacked by other men there.
> 
> The witness accused Scotland Yard of covering up the alleged abuse after she originally gave evidence to then-detective inspector Clive Driscoll in 1998.
> 
> ...





> The witness said in the late 1980s, while still working for Lambeth, she saw the politician’s name in the visitors’ book at the home as well as in a log book, which included details of which children were taken out.
> 
> She then confronted Carroll. “I said, ‘you have friends in high places’. He said something like, ‘I don’t know why you lot keep going on about him coming here, it’s not the only children’s home he goes to’.”
> 
> She said records showed the politician took boys out aged 12 to 15, but would sometimes be accompanied by Carroll with children under 10.


----------



## elbows (May 9, 2014)

> Mr Blair’s spokesman said: “Mr Blair has absolutely no recollection of this ever being brought to his attention.
> 
> “Of course if there is evidence of any wrongdoing that should be handed to the relevant authorities for full investigation.”



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-blair-demands-investigation-claims-3484990


----------



## elbows (May 9, 2014)

Should also point out that the Mirror were running with at least some aspects of the story in March 2013.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-mp-cover-up-claim-detective-1785273


----------



## butchersapron (May 17, 2014)

Big old piece in exaro tonight:

Ex-cabinet minister raped me when I was 19

This was in 1967 before he was an MP. Tom Watson is backing her claims to have been treated wrong by Fernbridge.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 17, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Big old piece in exaro tonight:
> 
> Ex-cabinet minister raped me when I was 19



Seems to be down at the moment...

http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme....nister-raped-me-when-i-was-19-woman-tells-met


----------



## fishfinger (May 17, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Seems to be down at the moment...
> 
> http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme....nister-raped-me-when-i-was-19-woman-tells-met


It's working here!


----------



## Blagsta (May 17, 2014)

its down for me too


----------



## brogdale (May 17, 2014)

So the Met think its Jane's fault for not making it clear enough that she did not consent. Handy.


----------



## Blagsta (May 17, 2014)

back up now


----------



## laptop (May 18, 2014)

brogdale said:


> So the Met think its Jane's fault for not making it clear enough that she did not consent. Handy.



As she says:



> “I do not feel that the police have handled this any differently from how it would have been handled if I had gone to them in 1967.”


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 21, 2014)

Whoa 



> * Was Bulic Forsythe killed to protect paedophile ring 'linked to future minister in Tony Blair’s government?'*





> Cold case detectives are probing the murder of a council official who vowed to expose a paedophile ring allegedly linked to a future minister in Tony Blair’s government.
> 
> The daughter of Bulic Forsythe believes her father may have been killed because he uncovered a children’s home vice ring involving powerful figures.
> 
> ...





> ...Bulic was last seen alive at 8.45pm on Wednesday, February 4, 1993.
> 
> A BBC Crimewatch broadcast five months later revealed that at 10am on the Thursday three official looking men were seen by a neighbour carrying files away from his flat in Clapham, South London.
> 
> Two more men were seen in a car behind the property at 2pm. His bedroom was torched at 1am on Friday and the oven turned on.





> ...Paedophiles abused children in Lambeth’s homes for decades.
> 
> A former social services manager told Mr Driscoll in 1998 that she saw the future Blair minister making evening visits to the Angell Road children’s home in Brixton in the early 80s.
> 
> She claimed she learnt he had visited South Vale.



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bulic-forsythe-killed-protect-paedophile-3578788

The article definitely drifts towards Hilda Murrell-type speculation territory - but how does the Lambeth stuff fit into the other investigations? elbows?


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 21, 2014)

blimey!


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> The article definitely drifts towards Hilda Murrell-type speculation territory - but how does the Lambeth stuff fit into the other investigations? elbows?



Not enough information about any new investigations regarding Lambeth, and the Mirror appears to be the only fresh source of info on all aspects relating to Lambeth. We usually get to hear about the names of the other investigations and scoping exercises from Exaro. Leaving aside events involving children's homes etc outside London, the vast bulk of what we've heard about surrounds one home in particular, and the guest house where abuse may of occurred. That investigation has developed a number of branches, but I do not believe anything has emerged so far that would link that stuff to the Lambeth stuff. And the political party affiliation of the alleged perpetrator is usually disclosed in the press, and doesn't match in these two cases.

But to be honest thats not much of a guide to reality as the vast bulk of what we have heard about in the last year+ is stuff that was already talked about at the time in the press, or gone over again more recently by blogs. Even though several media entities have managed to find victims, whistleblowers or investigators that were sidelined at the time, and interview them now, the amount of publishable detail they've been able to add to the stories so far is low. Interviewees have likely disclosed juicy stuff to the press, but the most 'tantalising' bits of it are unpublishable at this point for one legal reason or another.

Take the reasons why it feels like we know more about the Elm Guest House/Richmond Childrens home stuff than anything else:

Exaro have kept us informed of quite a lot of detail about where the police investigations have been going in the present era.
There was quite a lot of press coverage from the time the guesthouse was originally busted to look back on.
Someone who was investigating this stuff many years ago stuck their files online before the police took it away. The press can report on the existence of this material, and some details, but not the names obviously.

To say more about the Lambeth stuff I'll really need to know more about official investigations. Much like the North Wales stuff, this sounds like one where historical investigations and inquiries into both the original events and any coverups already happened. So any new inquiry will get dragged into investigating prior investigations as well as the police looking at whether there are enough blatant reasons why they'll at least have to go through the motions of looking at evidence/going after prosecutions again.

The crimewatch episode relating to the death of Bulic Forsythe appears to be on youtube, with annoying audio quality. I haven't had time to watch it yet, but the relevant piece seems to start by 1 minute 30 seconds in.



I'm certainly not holding my breath for more information about Lambeth abuse than has already existed on the net or mainstream media for a while. I still welcome the fresh press articles because they somewhat increase the pressure on people in various institutions to review this stuff again properly now, and not to drop investigations too blatantly.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 24, 2014)

It's all gone a bit _Red Riding_ 







Colin Wallace was the former British Army intelligence officer working in Northern Ireland on grey & black propaganda who blew the whistle on Kincora, Clockwork Orange and various psyops stuff going on in the 1970s, before being gaoled in the 80s following a conviction for manslaughter (subsequently quashed).


----------



## Dillinger4 (May 24, 2014)

I am reading _Who Framed Colin Wallace_ by Paul Foot at the moment. I have just started the chapter on Kincora.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 24, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> I am reading _Who Framed Colin Wallace_ by Paul Foot at the moment. I have just started the chapter on Kincora.




 



The Fred Holroyd one is also worth a read if you are interested in such things.


----------



## butchersapron (May 27, 2014)

Lord:

*Neil Wilby*@Neil_Wilby
Met Police take another step towards gutter as they set out to smear woman who alleged rape by ex-cabinet minister: exaronews.com/articles/5267/…


----------



## elbows (Jun 13, 2014)

Not surprising to see Rochdale council in the news again:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27819017



> Rochdale Council misled police looking into alleged paedophiles linked to a residential school by withholding a report detailing claims of serious sex abuse there, a former detective says.
> 
> Det Supt Bob Huntbach, who is now retired, led inquiries into people linked to Knowl View School in 2000 but says he did not see the 1991 report.
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Jun 13, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Lord:
> 
> *Neil Wilby*@Neil_Wilby
> Met Police take another step towards gutter as they set out to smear woman who alleged rape by ex-cabinet minister: exaronews.com/articles/5267/…



On the same front:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...elines-in-rape-investigation-into-ex-minister



> Guidance issued to police forces across the UK says that detectives should seek "corroboration of the accounts given by both the victim and suspect".





> Sources close to Operation Fernbridge told Exaro that, from the outset, it adopted the highly unusual strategy of only arresting suspects when there is enough evidence to bring charges.


----------



## The Pale King (Jun 22, 2014)

Simon Danczuk is appearing before the home affairs select committee next week, and says he will name names if asked:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...litician-involved-in-child-abuse-9554372.html


----------



## laptop (Jun 22, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> Simon Danczuk is appearing before the home affairs select committee next week, and says he will name names if asked:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...litician-involved-in-child-abuse-9554372.html



Hmm.

So which Committee member will pop the question?


Keith Vaz (Chair) Labour

Ian Austin Labour

Nicola Blackwood Conservative

Mr James Clappison Conservative

Michael Ellis Conservative

Paul Flynn Labour

Lorraine Fullbrook Conservative

Dr Julian Huppert Liberal Democrat

Yasmin Qureshi Labour

Mark Reckless Conservative

Mr David Winnick Labour
...that is: which will resist the pressure not to "abuse Parliamentary privilege", as it will be framed?


----------



## elbows (Jun 27, 2014)

Patrick Rock charged:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28054433



> A former senior adviser to the prime minister has been charged by police over child abuse images.
> 
> Patrick Rock was arrested at his home in London in February after Downing Street officials contacted officers.
> 
> ...


----------



## treelover (Jun 27, 2014)

My older friend was a foster mother, she was hearing lots of horror stories and finally broke the North Wales Childrens Home scandal to the media and wider world, power and paedophilia, it was similar to what is alleged in the London one.


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> Simon Danczuk is appearing before the home affairs select committee next week, and says he will name names if asked:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...litician-involved-in-child-abuse-9554372.html



I'm not exactly surprised that in the event this doesn't seem to have lived up to the hype. Not that I can blame him for trying to draw attention to the issue by making such teasing comments to the press in advance. Anyway I'm off to look at the detail of what happened to see if he was being clever or dropping disguised hints with any of his answers, but if there is anything like that it will probably be hard for me to draw attention to it without falling foul of the law.


----------



## 1%er (Jul 1, 2014)

Simon Danczuk was reported on the 30 June saying he would not name names and giving his reason why


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

Well I certainly wouldn't want him named unless a time comes when its clear no attempt at prosecution will be happening, just in case it messes with the legal case. I'm not sure I completely buy into Exaro's thinking that naming the person would get Cameron off the hook in terms of a far-reaching inquiry, possibly quite the opposite. I certainly support there being an overall inquiry, but I have some doubts as to how effective it would be, as I suspect it would be prone to the same problems as separate inquiries have been, and I've yet to see an inquiry that had aspects of 'security agency' stuff in it where everything really came out in the wash.

Did he actually make a statement on 30 June? The Exaro piece you linked to says he is considering Exaros points, not that he declared he wouldn't name names.

Anyway I think there are some further developments that I will post about very shortly, so don't worry about that question if you don't have time, since that particular aspect is already out of date now anyway.


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

> Detectives investigating child abuse allegations at the school where the shamed MP Cyril Smith was a governor are posed to make arrests, an MP has claimed.
> 
> Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk told the Home Affairs Select Committee that the town’s most senior GMP officer had assured him arrests were ‘imminent’.



http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...er-news/cyril-smith-sex-abuse-danczuk-7355328


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

> Disgraced Rochdale MP Cyril Smith wrote to the BBC in 1976 criticising its investigations into the “private lives of certain MPs”.
> 
> The politician, who died in 2010 and has been accused of abusing children, expressed “deep concern” about a probe into an alleged South African campaign to discredit members of parliament.





> In another letter, Smith urged the then Home Secretary, Merlyn Rees, to ensure the BBC was not using public money for “muck-raking”.
> 
> Former children’s minister Tim Loughton told the BBC the former Rochdale MP’s letters were “bully-boy tactics”.
> 
> “It was an abuse of position that somebody as an MP was saying, ‘You shouldn’t look at us, we’re above the law,”’ he said.



http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ews/cyril-smith-bbc-probe-ex-rochdale-7351291


----------



## 1%er (Jul 1, 2014)

elbows said:


> Well I certainly wouldn't want him named ................................


The BBC news has followed on the link I was watching the football on and maybe he did name the person but not in context, I just heard a name that has appeared on some sites as being the ex-cabinet member


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 1, 2014)

Much as I don't like Danczuk for other stuff, fair play to him on this.

How surprising (or not) is the name mentioned here to finally be bandied about in the mainstream?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28113517

What kind of reasons would Danczuk have for not having mentioned this kind of thing before?


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

1%er said:


> The BBC news has followed on the link I was watching the football on and maybe he did name the person but not in context



I can't go there, but I know what you are talking about.

Meanwhile, since I did have a good look at stuff that happened to MP Geoffrey Dickens back in the day when he named a name, I suppose I should note some press interest a few weeks ago in what drugs Danczuk took in the past. However since his ex-wife seems to be central to those stories, I will not jump to firm conclusions about the timing of these stories.

eg: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...led-nights-wife-defends-cleavage-selfies.html

I won't repeat myself yet again about the Geoffrey Dickens stuff, but I've gone on about it before so a search for that name should yield my previous posts.


----------



## 1%er (Jul 1, 2014)

I didn't think I'd ever heard of him before but it seems he was the one who made a complaint to Essex police about Chris Huhne and his penalty points


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> What kind of reasons would Danczuk have for not having mentioned this kind of thing before?



The dossier and who Dickens gave it to are not news, and indeed the fact the dossier went missing has been the subject of much earlier press stories and an internal inquiry.

Just one example: 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tom-watson-after-30-years-2824776

Danczuk probably mentioned it now because it was the right opportunity to, and to have it make the news. I would not be at all surprised if he has mentioned it in the past too, but since internet search results are now heavily skewed towards todays utterings, I'll have a bit of trouble finding out. Certainly his campaigning on these issues has gone up several notches over time.


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

And just to be clear, Danczuk has long been vocal about the Cyril Smith stuff, and has long called for an over-arching investigation.

e.g.: this from November 2012: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...d-of-compounding-cover-up-over-sex-abuse.html


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2014)

The Mail reckons:



> Tonight, Lord Brittan said: 'I will be issuing a statement tomorrow lunchtime about the handling of such papers in the Home Office.'



From http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-sex-abuse-dossier-sent-Whitehall-1980s.html


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 1, 2014)

elbows said:


> The Mail reckons:
> 
> 
> 
> From http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-sex-abuse-dossier-sent-Whitehall-1980s.html


Could be _interesting_.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

Brittan's statement. 



> Brittan said on Wednesday: "As I recall, [Mr Dickens] came to my room at the Home Office with a substantial bundle of papers. As is normal practice, my private secretary would have been present at the meeting.
> 
> "I told Mr Dickens that I would ensure that the papers were looked at carefully by the Home Office and acted on as necessary. Following the meeting, I asked my officials to look carefully at the material contained in the papers provided and report back to me if they considered that any action needed to be taken by the Home Office.
> 
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 2, 2014)

As _Channel 4 News_' Paraic O'Brien puts it...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

_Leon Brittan_, eh...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

Eh? BBC



> Leon Brittan passed concerns raised by a campaigning MP about alleged paedophiles at Westminster to the police, it has emerged.
> 
> The former home secretary asked officials in the 1980s to "look carefully" at a dossier handed to him by MP Geoffrey Dickens.
> 
> ...



and Guardian news ticker



> Former home secretary Lord Brittan issues new statement clarifying position on 1980s paedophile dossier, saying it was handled appropriately. More details soon …


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

Wilf said:


> _Leon Brittan_, eh...



Yes. _Leon Brittan._


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

Surprise surprise - Home Office loses Child Sex Offense Dossier. Who'd have thunk it?!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Surprise surprise - Home Office loses Child Sex Offense Dossier. Who'd have thunk it?!


 I lost a pen the other day. It's easily done.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

When they finally find that cupboard, the one with this dossier in, the Cyril Smith stuff, the 'take no action' stamp, there'll be a few laughs, a few red faces. _'Look, they were there all the time_!'


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jul 2, 2014)

Those absent minded scamps!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 2, 2014)

the overwhelming stink of complicity in covering up child abuse. Fuck me sideways, we always knew they were rotten but now its almost beyond doubt that we're being run by nonce enablers.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

It's as if MI5 didn't bother to vet Jimmy Savile. Or if they did they were completely incompetent, or didnt care.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

Daily Express, 2nd September 1983


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 2, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Daily Express, 2nd September 1983



Didn't Jim Callaghan come down hard on "PIE"?


----------



## gosub (Jul 2, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> Didn't Jim Callaghan come down hard on "PIE"?


"The Home Office is currently investigating allegations that PIE received public funds from the Government while James Callaghan was in Downing Street.

It has been claimed that tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money was funnelled to it via the Voluntary Services Unit (VSU), a department of the Home Office that gave annual grants to charities and non-profit-making lobby groups.

The probe comes after a whistle-blower had claimed the payments were signed off, over several years, by a senior civil servant who worked under Labour’s then Home Secretary, Merlyn Rees."

 http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/jack-dromey-fury-paedophile-links-6407122

In answer to the OP question, an alarmingly increasing amount


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 2, 2014)

gosub said:


> The Home Office is currently investigating allegations that PIE received public funds from the Government while James Callaghan was in Downing Street.
> 
> It has been claimed that tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money was funnelled to it via the Voluntary Services Unit (VSU), a department of the Home Office that gave annual grants to charities and non-profit-making lobby groups.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

> Search Google:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## cesare (Jul 2, 2014)

Kinell.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 2, 2014)

twitter has some interesting responses if you search it.


----------



## gosub (Jul 2, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


>



(irony)cos sarcastic or veiled posts about things in the public domain are SO helpfuly to a thread(/irony)


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

27 November 1983


----------



## gosub (Jul 2, 2014)

Can get results for both those searches.  Though i do live in Scotland


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 2, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


>



If I had more time on my hands I'd do a comparison of the top 50 or so results on google.co.uk and google.com (there are no warnings on the latter's results page)


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 2, 2014)

gosub said:


> Can get results for both those searches.  Though i do live in Scotland



They are only pointing out that that particular search, on that particular google domain, has been censored. It will still return other results.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 2, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


>




You can search Google.com instead of Google.co.uk for the results and play spot the difference.

This is possibly one that is missing.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 2, 2014)




----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 2, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


>


that roughly sums up my thoughts, or at least as far as i think it's legally advisable to post them...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 2, 2014)

The establishment may have backed themselves into a corner on this. They really went to town on the BBC over Savile. That's understandable, although there were probably political motivations beyond justice in destabalising the beeb.

It has absolutely astonished me that the West Yorkshire Police haven't come under more attack over Savile (perhaps it shouldn't do) or that MI5 didn't over Cyril Smith.

But if elected government turns out to be directly mixed up in cover-up, and lord knows there's been enough just on this thread today to remind us and raise eye brows, the country should really go ballistic. not that it necessarily will. We'll also know the true colours of the press who don't go to town as much on tories as they did the BBC.

And the whole "who could possibly have known?" blag would appear to be very much blown out of the water. This one could really have a long and dramatic way to unravel.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 2, 2014)

the saville/sutcliffe thing is fucking with my head.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 2, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Daily Express, 2nd September 1983


I'm not going to link to the sites where I read this, cos some looked a bit Icke-y, but has anyone else seen claims that Special Branch were 'running' P.I.E. as a means to blackmail its members? The comparison made was with Kincora, where that definitely was going on (secret services allowing the boys' home abuse to continue so that they could get juicy blackmail data on Unionists ). 

But I'm still trying to get my head round the P.I.E. claim - whether it stands up as an argument or not. Would it be blackmail-worthy info if it was known that someone was a member of P.I.E.? Back then? Or would the organisation have been seen as more acceptable - I'm thinking of the recent Labour/Harman stuff where *some* clearly thought that P.I.E. was a legitimate organisation...

Also, were membership lists a closely guarded secret, or did people come out and say they were members? Seems unlikely. I read Jimmy Savile was a member but that must surely not have been known at the time, otherwise it would have been used against him. 

the above are questions for anyone old enough to recall, or who is well-versed in this recent U.K. history...I *am* old enough, just, and remember P.I.E. as something vaguely distasteful but don't think either I - or society as a whole - had full awareness of what their agenda was and what it implied.



(Sorry if the above is incoherent, I have some weird ENT/lung infection, plus taking antibiotics where the possible side-effects are "confusion, hallucinations, delirium" - f**k me, I used to pay good money for that back in the acid house days)


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 2, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> the saville/sutcliffe thing is fucking with my head.


Me too! 
Mind you, contrary to some of the more wild blogs I've seen, I don't think it has any wider significance - I've read stuff saying that Savile was questioned during the Ripper enquiry, and that one of the Ripper's murder victims was found near Savile's home in Leeds...but these are nothing more than coincidence IMHO. If Savile 'bonded' with Sutcliffe in Broadmoor it might have been cos they were both from Yorkshire ...and perhaps Savile felt a secret affinity with someone else guilty of horrific sex crimes?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 2, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Me too!
> Mind you, contrary to some of the more wild blogs I've seen, I don't think it has any wider significance - I've read stuff saying that Savile was questioned during the Ripper enquiry, and that one of the Ripper's murder victims was found near Savile's home in Leeds...but these are nothing more than coincidence IMHO. If Savile 'bonded' with Sutcliffe in Broadmoor it might have been cos they were both from Yorkshire ...and perhaps Savile felt a secret affinity with someone else guilty of horrific sex crimes?




suggestion on another thread that maybe he knew sutcliffe prior to sutcliffes arrest and directed him to kill a few who knew too much about sex rings etc.

sounds conspiranoid right? but with saville and the exaro stuff, care homes, cyril, huate de la garrenne...who knows? post-saville revelations it seems possible


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 2, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> ... This one could really have a long and dramatic way to unravel.


Let's hope so...


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 2, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> suggestion on another thread that maybe he knew sutcliffe prior to sutcliffes arrest and directed him to kill a few who knew too much about sex rings etc.


Sounds unlikely to me tbh. What would have stopped Sutcliffe from talking, if this had been the case? He had already told police and his brother that he had done most, but not all, of the murders with which he was charged...if he was concerned about accuracy and possibly lessening his guilt, surely he would have said he'd been directed to do it. It sounds a bit 'From Hell'/Stephen Knight to me - Jack the Ripper's victims being murdered, cos they knew too much about royal/Masonic wrongdoings...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 2, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> I'm not going to link to the sites where I read this, cos some looked a bit Icke-y, but has anyone else seen claims that Special Branch were 'running' P.I.E. as a means to blackmail its members?



There was an Express story yesterday not a million miles from that suggestion.

Strange days that some people may start to think the likes of Icke to be at least as credible as mainstream sources (I find neither to be credible)

It's the failure of the mainstream and others that has driven too many to the arms of the conspiranoids

This is truly truly unpleasant stuff, but it can't be said that people, including Icke, haven't been going on about it for years. As I said a few posts back, many of the same forces who fumed and frothed about people looking the other way over Savile should really be under similar rigourous scrutiny in coming weeks. We'll see.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 2, 2014)

Danczuk - “People will be very disappointed in this statement, as it demonstrates a shockingly casual attitude."

http://www.itv.com/news/granada/upd...mp-criticises-brittans-paedophilia-statement/


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 2, 2014)

Christ.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-07-02/mp-professionally-burgled-after-submitting-dossier/

As someone else said, this is starting to look like an enormous zit which only needs a little squeeze.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 2, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> the overwhelming stink of complicity in covering up child abuse. Fuck me sideways, we always knew they were rotten but now its almost beyond doubt that we're being run by nonce enablers.


They probably don't see themselves like that. They probably (wild speculation ON) see themselves as the protectors of a greater good, which should not be allowed to be derailed or damaged by a few slightly iffy encounters or the exercise of some curious peccadilloes: best let sleeping dogs lie, after all it's not like anyone's going to believe some kind over a senior Government official, or anything. And we couldn't prove it anyway. It'll all blow over, no harm done.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 2, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Daily Express, 2nd September 1983


Blimey, it's as if the Daily Express used to be a serious paper, or something. Nowadays, they'd have mentioned Diana, giant killer rats and a six week heatwave in the first para.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 2, 2014)

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-07-02/mp-professionally-burgled-after-submitting-dossier/
_
 6:06pm, Wed 2 Jul 2014 Lord Brittan insists he did pass 'paedophile' claims to police 
*MP 'professionally' burgled after submitting dossier *_


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 2, 2014)

And: http://www.itv.com/news/granada/upd...mp-criticises-brittans-paedophilia-statement/


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 2, 2014)

So let's get this straight.

Brittan is handed what is likely to be one of the most politically explosive bundle of documents that crossed his desk while at the Home Office.

Did he actually read them? What did he think of the allegations?

He passes it on to officials to deal with and asks them to get back to him if there is anything of interest/concern. He hears nothing further.

Did it not occur to him to enquire if the officials had indeed found anything?

Did he mention the allegations to any of his Cabinet colleagues? If not, why not?

Did he alert/speak to M15 about the contents of the files? This would have be one of the first things a Home Secretary would have done unless of course, the security services already knew about the contents of the files. In fact, it is almost inconceivable that they didn't know.

It is also inconceivable that Dickenson gave Brittan the only copy of the dossier. Even if the Home Office didn't make at least one copy (and it is reasonable to suppose one would have been made) surely Dickenson must have kept at least one copy, possibly with drafts, notes, letters etc, in a place of safety "just in case". What happened to all that material?

This is not going to end well for Brittan - the questions will keep coming after each of his unconvincing public statements on the matter and his subsequent "clarifications".

Perhaps we are finally getting closer to the answer to the posed question in the OP.


----------



## elbows (Jul 2, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> It is also inconceivable that Dickenson gave Brittan the only copy of the dossier. Even if the Home Office didn't make at least one copy (and it is reasonable to suppose one would have been made) surely Dickenson must have kept at least one copy, possibly with drafts, notes, letters etc, in a place of safety "just in case". What happened to all that material?



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/elm-guest-house-abuse-scandal-1728050



> The Sunday People revealed two weeks ago how Mr Dickens gave one dossier to the Home Office in 1984 but it apparently vanished.
> 
> The other was kept by the colourful MP for Littleborough and Saddleworth until his death at the age of 63.
> 
> ...



There is still the question of where he got the material that formed the dossier from. It is likely that at least some of it involved Elm Guest House, and plenty of the notes about that case were collected by NAYPIC many years ago, published on the internet the other year, and then taken away by the police. Anyway from what people have seen of this info via the net, its a good starting point for further investigation, not damning and conclusive evidence on its own.


----------



## elbows (Jul 2, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Christ.
> 
> http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-07-02/mp-professionally-burgled-after-submitting-dossier/
> 
> As someone else said, this is starting to look like an enormous zit which only needs a little squeeze.



I suppose I will repeat what I said ages ago about my own research into stuff that happened to Geoffrey Dickens MP, which I gleaned from a couple of newspaper archives.

He was a well-known anti-paedophile campaigner back in the day. Apart from handing dossier(s) to the home office, the other thing that gained him notoriety was the naming of diplomat Peter Hayman in parliament. You can search the web for more info on that.

Anyway, at some point he was about to hold a press conference to discuss paedophile stuff. But at the very last minute he was forced to change the topic of the press conference, to admit to having an affair and state that he was leaving his wife (he went back to her later). The timing of the press being tipped off about the affair stunk.


----------



## elbows (Jul 2, 2014)

The other new angle we have now is how the executive summary of the recent home office review into what happened to the dossier, was released with so little fanfare that most people didn't learn that it had concluded until today. And that the government are refusing to publish it in full.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28125537


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 2, 2014)

elbows said:


> Anyway, at some point he was about to hold a press conference to discuss paedophile stuff. But at the very last minute he was forced to change the topic of the press conference, to admit to having an affair and state that he was leaving his wife (he went back to her later). The timing of the press being tipped off about the affair stunk.


Dickens is reported as saying, when he passed his dossier to Brittan, that if he wasn't satisfied that action was being taken, then he would name 8 high-level, important names...which he didn't. But it doesn't sound like he would have been satisfied with what action was taken either


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

Puddy_Tat said:


> that roughly sums up my thoughts, or at least as far as i think it's legally advisable to post them...


I'll bet there's some real modtwitch going on on this thread.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 2, 2014)

Thanks Elbows - that clears up the question about what happened to Dickens copy of the dossier.

It is interesting to note that the Home Office said in its 2013 review those parts of the dossier where there was thought to be "realistic potential" for further investigation were passed on to the police while other elements of the dossier were  not retained.

This suggests that, unless the only Home Office copy was physically split into two separate parts, at least one other copy would have been made.

In any case MI5 almost certainly would have a complete copy indicating that, apart from the Dickens' original, more than one copy must have existed.

While it is barely credible that the Home Office could "lose" one copy of the file, it is impossible to believe they/MI5 could lose two, or possibly more, copies.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

elbows said:


> I suppose I will repeat what I said ages ago about my own research into stuff that happened to Geoffrey Dickens MP, which I gleaned from a couple of newspaper archives.
> 
> He was a well-known anti-paedophile campaigner back in the day. Apart from handing dossier(s) to the home office, the other thing that gained him notoriety was the naming of diplomat Peter Hayman in parliament. You can search the web for more info on that.
> 
> Anyway, at some point he was about to hold a press conference to discuss paedophile stuff. But at the very last minute he was forced to change the topic of the press conference, to admit to having an affair and state that he was leaving his wife (he went back to her later). The timing of the press being tipped off about the affair stunk.


Your post brings it all back into my hazy memory. Dickens was such an absurd character - the 'tea dance lothario' - and a rather committed moralising Tory, but never part of the in-crowd.  I do remember him announcing his dossier and making pronouncements but, as you say, it dribbling away to nothing.  I also recall a personal wtf about him making serious and I'm sure heartfelt allegations against the 'establishment' on this.  However, like many others I had a vague disconnect on the whole thing, just couldn't associate him with anything _significant_.  Looks like I was wrong.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 2, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Thanks Elbows - that clears up the question about what happened to Dickens copy of the dossier.
> 
> It is interesting to note that the Home Office said in its 2013 review those parts of the dossier where there was thought to be "realistic potential" for further investigation were passed on to the police while other elements of the dossier were  not retained.
> 
> ...


Of course they didn't "lose" it.

They buried it. Entirely in keeping with the attitudes of the times.

Although I wouldn't be surprised if a copy was lurking in some very dark and mysterious filing rack somewhere.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

The chances that his son read the stuff or knew the gist are astronomically high - as is that journalists will be trying to get him to speak to them.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 2, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Your post brings it all back into my hazy memory. Dickens was such an absurd character - the 'tea dance lothario' - and a rather committed moralising Tory, but never part of the in-crowd.  I do remember him announcing his dossier and making pronouncements but, as you say, it dribbling away to nothing.  I also recall a personal wtf about him making serious and I'm sure heartfelt allegations against the 'establishment' on this.  However, like many others I had a vague disconnect on the whole thing, just couldn't associate him with anything _significant_.  Looks like I was wrong.


It was about this time that Dickens had a 'dossier' on Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.  i don't know if it was the same dossier but, if it was, that might explain why it didn't go much further.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 2, 2014)

It is also interesting to note that Brittan issued his statement through his lawyer. I wonder why?

When other public figures have been asked to comment on the various Danczuk allegations, most have made public, on camera, statements (eg Clegg and Steel) or, as in the case of Cameron, have issued a statement via their official spokesperson.

None, as far as I am aware, have used solicitors to issue statements on their behalf.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

Sirena said:


> It was about this time that Dickens had a 'dossier' on Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.  i don't know if it was the same dossier but, if it was, that might explain why it didn't go much further.


Fuck, Geoffrey Dickens, the campaigning MP Tom Watson dreams of becoming!


----------



## Sirena (Jul 2, 2014)

Sirena said:


> It was about this time that Dickens had a 'dossier' on Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.  i don't know if it was the same dossier but, if it was, that might explain why it didn't go much further.


The dossier that was passed to Leon Brittan was in 1983.  The Satanic obsession came later....

"Geoffrey Dickens, who in 1988 sponsored an adjournment debate in the House of Commons on the topics of child abuse and witchcraft. He announced his intention to present a dossier of confidential information to the Home Office, and declared that he would attempt to introduce legislation prohibiting the exercise of the Satanic religion.."


----------



## fogbat (Jul 2, 2014)

Derek Laud, eh?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

Just been looking for my (unread) copy of Bea Campbell's book on the Cleveland abuse cases.  Can't find it, but I bet she has some choice words for Dickens over the Satanic stuff.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

fogbat said:


> Derek Laud, eh?


All glory, Laud and yer'honour?


----------



## fogbat (Jul 2, 2014)

Wilf said:


> All glory, Laud and yer'honour?



His photo appeared in a link on the previous page. I'm just surprised is all.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 2, 2014)

Top story on Newsnight now


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 2, 2014)

The "right to be forgotten" must be one of the fastest-abused laws in history - tens of thousands of takedowns already, even an article by Robert Peston.

Of course, maybe we should look at how Google has become the de facto gatekeeper of the internet. (In the meantime, we should all be saving bookmarks to stuff and not thinking "oh well I'll just Google it if I want to find it again".)


----------



## elbows (Jul 2, 2014)

The channel 4 news piece does feature some archive clips of Dickens and his 'hang em and flog em' style. 

Also includes plenty of cynicism about Brittans 'evolving memories' of the dossier and how it was handled.

http://www.channel4.com/news/lord-leon-brittan-home-office-paedophile-dossier


----------



## fogbat (Jul 2, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The "right to be forgotten" must be one of the fastest-abused laws in history - tens of thousands of takedowns already, even an article by Robert Peston.
> 
> Of course, maybe we should look at how Google has become the de facto gatekeeper of the internet. (In the meantime, we should all be saving bookmarks to stuff and not thinking "oh well I'll just Google it if I want to find it again".)



Saving the whole document might not be a bad idea.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 2, 2014)

fogbat said:


> Saving the whole document might not be a bad idea.


True, a much better idea - HTML source takes trivial amounts of storage.


----------



## elbows (Jul 2, 2014)

This is the rather brief home office thing that people only just became aware was published some time ago:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...226147/Executive_Summary_-_Interim_Report.pdf


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 2, 2014)

I suspect that many, if not all, of the names in the Dickens dossier are those that were published in Scallywag although this, of course, does not mean that all, or indeed any, of them are actually true (Elbows - can you help here? All my Scallywags are stored away at the moment and I don't have access to them. Eta - obviously not asking you to mention the actual names).

As with Watergate, it now appears that the increasingly unconvincing Brittan and the equally unconvincing Home Office line about lost files is becoming the story rather than the actual contents of the dossier.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 2, 2014)

Are we suggesting that any of the Satanic Panic allegations were anything other than fundie horseshit?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 2, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Your post brings it all back into my hazy memory. Dickens was such an absurd character - the 'tea dance lothario' - and a rather committed moralising Tory, but never part of the in-crowd.



I wonder to what extent the various bees in his bonnet might have led some people to take anything he said less seriously than they might have done.

He was the MP who called for the BBC to sack Gorden Kaye from Allo Allo when he came out / got outed as gay...


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 2, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Are we suggesting that any of the Satanic Panic allegations were anything other than fundie horseshit?


I'm certainly not. It doesn't seem at all unlikely that MI5 and other bodies were complicit in covering up after those paedos in high places that did exist though. After all, they've been happy to cover up in all sorts of other instances.


----------



## gosub (Jul 2, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> It is also interesting to note that Brittan issued his statement through his lawyer. I wonder why?
> 
> When other public figures have been asked to comment on the various Danczuk allegations, most have made public, on camera, statements (eg Clegg and Steel) or, as in the case of Cameron, have issued a statement via their official spokesperson.
> 
> None, as far as I am aware, have used solicitors to issue statements on their behalf.



I don't want to stand up for Mr Brittan but the answer was in your question- others issued statements through their spokesman.  He's retired so he won't have media handlers, and why answer journos calls when you can have someone else you trust do it.  Nothing really sus in that


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 2, 2014)

gosub said:


> I don't want to stand up for Mr Brittan but the answer was in your question- others issued statements through their spokesman.  He's retired so he won't have media handlers, and why answer journos calls when you can have someone else you trust do it.  Nothing really sus in that



I'm not sure I agree. Both Clegg and Steel were interviewed on camera which means follow up questions could be asked. steel's on-camera interviews about Cyril smith certainly didn't do him any favours at all.

Issuing a statement through a solicitor does give the impression (possibly unfairly) that Brittan has something to hide.

It also means that it is easier for him to avoid answering any awkward follow-up questions arising from his statement and so minimizing the possibility of tripping himself up - always a possibility if you are being less than fully truthful.

And that any statement is pored over by the lawyers before it is issued - although they don't seem to  have made a particularly good job of it in this case. Perhaps they were simply wrong-footed by the Home Office's statement seemingly contradicting Brittan's first statement.

The problem is that neither the Brittan and Home Office lines are credible and, even worse, they can't get their story straight between them.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2014)

In 86 pages, this point will have been made I'm sure, but it really is fuckin' irritating searching around this stuff.  Putting in 'Elm House' and 'xxxxxx xxxxx MP' seemingly brings up some brave clued in soul, willing to say stuff out loud. Dick as I am I even read 3 sentences and am still nodding along, till you discover it's some truther shite.   Should be able to spot them by the tinfoil adverts they carry. Even more annoyingly, if you strip out 80% of the false connections, leaps and outright lizardry (and no doubt some false positives), they probably contain the bare bones of the story. 

Presumably some of these sites carried on as normal when McAlpine was carrying out his scorched earth policy last year (unless their host got twitchy)?  Just wasn't worth taking them on/feeding the fire.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

gosub said:


> I don't want to stand up for Mr Brittan but the answer was in your question- others issued statements through their spokesman.  He's retired so he won't have media handlers, and why answer journos calls when you can have someone else you trust do it.  Nothing really sus in that


Apparently not (retired) - wiki:


> *Peerage*
> He was created *Baron Brittan of Spennithorne*, of Spennithorne in the County of North Yorkshire in February 2000. He is vice-chairman of UBS AG Investment Bank, non-executive director of Unilever and member of the international advisory committee for Total. In August 2010, Brittan returned to the government under the Conservative-Liberal coalition acting as a trade advisor.[


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 3, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Are we suggesting that any of the Satanic Panic allegations were anything other than fundie horseshit?



or a well funded smokescreen? Fuck knows. That moral panic happening at the same time was fair convenient

at risk of sounding tinfoil. I just don't know with this stuff anymore. Even the shit you'd label as fantasy is being served up and documented true


----------



## elbows (Jul 3, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I suspect that many, if not all, of the names in the Dickens dossier are those that were published in Scallywag although this, of course, does not mean that all, or indeed any, of them are actually true (Elbows - can you help here? All my Scallywags are stored away at the moment and I don't have access to them. Eta - obviously not asking you to mention the actual names).



I've never actually had access to physical copies of Scallyway. But a bunch of us on the forum, quite some time ago, discussed the various Scallywag things in as much depth as we could, and I was able to read a shitload of the articles in digital form.

It's impossible to answer the question properly because we don't know which cases were discussed in the dossier(s). But if we assume that the Elm guest house stuff was a focus of it then no, going by Scallywag articles and the stuff that has been the focus in recent years, there is surprisingly little direct overlap between the two. Disregarding the more scurrilous Scallywag stuff, and sticking to their story that apparently actually involved detailed testimony from victims, the picture appeared to involve the transport of victims from, for example, North Wales children's homes, to a location in London. Whereas the Elm guest house stuff was more of a purely London affair, and the alleged perpetrators didn't have that much overlap either, at least not directly according to the limited info available.

In the post-Savile shitstorm I saw one thing in the media that may well have been directly related to the most specific, credible and detailed Scallywag accusation - a video interview (perhaps by Sky News) of an apparent victim, giving details about being transported to London to be abused at parties.



> As with Watergate, it now appears that the increasingly unconvincing Brittan and the equally unconvincing Home Office line about lost files is becoming the story rather than the actual contents of the dossier.



There are a couple of things that are almost certainly going on right now, and a few others that might be adding fuel to the fire:

The campaign to get loads of MPs to support an over-arching inquiry thinks it has done well in recent days, pushing the agenda towards this aspect rather than naming names etc.

Others, including various media and journalists, are more interested in the potential of recent events to lead to the naming of one or more people, and close one of the stupidly wide gaps between what some people have been talking about on the internet for years, and what can be said by mainstream media etc.

A gradual loss of faith in police etc investigations bringing any living politicians to justice as more time passes is another factor, and applying pressure to ensure this stuff doesn't go away with a whimper is also a factor.

The way the McApline stuff blew up and backfired is also a factor, both in terms of some being cautious and restrained this time, the build up of pressure that such restraint leads to, amplified by the amount of time that the press were left with nothing to get their teeth into to keep the stories alive in the wake of the McAlpine mess.

Slightly more generally, I feel that an additional factor in the lack of bringing political offenders to justice, beyond the obvious potential for coverup, intimidation, legal threats etc, has been a lack of critical mass of victims. For various reasons, not enough victims have come forwards to make arrests of high-profile political figures a completely unavoidable no-brainer. Due to the number of factors that can lead to this, including all the usual reasons a victim may not want to go through this all again before we even get to additional factors caused by the perpetrators being connected and powerful, its hard to say exactly what this means. 

I might tentatively suggest that one other reason is that contrary to some hyperbole, we arent actually looking at a very large network of high-profile offenders and a vast number of victims. If true that is no less reason to go after those who did abuse in my book, but it is part of the picture of relative legal inaction so far. Just look at the celebrity cases that the CPS decided were worth charging - given a lack of hard evidence and the amount of time that had passed since the alleged crimes, they went for cases where there were numerous victims and recurring patterns of abuse, partially backed up by evidence such as letters to or from victims and their families. But going by detailed reporting by the likes of Exaro, so far I am only aware of two victims of the Elm guest house stuff having contact with the police.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 3, 2014)

Sirena said:


> It was about this time that Dickens had a 'dossier' on Satanic Ritual Child Abuse.  i don't know if it was the same dossier but, if it was, that might explain why it didn't go much further.


Didin't he have a go at the 'Lamp of Thoth' shop in Leeds? It was around that time IIRC- lots of harmless pagan types were getting horrendous attention from the press and the govt, kids taken into care etc


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 3, 2014)

Thanks elbows - too tired to post sensibly now so can't do justice to your fulsome reply

Iirc Scallywag's allegations focused on a group of abusers at Dolphin Square involving senior politicians.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

Dickens was truly a buffoon, different politics and personality, but just as fuckin' daft as that UKIP nob Godfrey Bloom. It's a sign of the times that people with abuse info only felt they had him to go to.


----------



## elbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Wilf said:


> In 86 pages, this point will have been made I'm sure, but it really is fuckin' irritating searching around this stuff.  Putting in 'Elm House' and 'xxxxxx xxxxx MP' seemingly brings up some brave clued in soul, willing to say stuff out loud. Dick as I am I even read 3 sentences and am still nodding along, till you discover it's some truther shite.   Should be able to spot them by the tinfoil adverts they carry. Even more annoyingly, if you strip out 80% of the false connections, leaps and outright lizardry (and no doubt some false positives), they probably contain the bare bones of the story.
> 
> Presumably some of these sites carried on as normal when McAlpine was carrying out his scorched earth policy last year (unless their host got twitchy)?  Just wasn't worth taking them on/feeding the fire.



Yep, been there, discussed it, and have to discuss it again slightly every time something happens to re-peak mainstream interest in the story. I'll try to describe what is left when the various forms of shit are stripped away:

A) A bunch of well to do individuals who got somewhat caught or exposed at the time, and were often let off lightly or protected to some extent. One or two of them are still alive being reinvestigated and may not be so lucky this time. Others can be read about in press archives or by picking the good bits out of some hideously crap websites.

B) A bunch of dead people who are unlikely to be looked at again in great detail now, but can have the worst assumed about them without legal fears. Maybe one or two of them will end up having rumours about them actually substantiated, e.g. by victims speaking out and adding much needed meat added to the rumour bones, but I might have expected this to happen already if it was going to. Obviously it happen with Cyril Smith, but not anyone else yet.

C) Details, including a list of names, relating to Elm guest house. This fuels much of the twitter anger and sense that some have that they 'know who is being protected', but what is out there in the public domain is the stuff I refer to as being a good start for further investigation, rather than fully formed smoking guns already. The frustration won't go away by finding out this info, only by having it built upon by rigorous inquiry that cannot be conducted by the likes of me using internet info.

D) People that have never been named or gossiped about on the internet who might yet be exposed by any of the numerous inquiries and investigations into abuse at specific institutions, e.g. North Wales care homes. But its probably safer to assume that all sorts of people who were not high profile will be the main ones to get nabbed, e.g. those who managed the children's homes, with few or no high-profile perpetrators exposed.

E) People who were not powerful or high-profile themselves, but who may have at times serviced higher-profile offenders with anything from pornography to supplying victims. Some of these will have been tabloid bogeymen at various points over the decades, but it remains to be seen whether any of the potential dot-joining between these people and politicians will come to fruition or have any merit.

Returning briefly to the shit that should be dismissed, there are complications caused by the historically huge Tory 'closet' and really dodgy attitudes towards things like homosexuality or simply not liking certain famous people and hoping they are guilty. There are surely some red herrings, but without further detailed investigation and exposure it will be hard to safely rule many of these in or out.


----------



## elbows (Jul 3, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Thanks elbows - too tired to post sensibly now so can't do justice to your fulsome reply
> 
> Iirc Scallywag's allegations focused on a group of abusers at Dolphin Square involving senior politicians.



Cheers. Yes the Dolphin Square stuff was the specific Scallywag accusation I was focussing on in my reply, as opposed to some of the more scurrilous shit they threw around without due care.


----------



## elbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Probably goes without saying but I left out:

F) The stench of coverup and intelligence service games. We know its there, but easy to misjudge the exact motives behind each instance, or the scale of it in some specific cases. And pretty hard to imagine us getting great detail about the security services stuff, at least until many more decades have past.


----------



## elbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Speaking of the McApline mess:



> BBC News has instigated a “no surprises” rule in the wake of Newsnight’s Lord McAlpine scandal in which senior management including director of news James Harding are immediately alerted to issues of serious concern around a programme.
> 
> The new regime, outlined in a statement to the BBC Trust published on Tuesday, was put in place in the wake of the McAlpine fiasco and the BBC2 programme’s earlier decision to shelve its investigation into Jimmy Savile.
> 
> BBC management said it would “not shy away from investigative journalism in the public interest” but outlined a greater level of editorial supervision with a hands-on role for Harding, the former editor of the Times appointed last year, and his senior team.



http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jul/01/bbc-news-no-subscribers-mcalpine-savile


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 3, 2014)

elbows said:


> Probably goes without saying but I left out:
> 
> F) The stench of coverup and intelligence service games. We know its there, but easy to misjudge the exact motives behind each instance, or the scale of it in some specific cases. And pretty hard to imagine us getting great detail about the security services stuff, at least until many more decades have past.



This is the bit I am particularly interested in.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

elbows said:


> Cheers. Yes the Dolphin Square stuff was the specific Scallywag accusation I was focussing on in my reply, as opposed to some of the more scurrilous shit they threw around without due care.



Wilfred Bramble lived on Dolphin Square IIRC.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> This is the bit I am particularly interested in.



I was reading some stuff last night which sounded highly plausible but without solid evidence. Either way it did make me wonder just how many 'useful idiots' are doing what they do in politics at the behest of others.

Edited for clarity of language


----------



## Greebo (Jul 3, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Didin't he have a go at the 'Lamp of Thoth' shop in Leeds? It was around that time IIRC- lots of harmless pagan types were getting horrendous attention from the press and the govt, kids taken into care etc


He did, although you're confusing the shop ("The Sorceror's Apprentice") with the magazine published by it ("The Lamp of Thoth").  All credit to him, Chris Bray (the owner) wasn't driven out of business.

No thanks to Geoffrey Dickens, many a Pagan parent with young children lived in fear of them being taken into care if the neighbours heard the baby crying.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 3, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Didin't he have a go at the 'Lamp of Thoth' shop in Leeds? It was around that time IIRC- lots of harmless pagan types were getting horrendous attention from the press and the govt, kids taken into care etc


There was the Roger Cook expose on television!   Laying siege to a shop that sold occult paraphernalia!  That was at the peak of the Satanic hysteria. 

I've still got some of those television programmes on videocassette. And I still have some ORCRO (Occult response to the christian response to occultism) magazines that ran to about 12 issues over 3 or 4 years.

I can't remember Geoffrey Dickens getting involved but he probably did....


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Interesting piece. Special Branch of course having close ties to MI5. Clearly a large number of people on the PIE list were not arrested for anything untoward.



> PIE was being funded at the request of Special Branch which found it politically useful to identify people who were paedophiles. This led me not to pursue my objections. At that time, questioning anything to do with Special Branch, especially within the Home Office, was a ‘no-no’.
> 
> “I was under the clear belief that I was being instructed to back off and that his reference to Special Branch was expected to make me to do so.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Tory Party admits losing Leon Brittan


lol


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 3, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Wilfred Bramble lived on Dolphin Square IIRC.


So did John Vassall


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

This is all getting a bit Rock Family Trees of nonce.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 3, 2014)

Wilf said:


> This is all getting a bit Rock Family Trees of nonce.


Vassall wasn't a nonce, he was just gay. Prime was the paedo-spook (right down to PIE membership).


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> So did John Vassall



One particular building used by the Government in Dolphin Square supposedly had a reputation of young boys walking around half undressed asking for directions to MP's flats. Another Tory MP with recent accusations against his name also lived there.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Vassall wasn't a nonce, he was just gay. Prime was the paedo-spook (right down to PIE membership).


 Sorry, yes, the name is coming back to me now - the spy feller.  I just had a slightly flippant mental image of the whole story appearing on a TV screen setting out the connections like that Rock Family Trees prog.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Famous Dolphin Square Residents.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Vassall wasn't a nonce, he was just gay. Prime was the paedo-spook (right down to PIE membership).



He was apparently blackmailed due to his homosexuality.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 3, 2014)

Is no one going to mention the long standing Brittain _rumour _about the burglary at his office that found child porn in the safe? That's been going 30 years now.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 3, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> He was apparently blackmailed due to his homosexuality.


Quite famously, yes. But the point I was making is that there is no suggestion that John Vassall - a gay civil servant blackmailed into revealing secrets by Soviet intelligence - was a paedophile, involved in a paedophile ring, or connected to a “long term high level UK paedophile ring”.

On a behemoth thread about paedophiles I think it's an important distinction to clarify, given the number of people reading this who might otherwise mistake his presence here for something there has never been (as far as I am aware) any evidence for. It's just that he was a notable resident of Dolphin Square.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Quite famously, yes. But the point I was making is that there is no suggestion that John Vassall - a gay civil servant blackmailed into revealing secrets by Soviet intelligence - was a paedophile, involved in a paedophile ring, or connected to a “long term high level UK paedophile ring”.
> 
> On a behemoth thread about paedophiles I think it's an important distinction to clarify, given the number of people reading this who might otherwise mistake his presence here for something there has never been (as far as I am aware) any evidence for. It's just that he was a notable resident of Dolphin Square.


 Absolutely.  And ironically, the conflation of gay with abuser substantially muddied the waters when all this was first aired in the 80s.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Quite famously, yes. But the point I was making is that there is no suggestion that John Vassall - a gay civil servant blackmailed into revealing secrets by Soviet intelligence - was a paedophile, involved in a paedophile ring, or connected to a “long term high level UK paedophile ring”.
> 
> On a behemoth thread about paedophiles I think it's an important distinction to clarify, given the number of people reading this who might otherwise mistake his presence here for something there has never been (as far as I am aware) any evidence for. It's just that he was a notable resident of Dolphin Square.


Yep, and credit to elbows for making this point over and over. It's really quite important.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Quite famously, yes. But the point I was making is that there is no suggestion that John Vassall - a gay civil servant blackmailed into revealing secrets by Soviet intelligence - was a paedophile, involved in a paedophile ring, or connected to a “long term high level UK paedophile ring”.
> 
> On a behemoth thread about paedophiles I think it's an important distinction to clarify, given the number of people reading this who might otherwise mistake his presence here for something there has never been (as far as I am aware) any evidence for. It's just that he was a notable resident of Dolphin Square.



I agree.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

Just as an aside, yesterday was another spike of interest in this story, with Brittan's twisting in the breeze plain for all to see.  However it didn't feel like a staging post towards prosections - ditto the MPs calling for an overall inquiry. Quite the opposite, it was little more than an illustration that there _won't_ be prosecutions, unless some other document emerges which puts some lower level player in the frame (elbows point last night). 

Absurd to judge the story just 24 hours on, but it also doesn't seem to have much traction today.  Already slipped down the guardian's front page.  Also, Tom Watson seems to have left the field on this one.  Don't know that he was ever going to use parliamentary privelige to say anything or if he just hasn't got anything robust enough.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Are we suggesting that any of the Satanic Panic allegations were anything other than fundie horseshit?



A few years back, at a very delayed election count, I had a long and involved conversation with an elderly Marxist activist who'd been something high up in local education in the early 70s. She had kept hearing concerns about ritualistic abuse in local childrens homes but every attempt she made to follow it up fell on deaf ears. I dont recall wether or not it was related to the specific ritual nature, but one name that was mentioned is pretty household and respected and one I've heard separately in this context, kind of one of those "loads of people know" horrors that one assumes the best of anyway without court cases. As I keep saying, principles, patterns, themes etc. are more important than knowing individual names.

From what I can tell, Satanism is an incredibly tiny pursuit in the UK, IIRC Crowley did write some stuff about child sacrifice - what type of victim was best and why, but I won't go into it.

Satanism is more practiced in the US. Far from being a figment of fundamentalist Christian imagination, it could even be said to be a product of it. Common/garden paganism has been deliberately slurred by the fundies to equate it with Satanism. People (often young) who then dabble in paganism come to think they are Satanists and identify themselves as such. Theres a doc on the Columbine massacre that explains this pretty well.

Obviously most "satanists" wouldn't go near child sacrifice either. Mainstream Satanism can even make efforts to look quite respectable.

The lady I had that conversation agreed with me that there could be a bit of a blind spot for the left in regards to this: "opium of the people" is one of those quotes whose context is as interesting as the catchphrase, but many leftists are instinctive atheists (many are not of course, and there is no raw philosophical causal link between socialism and atheism). If leftists don't believe in "god" and are used to denouncing the whole gig, then they will have at least as negative an attitude towards the "satan" concept. It's understandable that they struggle to fully compute the idea and thus go no  further in considering consequences.

That conversation was one of quite a few, plus other stuff I've come across where, single instances, the tendency would be to shove it to the back of the mind and find reasons why it neednt have veracity. 

But after a while, you hear so many similar things from seemingly balanced people who have healthy thinking that you really begin to wonder. There's a lot of that wondering going on right now I suspect.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

This is an important text related to some of the above mentioned topic. It's long, but not neccessary to read all of it maybe - just down to where you are told why it has it's name. The bona fides of the speaker seem substantial and genuine. It's not available in audio or vidio form.

http://www.whale.to/b/greenbaum.html


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

This post is from justthetalk.com:

In the time I lived in Brighton I was told by two separate people - one a former Hove police sergeant, the other a well established and high ranking volunteer at Brighton Victim Support - that there had been a series of sacrificial child murders in Rottingdean, a seaside town just a couple of miles from Brighton.

These had happened a few years ago but were covered up because they involved a VIP and it was "in the interest of the general public" that they weren't brought to light.

Do I think they're true? Yes. Will I do anything about it? Of course not. Because people like you and me hear this kind of gossip, and we wait for THOSE IN CHARGE to do something about it.

But the reality is that "those in charge" are "those doing it", backed up by people who DO WHAT THEY'RE TOLD AND DON'T ASK QUESTIONS.

My police sergeant friend summed up his attitude another time, when he described a stake out on someone's home. He hadn't a clue what the case was, nor who the suspect was. He was just told what to do, and report what he saw and heard. Like so many people within the police, he just did what he was told and didn't "make waves".

And that's precisely how corruption of this nature happens.

I met a former chief inspector of West Midlands police one time, and he told me a similar story. "The corruption", he said "goes right to the very top". "There's NOTHING you can do about it, because someone will only bury the evidence, demote you, slander you, or make you go away".

That's the way it is, people. Those like Jimmy Saville and Rolf Harris are just the tip of a very deep and very large iceberg.

And those involved will do whatever they possibly can to make sure that none of it ever comes out.

And they will do so by buying politicians, buying newspapers, and controlling whomever they see fit to control by whatever means it takes.

I just found a news item on one of the Rottingdean murders, from 1958

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat
=19581220&id=1mhAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XpUMAAAAIBAJ
&pg=3038,6098704


----------



## existentialist (Jul 3, 2014)

You know, wildly and randomly speculating here, if I was, say, a 1980s Government minister of a particularly Machievellian tendency, facing the possibility of a wide-ranging and possibly quite embarrassing investigation into abuse at very high levels, one evil plan I might come up with would be to utterly over-egg the pudding. Start putting wild rumours out about Satanic abuse, all kinds of spooky and hugely organised stuff going on all over the place, stagemanage a couple of noisy investigations in the provinces (a long way away from anything I didn't want discovered), let it all crash around for a couple of years until it emerges that the Satanic stuff was completely over the top. Then it all dies down, the "oh well, that's all right" attitude sets in, and you're nicely inoculated against future calls for investigations, because you just mutely point to the clusterfuck that was the Satanic one, and people go..."oh well, that's all right then". Well, enough people to make the risk of a general outcry a lot smaller.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

existentialist said:


> You know, wildly and randomly speculating here, if I was, say, a 1980s Government minister of a particularly Machievellian tendency, facing the possibility of a wide-ranging and possibly quite embarrassing investigation into abuse at very high levels, one evil plan I might come up with would be to utterly over-egg the pudding. Start putting wild rumours out about Satanic abuse, all kinds of spooky and hugely organised stuff going on all over the place, stagemanage a couple of noisy investigations in the provinces (a long way away from anything I didn't want discovered), let it all crash around for a couple of years until it emerges that the Satanic stuff was completely over the top. Then it all dies down, the "oh well, that's all right" attitude sets in, and you're nicely inoculated against future calls for investigations, because you just mutely point to the clusterfuck that was the Satanic one, and people go..."oh well, that's all right then". Well, enough people to make the risk of a general outcry a lot smaller.



Have you ever thought of a career in politics?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

If you're in MI5 and you find out that establishment figures are up to their neck in criminal activites, what do you _actually_ do about it?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 3, 2014)

sell the dirt to the soviets


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Daily Express - 27th June 1984


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> So did John Vassall


Maxwell Knight ran MI5 dept B5(b) out of rooms in Dolphin Square once upon a time.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

existentialist said:


> You know, wildly and randomly speculating here, if I was, say, a 1980s Government minister of a particularly Machievellian tendency...



New Machievellian?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> sell the dirt to the soviets



Or blackmail them into whatever you fancy?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> New Machievellian?


There's nothing new where Machiavellianism is concerned: it's all been done before. And it'll all be done again


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 3, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Maxwell Knight ran MI5 dept B5(b) out of rooms in Dolphin Square once upon a time.


Ah yes... *Flicks through Andrew*


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

Clegg and a few others are going through the motions of asking for an investigation into what happened to the papers.  Whenever you get that I get a surreal image of the process, some twat wandering round an archive, looking in cupboards, asking if x still works there - the sort of thing you'd do if you were 'looking for stuff'.  Of course that level of detail is the last thing the minister who might order such an 'investigation' wants to hear.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Jeffery Epstein 

Royal family know plenty of paedophiles eh?


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> This is an important text related to some of the above mentioned topic. It's long, but not neccessary to read all of it maybe - just down to where you are told why it has it's name. The bona fides of the speaker seem substantial and genuine. It's not available in audio or vidio form.
> 
> http://www.whale.to/b/greenbaum.html


That reads as nutty to me


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 3, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> That reads as nutty to me



a whale.to link? nutty? say it ain't so!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I'm not sure I agree. Both Clegg and Steel were interviewed on camera which means follow up questions could be asked. steel's on-camera interviews about Cyril smith certainly didn't do him any favours at all.
> 
> Issuing a statement through a solicitor does give the impression (possibly unfairly) that Brittan has something to hide.
> 
> ...



Brittan has always had the misfortune of looking guilty, even at the despatch box. he's one of those people who always look sweaty and panicked, even when they're not, so he probably thinks going on camera is a hiding to nothing.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 3, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> a whale.to link? nutty? say it ain't so!


Takes about 1600 words to get to the Jews. It's all Cabalistic of course.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 3, 2014)

Keith Vaz says there is "No reason" to ask Brittan to give evidence re: missing paedophile documents.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> A few years back, at a very delayed election count, I had a long and involved conversation with an elderly Marxist activist who'd been something high up in local education in the early 70s. She had kept hearing concerns about ritualistic abuse in local childrens homes but every attempt she made to follow it up fell on deaf ears. I dont recall wether or not it was related to the specific ritual nature, but one name that was mentioned is pretty household and respected and one I've heard separately in this context, kind of one of those "loads of people know" horrors that one assumes the best of anyway without court cases. As I keep saying, principles, patterns, themes etc. are more important than knowing individual names.
> 
> From what I can tell, Satanism is an incredibly tiny pursuit in the UK, IIRC Crowley did write some stuff about child sacrifice - what type of victim was best and why, but I won't go into it.



Crowley wasn't a Satanist. 



> Satanism is more practiced in the US. Far from being a figment of fundamentalist Christian imagination, it could even be said to be a product of it. Common/garden paganism has been deliberately slurred by the fundies to equate it with Satanism. People (often young) who then dabble in paganism come to think they are Satanists and identify themselves as such. Theres a doc on the Columbine massacre that explains this pretty well.



Satanism in the US comes under two main groupings: Temple of Set and Anton Lavey's various outfits.  Neither of them are actually Satanist (i.e. they're not Christians blaspheming by desecrating the ritual and practice of Christianity), they're hedonists who aren't morally-responsible enough to take responsibility for their life choices, so they file their swinging and group sex under "religion".



> Obviously most "satanists" wouldn't go near child sacrifice either. Mainstream Satanism can even make efforts to look quite respectable.



There's no such thing as "mainstream Satanism" in the UK, and the few Satanic covens etc that there are, you'd never hear about, simply because they police their practices very carefully.  The "Satanists" you hear about are the bedbugs/lunatic fringe - the robe-wearing "look at me" types, not the actual believers.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 3, 2014)

theres a horrible whiff of power-fantasy right wingy ubermensch stuff about levays satanic bible. Not read Compleat Witch tho, so maybe he qualifies this later. Carny shit anyway


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> This is an important text related to some of the above mentioned topic. It's long, but not neccessary to read all of it maybe - just down to where you are told why it has it's name. The bona fides of the speaker seem substantial and genuine. It's not available in audio or vidio form.
> 
> http://www.whale.to/b/greenbaum.html



It's dung.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> theres a horrible whiff of power-fantasy right wingy ubermensch stuff about levays satanic bible. Not read Compleat Witch tho, so maybe he qualifies this later. Carny shit anyway



Nope, that's a theme through most of his shite, and the Temple of Set too. Middle-class honkies getting their horn and their hate on.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> This post is from justthetalk.com:
> 
> In the time I lived in Brighton I was told by two separate people - one a former Hove police sergeant, the other a well established and high ranking volunteer at Brighton Victim Support - that there had been a series of sacrificial child murders in Rottingdean, a seaside town just a couple of miles from Brighton.
> 
> ...



The Rottingdean murders have been the subject of various conspiracy theories for over 50 years, everything from aliens to Satanists to Freemasons, and every lunacy in-between.  Everything except "some murderous cunt killed some kids".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> sell the dirt to the soviets



No, you use the dirt to manipulate the politician into supporting MI5's interests.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> That reads as nutty to me



It's crap.  Psychology as a discipline has pretty much disavowed all the techniques that the author talks about, because nowadays they're understood to be *programming* techniques, not techniques for recovering repressed/buried memories.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 3, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Daily Express - 27th June 1984



I remember these 'slurs' and was just about to post about them.
Senior conservatives at the time said it was a story invented to discredit Brittan, made by disgruntled MI5 officers angry at the Home Secretary's action of altering the pay and conditions of serving officers.
All brushed under the carpet, but sling enough mud and eventually thirty years later it starts dropping off the fan.

This was all around the time Clive Ponting was passing state secrets to Tam Dalyell regarding the sinking of the Belgrano. 
This was just after Hilda Murrell, aunt of Commander Robert Green was murdered in strange circumstances.
Thatcher was also getting hounded over the security services allegedly  being involved in her death.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

yoentialist said:


> There's nothing new where Machiavellianism is concerned: it's all been done before. And it'll all be done again


Perhaps youre


ViolentPanda said:


> Crowley wasn't a Satanist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah, I know Crowley wasn't a Satanist, though I don't think it would just take an orthodox Christain to say he was in the grip of satanic influence. But that bit was written badly and apologies-  I was talking about documented stuff I knew regarding child abuse.

Rex Church as head of Church Of Satan seemed to be trying to be quite respectable. I agree, there's a lot of cross over with arch-hedonism,

Otherwise I entirely agree with that post. Thanks.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's dung.



Are you decrying all his bona fides and stated experience? You think the entire thing is start-to-finish concoction?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Are you decrying all his bona fides and stated experience? You think the entire thing is start-to-finish concoction?


It doesn't really have to be. If it's got concoction in it to any degree, it's already a more or less tainted source.

And if it's on whale.to, then the omens aren't propitious to start with.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Are you decrying all his bona fides and stated experience? You think the entire thing is start-to-finish concoction?



I think that the piece is of its' time, and of the psychotherapeutic trends of the time, and that those trends and attitudes have been shown to be invalid, specious and actively harmful to patients.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Are you decrying all his bona fides and stated experience? You think the entire thing is start-to-finish concoction?


I've met a few PhD holders and academics who are meshugah...holding academic credentials doesn't necessarily mean you're not a mentalist


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 3, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> ...Hilda Murrell...



Just to needlessly confuse things - I'm on my tea break and my head's fried - one of the private detective agencies spying on the Sizewell B protesters (including Miss Murrell) was Zeus, which was set up by no less than Jimmy Goldsmith, and run by one Major Peter Hamilton. His extensive military-intelligence CV includes writing the British Army's anti-Mau Mau handbook and close involvement in establishing the right wing private armies Unison and Civil Assistance.

It would be interesting to see a detailed analysis of this strand juxtaposed with one of the Tara/Kincora issue. Certainly the Colin Wallace/Fred Holroyd material bridges between the Wilson plot/private armies/‘rogue MI5 officers’ stuff on the mainland, and the securocrats/paramilitaries stuff in Northern Ireland. Anyone suggest some substantial reading on this?

(Caveat: I'm not making claims that “_*EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED IN ONE BIG PAEDOPOCALYPTIC CONSPIRACY”*_, just interested in how so much of this stuff was happening in parallel, involving many of the same bodies in one way or another.)


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Just to needlessly confuse things - I'm on my tea break and my head's fried - one of the private detective agencies spying on the Sizewell B protesters (including Miss Murrell) was Zeus, which was set up by no less than Jimmy Goldsmith, and run by one Major Peter Hamilton. His extensive military-intelligence CV includes writing the British Army's anti-Mau Mau handbook and close involvement in establishing the right wing private armies Unison and Civil Assistance.
> 
> It would be interesting to see a detailed analysis of this strand juxtaposed with one of the Tara/Kincora issue. Certainly the Colin Wallace/Fred Holroyd material bridges between the Wilson plot/private armies/‘rogue MI5 officers’ stuff on the mainland, and the securocrats/paramilitaries stuff in Northern Ireland. Anyone suggest some substantial reading on this?
> 
> (Caveat: I'm not making claims that “_*EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED IN ONE BIG PAEDOPOCALYPTIC CONSPIRACY”*_, just interested in how so much of this stuff was happening in parallel, involving many of the same bodies in one way or another.)


Ironically, Zac Goldsmith was one of the MPs calling for an overarching inquiry yesterday.

You put it better, but my (mistimed) comment about nonce family trees kind of had this stuff in mind. It isn't so much that powerful abusers are connected (well, it *is*...), it's that there are connections there anyway.  They aren't lizardy, just the old fashioned structures of power.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Just to needlessly confuse things - I'm on my tea break and my head's fried - one of the private detective agencies spying on the Sizewell B protesters (including Miss Murrell) was Zeus, which was set up by no less than Jimmy Goldsmith, and run by one Major Peter Hamilton. His extensive military-intelligence CV includes writing the British Army's anti-Mau Mau handbook and close involvement in establishing the right wing private armies Unison and Civil Assistance.
> 
> It would be interesting to see a detailed analysis of this strand juxtaposed with one of the Tara/Kincora issue. Certainly the Colin Wallace/Fred Holroyd material bridges between the Wilson plot/private armies/‘rogue MI5 officers’ stuff on the mainland, and the securocrats/paramilitaries stuff in Northern Ireland. Anyone suggest some substantial reading on this?
> 
> (Caveat: I'm not making claims that “_*EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED IN ONE BIG PAEDOPOCALYPTIC CONSPIRACY”*_, just interested in how so much of this stuff was happening in parallel, involving many of the same bodies in one way or another.)


It has been alleged on C4 news years back that her alleged murderer was a neo nazi working for a private security firm, he has a long record of violent sex attacks against children. Michael Mansfield QC asked for another government enquiry in 2012.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 3, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> It has been alleged on C4 news years back that her alleged murderer was a neo nazi working for a private security firm...



Certainly David Copeland mentor David Myatt (a Column 88 alumnus, Combat 18/political soldier ideologue, poet and latter-day Muslim revert) was long associated with the Murrell case, but I take it that's not who we're talking about? I don't remember any nonce stuff?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 3, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> That reads as nutty to me



He seems to think Crowley was a satanist and Dion Fortune a bloke. He's recycling Ed Sanders and Maury Terry's fairy stories about the Process. 

He's pushing theories about MDP originating from abuse which are widely questioned but which were central to the whole satanic panic mess. He's citing stuff that he says came out in therapy as evidence.

Reads like satanic panic horseshit to me.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> He seems to think Crowley was a satanist and Dion Fortune a bloke. He's recycling Ed Sanders and Maury Terry's fairy stories about the Process.
> 
> He's pushing theories about MDP originating from abuse which are widely questioned but which were central to the whole satanic panic mess. He's citing stuff that he says came out in therapy as evidence.
> 
> Reads like satanic panic horseshit to me.



Im not too sure what's "satanic panic" about_ "From what I can tell, Satanism is an incredibly tiny pursuit in the UK" _but at least "Satanic" and "panic" rhyme, which gives the phrase inate creibility.

I was responding to a question raised by someone else with a bunch of strung together thoughts. Certainly the stuff about Crowley could have been better phrased because it looks like I associate him with Satanism, which I don't. I was citing his stuff about ritual sacrifice. Anyhow, if people don't take the Greenbaum stuff seriously, that's fine. At this point I don't think the avenue of Satanism is that fruitful a one in the context of the OP or where the country is at. There's nothing about stuff like Bryn Estyn or Elm Guesthouse that seem to raise the issue. The main thing for me at the mo would be keeping up pressure on the what, where, how, who and why of the missing dossier. Will this country stand for such obvious cover-up?


----------



## elbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Just as an aside, yesterday was another spike of interest in this story, with Brittan's twisting in the breeze plain for all to see.  However it didn't feel like a staging post towards prosections - ditto the MPs calling for an overall inquiry. Quite the opposite, it was little more than an illustration that there _won't_ be prosecutions, unless some other document emerges which puts some lower level player in the frame (elbows point last night).
> 
> Absurd to judge the story just 24 hours on, but it also doesn't seem to have much traction today.  Already slipped down the guardian's front page.  Also, Tom Watson seems to have left the field on this one.  Don't know that he was ever going to use parliamentary privelige to say anything or if he just hasn't got anything robust enough.



I would see recent events a sign of frustration at a lack of arrests or prosecutions so far, rather than a direct indication that we are moving closer or further from such stuff.

At this stage if I were them, I'd be using the threat of using parliamentary privilege, rather than actually doing it just now.

I remain of the opinion that if the establishment know whats good for them and want to engage in the usual 'line drawing and moving on', they could really do with at least one prosecution taking place. Without such a thing happening, people will see all sorts of coverups regardless of what level of coverup is actually taking place.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> No, you use the dirt to manipulate the politician into supporting MI5's interests.



There is a bigger picture to this. I recently finished reading Who Framed Colin Wallace by Paul Foot. Towards the end is a quote from the foreword to Lobster Magazine Summer 1986 by Kevin McNamara MP:



> Brutally summarised, our thesis is this. Mrs Thatcher and Thatcherism grew out of a right wing network in this country with extensive links to the military-intelligence establishment. Her rise to power was the climax of a long campaign of by this network which included a protracted nationalisation campaign against the Labour and Liberal parties - chiefly the Labour party - during 1974 - 1976.



Kincora is a case in point.

And that is before considering an wider picture of similar scandals across Europe, such as Dutroux in Belgium and the links it has to the intelligence community, extreme right terrorism (De Bende van Nijvel) and so on. Almost every country in Europe has had similar scandals. 

I believe now that these many (but not all) of these scandals are not isolated incidents but are part of a larger fabric.

I am really hesitant about suggesting this. I want to say that I have been extremely cautious in the research I have been carrying out about much of this.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> This post is from justthetalk.com:



Don't trust NTT/JTT, dodgy as fuck site full of crazed US zionists, liberal democrats and worse.

You are not one of them, don't waste your time with them.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Don't trust NTT/JTT, dodgy as fuck site full of crazed US zionists, liberal democrats and worse.



There's not THAT many zionists. The fore-runner Graun site was "invaded" by Free Republic loons in the wake of 911. There's not that many LDs either. It's generally centre left but with a decent and balanced mix going either direction. It's certainly more right wing than here, I wouldnt deny that.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 3, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> There's not THAT many zionists. The fore-runner Graun site was "invaded" by Free Republic loons in the wake of 911. There's not that many LDs either. It's generally centre left but with a decent and balanced mix going either direction. It's certainly more right wing than here, I wouldnt deny that.



GUT was excellent compared the cesspit NTT has become. Unlike here the anonymous moderators' agenda is just weird. Incestuous, right wing and self congratulatory bollocks, don't lower yourself to their standards, GF.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 3, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Takes about 1600 words to get to the Jews. It's all Cabalistic of course.



It's not anyone's fault what LB's ethnicity is. That's what it is, we can't change it.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 3, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> It's not anyone's fault what LB's ethnicity is. That's what it is, we can't change it.


I think it was the mention of Cabala that raised some people's hackles - itr certainly did mine


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 3, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Absurd to judge the story just 24 hours on, but it also doesn't seem to have much traction today.  Already slipped down the guardian's front page.QUOTE]


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 3, 2014)

Ignore my previous post above - still not got the hang of the Quote function!

Back up the news agenda tonight. Sky news carried interview with Dickens' son calling for a proper inquiry. Ditto Nick Clegg.

Sky also reporting Home Affairs Select Committee has called a senior Home Office civil servant to give evidence about the dossiers. It showed the letter and the list of questions he's to be asked although I wasn't quick enough to catch them all.

Sadly, it doesn't seem to be calling Brittan to give evidence.

Would have been interesting if it had - although perhaps more in an entertaining watch-him-hang-in-the-wind way than shedding any further light on the contents/whereabouts of the dossiers. (According to Newsnight last night there were actually two separate dossiers).

But Brittan's still not off the hook yet.


----------



## nogojones (Jul 3, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> If you're in MI5 and you find out that establishment figures are up to their neck in criminal activites, what do you _actually_ do about it?


 Sit on it to ensure the figure stays on your message


----------



## laptop (Jul 3, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> If you're in MI5 and you find out that establishment figures are up to their neck in criminal activites, what do you _actually_ do about it?



Priority 1 is to stop MI6 getting a hint of it, in case they can use it to do down you and your fellow peasants.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 3, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Certainly David Copeland mentor David Myatt (a Column 88 alumnus, Combat 18/political soldier ideologue, poet and latter-day Muslim revert) was long associated with the Murrell case, but I take it that's not who we're talking about? I don't remember any nonce stuff?


Don't know the name, just the allegation made in the C4 report that is on YouTube under Hilda Murrell, I cannot post link because I am presently inside the belly of the beast!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2014)

elbows said:


> I remain of the opinion that if the establishment know whats good for them and want to engage in the usual 'line drawing and moving on', they could really do with at least one prosecution taking place. Without such a thing happening, people will see all sorts of coverups regardless of what level of coverup is actually taking place.


I can see the logic of that, but it's also a very dangerous strategy in terms of containment.  Why non-politician nonce x gets prosecuted whilst politician nonce doesn't, what will come out in court, what will emerge in terms of previous non-enquiries - all highly problematic. 

The whole thing brings the British State and elite into the foreground, but also that conspiracists are wrong to see the elite as monolithic or having perfect control.  Same time, I hope to fuck somebody does end up in the dock, just to give something to the poor sods who have suffered so long.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> The whole thing brings the British State and elite into the foreground, but also that conspiracists are wrong to see the elite as monolithic or having perfect control.



Conspiracy theories, from 9/11 to the moon landings, invariably attribute a level of competence to the baddies in question that unduly flatters them.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 4, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Conspiracy theories, from 9/11 to the moon landings, invariably attribute a level of competence to the baddies in question that unduly flatters them.


Broadly speaking I would agree with you. However in this instance really bad stuff has been fairly effectively covered up for a very long time. Saville and Smith are, unfortunately beyond the reach of the long arm of the law. Indeed it would seem they (the security services) may well have had a part to play in this being the case.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Keith Vaz says there is "No reason" to ask Brittan to give evidence re: missing paedophile documents.




fuck vaz


----------



## Favelado (Jul 4, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Broadly speaking I would agree with you. However in this instance really bad stuff has been fairly effectively covered up for a very long time. Saville and Smith are, unfortunately beyond the reach of the long arm of the law. Indeed it would seem they may well have had a part to play in this being the case.



I agree with that and would not for one minute suggest they weren't capable of a cover up. You only need to follow Hillsborough to know what the establishment is capable of. I meant rather that conspiracy theorists tend to see everything as perfectly planned in advance by Machiavellian geniuses, rather than the mundane truth of them closing ranks and threatening people as they go along.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2014)

Things didn't have to be well covered up because they knew that no one with any power gave a flying fuck.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 4, 2014)

Keith Vaz is a career politician with a background in law who chairs the parliamentary committee responsible for policing issues, yet in the wake of the Tomlinson killing he claimed not to understand that TSG is a specialist riot-trained public order unit. He can't tell the difference between Patricia Gallan and Cressida Dick. He allowed Mark Kennedy to lie to his face in public, and to offer wildly contradictory evidence - in the same session! The man's a buffoon.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Things didn't have to be well covered up because they knew that no one with any power gave a flying fuck.


Well whilst I would to some extent agree it would seem that a fairly successful and sustained cover up has been carried out otherwise why are we only now really getting any details of what happened?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Things didn't have to be well covered up because they knew that no one with any power gave a flying fuck.




thats the thing with conspiracy moony type things- they see a direct and orchestrated plot (by the jews) when actually it's as terrifyingly prosaic as an intersection of power, interests, 'needs' and simple process. What is done is done because that is what is done and we all carry on. Lord Shittington-Nob chairs an enquiry 50 years after the fact


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Well whilst I would to some extent agree it would seem that a fairly successful and sustained cover up has been carried out otherwise why are we only now really getting any details of what happened?


It's the almost banal, half assed nature of the cover-ups, send it to the police who ignore it, ask a civil servant to say they can't find the papers, maybe get somebody to whisper in Geoffrey Dickens ear.  It's nothing too organised, little more than what a local council does if it gets a troublesome letter of complaint - same mechanisms at least, same lack of giving a shit for victims.  Like many other scandals the bulk of this story has been rattling around for decades, it's little more than background noise for the elite.  The Brittan dossier comes from an era when nobody seriously thought you could really overturn rank, vile crimes by the police or politicians (how long it took on the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 - Hillsborough more so).  For me, this only got close to having purchase partly because times have changed after the expenses saga, but even more so, Savile.  There was a moment when it looked like Watson was going to say something, Philip Schofield trying to pressurise Cameron (but fucking things up).  Then comes McAlpine and the twitterati and we're back to business as usual.  Sorry, late night rant...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 4, 2014)

I'm deeply concerned and angry that after 3 decades of no justice, the likelyhood is that this is being discussed high up as a "how can we news manage this?" rather than "How can we best and belatedly serve victims?"


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I'm deeply concerned and angry that after 3 decades of no justice, the likelyhood is that this is being discussed high up as a "how can we news manage this?" rather than "How can we best and belatedly serve victims?"


'The government is taking this seriously ......launched 3/4/5 separate inquiries... it is important that we don't comment.... allow the police to do their work.... these matters were thoroughly investigated by Lord ..... nothing can be gained from...... just fuck off'


----------



## teqniq (Jul 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> It's the almost banal, half assed nature of the cover-ups, send it to the police who ignore it, ask a civil servant to say they can't find the papers, maybe get somebody to whisper in Geoffrey Dickens ear.  It's nothing too organised, little more than what a local council does if it gets a troublesome letter of complaint.



Yup the Douglas Adams strategy...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 4, 2014)

Well we know that covering political arses and the rights of paedophiles were probably more important than those of mere victims 30 years ago. The Conservatives have a small timeframe now to demonstrate it is still not the case. If they fail, I genuinelly believe they should be overthrown. I know that's strong language, easy to say on a messageboard, and methodology is a very wide open issue, but it's not even just about victims but raw survival. If they let people fuck kids and fob us off about it then it's inevitable we're going to be metaphorically shafted in countless ways as well.

It's like the war crimes, all bets are off when they receive clear signals of what they can get away with


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 4, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Conspiracy theories, from 9/11 to the moon landings, invariably attribute a level of competence to the baddies in question that unduly flatters them.


Unless secret state/intelligence/military/govt operatives are far more competent than their counerparts in everyday life, I tend to favour a cock-up model over a conspiracy model unless proved otherwise. Years of observing fantastically piss-poor management decisions at work have led me to this POV


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Keith Vaz is a career politician with a background in law who chairs the parliamentary committee responsible for policing issues, yet who claimed not to understand that TSG are specialist riot-trained public order unit in the wake of the Tomlinson killing. He can't tell the difference between Patricia Gallan and Cressida Dick. He allowed Mark Kennedy to lie to his face in public, and to offer wildly contradictory evidence - in the same session! The man's a buffoon.





DotCommunist said:


> fuck vaz



Corrupt bastard.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)

My particular favourite, shall we say 'interesting' (but beautifully constructed) conspiracy that Childline and Crimewatch were simply fronts to weed out claims of wrongdoing by the elite and to make sure nothing came of them in the public eye.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)

Leon Brittan's private secretary - links with MI5?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)

Worth re-posting a couple of these maybe....

Customs seize video of child sex abuse and ex-minister

and this one


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)

What is the Telegraph suggesting?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 4, 2014)

they put leon brittans pic right next to the article? interesting - I assume their lawyers greenlighted it.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 4, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> they put leon brittans pic right next to the article? interesting - I assume their lawyers greenlighted it.



They've changed the image it's now this:






You can see it near the bottom of this page:


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 4, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> There is a bigger picture to this. I recently finished reading Who Framed Colin Wallace by Paul Foot. Towards the end is a quote from the foreword to Lobster Magazine Summer 1986 by Kevin McNamara MP:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was a Lobster subscriber from issue 3 till the last paper issue (56 IIRC), and have read most of what's gone into print about/by Wallace and Holroyd.
Lobster did, IIRC, feature an analysis of intelligence and military links to the Belgian paedo scene, and the complicity of elements of them in a series of robberies of banks and supermarkets that were given a high media profile during the Dutroux crisis.

Are we looking at part of a larger tapestry of Euro-noncery?  I don't know.  Is it possible that the larger tapestry exists/has existed? It's *eminently* possible.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 4, 2014)

William Clark, one of Lobster's contributors can be found here at Pink Industry.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 4, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Keith Vaz is a career politician with a background in law who chairs the parliamentary committee responsible for policing issues, yet who claimed not to understand that TSG are specialist riot-trained public order unit in the wake of the Tomlinson killing. He can't tell the difference between Patricia Gallan and Cressida Dick. He allowed Mark Kennedy to lie to his face in public, and to offer wildly contradictory evidence - in the same session! The man's a buffoon.



Buffoon, or Establishment goon who'll happily derail stuff his masters (i.e. the people who'll decide whether he becomes Lord Vaz) want him to?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 4, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I was a Lobster subscriber from issue 3 till the last paper issue (56 IIRC), and have read most of what's gone into print about/by Wallace and Holroyd.
> Lobster did, IIRC, feature an analysis of intelligence and military links to the Belgian paedo scene, and the complicity of elements of them in a series of robberies of banks and supermarkets that were given a high media profile during the Dutroux crisis.
> 
> Are we looking at part of a larger tapestry of Euro-noncery?  I don't know.  Is it possible that the larger tapestry exists/has existed? It's *eminently* possible.



I think if we're talking about spooks, Gladio (or whatever it was called in all the other countries where it provided a fertile source of criminality and neo-fascist killers and fruitcakes) and all that far-right underground stuff, we're probably talking about a high concentration of sociopaths. 

So it's not really a huge surprise if these people don't see anything wrong with raping little kids.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> What is the Telegraph suggesting?


I saw Loughton on Newsnight a day or two ago.  Was a bit weird listening to one of the usual parliamentary windbags droning on, but theoretically raising the issue of naming and shaming.  Merely from looking at his wiki, he seems to be another family values ant-same sex weddings feller.  Superficial parallel with Dickens. He's also had issues with the police. Is he about to go 'off grid'? Wild - and ill informed - speculation on my part, but I wondered why he has popped up over this? Sounds like something more than simply continuity with the job he used to do (children's minister).

edit: having a quick trawl shows he's had a few run ins with his bosses over the last 2 years.  Awkward squad, off message, wants to make a name for himself, fuck, might even be genuine (though he presumably did nothing as a minister - and he's only _threatening_ to name and shame now).


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 4, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I think if we're talking about spooks, Gladio (or whatever it was called in all the other countries where it provided a fertile source of criminality and neo-fascist killers and fruitcakes) and all that far-right underground stuff, we're probably talking about a high concentration of sociopaths.
> 
> So it's not really a huge surprise if these people don't see anything wrong with raping little kids.



Fully agree. Like Italy at the time the intelligence services are complicit and rotten to the core and politicians, media moguls, journalists and the military are in there too.

Evil fuckers the lot of them. What's the name of the British P2 Lodge equivalent?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 4, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Fully agree. Like Italy at the time the intelligence services are complicit and rotten to the core and politicians, media moguls, journalists and the military are in there too.
> 
> Evil fuckers the lot of them. What's the name of the British P2 Lodge equivalent?



I don't think there's a clear-cut equivalent, but rather a bunch of different groupings.

See e.g. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/aitken-dropped-by-the-rights-secret-club-1258522.html for one example ...


----------



## existentialist (Jul 4, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Fully agree. Like Italy at the time the intelligence services are complicit and rotten to the core and politicians, media moguls, journalists and the military are in there too.
> 
> Evil fuckers the lot of them. What's the name of the British P2 Lodge equivalent?


That would probably depend on your view of mainstream British freemasonry. P2 was an "irregular" lodge in an unrecognised branch of Italian (quasi-)Freemasonry.

There are many, not least on here, who would argue that mainstream freemasonry in the UK is equally venal, "irregular", and given to criminal activities, up to and including murder.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

but mainly they just stitchup the local trades in the provinces to freeze out any honest man and hold meat raffles and do charidee stuff that works out as a tax write off.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 4, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> but mainly they just stitchup the local trades in the provinces to freeze out any honest man and hold meat raffles and do charidee stuff that works out as a tax write off.


Are we still talking about Freemasons, or is this paedophiles? I lose track...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 4, 2014)

Any sort of network of privilege is _potential _cover for well-connected child rapists.

Edited to add: of course that doesn't mean that _all _of them are.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 4, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I don't think there's a clear-cut equivalent, but rather a bunch of different groupings.
> 
> See e.g. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/aitken-dropped-by-the-rights-secret-club-1258522.html for one example ...



Thanks for the link. I remember back in the early seventies there were various reports in Italian newspapers about a far right coup plot in the UK. At the time coup paranoia was rife what with what we now know was Gladio and then thought was merely rogue Intelligence Services and a few Generals.

Is the UK less corrupt than Italy? I don't think so, it's just that posh people give it a patina of respectability but it's the same old shit.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

the generals plot. They were actually planning a coup if Benn got in, a mildly social democratic left labour man but to them the re-incarnation of vladmir illich


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 4, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Is the UK less corrupt than Italy? I don't think so, it's just that posh people give it a patina of respectability but it's the same old shit.



Not sure about Italy, but there's a general delusion that we aren't corrupt "like other countries" that actually smacks of racism. This place is riddled with corruption. It's not so much a government as an open cesspit.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 4, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> the generals plot. They were actually planning a coup if Benn got in, a mildly social democratic left labour man but to them the re-incarnation of vladmir illich


I believe you are referring to the private armies - such as Unison, Civil Assistance and GB75 - set up or proposed by various right-wing types (often with Security Service or military backgrounds) to take the reins of the country during Wilson's last government (1974-1976).

These putative paramilitary forces, and the shenanigans of several MI5 officers, have become known as ‘the Wilson plot’, for reasons which have become lost in the mists of time.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> I believe you are referring to the private armies - such as Unison, Civil Assistance and GB75 - set up or proposed by various right-wing types (often with Security Service or military backgrounds) to take the reins of the country during Wilson's last government (1974-1976).
> 
> These putative paramilitary forces, and the shenanigans of several MI5 officers, have become known as ‘the Wilson plot’, a name whose origins have become lost in the mists of time.




where would I be without you to remember the stuff I only half know?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 4, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> where would I be without you to remember the stuff I only half know?


King of Muttsville?


----------



## laptop (Jul 4, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> These putative paramilitary forces, and the shenanigans of several MI5 officers, have become known as ‘the Wilson plot’, a name whose origins have become lost in the mists of time.



You mean "Colonel" Stirling's plot against the dangerous Bolshevik "Harold" Wilson? "The Stirling plot"? 

Didn't happen. (If you clicked that, MI5 now has your IP address flagged "sarcastic".)


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Not sure about Italy, but there's a general delusion that we aren't corrupt "like other countries" that actually smacks of racism. This place is riddled with corruption. It's not so much a government as an open cesspit.




someone made the entirely valid point on another thread that just because we don't have to bribe low level officials we think we are immune to graft and can roll eyes at the likes of say india. Our corruption is more endemic than that, its establishment. It's not wads of used notes in envelopes- it's sincures, it's grace and favour housing tied to the former, it's share tips, it's directorships. Class and corruption just woven in to the fabric.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 4, 2014)

Here's a handy primer:

Interactive: Who sat with whom at the Conservative Summer Party


----------



## laptop (Jul 4, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> someone made the entirely valid point on another thread that just because we don't have to bribe low level officials we think we are immune to graft and can roll eyes at the likes of say india. Our corruption is more endemic than that, its establishment. It's not wads of used notes in envelopes- it's sincures, it's grace and favour housing tied to the former, it's share tips, it's directorships. Class and corruption just woven in to the fabric.



I'm trying to remyoember more about the conversation i had with a German law professor (or were they a judge?) which concluded "Of course you don't have "corruption" in the UK. Look who makes your laws!"


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Here's a handy primer:
> 
> Interactive: Who sat with whom at the Conservative Summer Party



I've not clicked the link- but does it reveal who bought the signed by thatcher bottle of bubbly for 45 thousand pounds. Grinding our faces in it eh.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 4, 2014)

No. I'm afraid not but it is somewhat vomit-inducing and illustrates the way power and influence operate.

Back on track and Cameron has ordered a new inquiry into Westminster child abuse claims



> David Cameron has ordered a fresh investigation into what happened to a missing dossier of alleged paedophile activity involving politicians in the 1980s.
> 
> The inquiry follows pressure from former ministers and campaigners against child abuse to find the dossier, which was handed to the then home secretary, Leon Brittan, by the Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens.
> 
> Cameron said he understood the concerns that had been raised. "That's why I've asked the permanent secretary at the Home Office [Mark Sedwill] to do everything he can to find answers to all of these questions and to make sure we can reassure people about these events....



I wonder if this is going to be an effort to kick it into the long grass?


----------



## The Pale King (Jul 4, 2014)

An internal enquiry I think. Seems like they are thinking to quarantine it, offer a sacrificial lamb if need be. Worked for phone hacking.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 4, 2014)

'waiting for the results of the public enquiry'

yeah it's long grass stuff. The matter is under investigation by lord whatever, I cannot comment until those findings etc


----------



## kenny g (Jul 4, 2014)

teqniq said:


> No. I'm afraid not but it is somewhat vomit-inducing and illustrates the way power and influence operate.
> 
> Back on track and Cameron has ordered a new inquiry into Westminster child abuse claims
> 
> ...



What experience in complex criminal investigations does the permanent secretary at the Home Office have? Is he going to interview participants under caution? Is he trained in effective interview techniques? What investigative powers does he have? This is completely scandalous, and possibly criminal in itself. Touching on conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 4, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> I believe you are referring to the private armies - such as Unison, Civil Assistance and GB75 - set up or proposed by various right-wing types (often with Security Service or military backgrounds) to take the reins of the country during Wilson's last government (1974-1976).
> 
> These putative paramilitary forces, and the shenanigans of several MI5 officers, have become known as ‘the Wilson plot’, for reasons which have become lost in the mists of time.



http://www.8bitmode.com/rogerdog/lobster/lobster11.pdf is relevant here. AND


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 4, 2014)

kenny g said:


> http://www.8bitmode.com/rogerdog/lobster/lobster11.pdf is relevant here.


Tape all the issues of _Lobster_ to a wall, throw a dart, and wherever it lands it will hit something relevant here.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 4, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Tape all the issues of _Lobster_ to a wall, throw a dart, and wherever it lands it will hit something relevant here.



Never read the journal before TBH.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 4, 2014)

kenny g said:


> Never read the journal before TBH.


Worth checking out Dorril and Ramsay's other stuff:


_MI6: Fifty Years Of Special Operations_
_Smear! Wilson And The Secret State_
_The Silent Conspiracy: Inside The Intelligence Services In The 1990s_
_Prawn Cocktail Party: The Hidden Power Of New Labour_
_Pocket Essentials: New Labour_


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 4, 2014)

It is worth adding The Secret Worlds of Stephen Ward: Sex, Scandal and Deadly Secrets in the Profumo Affair by Anthony Summers and Stephen Dorril to that list. I finished it just the other day. Some of it is extremely relevant to this discussion. I was quite pleased to find that it was dedicated to Guy Debord.


----------



## The Pale King (Jul 4, 2014)

The Telegraph is leading with this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nvestigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html


----------



## elbows (Jul 4, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> The Telegraph is leading with this:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nvestigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html



Certainly if we take all of the stronger historical mutterings and what can be gleaned from taking a somewhat cautious view of stuff that floats around the net these days, and imagining that there are some perpetrators that have no such internet shadow to date, the number 20 seems within reasonable bounds.


----------



## The Pale King (Jul 5, 2014)

elbows said:


> Certainly if we take all of the stronger historical mutterings and what can be gleaned from taking a somewhat cautious view of stuff that floats around the net these days, and imagining that there are some perpetrators that have no such internet shadow to date, the number 20 seems within reasonable bounds.



It does. In the byline below the headline of the article the number 40 'mps and peers' appears, but I would guess this includes some deceased and some no longer in parliament. Simon Danczuk was on the news last night saying one name in particular keeps being mentioned by victims coming to see him.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I think if we're talking about spooks, Gladio (or whatever it was called in all the other countries where it provided a fertile source of criminality and neo-fascist killers and fruitcakes) and all that far-right underground stuff, we're probably talking about a high concentration of sociopaths.



Yep.  The "stay-behind" networks that were built with OSS/CIA help certainly provided a ready source of cunts, guns and money, and fostered an attitude of being above the law.



> So it's not really a huge surprise if these people don't see anything wrong with raping little kids.



With raping kids and/or *facilitating* the rape of kids.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Fully agree. Like Italy at the time the intelligence services are complicit and rotten to the core and politicians, media moguls, journalists and the military are in there too.



Even if there's no over-arching "network", there are so many coinciding interests between such people and their "establishments" that complicity comes easily.



> Evil fuckers the lot of them. What's the name of the British P2 Lodge equivalent?



I doubt there is one, purely because there doesn't need to be in a nation-state where the "Chinese Walls" between supposedly-incompatible interests are so thin.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2014)

existentialist said:


> That would probably depend on your view of mainstream British freemasonry. P2 was an "irregular" lodge in an unrecognised branch of Italian (quasi-)Freemasonry.
> 
> There are many, not least on here, who would argue that mainstream freemasonry in the UK is equally venal, "irregular", and given to criminal activities, up to and including murder.



Except that (for the most part) they're entirely more quotidian than that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Any sort of network of privilege is _potential _cover for well-connected child rapists.
> 
> Edited to add: of course that doesn't mean that _all _of them are.



As was repeatedly stated on earlier threads. 
I think that some posters had a hard time assimilating that, because we're more used to looking at networks as individual vehicles for *particular* single purposes, than for multiple purposes.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 5, 2014)

It’s a fair bet that Cameron would have been briefed about the contents of the file, and what happened to it, before he publically announced Sedwill’s investigation.

If he thought something unpleasant would be revealed , or something that couldn’t be readily swept under the carpet, he wouldn’t have publically asked Sedwill’s to look into the matter in the first place.

It may just be semantics but Cameron’s wording is interesting in this regard:

“ . . . I've asked the permanent secretary at the Home Office to do everything he can to find answers to all of these questions and to *make sure we can reassure people about these events. *[my emphasis]

In short, he wouldn't be so stupid as to ask a question he doesn't already know the answer to. He already knows nothing embarrassing will come to light.

As a guess, the conclusion of the investigation will be something along the lines of “the appropriate action was taken . . . dossier lost/destroyed during the move to a new building . . . we found no evidence of wrongdoing” etc etc.

Of course, finding evidence of wrongdoing is often a function of how hard you actually look for it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> I believe you are referring to the private armies - such as Unison, Civil Assistance and GB75 - set up or proposed by various right-wing types (often with Security Service or military backgrounds) to take the reins of the country during Wilson's last government (1974-1976).
> 
> These putative paramilitary forces, and the shenanigans of several MI5 officers, have become known as ‘the Wilson plot’, for reasons which have become lost in the mists of time.



That old fucker Stirling was tied up in a fair bit of shenaniganning in the '60s and '70s, incl. (IIRC) private intelligence-gathering, and fronting some of the recruitment efforts for various of the above undertakings.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Worth checking out Dorril and Ramsay's other stuff:
> 
> 
> _MI6: Fifty Years Of Special Operations_
> ...



And, if you're interested in the history of British fascism, Dorril's "Blackshirt" bio of Mosley is a very good read.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 5, 2014)

*"Child abuse files lost at Home Office spark fears of cover-up"*

I suspect that's not "fears", but legalese for "a certainty".

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/05/lost-child-abuse-files-home-office

"The government faced fresh calls for an overarching inquiry into historical cases of paedophilia as it was revealed that a total of 114 Home Office files relevant to allegations of a child abuse network have disappeared from government records."

This *has* to be dodgy...


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 5, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> It is worth adding The Secret Worlds of Stephen Ward: Sex, Scandal and Deadly Secrets in the Profumo Affair by Anthony Summers and Stephen Dorril to that list. I finished it just the other day. Some of it is extremely relevant to this discussion. I was quite pleased to find that it was dedicated to Guy Debord.


I have their 1987 book on the Profumo affair, 'Honeytrap: the scandal'  (best analysis of the case I've read). It was a tie-in with the 'Scandal' film: wonder if this is an updated edition with new material? There must be still loads of unpublished info. Apparently, we, the public, are still not allowed to read a transcript of the Ward trial, even though it was over 50 years ago...  

House of Lords, 16 January 2014: 'Justice spokesman Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, pressed to release a full transcript of his trial, told the House: "The government cannot identify a full transcript of the Stephen Ward trial within its records."'


----------



## teqniq (Jul 5, 2014)

The BBC did a pretty large piece on it on this evening's news


----------



## existentialist (Jul 5, 2014)

teqniq said:


> The BBC did a pretty large piece on it on this evening's news


They're probably thinking "Thank goodness: at last, a paedophile sex scandal that isn't going to drag us into the mire again. Let's give it everything we've got!"


----------



## spartacus mills (Jul 6, 2014)

BBC News website saying that Independent on Sunday is reporting Leon Britton has been questioned under caution by police regarding the alleged rape of a woman in the 1960s


----------



## treelover (Jul 6, 2014)

Blimey..


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 6, 2014)

Here it is ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...d-by-police-over-rape-allegation-9587245.html


----------



## treelover (Jul 6, 2014)

Just googled L/B , it seems there are loads of accusations about unsavoury activities and worse across the web for ages.


----------



## treelover (Jul 6, 2014)

> http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/



from last year.

update, some very dodgy 'outing' on the above, is it ok to post it?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 6, 2014)

and another ..this one will run and run

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...allegations-include-rape-sexual-assaults.html


----------



## treelover (Jul 6, 2014)

Today, I spoke to my friend who I have mentioned broke the North Wales Childrens Home scandal, she says there is much much more to come out including links between that scandal and what happened in London.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 6, 2014)

Looks like the _Mirror_ can't find photographs of any other politicians at the moment:


----------



## free spirit (Jul 6, 2014)

treelover said:


> Today, I spoke to my friend who I have mentioned broke the North Wales Childrens Home scandal, she says there is much much more to come out including links between that scandal and what happened in London.


sounds like some of the stuff that was posted  / linked to towards the start of this thread, and long alleged by the North Wales victims.

as it unravels, it does seem that the web articles that seemed very out there at the time, are proving to have been pretty accurate sources, albeit with the mix up with Lord whatshisface.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 6, 2014)

> dossier handled in the normal way?



the normal way for paedophile dossiers relating to high up society / politcal types apparently being to get them to London then lose them and bury it. See also Cyril Smith's police dossier.


----------



## treelover (Jul 6, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> and another ..this one will run and run
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681827/Labour-Lords-sex-attacks-12-children-Horrific-allegations-include-rape-sexual-assaults.html




Labour this time, the DM will have been keeping this for now, all the press will have loads of stories/leads, etc they have been sitting on.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Well at least the question of why the press decided to play silly games with Leon Brittan stuff this week makes more sense with the revelation that he was actually questioned about the alleged rape recently.

I wonder what Exaro News will do now, given their previous approach of going into lots of detail and joining plenty of dots, and simply leaving out names, has been pushed into new territory as a result of the Independent piece. Many of their articles will read differently now to the previously uninitiated.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

On the wackier Geoffrey Dickens stuff, we also now have this from the Mirror:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mp-who-handed-vip-paedophile-3816675



> But soon afterwards, Mr Dickens’ constituency home in Saddleworth, Lancs, and his flat in London were ransacked – and his name was found in a notebook owned by killer Arthur Hutchinson.
> 
> The armed robber had murdered a bride’s parents and brother hours after she had got married in Sheffield in 1983.
> 
> ...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 6, 2014)

A "review into a review" is straight out of "Yes Minister", though I don't recall a plot about child rape being covered up.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 6, 2014)

The link that treelover posted - 

http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/

is pretty strong stuff. Is scriptonite daily kosher? Im not getting any tinfoil hat/"it was the joos!" type vibes but want to be sure before i facebook it.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 6, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> A "review into a review" is straight out of "Yes Minister", though I don't recall a plot about child rape being covered up.


We surely need a new Minister for the Wording of Statements on How We Are Going To Send Somebody Else To Confirm That Some Other Bloke Chucked The Paperwork in The Bin 30 Years Ago.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

Interesting quote from Norman Tebbit on the Andrew Marr show this morning (as reported on the BBC website http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28182373):

. . .The former Tory minister and party chairman also said there may have been a political cover-up of abuse in the 1980s.

"At that time most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected.

"And if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system than to delve too far into them.

"That view was wrong then and it has spectacularly shown to have been wrong because the abuses have grown."

Lord Tebbit added that "it was the thing that people did at that time, you didn't talk about those sort of things".


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 6, 2014)

There was a story in a newspaper today that didn't name a name

Here is a list of names:

http://www.labourlords.org.uk/LABOUR-PEERS


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 6, 2014)

It is a list of names. Of that we can be certain.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

Would be interesting to know the timeframe of this 'historical' set of allegations involving a Labour peer.

I.e. do they form part of the Saville/Smith plus assorted Tories, diplomats and spooks cluster or are they something separate, e.g. from the Blair years?


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

Sorry - cocked up Quote function again!

Meant to reply to Treelovers post 2736:

IF it's genuine that's a hell of a list.

For obvious reasons I'm not going to comment on anyone who is still alive but Colin Jordan - arguably Britain's foremost Nazi. Bloody hell!

It does raise a number of questions:

1) The photo of the list appears to have been cropped. I wonder what was at the bottom of the page.

2) Was it the only page, or were there others?

3) Why was the list compiled and who was it intended for?


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Its one of the documents from NAYPIC that I often go on about. It was from a bunch of notes that the charity made back in the day when it was talking to some victims and the female manager of the guest house (who subsequently died). It, and a lot of other, less interesting, documents from the same source were crudely photographed and released onto the net, if memory serves me correctly approximately 18 months ago. The police subsequently took away the files as part of their Fernbridge/Fairbanks investigation, files which had been sitting in a shed for a couple of decades. Files that were being looked after by a woman from NAYPIC who does not trust the police and, according to some parts of her historical internet footprint, sometimes suffers from some problems of the mind (e.g. thinks she is related to royalty).

That page is certainly one of the major sources of fuel for the persistent, but rather sloppy and on legally dodgy ground, twitter and broader internet mini shitstorm thats been going for quite some time now.

I'm pretty sure that even Chris Faye, who worked for NAYPIC back in the day, characterised the documents as being a starting point for proper investigation, not some cast iron smoking gun thing. For example I don't think its in dispute that Elm Guest House was a gay brothel, and evidence of attendance is not, on its own, evidence of child abuse.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 6, 2014)

Just watched the video posted on that Scriptonite blog link. Fucking nora! Hat off to Chris Faye!


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Here is Chris Faye being far more detailed and sensible about the files, explaining what they were and were not, from about a year ago:

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/elm-guest-house-mary-moss-files/

(Mary Moss is the NAYPIC woman I mentioned in my previous post.)


----------



## Sirena (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> I'm pretty sure that even Chris Faye, who worked for NAYPIC back in the day, characterised the documents as being a starting point for proper investigation, not some cast iron smoking gun thing. For example I don't think its in dispute that Elm Guest House was a gay brothel, and evidence of attendance is not, on its own, evidence of child abuse.



I know connections have been alleged with children in care.  But the guest house, generally, would have been trading as a bit of a gay knocking shop, of which here are still a couple in West London.  So, famous people who visited there (and who were listed by Carol Kasir) might have simply been visiting discreetly with partners or rent boys.

I heard from a friend of mine - whose mother worked with Cliff Richard back in the day - that Cliff wasn't thought to be gay but he just liked to dress up.  And, in those days, you needed a discreet place to be able to do that


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Might be a load of shit but I'll post it anyway.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...suspected-paedophiles-MP-pressured-not-to-out



> Mr Danczuk was ready to name the suspects in Tuesday’s select committee hearing.
> 
> On the eve of the meeting, however, he was told in relation to one individual: “He is an old man who is very ill. Do you want to be responsible for the death of a former member of this house?


----------



## torquemad (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Would be interesting to know the timeframe of this 'historical' set of allegations involving a Labour peer.
> 
> I.e. do they form part of the Saville/Smith plus assorted Tories, diplomats and spooks cluster or are they something separate, e.g. from the Blair years?



No. Before the Blair years. Well before.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

Just to reiterate something about the "Dickens Dossier" that Leon Brittan seems to have mislaid.

Dickens was a key figure in the 'Satanic Panics' see e.g. http://barthsnotes.com/2014/07/02/geoffrey-dickens-child-abuse-claims-and-satanic-panic/

Based on his witch-hunting activities contemporary with that dossier, I would be _extremely _sceptical about any allegations he was making.

There may be some real evidence but based on the rest of what he was up to at the time, there's also likely to be a lot "Satan ate my baby" stuff made up by fundie headcases.

edited to provide a more concise link.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

torquemad said:


> No. Before the Blair years. Well before.



Do you have a link? 

I couldn't see any clear reference to when the child abuse by a current Labour peer was meant to have happened in the Daily Mail article I read.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just to reiterate something about the "Dickens Dossier" that Leon Brittan seems to have mislaid.
> 
> Dickens was a key figure in the 'Satanic Panics' see e.g. http://www.paganlibrary.com/witch_hunting/dickens_child_sex_witch-hunt.php
> 
> Based on his witch-hunting activities contemporary with that dossier, I would be _extremely _sceptical about any allegations he was making.



I expect that he simply compiled material that was provided to him by others, including letters by members of the public. I wouldn't place much faith in his ability to sensibly edit the stuff and weed out the silly shit, but that doesn't really matter. From what the press have said about the dossier(s), I would expect that quite a lot of it relates to stuff that is discussed elsewhere on the net.

As for more detail on what was in it, this is a fair start:

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/what-was-in-geoffrey-dickens-dossier/


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> I expect that he simply compiled material that was provided to him by others, including letters by members of the public. I wouldn't place much faith in his ability to sensibly edit the stuff and weed out the silly shit, but that doesn't really matter. From what the press have said about the dossier(s), I would expect that quite a lot of it relates to stuff that is discussed elsewhere on the net.
> 
> As for more detail on what was in it, this is a fair start:
> 
> http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/what-was-in-geoffrey-dickens-dossier/



Sure, but they've taken (one might say cherry-picked) a sane-sounding quote there.

Here are some other 1980's Dickens quotes:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...zhAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=N1kMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1963,3804610

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/102072811

edited to add:

Now I'm not saying that his dossier can't have contained stuff with a basis in evidence, but his track record suggests that he was willing to uncritically promote utterly batshit fundie propaganda about satanic child abuse that wrecked the lives of thousands of innocent people while having almost no basis in reality. So as much as I'd like to see a bunch of politicians, especially Thatcherite ones, locked up as baby-rapers, I remain _extremely _skeptical of anything Dickens had to say.


----------



## torquemad (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Do you have a link?
> 
> I couldn't see any clear reference to when the child abuse by a current Labour peer was meant to have happened in the Daily Mail article I read.



There was no link. I know because the identity because I was told by someone, then in care, who was abused by this person as a child. It has been common knowledge in certain quarters fro some years.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just to reiterate something about the "Dickens Dossier" that Leon Brittan seems to have mislaid.
> 
> Dickens was a key figure in the 'Satanic Panics' see e.g. http://barthsnotes.com/2014/07/02/geoffrey-dickens-child-abuse-claims-and-satanic-panic/
> 
> ...



I remember him saying he had a 'dossier' about Satanic Ritual Child Abuse and wondered what had happened to it...  Here's a link to his involvement with the persecution of the Sorceror's Apprentice shop in Leeds
http://www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/cookdate.htm


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

Yep, he was also enthusiastically promoting Audrey Harper's 'Satan Ate My Baby' stories.


> Geoffrey Dickens latched on to Audrey Harper immediately, supporting her and helping her spread the news that, to her knowledge, English Satanists were still sacrificing children. Dickens was one of two Tory MPs (the other being DavidWilshire) engaged in anti-occult agitation during the late ’80s. Wilshire actually called for witchcraft laws to be re-instated, and Dickens campaigned for occult literature to be restricted or banned. Complaining that “perverted cults which worship the devil can freely publish guides on how to dabble in the occult,” he opined, “The Home Office must act.”
> 
> He worked closely with Childwatch, a Hull-based organization that used every opportunity to warn the public about Satanic ritual abuse in England. Its founder, Diane Core, declared that up to 4000 English children were being sacrificed by Satanists annually. <snip>
> 
> In spite of a years-long crusade against Satanic crime, no evidence of the mass murder of children by Satanists ever surfaced. The entire campaign was based on anecdotes, recovered memories, and uncorroborated stories from “former Satanists” and “ritual abuse survivors”.



https://swallowingthecamel.wordpress.com/2011/07/


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Might be a load of shit but I'll post it anyway.
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/487044/Parliamentarians-as-suspected-paedophiles-MP-pressured-not-to-out



I think it's true - *c*orroborated by the Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nge-Leon-Brittan-over-paedophile-dossier.html

Also confirmed by Danzuck himself on Radio 4 this lunchtime.

If I heard correctly, in the radio interview he says that he was thinking of naming 2 people, one of whom may or may not have been Brittan, at the hearing under Parliamentary Privilege but decided not to do so.

By the way, Keith Vaz refused to be interviewed on the programme but issued a statement along the same lines as Cameron, Gove etc: "nothing should be done to prejudice a police inquiry".

Interesting that they are all using exactly the same line.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Yep, he was also enthusiastically promoting Audrey Harper's 'Satan Ate My Baby' stories.



I was on a Robert Kilroy-Silk programme in 1998 with Audrey Harper..


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Do you have a link?
> 
> I couldn't see any clear reference to when the child abuse by a current Labour peer was meant to have happened in the Daily Mail article I read.



It's been widely reported that a serving Labour peer has had his premises searched in relation to very serious allegations of historic child abuse.

It may, or may not, be the person referred to in the Mail article although he, as yet, has not been interviewed or arrested.

Neither has the peer referred to in the Mail.

If it is the same person, it's rather old news.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just to reiterate something about the "Dickens Dossier" that Leon Brittan seems to have mislaid.
> 
> Dickens was a key figure in the 'Satanic Panics' see e.g. http://barthsnotes.com/2014/07/02/geoffrey-dickens-child-abuse-claims-and-satanic-panic/
> 
> ...



While it may be wise to be sceptical about allegations made by GD - we don't, of course, know the source of the allegations presented to him.

It is certainly healthy to be skeptical about how and why the dossier would go go walkies and why the person who supplied it appears to have been professionally burgled and even on a hitman list. Wether or not you trust GD doesn't really alter the fact that this stinks to the heavens.

Apols if link or info has been posted before.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mp-who-handed-vip-paedophile-3816675


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Here is Chris Faye being far more detailed and sensible about the files, explaining what they were and were not, from about a year ago:
> 
> http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/elm-guest-house-mary-moss-files/
> 
> (Mary Moss is the NAYPIC woman I mentioned in my previous post.)



Thanks Elbows. You may not know the answer to this but in the above Needleblog article, in the 4th para Faye refers to a handwritten list he made of people who stayed at the Elm Guest House.

Is this the same list as that photographed and placed on the scriptonitedaily site?


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Thats the entire point of me posting that stuff today in light of recent posts by others, yes.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> If it is the same person, it's rather old news.



Its probably a different case, but not quite enough detail to be absolutely certain. Still, I don't think the number of victims mentioned by the mail matches the known historical allegations and fresh police investigation you refer to.


----------



## laptop (Jul 6, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> There may be some real evidence but based on the rest of what he was up to at the time, there's also likely to be a lot "Satan ate my baby" stuff made up by fundie headcases.



Aye: to be fair to the civil servants, I was thinking that if I'd had a Dickens Dossier I'd likely have lost it too.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Interesting that they are all using exactly the same line.



because they've all been briefed


----------



## laptop (Jul 6, 2014)

Now Tebbit's on the case:



> The former Conservative cabinet minister Lord Tebbit has said he believes there "may well" have been a political cover-up over child abuse in the 1980s.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/06/child-abuse-coverup-1980s-lord-tebbit



Can't remember whether he has form on the issue...

And:



> Calls for 'overarching, Hillsborough-style' inquiry as it emerges that a total of *114 documents* are missing from official records
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/05/lost-child-abuse-files-home-office



E2A: whoops, slow this morning afternoon


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 6, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> The link that treelover posted -
> 
> http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/
> 
> is pretty strong stuff. Is scriptonite daily kosher? Im not getting any tinfoil hat/"it was the joos!" type vibes but want to be sure before i facebook it.



The claims made by Chris Faye AFAIK are pretty solid. He has first hand knowledge about some of the events.

It's worth watching the Elm Tree Nightmare video in the link, especially towards the end where he confirms that names were known by police, media and government when the inquest was bring held into Carol Kasir's death. According to Faye he came out of court to be ignored by UK media and on asking a BBC journo why was told "D-Notice".


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 6, 2014)

Should also mention that Kasir's death is suspicious, also talked about in the video. The inquest into her death was in 1990, so the information has been known about for a long time. If Faye is correct, we could have been having this conversation 24 years ago.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 6, 2014)

The other man in the video, and Bill Maloney,  doesn't do the piece any favours. I can understand has anger given his apparent background but he ventures a little into Mr Angry mode which for your casual observer is probably a bit off putting. He interrupted a Lib Dem press piece (and bbc journo on the spot)  outside the Houses of Parliament asking a sheepish Nick Clegg what he knew about Paedophile networks in the government. It's on YouTube


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Thats the entire point of me posting that stuff today in light of recent posts by others, yes.



Thanks Elbows - that makes things a bit clearer.

Danzcuk said today that things are now coming to head.

David Mellor has just been wheeled out to discredit Dickens, saying he was essentially a self-publicist.

How do you see things panning out over the next few days and weeks with regard to the Dickens files, the allegations contained in them, and Brittan's role in all this?


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> How do you see things panning out over the next few days and weeks with regard to the Dickens files, the allegations contained in them, and Brittan's role in all this?



Dunno really. The press clearly have an appetite for more, but not sure how far they'll go. There is quite a gap between details that Exaro reported months ago and events of the last week, the mainstream media haven't merged it all together yet and its not clear if they will at this point. And its not clear that there is much more to give the specific 'Dickens Dossier' part of the story more legs, but thats not a bad thing since its been more of a way to keep the story alive in the media without libel issues, and put pressure on the politicians, than the central and most important thing when it comes to actually bringing about justice.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Or to put it another way, I'm most interested in prosecutions, and there hasn't been any good news in that regard for ages now. The political fallout and prospect of inquiries interests me too, but not as much as people actually being brought to justice.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 6, 2014)

Mark Watts of Exaro

@MarkWatts_1 But both the immediate devs, and the additional story to come, will make #CSAinquiry “irresistible”, to quote @ZacGoldsmith.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Mark Watts of Exaro
> 
> @MarkWatts_1 But both the immediate devs, and the additional story to come, will make #CSAinquiry “irresistible”, to quote @ZacGoldsmith.



I wonder if he meant ... 

Irresistible in pursuit of justice?

Or irresistible as a lightning-rod for growing public distrust and loathing of the political class?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 6, 2014)

Yeah, I need that one explaining!


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> David Mellor has just been wheeled out to discredit Dickens, saying he was essentially a self-publicist.



Lol! Like Mellor _isn't _a self-publicist himself.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Jul 6, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Lol! Like Mellor _isn't _a self-publicist himself.



He always makes my skin crawl, and the thought of him in that football top shagging.  Eurgh.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 6, 2014)

farmerbarleymow said:


> He always makes my skin crawl, and the thought of him in that football top shagging.  Eurgh.



Well, this is a serious subject but if I can be forgiven a throwaway comment - what does his come-face look like if the normal one is that ugly?


----------



## Quartz (Jul 6, 2014)

A Tory MP says he was warned off:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nge-Leon-Brittan-over-paedophile-dossier.html


----------



## laptop (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> If it is the same person, it's rather old news.



Entire content of story: "Themmuns were at it too. Allegedly."


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Jul 6, 2014)

Tom Watson has a petition up on Change.org demanding a proper enquiry:

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petiti...iry-into-allegations-of-organised-child-abuse


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

Something I should have mentioned earlier in fairness to Geoffrey Dickens.

He's alleged to have given Leon Brittan "Dickens' Disappearing Dossier" in 1983.

The earliest reference to him jumping on the Satanic Panic bandwagon was pretty shortly after it arrived from the US in the form of fundie 'experts' eager to run seminars for 'investigators' and hand out 'activist packs', roughly late '87.

So it's _just possible_ that his beliefs and standards of evidence had altered over that period and that he was less credulous back in the early 80's than he was in the late 80's.

After all, if you just had all your evidence vanished by a real conspiracy, it's potentially going to predispose you to be more open to imaginary ones and to the testimony of obviously batshit fundies claiming that "Satan Ate My Baby" etc.

_Possible_, but not likely IMO.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 6, 2014)

its also entirely possible that faced with the idea that the establishment are child abusing cunts who collude in if not partake in the covering up of said crimes, its easier for aman of his age and class to latch onto satanic ritual abuse. Evil satanists vs the so called arbiters of good and democracy


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 6, 2014)

That guy on BBC news just used the word coincidence far to many times to be a coincidence.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Or to put it another way, I'm most interested in prosecutions, and there hasn't been any good news in that regard for ages now. The political fallout and prospect of inquiries interests me too, but not as much as people actually being brought to justice.



I agree prosecutions - particularly if they were successful, would be great and would at least go some way in securing justice for the survivors.

But I’m also interested in the role Leon Brittan is playing in all this.

The fact that news of his interview under police caution about an alleged rape has come out today cannot be a coincidence in light of the allegations about the missing dossier.

Tom Symonds, a BBC correspondent, today raised the question about the timing of the two events - whether they were linked in some way - but didn’t attempt to answer it. However, it was obvious he thought they were.

Leaving my tin-foil hat firmly locked in the cupboard, I’m not sure what the link is.

Is someone trying to discredit Brittan? Is it a veiled warning for him to keep his mouth shut? Is he being set up as some sort of fall guy to protect others?

Or is there something else that I’m missing entirely?


----------



## laptop (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Or is there something else that I’m missing entirely?



Is Brittan insufficiently Eurosceptic?


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> The fact that news of his interview under police caution about an alleged rape has come out today cannot be a coincidence in light of the allegations about the missing dossier.
> 
> Tom Symonds, a BBC correspondent, today raised the question about the timing of the two events - whether they were linked in some way - but didn’t attempt to answer it. However, it was obvious he thought they were.
> 
> Leaving my tin-foil hat firmly locked in the cupboard, I’m not sure what the link is.



The media know the historical rumours, and are more than capable of reading whats been on the internet for quite some time. They are also well aware of the legal minefield they operate in here.

As for exactly why this week as opposed to, for example 6 or 12 months ago, there are a number of possibilities. Here are a bunch, with ones I consider slightly more significant featuring earlier on:

Probably there were strong rumours that Brittan had actually finally been questioned about the historical alleged rape, and they weren't happy that this hadn't been reported or confirmed. Because until this part of the story broke, much less reported but still 'proper media' Exaro pieces detailed how the then-unnamed person had not even been questioned, and how the likes of Tom Watson were pressuring the CPS etc over how this was handled, and how the alleged victim was being treated.

They might not have liked whats been reported in regards to Fernbridge not having made arrests of politicians in the last year+ and the prospects of it doing so in future.

They may see the campaigners & MPs gathering momentum in regards to an over-arching inquiry, and have their own, more lurid, ideas of how this stuff should proceed.

The biggest celebrity trials are done, along with Savile NHS reports, so time to take the story to new ground.

The summer slow news silly season (e.g. parliament going on holiday) looms.


And yes, you do seem to be missing some pieces of the jigsaw, but don't ask me to lay them out bluntly and plainly right now, for the media have not joined it altogether yet and I don't intend to push my luck at this point. Read some older Exaro stories.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

The most interesting thing about the Daily Mail story about a Labour Peer is their suggestion that 12 victims have talked to police about it. Thats far more victims than we are aware have come forwards in any of the other politician cases, and would hopefully make it easier to go for a prosecution.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 6, 2014)

The thread is too long to go back over and read all of it so apologies if this has already been posted.
Last night on the radio Edwina Currie was saying that perhaps resources would be better spent finding the paedophiles of today rather than going back 30 years to bring those people to justice.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Jul 6, 2014)

Betsy said:


> The thread is too long to go back over and read all of it so apologies if this has already been posted.
> Last night on the radio Edwina Currie was saying that perhaps resources would be better spent finding the paedophiles of today rather than going back 30 years to bring those people to justice.



So presumably such an attitude would extend to all criminal offences that happened more than in the immediate past.  Murder, arson, terrorism?  An interesting argument she is putting forward there.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Should also mention that Kasir's death is suspicious, also talked about in the video. The inquest into her death was in 1990, so the information has been known about for a long time. If Faye is correct, we could have been having this conversation 24 years ago.



Those who have looked through historical press clippings, and those that have seen the results of their efforts, know that there have been opportunities to have at least a fair chunk of this conversation at various points over the years. Leaving aside the recent post-Savile years, we can see various degrees of press interest in 1982 and 1990.

e.g. the various historical articles shown here:

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.c...edophile-network-was-covered-up-for-31-years/

Sadly that blog is iffy in places so I'd only really use it for the scans of old press articles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2014)

back in 1990, i heard someone name a high profile politician as a paedo and said there'd been a d notice put on it. i bet the mp was feeling a bit sheepish when he had to confess all to mrs t.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 6, 2014)

Interesting below for the Geoffrey Dickens quote. These four knew Colin Peters (ex foreign office barrister who used Elm Tree to make videos and abuse boys)








I spent some time previously trying to do some sort of chart to show the links between different people and groups etc.. I gave up because it is so widespread and there are so any links it is really hard to put together. What it did show me is the size of what is being dealt with.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Those who have looked through historical press clippings, and those that have seen the results of their efforts, know that there have been opportunities to have at least a fair chunk of this conversation at various points over the years. Leaving aside the recent post-Savile years, we can see various degrees of press interest in 1982 and 1990.
> 
> e.g. the various historical articles shown here:
> 
> ...



The scans of old press articles tell a reasonably coherent story in themselves, especially in the light of the Exaro stuff you mentioned earlier.

Edited to add: see what you mean about "iffy". Just found a page on that blog uncritically quoting Diane "4000 children a year sacrificed to Satan in the UK" Core of Childwatch.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Interesting below for the Geoffrey Dickens quote. These four knew Colin Peters (ex foreign office barrister who used Elm Tree to make videos and abuse boys)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you can download a range of social network software without charge - see e.g. http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Interesting below for the Geoffrey Dickens quote. These four knew Colin Peters (ex foreign office barrister who used Elm Tree to make videos and abuse boys)



For reference, an Independent article from last year that discusses the Colin Peters connection to Elm Guest House.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-peters-linked-to-barnes-scandal-8518078.html


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> you can download a range of social network software without charge - see e.g. http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php



Thanks. I was searching for something like that but couldn't find the right search term!


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I spent some time previously trying to do some sort of chart to show the links between different people and groups etc.. I gave up because it is so widespread and there are so any links it is really hard to put together. What it did show me is the size of what is being dealt with.



Looks like others have tried hard to do this for some years now. For example this webbrain: https://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/0FE31538-2121-8495-33A5-86073BE95DE1#-1

I think the main problem with attempting this is of a different nature though. The problem is not created by the number of cases, its the quality and number of links we can make using information presently in the public domain. Personally I've only seen a small number of potentially interesting links, and they aren't usually solid enough to shout about beyond what the likes of Exaro and the Sunday People have already done in recent years, without at least further info and investigations by law enforcement etc.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> The most interesting thing about the Daily Mail story about a Labour Peer is their suggestion that 12 victims have talked to police about it. Thats far more victims than we are aware have come forwards in any of the other politician cases, and would hopefully make it easier to go for a prosecution.


I think the problem with the politician cases is different: it is not how many people have to come forwards to make a case for looking at prosecution, so much as how many people can come forwards before NOT looking at prosecution begins to look extremely dodgy.

My guess is that we're somewhere between the two right now...

And that somewhere in government, it is someone's job to try and keep it that way.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> The media know the historical rumours, and are more than capable of reading whats been on the internet for quite some time. They are also well aware of the legal minefield they operate in here.
> 
> As for exactly why this week as opposed to, for example 6 or 12 months ago, there are a number of possibilities. Here are a bunch, with ones I consider slightly more significant featuring earlier on:
> 
> ...



I certainly wouldn’t ask you to reveal any more of the picture for me.

I’m just curious about the timing of events. So much has happened in the last 24 hours- let alone the last few years - alone that it’s hard to make sense of it all and my brain is starting to hurt.

I’ve read some of the Exaro articles, particularly in relation to the alleged rape of “Jane” and the allegations about the way she was treated by the police. I’ll try and read back further, time permitting.

I agree - I’m sure the name of the alleged rapist was widely known in the media and other circles and the press could have named him, provided they were prepared to run the significant risk of a libel action.

But what they couldn’t have done 6 or 12 months ago was say that Leon Brittan had been questioned under caution by the police regarding an allegation of rape (if indeed Leon Brittan is the person alluded to in today’s Independent on Sunday) as, according to the article, the questioning only happened last month.

That’s what makes me particularly suspicious about the timing.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 6, 2014)

Been catching up with a huge chunk (many pages) of this thread. Can I just thank elbows, and several others, for the extremely low level of out-and-out conspiracist stuff in various posts and links?

Almost all posts seem to be focussing on whatever credible, fact/evidence based, stuff they can find, and good on you all for that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> But what they couldn’t have done 6 or 12 months ago was say that Leon Brittan had been questioned under caution by the police regarding an allegation of rape (if indeed Leon Brittan is the person alluded to in today’s Independent on Sunday) as, according to the article, the questioning only happened last month.


and...


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> and...



It's only a small point, and explaining it in a reply to your question would involve me going back and trying to interpret the meaning of someone else's post, or part of it which all gets a bit convoluted.

It might derail the thread unnecessarily and I'm too tired in any case.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> It's only a small point, and explaining it in a reply to your question would involve me going back and trying to interpret the meaning of someone else's post, or part of it which all gets a bit convoluted.
> 
> It might derail the thread unnecessarily and I'm too tired in any case.


ok


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> They may see the campaigners & MPs gathering momentum in regards to an over-arching inquiry, and have their own, more lurid, ideas of how this stuff should proceed.



With a slightly less cynical hat on, I should probably say that a good number of those in the press are probably in favour of the inquiry idea, rather than having an alternative in mind. Or the 'best of both worlds'.

Certainly a look at todays news suggests that the momentum for this stuff is reaching critical mass. I don't know if they've saved much 'new' stuff for the week ahead, but Tebbit's utterances are almost enough on their own, let alone everything else.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

New stuff:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ns-Scotland-Yard-detectives-trace-victim.html



> _The Telegraph_ can disclose officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Fernbridge - launched in February last year to examine allegations of a paedophile ring involving prominent figures - have closely examined the case of the eight-year-old alleged victim.





> Police are understood to have sent a United States investigator to interview the victim of alleged abuse at Elm Guest House, in Barnes, south-west London, who is now a successful businessman in his early 40s in the east coast US.
> 
> A US law enforcement officer, who had recently returned home after concluding a secondment to the Fernbridge team, was asked to interview the man on Scotland Yard’s behalf earlier this year.
> 
> ...





> Fernbridge detectives also interviewed a retired police officer who was involved in the original Elm Guest House investigation and who interviewed the alleged victim at the time.
> 
> This newspaper understands the retired detective was reluctant to go into detail about why information about the politician was not included into witness statements at the time or submitted into evidence as part of a potential prosecution.
> 
> His reluctance, which appears to reinforce the case for an amnesty, is understood to have stemmed from the policeman’s fear that he could face disciplinary action, or other legal implications, or lose his pension.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2014)

Here's a reasonably good account of the origins of the Satanic Panic in the UK from the Independent (can't find it on the Indy site)



> One  Rochdale  policeman involved in the case has a  theory:  "What  I think is happening is there are some cranks among social workers. They are  getting wind of these documents and they are trying to tie it  up with  routine  abuse  cases.  If  social  workers  came  to  us  with allegations of this nature we have to investigate. I don't see how  it can be stopped from happening again."



http://www.skepticfiles.org/rumor/is160990.htm

So I'm just wondering. Suppose it's 1988 and you're a Chief Constable someplace where (hypothetically of course), say five or ten years or so ago, you or your predecessor covered up a bunch of awful stuff about Jimmy, Cyril and their privileged pals raping little kids from the local childrens' homes and you're a bit worried that the (hypothetical) D-Notices aren't going to be enough to keep it quiet.

Then one of your detectives comes to you and says:

"Boss, we've got some fundie social workers who've been on courses run by some self-appointed 'ritual abuse experts' from the US alleging all kinds of totally implausible shit about massive satanic child molester mind-control / 'bloodlines' conspiracies sacrificing hundreds of babies.It all seems to be based on fairy stories that they've gotten off these 'ritual abuse experts' and then coached kids who've been taken into care amid traumatic scenes and who are probably feeling really vulnerable, into playing back, but all we have any actual evidence for is maybe a regular, sordid, stupid, non-conspiratorial, non-Satanic, incest/abuse case or two. "

The accused are all ordinary, mostly working class people. They're not celebrity friends of Mrs Thatcher or Prince Charles, nor senior civil servants, lawyers or politicians or anyone else that Special Branch, MI5,  or anyone like that might care about.

None of this stuff leads back to the actual child abuse by Cyril, Jimmy and other well-connected types, that you or your predecessor has (hypothetically) covered up.

Do you tell your cops to scupper all investigation into this obvious fundie horseshit for lack of evidence?

Or do you see an opportunity?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Sorry - cocked up Quote function again!
> 
> Meant to reply to Treelovers post 2736:
> 
> ...



Wasn't Jordan the one who got done for stealing knickers?


----------



## kenny g (Jul 6, 2014)




----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

The thing about that is that I believe there may have been several sets of rumours about him, which makes it rather hard to know what the rumours that were 'found to be untrue' were, and whether they relate to modern rumours.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2014)

kenny g said:


>


how refreshing to see an express front cover without a story about health or global warming on it


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Tom Symonds, a BBC correspondent, today raised the question about the timing of the two events - whether they were linked in some way - but didn’t attempt to answer it. However, it was obvious he thought they were.



Just saw him (or perhaps another BBC bod) on a recent bbc news channel bulletin. His explanation now is along the lines of 'loads of journalists are looking at all this stuff at the moment and churning different things up, be careful not to conflate the stories'.

As I guessed would happen, we are still at an awkward moment where all the related press stories, including Exaro ones, have not been merged into a complete picture, and so the silly games continue. And I continue to speak in riddles at times as a result.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> how refreshing to see an express front cover without a story about health or global warming on it



"Gipsy girl" in first line of lead article was prescient though.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Just saw him (or perhaps another BBC bod) on a recent bbc news channel bulletin. His explanation now is along the lines of 'loads of journalists are looking at all this stuff at the moment and churning different things up, be careful not to conflate the stories'.
> 
> As I guessed would happen, we are still at an awkward moment where all the related press stories, including Exaro ones, have not been merged into a complete picture, and so the silly games continue. And I continue to speak in riddles at times as a result.



Just seen it.

Unless I’m very much mistaken it was from the same package that I saw earlier this afternoon.

As you noted, he made it clear that a distinction needed to be made between allegations of historic child abuse and the allegation of rape made against Leon Brittan.

But then, immediately after that, the very last point raised by Symonds in the earlier broadcast was about the timing of the revelations about the missing files, and the subsequent news that Brittan had been questioned about an alleged rape.

That appears to have been cut from the latest broadcast version.

[Putting tin foil hat away for the night now]


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 6, 2014)

SpineyNorman said:


> Wasn't Jordan the one who got done for stealing knickers?



Yes - convicted of stealing three pairs of red knickers from Tesco's. Fined £50.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 6, 2014)

Am I right in thinking that its considered a possibility that there will not be a thorough and urgent investigation?

Surely public indignation will only bring forward their demise so they will try and delay their judgement.


----------



## elbows (Jul 6, 2014)

> *Mark Watts* @MarkWatts_1 · 2h
> Due @ExaroNews tmrw, inside story on why Met interviewed Lord #Brittan under caution over historical claim of rape. http://www.exaronews.com



edit - Given they've been the ones reporting on all previous matters in relation to this very specific part of the story, tomorrows story might be predictable already and not terribly exciting, we shall see.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

Betsy said:


> The thread is too long to go back over and read all of it so apologies if this has already been posted.
> Last night on the radio Edwina Currie was saying that perhaps resources would be better spent finding the paedophiles of today rather than going back 30 years to bring those people to justice.



2 things about that kind of attitude that are utterly sickening : First, the idea that there isn't really enough to go round to bring all abusers to justice. I mean, if not why not? Too much being pissed up the wall making sure Tory donors profit from the latest scam.

More importantly, it too easily belittles / overlooks the decades of ruined lives of victims of abuse longer ago, and the knock-on effects.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 7, 2014)

That would be the same Edwina Currie who  gave Jimmy Saville the keys to broadmoor.


----------



## elbows (Jul 7, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28187357



> The former leader of a pro-paedophile campaign group claims he stored material at the Home Office, according to an account seen by the BBC.
> 
> Steven Adrian Smith had clearance to work as an electrical contractor at the Westminster building in the late 1970s and early 1980s when he chaired the Paedophile Information Exchange.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 7, 2014)

Destroying those files is surely a criminal act? Let's hope someone knows who ordered it and speaks up.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 7, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Destroying those files is surely a criminal act? Let's hope someone knows who ordered it and speaks up.


Often the things which would be criminal acts if you or I did them turn out not to be when they are done by people presuming to act in our best interests...


----------



## elbows (Jul 7, 2014)

> Theresa May is to outline plans for a "wide-ranging" inquiry, led by an expert panel, into historic child sex abuse claims, the BBC understands.
> 
> The BBC's Nick Robinson said the inquiry would look at claims covering the government, the NHS and the BBC.
> 
> ...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28189072


----------



## teqniq (Jul 7, 2014)

What's with the 'not given under oath' bit?


----------



## Libertad (Jul 7, 2014)

Whilst all around him are clamouring for a public inquiry Michael Gove "disagrees".



> But when asked if the “toxic idea that politicians have been hiding this for a long time” meant a public inquiry was needed, Michael Gove told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that he disagreed.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...oliticians-at-top-of-westminster-9587642.html

Ploughing his own furrow, but why? What possible objection could there be to an inquiry?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 7, 2014)

Libertad said:


> Whilst all around him are clamouring for a public inquiry Michael Gove "disagrees".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As does Nick Clegg - Leon Britain's former boy-wonder.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 7, 2014)

Quartz said:


> A Tory MP says he was warned off:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nge-Leon-Brittan-over-paedophile-dossier.html


Danczuk is a Labour MP, but I see what you mean.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 7, 2014)

Libertad said:


> Whilst all around him are clamouring for a public inquiry Michael Gove "disagrees".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They will argue against a public inquiry in terms of the time it could take and its potential to compromise any police investigations. if you were of a cynical bent then you might not entirely believe them.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 7, 2014)

Now talking about a wide ranging enquiry covering the NHS, bbc and westminster. Sounds like a long drawn out process that allows them to say - "lets wait for the results of the enquiry" for the next three years. 
There needs to be an immediate, no holds barred criminal investigation into the whole kiddy-brothels-for-the-establishment cesspit - not just the perpetrators - but also including those who enabled it and covered it up.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 7, 2014)

teqniq said:


> What's with the 'not given under oath' bit?



Maybe get Lord Hutton to chair it as well

Safe pair of hands etc.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> 2 things about that kind of attitude that are utterly sickening : First, the idea that there isn't really enough to go round to bring all abusers to justice. I mean, if not why not? Too much being pissed up the wall making sure Tory donors profit from the latest scam.
> 
> More importantly, it too easily belittles / overlooks the decades of ruined lives of victims of abuse longer ago, and the knock-on effects.



According to Curry both she and Tebbitt knew.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 7, 2014)

Interesting that they want the scope of such an inquiry to include (privatisation targets) BBC and NHS but not other powerful Saville connections like Thatcher, Chuckie and their circles, spheres of influence etc.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 7, 2014)

.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 7, 2014)

. (Double post, bouncy train etc)


----------



## teqniq (Jul 7, 2014)

I feel quote fatigue coming on.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 7, 2014)

> A Labour politician suspected of abusing children with a convicted paedophile allegedly tried to help him foster two young brothers.
> 
> The figure, later a minister in Tony Blair’s government, backed South London children’s home boss Michael John Carroll’s bid to take on the boys, a new witness claims.



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...-accused-helping-3822224#.U7pr60QotAA.twitter


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Now talking about a wide ranging enquiry covering the NHS, bbc and westminster. Sounds like a long drawn out process that allows them to say - "lets wait for the results of the enquiry" for the next three years.
> There needs to be an immediate, no holds barred criminal investigation into the whole kiddy-brothels-for-the-establishment cesspit - not just the perpetrators - but also including those who enabled it and covered it up.



Sorry - I disagree.

The only way of establish the truth is by having a full scale public enquiry - the outcome of which would be far more difficult to control than what I suspect May is going to announce later today.

It would mean, for example, that witnesses would be required to give evidence under oath. They would be afforded a higher degree of protection (essential for survivors) and would also be protected from libel.

This is the point made by John Hemmings MP in a BBC tv interview earlier. Well worth watching if you can catch it.

The only way the truth about Hillsborough came out was following a full-scale public enquiry. It was what the families wanted. All the previous “ inquiries into inquiries” led precisely nowhere.

Just handing the matter over to the police is not good enough. Indeed, they are part of the problem - failing to properly investigate previous allegations and, if some witnesses are to be believed, actively obstructing investigations.

I don't believe anyone has any faith in them to do the job properly.

Finally, if the Government is so set against a public inquiry that alone should be a good enough reason for having one.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 7, 2014)

Labour minister? Anyone able to shed any light on that without breaking libel laws? PMs if you like.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 7, 2014)

It's all going off today.. 



> Steve Messham said Mr Hague had "questions to answer" over why a public inquiry by Sir Ronald Waterhouse was restricted under terms of reference laid down by the then Welsh secretary.
> 
> Mr Messham believes that Sir Ronald's three-year inquiry would have unearthed evidence of high-profile figures abusing children in collusion with care home staff had it not had such a narrow remit.
> 
> ...



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ifled-1996-paedophile-report-says-victim.html


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 7, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> It's all going off today..
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ifled-1996-paedophile-report-says-victim.html


That's from two years ago. Search this thread for Waterhouse  for more details.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

This is today's Exaro piece Elbows had referred to in Post 2827 above.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5315/dpp-forced-scotland-yard-to-quiz-leon-brittan-over-rape-claim

A classic example of why the police cannot be trusted to investigate these matters.

As an aside, it appears neither Exaro or "Jane" were the source of yesterday's Independent on Sunday article about Leon Brittan.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 7, 2014)

John Mann MP:

The 1988 lambeth corruption and sex ring investigation included allegations against several significant politicians

The 1988 Lambeth police files have clearly disappeared. As have the Notts police 1990s files and the Notts Social services files.

Edit apologies John Mann MP. from his Twitter feed. Got a 3 year old jumping on me which isn't helping!


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 7, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Peter Mann MP:
> 
> The 1988 lambeth corruption and sex ring investigation included allegations against several significant politicians
> 
> The 1988 Lambeth police files have clearly disappeared. As have the Notts police 1990s files and the Notts Social services files.


There isn't an MP called Peter Mann. Or do you mean Met police? Can we have some links to where this stuff is coming from please?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 7, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> There isn't an MP called Peter Mann. Or do you mean Met police? Can we have some links to where this stuff is coming from please?



See correction above


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 7, 2014)

Ta


----------



## andy usher (Jul 7, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Labour minister? Anyone able to shed any light on that without breaking libel laws? PMs if you like.



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-abuse-detectives-raid-labour-3740002#.U7nOw9r3bus.twitter ??


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

andy usher said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-abuse-detectives-raid-labour-3740002#.U7nOw9r3bus.twitter ??



This is pretty much old news - police searched Janner's home in connection with this matter in December 2013.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...t-of-child-sex-investigations-say-police.html

Afiak Janner was never a minister and so the person referred to in the Mirror report in Post 2846 is likely to be someone else.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 7, 2014)

Someone on FB has posted an article which links this whole thing into the murder of Jill Dando, as allegedly she had rumbled the game and was about to go public.  The site has a distinct waft of fruitloopery about it, where any connection between individuals appears to mean they were part of a giant kiddy fiddling conspiracy.  I don't buy into this level of collusion, I don't think the 'establishment' is competent enough to pull it off.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> This is today's Exaro piece Elbows had referred to in Post 2827 above.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5315/dpp-forced-scotland-yard-to-quiz-leon-brittan-over-rape-claim
> 
> ...




"As a result, the Met has replaced the officer in charge of the investigation" 

So where's he now, I wonder?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just to reiterate something about the "Dickens Dossier" that Leon Brittan seems to have mislaid.
> 
> Dickens was a key figure in the 'Satanic Panics' see e.g. http://barthsnotes.com/2014/07/02/geoffrey-dickens-child-abuse-claims-and-satanic-panic/
> 
> ...



Given the tenor of a lot of claims at the time, "Satan ate my baby" is too tame.  It'd be more along the lines of "I was a breeder for Satan, and the Satanic coven made me eat *all* my babies".


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 7, 2014)

Some shocking, appalling claims in this


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 7, 2014)

> From 1995 Westminster's Secret Service Doc
> 
> "Tim Fortescue, who was Ted Heath’s chief whip from 1970-73, said:
> 
> For anyone with any sense, who was in trouble, would come to the whips and tell them the truth, and say now, I’m in a jam, can you help? It might be debt, it might be…..erm……erm, a scandal involving small boys, or any kind of scandal in which, erm er, a member seemed likely to be mixed up in, they’d come and ask if we could help and if we could, we did. And we would do everything we can because we would store up brownie points……., and if I mean, that sounds a pretty, pretty nasty reason, but it’s one of the reasons because if we could get a chap out of trouble then, he will do as we ask forever more.


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

> And we would do everything we can because we would store up brownie points……., and if I mean, that sounds a pretty, pretty nasty reason, but it’s one of the reasons because if we could get a chap out of trouble then, he will do as we ask forever more.





But Britain isn't corrupt, its only those southern countries and the eyties who do that

So the whips would see the individual would be sorted and led out of the mess, in return, the whips would always be able to 'call on political favours'

democracy, eh?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jul 7, 2014)

Reminds me a bit of the Belgian case in the nineties. 



> There was widespread anger and frustration among Belgians due to police errors, the general slowness of the investigation and Dutroux's claims that he was part of a sex ring that included high-ranking members of the police force and government. This suspicion that Dutroux had been, or was being, protected, and anger over the outcome, culminated when the popular judge in charge of investigating the claims was dismissed on the grounds of having participated in a fund-raising dinner for the girls' parents. The investigation itself was wrapped up. His dismissal and end of the investigation resulted in a massive protest march (the "White March") of 300,000 people on the capital, Brussels, in October 1996, two months after Dutroux's arrest, in which demands were made for reforms of Belgium's police and justice system.
> 
> On the witness stand, Jean-Marc Connerotte (fr), the original judge of the case, broke down in tears when he described "the bullet-proof vehicles and armed guards needed to protect him against the shadowy figures determined to stop the full truth coming out. Never before in Belgium has an investigating judge at the service of the king been subjected to such pressure. We were told by police that [murder] contracts had been taken out against the magistrates." Connerotte testified that the investigation was seriously hampered by protection of suspects by people in the government. "Rarely has so much energy been spent opposing an inquiry," he said. He believed that the Mafia had taken control of the case.[9]


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Dogsauce said:


> Someone on FB has posted an article which links this whole thing into the murder of Jill Dando, as allegedly she had rumbled the game and was about to go public.  The site has a distinct waft of fruitloopery about it, where any connection between individuals appears to mean they were part of a giant kiddy fiddling conspiracy.  I don't buy into this level of collusion, I don't think the 'establishment' is competent enough to pull it off.



This sounds like a load of complete bollocks to me.

Sadly, this affair is likely to turn into a "Truth Seeker's" jamboree - especially given Tebbit's comments yesterday.

It won't be long before someone comes out and blames freemasons,"the joos" and/or shape-shifting lizards.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 7, 2014)

Contributed by BBCR4Today
about 5 hours ago 

Paedophile group leader 'stored material at Home Office'

https://audioboo.fm/boos/2307815-pa...ial-at-home-office?playlist_direction=forward


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Reminds me a bit of the Belgian case in the nineties.




The thing is there, half the country went onto the streets to peacefully protest/register its disgust and contempt for the establishment.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I agree prosecutions - particularly if they were successful, would be great and would at least go some way in securing justice for the survivors.
> 
> But I’m also interested in the role Leon Brittan is playing in all this.
> 
> ...



I'm extremely dubious that Brittan is being set up as a scapegoat.  Most of the rumours I heard about him back in the '80s at the _Express_ were fairly sordid, but as usual lacked *credible* witnesses (newspaper lawyers don't tend to see damaged victims as credible"  ), so the papers never published the stories (just as they didn't about the likes of Nutkins, Hall and Savile). What were the rumours about?  Not unadjacent to "if it moves, fuck it".
*If* Brittan IS being set up as a sacrifice, then he's the perfect person to throw to the wolves *if* the rumours are in any way true, because the story will have legs long enough to keep the media occupied for quite a while, possibly while other stuff gets a deeper grave.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 7, 2014)

As an aside to all this, Danczuk's being a bit of prima donna with all this 'I won't name the mp who approached me, but I urge them to come forward' (the stuff before the select committee meeting).  The whole problem about these 'networks' is the protected status of the powerful and the role of secrecy. However, while he's done great work on Smith, he can't quite shake off the idea that politicians deserve more respect than anyone else.  Just fucking spit it out FFS.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

teqniq said:


> What's with the 'not given under oath' bit?



It means that people questioned by the inquiry can lie, and not have to worry about getting done for perjury.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Destroying those files is surely a criminal act? Let's hope someone knows who ordered it and speaks up.



It'd only be a criminal act if they were destroyed wilfully to obfuscate future investigation (which is incredibly-difficult to prove), so even if they were destroyed for that sort of reason, no-one will be held to account.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

Libertad said:


> Whilst all around him are clamouring for a public inquiry Michael Gove "disagrees".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I suspect that Gove is aware of the "house of cards" nature of private "immorality" at the palace of Westminster, and is worried that a public enquiry into the child abuse issue will inevitably lead (as skeletons get disinterred, and deals get done) to to other instances of corruption and immorality being uncovered that aren't related to child abuse, but which will (in turn) lead to public demands for further enquiries.
IMO Gove knows that the credibility of parliamentary politicians is already hanging by a thread, and he's worried that a full public enquiry will sever that thread and incite demands for wide-ranging political reform.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm extremely dubious that Brittan is being set up as a scapegoat.  Most of the rumours I heard about him back in the '80s at the _Express_ were fairly sordid, but as usual lacked *credible* witnesses (newspaper lawyers don't tend to see damaged victims as credible"  ), so the papers never published the stories (just as they didn't about the likes of Nutkins, Hall and Savile). What were the rumours about?  Not unadjacent to "if it moves, fuck it".
> *If* Brittan IS being set up as a sacrifice, then he's the perfect person to throw to the wolves *if* the rumours are in any way true, because the story will have legs long enough to keep the media occupied for quite a while, possibly while other stuff gets a deeper grave.



I merely posed the question about Brittan's involvement and, in particular, is there possibly a link between his allegedly questionable role in the handling of the Dickens dossier being made public, and the revelation that he has been questioned in relation to an allegation of rape, given both took place within a week of each other.

I don't know the answer but it does seem a little suspicious to me. That's all.

As to the type of rumours swirling around Brittan in the 80's I'm not going to repeat them here.

But if you mean by the phrase "if it moves, fuck it" he was rumoured to be an adulterer they were far, far more scurrilous than that, but perhaps I'm misinterpreting your comments. If so, apologies.

As an aside, IIRC there were some questions about his marriage at that time and whether it was merely one of convenience.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Labour minister? Anyone able to shed any light on that without breaking libel laws? PMs if you like.



Don't think big (i.e. Cabinet Minister), think a bit smaller, is all I'm going to say.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I merely posed the question about Brittan's involvement and, in particular, is there possibly a link between his allegedly questionable role in the handling of the Dickens dossier being made public, and the revelation that he has been questioned in relation to an allegation of rape, given both took place within a week of each other.



It may be, with regard to Brittan, a case of "critical mass" being reached.



> I don't know the answer but it does seem a little suspicious to me. That's all.
> 
> As to the type of rumours swirling around Brittan in the 80's I'm not going to repeat them here.



I haven't asked you to.  In fact I mentioned that I worked in the media back in the '80s, where such rumours were rife.



> But if you mean by the phrase "if it moves, fuck it" he was rumoured to be an adulterer they were far, far more scurrilous than that, but perhaps I'm misinterpreting your comments. If so, apologies.
> 
> As an aside, IIRC there were some questions about his marriage at that time and whether it was merely one of convenience.



When I say "if it moves, fuck it", think of someone allegedly playing a sexual game of "animal, vegetable, mineral" with all the self-control of a magpie in a jewellery shop.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> When I say "if it moves, fuck it", think of someone allegedly playing a sexual game of "animal, vegetable, mineral" with all the self-control of a magpie in a jewellery shop.



Ahh. I understand. I was referring more to what was alleged to have happened at the Elm Guest House. But perhaps they are one and the same thing.

The other point to note about Brittan is that there has been a consistent whispering campaign against him, dating back to the 1980s and, after admittedly a lengthy lull, another now.

I can’t recall any other Cabinet member (and, indeed, any other politician of that era) who was subject to such a campaign at that time although I stand to be corrected on that point.

Where there were rumours (sometimes well-founded) about the sexual impropriety of others, they generally centered around adulterous heterosexual relationships - not the kind of scurrilous and unfounded rumours surrounding Brittan.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Mark Williams-Thomas (the person who was instrumental in exposing Savile) has just said on Sky News that, while he has no evidence of an organised ring, he is sure that senior members of the establishment were abusing children and that other members of the establishment (and I paraphrase), "turned a blind eye" to it.

In light of recent developments the latter group "should be very worried" he added.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

Dogsauce said:


> I don't think the 'establishment' is competent enough to pull it off.


ooer!


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 7, 2014)

Children were raped by monsters, it was covered up by the establishment.That should be all that needs to be said.
They should be vilified and hounded for their actions and crimes, instead they will talk their way out of it once again.
Things like this don't happen in Britain, do they?


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Children were raped by monsters, it was covered up by the establishment.That should be all that needs to be said.
> They should be vilified and hounded for their actions and crimes, instead they will talk their way out of it once again.
> Things like this don't happen in Britain, do they?



Sadly, it's not as easy as that.

The abusers have to be identified which is no easy task in itself. Evidence has to be gathered and, if they are prosecuted, any conviction has to be on the basis of "beyond all reasonably doubt". Ditto for those who covered up their actions.

While my knee-jerk reaction is to string them up - with my rational head on I have accept we can't suspend the normal rules of justice simply because we find the alleged crimes abhorrent.

I for one don't want to see witch hunts.

I want to see proper, through, and transparent investigations.

Something that has sadly been lacking to date.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 7, 2014)

As I said they will talk their way out of it, again.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> Some shocking, appalling claims in this



I didn't think I would have time to watch this, but I made time. You are right ShiftyBagLady, there are some pretty shocking and appalling claims, and the guy being interviewed certainly seemed to know his stuff. It seems mind boggling such activities went on without the perpetrators being apprehended at the time. High time something concrete was done about it. Heads should roll!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I for one don't want to see witch hunts.


you just haven't been reading the manual

http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> As I said they will talk their way out of it, again.



Quite possibly - but at the moment I can't see any realistic alternative.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> This sounds like a load of complete bollocks to me.
> 
> Sadly, this affair is likely to turn into a "Truth Seeker's" jamboree - especially given Tebbit's comments yesterday.
> 
> It won't be long before someone comes out and blames freemasons,"the joos" and/or shape-shifting lizards.



These threads have been active and vocal on the loons sites for a long time now - they see them reaching the surface of the MSN as a vindication of their understanding of the 'trooth'.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 7, 2014)

To be honest these stories were doing the rounds long before the internet and social media.
The people spreading the stories then were seen as loony as any foil hat wearing keyboard warriors of today.
 Ridiculing accusers as long been the weapon of choice.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> ooer!



Bearing in mind the trouble someone just was into on the Rolf Harris thread, on a thread about child abuse, this must also be most inappropriate!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Bearing in mind the trouble someone just was into on the Rolf Harris thread, on a thread about child abuse, this must also be most inappropriate!


perhaps you could elaborate on the 'reasoning' behind your statement.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 7, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> To be honest these stories were doing the rounds long before the internet and social media.
> The people spreading the stories then were seen as loony as any foil hat wearing keyboard warriors of today.
> Ridiculing accusers as long been the weapon of choice.




Maybe so, but I want any out-and-out loon involvement to remain confined to the fringes in all this, because the thing conspiracists are absolutely best at is exaggerating to the nth degree. Thus undermining/discrediting what could be a much more credible and fact/evidence based case it kept in the hands of sane people** who prefer evidence, fact, and proper methods of research/investigation to 'theory'  

**Not talkimg aboiut 'the establishment' here. The reverse, if anything ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Bearing in mind the trouble someone just was into on the Rolf Harris thread, on a thread about child abuse, this must also be most inappropriate!


*taps watch*


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> *taps watch*


Really? a cartoon in a serious thread? entitled ooer! ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Really? a cartoon in a serious thread? entitled ooer! ?


so there was no reasoning behind your post.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Really? a cartoon in a serious thread? entitled ooer! ?



Do you know who the character is?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> This sounds like a load of complete bollocks to me.
> 
> Sadly, this affair is likely to turn into a "Truth Seeker's" jamboree - especially given Tebbit's comments yesterday.
> 
> It won't be long before someone comes out and blames freemasons,"the joos" and/or shape-shifting lizards.


I think we've seen some nudges and hints in respect of the first of those three already, right here on this very thread


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> so there was no reasoning behind your post.


Incorrect, I just watched the video about leading personalities involved in child abuse including allegations about the then home secretary, which went on to suggest the existence of snuff movies featuring abused children, I don't really see just how much more serious that could be! I take it you haven't seen the video yet? and then, your cartoon .. wtf comes to mind.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 7, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Children were raped by monsters, it was covered up by the establishment.That should be all that needs to be said.
> They should be vilified and hounded for their actions and crimes, instead they will talk their way out of it once again.
> Things like this don't happen in Britain, do they?


They weren't "monsters". They were, like you and me, just human beings.

And, because they were human beings, they were and are able to hide in plain sight. Monsters aren't.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Teaboy said:


> Do you know who the character is?


As it happens I don't, it looks like Viz or something, how does it relate to child abuse?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

M'learned friends are watching ....

_“People are trying to restart [the rumours], people are trying to somehow to connect it to the Elm Guest House, a place I’ve not been to, where I’ve not been involved. And I give this public warning: if any substantial publisher links me in any defamatory way, they can expect the same kind of action as the Mail on Sunday got.”_

http://order-order.com/2014/07/07/listen-bottomley-denies-elm-house-child-abuse-rumours/


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Incorrect, I just watched the video about leading personalities involved in child abuse including allegations about the then home secretary, which went on to suggest the existence of snuff movies featuring abused children, I don't really see just how much more serious that could be! I take it you haven't seen the video yet? and then, your cartoon .. wtf comes to mind.


wtf comes to mind when reading your post which seems to suggest that, for no very good reason, your feelings take priority over mine. wtf? seriously, what the fuck?


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> wtf comes to mind when reading your post which seems to suggest that, for no very good reason, your feelings take priority over mine. wtf? seriously, what the fuck?


I think my response is fair. On the Rolf Harris thread someone made a badly judged observation and was roundly taken to task about it. Many of the posts taking him to task you liked, but at the same time on this, perhaps an even more serious thread, you posted a "lighthearted" cartoon!


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> As an aside to all this, Danczuk's being a bit of prima donna with all this 'I won't name the mp who approached me, but I urge them to come forward' (the stuff before the select committee meeting).  The whole problem about these 'networks' is the protected status of the powerful and the role of secrecy. However, while he's done great work on Smith, he can't quite shake off the idea that politicians deserve more respect than anyone else.  Just fucking spit it out FFS.




He is the one who pushes the idea people on benefits are all scroungers, and labour is not the 'welfare party', he is a nasty piece of work and its a shame he is one of the key campaigners in al this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> I think my response is fair. On the Rolf Harris thread someone made a badly judged observation and was roundly taken to task about it. Many of the posts taking him to task you liked, but at the same time on this, perhaps an even more serious thread, you posted a "lighthearted" cartoon!


i don't think your response is fair, because i don't think you read my post. please reply when you've been made a mod because afaic this correspondence is closed.


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> M'learned friends are watching ....
> 
> _“People are trying to restart [the rumours], people are trying to somehow to connect it to the Elm Guest House, a place I’ve not been to, where I’ve not been involved. And I give this public warning: if any substantial publisher links me in any defamatory way, they can expect the same kind of action as the Mail on Sunday got.”_
> 
> http://order-order.com/2014/07/07/listen-bottomley-denies-elm-house-child-abuse-rumours/




is this site, substantial?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think your response is fair, because i don't think you read my post. please reply when you've been made a mod because afaic this correspondence is closed.


I did a little shiver just then.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think your response is fair, because i don't think you read my post. please reply when you've been made a mod because afaic this correspondence is closed.


I will reply if and when I feel like it thanks.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

treelover said:


> is this site, substantial?



Probably not but as the sticky on the nonce threads states ed doesn't want to find  out the hard way. Have just watched the whole Chris Fay video and he seems to be a credible and reliable source for what are hair-raising revelations. What I don't get though is the box of Polaroids he says he saw of the King and Queen's parties at the Elm Guest House where there was allegedly a photo of a significant VIP in a maids hat and apron abusing a 12 year old boy is why would someone who had so much to lose allow these photos to be taken. Doesn't ring true to me on first hearing.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 7, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Probably not but as the sticky on the nonce threads states ed doesn't want to find  out the hard way. Have just watched the whole Chris Fay video and he seems to be a credible and reliable source for what are hair-raising revelations. What I don't get though is the box of Polaroids he says he saw of the King and Queen's parties at the Elm Guest House where there was allegedly a photo of a significant VIP in a maids hat and apron abusing a 12 year old boy is *why would someone who had so much to lose allow these photos to be taken*. Doesn't ring true to me on first hearing.



Maybe he didn't allow it? 

Maybe a combination of foolishness, arrogance and his 'excitement' drew his guard down? 

If it happened as Fay states, then it would seem the 'significant VIP' may have been justified in their arrogance; after all they have remained safe and sound.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> I will reply if and when I feel like it thanks.


yeh, that's a cross we have to bear


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Been listening to the May statement and subsequent questions. Unfortunately I have had to do it while doing other things so I couldn't give it my full attention.

However, May seemed to give a rather wobbly and flustered answer to Tom Watson's question relating to any files held by the security services and whether the inquiry will have access to them.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

In response to question from Tim Loughton (former Children's Minister) May says Panel will not have power to subpoena witnesses.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> As it happens I don't, it looks like Viz or something, how does it relate to child abuse?



It doesn't, its an aside.  A slightly jokey post made about an earlier post on the thread, the joke has nothing to do with the nature of the thread.  It is a Viz character.

Basically you've got the wrong end of the stick.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

Have yet to hear anyone from the Tory hierarchy step up to the plate in defence of Leon Brittan.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

mmm - in a further question from Kevin Brennan about security service files she seems to have given herself a get-out clause regarding access to them.

She's just given another rather evasive answer to a similar question regarding special branch files.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 7, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> It means that people questioned by the inquiry can lie, and not have to worry about getting done for perjury.



I was being sarcastic. I should have said 'bullshit' instead of 'bit'.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

Don't know if this has been posted before - but worth signing if you back Tom Watson's campaign.

https://www.change.org/petitions/da...iry-into-allegations-of-organised-child-abuse


----------



## laptop (Jul 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> how refreshing to see an express front cover without a story about health or global warming on it



Or Express miracle cures or Maddy or...







...both at once.


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> In response to question from Tim Loughton (former Children's Minister) May says Panel will not have power to subpoena witnesses.




Public opinion is going to push this inquest much further than the elites would like.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

Tom Watson just spoken on his petition.

https://www.change.org/petitions/da...iry-into-allegations-of-organised-child-abuse

Firstly, a very big thank you. Without your support we would never have forced the Home Secretary to make an announcement in the House of Commons at 3.30pm today.

Early press reports say she will announce an inquiry into allegations of organised child abuse.

The devil will be in the detail.

Having talked to a number of survivors and retired child protection specialists I know one thing: if this new inquiry is not given the power to obtain all documents it wants to see, then it won't get anywhere.

It has already been revealed that Special Branch suppressed police reports into allegations of child abuse by the late MP Cyril Smith. If they held a file on Smith, then the inquiry team will want to know if they held files on any other individual. That's why the power to demand files is vital.

So we've made great progress in 24 hours but we have a little further to go before we can claim victory.

I'll let you know my view later this afternoon.

In the meantime - if you can get us past the 75,000 supporter mark before the Home Secretary stands up in the Commons, it will send a big statement.

Best wishes - I've been very moved by your solidarity and support.

Tom W


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

treelover said:


> Public opinion is going to push this inquest much further than the elites would like.



Possibly - but an individual will have to weigh up the opprobrium he/she would attract by refusing to attend against the chance they would be incriminated/incriminate themselves if they attended and answered questions truthfully.

It would be far better if the panel had the power to subpoena witnesses so they don't get the chance to weasel out.

However, there would be a case for survivors not to be compelled to give evidence - unless they could give it anonymously, possibly in written form.

Even then I would have reservations about issuing them with a subpoena.


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

> Amnesty International wants the Belfast Kincora Boys' Home scandal to be covered by the new inquiry. My colleague Henry McDonald has sent me this.
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-abuse-allegations-ignored-politics-live-blog




the net widens, big style, the spooks will be worried.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> Some shocking, appalling claims in this




Sadly, there's a more recent interview with some even worse stuff (not neccessarily directly related to parliament) It needs huge trigger warnings. The update contains the most sick making stuff I've ever heard. Like many, I have my reservations about Maloney, but the interviewee seems bona fide.


----------



## elbows (Jul 7, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> M'learned friends are watching ....
> 
> _“People are trying to restart [the rumours], people are trying to somehow to connect it to the Elm Guest House, a place I’ve not been to, where I’ve not been involved. And I give this public warning: if any substantial publisher links me in any defamatory way, they can expect the same kind of action as the Mail on Sunday got.”_
> 
> http://order-order.com/2014/07/07/listen-bottomley-denies-elm-house-child-abuse-rumours/



The Mails story about what he said there:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...claims-says-Tory-grandee-Peter-Bottomley.html


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Sadly, there's a more recent interview with some even worse stuff (not neccessarily directly related to parliament) It needs huge trigger warnings. The update contains the most sick making stuff I've ever heard. Like many, I have my reservations about Maloney, but the interviewee seems bona fide.



Truly absolutely unbelievable horrific sickening stuff if true especially 'The London Tape' snuff movie which is referred to which makes Rolf Harris's serial groping almost seem innocent in contrast. Go to youtube channel pnmfilms to watch. 

Frankly I just don't believe it.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 7, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Go to youtube channel pnmfilms to watch.



Can't see any others, other than the one already posted here?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

Don't want to directly link to it - but you should be able to see it here. Can't imagine given the libel considerations it will stay up long on You Tube.

*WARNING *- contains utterly revolting descriptions of child abuse and killing for snuff movies . 

https://www.youtube.com/user/pnmfilms/videos


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

One simple thing to bare in mind amidst all the complexity:

There is mounting public record evidence of decades where surpression and damage limitation to protect the establishment were way higher priorities than truth, justice or needs of victims.

If anyone has a reason to suppose that collective instinct suddenly changed over the weekend, I'd genuinelly like to know.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Don't want to directly link to it - but you should be able to see it here.
> 
> <link not duplicated>



I know I said it, but could you please consider putting a trigger warning on your post. There really should be one on the video itself, I've asked for one dunno if it will be heeded. i may tweet the guy. The most sickening stuff is not actually directly related to the Parliamentary stuff (is later on too) and not thus really necessary to know for our purposes.

It did put me in mind of the conversation about satanism. It's not satanic, but it might as fucking well be. I'd hope most satanists wouldn't even dream of such depravity.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> One simple thing to bare in mind amidst all the complexity:
> 
> There is mounting public record evidence of decades where surpression and damage limitation to protect the establishment were way higher priorities than truth, justice or needs of victims.
> 
> If anyone has a reason to suppose that collective instinct suddenly changed over the weekend, I'd genuinelly like to know.



Well quite. If they can effectively neuter or at the very least water down the Chilcott enquiry for the benefit of Blair and a few others. Wither any enquiry into this especially if it has no right to subpoena and testify under oath?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 7, 2014)

Interesting timing for the ISGP archive to disappear.

The link for the ISGP archive is here, but it is down at the moment. I am trying to find a mirror and I will post it again when I can either find a mirror or it is back up.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 7, 2014)

That updated interview was just... just horrifying really. I haven't looked into any of this stuff before now, I stumbled upon that interview through a Facebook group and I didn't expect to watch it all but found myself gripped by the injustice, suffering and callousness described in the events. 
That video has even troubling me all day and I don't have any particular triggers other than a basic regard for my fellow man and an instinct to nurture and protect the young.

I dearly hope that the snuff movie described is not true but I am personally swayed by the account of Fay who seems to hbe no agenda other than to expose the horrors he encountered in his job. 

It's too sad for words really


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

Can anyone clarify if the activities and failings of police and intelligence services will be in the remit of what May has announced?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

[


ShiftyBagLady said:


> That video has even troubling me all day and I don't have any particular triggers other than a basic regard for my fellow man and an instinct to nurture and protect the young.
> 
> I dearly hope that the snuff movie described is not true but I am personally swayed by the account of Fay who seems to hbe no agenda other than to expose the horrors he encountered in his job.
> 
> It's too sad for words really



My feelings exactly. Truly upsetting and sickening. I don't think there's a special need for people to watch it in full actually, though the earlier stuff is very pertinent (and still quite upsetting).


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Can anyone clarify if the activities and failings of police and intelligence services will be in the remit of what May has announced?



With no power to subpoena and nobody under oath you can forget about getting to the truth with regular citizens.

Let alone unaccountable agencies like the secret police and spooks.

It'll be another whitewash. Paging Lord Hutton. Same old shit ...

Edited to add; they really do take the public for a bunch of mugs don't they?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

I don't doubt that Bill Mahoney has been abused and is on a crusade for justice but he seems to be in the join-the-dots world of Jazzz formerly of this parish. 

TRIGGER WARNINGS - graphic descriptions of child abuse.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 7, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> With no power to subpoena and nobody under oath you can forget about getting to the truth with regular citizens. Let alone unaccountable agencies like the political police and spooks.
> 
> It'll be another whitewash. Paging Lord Hutton ...



Ain't that the truth. Only solution would be mass protest as in Belgium back in the day. However being UK more likely some paediatrician will get his windows put in by a braying mob of idiots.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Can anyone clarify if the activities and failings of police and intelligence services will be in the remit of what May has announced?



Well - you would be hard pushed to discern whether or not the inquiry will have access to security service files from her statement, if that helps.

As I mentioned above, her response to questions from Tom Watson and Kevin Brennan on this matter was, at best, unclear and at worst rather evasive.

The police may be a different matter but her response to a question specifically relating to special branch was equally vague.

IMHO the role of the security services is important in relation to the Dickens file, as well as other matters.

It is hard to believe that the Home Office did not pass a copy of the file to MI5 (if it indeed didn't already have a copy) - in fact you could argue that it was a dereliction of duty not to do so but, judging by the way it has handled matters thus far, nothing would surprise me.

However, in my opinion it is likely that MI5 have a complete copy of the Dickens file, making it more difficult for the authorities to maintain that the only copy has been lost and/or destroyed.

I'm sure Watson will pursue his line of questioning in relation to the security services.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 7, 2014)

"Gary Walker" of Sinn Fein is Sean O' Callaghan.

http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/


----------



## Tankus (Jul 7, 2014)

The NSPcC lead review (non judge) appears to be coming out (10 weeks) around the same time as Chilcott ..!.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 7, 2014)

Tankus said:


> The NSPC lead review (non judge) appears to be coming out (10 weeks) around the same time as Chilcott ..!.




The review will get nowhere for reasons of national security. The Elms was also a place where MI6 compromised foreign diplomats during the cold war, just like MI5 did with leading Loyalists at Kincora.

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/...an-handed-the-lost-vip-paedophile-dossier-to/


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jul 7, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Ain't that the truth. Only solution would be mass protest as in Belgium back in the day. However being UK more likely some paediatrician will get his windows put in by a braying mob of idiots.



that never actually happened, you know.  it was a story made up to be sneering about working class people.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 7, 2014)

I see David Mellor has come to the Home Office's defence

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...office-cover-up-over-geoffrey-dickens-dossier



> My only reservation would concern the frankly rather emptily populist decision to put the chief executive of the NSPCC in charge of the inquiry into how the Home Office handled abuse allegations. Far more sensible, but, I admit, not so sexy publicity wise, would be to invite a boring lawyer to review what were, after all, legal or quasi-legal decisions, not social worker stuff.



That's right David, child abuse, it's just _'social worker stuff' _


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 7, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> that never actually happened, you know.  it was a story made up to be sneering about working class people.




and it rather turns out us thick proles were actually completely right to believe in a shadowy network of powerful people fucking our kids


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jul 7, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> and it rather turns out us thick proles were actually completely right to believe in a shadowy network of powerful people fucking our kids



innit.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 7, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> "Gary Walker" of Sinn Fein is Sean O' Callaghan.
> 
> http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/



the 'names' list on that link has a name who indisputably denies any involvement or knowledge of Elm Guest House.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Sadly, there's a more recent interview with some even worse stuff (not neccessarily directly related to parliament) It needs huge trigger warnings. The update contains the most sick making stuff I've ever heard. Like many, I have my reservations about Maloney, but the interviewee seems bona fide.


Can you expand on that a little, I have no knowledge of Maloney apart from what I saw in the first video posted on here. The chap being interviewed was certainly full of what seemed like credible information but as I said I don't know Maloney at all.

eta: I just listened to the second tape, it seems he might be a bit of a conspiraloon


----------



## Betsy (Jul 7, 2014)

Think this has only just gone on-line.....

_*Leon Brittan was given second paedophile dossier*

* Scotland Yard handed Leon Brittan, the former Conservative Home Secretary, a dossier naming 15 members of notorious paedophile group *_

_*In 1983 Scotland Yard sent Lord Brittan the results of a two -year investigation into the Paedophile Information Exchange, a group which campaigned for paedophilia to be legal.*

*According to reports the dossier named 15 men suspected of involvement in child sex activity and was passed to Sir Thomas Hetherington, the then Director of Public Prosecutions.*
_
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ttan-was-given-second-paedophile-dossier.html


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 7, 2014)

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/...an-handed-the-lost-vip-paedophile-dossier-to/

Heres why.


----------



## Batboy (Jul 7, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm extremely dubious that Brittan is being set up as a scapegoat.  Most of the rumours I heard about him back in the '80s at the _Express_ were fairly sordid, but as usual lacked *credible* witnesses (newspaper lawyers don't tend to see damaged victims as credible"  ), so the papers never published the stories (just as they didn't about the likes of Nutkins, Hall and Savile). What were the rumours about?  Not unadjacent to "if it moves, fuck it".
> *If* Brittan IS being set up as a sacrifice, then he's the perfect person to throw to the wolves *if* the rumours are in any way true, because the story will have legs long enough to keep the media occupied for quite a while, possibly while other stuff gets a deeper grave.



Funny I heard those rumours too about Brittan also in the 80's, from a very old friend of mine who is a journalist who also worked at the Express. There is undoubtedly in my mind something afoot here. I remember being quite shocked at the time at what I was told. Yet nothing ever surfaced. There are a lot of influential people that were either involved or knew of underage teenagers or children being abused. The whole rent boy thing is nothing not heard of.  A cover up and burying of evidence is not beyond belief.

It is depressing to think that all of this went on and goes on. The Saville/Hall/Gliitter/King/Cyril Smith etc etc revelations are a depressing testimony to the scale of abuse and the arseholeness of celebrity and power positions of the wealthy and influential elite . I live at the end of a road where there used to be long term abuse for dozens and dozens of children who were in care. The politicians too often sidestep these scandals for both political expediency and fear of drawing attention to their own ineptitude (Margaret Hodge anyone?).

You can see on the Internet the other names being banded around for some time including some very very important people and with that in mind it would be no surprise at stuff being 'buried' by a variety of people.

It's a fucking depressing dose of reality.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Can you expand on that a little, I have no knowledge of Maloney apart from what I saw in the first video posted on here. The chap being interviewed was certainly full of what seemed like credible information but as I said I don't know Maloney at all.
> 
> eta: I just listened to the second tape, it seems he might be a bit of a conspiraloon




His sister was in "care," abused and later topped herself. He is driven by that, fair play to him for keeping with it, he getscarried away at times and could be more analytical, but its him doing the legwork with lots of this stuff.

I don't think people can quite comprehend that in the past, "care homes," were places were children were targeted, society turned a blind eye.

Nor can they comprehend the establishment and security services have always been deviant, the fact they used kids in care as their play things and pawns is really no surprise.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 7, 2014)

Off on a tangent here, does anyone remember this ?

Vicky De Lambray was a transsexual involved with various MI5 and establishment figures, she was just about to out various establishment figures, in 1986, that was a big deal. Met a mysterious death like the lady who owned the Elms who died of an insulin overdose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicky_de_Lambray

_Gay News_ carried a short article in September 1983, saying de Lambray was a convicted High Society art thief and apparent MI5 tempter/temptress, and noting his brief sexual relationship with Captain Anatoli Zotov, former Soviet Naval attache.[3] De Lambray's 900 page autobiographical manuscript - "naming names" - went missing in the same year.[4]
*Death[edit]*
Despite a colourful life, de Lambray is perhaps known for a dramatic and mysterious death. According to _The Times_, de Lambray died in his flat in Stockwell, south London in August 1986 following a suspected heroin overdose. Three hours before he was found, de Lambray telephoned the Press Association, telling a reporter, 'I have just been killed. I have been injected with a huge amount of heroin. I am desperate.'[8] De Lambray's initial call to police, asserting that a group of men had injected the heroin into him, may not have been taken seriously. However, when they arrived Vicky was dead. No puncture marks were found on autopsy and no cause of death could be established, though traces of drugs and alcohol were detected in his system.[9] His body has been kept since at a London morgue


----------



## seventh bullet (Jul 7, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> However being UK more likely some paediatrician will get his windows put in by a braying mob of idiots.



This myth still has life, I see.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> and it rather turns out us thick proles were actually completely right to believe in a shadowy network of powerful people fucking our kids



aka "conspiracy theory"


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> His sister was in "care," abused and later topped herself. He is driven by that, fair play to him for keeping with it, he getscarried away at times and could be more analytical, but its him doing the legwork with lots of this stuff.
> 
> I don't think people can quite comprehend that in the past, "care homes," were places were children were targeted, society turned a blind eye.
> 
> Nor can they comprehend the establishment and security services have always been deviant, the fact they used kids in care as their play things and pawns is really no surprise.


I can understand people being unable to comprehend such things, I certainly had no idea and find it very shocking. If half of what he alleges is true it is a scandal and the perpetrators have been lording it over us far too long. I wonder about the new enquiry, who cares about the documents? what about the victims and the guilty?


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Belushi said:


> I see David Mellor has come to the Home Office's defence
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...office-cover-up-over-geoffrey-dickens-dossier
> 
> ...



I'm not sure why Mellor is putting himself forward as a commentator as, if he had an ounce of self-awareness, he would know he has zero credibility about this matter. Or anything else.

It is true that he held a junior position in the Home Office (something he was seemingly keen to mention in interviews yesterday) - for all of 9 months.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 7, 2014)

Re-watching Rik Mayell's New Statesman there are quite a few hints at scandals we now know to be true, or at least more likely than the fantastic they appeared to be at the time.  One of his associates is a transexual fixer who operates the dark arts. Series 2 episode 1 features references to Edwina Currie shagging half the cabinet, and there is repeated use of blackmail as a means of control.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 7, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> With no power to subpoena and nobody under oath you can forget about getting to the truth with regular citizens.
> 
> Let alone unaccountable agencies like the secret police and spooks.
> 
> ...


It was very annoying listening to Cameron, Gideon and Clegg spoting their sanctimonious shite about what form an inquiry might take; they seem to be saying that no stone will be left unturned to uncover those who had been guilty of sexual abuse, and bring them to justice. Quite right too. 

But no mention about strong suspicions of a systematic cover-up; will no stone be left unturned to uncover, for example, why Dickens was about to name names in a press conference, but - at the last minute - changed his mind and announced his own adulterous affair instead? 

Why did his wife destroy the other copy of his dossier? 

Why was Brittan suddenly, last month, questioned about a sex offence alleged to have happened nearly 50 years ago?  

IMHO these implications of a systematic, organised cover-up, including intimidation and threats, is just as alarming, and as deserving of a thorough investigation as the actual sexual abuse itself.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 7, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> My feelings exactly. Truly upsetting and sickening. I don't think there's a special need for people to watch it in full actually, though the earlier stuff is very pertinent (and still quite upsetting).


You know what, I think I disagree about that. I don't think their descriptions of the content are gratuitous and they do pause beforehand which gives some sort of a warning though it is not explicit. I think the video is useful in that is describes a specific video which was uncovered and investigated twice in foreign countries and the information was reported passed to the British authorities and not pursued. They claim the child who was so horrendously treated in the video was even identified by the british authorities and still not pursued.
The details of the abuse are deeply troubling and challenging because of the suffering of the children and because they challenge us to believe that people could be capable of such acts of depravity and cruelty. (But then that was my first response to the discovery of the child's mutilated torso found in the river Thames too). This is why the logical response to this stuff is disbelief; we just can't fathom the mentality of it and don't want to admit the possibilty into our consciousness. 
I think the severity of the abuse and the crimes committed against these children is relevant because it inidcates how callously corrupt the authorities were/are who know/know about it and didn't/don't hold people to account for their crimes.


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> His sister was in "care," abused and later topped herself. He is driven by that, fair play to him for keeping with it, he getscarried away at times and could be more analytical, but its him doing the legwork with lots of this stuff.
> 
> *I don't think people can quite comprehend that in the past, "care homes," were places were children were targeted*, society turned a blind eye.
> 
> Nor can they comprehend the establishment and security services have always been deviant, the fact they used kids in care as their play things and pawns is really no surprise.



They still are in relation to the grooming scandals, though now it is being taken seriously.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Listening to the evening news, about the new enquiry, is this just a way to kick it into the long grass? the enquiry is not due to report until after the next election.


----------



## elbows (Jul 7, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> But no mention about strong suspicions of a systematic cover-up; will no stone be left unturned to uncover, for example, why Dickens was about to name names in a press conference, but - at the last minute - changed his mind and announced his own adulterous affair instead?



I wasn't sure if, beyond me mentioning it in this thread several times because I the other year I saw an article from the time in a press archive that was fairly cheap to access online, this aspect had received any fresh mention in the press. Seems it did a few days ago:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-dismissed-as-fantasies-of-a-deluded-man.html



> “Although Sir Peter Hayman had subscribed to PIE, that is not an offence and there is no evidence that he was ever involved in the management. At the trial, whilst there were general references to members of PIE, including, though not by name, Sir Peter Hayman, there was no reference to any material produced by him or found in his possession.”
> 
> In fact, Hayman was referred to by the name of Henderson. To Dickens this was evidence of a deliberate cover-up by the prosecutors and he proposed to take the matter further. He called a news conference at Westminster but was told on its eve that a newspaper was about to publish a story that he was having an affair. His mistress attended the news conference, where Dickens confessed to “a skeleton in my own cupboard” and a predilection for afternoon tea dances. His paedophile campaign ran into the buffers of derision from the press and hostility from fellow parliamentarians, some of whom denounced his use of parliamentary privilege to name Hayman and accused him of grandstanding.





scalyboy said:


> Why was Brittan suddenly, last month, questioned about a sex offence alleged to have happened nearly 50 years ago?



We know the answer to that one, which is probably most neatly summarised in todays Exaro story, which has already been linked to on this thread but here it is again.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5315/dpp-forced-scotland-yard-to-quiz-leon-brittan-over-rape-claim


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Background to the review(s)

May asks NSPCC boss to head child abuse review
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28189072


----------



## treelover (Jul 7, 2014)

Furedi is on Newsnight pontificating about 'moral panics'


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Background to the review(s)
> 
> May asks NSPCC boss to head child abuse review
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28189072



There has just been a Newsnight interview with Peter McKelvie in relation to the NSPCC's role in the forthcoming enquiry (not very flattering) and other matters relating to survivors' allegations. He says that, according to survivors he has spoken to, abusers of 20 years' ago still occupy prominent and powerful positions.

Some background about him can be found here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nvestigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html


----------



## Wilf (Jul 7, 2014)

When it comes to _what was known, by whom, when - and why they didn't do anything about it_, aka 'the Savile question's, which will come into focus in the unlikely event that members of the whips office from the 1980s ever appear before an inquiry: pretty much any MP who'd come up through the ranks, had some familiarity with the Westminster machine/their own party machine would have known (as would any newspaper editor, Westminster correspondent). That's not to say any MP would have had perfect knowledge about _every_ scandal in _every era_, but they'd certainly have known the bare bones of their own era - or at the very least 'Lord Shit was picked up in a brothel, MP x nonced his PA' - and even more so the names of the people named in significant documents.  In a place that thrives on gossip, but also has access to police information and unpublished journalistic stories, they fucking knew.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

Wilf I am less bothered by who knew what and when, more by who the actual abusers were.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 7, 2014)

treelover said:


> Furedi is on Newsnight pontificating about 'moral panics'




A nice card to try and play, even though it's utterly and possibly deliberately bogus.

"moral panic" implies exagerated fuss.  While we don't know the extent of abuse, we do know that there is cover up. There's no panic about that whatsoever.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Wilf I am less bothered by who knew what and when, more by who the actual abusers were.



.....and who has helped protect them all these years.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2014)

DrRingDing said:


> .....and who has helped protect them all these years.


I am less bothered by that. It worries me these enquiries seem more about the handling of files and apparent loss of some of them, than the actual content of the files themselves, namely the perpetrators!


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 7, 2014)

Apologies if this link has already been posted elsewhere but more on Peter McKelvie, who appears to be one of Tom Watson's key sources.

It's his blog:

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/category/peter-mckelvie/

A warning - there's a hell of a lot of it. But it has a lot of interesting background - notably his numerous attempts to get Cameron, Clegg etc to take this issue seriously.

If true, it makes Cameron's "we need to get to the bottom of this" interview this afternoon a pile of hypocritical, self-serving, guff.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 7, 2014)

weltweit said:


> I am less bothered by that. It worries me these enquiries seem more about the handling of files and apparent loss of some of them, than the actual content of the files themselves, namely the perpetrators!


Savile was a spectacularly twisted and evil thing who raped children in plain sight for decades. For what it's worth I'd like to have seen some justice - him, the perp, having his head bounced off a pavement till the end of recorded time. However he's a fixed point in his story, the valuable 'lessons to be learned' is that vulnerable kids were exploited with various institutions unwilling to do anything - most of all, not giving a shit. That's the same story here.  There might be the odd doddery m'Lord rapist still around to arrest, I doubt anyone will do time to be honest, but again they are the fixed points. The real focus should be on why political parties let their members rape children.


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> There has just been a Newsnight interview with Peter McKelvie in relation to the NSPCC's role in the forthcoming enquiry (not very flattering) and other matters relating to survivors' allegations. He says that, according to survivors he has spoken to, abusers of 20 years' ago still occupy prominent and powerful positions.



Theres a BBC video of an interview with him online now:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28205225


----------



## ska invita (Jul 8, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> "moral panic" implies exagerated fuss. .


dont worry, im sure the rotweilers on newsnight wouldnt let that slip past


----------



## treelover (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Savile was a spectacularly twisted and evil thing who raped children in plain sight for decades. For what it's worth I'd like to have seen some justice - him, the perp, having his head bounced off a pavement till the end of recorded time. However he's a fixed point in his story, the valuable 'lessons to be learned' is that vulnerable kids were exploited with various institutions unwilling to do anything - most of all, not giving a shit. That's the same story here.  There might be the odd doddery m'Lord rapist still around to arrest, I doubt anyone will do time to be honest, but again they are the fixed points. The real focus should be on why political parties let their members rape children.




This could also be said about the grooming cases, the reasons for cover up may be different, but they occurred.


----------



## Tankus (Jul 8, 2014)

Apologies if mentioned ,as its its a hundred pages ...but
http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/
D notice ?......wag the dog ?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 8, 2014)

http://bilgewatch.wordpress.com/201...our-loving-government-about-kids-being-raped/


----------



## Batboy (Jul 8, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I'm not sure why Mellor is putting himself forward as a commentator as, if he had an ounce of self-awareness, he would know he has zero credibility about this matter. Or anything else.
> 
> It is true that he held a junior position in the Home Office (something he was seemingly keen to mention in interviews yesterday) - for all of 9 months.



I listened to Mellor on LBC with Livingstone last Saturday. I was shocked by his attitude, it didn't make sense he poopoohed criticism of Brittan and in the same show stood up for Rolf Harris over the age/sentence thing.  He was almost ambivalent about the issue of child abuse. Top wanker.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> `<snip> The real focus should be on why political parties let their members rape children.


  ... and perhaps also why they seem to have got so much help from the cops, DPP and spooks in covering it all up.


----------



## andy usher (Jul 8, 2014)

Batboy said:


> I listened to Mellor on LBC with Livingstone last Saturday. I was shocked by his attitude, it didn't make sense he poopoohed criticism of Brittan and in the same show stood up for Rolf Harris over the age/sentence thing.  He was almost ambivalent about the issue of child abuse. Top wanker.



I suppose some people are thee to defend to balance things out. Personally I do not think at Rolf's age he should be in prison, I feel that if no one spoke out and it has taken the CPS etc so much time (2 years is it) to get to court then that's a fault of the system and should be taken into account.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 8, 2014)

andy usher said:


> I suppose some people are thee to defend to balance things out. Personally I do not think at Rolf's age he should be in prison, I feel that if no one spoke out and it has taken the CPS etc so much time (2 years is it) to get to court then that's a fault of the system and should be taken into account.


Hmm. But that effectively says that if you can get away with something for long enough, you're off scot free - I'm not sure I like the implications of that.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 8, 2014)

One thing I don't understand about this paedophile ring thing, or I suppose paedophile rings entrenched in power generally, is how exactly do all these paedophiles find each other to conspire in the first place? Surely the number of people who want to rape or rape kids is so tiny that paedophiles finding each other is difficult? Or do nonces just flock to politics?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 8, 2014)

Chief Childraping enablers MI5 and special branch should be compelled to give up their info on high level nonces. After all - that is where the various files have ended up.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Chief Childraping enablers MI5 and special branch should be compelled to give up their info on high level nonces. After all - that is where the various files have ended up.



Which in a way, is a reductio ad absurdum of the whole inquiry farce, because we know that's never going to happen. 

Which means the toothless inquiry simply serves as a distraction, and maybe a chance to go after BBC and NHS to facilitate their privatisation.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 8, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Chief Childraping enablers MI5 and special branch should be compelled to give up their info on high level nonces. After all - that is where the various files have ended up.



Indeed, and it also makes you wonder about the fact that our security services have been mass recording images on webcams. Should people who work so closely with paedophiles really be recording so many images of kids? Obviously no one should in the first place, but it does raise a few extra questions re: mass surveillance.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 8, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Which means the toothless inquiry simply serves as a distraction, and maybe a chance to go after BBC and NHS to facilitate their privatisation.



Yep, the way the Murdoch press and the Tory scum have constantly been repeating BBC and NHS in relation to even this particular scandal shows that the political class never miss a chance to continue to promote their smash and grab raid on the rest of us. Even when they are being exposed as nonces and nonce facilitators.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 8, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> ... Which means the toothless inquiry simply serves as a distraction..


The enquiries just seem a bit "Yes Minister" to me - a year discussing who had the files? during which the perpetrators go yet further without punishment, until the calculation might be that we have all forgotten about them again ..


----------



## Betsy (Jul 8, 2014)

existentialist said:


> Hmm. But that effectively says that if you can get away with something for long enough, you're off scot free - *I'm not sure I like the implications of that*.


I'm absolutely positive I don't! Rolf Harris is where he belongs for what he has done. The only pity,I feel, is that he wasn't found out much much sooner - he has had a (charmed)life of unaccountabillty for his actions.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> "Gary Walker" of Sinn Fein is Sean O' Callaghan.
> 
> http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/201...nised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/



Website down.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> I wasn't sure if, beyond me mentioning it in this thread several times because I the other year I saw an article from the time in a press archive that was fairly cheap to access online, this aspect had received any fresh mention in the press. Seems it did a few days ago:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-dismissed-as-fantasies-of-a-deluded-man.html
> 
> ...



From the first link: "He [Dickens] called a news conference at Westminster but was told on its eve that a newspaper was about to publish a story that he was having an affair." - something of a coincidence, no?

From the second (I can't cut 'n' paste from this site, must be the lizards ) - the alleged victim and her partner were mystified as to how 2 Sunday newspapers were publishing the story of Brittan's being questioned about the allegation, when apparently only the Met knew that they'd interviewed him. 

Implications of media/'establishment' collusion - *gasp* whatever next


----------



## existentialist (Jul 8, 2014)

Betsy said:


> I'm absolutely positive I don't! Rolf Harris is where he belongs for what he has done. The only pity,I feel, is that he wasn't found out much much sooner - he has had a (charmed)life of unaccountabillty for his actions.


Yes., he did. And that's the next problem we have to solve - the way in which celebrity and status, in far too many cases, enables people to ar the very least delay any kind of inquiries into their actions.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 8, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Apologies if mentioned ,as its its a hundred pages ...but
> http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/
> D notice ?......wag the dog ?


What's all that stuff about Dunblane? Could someone summarise please ?


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

I see this BBC summary of how the papers are treating news of the inquiry indicates that spooks and whips offices are far from absent from the narrative.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-28205194



> Alan Travis, in the Guardian, explains that this is because it aims to "complement, not undermine" the various criminal investigations into the matters. But he adds that it will "have powers to request all government papers, including MI5 and special branch files... and intriguingly, it will be able to take evidence including from the political parties' whips offices, which are said to hold the darkest secrets of Westminster".
> 
> The Telegraph notes that it was mentioned in the Commons that one former Conservative whip, Tim Fortescue, had told the BBC in the 1990s that party whips might not disclose certain behaviour of colleagues including that "involving small boys".


----------



## Tankus (Jul 8, 2014)

Goldfish threshold ...sorry
Just that mention of Vicky de Lune , Cynthia Payne , Oranges in mouths , and Bunnies in France  bit of a lightbulb moment of reassessing past headlines  and an underlying link



weltweit said:


> The enquiries just seem a bit "Yes Minister" to me - a year discussing who had the files? during which the perpetrators go yet further without punishment, until the calculation might be that we have all forgotten about them again ..


Or die of old age ...... blackmail threats are weakening as the older string pullers lose their grip on power and the ablilty to manipulate the lid shut . ?
Its sort of like we are being drip fed expendable  celebrity purves, as nasty as they are, as bread and circuses .
Finding it hard to differentiate between conspiracy and reality any more , because the reality  is turning out to be far more scary .

Head goes back into the sand


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 8, 2014)

seventh bullet said:


> This myth still has life, I see.


It's undead, however many times it's knocked on the head it always pops back up.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 8, 2014)

treelover said:


> Furedi is on Newsnight pontificating about 'moral panics'



They say you never leave MI5.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> They say you never leave MI5.


My blood pressure disallows me from watching this, but you do wonder what decision making went on in the Newsnight team to interview him.  FFS this is a serious subject!


----------



## Frances Lengel (Jul 8, 2014)

andy usher said:


> I suppose some people are thee to defend to balance things out. *Personally I do not think at Rolf's age he should be in prison, *I feel that if no one spoke out and it has taken the CPS etc so much time (2 years is it) to get to court then that's a fault of the system and should be taken into account.



Fuck _right_ off. Klaus Barbie's murdering days were behind him by the time he ended up doing bird. Should've been let off then, eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

Batboy said:


> Funny I heard those rumours too about Brittan also in the 80's, from a very old friend of mine who is a journalist who also worked at the Express. There is undoubtedly in my mind something afoot here. I remember being quite shocked at the time at what I was told. Yet nothing ever surfaced. There are a lot of influential people that were either involved or knew of underage teenagers or children being abused. The whole rent boy thing is nothing not heard of.  A cover up and burying of evidence is not beyond belief.
> 
> It is depressing to think that all of this went on and goes on. The Saville/Hall/Gliitter/King/Cyril Smith etc etc revelations are a depressing testimony to the scale of abuse and the arseholeness of celebrity and power positions of the wealthy and influential elite . I live at the end of a road where there used to be long term abuse for dozens and dozens of children who were in care. The politicians too often sidestep these scandals for both political expediency and fear of drawing attention to their own ineptitude (Margaret Hodge anyone?).
> 
> ...



To give Hodge her due, she's not kept her gob shut on the stuff that's arisen post-Savile, even though she must be painfully aware that the meeja are just waiting to trot out her past.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

Anyone read this? 

http://www.richardwebster.net/brynestyn.htm


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> What's all that stuff about Dunblane? Could someone summarise please ?



Thomas Hamilton was given his gun licence by George Robertson (NATO). Hamilton wax a scout leader and paedophile. He was supplying boys to people in the local authority. He got pissed off and carried out Dunblane. Hence a 100 year gagging order on Dunblane files. 

That's something like the theory iirc.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

> Warner said his inquiry in 1992 showed how children's homes were targeted by powerful paedophiles. He told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4: "Some of these children's homes were targeted by people in power, powerful people. Indeed, sexual abuse of children is a power drive. That's what a lot of it is about.
> "It is possible that people who were authoritative, powerful in particular communities did sometimes have access to children's homes. We know for historical purposes that children's homes were a supply line sometimes."
> 
> Warner, a director of social services in Kent in the 1980s, said insufficient action was taken to deal with child abuse in that decade because there was "disbelief in the public mind".
> ...



http://www.theguardian.com/society/...upply-line-paedophiles-lord-warner?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## jusali (Jul 8, 2014)

Sickening that these people do it in the first place.
Double sickening that others have the audacity to try to cover it up.
Our whole entertainment, leader, political eco system seems to have been built by disgusting trolls getting their kicks out of kiddy fiddling, it defies belief? 
No wonder they're baying for water canons!


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Chief Childraping enablers MI5 and special branch should be compelled to give up their info on high level nonces. After all - that is where the various files have ended up.





The whole system is designed for abuse, pedo social workers could target a kid lets say from a large poor family, under the auspice's of a "wardship" order, which dates from feudal times, all it took was a word with a judge, no hearing necessary, the kid could then be put in a home hundreds of miles away, isolated and abused, with zero family contact allowed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Probably not but as the sticky on the nonce threads states ed doesn't want to find  out the hard way. Have just watched the whole Chris Fay video and he seems to be a credible and reliable source for what are hair-raising revelations. What I don't get though is the box of Polaroids he says he saw of the King and Queen's parties at the Elm Guest House where there was allegedly a photo of a significant VIP in a maids hat and apron abusing a 12 year old boy is why would someone who had so much to lose allow these photos to be taken. Doesn't ring true to me on first hearing.



Unfortunately, it makes psychological sense, both from the perspective of the arrogance of some abusers, and the urge that some abusers have to keep "trophies" of their "conquests", however risky that is.  In fact the _frisson_ of risk is often part of the *reason* for taking trophies (whether they be pictures, a lock of hair or an item of the victims' clothing) in the first place.


----------



## treelover (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> The whole system is designed for abuse, pedo social workers could target a kid lets say from a large poor family, under the auspice's of a "wardship" order, which dates from feudal times, all it took was a word with a judge, no hearing necessary, the kid could then be put in a home hundreds of miles away, isolated and abused, with zero family contact allowed.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

Any ideas? 



> I can think of quite a few men of my age who might have been sleeping badly recently, worrying about their past and wondering if anybody might have complained to the police about their doings with very young women. Some extremely famous men I knew personally might have been ransacking their memory to ask whether they ever crossed the line between indecency and illegality.* I do know, for certain, of one household name of almost saintly respectability from the Seventies and Eighties – a direct contemporary of Savile, Hall and Harris and equally well-known – who is lucky to be dead because, if his history of grooming under-age girls were to be dug up, he would certainly have found himself in the stocks of a tabloid pelting if not the handcuffs of the bizzies.*



http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/...-a-household-name-who-abused-under-age-girls/


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Thomas Hamilton was given his gun licence by George Robertson (NATO). Hamilton wax a scout leader and paedophile. He was supplying boys to people in the local authority. He got pissed off and carried out Dunblane. Hence a 100 year gagging order on Dunblane files.
> 
> That's something like the theory iirc.


Cheers


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> His sister was in "care," abused and later topped herself. He is driven by that, fair play to him for keeping with it, he getscarried away at times and could be more analytical, but its him doing the legwork with lots of this stuff.
> 
> I don't think people can quite comprehend that in the past, "care homes," were places were children were targeted, society turned a blind eye.



"In the past" is wishful thinking. It still goes on, *and* it stretches back a lot further than the '60s and '70s - at least to the days of the workhouse.



> Nor can they comprehend the establishment and security services have always been deviant, the fact they used kids in care as their play things and pawns is really no surprise.



Intelligence agencies don't "do" morality, unfortunately.  If it requires a kid getting raped for them to get their hooks into someone, that's what they'll set up.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

*Martin Allen, a 15-year-old boy, vanished on 5 November, 1979 at Kings Cross


In 1981, eight-year-old Vishal Mehotra went missing in Putney, not far from the Elms.

And others, 

No proof of any links but, obviously they were abducted and murdered by someone.

Its known paedophiles who made violent kiddie porn films including its alleged at least one snuff one in Holland did visit the Elms.

As did others with an active interest in violence on children.

I was surprised when the Police stated a few years ago such films were a myth, how could they say that ? 

*


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 8, 2014)

There's been mention of mass street protests in Belgium after the Dutroux scandal broke. Does anyone know of any proposals for a similar demo/march here (perhaps in London and ending up by/near Parliament), about this current stuff?  I'd be up for it (as long as it wasn't organised by the EDL or David Icke etc etc)


----------



## 1927 (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Any ideas?
> 
> 
> 
> http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/...-a-household-name-who-abused-under-age-girls/


Please don't let it be Bob Monkhouse!

What about Bygraves, there was something odd about him!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> It was very annoying listening to Cameron, Gideon and Clegg spoting their sanctimonious shite about what form an inquiry might take; they seem to be saying that no stone will be left unturned to uncover those who had been guilty of sexual abuse, and bring them to justice. Quite right too.
> 
> But no mention about strong suspicions of a systematic cover-up; will no stone be left unturned to uncover, for example, why Dickens was about to name names in a press conference, but - at the last minute - changed his mind and announced his own adulterous affair instead?
> 
> Why did his wife destroy the other copy of his dossier?



TBF, the narrative is that Dickens told her to, because of the trouble it could bring.



> Why was Brittan suddenly, last month, questioned about a sex offence alleged to have happened nearly 50 years ago?



Sacrificial damage, perhaps?  Nail him in the public consciousness as an oleaginous creep who rapes women, rather than an oleaginous creep who rapes children/puppies/letterboxes/knot-holes in planks of wood?



> IMHO these implications of a systematic, organised cover-up, including intimidation and threats, is just as alarming, and as deserving of a thorough investigation as the actual sexual abuse itself.



I'm not sure the weight of evidence doesn't go beyond "implications" by now.  It certainly appears that "the establishment" think so, as they're very obviously attempting to set discursive boundaries to any enquiry.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

1927 said:


> Please don't let it be Bob Monkhouse!
> 
> What about Bygraves, there was something odd about him!



I think they may be talking about Benny Hill.


----------



## 1927 (Jul 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I think they may be talking about Benny Hill.


Benny Hill was hardly of saintly respectability!


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> I see this BBC summary of how the papers are treating news of the inquiry indicates that spooks and whips offices are far from absent from the narrative.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-28205194



Unfortunatly I've only limited time today but for those who are interested in May's response to questions yesterday that pertain to the security services, they can be found here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/house-of-commons-28198412

The relevant questions are from:

1] Tom Watson (approx. 21.46 into the video)

2] Michael Ellis (50.27)

3] Kevin Brennan (1 hour 9 mins)

4] Pat Glass (1 hour 11 mins)

IMHO they give the Government some wriggle room with regard to the enquiry's full and unexpurgated access to all security service files.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> You know what, I think I disagree about that. I don't think their descriptions of the content are gratuitous and they do pause beforehand which gives some sort of a warning though it is not explicit. I think the video is useful in that is describes a specific video which was uncovered and investigated twice in foreign countries and the information was reported passed to the British authorities and not pursued. They claim the child who was so horrendously treated in the video was even identified by the british authorities and still not pursued.
> The details of the abuse are deeply troubling and challenging because of the suffering of the children and because they challenge us to believe that people could be capable of such acts of depravity and cruelty. (But then that was my first response to the discovery of the child's mutilated torso found in the river Thames too). This is why the logical response to this stuff is disbelief; we just can't fathom the mentality of it and don't want to admit the possibilty into our consciousness.
> I think the severity of the abuse and the crimes committed against these children is relevant because it inidcates how callously corrupt the authorities were/are who know/know about it and didn't/don't hold people to account for their crimes.



I absolutely agree, but I also think we can't afford to be squeamish when confronting such issues, because that's part of what allows the scum that do such things to cover up their activities - that the acts are so "beyond the pale" that no normal person (like the MP or bureaucrat on your telly, or that nice headmaster at your kids' school) could commit them.


----------



## discokermit (Jul 8, 2014)

1927 said:


> Please don't let it be Bob Monkhouse!


my mate used to see his car parked outside anne astons house on his way to work sometimes. which suggests affairs with adult co stars was more his thing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

1927 said:


> Benny Hill was hardly of saintly respectability!



There was a lot of rhetoric (even from his PR people) about him being a (rather sad) groper of the young women on his show, but there were also "underground" stories about him liking chicken.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

treelover said:


> Furedi is on Newsnight pontificating about 'moral panics'



Furedi probably believes that sexual boundaries are a _bourgeois_ affectation, the RCP twat.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Wilf I am less bothered by who knew what and when, more by who the actual abusers were.



I'm bothered about both.  Those who facilitate abuse, whether through direct action, or through silence, are as guilty as the abusers themselves.  The one couldn't exist without the other.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> There's been mention of mass street protests in Belgium after the Dutroux scandal broke. Does anyone know of any proposals for a similar demo/march here (perhaps in London and ending up by/near Parliament), about this current stuff?  I'd be up for it (as long as it wasn't organised by the EDL or David Icke etc etc)





Open goal for the far right to jump on this cause.

Ironic seeing that so many of the Monday club were at the Elms as was Nazi leader Colin Jordan.

Apparently Jordan, Proctor and Cyril Smyth were particularly sadistic with small children.


----------



## treelover (Jul 8, 2014)

1927 said:


> Please don't let it be Bob Monkhouse!
> 
> What about Bygraves, there was something odd about him!




is this speculation about dead people helpful, legal?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Which in a way, is a reductio ad absurdum of the whole inquiry farce, because we know that's never going to happen.
> 
> Which means the toothless inquiry simply serves as a distraction, and maybe a chance to go after BBC and NHS to facilitate their privatisation.



Oh, it's not a "distraction", it's an opportunity to construct a narrative whereby whatever piffling conclusions the inquiry reaches (and we *know* the conclusions will be piffling) will represent the "closure" of the whole sorry saga.  There'll be a few sacrifices, mostly of the posthumous type, but with a few lower-level scumbags, and then offialdom will insist, likely for another 30-50 years, that matters were dealt with.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> There was a lot of rhetoric (even from his PR people) about him being a (rather sad) groper of the young women on his show, but there were also "underground" stories about him liking chicken.



I learnt on here that "chicken" is slang for young girls, but it's a grotesque turn of phrase that trivialises the nature of the crimes in question.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.c...yard-investigation-into-missing-boys-stopped/

Links to an article about Police reopening missing childrens investigations after the raid on the Elms, the investigation was quickly closed.


8 year old Vishal Mehrotra  went missing on the night of the Royal Wedding in 1981. He was on his way home to Holmbush Road in Putney, less than a mile from Elm Guest House. The same night, there was a ‘Kings and Queens’ party in full swing at Rocks Lane


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 8, 2014)

treelover said:


> is this speculation about dead people helpful, legal?



You can't libel the dead.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I absolutely agree, but I also think we can't afford to be squeamish when confronting such issues, because that's part of what allows the scum that do such things to cover up their activities - that the acts are so "beyond the pale" that no normal person (like the MP or bureaucrat on your telly, or that nice headmaster at your kids' school) could commit them.


Yeah, I think so. The squeamishness is a factor but if something happens to a member of society, and we as a society have allowed the structures that facilitates it to exist and to remain then I think the least we can do is to bear witness to it and not try to pretend it didn't happen to the victims.

I'm filled with such disdain and revulsion for politicians now (because they denied those children the witnesses and justice they deserved).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Thomas Hamilton was given his gun licence by George Robertson (NATO). Hamilton wax a scout leader and paedophile. He was supplying boys to people in the local authority. He got pissed off and carried out Dunblane. Hence a 100 year gagging order on Dunblane files.
> 
> That's something like the theory iirc.



Just thought I'd point out that Robertson was an MP when he assisted Hamilton's application.  He didn't become Chair of NATO until quite a while after the Dunblane massacre.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

It's interesting as we enter as we enter another phase of politicians setting up inquiries and looking to 'sort it all out', just to remember how that played out in the past.  I was just looking at the timeline of the North Wales Scandal and went to the wiki page, which goes through the different reports.  As you will know, it's a long story of whistle blowers being sacked, inquiry after inquiry, councils and even Chief Constables having the fucking gall to simply say 'no, fuck off, not speaking to you'.  You even get the Jillings report being supressed 'for insurance purposes':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryn_Estyn

Important to remember those inquiries took place not in some distant place of the 1950s, but within the last 20 years, a time when child abuse had been 'rediscovered' by campaigners, social workers and the like.  This time round it has a different dynamic to some extent, certainly post Savile, which will make it harder for politicians, cops and officials to simply say fuck off.  However I'd struggle to see anything different in terms of the power relationships and desire to name names.  Expect a story of missing documents, failing memories and spooks unwilling to appear.  Also, the whole process dragging on well into the next parliament and resulting in very little except new procedures, maybe a strengthening of whistle blowers rights.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

IMHO the security services are now key to unravelling this saga.

The must have known what was in the Dickens files, and much more besides.

Indeed, if the Whips Office knew about abusers it is not unreasonable to assume MI5 did as well.

They are now in something of a bind of a “when did you stop beating your partner” variety.

If they maintain they did not know about alleged abuse, why not? It’s their job after all.

If they did know, why didn’t they do anything?

Indeed, it is not impossible that some of the alleged abuse, particularly that perpetrated by prominent figures, was with the connivance of, or even at the behest of, the security services.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> IMHO the security services are now key to unravelling this saga.
> 
> The must have known what was in the Dickens files, and much more besides.
> 
> ...





They are the ones who kept a lid on it and will do so.

In 1981 an 8 yr old child went missing one mile from the Elms child brothel on one of their kings and Queens nights, it was also the day of the Royal wedding. Should this not have been a major line of inquiry ?

The Police enquiry into this after it was raided in 91 was quickly closed down.

The head of Special branch was a visitor there ffs.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> IMHO the security services are now key to unravelling this saga.
> 
> The must have known what was in the Dickens files, and much more besides.
> 
> ...


 Pretty much the whole story of 'elite level' nonces from Smith onwards could probably be told in the brefings between the security services, Chief Secretaries and the PM (along with the Whip's Office and their role in controlling/blackmailing MPs).  There's a long list of people who would have 'known', including MPs, but each PM and/or Home Secretary would have had something like chapter and verse on the parliamentary nonces on their watch.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Jul 8, 2014)

Favelado said:


> I learnt on here that "chicken" is slang for young girls, but it's a grotesque turn of phrase that trivialises the nature of the crimes in question.



Chicken's also perverted filthdog slang for a rent boy who's yet to start shaving.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 8, 2014)

J Ed said:


> One thing I don't understand about this paedophile ring thing, or I suppose paedophile rings entrenched in power generally, is how exactly do all these paedophiles find each other to conspire in the first place? Surely the number of people who want to rape or rape kids is so tiny that paedophiles finding each other is difficult? Or do nonces just flock to politics?



Is it a 'Top public school' thing?  Some kind of fucked up status/power thing that rises out of such practices as 'fagging' and having young people subservient to you?  Are there any school links with those currently on the rumour list?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

These four men all sentenced together as per article, Peters was down on Elmtree list. From 1989, see references to Whitehall etc.



> BARRISTER and three other men are to be sentenced at the Old Bailey today for involvement in a sex ring which lured boys as young as 10 into prostitution.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport...d-guilty-in-rent-boy-conspiracy-case-1.641496


----------



## jusali (Jul 8, 2014)

Dogsauce said:


> Is it a 'Top public school' thing?  Some kind of fucked up status/power thing that rises out of such practices as 'fagging' and having young people subservient to you?  Are there any school links with those currently on the rumour list?


It wouldn't surprise me!
These "all boys" schools are a seething mass of power and control. Trust no-one etc


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 8, 2014)

ELizabeth Butler-Sloss to chair enquiry. About as establishment as you can get - ex judge, daughter of  judge, sister to the lord havers the lord chancellor.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 8, 2014)

I thought it was the NSPCC bloke doing it. Have I got my white-washes mixed up?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 8, 2014)

I think Butler Sloss is a dame? It would certainly sound more aloof and patronising to keep referring to "Dame blah's" inquiry as the reason why they cant possibly say anything about covering up child rape for a year or 2. Scum.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 8, 2014)

I turned on Radio 5 at lunch time. Mistake. First thing was a little montage they've done from all abuse stories going back some time. 

That's the idea : Now the spotlight is on government it's time to look at absolutely everybody (and therefore much less at government)

Then, the first interviewee had the softball put to him "you don't think this is a hard-headed coverup do you"? All nicey, and off he started but I had to switch off. I'm so fucking angry.

NO HARD HEADED COVER UP? 

Why bring people on who haven't followed the barest basics? Why is the BBC repeating these dumb-down play-down mantras when they got it in the neck themselves? 

MI5 waltzing off with Smith files is hard headed cover up. 

Weird threats in Danczuk's ear are hard headed cover up.

Hard headed cover up then, hard headed cover up now. It's one big PR and news management exercise to these utter shits.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Sedwill before parliamentary committee at the moment - live reporting on guardian site.  Fuck me, the 'can't remember' has started already, about stuff from just last year:

_Q: Did you tell the home secretary not to look at this? Or did she say she did not want to see it?_
Sedwill says the report was not shown to ministers or special adviser.
It was quite clear to him and to May that it was best for her not to see the whole thing.
_Q: Did you tell her 114 files were missing?_
Sedwill says he cannot remember doing so, but he did mention this when the Home Office had to reply to a further question from Watson last autumn.
_Q: So did you tell May when the report was finished that 114 files were missing?_
Sedwill says he does not recall doing so. And he doesn't think he would have done.
The investigator decided that he did not find any evidence that files had been destroyed or removed without authorisation.
Most of the files were probably destroyed in accordance with normal procedure, he says. But he cannot confirm that because proper records were not kept.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

(this is going to go on for yonks, i really would recommend a re-read of the thread for all - it's not a thread you can skim through. It's taken me all day to do 40 pages with the concentration that they're worth - like a brief reviewing case notes)


----------



## andy usher (Jul 8, 2014)

Had Lyndon named this individual in the press while the person was alive, he would have been sued and almost certainly lost


Citizen66 said:


> You can't libel the dead.



I think that is one of the problems, I do not agree with Libel, or claims for compensation for victims, if they stopped the claims maybe more truth would come out, I think its kind of sick that money is the issue and not the sick depraved acts that the abusers are more worried about.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 8, 2014)

andy usher said:


> Had Lyndon named this individual in the press while the person was alive, he would have been sued and almost certainly lost
> 
> 
> I think that is one of the problems, I do not agree with Libel, or claims for compensation for victims, if they stopped the claims maybe more truth would come out, I think its kind of sick that money is the issue and not the sick depraved acts that the abusers are more worried about.


I don't think it is libel _per se_ that is the issue - just the way in which libel suits can be used in this country to "chill" any kind of debate: it comes down to who's got the deepest pockets. That's what is wrong.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 8, 2014)

Brendan O'Neill's penned this hatchet job. The LM network works tirelessly to smear anyone who has concerns. It's as if the kids who died don't count. Furedi, Fox, O'Neill Hume et al never once mention the victim.These people are scum.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsit...-obsesses-over-child-abuse/15335#.U7wAT9ilDJY


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

andy usher said:


> Had Lyndon named this individual in the press while the person was alive, he would have been sued and almost certainly lost
> 
> 
> I think that is one of the problems, I do not agree with Libel, or claims for compensation for victims, if they stopped the claims maybe more truth would come out, I think its kind of sick that money is the issue and not the sick depraved acts that the abusers are more worried about.



I do agree that the libel laws, when used simply as a gagging tool, are arguably draconian and are weighted in favour of the wealthy and powerful.

However those falsely, or indeed, maliciously accused of wrongdoing (say, in relation to child abuse) should have recourse to the law.

Otherwise the press could print all kinds of unfounded rumours and speculation about individuals which could be highly damaging (and, in extremis, life-threatening), with impunity.

That cannot be right.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 8, 2014)

This is so toxic that no one will want to admit any culpability; failing/missing memories and adherence to either presumed common practice (oh that's not the way things would have been done) or the 'letter of the law' (the regulations didn't say we had to report back to x, y or z) will be common place.

It is really depressing, not because I necessarily believe in the existence of some high level far reaching conspiracy (as opposed to a sometimes mutually beneficial coming together of many different self-interested networks e.g. security services, political parties and paedophiles). But rather because of the delusional arrogance of those in charge:

the arrogant delusion that they know best,
that they are capable of genuinely investigating themselves,
that the systems of power and influence which they profit from are the best arrangements for us all,
that the rest of us should and will trust them.
I really hope that enough leverage can be gained to actually lever the lid of these cans of worms - the child abuse, the corruption, the secrecy - but I am deeply sceptical that anything more than a quickly forgotten frisson of panic will affect those responsible (for the abuse, it's covering up and it's use).


Louis MacNeice


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> There's been mention of mass street protests in Belgium after the Dutroux scandal broke. Does anyone know of any proposals for a similar demo/march here (perhaps in London and ending up by/near Parliament), about this current stuff?  I'd be up for it (as long as it wasn't organised by the EDL or David Icke etc etc)


If there were they'd be dismissed as whey faced harridans. The women of paulsgrove, the people of Bishop's Lydeard - heroes.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

_Should have been done/oh we will now. _

The escape routes for many failures are already clear.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> I really hope that enough leverage can be gained to actually lever the lid of these cans of worms - the child abuse, the corruption, the secrecy - but I am deeply sceptical that anything more than a quickly forgotten frisson of panic will affect those responsible (for the abuse, it's covering up and it's use).
> 
> 
> Louis MacNeice


Sorry to cut the other bits of your post Louis - November 2012 this was gaining traction, inquiries thrown out left right and centre, most (handily) having to stop because of police investigations - they've had to do the same operation again. Point being this is still live as a political issue and they know it. And they can't handle it outwith of inquiries at all.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Sedwill looking completely underprepared for the meeting:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-missing-child-abuse-files-politics-live-blog

Still it all has the feel of the usual dance, a few outraged sticks and stones, but all falling to ground in the same pattern.


----------



## D'wards (Jul 8, 2014)

To me this is the worst of all crimes; these poor kids were in  Children's Home so may have had a rough time already, and the people that are there to protect them are the ones that are indirectly or directly responsible for their suffering. They had nowhere to turn.
Man on LBC last night was in a children's home and was abused in this way. Said there had been suicides amongst his friends at the home at the same time.
I hope I don't come across all moral-outrage, but I would happily seeing the perpetrators tortured in the worst possible way for this.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 8, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Brendan O'Neill's penned this hatchet job. The LM network works tirelessly to smear anyone who has concerns. It's as if the kids who died don't count. Furedi, Fox, O'Neill Hume et al never once mention the victim.These people are scum.
> http://www.spiked-online.com/newsit...-obsesses-over-child-abuse/15335#.U7wAT9ilDJY


 
Have you read the associated comments? There are some really brave free thinkers taking the opportunity provided by O'Neill to tell it like it is.

It is however a little odd that none of them seems able to imagine an objection to paedophilia based on by turns experience, empathy and care. Perhaps their thinking is just a little constrained after all?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

I can't see MI5 handing over files. Can you?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 8, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Have you read the associated comments? There are some really brave free thinkers taking the opportunity provided by O'Neill to tell it like it is.
> 
> It is however a little odd that none of them seems able to imagine an objection to paedophilia based on by turns experience, empathy and care. Perhaps their thinking is just a little constrained after all?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Aye, I saw them and I wanted to puke.

At times like these, libertarians tend to reveal the limits of their thinking.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I can't see MI5 handing over files. Can you?


 Only if there's some kind of Eastern European scene circa 1990, with protesters storming the interior ministry building and hurling the files out of the window.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I can't see MI5 handing over files. Can you?


 
What files...we have no files. Anyway why are you asking about files?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Aye, I saw them and I wanted to puke.
> 
> At times like these, libertarians tend to reveal the limits of their thinking.


 Fucking right.


----------



## Tankus (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Sedwill looking completely underprepared for the meeting:
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-missing-child-abuse-files-politics-live-blog
> 
> Still it all has the feel of the usual dance, a few outraged sticks and stones, but all falling to ground in the same pattern.



Prep seemed like a quick peruse after a long and hearty brunch this morning .

TV coverage cut as it started to get interesting


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 8, 2014)

D'wards said:


> To me this is the worst of all crimes; these poor kids were in  Children's Home so may have had a rough time already, and the people that are there to protect them are the ones that are indirectly or directly responsible for their suffering. They had nowhere to turn.
> Man on LBC last night was in a children's home and was abused in this way. Said there had been suicides amongst his friends at the home at the same time.
> I hope I don't come across all moral-outrage, but I would happily seeing the perpetrators tortured in the worst possible way for this.


You should have heard Claire Fox last night. She was talking about families, not kids in care homes, where all the abused victims came from, but_ families_.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Prep seemed like a quick peruse after a long and hearty brunch this morning .


 It seems to be the point where complete ignorance meets plausible deniability.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I can't see MI5 handing over files. Can you?



In those halls almost everyone is expendable. There will be a reckoning of sorts.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Vile shitbag as he is, Vaz managed a neat little quip:



> Austin mentions Clifford Hindley, a Home Office civil servant accused of authorising funding for PIE and asks a question about his background.
> Sedwill says he cannot help with that query. He did not conduct the investigation.
> Keith Vaz says there is now a list of questions for Sedwill to answer by letter.
> Sedwill says one of his officials is keeping a note.
> Vaz says he would prefer to rely on the committee's note. Home Office notes keep getting lost, he says.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 8, 2014)

Tankus said:


> TV coverage cut as it started to get interesting


 
its streaming on teh guardian live now
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-missing-child-abuse-files-politics-live-blog


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

ska invita said:


> its streaming on teh guardian live now
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-missing-child-abuse-files-politics-live-blog


 This really does look like choosing to call as a witness someone who they know won't want/be able to answer their questions.  There was never a chance Sedwill was going to give any specifics about who turned the shredder on and under who's instructions. Pointless (shit) theatre.


----------



## Tankus (Jul 8, 2014)

Oh cheers...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Sorry to be harking on about this, but here's another little gem:

Labour's *Yasmin Quresh*i goes next.
_Q: Did your investigator looking into the Dickens paperwork interview the Home Office officials involved?_
Sedwill says he did not interview former ministers or officials.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 8, 2014)

*pic of Fawlty Towers waiter*


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Any ideas?
> 
> 
> 
> http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/...-a-household-name-who-abused-under-age-girls/


I remember hearing a radio 1  DJ mentioning that he collected the neck ties of schoolgirls which he kept in glass cases. This would be the early eighties I think.
Today this would be considered suspect,but it didn't raise an eyebrow then.
He also later went on to write about the possibility of having oral sex with underage girl groupies in the seventies in his autobiography . Again no questions, no pack drill.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 8, 2014)

Dame Butler-Sloss is 80.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

mystic pyjamas said:


> I remember hearing a radio 1  DJ mentioning that he collected the neck ties of schoolgirls which he kept in glass cases. This would be the early eighties I think.
> Today this would be considered suspect,but it didn't raise an eyebrow then.
> He also later went on to write about the possibility of having oral sex with underage girl groupies in the seventies in his autobiography . Again no questions, no pack drill.


 D'ye ken John Peel?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> Dame Butler-Sloss is 80.


This thread doesn't need this.


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> D'ye ken John Peel?


Have a hob nob.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 8, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> This thread doesn't need this.



Strange you picked my message, which is related to the subject at hand, rather than this one two posts previous:



DotCommunist said:


> *pic of Fawlty Towers waiter*



Maybe stop trying to act like a mod and policing what other people have to say?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> Strange you picked my message, which is related to the subject at hand, rather than this one two posts previous:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe stop trying to act like a mod and policing what other people have to say?


Not strange at all. That post was irrelevant to the content of the thread. Yours wasn't. As you so helpfully pointed out.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

Maybe you could expand on why an a judge being 80 years old is worthy of comment. Leaving aside the multi-generational role in the elite and how and why this works.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> What files...we have no files. Anyway why are you asking about files?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



Whatever you think about the security services, they're not stupid.

They must know that this line is simply untenable.

I'm sure some files will be released, but certainly not those relating to sources and methods.

While I want the inquiry to have full access to all security service files, on reflection I'm not sure all should be placed in the public domain if they solely relate to unfounded rumour and speculation.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 8, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe you could expand on why an a judge being 80 years old is worthy of comment. Leaving aside the multi-generational role in the elite and how and why this works.



The retirement age for judges is 70 for a reason.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

No, they're not stupid enough to release any files they might  have that show they knew about paedophiles in positions of power and did nothing about it, apart from perhaps blackmailing them into being useful idiots. 

"National security"?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> The retirement age for judges is 70 for a reason.


Any chance you could expand on that reasoning and the difference between_ active service _judges and proper respected people doing a one off job.

Seriously, what is your point - that she is 80? Of all the things to attack this appointment, her being 80?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> No, they're not stupid enough to release any files they might  have that show they knew about paedophiles in positions of power and did nothing about it, apart from perhaps blackmailing them into being useful idiots.
> 
> "National security"?


We can't ever see those files. They're not recorded in the normal records.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 8, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> Strange you picked my message, which is related to the subject at hand, rather than this one two posts previous:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe stop trying to act like a mod and policing what other people have to say?




that was supposed to indicate how I find the repeated sedwill denials/forgets verging on the farcical, thats all.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> No, they're not stupid enough to release any files they might  have that show they knew about paedophiles in positions of power and did nothing about it, apart from perhaps blackmailing them into being useful idiots.
> 
> "National security"?



If they deny the existence of the files then the logical conclusion is that they will have to maintain the pretence that they didn't know anything at all, which is simply preposterous.

If they fall back on the "national security" defence, something that May mentioned more than once yesterday, then they would have to explain why releasing a file
showing that politician x is child abuser would be a threat to the security of the state (unless it reveals their sources and methods).

Quite the opposite in fact as, if was true, it would free that person from the possibility of external blackmail which is the reason the security services give for keep such files in the first place.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Don't want to directly link to it - but you should be able to see it here. Can't imagine given the libel considerations it will stay up long on You Tube.
> 
> *WARNING *- contains utterly revolting descriptions of child abuse and killing for snuff movies .
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/pnmfilms/videos




Not all of them.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

The inquiry will, at the outset, need full and unexpurgated access to all security service files, even if not all of them can be placed in the public domain.

These files will answer most, if not all, of the key questions - “who, why, what, where and when”.

Then the inquiry will be able to concentrate its efforts filling in any gaps. I don’t think MI5 would have paid too much attention to the NHS, for example.

Otherwise, if the inquiry will have to start from first principles and/or work its way backwards, it will expend a great deal of effort sifting through a mass of information only some of which may be relevant, and most of it likely to be completely useless - being led up blind alleys, either accidentally or by design.

It will remain to be seen if this happens but my guess is that the security services will now come under a level of scrutiny the like of which they have never experienced before. It's not something they will be particularly comfortable with.

It will be interesting how this one will pan out.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Whatever you think about the security services, they're not stupid.
> 
> They must know that this line is simply untenable.
> 
> ...






Its not going to happen, turkeys don't vote for Christmas, they will either fake copies or say they have been destroyed.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Its not going to happen, turkeys don't vote for Christmas, they will either fake copies or say they have been destroyed.



I’m not saying that won’t happen.

Just that the line that they knew nothing or that “we’ve lost them, they got shredded, the dog eat them” or any other similar tripe simply won’t wash anymore with an increasing sceptical public who will no longer uncritically swallow anything the Government says in the way they would, say, 40 years ago.

Neither will it wash with the survivors, or with MPs such as Tom Watson who, to his immense credit are like terriers with a bone and simply won't be fobbed off.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

According to Chris Fay ex head of the nat assoc of young people in care, in this video, kids were warned off by Special branch in reporting to them, his org was also placed under surveillance."it got so bad we had to meet kids in other locations".

41mins 30 secs.


----------



## Tankus (Jul 8, 2014)

Push too hard and if its not his expenses coming under renewed scrutiny... It'll be a sports bag ( feccin huge though) tree in the woods , or mouth sized orange and suspenders waiting for him .


----------



## existentialist (Jul 8, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> The retirement age for judges is 70 for a reason.


Retired judges are quite often used for inquiries. Provided she still has all her faculties, there is no reason why EB-S shouldn't do a perfectly good job, at least as far as her age is concerned: her experience as a lawyer will be useful in examining evidence (assuming there is any) and questioning witnesses.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 8, 2014)

The thing turning my stomach is that there will be a significant amount of time and effort spent by politicians (and media accomplices) _seeing what they can gain from this.
_
Who gets to look resolute in pushing this enquiry? Who can be attacked for being a bit weak or disorganised?  Who gets to point at past figures from one particular party or the other (cf the Mail's 'Labour Lord' headline a couple of days ago) - _yes, those are the bad guys, it was the other lot. _Who gets to be the hero when some bit player in the whole conspiracy gets sent down?

Amongst all this partisanship and positioning nobody actually gives a flying fuck about the kids, do they?


----------



## kenny g (Jul 8, 2014)

Don't know if this has been linked to yet:-
It appears to be a copy of the westminster secret service doc from 1995. Would be interested in where the recently quoted segment is.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 8, 2014)

> Baroness Butler-Sloss's broader, independent inquiry, will look at how seriously public bodies and other important institutions have taken their duty of care to protect children from sexual abuse.
> ...
> Mr Sedwill said Lady Butler-Sloss's inquiry would not be pursing individual cases, although she would want to hear cases of that type.
> ...
> Her report on child sex abuse in Cleveland during the 1980s - which had led to more than 100 children being removed from their families - resulted in the Children's Act 1989.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914
I am less interested in the probity of public bodies, or even kids being taken from their families, I am interested in prominent perpetrators, if there are any, being punished.


> As part of a two-pronged attack on child abuse, Home Secretary Theresa May announced on Monday a separate review, headed by the NSPCC's Peter Wanless, which would focus on concerns the Home Office failed to act on allegations of child sex abuse contained in a dossier handed over in the 1980s by former Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914
So the first and second reviews both focus mainly on institutions, rather than perpetrators. I suppose police investigations are ongoing, but they don't seem to be ongoing very quickly, these allegations are many years old.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Sedwill's ineffectual incompeto-fuckwittery today was probably a micro model of the coming process(es).  When asked questions like 'did you read it, did you speak to them, did you look in the cupboard', the answer was always an astonished 'no'.  He undertook a 'review' which appeared to involve him doing nothing at all.  I somehow can't see teams of investigators crowbarring cabinets open (or electronic versions thereof) or chasing down the clerk who might have been given the shredding job in 1984.  There will be some interviews, a lot of submissions - and a report that is a cautious assemblage of that which can't be ignored, but nothing more radical.  No risks taken, nothing pushed and nothing more than an allusion to events which are plainly true but can't be proved beyond 'reasonable doubt'.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 8, 2014)

The quoted segment is by Tim Fortescue and is at 23.50

The whole documentary is very interesting, if you are into that kind thing. And it is extremely relevant to the matter at hand.


----------



## treelover (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Not all of them.




Can't stand L/G, but that was strangely moving...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 8, 2014)

From last year. Some of this article is touched upon in the youtube video "Nightmare at Elmtree Guesthouse" a few pages back.



> Chris Fay said he was pinned to a wall and throttled before being given a chilling warning to “back away” from allegations surrounding the notorious Elm Guest House in Barnes, south-west London.
> 
> Young boys in care were allegedly taken there in the Eighties to be abused by high-profile MPs and other powerful establishment figures.
> 
> Mr Fay, who worked for the now-defunct National Association of Young People In Care, accused the Metropolitan Police of acting like “gangsters” when news of the scandal broke in 1990. He revealed how some Special Branch members routinely threatened him and his colleagues and even victims over a three-month period of intimidation


----------



## treelover (Jul 8, 2014)

So frightening, what really goes on...


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 8, 2014)

Also interesting at about 41.40


----------



## Batboy (Jul 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> To give Hodge her due, she's not kept her gob shut on the stuff that's arisen post-Savile, even though she must be painfully aware that the meeja are just waiting to trot out her past.



True... though normally when she opens her gob a foot goes in it.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 8, 2014)

existentialist said:


> Retired judges are quite often used for inquiries. Provided she still has all her faculties, there is no reason why EB-S shouldn't do a perfectly good job, at least as far as her age is concerned: her experience as a lawyer will be useful in examining evidence (assuming there is any) and questioning witnesses.





> *Butler-Sloss knows an establishment cover-up when she sees one*
> 
> The ‘establishment’ have decided to respond to allegations of an ‘establishment’ cover-up of the wholesale abuse of children by ‘establishment’ figures, by installing an ‘establishment’ figure to investigate them…. Dame Butler-Sloss will lead a review into whether “_public bodies had failed in their duty of care towards children._”
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

weltweit said:


> So the first and second reviews both focus mainly on institutions, rather than perpetrators. I suppose police investigations are ongoing, but they don't seem to be ongoing very quickly, these allegations are many years old.



The age of the allegations will make the police work slower, since they are mostly reliant on finding enough victims who are willing to co-operate, and most other potential forms of evidence are long gone. And the police only restarted this work in recent years, and will be hindered not just by any present willingness for fresh coverup, but all that was lost by coverups that happened long ago and may not be undoable.

My faith in police investigations snaring some high-profile perpetrators has diminished somewhat over time, but thats not just because of how long its taking, but rather the way the mood of Exaro news pieces has changed over time. They started off sounding quite confident, and had some good police and/or victim sources, but the relationship with the relevant parts of the Met seems to have been more antagonistic as time has gone on, and with less confident hopeful details to report.

I hope there turns out to be a difference between the reality of police investigations and the public understanding of such at this point. And I certainly hope there are other cases getting somewhere beyond the Elm Guest House stuff, I don't want to put all my eggs in one basket on that one. For numerous reasons, including the apparent lack of victims willing to cooperate, some questions about exactly how well run and thorough NAYPIC was, and also the complications stemming from the fact that this case was the one rumoured about most strongly, and with most detail, all those years ago. These questions don't make me think any less of the possible abuse that took place there, not by any means, and I want it to get somewhere, but I would he happier if I knew that there were other cases involving high-profile people being pursued, so we aren't left with nothing if that particular case goes nowhere. And when we speak of the dark arts, I cannot rule out the possibility that some of the info that appears in the public domain in relation to that case, was a load of crock that stemmed from a different sort of spooky game being played back in the day.

It doesn't help when we get confident stories about imminent arrests stemming from other branches of police investigation, and then nothing happens. For example this piece about operation Cayacos from Feb 2014, which spoke of charges being pressed within weeks:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...evel-charges-in-paedophile-ring-linked-to-mps


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> *<snip>
> I was surprised when the Police stated a few years ago such films were a myth, how could they say that ?
> *



One possible interpretation is that 'snuff film' is often taken to imply something made primarily for commercial gain, where the very few actual cases of filmed sex murders are more like 'sex killer home movies' ie more in the nature of a trophy than a commercial thing.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 8, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I’m not saying that won’t happen.
> 
> Just that the line that they knew nothing or that “we’ve lost them, they got shredded, the dog eat them” or any other similar tripe simply won’t wash anymore with an increasing sceptical public who will no longer uncritically swallow anything the Government says in the way they would, say, 40 years ago.


Well, I imagine what will happen is: 
The Agencies will say - we are unable to release these files, as release might compromise national security. Never mind that this is a crock of shite.  The Express/Mail papers will get behind this - do you want to jeopardize national security? What are you, some kind of traitor?


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> One possible interpretation is that 'snuff film' is often taken to imply something made primarily for commercial gain, where the very few actual cases of filmed sex murders are more like 'sex killer home movies' ie more in the nature of a trophy than a commercial thing.



A more careful version of that classic police line, which would also have been used at the time and I'm sure I heard in at least one documentary from the late 80's or early 90's, is that 'the snuff movie(s) may exist, but we've not seen one and until we do we'll have to treat it as an unsubstantiated rumour'.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 8, 2014)

Posted on needleblog.That's ring so true as to how whippery did/does work.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> A more careful version of that classic police line, which would also have been used at the time and I'm sure I heard in at least one documentary from the late 80's or early 90's, is that 'the snuff movie(s) may exist, but we've not seen one and until we do we'll have to treat it as an unsubstantiated rumour'.




Just came across this :

Police did nothing to track down victim of child porn snuff film

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> A more careful version of that classic police line, which would also have been used at the time and I'm sure I heard in at least one documentary from the late 80's or early 90's, is that 'the snuff movie(s) may exist, but we've not seen one and until we do we'll have to treat it as an unsubstantiated rumour'.



Sure but as far as I know (and I'm willing to be educated here), even if you include sex killer verite (but exclude stuff like the 911 footage) there are only about half a dozen documented cases ever, anywhere, that didn't turn out to be sfx fakes, run of the mill Japanese porn or various sorts of myths (e.g. every case of the many mentioned during the Satanic Panics, including one that turned out to be a Derek Jarman/Throbbing Gristle movie, but which sensation seeking journalists at C4 didn't bother to check the claims of xtian loons about).

So given the number of actual occurences vs myths, I don't think it's unreasonable to treat any claim of snuff movies as unsubstaniated until you've got a case that'll stand up in court.


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

treelover said:


> So frightening, what really goes on...



I find it equally frightening that despite several years of trying to consume all the info that is out there for a layman to get his hands on, I don't have that much clearer a sense of what really goes on, or did go on.

Just to pick one example, I have no clear sense of how many MPs or other prominent outsiders abused kids from children's homes. It sounds like it happened, but I really need a case to go to court to firm up the couple of plausible examples we've heard about, let alone those whose plausibility was damaged by the damaged nature of some of the victims, witnesses, and their ability to correctly identify perpetrators. If that doesn't happen, I'll be left with the sense that some bad shit happened, but no real idea about who did this shit, and what scale it happened on.


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> My faith in police investigations snaring some high-profile perpetrators has diminished somewhat over time, but thats not just because of how long its taking, but rather the way the mood of Exaro news pieces has changed over time.



David Hencke was used to getting faster responses to his stories on important but less-explosive issued when he was at the _Guardian_, before he went over to Exaro.

It's in the nature of things that it's even easier to slow down responses to decades-old events (particularly when those events are said to be coverups).

And slowing things down is one of the main purposes of inquiries.

And it's particularly important to quieten everything down in the year before an election.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Sure but as far as I know (and I'm willing to be educated here), even if you include sex killer verite (but exclude stuff like the 911 footage) there are only about half a dozen documented cases that didn't turn out to be sfx fakes, run of the mill Japanese porn or various sorts of myths (e.g. every case of the many mentioned during the Satanic Panics). So given the number of actual occurences vs myths, I don't think it's unreasonable to treat any claim of snuff movies as unsubstaniated until you've got a case that'll stand up in court.




It has to be out there, the fact now adays everyone has a phone camera means its inevitable.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

Another thing I think we need, especially when considering the potential for continued abuses today, is for society to have a whole bunch of frank discussions about 'rent boys'. But we actually seem to get less of this these days than we did back when it was 'mainstream acceptable' to spout a load of awful shit about homosexuality, gender issues, etc.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> It has to be out there, the fact now adays everyone has a phone camera means its inevitable.
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film



Perhaps so. Certainly, all of the less than half a dozen documented cases that I'm aware of have been 21st century.

Thousands of others that have been claimed to exist since Ed Sanders coined the term in the late 60's for the alleged Manson Family home movies (which have never surfaced) have turned out to be bullshit of various kinds.

Edited to add: so just to be clear, I think the weight of evidence vs quantity of claims warrants treating stories about snuff movies with slightly less, scepticism than claims of psychic spoon-bending and about the same as claims of satanic ritual abuse. It could happen, especially with modern technology, but historically an awful lot of sensationalist snuff movie stories have been circulated and virtually all such claims have turned out to be bogus.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jul 8, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> It's undead, however many times it's knocked on the head it always pops back up.



Whack an anti-working class mole.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

http://thefreedomagenda.wordpress.c...-child-sex-abuse-network-leads-back-to-no-10/
I don't know how reliable this list is but it's a list


----------



## 1927 (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> http://thefreedomagenda.wordpress.c...-child-sex-abuse-network-leads-back-to-no-10/
> I don't know how reliable this list is but it's a list


That list has been around for a while. Thing is note the MI 5 names on there, and the name of Leon Brittan. It's hardly likely that the dossier given to Brittan ever went anywhere than the bin, and MI5 are not going to drop their own in the shit. Expect a cover up!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> Another thing I think we need, especially when considering the potential for continued abuses today, is for society to have a whole bunch of frank discussions about 'rent boys'. But we actually seem to get less of this these days than we did back when it was 'mainstream acceptable' to spout a load of awful shit about homosexuality, gender issues, etc.



umm

or about prostitution and /or under-age prostitution in general?  (I assume the latter exists with both genders) - and I'm not sure that a "rent boy" is necessarily under age, even now.  it's also worth bearing in mind that until the mid 90s, a 20 year old was 'under age' as regards gay male sexual activity.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Just came across this :
> 
> Police did nothing to track down victim of child porn snuff film
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film



Express stories should set alarm bells ringing - the plot line and American accent suggest a fake snuff film - Charlie Sheen I seem to remember was taken in by the sick Japanese Guinea Pig films which are sfx and gruesome and loathsome. For some reason they survive uploads on You Tube - search guinea pig japan  TRIGGER ALERT - disturbing horror material which still remains very controversial more than 20 years after their release. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_Pig_(film_series)


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 8, 2014)

Cover up without doubt on the way.
All blame will be laid at the door of some long deceased scumbucket. 
All will be well in the island of Angels, we can all sleep a little less soundly in our beds tonight.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 8, 2014)

1927 said:


> That list has been around for a while. Thing is note the MI 5 names on there, and the name of Leon Brittan. It's hardly likely that the dossier given to Brittan ever went anywhere than the bin, and MI5 are not going to drop their own in the shit. Expect a cover up!



I'm surprised none of these names come out fighting McAlpine stylee as their reputations are being chipped away with innuendo and if they are totally innocent or unconnected have nothing to lose. Peter Bottomeley was quick out of the traps.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 8, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> I'm surprised none of these names come out fighting McAlpine stylee as their reputations are being chipped away with innuendo and if they are totally innocent or unconnected have nothing to lose. Peter Bottomeley was quick out of the traps.


I was thinking just the same. I wonder how long that list has been online.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> I'm surprised none of these names come out fighting McAlpine stylee as their reputations are being chipped away with innuendo and if they are totally innocent or unconnected have nothing to lose. Peter Bottomeley was quick out of the traps.




Leon Brittan never sued when Private eye first made the allegation in the 80s.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 8, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Cover up without doubt on the way.
> All blame will be laid at the door of some long deceased scumbucket.
> All will be well in the island of Angels, we can all sleep a little less soundly in our beds tonight.



Peter Morrison - noted pederast will do nicely - I used to work in the Department of Energy when he was minister - he was always pissed and surrounded by blue eyed blonde young men in his Private Office.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 8, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> I'm surprised none of these names come out fighting McAlpine stylee as their reputations are being chipped away with innuendo and if they are totally innocent or unconnected have nothing to lose. Peter Bottomeley was quick out of the traps.



One of the more famous names on the list is using the EU right to be forgotten ruling to remove some of the gossip about him, I've been comparing Google search results with those obtained via a US proxy where the ruling doesn't apply. So they are obviously concerned about this stuff but don't want to take it to court.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 8, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> One of the more famous names on the list is using the EU right to be forgotten ruling to remove some of the gossip about him, I've been comparing Google search results with those obtained via a US proxy where the ruling doesn't apply. So they are obviously concerned about this stuff but don't want to take it to court.



Fighting a losing battle methinks - rather like Brazil - truth will out.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> http://thefreedomagenda.wordpress.c...-child-sex-abuse-network-leads-back-to-no-10/
> I don't know how reliable this list is but it's a list


The list is certainly interesting (although not much background info) but the website it is on seems a little less credible.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

Yes, probably, i recall that mary moss worked closely with chris fay in exposing this stuff and was, i believe, the source of the list

more of her documents here *removed*


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

Puddy_Tat said:


> umm
> 
> or about prostitution and /or under-age prostitution in general?  (I assume the latter exists with both genders) - and I'm not sure that a "rent boy" is necessarily under age, even now.  it's also worth bearing in mind that until the mid 90s, a 20 year old was 'under age' as regards gay male sexual activity.



Certainly all of that stuff too. And I wasn't trying to imply that rent boy = under age. The changing laws regarding age of consent for gay male sexual activity is certainly a complication which can come up quite a bit when dealing with the specific subset of 'rent boy' stuff which I was getting at.

Specifically, the number of cases we have either heard about in the mainstream media (the original North Wales care home stuff that grabbed most of the attention initially) or via longstanding rumours. And the abuse-related vectors that put some people on that path. And any changes that have occurred both specifically to that stuff and more generally regarding male prostitution since the eras the historical allegations encompass.

To give just one very small and specific example, I don't think I've got that much idea exactly how old the boys that Peter Morrison was involved with were, or how such things would be treated today.

More broadly, societies failure to routinely and frankly discuss wider issues relating to age of consent and sex workers with a sustained clarity and depth, makes it even harder to have more specific discussions. The foundations for this discussion are weak and don't seem to be able to sustain a heavier conversation without repeated risk of collapse into one or another horrible mess. Including when people like me try to bring it up without using so many words as to ensure the subject is done justice and I don't come across as having some kinds of dodgy attitude towards either matters of sexuality or sex work.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 8, 2014)

that list (obviously I'm not commenting on the credibility or otherwise thereof) has been floating around the interweb for months if not a year or more.  i'm not sure who floated it first


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> Yes, probably, i recall that mary moss worked closely with chris fay in exposing this stuff and was, i believe, the source of the list
> 
> more of her documents here http://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/the-elm-guest-house-vip-paedophile-party-list/



That's a neo Nazi blog.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

is it?
Well i don't read it, it just came up in google. Honestly.
The pictures are interesting but I will take down the link as I wouldn't want to increase their traffic and I'm sure they can be found elsewhere.
It's also hard to make much out in the pictures


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

Just search the thread for NAYPIC if you want my often-repeated description of the list, in terms of who made it, what it is and isn't.

One thing I probably haven't said umpteen times before is that I would not be at all surprised if certain journalists had been shown that list at various times over the decades since it was compiled. Certain historical press reports certainly suggest a strikingly similar list of alleged abusers were mentioned back in the day, although only the already disgraced or deceased were mentioned by name rather than vaguer descriptions of their position in society.


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> is it?
> Well i don't read it, it just came up in google. Honestly.
> The pictures are interesting but I will take down the link as I wouldn't want to increase their traffic and I'm sure they can be found elsewhere.
> It's also hard to make much out in the pictures



Have a look at their "about" page. 

http://cigpapers.wordpress.com/about/


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> That's a neo Nazi blog.



And as noted above the alleged list is very old and frequently posted - usually in very dodgy places.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

laptop said:


> And as noted above the alleged list is very old and frequently posted - usually in very dodgy places.


Well for me, as I have been completely ignorant of the supposed identities it was surprising. Is it not credible then?
I'll remove the link if you lot think it muddies the waters or is not credible.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 8, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Express stories should set alarm bells ringing - the plot line and American accent suggest a fake snuff film - Charlie Sheen I seem to remember was taken in by the sick Japanese Guinea Pig films which are sfx and gruesome and loathsome.


Sheen contacted the FBI who eventually turned up on the doorstep of the late Chas Balun. When they explained why they were there he asked them if they had watched the end of the tape. It contained a 'making of' documentary showing how the special effects had been done.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> is it?
> Well i don't read it, it just came up in google. Honestly.
> The pictures are interesting but I will take down the link as I wouldn't want to increase their traffic and I'm sure they can be found elsewhere.
> It's also hard to make much out in the pictures



I guessed it was at the first mention of "jews" which is in the first sentence.


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> Well for me, as I have been completely ignorant of the supposed identities it was surprising. Is it not credible then?
> I'll remove the link if you lot think it muddies the waters or is not credible.



As elbows posted just on Sunday:




			
				elbows said:
			
		

> It's one of the documents from NAYPIC that I often go on about. It was from a bunch of notes that the charity made back in the day when it was talking to some victims and the female manager of the guest house (who subsequently died). It, and a lot of other, less interesting, documents from the same source were crudely photographed and released onto the net, if memory serves me correctly approximately 18 months ago. The police subsequently took away the files as part of their Fernbridge/Fairbanks investigation, files which had been sitting in a shed for a couple of decades. Files that were being looked after by a woman from NAYPIC who does not trust the police and, according to some parts of her historical internet footprint, sometimes suffers from some problems of the mind (e.g. thinks she is related to royalty).
> 
> That page is certainly one of the major sources of fuel for the persistent, but rather sloppy and on legally dodgy ground, twitter and broader internet mini shitstorm thats been going for quite some time now.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that even Chris Faye, who worked for NAYPIC back in the day, characterised the documents as being a starting point for proper investigation, not some cast iron smoking gun thing. For example I don't think its in dispute that Elm Guest House was a gay brothel, and evidence of attendance is not, on its own, evidence of child abuse.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> Have a look at their "about" page.
> 
> http://cigpapers.wordpress.com/about/


Oh dear


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 8, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> Well for me, as I have been completely ignorant of the supposed identities it was surprising. Is it not credible then?
> I'll remove the link if you lot think it muddies the waters or is not credible.



I'm pretty sure it's been linked to on this thread a few times.  Maybe from that site, maybe from others.

it's not entirely helpful that some of the sites making much of this whole issue are also virulently homophobic and / or anti-semitic and trying to make the story fit their shitty agendas.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

Yes, well, that's a lesson sharply learned.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jul 8, 2014)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I'm pretty sure it's been linked to on this thread a few times.  Maybe from that site, maybe from others.


I'm sorry then to be raking over old ground. I've not read the whole thread, I believe I read a few pages at the very beginning and my response was that of mind boggled disbelief.So I stopped reading. It was not until yesterday that I truly paid attention to all of this so I hope you will excuse me and my internet naivety.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2014)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I'm pretty sure it's been linked to on this thread a few times.  Maybe from that site, maybe from others.
> 
> it's not entirely helpful that some of the sites making much of this whole issue are also virulently homophobic and / or anti-semitic and trying to make the story fit their shitty agendas.



Or your common or garden conspiraloons ...


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Or your common or garden conspiraloons ...



There are some who _don't_ turn out, when the paint's scratched off, to fit the above description?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

weltweit said:


> The list is certainly interesting (although not much background info) but the website it is on seems a little less credible.




The most interesting name on the list is "Gary Walker, " aka Sean O Callaghan an IRA/MI5 informer.

The list comes from the evidence in this video. From Chris Fay, former head of the nat assoc of young people in care and evidence he got from the woman who owned the Elms b and b.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> The most interesting name on the list is "Gary Walker, " aka Sean O Callaghan an IRA/MI5 informer.


wasn't there some story about when he was staying with ruth dudley edwards about sexual shenanigans?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> wasn't there some story about when he was staying with ruth dudley edwards about sexual shenanigans?




Correct he went to a pub In Earls court, picked up a rent boy, brought him home, got tied up and robbed. Claimed it was all innocent.

The fact he is named by his MI5 codename shows the list could be authentic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Correct he went to a pub In Earls court, picked up a rent boy, brought him home, got tied up and robbed. Claimed it was all innocent.


yeh that's the one.


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> The fact he is named by his MI5 codename shows the list could be authentic.



Or disinformation.

Or the name leaked out of MI5 in some other context.

Or... what's the source for it being his codename anyway?

Or...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Regardless of how true the list is, it will be interesting to see if the announcement of inquiries emboldens other sites to repeat it.  What happens after that will be even more interesting. Will any of the (living) people named do a Lord McAlpine, or will it spread?  Can't see the mainstream media printing it in full to be honest, but there might be a few indirect references.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Will any of the (living) people named do a Lord McAlpine, or will it spread?


do you mean will any of them become tory treasurer?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> do you mean will any of them become tory treasurer?


That job's more suited to the dead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> That job's more suited to the dead.


the best government is a government of the dead.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 8, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Pretty much the whole story of 'elite level' nonces from Smith onwards could probably be told in the brefings between the security services, Chief Secretaries and the PM (along with the Whip's Office and their role in controlling/blackmailing MPs). * There's a long list of people who would have 'known', including MPs, but each PM and/or Home Secretary would have had something like chapter and verse on the parliamentary nonces on their watch.*



First thing this morning on Radio 6 I heard the Cabinet secretary during Thatchers administration basically saying the whole thing was a load of bollox. With all the stuff that's floating around including stuff on here I find it vanishingly unlikely that (a) it was untrue and (b) that he did not know. What amazes me is that he could come out with such a flat rebuttal. It does not bode well for any enquiry unless it actually has teeth.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 8, 2014)

laptop said:


> Or disinformation.
> 
> Or the name leaked out of MI5 in some other context.
> 
> ...




Why would Chris Fay(the guy in the video) want to put out disinformation ?

How would this benefit him ?

The name is from Republican sources.


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

laptop said:


> Or disinformation.
> 
> Or the name leaked out of MI5 in some other context.
> 
> ...



Half the reason I am cautious about many details of many alleged cases is the possibility that for all we know much of the attention is falling on stuff that may have been created for a range of purposes other than the truth, back in the day. Some politicians who were abusers have probably never featured in any of the historical rumours, or the modern whispers, and I'd like to see some of those prosecuted if at all possible.


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Why would Chris Fay(the guy in the video) want to put out disinformation ?



elbows says he did *not* put it out and doesn't believe it. 

I reposed that just up there ^ for those who don't, can't or won't search.

You know better?


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Why would Chris Fay(the guy in the video) want to put out disinformation ?
> 
> How would this benefit him ?



It's not that simple. Even if we assume he and NAYPIC were beyond repute, he was given information by others, and would have been unable to get cast-iron confirmation of some crucial details. His own contemporary description of what the list was, and was not, does not cover all these possibilities, but it is suitably cautious and he is well aware that the stuff they gathered is a good basis for further investigation of what went on, and by whom, not a smoking gun on its own.


----------



## elbows (Jul 8, 2014)

laptop said:


> elbows says he did *not* put it out and doesn't believe it.



I'm not sure I would quite put it like that at all. That makes it sound like he had nothing to do with that list at any point, which is not the case at all. What he is not responsible for, and was trying to point out, was the modern day turning of this list into some kind of cast-iron list of abusers by sloppy commentators.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 8, 2014)

Can we all take a step back and do critical interrogation again?  Can we stop piling link on link and claim  on claim and try and tie some things together,  or ask some questions about one directed target?


----------



## laptop (Jul 8, 2014)

elbows said:


> I'm not sure I would quite put it like that at all. That makes it sound like he had nothing to do with that list at any point, which is not the case at all. What he is not responsible for, and was trying to point out, was the modern day turning of this list into some kind of cast-iron list of abusers by sloppy commentators.



Ah, thanks for the edit. I didn't mean to imply he had no connection to it - just that, er, there's no evidence he "leaked" it and, in your words, he does not think it's  "some cast iron smoking gun thing". 

Just to reinforce the butchersapron point.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 9, 2014)

It is interesting that none of the names on that list have tried to get it suppressed. Especially after the macalpine farrago .


----------



## Libertad (Jul 9, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> is it?
> Well i don't read it, it just came up in google. Honestly.
> The pictures are interesting but I will take down the link as I wouldn't want to increase their traffic and I'm sure they can be found elsewhere.
> It's also hard to make much out in the pictures



Your link is still there Shifty. It's behind the first asterisk.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 9, 2014)

[QUOTE="scalyboy, post: 13256035, member: 13London.ere's been mention of mass street protests in Belgium after the Dutroux scandal broke. Does anyone know of any proposals for a similar demo/march here (perhaps in London and ending up by/near Parliament), about this current stuff?  I'd be up for it (as long as it wasn't organised by the EDL or David Icke etc etc)[/QUOTE]

This really should happen, may be not just london. The risk is that truthy types might predominate but who's going to do the legwork? Anyone know the basis of organisation in Belgium? I think there were rallies against the RC church in Ireland too?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Vaz  makes a good point about the Butler-Schloss appointment:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ss-inquiry-child-abuse-allegations-parliament

Essentially, _her own brother_ was attorney general and then lord chancellor in the governments at the heart of this.  Hardly makes any difference to the bigger picture, but fuckin' hell, at least _try_ and keep it clean.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 9, 2014)

Late last year. Apols it's the Express, though they've done some running on this stuff and these are strange times etc.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/43...-paedophiles-says-ex-child-protection-officer


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 9, 2014)




----------



## Batboy (Jul 9, 2014)

weltweit said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914
> I am less interested in the probity of public bodies, or even kids being taken from their families, I am interested in prominent perpetrators, if there are any, being punished.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914
> So the first and second reviews both focus mainly on institutions, rather than perpetrators. I suppose police investigations are ongoing, but they don't seem to be ongoing very quickly, these allegations are many years old.



Oh boy...
Butler Sloss 80 years old, the bible bashing (oversaw appointment  of Archbishop of Canterbury) judge well connected to her chums the political elite, sister of former chancellor Lord Michael Havers (deceased), 80 years old is to chair inquiry (not public of course, but behind closed doors something she is very used to).... perfect appointment to make sure nothing goes wrong, the judge a Dame whose husband a Peer  (also a judge) was embroiled in his own 1980s tabloid sex sleaze scandal in finding 'working' Kenyan girls in and outside night clubs in Nairobi for sexual services.

Oh like Leon Brittan, she was greatly admired by Thatcher and more interestingly obviously related to Lord Michael Havers who was involved via Dickens of losing the dossier on child abuse in Westminster... well that's all sorted then..,,


don't you just fucking love it!


----------



## elbows (Jul 9, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> It is interesting that none of the names on that list have tried to get it suppressed. Especially after the macalpine farrago .



The McAlpine thing, despite broader threats, mostly focussed on the media, and a handful of high-profile tweeters.

They don't actually have an effective way to utterly eradicate such lists from the internet completely, or cease the broader chatter around the subject completely. And some form of actions can become a story in themselves and actually draw attention to stuff.

What has happened so far is that at least one person in the last week or so has warned 'substantial' people/media not to say/write anything that names them and associates them with events surrounding the list. And its very far from clear that any media are going to flout this, even without such threats being in place, at least right now without anything else to collaborate list details.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 9, 2014)

Batboy said:


> Oh boy...
> Butler Sloss 80 years old, the bible bashing (oversaw appointment  of Archbishop of Canterbury) judge well connected to her chums the political elite, sister of former chancellor Lord Michael Havers (deceased), 80 years old is to chair inquiry (not public of course, but behind closed doors something she is very used to).... perfect appointment to make sure nothing goes wrong, the judge a Dame whose husband a Peer  (also a judge) was embroiled in his own 1980s tabloid sex sleaze scandal in finding 'working' Kenyan girls in and outside night clubs in Nairobi for sexual services.
> 
> Oh like Leon Brittan, she was greatly admired by Thatcher and more interestingly obviously related to Lord Michael Havers who was involved via Dickens of losing the dossier on child abuse in Westminster... well that's all sorted then..,,
> ...



Yep. I'd imagine she'll be able to produce a report that identifies historic, systemic complicity to conceal child abuse across a number of public bodies and institutions; and we will be invited to learn from the mistakes made by (now) deceased "worthies". All without one single clue that senior tories like her brother and his boss were complicit in concealing paedophiles within the party. 
L BS's main task will be to prevent the revelation the Thatcher protected Morrison and allowed him to continue sexual abuse of under-age boys.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 9, 2014)

John Mann MP was on BBC 5Live 5 minutes ago saying there were and almost certainly still are multiple copies of the Dickens missing dossier. Copies made inside Whitehall and read by people sworn to confidentiality under the Official Secrets Act. Copies present in various departments that is.

Fucking stitch up all the way.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 9, 2014)

the way this is being framed already stinks- why include the NHS and the BBC? those should be matters for separate inquiries. If the three inquiries throw to light cross-collusion etc then that should be dealt  with in due course.

Lumping them all together is trying to distract and throw sand.

As for appointing someone so establishment they fart the opening bars to god save the queen...well..


----------



## elbows (Jul 9, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> Lumping them all together is trying to distract and throw sand.



The be fair, thats what the campaign for an inquiry has been calling for, an overarching inquiry.

Personally I would prefer there to be some prosecutions of MPs take place before such an overall inquiry.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

elbows said:


> The McAlpine thing, despite broader threats, mostly focussed on the media, and a handful of high-profile tweeters.
> 
> They don't actually have an effective way to utterly eradicate such lists from the internet completely, or cease the broader chatter around the subject completely. And some form of actions can become a story in themselves and actually draw attention to stuff.
> 
> What has happened so far is that at least one person in the last week or so has warned 'substantial' people/media not to say/write anything that names them and associates them with events surrounding the list. And its very far from clear that any media are going to flout this, even without such threats being in place, at least right now without anything else to collaborate list details.


I suppose here are 2 extreme, opposing assumptions about the internet - that it is an uncontrollable venue for freedom where the old controls just don't work Vs the idea that the old structures of commerce and power simply play out in cyberspace.  The list seems to sit somewhere between the 2. It can easily be found, there are pieces in the feckin' Daily Mail that broadly give its contents (minus the living names).  However, as you say, 'they' are still able to stop the living names crossing the boundary into the mainstream media.  I'm sure you are right also about the lack of corroboration being a factor in all this - and the Newsnight/McAlpine fuck up still casts a shadow.

Having said all that, it's not uniquely an internet phenomena. The press have sat on all kinds of stories out of fear, Savile, Smith, Harris...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Danczuk and others already calling for Butler Schloss to resign (because of her brother)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...abuse-inquiry-says-danczuk-politics-live-blog
She claims she didn't know about the link.  Well, I suppose when you are in a family like hers you just get used to being to connected to just about every decision maker and person of note.

Can't say I'm that worried because I don't expect the various inquiries to really dig in anyway, but from Cameron's own perspective it was a fucking silly decision. She might well have been the judge with the most appropriate CV, but when you want to investigate something specifically about the _political establishment_...
Of course, needless to say, from the point of view of the establishment she's also an _excellent_ appointment.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

No idea whether this is true about the 20 minute row (and also ignoring the stuff on her age) but here's a guardian comment that gets to the point:


> It's alleged they had a 20 minute shouting match when Havers tried to warn Dickens off naming Sir Peter Hayman in Parliament.
> At the moment we have an inquiry where people are not compelled to give evidence, and what evidence is given is not under oath, chaired by the 80(81 next month) year old sister, of an individual thar Dickens accused of "the cover-up of the century."
> At best it is the most appalling PR for the start of the inquiry; at worst its an attempt to again brush this under the carpet.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

Appalling short term political management - maybe makes more sense in the long run in that she'll likely report under a labour administration and a few bodies will go under the wheels on their watch and they'll have to deal with the inevitable_ a few mistakes were made but no conspiracy existed or exists _conclusions. That said, i'm not sure the tories in charge of the party strategy are capable of that sort of longer term planning.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

'Clerk, where are we up to, which bit of the story is the Independent Panel looking at today?'

'Errrm, the bit where your brother tried to stop Geoffrey Dickens naming names m'lady'.

'My brother y'say? He's was an _excellent_ chap, this should be over by 12, I _will_ make lunch at the Atheneum'.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 9, 2014)

elbows said:


> What has happened so far is that at least one person in the last week or so has warned 'substantial' people/media not to say/write anything that names them and associates them with events surrounding the list. And its very far from clear that any media are going to flout this, even without such threats being in place, at least right now without anything else to collaborate list details.



I agree - as you point out the media may not at the stage of “naming names”.

But what the press are good at, particularly the tabloids, is dropping hints (for example, “former cabinet minister”, “senior figure in the Conservative party”, “currently sitting in Parliament” and so on) to the point that, while not actually naming any particular individual, several candidates are effectively ruled out by a process of elimination, thus leaving a significant narrowing of the field of likely suspects.

And there is also the possibility of people being named under Parliamentary Privilege - indeed Danczuk said he came close to naming two individuals earlier this week.

At a guess one of most interesting developments will be on late Saturday night/early Sunday when the first editions of the Sunday papers come out as this is when, traditionally, many of the headline-grabbing investigative stories are published.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Favelado said:


> I learnt on here that "chicken" is slang for young girls, but it's a grotesque turn of phrase that trivialises the nature of the crimes in question.



It's the language used when I was told.  Of course it's a grotesque turn of phrase!  that's the bloody point! 
I apologise if my attempt to report verbatim offends your sensibilities.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> ELizabeth Butler-Sloss to chair enquiry. About as establishment as you can get - ex judge, daughter of  judge, sister to the lord havers the lord chancellor.



Although, to give her her due, she does have a good record on childrens' issues.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 9, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Fighting a losing battle methinks - rather like Brazil - truth will out.




If we look at Kincora, which was similar, MI5 framed their own, to protect others. I don't think the truth will come out from an inquiry, this is the British establishment you are dealing with, they wont give themselves up. This is the third time this stuff has come around, first in the 80s then in 92, when Chris Fay was threatened with a gun by Special branch,  now back again. It was back then a famous Batchelor boy, youthful pop star who has a super injunction out now against any links to him and the Elms, was exposed as using the pseudonym "Doris" at the Elms. Its been around donkeys years, private eye first exposed it in the mid eighties.

But they have been outed due to the internet.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I can't see MI5 handing over files. Can you?



I can't even see them giving limited access to them, without the files having been redacted into worthlessness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> <snip>
> I'm sure some files will be released...
> </snip>



In fact they're probably being fabricated as we speak.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Although, to give her her due, she does have a good record on childrens' issues.


Absolutely - and given the limited gene pool if you restrict this to judges and former permanent secretaries, she's the obvious choice.  But given the focus on establishment cover ups it's not a great starting point to give the gig to the sister of one of the cover-uppistes.  What's next, Peter Suttclife's Nan chairing his parole hearing?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

TodayIsCaturday said:


> The retirement age for judges is 70 for a reason.



The retirement age of 70 is, as was much stated at the time it became statutory rather than discretionary, mainly due to public perception, whereby people thought that if someone was over 70, they were past it.

Kind of like your perceptions about Butler-Sloss, in fact.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 9, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I can't even see them giving limited access to them, without the files having been redacted into worthlessness.




MI5/16 are corrupt and undemocratic organisations, their first duty is the defence of the realm. The fact they are staffed by nonces in league with establishment nonces who they protect is really no great surprise. It was only two years back one of them was found dead in a bag, with 20k worth of womens clothing in the wardrobe, hardly normal behaviour. 

I suspect public schools warp these fuckers, with their weird rituals, fagging, using younger kids as servants/slaves etc.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Leon Brittan never sued when Private eye first made the allegation in the 80s.



IIRC, Brittan didn't sue because Richard Ingrams (then-editor of PE) made very clear in print that _Private Eye_ didn't believe the rumours relating to Brittan.  Given Ingrams's establishment connections, I suspect that a "friend of a friend" gave him the supposedly-straigh dope on Brittan, and Ingrams ran with it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Wilf said:


> 'Clerk, where are we up to, which bit of the story is the Independent Panel looking at today?'
> 
> 'Errrm, the bit where your brother tried to stop Geoffrey Dickens naming names m'lady'.
> 
> 'My brother y'say? He's was an _excellent_ chap, this should be over by 12, I _will_ make lunch at the Atheneum'.



Does the Atheneum allow diners who don't have penises nowadays, then?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 9, 2014)

Its funny how these child abuse files always get lost.

A dossier of sexual abuse allegations against Sir Cyril Smith, the late Liberal Democrat MP, which police claimed was "lost" was actually seized by MI5, according to a former special branch officer.




Theres a strong chance those missing original files on MPs and child abuse have actually been seized by MI5. Very much doubt they would admit it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...il-Smith-sex-abuse-dossier-seized-by-MI5.html


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 9, 2014)

Wilf said:


> ...
> Of course, needless to say, from the point of view of the establishment she's also an _excellent_ appointment.


100% agree, and IMHO this is the sort of detail that should get people out on the streets, marching and waving placards - don't treat us like idiots, we know you are covering this up. Don't expect us all to fall for your flim-flam.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 9, 2014)

Some MP,on the radio just now, has said (about Elizabeth Butler Schloss) what if there is a link found between her brother during the inquiry and what went on back then? He hurriedly said he had no reason whatsoever to think that would be so but.....


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Does the Atheneum allow diners who don't have penises nowadays, then?


 A world turned upside down.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 9, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Leon Brittan never sued when Private eye first made the allegation in the 80s.



Nothing substantial about this in this week's Private Eye apart from a page 1 quote from its 1984 article as referred to in Post 2620 above concerning the rumours surrounding Leon Brittan (who's name crops up yet again) .

But strangely it omits the bit where it says that they are completely unfounded.

Oh, and an oblique reference to, by photograph, William Hague.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 9, 2014)

the automatic, unquestioning deference shown to  butler-schloss even by those criticsing her appointment is sickening. "She was a highly respected judge - her family were highly respected - she is, of course, beyond any suspicion of impartiality" etc etc. No-one hints at the obvious suspicion of blatant nepotism in how she got to be a senior judge in the first place.

But its exactly this unquestioning acceptance of these people's authority which allows the cunts to get away with the worst shit imaginable.

The obvious choice to lead the enquiry into shit like this - assuming you actually wanted it to be halfway effective - would be someone with a track record of taking on establishment dodginess - i.e. michael mansfield or Imran Khan.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> the automatic, unquestioning deference shown to  butler-schloss even by those criticsing her appointment is sickening. "Shew as a highly respected judge - her family were highly respected - she is, of course, beyond any suspicion of impartiality" etc etc. No-one hints at the obvious suspicion of blatant nepotism in how she got to be a senior judge in the first place.
> But its exactly this unquestioning acceptance of these people's authority which allows the cunts to get away with the worst shit imaginable.
> 
> The obvious choice to lead the enquiry into shit like this - assuming you actually wanted it to be halfway effective - would be someone with a tack record of taking on establishment dodginess - i.e. michael mansfield or Imran Khan.


 Radio 4's just wheeled out Nigel Havers to give her a bit of smooth caddish support. Fuck me, who's next, the Havers family dog?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Even though it was a long time ago, her assertion that she had no idea her brother was a key player in (presumably) stopping Dickens going public is a bit suspicious.  She might not have discussed it with him, but as a senior judge in the 1980s it would have been pretty obvious to her that the fuckin' _Attorney General_ would have been involved at the point Dickens started threatening to name names (ditto in terms of the Brittan allegations).


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 9, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> In fact they're probably being fabricated as we speak.



I very much doubt MI5 is about to throw open its doors to the general public to have a root around the files or that there was anything in May’s statement on Wednesday they didn’t already know about.

They also know exactly the lines Watson, Danczuk et al are perusing as they will be bugged, as will many of their associates.

Perhaps they do keep “two sets of books”.

But in questions to Theresa May the day before yesterday there were four specific questions from MPs about the role of the security services.

And they weren’t the usual “Would the Right Honourable member agree with me that MI5 do a wonderful job in protecting the nation” variety either.

All I was suggesting is that it is now harder for the security services to say we haven’t got the files or we can’t release them on the grounds of national security than in the past. That’s not to say they won’t try it.

But if you’d have asked the average person in the street at the height of the Troubles who Fred Holroyd was they’d have probably said he was a character in Coronation Street such was the level of disinterest amongst the general public about what the secret state was up at that time.

Even if they did know they would have probably shrugged their shoulders and said the IRA were fair game anyway.

Now practically everyone knows about the allegations of child abuse by senior politicians - a crime the public are much less forgiving about - making that much harder for there to be a cover up, certainly after Tebbit effectively let the cat out of the bag last Sunday and Tom Watson and some of his colleagues continue to ask awkward questions in the public arena.

I think Kalfindin’s post 381 is closer to the mark - some will be sacrificed to protect others.

Although they will then have to answer the question of why they didn’t do anything about the abuse they knew of at the time.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 9, 2014)

The inquiry hasn't started yet, but the ridiculous denials have already started:



> Lady Butler-Sloss said she was unaware of her brother's role as Attorney General during the paedophile controversy in the 1980s


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> the automatic, unquestioning deference shown to  butler-schloss even by those criticsing her appointment is sickening. "She was a highly respected judge - her family were highly respected - she is, of course, beyond any suspicion of impartiality" etc etc. No-one hints at the obvious suspicion of blatant nepotism in how she got to be a senior judge in the first place.
> 
> But its exactly this unquestioning acceptance of these people's authority which allows the cunts to get away with the worst shit imaginable.
> 
> The obvious choice to lead the enquiry into shit like this - assuming you actually wanted it to be halfway effective - would be someone with a track record of taking on establishment dodginess - i.e. michael mansfield or Imran Khan.



I'm judging her purely on the basis of her work record.  I think she should recuse herself if there's *any* possibility she'll be influenced by familial considerations.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I very much doubt MI5 is about to throw open its doors to the general public to have a root around the files or that there was anything in May’s statement on Wednesday they didn’t already know about.
> 
> They also know exactly the lines Watson, Danczuk et al are perusing as they will be bugged, as will many of their associates.
> 
> Perhaps they do keep “two sets of books”.



We know that, historically, they have maintained "white" and "black" records, so it's not exactly a stretch.



> But in questions to Theresa May the day before yesterday there were four specific questions from MPs about the role of the security services.
> 
> And they weren’t the usual “Would the Right Honourable member agree with me that MI5 do a wonderful job in protecting the nation” variety either.
> 
> All I was suggesting is that it is now harder for the security services to say we haven’t got the files or we can’t release them on the grounds of national security than in the past. That’s not to say they won’t try it.



As I've said, I think they'll release files.  I'm just not sanguine that the information in the files won't have been carefully constructed by MI5's incredibly-efficient docu-forgers.



> But if you’d have asked the average person in the street at the height of the Troubles who Fred Holroyd was they’d have probably said he was a character in Coronation Street such was the level of disinterest amongst the general public about what the secret state was up at that time.



True.
Not everyone is a sick suspicious fuck like thee or me, more's the pity!



> Even if they did know they would have probably shrugged their shoulders and said the IRA were fair game anyway.
> 
> Now practically everyone knows about the allegations of child abuse by senior politicians - a crime the public are much less forgiving about - making that much harder for there to be a cover up, certainly after Tebbit effectively let the cat out of the bag last Sunday and Tom Watson and some of his colleagues continue to ask awkward questions in the public arena.
> 
> I think Kalfindin’s post 381 is closer to the mark - some will be sacrificed to protect others.



it's always the way.  We'll possibly have one (presumably-dead) "Big fish", plus a couple of live minnows, and then all the rest will be brushed under the carpet until everything boils over another generation down the line.



> Although they will then have to answer the question of why they didn’t do anything about the abuse they knew of at the time.



Unfortunately, I can see a few holes they can crawl though with regard to that. Blaming a dead superior for telling you "don't look into that" always plays well, as does playing the Saundersitis card - "sorry, I don't remember.  I have dementia and my long-term memory has eroded at a shocking rate".


----------



## Sue (Jul 9, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Radio 4's just wheeled out Nigel Havers to give her a bit of smooth caddish support. Fuck me, who's next, the Havers family dog?


 
I was just listening to that and thinking what the fuck?


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)




----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

wtf?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> View attachment 57196


 I'm not sure if you've posted this in the wrong thread, or the wrong universe?


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Jul 9, 2014)

edit: And i just realised it is the wrong thread.

Thought i was viewing the wasting bandwidth thread.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> edit: And i just realised it is the wrong thread.
> 
> Thought i was viewing the wasting bandwidth thread.



Oh, the irony!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Oh, the irony!


 If you've got a point, spit it out.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

Have you any purpose here Diamond? You've clearly not read the thread and are feeling a bit superior and arrogant.  Take it elsewhere.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

A purpose?

Sorry, I didn't realise we needed mission statements...

All a bit serious, no?

Tell you what, point me in the direction of yours butchers and I'll try and knock something up (oo'er!!) appropriate.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

Bye


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> A purpose?
> 
> Sorry, I didn't realise we needed mission statements...
> 
> ...


Child abuse stretching up the highest stratum of society. Yeah, let's piss around on that thread.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond :
All a bit serious, no?

.....Course its serious you fucking numpty, about its kids being abused by politician's who are protected by the secret state.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> All a bit serious, no?
> .


Yes, it is actually.  One of the few areas where there can be unambiguous rage and contempt - on a thread in which a number of posters have shown exemplary research skills - elbows, butchers etc.  To be honest, I don't give a shit if you find any of my posts overly earnest or committed, I just think it's odd that you choose _this_ thread to behave like a teenager.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 9, 2014)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> is it?
> Well i don't read it, it just came up in google. Honestly.
> The pictures are interesting but I will take down the link as I wouldn't want to increase their traffic and I'm sure they can be found elsewhere.
> It's also hard to make much out in the pictures


I had to warn someone on FB about posting a link to that blog the other day.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 9, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> I suspect public schools warp these fuckers, with their weird rituals, fagging, using younger kids as servants/slaves etc.



Indeed. Remember this is where Britain's colonial administrators were schooled. The bullying regime follows them into adulthood and is then applied to the colonised as well as those at home.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

Prurient and spurious.

Still does jolly good business amongst the chronically idle, I see.

Pat on the back all round.

Especially for those game changing "research skills".

Where on earth would we be without them?

Maybe forced to look at an internet or, chillingly, compelled to consult a library of record for our ultimate purpose - to generate vital comment..


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Indeed. Remember this is where Britain's colonial administrators were schooled. The bullying regime follows them into adulthood and is then applied to the colonised as well as those at home.



You could be a psychoanalyst sir!


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

You know what to do folks.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Yes, it is actually.  One of the few areas where there can be unambiguous rage and contempt - on a thread in which a number of posters have shown exemplary research skills - elbows, butchers etc.  To be honest, I don't give a shit if you find any of my posts overly earnest or committed, I just think it's odd that you choose _this_ thread to behave like a teenager.



If some of the country's most powerful people sexually exploiting the country's most vulnerable isn't serious then fuck knows what is.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Prurient and spurious.
> 
> Still does jolly good business amongst the chronically idle, I see.
> 
> ...


 This really is weak stuff.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

Wilf said:


> This really is weak stuff.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


>


Just fucking do one.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 9, 2014)

chronically idle, you prick.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


>


 To be honest, you're not even worth ignoring.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> chronically idle, you prick.



Bit close to the bone?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Bit close to the bone?


 Just stop now, eh?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 9, 2014)




----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Bit close to the bone?



great thread to act the dick on m8, well judged.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


>


Can't you be having one of your unreasonable days?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 9, 2014)

Good evening and welcome to The Great British Stitch-Up!


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Prurient and spurious.
> 
> Still does jolly good business amongst the chronically idle, I see.
> 
> ...


Kids being raped, what finer topic for a good old laugh and a wind-up, what a wheeze you are. Your parents must be proud of you.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 9, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's the language used when I was told.  Of course it's a grotesque turn of phrase!  that's the bloody point!
> I apologise if my attempt to report verbatim offends your sensibilities.[/



Hello there Violent Panda. It really did look like your turn of phrase to me because you didn't use direct reported speech or put "chicken" in speech marks. I wasn't too offended but it did look dodgy. Peadophile slang would be an excusable place to start develop delicate sensibilities should I ever start to get very upset about these things.

Thanks for your answer.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

Yay for censorship!

Down with civil liberties!


scalyboy said:


> Kids being raped, what finer topic for a good old laugh and a wind-up, what a wheeze you are. Your parents must be proud of you.



Apologies. I didn't realise that my behaviour should conform to my parents' moral universe on pain of your disdain.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

Who's the real nazis eh? Just piss off.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

Your grammar is wrong.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

No it isn't. Go away little boy.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> No it isn't. Go away little boy.


Leave him. Please. If i've got any favours to pull in, from any active posters on the thread, i'm calling them in now. Ignore Diamond.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Yay for censorship!
> 
> Down with civil liberties!
> 
> ...


 I don't feel the need to engage with this nonsense, you're just a clown.  Be nice if you could be a clown somewhere else.  Seriously, take a good look at yourself.  Whatever you think about the way people have posted on this thread (it's hard to tell what your beef is to be honest), it really, really isn't the place for this puerile stuff.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Leave him. Please. If i've got any favours to pull in, from any active posters on the thread. i'm calling them in now. Ignore Diamond.


Fair dos.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Fair dos.


 Aye - Diamond, I think we'll leave you to it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Yay for censorship!
> 
> Down with civil liberties!
> 
> ...


Kindly stop disrupting this thread.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 9, 2014)

Prince Andrew with a young masseuse. They go after useful idiots like Gary Glitter to appease the public.

Prince Andrew holidayed and had daily massages at a Florida mansion where teenage girls were abused by a billionaire child sex offender, it can be revealed. 



http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/02/article-1362034-0D60F629000005DC-211_468x529.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ase-billionaire-Jeffrey-Epsteins-mansion.html


Epstein’s long-standing handyman and cleaner Juan Alessi revealed how he set up massage tables for Andrew, 51, on a daily basis during an extended stay, thought to be about ten years ago.
Speaking under oath to solicitors in September 2009, he said pictures of naked women were on display by the pool, while other witnesses have described a gallery of nude photographs of underage girls adorning the wall of a staircase.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Diamond said:


> View attachment 57196



Is it really necessary to put up a "paint-by-numbers" version of your posting policy?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Have you any purpose here Diamond? You've clearly not read the thread and are feeling a bit superior and arrogant.  Take it elsewhere.



Well, he is one of those right-libertarians isn't he?

Apropos of nothing, it's always been a matter of puzzlement for me, how many right-libertarians are into the more repulsive side of sex.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Can't you be having one of your unreasonable days?



I hear that Diamond called Fridgemagnet's favourite camera "a poofy piece of shit".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 9, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Kids being raped, what finer topic for a good old laugh and a wind-up, what a wheeze you are. Your parents must be proud of you.



Given the volume of good research in this thread, Diamond making comments about "research skills" is more than a little pathetic.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

Would it be possible for a mod to tidy up the last couple of pages? I know it's a big ask but the disruption and retorts just adds a load of surplus crap to an otherwise focused thread.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 9, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Would it be possible for a mod to tidy up the last couple of pages? I know it's a big ask but the disruption and retorts just adds a load of surplus crap to an otherwise focused thread.


Don't think it's worth it or helpful - let the record stand. Let's crack on.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jul 9, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Don't think it's worth it or helpful - let the record stand.


ok. I'll stop adding to the derail now.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 9, 2014)

Just to say, not read thread today but I think it's excellent overall. Every other converstaion I've seen on this complex and perplexing issue has lacked the general breadth and well informed nature. I think tempers have been held pretty well here too. Just saying, perhaps others disagree. If thwt know of a better tempered, informed and overall balanced discussion I hope they link to it.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 9, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Just to say, not read thread today but I think it's excellent overall. Every other converstaion I've seen on this complex and perplexing issue has lacked the general breadth and well informed nature. I think tempers have been held pretty well here too. Just saying, perhaps others disagree. If thwt know of a better tempered, informed and overall balanced discussion I hope they link to it.



Agreed. A fine filter of the hive mind has been going on here. A most valuable resource.


----------



## Diamond (Jul 9, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I don't feel the need to engage with this nonsense, you're just a clown.  Be nice if you could be a clown somewhere else.  Seriously, take a good look at yourself.  Whatever you think about the way people have posted on this thread (it's hard to tell what your beef is to be honest), it really, really isn't the place for this puerile stuff.



The endemic self importance is the point. Don't you see how irrelevant this all is in direct proportion to the slightly paranoid, hurried tones in which it is discussed?

And then there is the odd, slightly Daily Mail prurience bubbling away close to the surface.

Very odd.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 9, 2014)

Please fuck off Diamond.

Thatchers govt funded the paedophile information exchange


In an interview at his home today, Mr Hulbert also says he was told that the payment was made on the orders of the Metropolitan Police's Special Branch

http://www.itv.com/news/2014-07-09/westminster-pie-grant-home-office-whistleblower-tim-hulbert/


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Please fuck off Diamond.
> 
> Thatchers govt funded the paedophile information exchange
> 
> ...


Hmm. The good old Met practice of undercover/entrapment? For whose benefit?


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 10, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Hmm. The good old Met practice of undercover/entrapment? For whose benefit?


"for the greater good", presumably. Same as Kincora.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 10, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Indeed. Remember this is where Britain's colonial administrators were schooled. The bullying regime follows them into adulthood and is then applied to the colonised as well as those at home.


The public school/boarding school background of our rulers may give a clue to the otherwise unfathomable disconnect between ordinary peoples' revulsion at child sex abuse, and the seeming unwillingness to act/inability to view it as revolting, as is displayed by the 'Establishment'.

Does this also give us a clue as to why so many have been willing to turn a blind eye/'lose' files/ignore calls for an enquiry? If they - when at public school - were either witness to, perpetrators of, or victims of sexual abuse, have they somehow internalised it as "well it wasn't that bad"? It is extraordinary, but may go some way to explain the inexplicable refusal to be a 'whistleblower' or just refuse to obey your higher-ups who wanted a report buried?

The latter point may apply just as much to police as to civil servants/ politicians, but here it's less likely - I would guess - that police have a background of public/boarding school. But with the police there is the strong tendency to conservatism, respect authority, obey higher-ups. So the end result may be the same thing - reports got 'lost', witnesses ignored etc. Where it gets really f--ing nasty and unfathomable is when witnesses are intimidated and threatened so as to protect high-society nonces - this is presumably down to the "for the greater good" mentality, preserve the 'Estabishment' at all costs.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 10, 2014)

Don't know if anyone else has mentioned this upthread, or heard this rumour (and I'll be careful how I word it) but I was told this a few weeks ago (oddly, before this latest story broke in the press) by a friend of a friend.

During the 1980s a high-ranking politician was discovered by his police protection officers to be involved in heavy duty noncery. One of the officers was said to have gone mental and tried to assassinate the politician, was sectioned, and it was all hushed up. The other topped himself out of disgust, after having reported their findings to their higher-ups who told them to keep quiet and forget it. 

It may be a load of bollocks but I just wondered if anyone else had heard this story?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

There's something almost inevitable about it, as if cover-up were part of a self-healing process. Just think about the way the Stafford whistle-blower was treated like an enemy virus. 
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/27/julie-bailey-mid-staffordshire-nhs-whistleblower


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> (...) In an interview at his home today, Mr Hulbert also says he was told that the payment was made on the orders of the Metropolitan Police's Special Branch
> 
> http://www.itv.com/news/2014-07-09/westminster-pie-grant-home-office-whistleblower-tim-hulbert/



I note the current quote from the Met in that article:

_"Whilst this is ongoing it would be inappropriate to comment further."_

Going to be a lot of that sort of thing, isn't there?  How long can these enquiries run in order to allow such a catch-all get out?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

So I take it from this article that if the defendant is unfit to stand trial then there is no trial..never mind there might be enough evidence to warrant a prosecution. 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-peer-escapes-probe-over-3836213#.U72629iy_Dl.twitter


----------



## kenny g (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> So I take it from this article that if the defendant is unfit to stand trial then there is no trial..never mind there might be enough evidence to warrant a prosecution.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-peer-escapes-probe-over-3836213#.U72629iy_Dl.twitter



Well, if he is unfit to stand trial you obviously can not put him on trial. I wonder if he will join Ernest Saunders and have a remarkable recovery in a couple of years? It is horrible to think he will be alive and still get away with it.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> So I take it from this article that if the defendant is unfit to stand trial then there is no trial..never mind there might be enough evidence to warrant a prosecution.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-peer-escapes-probe-over-3836213#.U72629iy_Dl.twitter


Ah, the Ernest Saunders defence.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Well this must have come on rather quickly post-raid and questioning as he was attending the House of Lords (pdf) for the max number of days as recently as December.

edit: and was willingly helping with police enquiries last month,


----------



## teqniq (Jul 10, 2014)

I want to see some heads on poles. Now.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

If there is enough evidence for the CPS to warrant a trial then he should be tried in absentia.

http://blog.ilcuk.org.uk/2011/10/24/should-older-people-suffering-from-dementia-go-to-prison/


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

At the least, the court rather than the CPS should decide if he's fit to plead.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Aye Ernest Saunders lest we forget ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Saunders


----------



## Libertad (Jul 10, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> At the least, the court rather than the CPS should decide if he's fit to plead.



Damn right.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

It's not even got to the stage where he'd have to plead - it's just basic police questioning that he's _not fit_ to undergo. Although i don't see the police themselves specifically saying that in the Mirror piece.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

Oh we are such cruel people to be hounding a poor sick defenceless old man who is innocent until proved guilty.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 10, 2014)

As if you or I would be able to escape prosecution on such grounds. 
Not my cup of tea musically, but an Apposite album title


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Just to say, not read thread today but I think it's excellent overall. Every other converstaion I've seen on this complex and perplexing issue has lacked the general breadth and well informed nature. I think tempers have been held pretty well here too. Just saying, perhaps others disagree. If thwt know of a better tempered, informed and overall balanced discussion I hope they link to it.


Aye, urban at its best I think.  There's always a potential tension in a thread like this where some people have done long term research and are using the thread to build things up precisely and logically Vs people like me who pop in and just comment on the days events or let off steam.  However that doesn't become a problem and the thread works overall.  In fact something that is primarily about integrating news and research, over 100+ pages and still functioning is good in itself.


----------



## D'wards (Jul 10, 2014)

Haven't read all thread, but is there any evidence that Jill Dando was planning an expose, hence the execution, or is that tin foil hat stuff?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> So I take it from this article that if the defendant is unfit to stand trial then there is no trial..never mind there might be enough evidence to warrant a prosecution.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-peer-escapes-probe-over-3836213#.U72629iy_Dl.twitter



If not mentally fit for trial then I trust he's not still deemed mentally fit to be part of the law making process, drawing hundreds of pound a day for doing so.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> So I take it from this article that if the defendant is unfit to stand trial then there is no trial..never mind there might be enough evidence to warrant a prosecution.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-peer-escapes-probe-over-3836213#.U72629iy_Dl.twitter




If that's the person Im thinking of, he has very powerful connections on an international level. I know someone abused in one of the homes he frequented , they and another reported him to cops in the 90s, they were asked to draw diagrams of the buildings and where abuse took place etc. A short time after the guy got sectioned and the former home then a derelict building mysteriously burnt down, then demolished. No action was taken.

The peer in question is also an amateur magician, he used that to entertain kids in homes, before he abused them. An absolute scumbag. Find it hard to believe, Blair was not aware of this guy.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> If that's the person Im thinking of, he has very powerful connections on an international level. I know someone abused in one of the homes he frequented , they and another reported him to cops in the 90s, they were asked to draw diagrams of the buildings and where abuse took place etc. A short time after the guy got sectioned and the former home then a derelict building mysteriously burnt down, then demolished. No action was taken.



There is a strong hint, deliberately or not, as to the identity of the Peer in the third paragraph of the article.

If it is the person you are thinking of you can always Wikipedia his name and have a look at some of his interests and hobbies.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> If that's the person Im thinking of, he has very powerful connections on an international level. I know someone abused in one of the homes he frequented , they and another reported him to cops in the 90s, they were asked to draw diagrams of the buildings and where abuse took place etc. A short time after the guy got sectioned and the former home then a derelict building mysteriously burnt down, then demolished. No action was taken.
> 
> The peer in question is also an amateur magician, he used that to entertain kids in homes, before he abused them. An absolute scumbag. Find it hard to believe, Blair was not aware of this guy.



Sorry - you got in before me but yes it appears to be one and the same person!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

The amount of detail given about the Labour Peer means he's virtually been named, but I won't.  More to the point, I wonder what the police/social services are going to do see that he doesn't abuse again, in the absence of legal action?  Also, he has a range of national and international positions. Particularly those where he was required to actually do something (rather than sit in an honourary positin), has he resigned from them recently due to reduced capacity?  I'm about to look, but I suspect the answer's no.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

Well, I've just found him giving a major speech from July 2013 (won't link)


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

As i said above - he was attending the Lords for the max number of days available as late as december last year. The following month - the last with publicly available records - he didn't attend at all. The months leading up to december pretty much all show max attendance.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> As i said above - he was attending the Lords for the max number of days available as late as december last year. The following month - the last with publicly available records - he didn't attend at all. The months leading up to december pretty much all show max attendance.


Aye, I was just looking for evidence of him undertaking active tasks outside parliament.  Anyway, I'm not sure why I'm pussy footing around with regard to identification, he was named by the Jewish Chronicle 10 days ago:
http://www.thejc.com/news/topics/abuse

And again, maintaining a fairly pointless anonymity, politically active in September 2013:


> A member of the house of Lords has written to Ofcom questioning whether Bauer Media is a fit and proper company to own broadcasting licences in Britain because it publishes the military magazine Der Landser, which is said to glorify second world war German soldiers who were guilty of war crimes
> Lord (Monroe) Palmer has complained to the broadcasting regulator as it considers Bauer's acquisition of Absolute Radio (formerly Virgin Radio).
> His letter follows one sent by the media banker and analyst Bruce Fireman, which I reported on last month. And another peer, Lord xxxx xxxx is, according to his assistant, also considering following suit.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 10, 2014)

If he is suffering from early stage dementia he can still be interviewed in accordance with code c of the police and criminal evidence act 1984. The code specifically addresses mental health issues. He would have to be very far gone for an interview to have no evidential value. However, one factor in considering whether a prosecution would be in the public interest under the cps code for prosecutors is the infirmity of the defendant.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

I can find informal references to him suffering from early stage dementia from dec '13. At the same time as he was putting in max attendance at the lords.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I can find informal references to him suffering from early stage dementia from dec '13. At the same time as he was putting in max attendance at the lords.



Was he actually working at the lords, or just using the restaurant? I hope that doesn't sound flippant - my understanding is that a lot of the Vermin in Ermine use it as  a social club or retirement home.

Most likely this is the Saunders defence all over again, of course.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I can find informal references to him suffering from early stage dementia from dec '13. At the same time as he was putting in max attendance at the lords.


The very month his house was searched. Chicken/egg?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> Was he actually working at the lords, or just using the restaurant? I hope that doesn't sound flippant - my understanding is that a lot of the Vermin in Ermine use it as  a social club or retirement home.
> 
> Most likely this is the Saunders defence all over again, of course.


Janner is a proper busy body, fingers in every pie - i suspect he will have been working. And not at anything good. For instance he's been the main man on the consolidation bill joint select committee (i.e a body of both lords and commons and so pretty high powered) since 98.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> The very month his house was searched. Chicken/egg?


Yep - and he's a lawyer - a QC even. He's not stupid.


----------



## laptop (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Well, I've just found him giving a major speech from July 2013 (won't link)



I can't find anything in Hansard later than February 2013?


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Janner is a proper busy body, fingers in every pie - i suspect he will have been working. And not at anything good. For instance he's been the main man on the consolidation bill joint select committee (i.e a body of both lords and commons and so pretty high powered) since 98.



And using the old grey matter is apparently thought to provide at least some protection against the dreaded Herr Doktor Alzheimer.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> Was he actually working at the lords, or just using the restaurant? I hope that doesn't sound flippant - my understanding is that a lot of the Vermin in Ermine use it as  a social club or retirement home.
> 
> Most likely this is the Saunders defence all over again, of course.


 Well, I found him making a speech outside Parliament in July 2013:
http://www.chabadslo.com/templates/articlecco_cdo/aid/2328621/jewish/Lord-Janners-Speech.htm

Along with showing an interest in a case in the Lords, post 3281 above.

Needless to say, forms of Dementia are complex and work out differently in the different areas of mental capacity, day to day life etc.  However, this does look pretty Saundersish.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

laptop said:


> I can't find anything in Hansard later than February 2013?


 Sorry, I was still in coy mode at that point.  It was outside parliament - link in 3290.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

I'm surprised he didn't do a Dame Shirley Porter and flee to Israel claiming an anti-semetic plot to bring him down. Whatever happens like Maxwell before him his burial with full state honours on the Mount of Olives is assured.

Oh I forgot he forgets so he won't remember that , probably , allegedly.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Yep - and he's a lawyer - a QC even. He's not stupid.


 Yes, he's had plenty of time to get everything in place since he was first named in earlier inquiries.  The knock on the door was never going to be a shock.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

if you try to google new "lord janner" or "greville janner" for the period between 2001 and November 2013 (to get a pic of his activity) you'll see it's been stripped bare and the google  link to further info about why says:



> Notice Unavailable
> 
> The cease-and-desist or legal threat you requested is not yet available.
> 
> Chilling Effects will post the notice after we process it.



Which suggests it may be relatively recent.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> if you try to google new "lord janner" or "greville janner" for the period between 2001 and November 2013 (to get a pic of his activity) you'll see it's been stripped bare and the google  link to further info about why says:
> 
> 
> 
> Which suggests it may be relatively recent.


 'Magic tricks'


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

BBC Leicester have an article online from 30 April about evidence being sent to the CPS concerning a named 85 year old peer, renowned for good works. His home had been raided in December, so it's not surprising he didn't feel like turning up to the Lords after that. At the time of the article, the peer hadn't been charged or even interviewed. Now it looks as if he isn't going to be. 

BTW, you can always try google.com/ncr if you want to avoid Google's trick of always referring you back to your national domain with its legal restrictions.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> 'Magic tricks'


Quite! 

I think that magic circle stuff is going to bring in a whole heap of stuff for people to latch onto - uri geller, michael jackson...prince charles  - the dot joiners are going to have a field day.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Quite!
> 
> I think that magic circle stuff is going to bring in a whole heap of stuff for people to latch onto - uri geller, michael jackson...prince charles  - the dot joiners are going to have a field day.


  What, what - some dots ...

http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/lord-janner-my-friend-michael-jackson


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

Needless to say, it's a grim busines searching for stuff on Janner at the moment. All the anti-semitic bloggers are going apeshit.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> What, what - some dots ...
> 
> http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/lord-janner-my-friend-michael-jackson


Hiding in plain sight!


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

If he fancies a getaway so that he can relax whilst not remembering he will be at home in the understated luxury of the Grevile Janner suite at the London Elizabeth Hotel.It has a direct dial telephone no less.

http://www.londonelizabethhotel.co.uk/hotel-rooms.html


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

All those medals, all those honoury positions, all those places on the board... what to do about them, get rid now or wait 6 months?  New headed notepaper anyone?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Put Greville Janner into google news and get only one result - could this forgetting be spreading....could the cover up be happening right in front of our eyes ??

https://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&gl=uk&authuser=0&biw=1526&bih=780&tbs=qdr:d&tbm=nws&q=greville janner&oq=greville janner&gs_l=serp.12...5600.12251.0.13613.13.10.3.0.0.0.72.629.10.10.0....0...1c.1.48.serp..13.0.0.4uqdol5Rv80


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Put Greville Janner into google news and get only one result - could this forgetting be spreading....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

That looks to be an anti-semitic site, at least going by this:
http://thecolemanexperience.wordpre...-of-vip-child-abuse-and-the-missing-religion/


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Seriously, there's better sources to use than that anti-semitic filth.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 10, 2014)

Is anyone else concerned about the prominent names cropping up on this thread?
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Is anyone else concerned about the prominent names cropping up on this thread?
> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/


Are you talking about Janner? If so, then no - all that's been mentioned is what has been reported by mainstream media and acknowledged by Janner's reps. If you mean someone else then who/where - and why?


----------



## weltweit (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Are you talking about Janner? If so, then no - all that's been mentioned is what has been reported by mainstream media and acknowledged by Janner's reps. If you mean someone else then who/where - and why?


Just that in reading the thread I have come across the names of a lot of prominent living people, usually via links and I wonder if it might open U75 up for legal action?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> That looks to be an anti-semitic site, at least going by this:
> http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/the-mysterious-case-of-vip-child-abuse-and-the-missing-religion/




I never knew it was, I looked at home page, it seemed ok, will have another look.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Lots of conspiracy nonsense, which discredits it, If its an anti Semitic loon site,that was not my intention.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Just that in reading the thread I have come across the names of a lot of prominent living people, usually via links and I wonder if it might open U75 up for legal action?


 If for example, you mean 'the list', yes some sailing close to the wind (but generally not naming living persons). However its existence was discussed in the mainstream a while ago.  Other sites have it in full.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Lots of conspiracy nonsense, I cant see anything specifically anti-Semitic.


You can't see anything anti-semitic in the piece that me and wilf both linked to?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Frank Beck was a seriously nasty piece of work but there is not a single mention of Janner in the Wiki article plus the talk section is empty which is surprising for an article of this length and prominence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Beck_(sex_offender)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Frank_Beck_(sex_offender)


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Lots of conspiracy nonsense, which discredits it, If its an anti Semitic loon site,that was not my intention.



it was inevitable that filth like that would come out of the woodwork - someone or someones on the internet will be merrily blood libeling away.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Frank Beck was a seriously nasty piece of work but there is not a single mention of Janner in the Wiki article plus the talk section is empty which is surprising for an article of this length and prominence.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Beck_(sex_offender)
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Frank_Beck_(sex_offender)


 

This page was last modified on 6 July 2014 at 08:10.
and this for the second entry:

This page was last modified on 29 June 2014 at 14:45.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> You can't see anything anti-semitic in the piece that me and wilf both linked to?




Just noticed, I usually just scan sites quickly. I deleted the link.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> This page was last modified on 6 July 2014 at 08:10.
> and this for the second entry:
> 
> This page was last modified on 29 June 2014 at 14:45.



Not significant changes by a Philip Cross he edits these entries...which includes Lord Dacre....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philip_Cross

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Beck_(sex_offender)&diff=615794785&oldid=615794558


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Not significant changes by a Philip Cross he edits these entries...which includes Lord Dacre....
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philip_Cross
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Beck_(sex_offender)&diff=615794785&oldid=615794558


 To be honest I've no idea how wiki edits work. It looked to me as if the Beck pages bein edited in the last few days was significant, but I've a looked at a few other random pages and they also have pretty recent edits.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> To be honest I've no idea how wiki edits work. It looked to me as if the Beck pages bein edited in the last few days was significant, but I've a looked at a few other random pages and they also have pretty recent edits.



Could just be general edit noise - that said no mainstream sources other than the Mirror seem to have carried the story - in particular the Telegraph which has been trailing Westminster paedophile stories along with the Mail zilch which makes me smell a very big rat.

Edit - the story has now gone from the Mirror website.

2nd edit - the name Janner has been removed from the article - hence I couldn't find it by search.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-peer-escapes-probe-over-3836213#.U72629iy_Dl.twitter


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

It didn't say Janner to begin with mate - though they made it as clear as possible who they meant.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> It didn't say Janner to begin with mate - though they made it as clear as possible who they meant.



I'm not sure as I found the article by using search term "Janner" in google news and looking for the last 24 hours results - maybe when you read it it had been edited.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Time to step back from the internet and put the keyboard down.....


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)




----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2014)

yeah the sinister music really adds pathos


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Could just be general edit noise - that said no mainstream sources other than the Mirror seem to have carried the story - in particular the Telegraph which has been trailing Westminster paedophile stories along with the Mail zilch which makes me smell a very big rat.
> 
> Edit - the story has now gone from the Mirror website.
> 
> ...


it's ok, you can rely on the mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-inquiry-historic-child-sex-abuse-claims.html


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> yeah the sinister music really adds pathos


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> it's ok, you can rely on the mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-inquiry-historic-child-sex-abuse-claims.html



That's 22nd June - his Alzheimer defence or allusion to a Labour peer hasn't appeared there yet to my knowledge.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

Alzheimers is a terrible condition affecting rich and poor. However it only kicks in for the rich at a certain point in the legal process.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Needless to say, it's a grim busines searching for stuff on Janner at the moment. All the anti-semitic bloggers are going apeshit.


Yeah, inevitable I suppose, feared that might happen, what with Brittan too


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 10, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Alzheimers is a terrible condition affecting rich and poor. However it only kicks in for the rich at a certain point in the legal process.


  A Doctor Writes


----------



## Celyn (Jul 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Quite!
> 
> I think that magic circle stuff is going to bring in a whole heap of stuff for people to latch onto - uri geller, michael jackson...prince charles  - the dot joiners are going to have a field day.



Maybe Jerry Sadowitz will do a comedy routine about it.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 10, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Yeah, inevitable I suppose, feared that might happen, what with Brittan too


 Leon, 'it might kill him',Brittan. Creaking gates these m'Lords.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Celyn said:


> Maybe Jerry Sadowitz will do a comedy routine about it.



He did one before.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Is anyone else concerned about the prominent names cropping up on this thread?
> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/


This seems a bit silly
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...paedophile-ring.301059/page-107#post-13258521


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> This seems a bit silly
> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/how-much-evidence-is-there-of-long-term-high-level-uk-paedophile-ring.301059/page-107#post-13258521




you joined up to say its silly ?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Can someone with dementia legally sue ?


----------



## elbows (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> you joined up to say its silly ?



They made other posts here before that one, check your facts.

I won't comment on anything else you've said, but I will say that unsubstantiated talk of super-injunctions is silly.

I mean legal stuff used to block truth is a serious issue. But there are many other aspects to this beyond people routinely jumping to the conclusion that d-notes/da-notes or super-injunctions simply must be the reason why some info hasn't been printed in the press.

In this particular case I've seen nothing that would enable the media to report details of a persons name and their alleged crimes without running a high risk of being sued for libel. There is just a list of names on the net, and that is nowhere near enough to run with.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Can someone with dementia legally sue ?


Yes, through a guardian ad litem.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Yes, through a guardian ad litem.



Thanks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_litem


----------



## elbows (Jul 10, 2014)

There was always going to be a backlash against the choice of inquiry chair, the only question was how broadly this understandable cynicism would reach.

For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail, and by picking Butler-Sloss they have something easy to grasp onto since she was involved in a Diana inquiry.

Next we have all those who are not conspiraloons but lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons. Again these would not be easy to satisfy no matter the terms, choice of personnel and other details, but could be won over to a certain extent if the inquiry actually seemed to be doing good work when it got going and shared some info with the public.

But in this case the government seem to have managed to make critics out of a far broader range of society than they often do with inquiries and chair choices. Hopefully it will blow up in their face, but whatever happens I find it unlikely that much credibility and faith will be restored by going about this stuff in such a manner. Quite how much they actually care about that remains to be seen.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

elbows said:


> They made other posts here before that one, check your facts.
> 
> I won't comment on anything else you've said, but I will say that unsubstantiated talk of super-injunctions is silly.
> 
> ...




Its all over the internet that that particular pop star has a super injunction connected with him and the Elms.

Its also common knowledge these allegations have been around since the 80s, they are nothing new, including the said popstars female nickname. 
Its no more "silly" then any another "unsubstantiated" claims.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

Here is Janner in 2011 - looking a bit batty back then. He is 86 now after all.

http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/...p_founding_chairman_lord_janner_of_braunstone


----------



## elbows (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Its all over the internet that that particular pop star has a super injunction connected with him and the Elms.
> 
> Its also common knowledge these allegations have been around since the 80s, they are nothing new, including the said popstars female nickname.
> Its no more "silly" then any another "unsubstantiated" claims.



And the internet found out about the super-injunction how exactly?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

elbows said:


> There was always going to be a backlash against the choice of inquiry chair, the only question was how broadly this understandable cynicism would reach.
> 
> For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail, and by picking Butler-Sloss they have something easy to grasp onto since she was involved in a Diana inquiry.
> 
> ...



"For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail"

So you must be a conspiracy loon, not to have faith in the establishment investigating itself ?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

...


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

elbows said:


> And the internet found out about the super-injunction how exactly?



Leaked, like most stuff.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> "For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail"
> 
> So you must be a conspiracy loon, not to have faith in the establishment investigating itself ?



Or just " lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons."


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Buckaroo said:


> Or just " lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons."



If we look at history establishment inquires have been a fix from bloody Sunday to Hillsborough, why would this one be any different ? Apparently that makes me a conspiracyloon.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> If we look at history establishment inquires have been a fix from bloody Sunday to Hillsborough, why would this one be any different ? Apparently that makes me a conspiracyloon.



Fuck off.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Its all over the internet


is no defense if the site gets sued. 



> Unless you can support this claim with credibly-sourced links with references to actual successful prosecutions (NOT just allegations or rumours), there's a chance I'll get a letter from a very expensive lawyer saying that the post is defamatory.


http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/

I contribute very little but I like the site still being here.


----------



## elbows (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> If we look at history establishment inquires have been a fix from bloody Sunday to Hillsborough, why would this one be any different ? Apparently that makes me a conspiracyloon.



Try comprehending what I actually said. Others already pointed out what I meant, so I'm not entirely sure its worth me trying to explain it to you again.

Anyway, I'm not going to punch a giant hole in my filter just to satisfy those that are not so careful with distinguishing between facts and possibilities. Believe me, I am very interested in the murky stuff but Im not going to make the mistake of thinking that the stuff that floats around on the net is established fact just because its been repeated for so long.

Meanwhile:



> *ExaroNews* @ExaroNews · 6h
> Any idea why someone is trying to hack our phones? We know for sure that it is not the News of the World. #CSAinquiry http://www.exaronews.com


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> is no defense if the site gets sued.
> 
> 
> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/
> ...




And where did I name him brainiac ?


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> And where did I name him brainiac ?


Where did Sally Bercow name McAlpine ?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Where did Sally Bercow name McAlpine ?



On twitter, she directly referred to the event and person in a direct way.  Where did I do that ? Famous 60s pop star whos a bachelor, ffs is hardly liable.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> On twitter, she directly referred to the event and person in a direct way.  Where did I do that ? Famous 60s pop star whos a bachelor, ffs is hardly liable.


No she didn't - she alluded to an internet rumour which she could not substantiate in a deliberately oblique way expecting that it insulated her from consequences. It didn't. Exactly as you are doing.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

How many of 'The List' will ever see justice - very few I fear or else we are on the edge of the biggest scandal in British history. I hope I'm wrong I was convinced Harris would walk.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> No she didn't - she alluded to an internet rumour which she could not substantiate in a deliberately oblique way expecting that it insulated her from consequences. It didn't. Exactly as you are doing.




Not true, she directly referred to the person and event in an unambiguous way.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 10, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> How many of 'The List' will ever see justice - very few I fear or else we are on the edge of the biggest scandal in British history. I hope I'm wrong I was convinced Harris would walk.





My money is on it all being swept under the carpet, the media dropping it slowly, the investigation being wishy washy blaming a few dead people, coming out with how it can be stopped from happening again, MI5 run this country. They have numerous journalist's, editors etc in their pocket, I suppose that makes me a conspiracyloon.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2014)

She tweeted "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *innocent face*".
After losing the subsequent libel action


> Bercow said: "The High Court found that my tweet constituted a serious libel, both in its natural meaning and as an innuendo."



What you posted was entirely obvious innuendo about an individual. The fact it is "all over the internet" and that you believe it to be true is of little use to this site if you can't prove it. 

This isn't about you. If you feel strongly enough that the truth as you see it needs to be out there you can always start your own blog.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 10, 2014)

I CAN see the enquiry dragging out for a few years, the good dame approaching her mid 80s and then taking ill and the whole thing sinking.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

kenny g said:


> I CAN see the enquiry dragging out for a few years, the good dame approaching her mid 80s and then taking ill and the whole thing sinking.



And as the main protagonists die the 'Cyril Smith truth' will out. Sadly instinct and experience makes me feel this is what will happen - tbh it's happening already.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 10, 2014)

1990s BBC documentary about Peter Righton whose files if found may be the key to unlock many of the potential cases in the pipeline.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 10, 2014)

Spotlight on Abuse - Why Butler-Sloss should not be selected


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 10, 2014)

Interesting one....(_slight understatement_).  It was published back in 1983 by LaRouche in the USA. It has Government ministers - now dead, Adrian Smith (the PIE member who recently said PIE documents were kept at the Home Office), the Palace and the Home Office all rolled into one. You can read the pdf archived edition here



> While former British Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington is
> expected to be appointed NATO Secretary General at the
> alliance's foreign ministers meeting on Dec. 8, the Carring
> ton appointment is ill-timed, to say the least. Alarm bells
> ...


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Interesting one....(_slight understatement_)...


Yes, I saw that on Spotlight. Spotlightonabuse is a great resource for old newspaper articles and the like on this subject. It's interesting to see all the press around the time Dickens presented his dossiers.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2014)

Scott Thompson.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 10, 2014)

Tom Watson has just tweeted that the Met have trebled the number of officers working on historic abuse cases. And there is this article in HuffPo: 
<snippage>By Geoffrey Seed, the author of _The Convenience of Lies_, a powerful story about a conspiracy between politicians, police and spies to cover-up the sexual abuse of children.

In December 1996, I arranged to meet a disaffected London detective in a motorway cafe where we couldn't be overheard, and was told how two investigations into alleged child sex abuse by MPs and other establishment figures were deliberately sabotaged.

I didn't realise then I'd have the basis of a novel or that it'd take another eighteen years before the truth or otherwise of such crimes - supposedly covered up by Westminster insiders - would finally be addressed.

My source was in what I named the Blackened Name Club, officers who'd fallen foul of the Metropolitan Police anti-corruption squad in contentious circumstances which didn't guarantee convictions in court.

He contrasted their treatment - phoned-tapped like terrorists, family lives scrutinised, liberty in jeopardy - with how official blind eyes were turned when paedophile politicians, churchmen and lawyers were allegedly violating children. /snip​


----------



## comrade spurski (Jul 10, 2014)

If there aint a conspiracy then the level of sheer incompetence is equally amazing and frightening.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 10, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> My money is on it all being swept under the carpet, the media dropping it slowly, the investigation being wishy washy blaming a few dead people, coming out with how it can be stopped from happening again, MI5 run this country. They have numerous journalist's, editors etc in their pocket, I suppose that makes me a conspiracyloon.


You're probably right, but I think quite a few people had more than money on the idea that Savile et al would go a similar way.

There is a snowballing process going on here. MI5 et al may yet stop it in its tracks, but I am not 100% convinced they can. It will only take another credible report of a Senior Establishment Figure having been up to a spot of pederasty and somehow not being nailed for it, and I think the dam will break.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 10, 2014)

comrade spurski said:


> If there aint a conspiracy then the level of sheer incompetence is equally amazing and frightening.


It's both, I think. Most of it is incompetence, but that has fed the ability of those interested in doing such things to be able to construct real conspiracies, secure in the knowledge that they don't even need to be that good, if the appetite of the current elite for truth, justice, and protection of innocent and powerless individuals is as it is...which is to say, mostly, near non-existent.

We live in a strange society: one in which most of the "system" really doesn't give a shit about the poor, the vulnerable and the easily exploited, but at the same time one in which we like to believe that we, as a society, do give a shit. The "paedo panics" of the red-top press are both a symptom of and the driving force behind so much of our society's attitudes towards child sexual abuse: when we didn't much care, the "paedos" were demonised and put "out there" - remote figures who occasionally touched up unwary or careless kids in the park, a stereotype which conveniently kept us looking the wrong way while known-to-us, responsible, and - yes - respectable types were busily fiddling around with children at every opportunity they were so conveniently handed.

Now, we are confronted with the reality of what child abuse does to people - far from the "they'll get over it", we're seeing people we respect and whose views carry some weight, if only in some cases by virtue of their celebrity, coming out from the shadows and saying "yes, I was abused, and it wrecked my life". Against that, it's rather hard to cling onto the blandishments of 40-50 years ago which suggested that, well, when it all came down to it, a bit of light kiddy-fiddling never really did anyone any harm, and anyway the kids wouldn't stick around if they didn't like it...

And, all of a sudden, the core protective strategies of "the establishment" - essentially, "it doesn't really matter", and "it'll all blow over anyway" - are being shown to be ineffective. People - people like me, damnit - who were abused up to and beyond 40 years ago are prepared to stand up and say what happened, and they cannot be ignored. It hasn't "blown over", and it won't. And it *does* matter. And there are enough of us saying it now that it is becoming increasingly hard to ignore it, discredit the victims, or simply pretend there isn't a problem. And there will be enough of those inside the establishment - people like Lord Tebbit, whose politics I continue to loathe three decades after they first came to light, but who at least has the conviction to be able to point out the wrongness in the attitudes of his time - who are disgusted enough by what was done, both by the abusers, and by those seeking to cover up their activities, that the ability to keep those secrets is further diminished.

It all comes down to how willing and able "the establishment" is to face down the onslaught of disclosures, allegations, and criticisms. If there's one thing I can say for the ship of fools that currently runs the show, their ability to face anything down is limited to the point of non-existence. They will, no doubt, mount a coverup. They will fall over themselves to stonewall the truths they think simply cannot be revealed. But they will fail, because even now they underestimate the weight of public revulsion at not just the abuse of children, but the idea that those in power were a) doing it, and b) able to get away with it. They will grossly miscalculate, and with any luck, the fallout will ensure that a deep and abiding suspicion of power and privilege so profound that it completely cuts the ground away from under the system that has operated, for longer than any of us have lived, to protect those it represents.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2014)

> people like Lord Tebbit, whose politics I continue to loathe three decades after they first came to light, but who at least has the conviction to be able to point out the wrongness in the attitudes of his time - who are disgusted enough by what was done, both by the abusers, and by those seeking to cover up their activities, that the ability to keep those secrets is further diminished.....



I was watching the Andrew Marr show last Sunday and found myself in the unlikely position of agreeing with the Chingford skinhead.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

teqniq said:


> I was watching the Andrew Marr show last Sunday and found myself in the unlikely position of agreeing with the Chingford skinhead.


Like Thatcher, whose politics I also despise, the Chingford Strangler operated from a position of principle, rather than expediency.

It is telling that Thatcher was very successful in purging her - repellant - political ideology of those whose motives seemed to be something other than grabbing power at any cost. Perhaps she wanted to be the last of her line.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 11, 2014)

teqniq said:


> I was watching the Andrew Marr show last Sunday and found myself in the unlikely position of agreeing with the Chingford skinhead.




He's settling old scores, Leon Brittan stabbed his beloved Thatcher in the back, he's like a Dickensian Workhouse type character, you don't really think he's really motivated by wrongs done to orphans and waifs and strays do you.


----------



## discokermit (Jul 11, 2014)

tebbit is a cunt. thirty odd years he's kept his mouth shut about this. he was happy enough to work with these people at the time.

pitchforks and torches. it's the only way to deal with vampire cunts like these.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Jul 11, 2014)

Wilf said:


> What, what - some dots ...
> 
> http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/lord-janner-my-friend-michael-jackson



Blast off my socks you'd sell your kidney for dots. Or something. Probably.


----------



## Batboy (Jul 11, 2014)

I cannot believe the press is not lambasting the appointment of Butler Sloss considering how her brother was involved in so much controversy in failing to deal with investigations on people like Sir Peter Hyman a known paedophile who operated in the upper echelons and corridors of power.

Eta.... some finally look like they are. If she stays as chair of enquiry, we will see just how corrupt this is.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 11, 2014)

teqniq said:


> I was watching the Andrew Marr show last Sunday and found myself in the unlikely position of agreeing with the Chingford skinhead.



For Tebbit there is an equivalence between homosexuality and paedophilia. Add this to an over riding loyalty to the Thatcher governments (a loyalty that he doesn't feel towards Cameron et. al.) and Tebbit's apparent change of heart makes sense. Of course it doesn't make it any less objectionable.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> He's settling old scores, Leon Brittan stabbed his beloved Thatcher in the back, he's like a Dickensian Workhouse type character, you don't really think he's really motivated by wrongs done to orphans and waifs and strays do you.


I did say 'unlikely', and pretty much inevitably there is always an ulterior or hidden motive with politicians.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

Not looking good for the paedo protecting Sloss

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28257488


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

existentialist said:


> Like Thatcher, whose politics I also despise, the Chingford Strangler operated from a position of principle, rather than expediency.
> 
> It is telling that Thatcher was very successful in purging her - repellant - political ideology of those whose motives seemed to be something other than grabbing power at any cost. Perhaps she wanted to be the last of her line.


Reading this back, it says something about the moral vacuum that the current lot inhabit that I could ever have said something even remotely positive about the reactionary old curmudgeon Tebbit. I feel I need to take a shower now.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Not looking good for the paedo protecting Sloss
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28257488


I think it is very telling that, almost from the moment the appointment was announced, there has been little but a chorus of disapproval.

Cameron does not want a proper enquiry, but a whitewash that can quickly brush all this stuff under the carpet. If he had had an ounce of ability, he would have made sure, before he opened his stupid big trap, that he had secured an uncontroversial "consensus" person to lead the whitewash inquiry. I suspect that, as ever, he rushed off in several directions at once, came up with a wizard wheeze, ran it past a chum or two and went with it.

Good. The more stepping on his own dick he does, the likelier we are to have to move to a a proper independent public inquiry.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Not looking good for the paedo protecting Sloss
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28257488


good.

the mighty shall fall


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Not looking good for the paedo protecting Sloss
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28257488


Every word in that clip rang true, particularly the 'not giving the press a bishop'.  A perfect example of how the process works.  There's no grand lizardy conspiracy, just a few key figures with a certain mindset and background - who makes separate decisions that together amount to a watering down, a weakening, making the whole thing more cautious.  Power in play.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 11, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Not looking good for the paedo protecting Sloss
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28257488



Thanks for the link, unbelievable appointment: 

_"A man abused by a paedophile priest in Sussex says Baroness Butler-Sloss is the wrong person to lead an inquiry into how public bodies dealt with allegations of child abuse. 


Phil Johnson says she told him she wanted to exclude his allegations of abuse at the hands of a bishop from a public report because she "cared about the church" and "did not want to give the press a bishop". _


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Thanks for the link, unbelievable appointment:
> 
> _"A man abused by a paedophile priest in Sussex says Baroness Butler-Sloss is the wrong person to lead an inquiry into how public bodies dealt with allegations of child abuse.
> 
> ...


That's fucking disgraceful.


----------



## treelover (Jul 11, 2014)

Some victims are still not being treated properly , apparently Vanessa Feltz has faced terrible personal attacks since revealing the gross incident with Harris on the Big Breakfast, she is a tough woman but listening to what she has faced on twitter, etc, was shocking.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

treelover said:


> Some victims are still not being treated properly , apparently Vanessa Feltz has faced terrible personal attacks since revealing the gross incident with Harris on the Big Breakfast, she is a tough woman but listening to what she has faced on twitter, etc, was shocking.


We haven't really even scratched the surface, yet. It is going to take a long time before we get anywhere meaningful. And even when most of us have got there, there'll still be the cunts and idiots who insist "we're not allowed to say this, but...", or who just do their shit for attention and effect.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 11, 2014)

Perhaps the Baroness should have been less concerned to stop 'the press getting a bishop', and much more worried about what the ecclesiastical big wig was getting? 

The apparent presumption that the establishment (in the person of the bishop) needs protection from the press (laughable as that may seem), and that this need takes priority over both the experience of victims and the potential for further abuse, is more evidence of the huge distance between the interests of a very small, very powerful minority and everybody else.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Perhaps the Baroness should have been less concerned to stop 'the press getting a bishop', and much more worried about what the ecclesiastical big wig was getting?
> 
> The apparent presumption that the establishment (in the person of the bishop) needs protection from the press (laughable as that may seem), and that this need takes priority over both the experience of victims and the potential for further abuse, is more evidence of the huge distance between the interests of a very small, very powerful minority and everybody else.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


 
its a scandalous comment as shes meant to be acting as an impartial judge - in fact shes shown up exactly what these inquiries are, a chance to throw a token person to the press


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 11, 2014)

*The time when child abuse wasn't dealt with properly*
By Sanchia Berg BBC Radio 4's Today programme

OK, the title begs the question that it's dealt with properly now, but these cases from the 50s and 60s display scant regard for the victims, even suggesting in one case that the abuser "might himself be in one sense the victim of boys who had already been corrupted." In another case mentioned in the article: "The other men denied the charges - no adult witnesses were called in the trial and the boys were easy to undermine. The men were found not guilty." Rules on evidence have vastly improved since then, and the evidence of children is taken more seriously. 

On a separate note, today's the day that Mark Sidwell is due to deliver to the Home Affairs Select Committee the answers to the questions he couldn't answer at the hearing: (from memory) the full report (with names redacted if necessary), the titles of the files, whether adjacently numbered files were also missing, or what proportion of missing files these represent (ie, had they been targeted or were the missing files part of a general pattern of carelessness) and various other uncomfortable questions... Anyone know whether Vaz is going to make these answers public?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 11, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Not looking good for the paedo protecting Sloss
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28257488




Its all about damage limitation. Shes a safe pair of hands.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2014)

the abuser "might himself be in one sense the victim of boys who had already been corrupted."

ah yes, classic oxbridge debating style in action there


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 11, 2014)

Wilf said:


> That looks to be an anti-semitic site, at least going by this:
> http://thecolemanexperience.wordpre...-of-vip-child-abuse-and-the-missing-religion/



Yep, virulent Judaeophobic nutbaggery of the usual sort, and as for the comments, they're Jazzztastic!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 11, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> If we look at history establishment inquires have been a fix from bloody Sunday to Hillsborough, why would this one be any different ? Apparently that makes me a conspiracyloon.



Why are you taking personally a generalised comment meant to demarcate how various elements of the population might react?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

One more related link at to why she shouldn't be leading the investigation 

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/07/11/baroness-butler-sloss-and-now-a-link-to-kincora/


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2014)

camerons going to look fucked either way here- either scholss stays and the inquries credibility is shot from the get go, or she is replaced and he looks like a cunt.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> camerons going to look fucked either way here- either scholss stays and the inquries credibility is shot from the get go, or she is replaced and he looks like a cunt.


*Continues* to look *even more* like a cunt, you mean


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

Not sure why, maybe because the it's the Durham gala this week, but this is all bringing to mind the words of Labour traitor JH Thomas. When AJ Cook questioned the appointment of Sir Herbert Samuel to chair a commission into wages and hours in mining, Thomas came out with the line “you may not trust my word but will you not accept the word of a British gentleman who has been Governor of Palestine?”  Needless to say, Samuel's word was shit.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> camerons going to look fucked either way here- either scholss stays and the inquries credibility is shot from the get go, or she is replaced and he looks like a cunt.


 Hard to tell, but my guess is if 1, maybe 2, national children's charities come out against her, she will have to resign.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2014)

Boris Johnson's former prep school headmaster arrested on suspicion of child sex offences



> Clive Williams, 69, who was in charge of Ashdown School in East Sussex for almost 30 years before he left in 2003, was questioned by police on Wednesday in connection with alleged offences of sexual assault and child neglect against pupils.
> Mr Williams was interviewed by officers from Sussex police’s Operation Mitre, which has received complaints of past abuse from more than 20 past pupils spanning three decades.
> Mr Williams has not been charged and has been released on police bail pending further inquiries....


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

I feel a bit sordid posting this bit of dirt on the Havers-Butler-Schloss type people, it's almost certainly from a loon site going by the url, but I will. It came up on a random search on the good Dame:
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/zbbsloss1.htm

Edit: yes, she's not responsible for his actions - but in her you've got an opponent of gay marriage*, defending the church, at the very least tolerating some imperial throwback buying his way through the local sex workers. Fuck 'em all.

*if, apparently, quite good on gay rights otherwise.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 11, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Hard to tell, but my guess is if 1, maybe 2, national children's charities come out against her, she will have to resign.



No chance, they can't afford the loss of face and credibility. (not that they have any of course)


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

Another potentially big disclosure. http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...igures-child/story-21451466-detail/story.html



> A former prison worker claims he contributed to the missing paedophile dossier by handing over names of VIPs and MPs who were coercing teenage rent boys behind bars.
> 
> Barrie Trower, 68, says he was recruited by M15 to work as a spy in the education department of Wormwood Scrubs jail in the 1960s and 1970s.
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 11, 2014)

"give daily verbal revelations of links between inmates and VIPs." i.e unevidenced. Careful eh. Two seconds and Trower appears to be a nut.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Another potentially big disclosure. http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...igures-child/story-21451466-detail/story.html


 Unless he turns out to be an unreliable witness, that statement in itself is a little challenge for the coming inquiry:


> Barrie says the only person he will disclose the MP names to is judge Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss who is leading a non-statutory inquiry into the affair.


Not that (m)any new names are likely to find their way to the final report.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2014)

has liedwill been up to rectify his memory losses of the other day yet?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> has liedwill been up to rectify his memory losses of the other day yet?


 He'd had a couple of pints of guinness before the hearing.

coat


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 11, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> camerons going to look fucked either way here- either scholss stays and the inquries credibility is shot from the get go, or she is replaced and he looks like a cunt.



Sloss, not _schloss_.  She's a pillar of the establishment, not a Germanic castle.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

edit, a Paul Scholes play on words too banal even for Friday afternoon timekilling.


----------



## King Biscuit Time (Jul 11, 2014)

Still. her nephew, who's an actor, reckons she'll be fine and doesn't know what all the fuss is about. Precisely the kind of nepotistic now, now, we're all a cut above and we know best environment that allows scandals like this to happen and then be covered up. Where people wield power they don't deserve and are able to squash others so you'd better shut your gob about what you saw OK. - Well shut your fucking trap Havers. You are not qualified to comment here.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

King Biscuit Time said:


> Still. her nephew, who's an actor, reckons she'll be fine and doesn't know what all the fuss is about. Precisely the kind of nepotistic now, now, we're all a cut above and we know best environment that allows scandals like this to happen and then be covered up. Where people wield power they don't deserve and are able to squash others so you'd better shut your gob about what you saw OK. - Well shut your fucking trap Havers. You are not qualified to comment here.


I can just imagine the consternation in his family when he said it was the stage for him. He does have loverly hair though.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 11, 2014)

This isn't the first time he's stuck his oar in here is it? Am i misremembering?


----------



## King Biscuit Time (Jul 11, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I can just imagine the consternation in his family when he said it was the stage for him. He does have loverly hair though.


They must have gone fucking ballistic when he turned up in Corrie shagging Gail Platt.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

From Wiki - he sounds a real 'charmer' (underlined bit).  Mind it's the final sentence that will do for him in a first up against the wall scenario.

*Private life[edit]*
In the mid-1980s Havers began an affair with Polly Williams, the sister of his friend, the actor Simon Williams. News broke as he was appearing in TV series _The Charmer_ and caused him to be identified with the role in his public persona. Havers has written of the depression he experienced trying to choose between his marriage to Carolyn Cox and their young daughter Kate, born in 1977, and his mistress. During this time he consulted a psychiatrist at the Devonshire Hospital in London. Things were resolved in his mind when he took a part in the TV film _Naked Under Capricorn_, which was filmed in Alice Springs, Australia. He describes in his autobiography wrangling a herd of cattle and catching sight in the distance of a figure who turned out to be Williams. The following year they were married. Polly Williams died of cancer on 24 June 2004. Subsequently Havers challenged his wife's will, in which she left her estate to her children from an earlier marriage, obtaining a share of the estate in an out-of-court settlement.[6]
In New York City on 8 June 2007 Havers married Georgiana Bronfman, the former wife of the Canadian billionaire drinks magnate, Edgar Bronfman, Sr.[7] A blessing was held in Saint Tropez the following month.
Havers appeared in BBC One's genealogical show _Who Do You Think You Are?_ in 2013.
He is the godfather of comedian Jack Whitehall.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

King Biscuit Time said:


> They must have gone fucking ballistic when he turned up in Corrie shagging Gail Platt.


----------



## Libertad (Jul 11, 2014)

King Biscuit Time said:


> They must have gone fucking ballistic when he turned up in Corrie shagging Gail Platt.



That was Gail's mother, Audrey Roberts iirc. [/offtopic]


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2014)

ken barlow connection- its all interconnected


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 11, 2014)

Libertad said:


> That was Gail's mother, Audrey Roberts iirc. [/offtopic]


The wife of Councillor and Freemason alf ROBBERrts who was based on thatchers shop owning free-mason groper dad.

edit: sorry, not right thread for this.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

Love these little details


> After his theatre work, Havers slid into a period of acting unemployment, during which time he worked for a wine merchant.


All you fuckers moaning about the bedroom tax, FFS, just take a job with your wine merchant!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> edit: sorry, not right thread for this.


 Well, maybe, probably even, but there's scope for a bit of light hearted comtempt before returning to the grim truth of the thread.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> This isn't the first time he's stuck his oar in here is it? Am i misremembering?


I do have the vaguest memory of him chipping in in the distant past, conceivably a direct defence of his Dad in the 80s/90s? On his role in the guildford/maguire cases?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Love these little details
> 
> All you fuckers moaning about the bedroom tax, FFS, just take a job with your wine merchant!



You don't know what it's like! You weren't there man!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

My last derail, I promise (from the DM, copied so you don't need to):




> *The Charmer wrests £375,000 (and a Mercedes) from dead wife's son*
> *By DANIEL BOFFEY*
> *Last updated at 22:00 31 March 2007*
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> "give daily verbal revelations of links between inmates and VIPs." i.e unevidenced. Careful eh. Two seconds and Trower appears to be a nut.



Is he microwave man?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 11, 2014)

Indeed. (Sorry,  have  to dip out for proper posts tonight, cricket now)


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

Well I won't dwell on him for long them. But to save others who may be inclined to look into him some time, but can't be arsed to wade through comment sections of sometimes fruit loopy sites for details that debunk him and damage his credibility, here is something from a local US paper from a few years ago when an anti-WIFI school thing went to legal action that was costing the state quite a bit of cash.



> One Morrison expert PPS attorneys have had to depose is Barrie Trower, who claims he worked on a “stealth” microwave warfare program for the British Navy (noting he had no rank because he refused promotions) and was assigned to a secret British prison housing “spies, dissidents, international terrorists [and] gangland killers.”
> 
> Trower claims a bachelor’s degree in physics earned in night classes, has been repeatedly turned down by Ph.D. programs, and says he recently traveled to consult with “the king in South Africa” on Wi-Fi dangers. (South Africa abolished the monarchy in 1961.)



http://www.wweek.com/portland/artic...00_fighting_a_parents_lawsuit_over_wi_fi.html


----------



## terryterry (Jul 11, 2014)

Have you seen this? More questions than answers - what else was 'doing the rounds'??!? http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...video-between-underage-boy-well-known-grandee


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 11, 2014)

terryterry said:


> Have you seen this? More questions than answers - what else was 'doing the rounds'??!? http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...video-between-underage-boy-well-known-grandee



Fuck off.


----------



## terryterry (Jul 11, 2014)

Buckaroo said:


> Fuck off.



Why?!


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

To be honest I did suggest he post that story here, since it was posted in the Savile thread. The article and the events it suggest are part of the shit and still worthy of a mention, even if the only question is which of numerous sorts of shit on display there is the most important to keep in mind when thinking about that sort of thing.


----------



## laptop (Jul 11, 2014)

From another thread:



terryterry said:


> Have you seen this? More questions than answers - what else was 'doing the rounds'??!? http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...video-between-underage-boy-well-known-grandee



Yabbut, what's the story? Jerry Hayes saw a video alleged to show "a Tory grandee" with an underaged boy and concluded ""I knew [the alleged politician] and it looked nothing like him."

Bad, bad _Express_. 

Hayes also observed:

"You saw a lot of grunting but it was all bollocks."

And as FridgeMagnet observed: "Tory grandee not seen in sex tape" is surprising but not news. (I paraphrase.)


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 11, 2014)

terryterry said:


> Why?!



I thought you were putting it up on the Jimmy thread again, apologies, elbows suggested you put it on this. So you did. Still a bit shit though. Reminds me of the time some cunt waded into this thread on his first day on Urban with a conspiracy theory about Kirsty Walk being a mason which he found hilarious. Elbows called him an idiot.


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

Thing is I want that sort of shit here because that sort o press article is part of the picture.

And when it comes to the subject of this thread, I'm interested in anything that talks about the 'rumour mill', press bubble etc, both present and historical. More interested than I would like to be, but to date nearly all of the revelations of recent years are actually the very same ones that partially surfaced decades ago. That may be somewhat fitting since the Savile stuff triggered this era of re-examining historical child abuse, and there were no shortage of rumours about him at the time. But if this time around we only get to hear about, or see brought to justice, cases that actually slightly came out in the past, it means we are only getting ones that were not covered up very effectively back in the day. People that evaded justice, but not without at least some lingering reputations damage and echoes of whispers.

There are quite a lot of people out there, often quite vocal on twitter, who will believe that there is a modern-day coverup if the cases and names they have already heard about on the net or in the past, are not prosecuted. I've decided to judge it a bit differently, in that my mind will cry out 'cover-up' most strongly if, when all this stuff is done over the years to come, there are no prosecutions of political figures that have NOT been rumoured about in the past. i.e. someone that nobody here currently suspects or has ever heard whispers about.


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> i.e. someone that nobody here currently suspects or has ever heard whispers about.



I suppose I should not go as far as to say nobody, since in theory someone here could be a victim, or know a victim that confided in them, and therefore knows about a person that hasn't been rumoured about more widely to date.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 11, 2014)

I’ve just got my tin foil hat out of the cupboard and it’s time to give my favourite hobby horse another run round the paddock.

On reflection, I think I’ve been looking through the wrong end of the telescope regarding Leon Brittan, who I still think is a central figure. He would have certainly been vetted by MI5 when he became Home Secretary, if not before. The security services would have been fully aware of the allegations and rumours about him.

I think it’s possible that he became Home Secretary not *in spite* of the speculation about sexual misconduct, but *because* of it. MI5 now had “their” man in the Home Office, the very department nominally in charge of its activities, and he was completely beholden to them. In return he gets one of the highest offices of state and what he understands is lifelong protection against any really damaging material being made public by the security services. He was certainly very helpful to MI5 during his time at the Home Office. Amongst other things he:

1] gave them primacy in the intelligence gathering activities against the NUM during the Miners’ Strike
2] authorised highly controversial phone taps on organisations such as CND and
3] buried the Dickens Dossier.

The last was particularly important - especially if it contained some of the people named on the Elm guest list. One was listed as an MI5 operative and some of the others were probably security service assets (or at least “persons of interest”) such as Colin Jordan.

So job done - at the end of his Cabinet career he’s given a plum EU post, a peerage and off he goes to enjoy his retirement on a promise that MI5 will keep his alleged dirty secrets secret.

But fast-forward 30 years and things start to unravel in a way that no one could have foreseen three decades earlier:
1] Jimmy Savile is exposed as a serial paedophile, bringing the subject of sexual abuse to the public’s attention in the most salacious way. It’s all over the media and it won’t go away thanks to people like Stuart Hall, Max Clifford and Rolph Harris.
2] Tom Watson, aided by Peter McKelvie, starts to ask awkward questions about a high-level paedophile ring which includes senior politicians - and he threatens to name them.
3] In parallel Simon Danczuk exposes Cyril Smith as an alleged serial abuser- the first time such a high profile politician has been named in this way. Danczuk also threatens to name others.
4] Questions re-emerge about the missing Dickens Dossier.

The spotlight inevitably falls on Brittan in relation to the dossier and matters possibly to be raised by Watson and Danczuk. First he denies knowing anything about the dossier and then, after the Home Office (read MI5) says it did exist he has to admit he did get it, but says he passed it on to the “appropriate authorities”. As we know, nothing further happened - likely at the behest of the security services for the reasons outlined above.

Curiously to my mind, just a week later, in a newspaper article based on some sort of leak, Brittan is exposed as a person who has been recently questioned about an allegation of serious sexual assault that allegedly took place decades ago.

Meanwhile the Government, which had resisted calls for a public enquiry regarding the dossier and the allegations contained in it, has to give ground. Teresa May announces the two enquires (neither of which are public enquiries). During her statement there are 4 specific questions raised by different MPs about the role of the security services. MI5 know they will have to give up some names. Who better than Leon Brittan for starters? A man now pretty much discredited - seen as untrustworthy and unreliable regarding the missing Dickens Dossier and who is also facing allegations of serious sexual assault. Not particularly popular with the public and, as someone said in another post, a person who comes across as very shifty at the best of times.

MI5 renege on their promise to protect him. But Brittan can’t do anything about it. Whichever way he turns he’s completely fucked. He just has to sit it out.

The enquiry, when it eventually gets around to reporting, finds a few more names - some MPs (dead and alive) not even their constituents have heard of; a few Lords; a couple of senior clergy; some Directors of Social Services, a couple of NHS bods and some high-profile celebrities for titillation value, perhaps even a judge or two and some senior civil servants and coppers for good measure. But then there’s the awkward question of why MI5 didn’t expose Brittan before? Here’s where my theory is a little sketchy but FWIW it could be something along the lines of:

“We only became aware, and could corroborate, the allegations once he became Home Secretary. But the country was then facing a grave national emergency. The NUM was trying to overthrow a democratically elected Government. If news of Brittan’s alleged indiscretions had come out the Government would have been brought down and could have been replaced by one run by communist sympathisers such as Arthur Scargill. Complete anarchy would have ensued. We simply could not let that happen. Of course we agonised over the decision. We wished we could have done things differently but you have to realise our hand was forced - the very fabric of society was under serious threat. Anyway, it all happened at a different time when the Service had a different ethos. But we can assure you it couldn’t happen today” etc.

(Just as a matter of interest Sir John Jones, Director General of MI5 between 1981 and 1985, died in 1998).

But why didn’t they expose Cyril Smith, the other MPs, the clergymen, the directors of Social Services, the entertainers? The answer is given on MI5’s own website: “The Security Service does not routinely monitor the private lives of prominent people and never simply because of their high profile. We will only carry out an investigation if there is a clear national security reason for doing so”.

https://www.mi5.gov.uk/home/about-us/faqs-about-mi5/does-mi5-monitor-the-private-lives-of-public-figures.htm

In summary MI5 could conceivably claim:

"We [MI5] didn’t know because we weren’t monitoring them. At the time we were far too busy combatting domestic subversion and the IRA. Anyway we weren’t particularly interested in any of them in the first place".

So all-in-all not a bad outcome for MI5. They still may have a few other dirty tricks up their sleeve just in case any other difficulties arise - hiding files, blackmailing vulnerable people, forging documents etc. The usual stuff. Other accusations of incompetence, or even cover-ups, could conveniently be blamed on Special Branch and the police who have hardly emerged from the affair thus far covered in glory.


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

I could be wrong but perhaps more people will read your entire post if you remove quite a lot of the blank lines. I've not managed to get through reading it all myself yet for that reason.

edit - cheers, this has been done, so anyone reading it now won't be seeing the version that I had a little moan about there.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> I could be wrong but perhaps more people will read your entire post if you remove quite a lot of the blank lines. I've not managed to get through reading it all myself yet for that reason.



sorry - will do!


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2014)

I didn't have any trouble reading it


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2014)

Diversionary tactic?

Historical abuse cases 'diverting attention from children at risk'



> Police officers investigating hundreds of child sex abuse cases are at breaking point psychologically with many suffering exhaustion, secondary trauma and stress, a leading psychologist has warned.
> 
> Dr Noreen Tehrani, who advises specialist child abuse detectives in the Metropolitan, Surrey, Thames Valley and Hampshire forces, added that pressure from Westminster politicians forced police to divert attention from children at risk to historic cases.
> 
> "They are just completely inundated with work, they are beginning to collapse. What I am getting are more and more exhausted officers. There aren't enough officers in these specialist teams and they are overwhelmed," Tehrani said.....


----------



## Wilf (Jul 11, 2014)

The only bit of relevance I got from the Hayes piece was that underlined:


> "You saw a lot of grunting but it was all bollocks. You could just see a lot of faffing around."
> Asked if he could remember who sent it to him, he added: "I really couldn't. These things appear anonymously.
> "It's different people wanting to make money.
> "It was sent to my editor.
> "It was not clear if it was underage, but if it had been an underage boy my editor would have sent it to the police."


 There's not a _fucking chance_ they would have sent it to the police. If it wasn't something they could print or sell to other journos, they'd have chucked it in the bin.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 11, 2014)

_

They still may have a few other dirty tricks up their sleeve just in case any other difficulties arise - hiding files, blackmailing vulnerable people, forging documents etc._

+ unfortunate fatal accidents


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 11, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> _
> They still may have a few other dirty tricks up their sleeve just in case any other difficulties arise - hiding files, blackmailing vulnerable people, forging documents etc._
> 
> + unfortunate fatal accidents



I forgot about those!


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Diversionary tactic?
> 
> Historical abuse cases 'diverting attention from children at risk'


Quite possibly not. Perhaps just the reality of the situation - for years, the police have been used to operating on a "har, yes, sorry to hear it but it'll never get to court" basis, and now, really quite suddenly, they're actually having to investigate and prosecute cases - and not just any cases, but complicated historical ones without forensic evidence and needing lots of tracking down of other victims, corroborating witnesses, etc.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I forgot about those!


_Nobody _expects the Unfortunate Fatal Accidents!


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2014)

existentialist said:


> Quite possibly not. Perhaps just the reality of the situation - for years, the police have been used to operating on a "har, yes, sorry to hear it but it'll never get to court" basis, and now, really quite suddenly, they're actually having to investigate and prosecute cases - and not just any cases, but complicated historical ones without forensic evidence and needing lots of tracking down of other victims, corroborating witnesses, etc.



And you never know, we could always hope that if they actually do some of these investigations properly, it may develop skills, teams, attitudes and channels of communication that will, once the historical cases are done, lead to more effective policing of the here and now.

No matter how unlikely such a possibility may turn out to be, I refuse to live in a world where I cannot at least retain at least the hope that it might be possible.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> And you never know, we could always hope that if they actually do some of these investigations properly, it may develop skills, teams, attitudes and channels of communication that will, once the historical cases are done, lead to more effective policing of the here and now.
> 
> No matter how unlikely such a possibility may turn out to be, I refuse to live in a world where I cannot at least retain at least the hope that it might be possible.


I have to say that my first-hand experience of such an investigation yields the following:

It's slow. V-E-R-Y slow. Typical turnaround time on an email is somewhere between 3 weeks and 2 months. Almost every email I send to the investigating officer I am working with, no matter how soon after he sends me one, gets an out of office reply.
They are being incredibly painstaking. I can provide a bit of information and then, a considerable while afterwards, will get a request for contacts in this, that or the other area - people I might have disclosed to in the past, the schools I attended, any organisations I knew the perpetrators were involved in, etc., and so on.
They are at pains to be sensitive and supportive, sometimes to a somewhat excruciating degree. 
My experience leads me to believe that individual officers are being professional, careful, painstaking and serious about this stuff. There has never been any disbelief, scepticism, or apparent reluctance to pursue the matter.

But I do very strongly suspect that they are extremely thin on the ground.

Incidentally, I happened to - quite coincidentally - have a conversation with a former military plod who worked in this area on the MOD police side. They tell a similar story: the stuff is being taken seriously, staff are receiving intensive and in-depth training, from psychologists and psychiatrists who specialise in the field of abuse, on how to investigate and question suspects. But there are precious few of them, and they are victims of their own success - as each case proceeds to a conclusion, more allegations come out of the woodwork.

We're paying the price for decades and decades of kicking the can down the road. It is self-limiting - perpetrators and victims die eventually, but in the worst case, they're trying to catch up on a 60+ year backlog. It's no wonder they're snowed under.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

Just to go back over Geoffrey Prime (MI5), as it was mentioned in the depths of this thread some time ago IIRC. But it ties in neatly with current events given Havers second intervention following Sir Peter Morrison. Worth looking at the article as it comes with press clippings.

Havers, Prime, Thatcher, MI5, PIE, Dickens.



> In 1982 a Cheltenham taxi driver called Geoffrey Prime was arrested for sexually assaulting two young girls. His wife then reported her suspicions about him to the police, and it transpired that he had been selling state secrets to the Russians during his previous employment in GCHQ. He had been a spy for over 14 years and had also worked in the Foreign Office and the RAF.
> 
> On 20th July 1982, Margaret Thatcher told Parliament that Prime had been charged under the Official Secrets Act. (Guardian 21/07/1982)
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

existentialist said:


> I have to say that my first-hand experience of such an investigation yields the following:
> 
> It's slow. V-E-R-Y slow. Typical turnaround time on an email is somewhere between 3 weeks and 2 months. Almost every email I send to the investigating officer I am working with, no matter how soon after he sends me one, gets an out of office reply.
> They are being incredibly painstaking. I can provide a bit of information and then, a considerable while afterwards, will get a request for contacts in this, that or the other area - people I might have disclosed to in the past, the schools I attended, any organisations I knew the perpetrators were involved in, etc., and so on.
> ...



Thanks for this, v interesting. I believe Tom Watson tweeted the other day that the number of police had been increased. Here you go:


> *tom_watson* @tom_watson · Jul 10
> The Met police have just announced they've tripled the number of cops investigating historic allegations of child abuse. Best news all week.



Issues for many people I suspect are the two words "Met Police".


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 11, 2014)

Dickens asked Thatcher about Prime's membership of PIE, which she denied. However Telegraph reports suggest that at his secret trial this was confirmed to be true.



> When he asked Mrs Thatcher whether the convicted spy Geoffrey Prime had been involved in child abuse, she replied: “I understand that stories that the police found documents in Prime’s house or garage indicating that he was a member of PIE are without foundation.”
> 
> But this was not true. At his trial, mostly held in secret, it was disclosed that Prime had indeed been detected as a spy through child offences and was a member of PIE.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-dismissed-as-fantasies-of-a-deluded-man.html


----------



## little_legs (Jul 11, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> The public school/boarding school background of our rulers may give a clue to the otherwise unfathomable disconnect between ordinary peoples' revulsion at child sex abuse, and the seeming unwillingness to act/inability to view it as revolting, as is displayed by the 'Establishment'.
> 
> Does this also give us a clue as to why so many have been willing to turn a blind eye/'lose' files/ignore calls for an enquiry? If they - when at public school - were either witness to, perpetrators of, or victims of sexual abuse, have they somehow internalised it as "well it wasn't that bad"? It is extraordinary, but may go some way to explain the inexplicable refusal to be a 'whistleblower' or just refuse to obey your higher-ups who wanted a report buried?
> 
> The latter point may apply just as much to police as to civil servants/ politicians, but here it's less likely - I would guess - that police have a background of public/boarding school. But with the police there is the strong tendency to conservatism, respect authority, obey higher-ups. So the end result may be the same thing - reports got 'lost', witnesses ignored etc. Where it gets really f--ing nasty and unfathomable is when witnesses are intimidated and threatened so as to protect high-society nonces - this is presumably down to the "for the greater good" mentality, preserve the 'Estabishment' at all costs.



_Scandal damages democracy itself. After all the worst bit about raping kids is the scandal that it causes._


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 11, 2014)

Sedwill was due to give Vaz the answers to awkward questions by noon today. Quelle surprise:


> The top Home Office mandarin has told MPs that he could not immediately provide them with the titles of the 114 "lost or destroyed" child sex abuse-related files because personal names would have to be redacted first.


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/11/missing-child-abuse-files-home-office-chief-mps
Nevertheless, in an odd kind of way, I count this as progress. There are names preserved in the bureaucratic aspic, even though we are not permitted to know them.


----------



## little_legs (Jul 11, 2014)

Apologies, I am still catching up with the tread, I've never heard of Janner before, though a quick Athens search produces this article, eugh...


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 12, 2014)

little_legs said:


> Apologies, I am still catching up with the tread, I've never heard of Janner before, though a quick Athens search produces this article, eugh...



I don't rememeber , it was such a long time ago , I know Golda Meir y'now - now where's my glasses. A boy you say ....it was such a long time ago ...who did you say you where. Can I go home please.....

"He's Lady Gaga Sarge - poor bugger".


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 12, 2014)

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/453381/Female-MP-abused-boy-in-care?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed: d

She is alleged to have forced a boy in care to perform a “vile”  sex act at one of a series of drug-fuelled parties in Westminster in the Eighties where boys and girls as young as 13 were allegedly abused.

Last night her alleged victim told the Sunday Express: “I want justice.”

Andrew Ash, now 45, said he has given Scotland Yard the name of the former MP.

Dutch intelligence officers attended at least one interview because Andrew told of being trafficked to Amsterdam on a number of occasions to be abused by a group of paedophiles including convicted child killer Sidney Cooke.

He claims Cooke, now 84, made him film the paedophile abusing another young boy on video. It is feared Cooke may have abused and killed young boys in the Netherlands.

Mr Ash also told police he was abused by a big-name celebrity.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jul 12, 2014)

Tomorrow's Times front page has the story about Sloss suppressing abuse allegations. 

Drip drip….


----------



## Wilf (Jul 12, 2014)

In a rational world that _should_ be her shot off the inquiry. Never underestimate though the ability of the powerful and entitled to rationalise everything away.

Fuck, a _judge_ deciding crimes should be reported in a private letter to the bishop's boss rather than publically/to the police! Beggars belief, but then of course it doesn't. Cunt.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 12, 2014)

BBC Radio 4 Today: interview with Tim Yeo MP (worked in Dept of Health during the Thatcher years).

He basically rubbishes the account given by David Tombs (the ex-head of Social services in Hereford and Worcester) of the Department's response to his report into a suspected paedophile network involving Peter Righton and Rod Ryall. Tombs states that he was told that the evidence in his report wouldn't be pursued because there were 'too many of them over there'; Tombs understood the 'them' to be paedophiles and the 'over there' to mean the Houses of Parliament.

Yeo doesn't actually accuse Tombs of lying; rather he says that his account is unbelievable and questions why he hasn't come forward earlier. Interestingly he makes no reference to the original claims  made by Tombs, nor the evidence of paedofile activity presented by both the Smith and Hayman cases; prefering instead to talk only about Saville as an individual abuser.

Disappointingly the BBC interviewer makes no attempt to get Yeo to tackle the actual evidence (from Tombs' report or Smith or Hayman).

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 12, 2014)

The Dame Butler-sloss' statement regarding Phil Johnson's questioning of her impartiality:

Throughout many years of public service I have always striven to be fair and compassionate, mindful of the very real suffering of those who have been victims of crime or other injustice. I have never put the reputation of any institution, including the Church of England above the pursuit of justice for victims.

That is why I am honoured to be leading this inquiry into whether public bodies and other non-state institutions have done enough to protect children from sexual abuse. I am assembling an independent panel of experts so that we can begin this important work as soon as possible.​None of which contradicts the actual substance of what Phil Johnson said happened (i.e. the Judge said she didn't want to give the press a bishop and she would deal with it by private letter rather than public prosecution). So what we have is Butler-sloss simply restating that she knows best and we should all trust her; that she will not or cannot see that this expectation/demand is part of the problem rather than part of the solution, speaks volumes about the entrenched and entitled nature of power. None of which bodes well for the victims seeking justice or the wider interests in transparency and accountability.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## kenny g (Jul 12, 2014)

Going back to the Edwina Currie story, I have always wondered whether the rumours of John Major shagging his catering assistant which were repeated in Scallywag and resulted in a libel action, were merely a result of someone hearing her last name mentioned and getting the wrong end of the stick. Either way it does take some chitzpah to go for a libel when you are having an affair but it just happens to be with an MP rather than your cook.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-140434/Magazine-threatens-legal-action-Major.html goes into this but I don't know the follow on.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> <snip>BBC Radio 4 Today: interview with Tim Yeo MP (worked in Dept of Health during the Thatcher years).
> 
> He basically rubbishes the account given by David Tombs (the ex-head of Social services in Hereford and Worcester) of the Department's response to his report into a suspected paedophile network involving Peter Righton and Rod Ryall.


One thing that struck me about this interview, apart from Yeo's full-on protestations of incredulity, was his comment that Tombs had gone away with his tail (or tale) between his legs and sat on it for 20 years, without contacting his MP or anyone else. Is any of that true? I had a quick google and couldn't find anything, except that Today was tweeting him as Peter Tombs. Not that any of it would necessarily be online anyway.
It will be on Listen Again shortly, some time after 8 am iirc.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 12, 2014)

Apologies for the link and author. Interesting that this has made an appearance into the msm. Albeit the express

Dunblane Cover up?

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/co...airport-ethnic-screening-and-the-French-media


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 12, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> One thing that struck me about this interview, apart from Yeo's full-on protestations of incredulity, was his comment that Tombs had gone away with his tail (or tale) between his legs and sat on it for 20 years, without contacting his MP or anyone else. Is any of that true? I had a quick google and couldn't find anything, except that Today was tweeting him as Peter Tombs. Not that any of it would necessarily be online anyway.
> It will be on Listen Again shortly, some time after 8 am iirc.



There was a request for information relating to Tombs made last summer: link

The requested info wasn't forthcoming, but there was a suggestion to redirect it to Ofsted.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 12, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> One thing that struck me about this interview, apart from Yeo's full-on protestations of incredulity, was his comment that Tombs had gone away with his tail (or tale) between his legs and sat on it for 20 years, without contacting his MP or anyone else. Is any of that true? I had a quick google and couldn't find anything, except that Today was tweeting him as Peter Tombs. Not that any of it would necessarily be online anyway.
> It will be on Listen Again shortly, some time after 8 am iirc.



Doesn't he say he reported it but nothing happened?


----------



## golightly (Jul 12, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> BBC Radio 4 Today: interview with Tim Yeo MP (worked in Dept of Health during the Thatcher years).
> 
> He basically rubbishes the account given by David Tombs (the ex-head of Social services in Hereford and Worcester) of the Department's response to his report into a suspected paedophile network involving Peter Righton and Rod Ryall. Tombs states that he was told that the evidence in his report wouldn't be pursued because there were 'too many of them over there'; Tombs understood the 'them' to be paedophiles and the 'over there' to mean the Houses of Parliament.
> 
> ...


 
Yeo was completely unbelievable in that interview.  He was saying that paedophilia in high places was unthinkable so he wasn't even prepared to consider it as a possibility.  He only made mention of one investigation of allegations against a lone individual which was not proven.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

Cheers, Louis MacNeice, your google fu is better than mine! And yes, Barking, Tombs said that nothing had happened. Yeo was suggesting that if what Tombs was alleging was true, he wouldn't have left it at that. And thanks to Louis we have evidence that he didn't.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

Here you go. The Tombs/Yeo package starts at 01.10.00
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0495ds9

E2A apols for changing the time, the ticker keeps lying to me. But I think it's right now.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 12, 2014)

[Edited to delete any legally problematic links - thanks to ohmyliver for pointing this out]

I think you may need to treat the Private Eye cover linked to above Express article with caution as it's not genuine and is just a mock-up done by Max Farquar. Check the spelling of "Private Eye". Of course, Farquar may, or may not, be on to something about the female MP but it's not a conclusion you could draw by reading the Express article and then looking at what is a mock-up.

I thought there was something odd about it when I first saw it. It seemed very close to actually naming that particular MP as a abuser, the font used in the speech bubble isn't one normally used by Private Eye and it also says that the 13-year old boy reported the incident at the time. I'm not sure Ash actually said he did so. It's certainly not clear from the Express article that he did.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 12, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> The public school/boarding school background of our rulers may give a clue to the otherwise unfathomable disconnect between ordinary peoples' revulsion at child sex abuse, and the seeming unwillingness to act/inability to view it as revolting, as is displayed by the 'Establishment'.
> 
> Does this also give us a clue as to why so many have been willing to turn a blind eye/'lose' files/ignore calls for an enquiry? If they - when at public school - were either witness to, perpetrators of, or victims of sexual abuse, have they somehow internalised it as "well it wasn't that bad"? It is extraordinary, but may go some way to explain the inexplicable refusal to be a 'whistleblower' or just refuse to obey your higher-ups who wanted a report buried?



I’m sure that many of the alleged abusers and their protectors do have common backgrounds, but I think the rationale runs deeper than that. It’s more about power relationships and manipulating people to do things they otherwise wouldn’t do, or not to do things they otherwise would.

Just as the as the abuser exercises power over the abused then in turn the protector exercises power over the abuser.

One, perhaps small example, is the interview with a Government Whip mentioned elsewhere in this thread and shown on Newsnight last week. The interviewee (a Whip) says that they would be willing to help out MPs when the get into trouble - even “with little boys” as he puts it. It’s unlikely that Whips are doing it simply because they went to the same school, or are member of the same club (in this case, a political party) or even share the same sexual tastes, but primarily because it then gives the protector an incredibly strong hold over the abuser.

That then becomes an abusive relationship, albeit of a different kind.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Tomorrow's Times front page has the story about Sloss suppressing abuse allegations.
> 
> Drip drip….


Good!!
Have just seen this on Twitter so apologies if it is old news (as far as this thread is concerned)

_England's leading family judge assigned a false name to a claim for financial support launched in the English courts against King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, to stop the media linking the case with him. 
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, then president of the high court's family division, gave the case the title Maple v Maple, choosing the surname of a district judge who had been involved in an earlier stage of the case. 

The case has been brought by Janan Harb, who claims to be a wife of the 83-year-old king, one of the world's richest men. _

_The king's lawyers argued that the appeal should be heard behind closed doors, saying that article 29 of the Geneva convention obliged Britain to "prevent any attack on his person, freedom or dignity".

But the judges rejected their argument as "particularly unpersuasive" and ruled that Dame Elizabeth had "misdirected herself" in allowing the immunity issue to be heard in private in the high court.

More here...
_
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/jun/07/saudiarabia.pressandpublishing


----------



## kenny g (Jul 12, 2014)

Betsy said:


> Good!!
> Have just seen this on Twitter so apologies if it is old news (as far as this thread is concerned)
> 
> _England's leading family judge assigned a false name to a claim for financial support launched in the English courts against King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, to stop the media linking the case with him.
> ...



It does seem bizarre to put someone previously in charge of one of the most secretive areas of "justice" in control of a public inquiry where the first obvious line of investigation  will be  into cover ups.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 12, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I think you may need to treat the Private Eye cover linked to above Express article with caution as it's not genuine and is just a mock-up done by Max Farquar. Check the spelling of "Private Eye". Of course, Farquar may, or may not, be on to something about the female MP but it's not a conclusion you could draw by reading the Express article and then looking at what is a mock-up.<snip>



Hence not a very smart move for the post in question to be naming the female MP when the Express isn't doing so (presumably to avoid libel lawyers)


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 12, 2014)

golightly said:


> Yeo was completely unbelievable in that interview.  He was saying that paedophilia in high places was unthinkable so he wasn't even prepared to consider it as a possibility.  He only made mention of one investigation of allegations against a lone individual which was not proven.




Hes telling lies, when people tell lies, they overstate themselves, their damage limitation operation is in full swing.



kenny g said:


> Going back to the Edwina Currie story, I have always wondered whether the rumours of John Major shagging his catering assistant which were repeated in Scallywag and resulted in a libel action, were merely a result of someone hearing her last name mentioned and getting the wrong end of the stick. Either way it does take some chitzpah to go for a libel when you are having an affair but it just happens to be with an MP rather than your cook.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-140434/Magazine-threatens-legal-action-Major.html goes into this but I don't know the follow on.




It was a smokescreen/damage limitation, I doubt gormless Major invented the idea.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 12, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Hence not a very smart move for the post in question to be naming the female MP when the Express isn't doing so (presumably to avoid libel lawyers)



Its been edited.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 12, 2014)

Yeo - what a lying cunt! Saying he'd not heard anything about abuse networks in and around Parliament at the time Tombs came to Whitehall in 1992.  Dickens announced he was about to name names and submitted his dossier in the 80s - and there was a godalmighty flap around it with Brittan, Havers and others as chief flappers.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 12, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> I think you may need to treat the Private Eye cover linked to above Express article with caution as it's not genuine and is just a mock-up done by Max Farquar. Check the spelling of "Private Eye". Of course, Farquar may, or may not, be on to something about the female MP but it's not a conclusion you could draw by reading the Express article and then looking at what is a mock-up.
> 
> I thought there was something odd about it when I first saw it. It seemed very close to actually naming Currie as a abuser, the font used in the speech bubble isn't one normally used by Private Eye and it also says that the 13-year old boy reported the incident at the time. I'm not sure Ash actually said he did so. It's certainly not clear from the Express article that he did.




Just noticed that, so removed it, this was a big allegation in the late 80s/early 90s, I remember in the press talk of a female MP etc.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 12, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> Are you sure its a hoax, this was a big allegation in the late 80s/early 90s, I rememer in the press talk of a female MP etc.



I'm certainly not saying it's a hoax. I've got no idea of knowing

What I was pointing out that looking at an obviously forged Eye front cover and then reading the Express piece should not lead you to conclude that Currie is the MP named in the article.

Unless there is other coverage about this in the Eye circa 1985 (I can't honestly recall of there is or not) it is not correct to say that the Eye followed up this story in 1985 if the only basis for this assertion is a forged front cover.

If there isn't such coverage then your post as originally constituted could be a bit legally dubious for obvious reasons.

If there is, however, genuine Eye coverage about this in 1985 then please accept my apologies.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 12, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> It was a smokescreen/damage limitation, I doubt gormless Major invented the idea.



He used to be a whip, a job he claims to have enjoyed.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 12, 2014)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Tomorrow's Times front page has the story about Sloss suppressing abuse allegations.
> 
> Drip drip….



As Murdoch is no longer or was he ever part of the British establishment he and his media may have cause more than others to keep this story on the go.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> As Murdoch is no longer or was he ever part of the British establishment he and his media may have cause more than others to keep this story on the go.


I have heard it suggested that the reason all this is coming out now is Murdoch's revenge. It's an ill wind...


----------



## Libertad (Jul 12, 2014)

Kalfindin Please consider the ramifications of posting unsubstantiated accusations in this and other threads. Urban75 is for the greater part "self policing" in such matters but this does not preclude the very real possibility that a markedly different form of policing would have no compunction in kicking in the door of the server suite.

Take the time to read this thread:

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/

[/pompousplasticmod]


----------



## juice_terry (Jul 12, 2014)

Interesting, probably unrelated to current events 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ily-granted-new-right-of-secrecy-2179148.html


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

Libertad said:


> Kalfindin Please consider the ramifications of posting unsubstantiated accusations in this and other threads. Urban75 is for the greater part "self policing" in such matters but this does not preclude the very real possibility that a markedly different form of policing would have no compunction in kicking in the door of the server suite.
> 
> Take the time to read this thread:
> 
> ...


Yup. This place is valuable to many people - let's not trash it.


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 12, 2014)

Sorry - I erroneously stated there was little of interest in this week's Private Eye about alleged sexual misconduct apart from yet another reference to Leon Brittan and an oblique reference to William Hague.

Actually, there was quite a long letter from John Walker (former editor of the Rochdale Alternative Press) rubbishing David Steel's explanation of why he (Steel) did nothing to expose Cyril Smith even though Smith had already been exposed as an alleged abuser.

There is also a smaller item in Rotten Boroughs about the cover-up of alleged abuse in Scarborough, possibly involving Jimmy Savile.

Apologies.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> Sorry - I erroneously stated there was little of interest in this week's Private Eye about alleged sexual misconduct apart from yet another reference to Leon Brittan and an oblique reference to William Hague.
> 
> Actually, there was quite a long letter from John Walker (former editor of the Rochdale Alternative Press) rubbishing David Steel's explanation of why he (Steel) did nothing to expose Cyril Smith even though Smith had already been exposed as an alleged abuser.
> 
> ...



And a rather good cartoon regarding Scarborough, Savile, Jaconelli and plod!


----------



## treelover (Jul 12, 2014)

> Actually, there was quite a long letter from John Walker (former editor of the Rochdale Alternative Press) rubbishing David Steel's explanation of why he (Steel) did nothing to expose Cyril Smith even though Smith had already been exposed as an alleged abuser.



I imagine there is lots more to be gleaned by an interrogation of the independent/ radical journals/local left wing newsletters, etc of the 70's, early 80's.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 12, 2014)

Reposted from Needleblog...
http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/07/12/food-for-thought/

A quote from Michael Havers, brother of Baroness Butler-Sloss, in regard to the victims of Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Riper.
“Some were prostitutes, but perhaps the saddest part of the case is that some were not. The last six attacks were on totally respectable women.” - Robert Michael Oldfield Havers, Baron Havers PC, QC (10 March 1923 – 1 April 1992)


----------



## teqniq (Jul 12, 2014)

What?


----------



## Celyn (Jul 12, 2014)

Wow.  Words fail me.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

Oh, for goodness' sake. That was a long time ago. We don't know that the good Dame shares those antiquated views, do we? Do we? Do we?


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

Celyn said:


> Wow.  Words fail me.


Me too!


----------



## elbows (Jul 12, 2014)

Words don't fail me because I'm painfully aware of what attitudes were like in 1981. It did provoke a backlash from 'feminists' at the time:



> These remarks invoked a furious reaction from feminists outside the courtroom, who handed out a statement saying: 'This distinction between prostitutes and "respectable" and "innocent" victims has been made all along by the police and the media - the murder of prostitute women seems irrelevant and unimportant. This attitude towards prostitutes, much the same as the Ripper's, allowed him to carry on murdering women for five years.'



http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...cks were on totally respectable women&f=false


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

elbows said:


> Words don't fail me *because I'm painfully aware of what attitudes were like in 1981*. It did provoke a backlash from 'feminists' at the time:


So am I but to actually see it written down from such a person in such a high position at the time is still shocking to read.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 12, 2014)

It just gets worse ...how long can Cameron hold the line against a torrent of criticism or perceived lack of partiality of the good Dame ?


----------



## kenny g (Jul 12, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> It just gets worse ...how long can Cameron hold the line against a torrent of criticism or perceived lack of partiality of the good Dame ?




More a lack of competence. I would have thought building a sufficiently accurate  timeline when looking into a matter like the one reported is essential. Follow the money (probably less relevant in paedo investigations) and check the dates is investigatory A,B,C.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 12, 2014)

kenny g said:


> More a lack of competence. I would have thought building a sufficiently accurate  timeline when looking into a matter like the one reported is essential. Follow the money (probably less relevant in paedo investigations) and check the dates is investigatory A,B,C.


 Please explain for us plebs what the timeline is and what it tells us.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 12, 2014)

So, she's a member of the CofE who conducted and Independent Inquiry into.... the CofE, which didn't want to 'give the press a bishop' - and anyway got hoodwinked on the paedo priests. Now she's leading an Independent Inquiry into... her brother.  I'll have to have another look in the dictionary to see what the word 'independent' means.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

In tomorrow's Sunday Mirror...

_*"Victims of alleged child abuse 'raped by MPs in exclusive flats near House of Commons' *
_
_The pair claim they were 11 and 13 when they were first taken to “parties” at Dolphin Square, short walk from the Commons and home for up to 59 MPs at a time" _
*
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/victims-alleged-child-abuse-raped-3848589#ixzz37Hyw2JsQ *
http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=dndq0sFGyr34avadbi-bnq&u=DailyMirror


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)

Betsy said:


> In tomorrow's Sunday Mirror...
> 
> _*"Victims of alleged child abuse 'raped by MPs in exclusive flats near House of Commons' *
> _
> ...


this would be the same dolphin square where princess anne lives


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> this would be the same dolphin square where princess anne lives


I have no idea - is it?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 12, 2014)

The times had a leader saying slossb should step aside today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)

Betsy said:


> I have no idea - is it?


research indicates she may have moved.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 12, 2014)

Are these allegations about Dolphin Square the same allegations referred to by Simon Regan (Scallywag) that I'd quoted near the start of this thread?



> In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.
> 
> Two of these young men, who had been 14-years-old at the time, swore they had been not only introduced to the paedophile ring operating in the Crest Hotel in Wrexham but had later been escorted on three or four occasions to an address in Pimlico where they were further abused.
> 
> ...


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> this would be the same dolphin square where princess anne lives



This is an old story that did the rounds I seem to remember it was in the Scallywag McAlpine stuff and brings back 3 Tory names that seem to be have absent for a while from the more bucanneer , sailing close to the winds websites where truth may or maybe not hatched. Free spirit we must have had the same thought - there is a 4th key name who was very active in Tory circles at the time but now lives seemingly quietly abroad after stepping down for a non-sexual scandal.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> this would be the same dolphin square where princess anne lives



I'm pretty sure she only molests foals.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 12, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Please explain for us plebs what the timeline is and what it tells us.



A timeline can be as simple as one of those lines you used to see in history books showing events form the ancient Egyptians to the modern age. 

When unravelling past events, especially when you suspect one or more people are spinning a yarn, it can be most effective to attempt to build a time line from each persons account of the events. When someone provides dates particular events are supposed to have  happened you then go and look for evidence to support the date. If dates, (or times) don't tally it can often be an indicator that a person has something to hide. 

 In the matter the TV report was about the timeline would have included as simple as the date the paedo priest moved into a nursing home and supposedly no longer had contact with children. According to the BBC report,the date provided by the Bishop was  2001, but the priest who took over the parish stated it was  2003. Checking these dates would have been a simple matter for Butler-Sloss. If she didn't check them, or more to the point, have them checked, in such a relatively simple inquiry,  it does suggest she is hardly up to the job at hand.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

*From Twitter..*
*ExaroNews* ‏@*ExaroNews*  15m

1/4 Our site crashed at 8.45pm, soon after we published three pieces on witnesses’ story of #*childsexabuse* by MPs at Dolphin Square.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)




----------



## toggle (Jul 12, 2014)

juice_terry said:


> Interesting, probably unrelated to current events
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ily-granted-new-right-of-secrecy-2179148.html



It is.

John Kirkhope did a phd on the legal status of the duchy of cornwall, and sent out a lot of FOI requests that the crown fought against in court. they lost, the royal veto was revealed and this is the result - so they don't have to release any more documents under FOI


----------



## MrSki (Jul 12, 2014)




----------



## treelover (Jul 12, 2014)

Just saw that on Sky paper review, wow, just wow..


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 12, 2014)

Fucking hell if that's true that's 

Just as well Thatcher's dead...


----------



## Dan U (Jul 12, 2014)

Given her relationship with Saville it's not a huge surprise these dots are being joined.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> Fucking hell if that's true that's
> 
> Just as well Thatcher's dead...


whatever happened to 'a crime is a crime is a crime'? unless it's done by one of her mates, it seems.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)

Dan U said:


> Given her relationship with Saville it's not a huge surprise these dots are being joined.


'can you see what it is yet?'


----------



## Dan U (Jul 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> 'can you see what it is yet?'



Can you look to the right a bit, your majesty


----------



## Favelado (Jul 12, 2014)

The Mirror look like they're going with it too judging by the website.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 12, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> Fucking hell if that's true that's
> 
> Just as well Thatcher's dead...



Not really. I'd like her to be alive and fully compus mentus all of a sudden.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Not really. I'd like her to be alive and fully compus mentus all of a sudden.


so would i. and to find herself trapped in a coffin.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 12, 2014)

Is it really any surprise that most of Thatcher's cabinet deserved long sentences in the 'beast' wing at Belmarsh and that she actively facilitated child rape among her cronies?

After all the victims were merely care home oiks and the abusers were the 'right sort of people' by her standards.

Letting them rape little kids (as long as they were oiks) is a natural expression of everything that she stood for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Is it really any surprise that most of Thatcher's cabinet deserved long sentences in the 'beast' wing at Belmarsh and that she actively facilitated child rape among her cronies?
> 
> After all the victims were merely care home oiks and the abusers were the 'right sort of people' by her standards. That sort of thing is a natural expression of everything that she stood for.







i wonder who 'us' were


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i wonder who 'us' were



Bunch of 'untouchable' child-raping nonces apparently. Hurrah for capitalism


----------



## Betsy (Jul 12, 2014)

Letter to the P.M. from Mark Reckless about whips and child abuse.

_"How can we hope to get to the bottom of what was known within 'the establishment' about historic child abuse,if you purport to be unaware of how whips keep and use information to help secure government business?"_
Full letter...

markreckless.com/2014/07/12/my-letter-to-pm-on-whips-and-child-abuse-inquiry/


----------



## Belushi (Jul 12, 2014)

Given her dads proclivities I'm not surprised she was used to ignoring things she didn't want to hear.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 12, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Given her dads proclivities I'm not surprised she was used to ignoring things she didn't want to hear.



Oh jeez I'd forgotten her dad was a molester, but he was wasn't he?


----------



## CRI (Jul 12, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> Fucking hell if that's true that's
> 
> Just as well Thatcher's dead...


But, why does stuff like this only "come to light" after the shitweasels have pegged it?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 12, 2014)

My How-Many-Of-Them-Will-Actually-Do-Time-O'Meter is flickering, but is still pointing at zero.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 12, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Oh jeez I'd forgotten her dad was a molester, but he was wasn't he?



There was a biography back in the 90's that alleged it, but I was also told by a friends dad in Grantham back in the 80's that he was notorious for groping and taking advantage of his shop girls.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 12, 2014)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/thatchers-dad-mayor-preacher-groper-1257249.html


----------



## treelover (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Bunch of 'untouchable' child-raping nonces apparently. Hurrah for capitalism



I wonder if the same thing went on in the Soviet Union, very likely


----------



## Quartz (Jul 13, 2014)

Fucking hell.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 13, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> Fucking hell if that's true that's
> 
> Just as well Thatcher's dead...


she's lucky she died after savile or he'd have had his way with her in the mortuary


----------



## Favelado (Jul 13, 2014)

treelover said:


> I wonder if the same thing went on in the Soviet Union, very likely



Yeah, it's concentration of power that does it isn't it? Common to 80s Britain and 80s Soviet Union under different systems.


----------



## treelover (Jul 13, 2014)

> He added: “We were asked if we wanted a drink – but it was always whisky.
> “Both MPs were brutal. I was raped over a bath-tub while my head was beneath the water."
> 
> 
> ...



How could they do this, who were they? bastards


----------



## Favelado (Jul 13, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> she's lucky she died after savile or he'd have had his way with her in the mortuary



I was thinking that. That would have been his ultimate conquest wouldn't it the dirty bastard. He might have done his dead mum. We'll never know for sure but it seems possible seeing as he had access and an Oedipus problem.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 13, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Yeah, it's concentration of power that does it isn't it? Common to 80s Britain and 80s Soviet Union under different systems.



I rather suspect it's been going on since the dawn of time. Of course, until recently, we proles were of no consequence.


----------



## treelover (Jul 13, 2014)

> The second man said he was about 13 when an MP took him to a “dinner party” for 12 people in the early 80s in a flat with “lots of artwork”.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/victims-alleged-child-abuse-raped-3848589#ixzz37IZQa8Rr
> Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook



Cultured barbarians, closer to the Nazis...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

I'm just musing on the pathway to any kind of prosecution (ignoring these pointless inquiries).  Within the '20 names', of those still living, there must be a handful of well corroborated, robust potential cases, some of which will have already been reported to police 20 years ago.  Has anything been re-presented to the police?  By solicitors acting for survivors?  Will Danczuk or Watson actually name anyone, again, they will have the same info and are being fed/are feeding journos?  Even after the McAlpine fiasco, there must also be legally less risky ways for the papers to name someone, perhaps simply mentioning that they were previously interviewed or cautioned by police.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

I've just realised I've hung the chances of a prosecution on the following: lawyers, politicians, newspaper editors, judges.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 13, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I've just realised I've hung the chances of a prosecution on the following: lawyers, politicians, newspaper editors, judges.


you're just hoping someone will take your bait and say you're well hung

well, i won't


----------



## free spirit (Jul 13, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I'm just musing on the pathway to any kind of prosecution (ignoring these pointless inquiries).  Within the '20 names', of those still living, there must be a handful of well corroborated, robust potential cases, some of which will have already been reported to police 20 years ago.  Has anything been re-presented to the police?  By solicitors acting for survivors?  Will Danczuk or Watson actually name anyone, again, they will have the same info and are being fed/are feeding journos?  Even after the McAlpine fiasco, there must also be legally less risky ways for the papers to name someone, perhaps simply mentioning that they were previously interviewed or cautioned by police.


there will almost certainly be a couple of scapegoats thrown to the wolves.

What I doubt will ever happen, at least not with the current approach, is any sort of serious investigation into how and who enabled these long term coverups to happen across multiple geographic regions over several decades, or arrest and prosecution of those involved. To me, that's the real crux of the matter


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

free spirit said:


> there will almost certainly be a couple of scapegoats thrown to the wolves.
> 
> What I doubt will ever happen, at least not with the current approach, is any sort of serious investigation into how and who enabled these long term coverups to happen across multiple geographic regions over several decades, or arrest and prosecution of those involved. To me, that's the real crux of the matter


It's the almost _lack of a cover up_ in some cases. They don't do some trawl through police documents, removing names, bribing witnesses or whatever, just give the rapist MP a caution. The victims don't exist - either as a future threat or even as a human being.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 13, 2014)

Wilf said:


> It's the almost _lack of a cover up_ in some cases. They don't do some trawl through police documents, removing names, bribing witnesses or whatever, just give the rapist MP a caution. The victims don't exist - either as a future threat or even as a human being.



I want perpetrators convicted, rather than focussing on cover ups. I wonder what is different now to when the offences took place? It may have been possible to get evidence, charge and try the perpetrators a number of times since then, but for various reasons it was not done. So, has anything changed now or are efforts still doomed to be fruitless?


----------



## little_legs (Jul 13, 2014)

treelover said:


> I wonder if the same thing went on in the Soviet Union, very likely





Favelado said:


> Yeah, it's concentration of power that does it isn't it? Common to 80s Britain and 80s Soviet Union under different systems.



Do you guys have links to this? Genuine question.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 13, 2014)

One thing that has changed massively since some of these crimes were first reported is how we deal with child witnesses. Many cases never got there, not because of conspiracy or anything like that, but simply because there was no corroborative evidence. How convenient. 

These days, we listen to children more. In theory, anyway. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/v_to_z/safeguarding_children_as_victims_and_witnesses/


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 13, 2014)

The Sunday Fail bravely posts an article about dead people (possibly forgetting that Jeremy Thorpe is still alive).


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Jul 13, 2014)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-margaret-3849172

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987

Fucking hell. “It was held on the night before the [Brighton] bomb went off and afterwards one MP crudely joked that it was a good job it was, or there would have been [under age] rent boys falling through the floor.”  Nye Bevan had them bang to rights, these people are lower than vermin.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

In the 80s there used to be a Christian booklet you could send off for by ads in the papers and magazines and had a Freepost address and cut out coupon - my brother and me thought it amusing to send off for copies in fictitious names and get them back addressed to P.ennis , Richard Head , S. Atan and the rest - as part of the introduction they had a full page photo of a celebrity and then an accompanying page of text of what it meant to them to be a Christian. Two of the celebrities I remember were George Thomas and Britain's favourite bachelor boy singer.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

bolshiebhoy said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-margaret-3849172
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987
> 
> Fucking hell. “It was held on the night before the [Brighton] bomb went off and afterwards one MP crudely joked that it was a good job it was, or there would have been [under age] rent boys falling through the floor.”  Nye Bevan had them bang to rights, these people are lower than vermin.



The whistleblower mentions Michael Havers - always though Rhoydes Boyson looked dodgy - maybe the dam is at starting to break. 

and yes *FUCKING HELL !*


----------



## MrSki (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> In the 80s there used to be a Christian booklet you could send off for by ads in the papers and magazines and had a Freepost address and cut out coupon - my brother and me thought it amusing to send off for copies in fictitious names and get them back addressed to P.ennis , Richard Head , S. Atan and the rest - as part of the introduction they had a full page photo of a celebrity and then an accompanying page of text of what it meant to them to be a Christian. Two of the celebrities I remember were George Thomas and Britain's favourite bachelor boy singer.


Interesting YouTube clips are available.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Jul 13, 2014)

Re the Mirror story and the Oscar Wilde reference, how beyond disgusting is that given these Clause 28 fanatics were such virulent homophobes. Homophobes who it's now claimed were abusing children.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Dicken's Dossier may still exist.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ossier-Westminster-paedophile-ring-found.html

and more Fail - Brittan may have been smeared by MI5 SHOCK.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-lurid-sex-scandal-rumours-Leon-Brittan.html

Smearing, loss of memory - it's all coming along very nicely - just another case of the Establishment's entrenched anti-semetism.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 13, 2014)

Wasn't Rhodes Boyson a Headmaster before becoming an MP?


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Wasn't Rhodes Boyson a Headmaster before becoming an MP?



He was indeed...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 13, 2014)

free spirit said:


> Are these allegations about Dolphin Square the same allegations referred to by Simon Regan (Scallywag) that I'd quoted near the start of this thread?



Oh.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/greer-says-mps-conceal-gay-secret-1272064.html


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Jul 13, 2014)

Mellor on the Andrew Marr show brazening it out. Tittle tattle it's all tittle tattle. How could such an eminent man as Rhodes Boyson be guilty of anything so low. "I don't know if there was a cover up or not." And Christ you so sound like you don't give a fuck either you slug.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 13, 2014)

good work by the mirror. The gruan doesn't seem to be touching this at all - indeed it has run several opinion pieces pouring cold water on the enquiry, warning against witch hunts etc

this smug, mealy mouthed tosh from andrew rawnsley is pretty typical - essentially warning against the dangers of completely losing trust in the establishment

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ent-lack-of-trust-paedophile-ring-westminster

But the media must have known about a lot of this stuff for years. Rawnsley  - as a leading lobby journalist - certainly would.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Jul 13, 2014)

How long before there's a wall in Belfast that says: "Pat Magee, Child Protection Officer"


----------



## Favelado (Jul 13, 2014)

little_legs said:


> Do you guys have links to this? Genuine question.



No. Nothing at all.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 13, 2014)

> “So myself and another Tory candidate walked down there and sat on some benches underneath an archway in the Pavilion area of Blackpool and waited.”



What the fuck does that mean?  There's no pavilion in Blackpool. Or archways. Has he got his towns mixed up for that bit? That's Brighton isn't it? There's a Winter Gardens in Blackpool.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

bolshiebhoy said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-margaret-3849172
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987
> 
> Fucking hell. “It was held on the night before the [Brighton] bomb went off and afterwards one MP crudely joked that it was a good job it was, or there would have been [under age] rent boys falling through the floor.”  Nye Bevan had them bang to rights, these people are lower than vermin.


Slightly odd that Gilberthorpe would publicly admit to doing this i.e. supplying under age boys for sex.  Suppose his desire for fame/revenge overcomes any fear of prosecution.  There's no way he would be prosecuted without any still living politicians also getting it, so he's safe (never mind the impossibility of finding the lads to testify). Still, if what he says is true, he's just as guilty of abuse as the politicians. Cunt.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

Link to a thread on another forum. The only other place I have seen that is similar to this thread. Very useful.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 13, 2014)

Another one worth a read. 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488481/EXCLUSIVE-MP-daughter-sexually-abused


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

Is exaronews now unavailable? http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5322/dolphin-square-mps-threw-parties-for-sexual-abuse-of-children


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Is exaronews now unavailable? http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5322/dolphin-square-mps-threw-parties-for-sexual-abuse-of-children



I was about to ask the same. It is unavailable for me as well. If it has gone down, it is the second site (after the IGSP archive) related to this story that has become unavailable. The timing of the IGSP archive disappearing makes me very very suspicious. If exaronews starts having problems as well...


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> I was about to ask the same. It is unavailable for me as well. If it has gone down, it is the second site (after the IGSP archive) related to this story that has become unavailable. The timing of the IGSP archive disappearing makes me very very suspicious. If exaronews starts having problems as well...



Very strange as is the new legislation granting total secrecy to the Royal Family: _http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ily-granted-new-right-of-secrecy-2179148.html_

Just a coincidence almost certainly.


----------



## andrewc (Jul 13, 2014)

They are tweeting this:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Attempts to hack our phones, brazen surveillance of one of our reporters, site mostly down since publishing Dolphin Square. Quite a week.</p>&mdash; ExaroNews (@ExaroNews) <a href="">July 13, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

Do you happen to know the URL for the IGSP archive?


----------



## Favelado (Jul 13, 2014)

Nowt at all in today's Telegraph.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

isgp archive


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

andrewc said:


> They are tweeting this:
> 
> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Attempts to hack our phones, brazen surveillance of one of our reporters, site mostly down since publishing Dolphin Square. Quite a week.</p>&mdash; ExaroNews (@ExaroNews) <a href="">July 13, 2014</a></blockquote>
> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>




They're brave, someone could easily end up dead over this.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

Exaro appear to be hosted by amazon aws (ie a cloud service with masses of spare capacity) so rather unlikely that they could be flattened by genuine demand without amazon asking if they want to be scaled up to meet it.

http://whatmyip.co/info/whois/54.229.226.155/k/2886291465/website/exaronews.com


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Exaro appear to be hosted by amazon aws (ie a cloud service with masses of spare capacity) so rather unlikely that they could be flattened by genuine demand without amazon asking if they want to be scaled up to meet it.
> 
> http://whatmyip.co/info/whois/54.229.226.155/k/2886291465/website/exaronews.com



Is this the article? http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...ps-threw-parties-for-sexual-abuse-of-children

From: https://twitter.com/search?q=exaronews&src=typd


----------



## teqniq (Jul 13, 2014)

Dos attack or something more sophisticated?


----------



## brogdale (Jul 13, 2014)

Must be "getting warmer" for the spooks to take so much interest in them. Well done Exaro.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

Or less sophisticated "Hi, this is MI5, please take Exaronews down right now for reasons of state. "


----------



## teqniq (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Or less sophisticated "Hi, this is MI5, please take Exaronews down right now for reasons of state. "


haha yes But by sophisticated I mean something beyond the means of us mere proles, even if it is the IT equivalent of a Big Switch.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

There is nothing sophisticated about the result.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

Does this go higher than mere politicians?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Does this go higher than mere politicians?



Yes.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 13, 2014)

Just in case the Google webcache gets removed, here is the Exaro article on freezepage

http://www.freezepage.com/1405248690SHZKYBWTDA


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> Yes.



Thanks, thought I was being paranoid. The new legislation being proposed today made me think along those lines.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

From many years ago:

_A fortnight ago, an assistant chief constable of Hampshire Police stopped the prosecution of *Lady Justice Elizabeth Butler-Sloss*, after she blinded her son’s nanny in a car accident. In what was doubtless an effort to assure us of their impartiality, the police explained that cases which involved ‘anyone high profile’ were routinely handled by senior, rather than junior officers, thus neatly confirming that there is one law for the powerful and another for the powerless. _

http://www.monbiot.com/1998/11/19/inequality-before-the-law/


----------



## laptop (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Exaro appear to be hosted by amazon aws (ie a cloud service with masses of spare capacity) so rather unlikely that they could be flattened by genuine demand without amazon asking if they want to be scaled up to meet it.
> 
> http://whatmyip.co/info/whois/54.229.226.155/k/2886291465/website/exaronews.com



So some kind of DNS poisoning so requests never get to the server is a possibility.

Name registration is at webfusion.com


----------



## brogdale (Jul 13, 2014)

Favelado said:


> Nowt at all in today's Telegraph.


So, aside from Trinity Mirror taking on the Exaro stuff, is it reasonable to see some of this as Murdoch enjoying the dish cold? 
(Apologies if already covered, but I'm out of UK atm)


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 13, 2014)

Now I get an answer to my question of why Boris ordered water cannons.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 13, 2014)

there's definitely more than a hint of the Revenge of the Dirty Digger


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

brogdale said:


> So, aside from Trinity Mirror taking on the Exaro stuff, is it reasonable to see some of this as Murdoch enjoying the dish cold?
> (Apologies if already covered, but I'm out of UK atm)



That is something I have been wondering as well. It is complete speculation, but I have a suspicion that these revelations, their timing, having _something_ to do with phone hacking and the subsequent trial.

Again that is pure speculation.


----------



## Favelado (Jul 13, 2014)

There is this actually but a long way down the headlines and I couldn't see it a few hours ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...work-ignored-because-there-were-too-many.html


----------



## brogdale (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> That is something I have been wondering as well. It is complete speculation, but I have a suspicion that these revelations, their timing, having _something_ to do with phone hacking and the subsequent trial.
> 
> Again that is pure speculation.


Gotta wonder what the old fucker would have done if they hadn't let Becks off?


----------



## laptop (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> http://whatmyip.co/info/whois/54.229.226.155/k/2886291465/website/exaronews.com



Blimey. One of my sites gets 50% more visits than Exaro, according to that.

E2A: and urban75.net (mostly the boards, I think) four times as many.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 13, 2014)

The direct IP for exaro is still working

http://54.229.226.155/

So this is not a DDOS attack, or overload, someone is blocking the redirect from the URL to the IP address.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)




----------



## Betsy (Jul 13, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> From many years ago:
> 
> _A fortnight ago, an assistant chief constable of Hampshire Police stopped the prosecution of *Lady Justice Elizabeth Butler-Sloss*, after she blinded her son’s nanny in a car accident. In what was doubtless an effort to assure us of their impartiality, the police explained that cases which involved ‘anyone high profile’ were routinely handled by senior, rather than junior officers, thus neatly confirming that there is one law for the powerful and another for the powerless. _
> 
> http://www.monbiot.com/1998/11/19/inequality-before-the-law/


That article is from 1998 so I'm a little confused about the "her son's nanny" bit.

Elizabeth Butler -Schloss is 80 which would have made her around 64 when that article was written and her youngest son born in 1967 would have been around 31!

Even if she and the nanny remained friends it still seems rather an odd thing to say.

Perhaps I'm missing something.

I am fuming about this part of the article ...

_"In what was doubtless an effort to assure us of their impartiality, the police explained that cases which involved ‘anyone high profile’ were routinely handled by senior, rather than junior officers, thus neatly confirming that there is one law for the powerful and another for the powerless." _


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 13, 2014)

The nanny was employed _by _her son, not as a nanny _for _him.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 13, 2014)

Betsy said:


> That article is from 1998 so I'm a little confused about the "her son's nanny" bit.
> 
> Elizabeth Butler -Schloss is 80 which would have made her around 64 when that article was written and her youngest son born in 1967 would have been around 31!
> 
> ...



Presumed by her son's nanny it meant the nanny of her son's children? Same words but different meaning


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

Having a nanny as an adult is not unusual for some. Especially if she is very strict.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 13, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> The nanny was employed _by _her son, not as a nanny _for _him.





quiquaquo said:


> Presumed by her son's nanny it meant the nanny of her son's children? Same words but different meaning


Thanks to you both - could have been put better.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> Having a nanny as an adult is not unusual for some. Especially if she is very strict.


True  - Jacob Rees Mogg took his nanny canvassing in a working class area of Scotland,I believe.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 13, 2014)

> 54.229.226.155 is from United States(US) in region North America
> 
> *TraceRoute from Network-Tools.com to 54.229.226.155 [exaronews.com]*
> *Hop(ms)(ms)(ms)  IP AddressHost name*
> ...




That's the traceRoute details for exaronews.com

I've done it several times and got the same results.

The last IP addresses on the list resolve to Amazon Ireland.

The site is hosted by Amazon in the USA.

To me it looks as if the URL redirect is being blocked from crossing the atlantic, not matter which route it takes it can't get to the amazon USA servers, which to me can only mean that either all owners of the undersea cables are conspiring to block it, or that the gatekeepers at GCHQ have blocked the URL from exiting the UK via the sub sea cables, or that Amazon themselves are blocking it via their Irish servers.

But someone more expert than me could do with having a look at this.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

free spirit said:


> The direct IP for exaro is still working
> 
> http://54.229.226.155/
> 
> So this is not a DDOS attack, or overload, someone is blocking the redirect from the URL to the IP address.



I've been trying a few alternative DNS servers, still blocked. Anyone found a DNS that resolves exaro.com correctly? 

If all of them fail to resolve, that tells us something about the attack if you get me?


----------



## free spirit (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I've been trying a few alternative DNS servers, still blocked. Anyone found a DNS that resolves exaro.com correctly?
> 
> If all of them fail to resolve, that tells us something about the attack if you get me?


I think they all fail, the traceroute shows it trying multiple ways of getting to the US servers, but none of them are outside UK and Ireland that I've tried, it can't get into the USA.


----------



## laptop (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Anyone found a DNS that resolves exaro.com correctly?



www.exaronews.com works for me at present. Note extra 3 letters.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

laptop said:


> www.exaronews.com works for me at present. Note extra 3 letters.



Yep, me too. But some of their other servers still giving 503 errors as of 5 mins ago.

edited to add: just retried and it looks like they're all back up now.


----------



## laptop (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Yep, me too. But some of their other servers still giving 503 errors as of 5 mins ago.
> 
> edited to add: just retried and it looks like they're all back up now.



I'm getting "Bad hostname" for exaro.com - but it's been giving that to archive.org since 2007.

From a random earlier crawl:



> Exaro Systems AB is a private company and was founded in Stockholm 1998. The current business with focus on information technology and security has been active since July 2002.
> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/20030501202807/http://www.exaro.com/ = May 2003


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

Yeah, exaro.com was a typo, it was exaronews.com I was checking e.g. in that whois earlier.

Some of the individual addresses within the page on the ip that FreeSpirt quoted were also giving 503's


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2014)

Apologies if I'm wrong but I haven't seen this linked to :

Questions over Labour peer's letters to care home boy
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/13/labour-peer-letters-boy-questions



> Copies of old letters sent to a young boy in a care home by a Labour peer now at the centre of paedophile allegations reveal how the politician cultivated an extremely close relationship with the teenager over a two-year period.
> 
> The letters, which have been seen by the _Observer_, raise serious questions about the peer's motives. Several are signed with "love from" and show how the peer was assiduous in writing to the boy and arranging for them to meet, sometimes in a hotel. The boy, now a married man with children, has alleged that he was sexually abused by the peer.
> 
> The existence of the letters – if not their content – has been known about in many quarters for many years. Despite allegations about the peer, no action was taken and he was robustly defended by a number of politicians, including at least one prominent MP who has been openly critical of the government's response to allegations of historical child abuse by MPs and peers.



One of the co-authors of that also wrote a piece yesterday casting doubt on the idea that whips would supply any useful information
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ck-books-threats-child-abuse-inquiry-politics


> Now further investigations by MPs have revealed that the Conservative whips' office began a systematic policy of shredding all written information it held from late 1996 onwards.
> The shredding policy, introduced after a memo to the whips was made public on a judge's orders during Neil Hamilton's unsuccessful libel case against the _Guardian_ over "cash for questions", is revealed in the diaries of former Tory MP Gyles Brandreth.
> 
> On 11 December 1996, Brandreth wrote: "The question is what to do in future? The chief's [chief whip's] conclusion is: keep writing notes – he needs the information, so does the PM. But sleep easy, boys: from now on the notes will be shredded on a regular basis."


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> isgp archive



Wikispooks is still there and so is the archive page, but the sub-site the index page presumably pointed to and the downloadable archive are gone.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

Whole thing seems weirdly poised at the moment. Pretty much open season on dead MPs, but no signs of an imminent outing of those still alive. Presume Danczuk/Watson are in contact with a few journos and the stories are all ready to go.  Think it was Kenny mentioned timelines a few pages back.  These will all be in place, with new bits added each day. Same time, I'm still holding with the prediction of  zero prison sentences.  If anyone does, it will be ex-mps, no longer in the party who have already had the odd scandal (couple of names come to mind).


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 13, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Apologies if I'm wrong but I haven't seen this linked to :
> 
> Questions over Labour peer's letters to care home boy
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/13/labour-peer-letters-boy-questions
> ...


There appears to be an implication in that first piece that Watson has defended Janner on a political loyalty basis:



> The existence of the letters – if not their content – has been known about in many quarters for many years. Despite allegations about the peer, no action was taken and he was robustly defended by a number of politicians, including at least one prominent MP who has been openly critical of the government's response to allegations of historical child abuse by MPs and peers.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> There appears to be an implication in that first piece that Watson has defended Janner on a political loyalty basis:


It's a tenuous link, but they are/were also both midlands MPs.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2014)

Depends how you read 'critical of the government's response' I guess ? Does it mean critical of them not doing enough or critical of them pandering to 'tittle tattle' ?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 13, 2014)

Has there been any of them publicly taking that latter line though? Surely anyone with those views would be keeping them very quiet right now.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 13, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Please explain for us plebs what the timeline is and what it tells us.



In case no-one has answered this, an investigative timeline is the plotting of who is accused of what, and when and where the offence is alleged to have taken place.  You can then use this timeline to map where the alleged offender was when the alleged offence took place, as well as using it to establish if the alleged offender was in contact with other alleged offenders, etc.  This is why evidence such as that amassed with regard to Elm House(?) is so important: It ties alleged individual offenders to a certain place at a certain time, where that certain place functioned as a nexus for other offenders.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Has there been any of them publicly taking that latter line though? Surely anyone with those views would be keeping them very quiet right now.


Not much publically I admit although I'd be astonished if there weren't a lot who held that view. I seem to recall Tim Yeo being a bit disparaging over the last week but obviously having been de-selected he has less need to be careful what he says. Mellor is undoubtedly saying the kind of thing a lot of M.P.'s think - probably why he is saying it.


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> There appears to be an implication in that first piece that Watson has defended Janner on a political loyalty basis:



I strongly suspect they aren't talking about Watson. Vaz.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

elbows said:


> I strongly suspect they aren't talking about Watson. Vaz.


Good call.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 13, 2014)

elbows said:


> I strongly suspect they aren't talking about Watson. Vaz.


Ah yes, that would make more sense on a number of levels - both Leicester Mps, crossover in parliamentary careers, and actual past interventions on Janner's behalf by Vaz being on record.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2014)

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/...ew-law-to-protect-his-friend-greville-janner/

E2A:


> what has happened to my hon. and learned Friend could happen to any one of us, so we should all be aware of it.


----------



## Dandred (Jul 13, 2014)

free spirit said:


> That's the traceRoute details for exaronews.com
> 
> I've done it several times and got the same results.
> 
> ...



Working fine here in South Korea, have you tried using TOR? 
https://www.torproject.org/download/download


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

When Vaz does his angry chairman thing, about civil servants and others not having all the details, I've always suspected it was purely about defying his authority - not a desire to get at the abusers. Ditto on the News International stuff. There's so many ways in which he is a cunt.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 13, 2014)




----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

If I wanted to be extremely charitable towards him I'd say historically he was displaying the rather common phenomenon of defending your friends and assuming they are innocent. I'm not sure that option will be wide open to MPs this time, and they will think a bit more carefully before presuming innocence. We shall see.


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

It's good to see the Dolphin Square stuff getting attention this time around. Entirely missing, as best I can tell, from the stories this time is any detail of how the victims who spoke to Exaro were introduced to the parties and that circle of people. Much older versions of Dolphin Square stories tended to involve the kids being brought to the parties from children homes far outside London, but I cannot say whether thats the case with the victims that have come forwards and given their stories to Exaro this time, simply not enough detail in the present stories for that.


----------



## snadge (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> Link to a thread on another forum. The only other place I have seen that is similar to this thread. Very useful.



Seems quite conspiraloon that site, saying that, there is a lot of good research on the thread you have linked.

This subject is quite close to me, I know people that were abused in care and have some horror stories about it, trouble is, they are defamatory also.

Or should I say libellous, this rabbit hole is never ending, there are loads more establishment names that should be exposed but I fear they won't.


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

Since the Dolphin Square stuff came up, I'll post to this video interview Sky did ages ago, that was originally linked to way back in this thread.

It's far from clear that he was talking about a flat in Dolphin Square, but in other ways it seems relevant.

Care Home Abuse Victim Tells Of Sex Parties


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> and more Fail - Brittan may have been smeared by MI5 SHOCK.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-lurid-sex-scandal-rumours-Leon-Brittan.html
> 
> Smearing, loss of memory - it's all coming along very nicely - just another case of the Establishment's entrenched anti-semetism.



Such angles should not be dismissed so lightly, especially when the motives for media revisiting this history can vary quite widely right now and may be more to do with the silly games they play while feeling unable to tell the whole story at the moment.

Anyway as I've said before, there are also lots of possibilities regarding the rumours at the time, and the likes of the Private Eye response to them.

For example as far as I'm aware, we don't know for sure which rumours were being rebuffed at the time, only the theme of them. One possibility is that the rumours were actually not exactly the same ones as we know about, and might have been untrue even if other ones are true. Following on from that, I don't know if spooks etc would ever put out a rumour that was deliberately untrue, but was strongly related to something else they weren't putting about that was true. If they did, it would be rather an effective threat of what may come if they didn't get their way, and easier to kill off when its work is done, ie people can deny it without lying.

Of course this is only one possibility.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 13, 2014)

Where does this leave Chris Fay's stuff about the video tape confiscated at customs, that was viewed by the customs official at that time & who named LB in the video?


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

The Mail has followed its usual policy of creating stories from other newspapers stories, and has covered the Gilbertthorpe stuff.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...party-conferences-claims-former-activist.html

They include the response that David Mellor gave to this story on The One Show. It's what we are used to from Mellor, and I note that long before people were moaning about Mellors words recently, he received a backlash for calling Steve Messham a weirdo on the Sunday Politics show in November 2012.


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Where does this leave Chris Fay's stuff about the video tape confiscated at customs



There have been two different customs-related stories in the press, both covered on this thread at some point. If memory serves me correctly at least one of them is intertwined with the angle of 'former state workers wondering whether they can speak to police or inquiries openly without breaking confidentiality/official-secrets terms of their prior employment'. 

I don't think any of the other stuff that the press are digging up at the moment, including whether old rumours were identified as false and dismissed at the time, affects this stuff really. There are umpteen inquiries and investigations which may uncover stuff relating to customs, videos and photos, and it's much too early for me to make any assumptions, other than there being quite a likelihood that primary evidence has long since been destroyed. Mind you, some Exaro stories mentioned police having a video tape of one of the sex parties with the ex-minister in attendance, so maybe more stuff remains intact than we might assume.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

As an aside, it would be interesting to know if the Mirror paid Gilberthorpe, particularly as he was seemingly admitting to the supply of underage boys for sex.


----------



## laptop (Jul 13, 2014)

elbows said:


> The Mail has followed its usual policy...



A policy which has varied over time. The _Mail_ might/could/should now be embarrassed by this interview with a prolific expert witness in defence of alleged abusers (hosted on spotlightonabuse - is that an issue?)


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 13, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Wasn't Rhodes Boyson a Headmaster before becoming an MP?


Yes, he was and he had a predilection for _corporal punishment_ iirc.

He was also a member of the Monday Club


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2014)

Gilberthorpe himself is a very interesting figure who has previously worked with the Mirror on a Max Clifford organised expose of Tory MP Piers Merchant.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/anatomy-of-a-sting-how-an-mp-was-trapped-1236130.html

Rather explains why the first Mirror story about his 'revelations' includes some caveats about him.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Oh.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/greer-says-mps-conceal-gay-secret-1272064.html



wondering when he would turn up ...


----------



## Belushi (Jul 13, 2014)

I bet Max knows a few things


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 13, 2014)

Belushi said:


> I bet Max knows a few things




I said to ma that he's likely been given carrot and stick. Carrot is short spell, nice wedge on exit. Stick is open your gob and become another D Kelly.

I was wearing my tinfoil hat at the time though.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Cripes the Pope chips in that 2% of priests could be paedophiles - speculating wildly if applied to the HOC that would make 10 -15 paedophile MPs - with probably a higher proportion if gone to single sex public schools. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-paedophiles-interview-Italian-newspaper.html


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 13, 2014)

snadge said:


> Seems quite conspiraloon that site, saying that, there is a lot of good research on the thread you have linked.
> 
> This subject is quite close to me, I know people that were abused in care and have some horror stories about it, trouble is, they are defamatory also.
> 
> Or should I say libellous, this rabbit hole is never ending, there are loads more establishment names that should be exposed but I fear they won't.



To be fair even the David Icke forum has a very good timeline on it, even accounting for some of the more unproven rumours.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 13, 2014)

This thread is disturbing and depressing, but the truth does need to come out.  That said, I fear for the presumption of innocence.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 13, 2014)

Quartz said:


> This thread is disturbing and depressing, but the truth does need to come out.  That said, I fear for the presumption of innocence.



Why the fear?
In the conspicuous absence of any actual proceedings against the pederasts amongst those that presume to govern us, most serious posters on this thread appear to be making sterling efforts to present evidence and address the burden of proof...despite the state doing its utmost to prevent that.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 13, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Why the fear?



Because it's happened before.



> In the conspicuous absence of any actual proceedings against the pederasts amongst those that presume to govern us, most serious posters on this thread appear to be making sterling efforts to present evidence and address the burden of proof...despite the state doing its utmost to prevent that.



I agree, but I'm not talking about here but about in general.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Thatcher's father was a nonce. He'd be on a good 5 year stretch if Rolf Harris is a good current benchmark or 7 if a Clifford. 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/thatchers-dad-mayor-preacher-groper-1257249.html


----------



## brogdale (Jul 13, 2014)

Quartz said:


> I agree, but I'm not talking about here but about in general.


That wasn't how your post came across.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Thatcher's father was a nonce. He'd be on a good 5 year stretch if Rolf Harris is a good current benchmark or 7 if a Clifford.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/thatchers-dad-mayor-preacher-groper-1257249.html


Bad genes.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 13, 2014)

laptop said:


> A policy which has varied over time. The _Mail_ might/could/should now be embarrassed by this interview with a prolific expert witness in defence of alleged abusers (hosted on spotlightonabuse - is that an issue?)
> 
> <image snipped>



I'm not sure that the Butler-Sloss inquiry into the Cleveland abuse cases was necessarily that dodgy though and in the wider context of the satanic panics the bloke in that article had a point IMO.

The Cleveland cases weren't, as far as I can recall, kids from care homes being abused by: celebs, tories, bishops or other toffs that 'Aunt Lizzy' might have felt compelled to bend the law for.

They were kids being taken away from their fairly ordinary families in traumatic midnight raids on the word of a particular paediatrician using a controversial methodology.

Of course once they _were_ in care, they presumably were at increased risk from the likes of Saville, Smith and the rest of the privileged child rapist clique.

Satanic ritual abuse claims were made around the fringes of Cleveland, but weren't at the core of this cluster the way that they were say in Rochdale.

At Rochdale and a few other places, if I recall right, the cases consisted largely of the Ozzy Osbourne imaginings of fundie social workers, evidenced by badgering little kids who'd been dragged away from their families in traumatic circumstances with leading questions based on a prior assumption of satanic ritual abuse. I tend to agree with the bloke in the article about that not being good practice.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)




----------



## tbtommyb (Jul 13, 2014)

can anyone recommend good blogs covering this? I am doing some Googling but very hard to know whether what's coming up is possibly true or the result of a delusional going on a roll...


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

The Scotsman gets in on the act with the good old tartan trews wearing Sir Nicholas Fairbairn...long since dead and unpunished.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...irbairn-in-child-abuse-scandal-link-1-3474912


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

tbtommyb said:


> can anyone recommend good blogs covering this? I am doing some Googling but very hard to know whether what's coming up is possibly true or the result of a delusional going on a roll...



Needleblog is by far the best http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Gilberthorpe himself is a very interesting figure who has previously worked with the Mirror on a Max Clifford organised expose of Tory MP Piers Merchant.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/anatomy-of-a-sting-how-an-mp-was-trapped-1236130.html
> 
> Rather explains why the first Mirror story about his 'revelations' includes some caveats about him.


Must admit when I read his story some of it did read like an attempt to get all the most bizarre, dead, Tories at one party, raping kids and doing coke.  Not sure why but I somehow struggle to see Boyles-Rodent doing lines.  Trouble is with these stories, ultimately the truth is always worse than you imagined.


----------



## tbtommyb (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Needleblog is by far the best http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/


thanks. some others are very interesting but then immediately link into Mossad etc.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Must admit when I read his story some of it did read like an attempt to get all the most bizarre, dead, Tories at one party, raping kids and doing coke.  Not sure why but I somehow struggle to see Boyles-Rodent doing lines.  Trouble is with these stories, ultimately the truth is always worse than you imagined.



Think of John Major doing Ewina Curry from behind over his green leathered desk - and then try to wipe out that image from your mind. The other truth you have alluded just doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Think of John Major doing Ewina Curry from behind over his green leathered desk - and then try to wipe out that image from your mind. The other truth you have alluded just doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 13, 2014)

The Mail, the Mail the Mail.

I suspect that Lord Rothermere is mightily mad about any Leveson-style restrictions being placed on his excellent reporters. I wonder if he plans to keep publishing stories about MPs and their failings until the powers that be see things his way and abandon any attempts at press regulation.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 13, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Must admit when I read his story some of it did read like an attempt to get all the most bizarre, dead, Tories at one party, raping kids and doing coke.  Not sure why but I somehow struggle to see Boyles-Rodent doing lines.  Trouble is with these stories, ultimately the truth is always worse than you imagined.


In direct response to the OP, more and more.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> In direct response to the OP, more and more.



It's like something out of Pasolini's Salo which I saw many years ago at the Scala - and whilst it is a brilliant anti-fascist film contains some of the most harrowing scenes ever depicted on film.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> It's like something out of Pasolini's Salo which I saw many years ago at the Scala - and whilst it is a brilliant anti-fascist film contains some of the most harrowing scenes ever depicted on film.



The latest to be named is Fairbairn, self confessed heterosexual cocksman, who has now been accused of buggering little boys. A regular at the Elm Guest-House.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

The arrogant cheek of these fuckers to lecture anybody on anything whilst buggering and raping their way around the children's homes of the UK.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> The arrogant cheek of these fuckers to lecture anybody on anything whilst buggering and raping their way around the children's homes of the UK. ( Legal note - am not referring to Cecil here who just got Sarah Keays pregnant).
> 
> Dead List of MP Child Abusers
> 
> ...


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> It's like something out of Pasolini's Salo which I saw many years ago at the Scala - and whilst it is a brilliant anti-fascist film contains some of the most harrowing scenes ever depicted on film.



quite


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> quite



Mark Oaten would be quite at home with the imagery therein. Allegedly.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 13, 2014)

Alan Clarke? Missed that one. Although no surprise if there's stories of him being a sex pest


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Alan Clarke? Missed that one. Although no surprise if there's stories of him being a sex pest



http://order-order.com/2012/11/08/w...mer-tory-minister-alan-clark-of-underage-sex/


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> The arrogant cheek of these fuckers to lecture anybody on anything whilst buggering and raping their way around the children's homes of the UK.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 13, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Cripes the Pope chips in that 2% of priests could be paedophiles - speculating wildly if applied to the HOC that would make 10 -15 paedophile MPs - with probably a higher proportion if gone to single sex public schools.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-paedophiles-interview-Italian-newspaper.html




That stat is higher in the general public, its a damage limitation exercise. I think much more then 2% of Catholic clergy are paedophiles.

Short, left handed more likely to be nonces study finds.


http://www.thestar.com/life/health_...ophiles_tend_to_be_short_men_study_finds.html



Heres another mentalist find.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-ladowsky/pedophilia-and-star-trek_b_5857.html

The _LA Times_ recently ran a story about the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit, which contained a mind-boggling statistic: of the more than 100 offenders the unit has arrested over the last four years, "all but one" has been "a hard-core Trekkie.

My webdesign guy is a treckie, very distant, loner, total fucking weirdo.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 13, 2014)

MP's write to Home Secretary stating survivors  must be on panel.


Kalfindin said:


> That stat is higher in the general public, its a damage limitation exercise. I think much more then 2% of Catholic clergy are paedophiles.
> 
> Short, left handed more likely to be nonces study finds.
> 
> ...


So your average offender is 2cm shorter than the national average & the report does not say what how much more likely they are to be a lefty just more likely. Successful sportsmen & women are more likely to be left handed. Does that mean that more successful you are at sport, the more likely you are attracted to kids? It is a study from Canada not an international study which would have to take in to account the difference in national height which varies by a lot more than 2cm. It comes across as poor reporting.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 13, 2014)

.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 13, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> That stat is higher in the general public, its a damage limitation exercise. I think much more then 2% of Catholic clergy are paedophiles.
> 
> Short, left handed more likely to be nonces study finds.
> 
> ...



weird, my otherwise sane appearing philosophy teacher in sixth form used to love to use examples from star trek during class. He followed one of his students to Oxford and had to resign.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 13, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> That stat is higher in the general public, its a damage limitation exercise. I think much more then 2% of Catholic clergy are paedophiles.
> 
> Short, left handed more likely to be nonces study finds.
> 
> ...



Gives a whole new sinister twist to the phrase "to boldy go where no man has gone before."


----------



## MrSki (Jul 13, 2014)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 13, 2014)

tbtommyb said:


> can anyone recommend good blogs covering this? I am doing some Googling but very hard to know whether what's coming up is possibly true or the result of a delusional going on a roll...



This one is also excellent 

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com


----------



## laptop (Jul 13, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I'm not sure that the Butler-Sloss inquiry into the Cleveland abuse cases was necessarily that dodgy though and in the wider context of the satanic panics the bloke in that article had a point IMO.



I should have been more explicit.

The Mail should be embarrassed about promoting paedogeddon now, when then it was ready then to take the side of parents - many of whom _were_ abusing - against social workers. 

The reference to what happens on "estates" in the article was important.

The implication was that _Mail_-reading parents couldn't possibly be doing that kind of shit - and _that_ was the entire political point of satanscares - "it's them over there not us!" - and why they served as cover for actual abuse (by _Mail_-reading stepfathers, uncles, brothers, fathers..."


----------



## elbows (Jul 13, 2014)

That mirror story mentioned on the frontage above is here:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/award-winning-author-abused-council-3852554


----------



## uk benzo (Jul 13, 2014)

Margaret Thatcher 'Covered Up for Minister Accused of Child Sex Abuse'

-Link to the International Business Times.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 14, 2014)

laptop said:


> I should have been more explicit.
> 
> The Mail should be embarrassed about promoting paedogeddon now, when then it was ready then to take the side of parents - many of whom _were_ abusing - against social workers.
> 
> ...



I see your point about the Mail's behaviour. They were also promoting Satanic paedogeddon back in the late 80's to early 90's too though as well as doing some debunking.

I'd expect that the Mail would find it hard to resist piling on with any opportunity to go on the attack on social workers for whatever reasons. Ditto a predisposition to attack anything someone like Bea Campbell had to say (and she said a lot of stupid shit back then that was easy to attack) No doubt though there's also a split along the lines you suggest. Pro-paedogeddon bile against people on 'estates' contrasted with debunking of middle class abuse.

Pretty clearly there was _some_ actual abuse going on in both Cleveland and Rochdale (of the sordid intra-family kind rather than Cyril, Jimmy and their mates abusing kids in institutional situation)

In that period, say late 1987 onwards, Satanic Ritual Abuse hysteria promoted by xtian loons was being amplified by professional sensationalists like Cook, Dickens and the Mail. I would argue that it had a similar effect to that which alien autopsy stories had on Lockheed testing secret stealth aircraft at Area 51. A strong impact on the credibility of stories about funny looking aircraft that didn't show up on radar in the latter case and a strong impact on the credibility of any revelations about _actual_ child abuse in the former. That would potentially affect both the intra-family / isolated stuff (including middle-class child abuse) _and_ the organised use of the care home system as a child brothel for toffs.


----------



## smokedout (Jul 14, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> It is interesting that none of the names on that list have tried to get it suppressed. Especially after the macalpine farrago .



sorry if this has been pointed out but am wading through this thread and off to bed now and wanted to post this whilst I remembered.  This list is nothing, even if it is genuine, which I think it probably is, and the names are genuine, which they might not be, then all it shows is a list of people who once stayed at a gay B&B where abuse has allegedly occurred (and I have no doubts it did but the list proves nothing, it's not evidence of anything).  I also think its worth mentioning that Maloney has been one of the biggest cheerleaders of Ben Fellows, who is a fraud, and that Chris Fay was recently involved in quite a nasty fraud himself - whilst that doesnt mean he's not sincere in this case I think its worth knowing and it also means he'll have zero credibility should this ever come into court.  which is why I suspect none of the press will touch it unless something far more substantial comes out.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 14, 2014)

smokedout said:


> sorry if this has been pointed out but am wading through this thread and off to bed now and wanted to post this whilst I remembered.  This list is nothing, even if it is genuine, which I think it probably is, and the names are genuine, which they might not be, then all it shows is a list of people who once stayed at a gay B&B where abuse has allegedly occurred (and I have no doubts it did but the list proves nothing, it's not evidence of anything).  I also think its worth mentioning that Maloney has been one of the biggest cheerleaders of Ben Fellows, who is a fraud, and that Chris Fay was recently involved in quite a nasty fraud himself - whilst that doesnt mean he's not sincere in this case I think its worth knowing and it also means he'll have zero credibility should this ever come into court.  which is why I suspect none of the press will touch it unless something far more substantial comes out.



Chris Fay only got onto this in the early 90s, the press first reported the abuse cover up in the mid 80s. There were and have been witnesses and names named,the point being they were ignored.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elm_Guest_House_child_abuse_scandal


"A party was raided by the police in 1982, following which 12 boys gave evidence that they had been abused by men at the house. Kasir was convicted of the charge of running a disorderly house, but allegations of abuse against children, and a subsequent reported investigation in 2003, were apparently not pursued.[8]"


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 14, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Wikispooks is still there and so is the archive page, but the sub-site the index page presumably pointed to and the downloadable archive are gone.



There is a strange story about how it disappeared last time in 2010. But now I cant find that either.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

Vera Baird, former solicitor general, now saying butler-sloss should step aside:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...itor-general-butler-sloss-child-abuse-inquiry

In theory the Gilberthorpe accusations should take her straight out of the inquiry, given that he names Havers, particularly if it ever became part of a police inquiry.  For the moment they must be thinking Gilberthorpe is so tainted as a witness to ignore all that (probably rightly).


----------



## weltweit (Jul 14, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Vera Baird, former solicitor general, now saying butler-sloss should step aside:
> http://www.theguardian.com/society/...itor-general-butler-sloss-child-abuse-inquiry
> 
> In theory the Gilberthorpe accusations should take her straight out of the inquiry, given that he names Havers, particularly if it ever became part of a police inquiry.  For the moment they must be thinking Gilberthorpe is so tainted as a witness to ignore all that (probably rightly).


Also reported here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28291275


----------



## weltweit (Jul 14, 2014)

Butler Sloss stands down!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28295282


----------



## Betsy (Jul 14, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Butler Sloss stands down!
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28295282


Have just this minute heard this news!


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 14, 2014)




----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2014)

So, cameron looks a right mug for having appointed her


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 14, 2014)

Good news for all concerned.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

But who should replace her? 

You need someone who is familiar with the workings of the establishment but not part of it.

My vote would go for Shami Chakrabarti.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 14, 2014)

Just heard the news, Cameron you utter cock


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 14, 2014)

and she looks like the arrogant twat she is after saying she wouldn't


----------



## Quartz (Jul 14, 2014)

MrSki said:


> But who should replace her?



How about a respected Commonwealth jurist? Perhaps someone from Canada, NZ, or Australia?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> So, cameron looks a right mug for having appointed her


 I think we could write his statement for him - 'absolute integrity... thanks for her dedication in support of vulnerable children blah'


----------



## spirals (Jul 14, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28295282  She's stepped down. Should never have been appointed.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

MrSki said:


> But who should replace her?
> 
> You need someone who is familiar with the workings of the establishment but not part of it.
> 
> My vote would go for Shami Chakrabarti.


 Maybe, a former Home Secretary, perhaps with some experience working outside the UK, in the European Union say?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I think we could write his statement for him - 'absolute integrity... thanks for her dedication in support of vulnerable children blah'




I think she stepped down because she didn't want further dragging through the mud and further press scrutiny on herself and her family. I don't for a moment recon it was out of reflecting on the matter and realising she is just exactly the wrong person for the job


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 14, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I think we could write his statement for him - 'absolute integrity... thanks for her dedication in support of vulnerable children blah'


from the beebs article

'A No 10 spokesman said there had been no change in the view of the prime minister or Home Secretary Theresa May about Lady Butler-Sloss' integrity or suitability for the job'

lols


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> I think she stepped down because she didn't want further dragging through the mud and further press scrutiny on herself and her family. I don't for a moment recon it was out of reflecting on the matter and realising she is just exactly the wrong person for the job


or she was getting so much shit from EVERYONE she thought shed better scarper quick time


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> I think she stepped down because she didn't want further dragging through the mud and further press scrutiny on herself and her family. I don't for a moment recon it was out of reflecting on the matter and realising she is just exactly the wrong person for the job


 Absolutely - and the Gilberthorpe stuff over the weekend, however flakey it may well have been, showed how close to home the focus was going to stay.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 14, 2014)

ruffneck23 said:


> from the beebs article
> 
> 'A No 10 spokesman said there had been no change in the view of the prime minister or Home Secretary Theresa May about Lady Butler-Sloss' integrity or suitability for the job'
> 
> lols


They would say that,wouldn't they?


----------



## two sheds (Jul 14, 2014)

Shame Coulson's not available, he'd have had no problem gathering information.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 14, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Maybe, a former Home Secretary, perhaps with some experience working outside the UK, in the European Union say?


I don't think that would be a good idea


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 14, 2014)

MrSki said:


> But who should replace her?
> 
> You need someone who is familiar with the workings of the establishment but not part of it.
> 
> My vote would go for Shami Chakrabarti.



What about Peter Garsden?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 14, 2014)

Alternatively why does it have to be one person? The job requires a wide range of skills and knowledge; why not draw a group of people together to do it?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## yardbird (Jul 14, 2014)

two sheds said:


> Shame Coulson's not available, he'd have had no problem gathering information.


Just my thoughts.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Alternatively why does it have to be one person? The job requires a wide range of skills and knowledge; why not draw a group of people together to do it?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


It is not one person. The job is for the chair of the committee.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

Whole thing over the last week smacks of crisis management. According to this piece
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/14/lady-butler-sloss-stands-down-child-abuse-inquiry
they've even been forced to defend themselves against the accusation they _forgot_ she was Havers brother.



> Butler-Sloss's decision to stand down is a blow to the government, which appeared to have rushed into appointing her. On Sunday last week Michael Gove said there would be no public inquiry. Within 24 hours the home secretary announced a wide-ranging inquiry that will examine how public institutions responded to allegations of child abuse.
> There were suggestions that the Home Office overlooked Butler-Sloss's family links. Government sources insisted last week that it was well known that Butler-Sloss was the sister of Sir Michael Havers, attorney general from 1979 to 1987.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 14, 2014)

They really are an utter shower of shite.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2014)

They thought they could get away with an establishment yeswoman being put in place. And, tbf, I thought they'd get away with it as well. Will be exteremely interesting to see who takes her place. Whover it is wants to be whiter than white now, because a second embarrasment like this would be hugely damaging to the vermin on the front benches.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 14, 2014)

MrSki said:


> It is not one person. The job is for the chair of the committee.



Thanks for the clarification; therefore the skills that are really needed are those of leading a complex investigative team, including the production of their findings. The other demand should obviously be that the appointee should not be compromised by membership of or connection with the establishment bodies they are helping to investigate.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Betsy (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> *They thought they could get away with an establishment yeswoman being put in place.* And, tbf, I thought they'd get away with it as well. Will be exteremely interesting to see who takes her place. Whover it is wants to be whiter than white now, because a second embarrasment like this would be hugely damaging to the vermin on the front benches.


I think they might have done before the advent of the internet.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 14, 2014)

Now what we need is someone with no dodgy links and an enquiry with subpoena and testify under oath, ta.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 14, 2014)

From The Guardian

*Lady Butler-Sloss's resignation statement*

_"I was honoured to be invited by the Home Secretary to chair the wide-ranging inquiry about child sexual abuse and hoped I could make a useful contribution.

It has become apparent over the last few days, however, that there is a widespread perception, particularly among victim and survivor groups, that I am not the right person to chair the inquiry. It has also become clear to me that I did not sufficiently consider whether my background and the fact my brother had been Attorney General would cause difficulties.

This is a victim-orientated inquiry and those who wish to be heard must have confidence that the members of the panel will pay proper regard to their concerns and give appropriate advice to Government.

Nor should media attention be allowed to be diverted from the extremely important issues at stake, namely whether enough has been done to protect children from sexual abuse and hold to account those who commit these appalling crimes.

Having listened to the concerns of victim and survivor groups and the criticisms of MPs and the media, I have come to the conclusion that I should not chair this inquiry and have so informed the Home Secretary.

I should like to add that I have dedicated my life to public service, to the pursuit of justice and to protecting the rights of children and families and I wish the inquiry success in its important work"_

_And here is *Theresa May*'s statement on Lady Butler-Sloss's resignation.

"I am deeply saddened by Baroness Butler-Sloss’s decision to withdraw but understand and respect her reasons. Baroness Butler-Sloss is a woman of the highest integrity and compassion and continues to have an enormous contribution to make to public life.

As she has said herself, the work of this inquiry is more important than any individual and an announcement will be made on who will take over the chairmanship and membership of the panel as soon as possible so this important work can move forward."

*May will be taking questions on this when she gives evidence to the home affairs committee at 3pm.*

More comments here....

*http://www.theguardian.com/politics...tics-live-blog#block-53c3b9f0e4b093fa8e0aacd1*

_


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 14, 2014)

Needs someone used to unpicking establishment bullshit - i.e. Michael mansfield. Imran Khan.

Wont happen of course.


----------



## laptop (Jul 14, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Alternatively why does it have to be one person?



Also, because it must be the Boggins Inquiry, leading to the Boggins Report. That is The Rule.

Having co-chairs would make it sound like an estate agent. The Knight, Frank and Rutley Inquiry?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2014)

laptop said:


> Also, because it must be the Boggins Inquiry, leading to the Boggins Report. That is The Rule.
> 
> Having co-chairs would make it sound like an estate agent. The Knight, Frank and Rutley Inquiry?


the grabbit and runn inquiry


----------



## existentialist (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> So, cameron looks a right mug for having appointed her


Yes . Sadly, it's half a cup of piss in an ocean of mugness.

But every little helps


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 14, 2014)

Frank Field just on the radio saying what a shame it is that she has stepped down; his solution to the potential conflicts of interest was to have ' got on with the inquiry straight away' so that people could see how good she was. Or to put it another way; present the public with a fait accomplis.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2014)

mad frankie fields charts some right old bollocks as usual then.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2014)

Were we not due a re-shuffle today, or has that been postponed because of this


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> Were we not due a re-shuffle today, or has that been postponed because of this


he's got to ask all the prospective ministers whether they're kiddy fiddlers.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 14, 2014)

Betsy said:


> From The Guardian
> 
> *Lady Butler-Sloss's resignation statement*



Full credit to her for doing the right thing so quickly.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> I think she stepped down because she didn't want further dragging through the mud and further press scrutiny on herself and her family. I don't for a moment recon it was out of reflecting on the matter and realising she is just exactly the wrong person for the job



Plus at her age perhaps she just couldn't be arsed. Its still the right decision.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Full credit to her for doing the right thing so quickly.



bollocks to that. She shouldn't have accepted the job in the first place.  Typical upper crust arrogance to not even consider the fact that her brother was the fucking attorney general might present just a teensy weensy conflict of interest.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Full credit to her for doing the right thing so quickly.


Well, yes going now is better than not going or spinning it out for another few days. Same time, she was monstrously arrogant to think that everyone praising her 'integrity' would overcome what was a blatant conflict of interest.  The fact that she seemingly doesn't deny the 'giving the press a bishop' stuff for me means she's part of the problem, not the soluton.

Edit, beaten to it.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 14, 2014)

So what's Lord Hutton up to these days?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Full credit to her for doing the right thing so quickly.



Why do you even bother? Read posts 3724 and 3725.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 14, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Why do you even bother? Read posts 3724 and 3725.



Get real. It may be umpteen pages in this thread, but it's only been a few days since she was appointed, including a weekend. Plus she's 80 and likely doesn't follow things online.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Plus she's 80 and likely doesn't follow things online.


If she didn't realise her own brother being at the heart of the 'dossier' case and limiting the scope of the Kincora inquiry was a problem, it looks like she doesn't follow things offline as well.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 14, 2014)

vaz v home sec on the telly now (committee hearing):
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=15801


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Get real. It may be umpteen pages in this thread, but it's only been a few days since she was appointed, including a weekend. Plus she's 80 and likely doesn't follow things online.


or follow things too well generally.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

Wilf said:


> If she didn't realise her own brother being at the heart of the 'dossier' case and limiting the scope of the Kincora inquiry was a problem, it looks like she doesn't follow things offline as well.


And according to the Mirror being an attendee at the sex parties.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> *Get real*. It may be umpteen pages in this thread, but it's only been a few days since she was appointed, including a weekend. Plus she's 80 and likely doesn't follow things online.



You need to. She deserves not a single iota of credit. See Wilf's post (3729) just above.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> mad frankie fields charts some right old bollocks as usual then.



He is at least gracious enough to provide us with frequent reminders of just how apposite his nickname is.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 14, 2014)

Wilf said:


> vaz v home sec on the telly now (committee hearing):
> http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=15801


When I started looking the word "obfuscation" came immediately to mind.

Also, it isn't just the chairperson of the committee that has yet to be established, the rest of the panel needs to be assigned also. So it could be some time before the enquiry gets going. And May was specific, this enquiry is not about bringing individual perpetrators or alleged perpetrators to book, anyone with specific allegations has still to go directly to the police.


----------



## chandlerp (Jul 14, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Just in case the Google webcache gets removed, here is the Exaro article on freezepage
> 
> http://www.freezepage.com/1405248690SHZKYBWTDA



blocked at my workplace which, coincidentally, is local government.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> So, cameron looks a right mug for having appointed her



Yet another example of how head-in-hands incompetent this government is. Thing is, they have Civil Service advice about this stuff, and yeah yeah at the top end the CS is as Establishment as it gets, but they aren't fools, they are operators. Are they leaving this Govt to hang itself?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 14, 2014)

One might hope but they are doing pretty well on their own


----------



## elbows (Jul 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> Were we not due a re-shuffle today, or has that been postponed because of this



Still happening, as there is an article on the bbc news site about Ken Clarke stepping down.

Its possible they delayed it very slightly to make it seem that the 'loud train phonetical' leak about the reshuffle didn't have all the facts right.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 14, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> he's got to ask all the prospective ministers whether they're kiddy fiddlers.



Is that _still_ a job requirement?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Is that _still_ a job requirement?


i'm afraid so


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 14, 2014)

A fundamental difficulty - which is pretty obvious but I'll spell it out anyway - is that anybody who the establishment will deem trustworthy, will need to be acceptable to the security services. For everybody else this means that either we would have to accept the security services effective veto (and lets not forget that the security services are necessarily one of the bodies being scrutinised) or question/dismiss the capability of the enquiry from day one. Personally I'd place myself in the second camp, and beyond the government doing the unthinkable (i.e. appointing someone genuinely independent) I can't see any way out of the paradox.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 14, 2014)

Presumably, given some of the cases he's been involved with, Michael Mansfield QC (for example) has to have been DV cleared in order to look at some of the evidence?

Edited to add: such speculation apart, obviously it's going to be someone from the establishment (I'd include Manfield, Chakravati et al in that), although ideally not someone whose close relatives have been named as being culpable.

A more fruitful area to put pressure on IMO is whether it's a proper public inquiry rather than a Hutton-style stitch up. So subpoenas, witnesses under oath etc.

Also, that it focus on child abuse rather than setting up the BBC and NHS for privatisation.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 14, 2014)

Subpoenas? Can't see them accepting that and anyway a couple who need one are in countries without extradition treaties. Admittedly one of those is doing a wonderful job as a peace envoy but.


----------



## little_legs (Jul 14, 2014)

Isn't Mansfield currently involved in Mark Duggan case?


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

little_legs said:


> Isn't Mansfield currently involved in Mark Duggan case?


That finished last week. Was only a two day hearing. Considering the fact that judges seem to be part of the problem, anyone who is a QC is also not above being  part of the establishment.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 14, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Subpoenas? Can't see them accepting that and anyway a couple who need one are in countries without extradition treaties. Admittedly one of those is doing a wonderful job as a peace envoy but.


Anything else is unacceptable really.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 14, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Anything else is unacceptable really.



Agreed but how much shit will be allowed to hit the fan is another matter.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Subpoenas? Can't see them accepting that and anyway a couple who need one are in countries without extradition treaties. Admittedly one of those is doing a wonderful job as a peace envoy but.


Is there an extradition treaty with Barbados?


----------



## teqniq (Jul 14, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Is there an extradition treaty with Barbados?


I think this has been discussed already and the answer is no.


----------



## little_legs (Jul 14, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> bollocks to that. She shouldn't have accepted the job in the first place.  Typical upper crust arrogance to not even consider the fact that her brother was the fucking attorney general might present just a teensy weensy conflict of interest.


Plus her first initial response to the calls to step down was _STFU everyone, I am here to stay_.

I can just imagine the awkward conversation between DC's chief of staff & govt lawyers and her in which they told her she's fired, it's like kicking a cripple.


MrSki said:


> That finished last week. Was only a two day hearing. Considering the fact that judges seem to be part of the problem, anyone who is a QC is also not above being  part of the establishment.



Good to know.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 14, 2014)

What I don't understand about all this is the paedo side of things. In Italy there were always sex scandals, one time Prime Minister Emilio Colombo used to visit a prostitute a couple of hundred metres from where I lived and his armoured Alfa would be parked outside together with that of his escort who were usually hanging around smoking cigarettes while he shagged away. No one cared and most knew what was going on. What is it however with the British establishment and kids? Some even suggest kids were killed either during or after the abuse. Sick society beyond belief.


----------



## little_legs (Jul 14, 2014)

Did anyone listen to BBC's R4 Profile on LBS this weekend?

A minute and a half into the program they played a recording of her talking to Today programme last year in which she said:

_Most of people are in a very understandable denial that it [child abuse] really could happen. And in a sense being a celebrity, or being a priest, or being some very important person makes it that much more difficult for other people to accept that they could behave like that. I think that Jimmy Savile has been a wakeup call. _

At which point I thought, good God, it's so fucked up, it's not true.

Edited to correct


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

Society & those in power has always been a bit sick. There used to be a brothel in the Vatican for those celibate priests. 

I have heard the shit about kids being killed & there is some stuff on YouTube. If any of this turns out to be true then anyone who knew about it should be prosecuted.

If it turns out that Thatcher knew some of her cabinet were buggering little boys then she should be stripped of her baronet & her body dug up, then dumped in a cess pit with her mate Jimmy Savile.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 14, 2014)

little_legs said:


> Did anyone listen to BBC's R4 Profile on LBS this weekend?
> 
> A minute and a half into the program they played a recording of her talking to Today programme last year in which she said:
> 
> ...



Yes I heard it. As well as that gem, it also contained another glowing character reference from another Havers family member; this one in the legal profession. Why the BBC though it appropriate to broadcast such a testimonial, for an individual whose family connections were already proving so problematic, is another question.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 14, 2014)

Betsy said:


> From The Guardian
> 
> *Lady Butler-Sloss's resignation statement*
> 
> ...


The real reason is that she is clearly a lizard wearing Jimmy Savile's skin. Didn't even bother changing the wig


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 14, 2014)

little_legs said:


> Did anyone listen to BBC's R4 Profile on LBS this weekend?
> 
> A minute and a half into the program they played a recording of her talking to Today programme last year in which she said:
> 
> ...


Just don't try telling me that Cliff was a part of it. I'm still coming to terms with Rolf being sent to prison. 

That I would not believe. Half of the nation would need at least mass televised 1984-style psychotherapy.

No. No. No.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

UrbaneFox said:


> Just don't try telling me that Cliff was a part of it. I'm still coming to terms with Rolf being sent to prison.
> 
> That I would not believe. Half of the nation would need at least mass televised 1984-style psychotherapy.
> 
> No. No. No.


Don't what ever you do look on YouTube.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 14, 2014)

Interesting parallels in a case from the 19th C. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Street_scandal (this was referred to in the Capital Gay  report of the Elm Guest house raid)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2014)

UrbaneFox said:


> Just don't try telling me that Cliff was a part of it. I'm still coming to terms with Rolf being sent to prison.
> 
> That I would not believe. Half of the nation would need at least mass televised 1984-style psychotherapy.
> 
> No. No. No.


----------



## The Pale King (Jul 14, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> The real reason is that she is clearly a lizard wearing Jimmy Savile's skin. Didn't even bother changing the wig
> View attachment 57564



It's genuinely uncanny...


----------



## kenny g (Jul 14, 2014)

"
William Hague is to stand down as foreign secretary with immediate effect and will take on the lesser role of leader of the House of Commons as he prepares to end his political career by retiring as an MP at the next election."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/14/cabinet-reshuffle-william-hague-tory-government 

 fucking hell!


----------



## MrSki (Jul 14, 2014)

Ken Clarke too?


----------



## kenny g (Jul 14, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Ken Clarke too?



Yep - the article I linked to does mention Ken Clarke was a whip during the heath era. Knowing what we do now about that time and the then whippery I am sure he has many tales to take to his grave.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2014)

Ken the hardman Clarke has been at the forefront of tory parliamentary politics for over 20 years now. He;s been put out to pasture, like Tebbit was in his day. Not that being out to pasture has stopped tebbit chatting shit regular.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2014)

reshuffle thread >>>> that way


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 14, 2014)

Hague can now divorce Ffion and, at last, stop living a lie.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 14, 2014)

So one establishment figure, whose links to the institutions being investigated are rather visible, will be replaced with a more presentable one whose links, however deep, don't cast as much of a shadow over the final report. Buggered if I can see what there is to celebrate.

This is all about the way the next official version of 'what went wrong' gets presented. It won't make any difference as to whether anyone who engaged in abuse, or who failed to stop it or investigate it, get's held to account.

It has given politicians, anxious to present themselves as diligently 'scrutinizing' things, an opportunity to offer some sanctimonious commentary. Step forward the odious Vaz (on C4 news) :


> So poor old Lady Butler-Shloss, she's the innocent victim in all this...


Yeah right.


----------



## october_lost (Jul 15, 2014)

Lots of speculation in the papers and on here about existing member(s) of the Tory party being nonces, this reshuffle of Hague and Clarke - is it a coincidence? Who else is moving on to new pastures?


----------



## laptop (Jul 15, 2014)

october_lost said:


> Lots of speculation in the papers and on here about existing member(s) of the Tory party being nonces, this reshuffle of Hague and Clarke - is it a coincidence? Who else is moving on to new pastures?



reshuffle thread >>>> that way


----------



## Dandred (Jul 15, 2014)

Is this why he has quit?


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 15, 2014)

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848

*Whistleblower and former Conservative party activist Anthony Gilberthorpe says he provided child prostitutes for a sex and drugs party with top politicians*

*Senior Tory cabinet ministers were supplied with underage boys for sex parties, it is sensationally claimed.*

*Former Conservative activist Anthony Gilberthorpe said he told Margaret Thatcher 25 years ago about what he had witnessed and gave her names of those involved*

*Anthony says he was a full-time political activist when he helped procure the “youngest and prettiest” boys for several cabinet ministers after being told to find “entertainment”.

In a series of explosive claims about conferences at Blackpool and Brighton in the 1980s, he alleges boys as young as 15 indulged in alcohol and cocaine before they had sex with the powerful politicians.

He says one person who attended a party is a current serving minister.

Others said to be present at the parties included Keith Joseph, Rhodes Boyson, Dr Alistair Smith and Michael Havers
*


----------



## Libertad (Jul 15, 2014)

Indeed, as posted on Sunday morning:

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...paedophile-ring.301059/page-119#post-13267192


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 15, 2014)

"William Hague" with George Galloway, note Brighton hotel comment.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> Ken the hardman Clarke has been at the forefront of tory parliamentary politics for over 20 years now. He;s been put out to pasture, like Tebbit was in his day. Not that being out to pasture has stopped tebbit chatting shit regular.


More like 45 years.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 15, 2014)

Dandred said:


> Is this why he has quit?




Photoshopped just like those pictures of Thatcher and Savile. 

Nothing to see here, move along now.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 15, 2014)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Yet another example of how head-in-hands incompetent this government is. Thing is, they have Civil Service advice about this stuff, and yeah yeah at the top end the CS is as Establishment as it gets, but they aren't fools, they are operators. Are they leaving this Govt to hang itself?



Well, there's the rub. Since '97 the upper level of the CS has become increasingly politicised.  This has a "drag" effect on managing situations, because whereas previously every senior CS would act very much from the same script, now many of them act in terms of looking after their own dept first and foremost.  Basically a case of the left hand not knowing or caring what the right hand was doing.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 15, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> The real reason is that she is clearly a lizard wearing Jimmy Savile's skin. Didn't even bother changing the wig
> View attachment 57564


----------



## happie chappie (Jul 15, 2014)

This may be of interest (or not, as the case may be):

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2...ts&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Jul15Mailout


----------



## treelover (Jul 15, 2014)

> We had talked about a potential paedophile ring with MPs before but she said no one would listen and the national papers didn’t want to know so she asked me if I would take a look and run a story from her point of view.
> “When I met Barbara again, she apologised for the ‘hassle’ caused and reluctantly admitted she was fighting a formidable foe.”



If the formidable Red Queen couldn't make much headway, then the establishment really must have closed ranks, this is all going to be dynamite.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 15, 2014)

kenny g said:


> Yep - the article I linked to does mention *Ken Clarke *was a whip during the heath era. Knowing what we do now about that time and the then whippery I am s


Ken Clarke was on 5 Live this morning saying that losing Baroness Schloss was ridiculous. He carried on to say that it was a _silly story _(the Geoffrey Dicken's one) and that the police or the press had failed to find anything on it. He said it was absurd that there was some organised cover up and equally absurd that Michael Havers was involved in some cover up conspiracy  (to anyone that knew him) 
You can listen here from 2-45 mins in... 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0495jkn

After he had spoken Nicky Campbell spoke to Ian McFadyen (who was abused at Caldicott Boys Preparatory School) who reponded to what Ken Clarke had said


----------



## Betsy (Jul 15, 2014)

From a Roy Greenslade blog in The Guardian

*Editor explains why he didn't publish Barbara Castle's paedophile dossier*

*

*

_The __Daily Star Sunday published an interesting exclusive at the weekend: "Second paedo dossier cover-up after cop raid"._

_It revealed that a former newspaper editor, Don Hale, was handed a dossier at some time in the early 1980s about 16 high-profile political figures who appeared sympathetic to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE)._

_The document was given to Hale, the then editor of the Bury Messenger, by the late Barbara Castle, the veteran Labour politician. _

_At the time, Castle was a member of the European parliament for __Greater Manchester after her 34-year stint as MP for Blackburn. _

_According to the Star's report, once Hale began to investigate the claims made in the dossier "an astonishing operation kicked in to silence the claims."_

_First, Hale said he was visited by the Liberal MP for Rochdale, __Cyril Smith, who tried to persuade the journalist that it was "all poppycock"._

_Second, Hale said special branch officers arrived at the Messenger's office, showed him a D-notice and warned him of imprisonment if he failed to hand over the dossier._

_Hale had agreed with Castle that he would run a story the week after she handed him her documents. He was quoted by the Star as saying:_

_"Obviously, I had to contact certain members named [in the dossier] and the home office for their responses._

_Each call was met with shock horror as to why I should be wasting my time asking these 'daft' questions as nothing was happening within parliament._

_When I explained the detailed nature of the information available and that I couldn't reveal my source, you could almost hear a pin drop as officials were unsure as to what to say or do."_

_Then came the special branch visit. Hale said: "I was sworn to secrecy by special branch at the risk of jail if I repeated any of the allegations._

_"When I met Barbara again, she apologised for the 'hassle' caused and reluctantly admitted she was fighting a formidable foe."_

_The revelations follow revelations about a dossier compiled by the late Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens detailing an alleged Westminster paedophile ring._

_Don Hale later became editor of the Matlock Mercury where he successfully campaigned for the release of Stephen Downing, a man wrongly imprisoned for 27 years for murder. Downing's conviction was quashed and declared unsafe by the appeal court in 2001. _

_Hale was named journalist of the year in the 2001 What the Papers Say awards and received the OBE for his campaigning journalism._

_Since leaving the Mercury in 2001 Hale has written several books, mostly about crime. _

_Source: __Daily Star Sunday Hat tip: HoldTheFrontPage_

_http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/jul/15/daily-star-sunday-cyril-smith_


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 15, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Don't what ever you do look on YouTube.


'Too late', went the cry.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 15, 2014)

Betsy said:


> From a Roy Greenslade blog in The Guardian
> 
> *Editor explains why he didn't publish Barbara Castle's paedophile dossier*
> 
> ...


 This all confirms my world view about power, class and the state. Same time, I'm fucking glad jazzz isn't here, he'd be all over this stuff.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 15, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848
> 
> *Whistleblower and former Conservative party activist Anthony Gilberthorpe says he provided child prostitutes for a sex and drugs party with top politicians*
> 
> ...


Is it just me or does Gilberthorpe's story not have the ring of truth about it? There was something about the way it worded that sounded to me how it might read if someone was farbricating a sensational story for the tabloids. And Rhodes Boyson doing coke, hmmm. By contrast, Alex Wheatle's account in the Mirror yesterday seemed genuine to me, the unnamed adults men roaming around the childrens' home, no-one quite knowing quite what their legitimate role was. 

I may be wrong. But I reckon the papers' sudden frenzy to run their own scoop may have led to individuals thinking they can make a few bob.

Equally - and this may be just me being suspicious - I was dubious about the item claiming MI5 had had it in for Leon Brittan and were, what, concocting, or suddenly making available, these allegations, or had done in the 1980s re. the rape claim. It suggested there was an element of anti-semitism in MI5 and that they objected to a Jewish Home Secretary...but Thatcher's Cabinet had several other Jewish members...Howard was at one stage H.S. as well.

It read to me like the sort of thing Fred Holroyd and Colin Wallace recalled doing, working for the 'secret state' re. Ireland in the 1970s - deliberate spread of misinformation, sometimes to deflect attention away, sometimes just to muddy the waters.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 15, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Thatcher's Cabinet had several other Jewish members...



"More old Estonians than old Etonians"


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 15, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> but Thatcher's Cabinet had several other Jewish members...Howard was at one stage H.S. as well.



"Members" being the operative word. 

Howard was Home Sec under John 'Pass the Peas' Major. He was Employment Sec'y briefly under Thatcher and held the same job under Major for around a year.

We should also remember that while he was Tory leader, he adopted (or Crosby did) the same slogan that was much loved by the NF in the late 70s: "Are you thinking what we're thinking"?


----------



## kenny g (Jul 15, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Is it just me or does Gilberthorpe's story not have the ring of truth about it?


 The tables of cocaine aspect seemed especially improbable. Unless they were being served particularly shit powder, or had developed monumental tolerances, the idea of tables of powder getting shoved up their hooters prior to having to give speeches etc the next day sounds like absolute bollocks. Maybe a few lines laid out discretely but tables of the stuff sounds like BS to me.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2014)

elbows said:


> And according to Exaro, Charles Napier has been arrested as part of operation Fairbank.
> 
> Napier is half-brother of John Whittingdale MP, Conservative.
> 
> Further background of Charles Napier is mentioned in this Mirror article from last year for those struggling to recall who is who in the whole PIE angle. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-scandal-charles-napier-could-1430365


Now charged along with another man.



> Charles Napier, 66, of Sherborne, Dorset, is accused of inciting a child to commit an act of gross indecency.
> 
> Richard Alston is charged with five counts of indecent assault and three counts of gross indecency with a child.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 15, 2014)

kenny g said:


> The tables of cocaine aspect seemed especially improbable. Unless they were being served particularly shit powder, or had developed monumental tolerances, the idea of tables of powder getting shoved up their hooters prior to having to give speeches etc the next day sounds like absolute bollocks. Maybe a few lines laid out discretely but tables of the stuff sounds like BS to me.


 Well, yes, this was my view a couple of pages back:



Wilf said:


> Must admit when I read his story some of it did read like an attempt to get all the most bizarre, dead, Tories at one party, raping kids and doing coke.  Not sure why but I somehow struggle to see Boyles-Rodent doing lines.  Trouble is with these stories, ultimately the truth is always worse than you imagined.


The bloke has a grieveance and is pretty much admitting to criminal behaviour himself.  It may have its origin in real events but sounded overdone.  You do wonder what games the papers are playing, pretty much willing to run anything on the dead, but terrified to go with the chapter and verse they will undoubtedly have on a number of leading politicians.  Not unexpected, but no real sense of there being any campaigning journalism.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 15, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Now charged along with another man.


 Napier was linked to Righton a couple of years ago.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 15, 2014)

is there any link between operation YEWTREE and operation FAIRBANK?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Napier was linked to Righton a couple of years ago.


Through PIE - Napier is ex-treasurer. And yes, they were very close indeed.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 15, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Through PIE - Napier is ex-treasurer. *And yes, they were very close indeed*.


I've just been reading this article, from a couple of years ago, about the pair of them +

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-scandal-charles-napier-could-1430365


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 15, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Is it just me or does Gilberthorpe's story not have the ring of truth about it? There was something about the way it worded that sounded to me how it might read if someone was farbricating a sensational story for the tabloids. And Rhodes Boyson doing coke, hmmm. By contrast, Alex Wheatle's account in the Mirror yesterday seemed genuine to me, the unnamed adults men roaming around the childrens' home, no-one quite knowing quite what their legitimate role was.
> 
> I may be wrong. But I reckon the papers' sudden frenzy to run their own scoop may have led to individuals thinking they can make a few bob.
> 
> ...








There will be alot of muddying the waters and disinformation to make the public believe its too incredible to be true. I expect lots of fake witnesses who will be discredited.

There should be a full inquiry into the Monday club, its linked to nearly all of these events, its seems to be a nest of far right hang em and flog em type degenerates, the same mixed up weirdos who outwardly oppose gay equal rights, its no coincidence far right authoritarian types are liked to abuse, their worldview is one of abusing people less fortunate and all about power and control, scum.

William Hague being around such degenerates at an early age most likely started out as a victim as well.

To think these scum who deserve a hard death for their crimes against the innocent and the people, who wrecked the country had the audacity to call the brave IRA soldiers who died on hunger strike criminals.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jul 15, 2014)

Quite possible.

Disagree about Howard though, whatever his many faults from a political perspective he certainly wasn't into the homicidal depravity of the likes of Edward Heath


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 15, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Well, yes, this was my view a couple of pages back:
> 
> The bloke has a grieveance and is pretty much admitting to criminal behaviour himself.  It may have its origin in real events but sounded overdone.  You do wonder what games the papers are playing, pretty much willing to run anything on the dead, but terrified to go with the chapter and verse they will undoubtedly have on a number of leading politicians.  Not unexpected, but no real sense of there being any campaigning journalism.



Gilberthorpe's use of the term 'rent boys' leaves an even more unpleasant taste in the mouth given that by his own admission he is the one who exemplifies all the negative connotations he intends by it.

I also note the way he has been promoted to being a "whistleblower". Presumably the justification for using the word is his story of the dossier he supposedly sent Thatcher. (Doubtless another one that has gone "missing"). Apart from that the only thing even close to 'whistleblowing' is whatever he told Max Clifford and/or the Sunday Mirror in 1997 when he was paid to help expose Piers Merchant.



> How did the Sunday Mirror get this? It was arranged through Anthony Gilberthorpe, and filmed at his York home, the apparatus being set up by a surveillance expert.
> 
> It is understood that Mr Gilberthorpe, who had worked for Mr Merchant in the mid 80s when he was MP for Newcastle Central and subsequently kept in touch, took the story to the Sunday Mirror at the end of last week. A figure of around pounds 25,000 was negotiated. Mr Gilberthorpe has not been available for comment since.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/anatomy-of-a-sting-how-an-mp-was-trapped-1236130.html

(For those who have forgotten him the late Piers Merchant was a serious contender for most stupid Tory MP of his generation. He was first set up by The Sun as having an affair with a Ms Cox whose agent just happened to be Max Clifford. 


> Cox had been speculatively sent along to a Tory meeting to get close to Merchant, just in case his eye for an attractive young girl got the better of his judgment. (...) Unbeknown to the MP, a photographer from _The Sun_ was concealed in a nearby ditch


Almost unbelievably he then actually began an affair with her and was promptly caught out by the Sunday Mirror having been set up by Gilberthorpe. 


> Merchant took Cox to the Tory conference in Blackpool that year, and afterwards for a two-night break in York at a discreet flat owned by his former researcher, Anthony Gilberthorpe. In fact, Merchant was about to fall victim to another tabloid sting. Gilberthorpe had been paid £25,000 by _the Sunday Mirror_, whose journalists had wired the flat with concealed video recorders to capture the couple's cavortings.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/6224063/Piers-Merchant.html

Cue resignation).


----------



## teqniq (Jul 15, 2014)




----------



## phildwyer (Jul 15, 2014)

kenny g said:


> The tables of cocaine aspect seemed especially improbable. Unless they were being served particularly shit powder, or had developed monumental tolerances, the idea of tables of powder getting shoved up their hooters prior to having to give speeches etc the next day sounds like absolute bollocks. Maybe a few lines laid out discretely but tables of the stuff sounds like BS to me.



Aye.  There was very little cocaine available in Britain in the '80s.


----------



## elbows (Jul 15, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Is it just me or does Gilberthorpe's story not have the ring of truth about it?



I find it impossible to judge. No important aspects of the story stuck me as being beyond the reasonable bounds of possibility. He clearly has an axe to grind about the tory party he dealt with and failed to progress through in his quest for power, and both he and probably the journalist(s) who spoke to him didn't hold back on making the story tabloid-tastic. But on the other hand I have no trouble imagining such parties having taken place, the details of which would come already well setup for typical tabloid banter, no modification needed.

For me to attempt to judge the story, I'm left with few options other than to study the deceased people he named. And to wonder how many members of the press are now aware of the living people it sounds like he probably named!

For me to judge the dead ones named is tricky in many instances. Without some personal knowledge or contacts who were there at the time, it is pointless for me to attempt to peer inside the 'huge closet' of the tories, as the only ones I'll spot are the more obvious ones or ones that the press has had fun with over the years hinting about. There will be others that are not obvious,it is futile for me to make assumptions about how likely it was they were gay or at least ambivalent about which sex they were screwing, let alone whether they would indulge in that kind of scene, snort cocaine, abuse underage boys, etc.

For example, if I start a quest to learn more about Dr Alistair Smith, and start off reading an obituary to see if there were any very vague hints slipped in, I'm left clutching at very thin straws like this:



> Some dozen years ago, he surprised many by deciding to spend his retirement in Sri Lanka, and he settled in the township of Bentota.



http://www.scotsman.com/news/obitua...local-party-at-the-tender-age-of-28-1-2452002

I can't build a useful picture with stuff like that, any more than I can look at some of the theories people have about the reshuffle and know which angle I'd like to buy into, other than 'no idea'. I guess I am frustrated that I don't really have any interesting new dots to join despite weeks of, at times, press frenzy. The Gilberthorpe stuff is the first stuff I've really heard about regarding politicians and child abuse that wasn't already in the press or public/semi-public rumour mill decades ago. It would be really rather useful to know if its a bullshit red herring or not.

As for use of the term 'rent boys', when I use it I will normally be doing so precisely because I want to make points that involve all the loaded baggage that come with that term. I am entirely unqualified to talk about the subject, but I know its a part of many of these stories, and it pains me that it tends to only get mentioned with the passing use of the phrase 'rent boy' in the press. And the tabloids may be the ones to throw the phrase around so lightly, but I see few other segments of society that are prepared to talk in detail about young male sex workers and the couple of different ways that they are part of these stories of historical abuse by the powerful. Plus I feel the need to harp on about this because when it comes to the question of whether such abuses occur as much in the present age as they did in the past, I would think that young sex workers would be on the front lines of any modern forms of the activity. I suppose if we push these sorts of points to their natural conclusion, we might get into issues of power that could be applied far more broadly and would certainly apply to politicians and political systems. e.g. when it comes to power and exploitation, how much less guilty are you of abuse if the person handed to you on a plate was placed in their current predicament and losing end of the power dynamic by abuse and neglect they suffered at the hands of others, institutions, ideologies, indoctrination regimes etc at an earlier time?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 15, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Now charged along with another man.


The timing is interesting. Sacrificial lambs, in the hope that it will dampen the public appetite for more investigations?


----------



## elbows (Jul 15, 2014)

existentialist said:


> The timing is interesting. Sacrificial lambs, in the hope that it will dampen the public appetite for more investigations?



I doubt it, not least because the appetite is clearly for 'bigger names'. Its probably just the justice system finally reaching the charging stage after a long journey.


----------



## elbows (Jul 15, 2014)

Clive Driscoll has spoken to Newsnight! I'm still absorbing it and looking at the detail, on the face of it what he says matches what has already been said happened to his investigation.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28316874



> Mr Driscoll told BBC Newsnight that while conducting a 1998 inquiry into allegations of abuse in children's homes in Lambeth, south London, in the 1980s, he was passed a list of suspects' names, including politicians, that he wanted to investigate.
> 
> Speaking for the first time since retirement, he said: "Some of the names were people that were locally working, some people that were, if you like, working nationally.
> 
> ...


----------



## existentialist (Jul 15, 2014)

elbows said:


> I doubt it, not least because the appetite is clearly for 'bigger names'. Its probably just the justice system finally reaching the charging stage after a long journey.


Fair enough. I bet a few of the more naive party faithful might have hoped that a few scraps tossed to the baying hounds might distract them a little, though


----------



## elbows (Jul 16, 2014)

The first 3 minutes of my local bbc midlands news bulletin tonight involved the Peter Righton stuff, and the latest midlands-based person to come forwards and make noises about how claims regarding Rightons wider network were treated by government etc back in the day. There's not a lot of detail here really, but it demonstrates how those now speaking up from the lower/regional echelons of the establishment past are becoming something of a chorus right now. In this case the former head of social services for Hereford and Worcester many years ago, David Tombs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b048rxtj/midlands-today-15072014

edited to add that it seems this story broke some days ago via a radio 4 interview:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28275611



> Mr Tombs, who in charge of social services in his area for 20 years, claims that when Righton was arrested in 1992, he became aware of information through the police investigation that suggested a paedophilic network was operating.
> 
> He said what he learned would have been of "national concern" and told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It was coming across to me at the time that there were names there that were linked into the establishment, if you like.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 16, 2014)

elbows said:


> <snip>
> 
> ... those now speaking up from the lower/regional echelons of the establishment past are becoming something of a chorus right now.
> 
> <snip>



Which is quite an interesting phenomenon.


----------



## laptop (Jul 16, 2014)

phildwyer said:


> Aye.  There was very little cocaine available in Britain in the '80s.



False. Cocaine was freely available _in certain circles_. Source: personal experience.

All that Dwyer is saying is that _he_ didn't have the connections.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

laptop, this is a serious question. Do you think it credible that snorting and buggering could have been going on at the Tory conference without the press being aware? Or are you suggesting the press were party to corruption? 
*shields eyes*


----------



## ohmyliver (Jul 16, 2014)

laptop said:


> False. Cocaine was freely available _in certain circles_. Source: personal experience.
> 
> All that Dwyer is saying is that _he_ didn't have the connections.



To be fair to Dwyer, I thought he was being ironic in that post.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

The thing that enrages me - oh, there's lots that enrages me - is the idea that homeless working class boys were regarded as expendable by the elite. That might not be an actual thing, I suppose. But it's certainly a thing that some boys were exploited by some powerful men.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2014)

Not necessarily prominent people or an elite, but :

Author Alex Wheatle: 'Systematic abuse where I grew up'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28295982


----------



## laptop (Jul 16, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> laptop, this is a serious question. Do you think it credible that snorting and buggering could have been going on at the Tory conference without the press being aware? Or are you suggesting the press were party to corruption?
> *shields eyes*



It's not _that_ difficult to organise a private party about which only select invitees know, is it?


----------



## Greebo (Jul 16, 2014)

laptop said:


> False. Cocaine was freely available _in certain circles_. Source: personal experience.
> 
> All that Dwyer is saying is that _he_ didn't have the connections.


Ramsey Dukes describes cocaine as toryism in powder form.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 16, 2014)

> A former Scotland Yard detective who won plaudits for his work on cases including the murder of Stephen Lawrence has claimed that he was moved from his post earlier when he revealed plans to investigate politicians over child abuse claims.
> 
> Speaking about his inquiries in 1998 into activity alleged to have taken place in Lambeth children's homes in the 1980s, retired detective chief inspector Clive Driscoll said that his work was "all too uncomfortable to a lot of people".
> 
> ...



http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/16/uk-detective-removed-post-alleged-child-abuse-claims


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 16, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Not necessarily prominent people or an elite, but :
> 
> Author Alex Wheatle: 'Systematic abuse where I grew up'
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28295982




Shirley Oaks was raised to the ground, also allegations of missing children reported by asbuse victims not investigated.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 16, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Clive Driscoll
> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/16/uk-detective-removed-post-alleged-child-abuse-claims


 
Good luck to him, hope he keeps piping up about this and some of the chain above him gets exposed. you can but hope. Id be scared if i was him though


----------



## Quartz (Jul 16, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> The thing that enrages me - oh, there's lots that enrages me - is the idea that homeless working class boys were regarded as expendable by the elite.



The lower orders of both sexes have always been regarded as expendable by the elite. Hell, they regarded their junior children as expendable, to be sent off to war or to the church if male and married off in advantageous alliances or sent to nunneries or become governesses if female.


----------



## Dan U (Jul 16, 2014)

the crime correspondent at the Telegraph is reporting the results of a massive nationwide police operation against suspected paedophiles

lots of tweets, but headline is over 600 arrested

https://twitter.com/evansma

given some of the specfics he is reporting, assuming a lot of these arrests happened recently, rather than 600 doors being kicked in this morning.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 16, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/16/660-suspected-paedophiles-arrested-uk

Big numbers, 660 arrests, over 400 children taken into care (where one hopes that lessons have been learned so that they won't get molested by toffs or badgered about Satan by xtian loons) but this looks at first sight like some sort of internet child porn thing, rather than anything directly connected to high-level abuse rings.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2014)

Dan U any sign of any prominent individuals? or politicians?


----------



## Dan U (Jul 16, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Dan U any sign of any prominent individuals? or politicians?



there were some notable omissions from the list of professions he gave



*Martin Evans* @evansma · 54m
BREAKING: Doctors, teachers, scout leaders, care workers and former police officers are among those arrested.


----------



## Dan U (Jul 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> rather than anything directly connected to high-level abuse rings.



that was my first thought if i am honest. it's all a bit quick to be that.


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jul 16, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Dan U any sign of any prominent individuals? or politicians?



"The NCA stressed that none of those arrested is a serving or former MP or member of the Government."


----------



## Betsy (Jul 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/16/660-suspected-paedophiles-arrested-uk
> 
> Big numbers, 660 arrests, *over 400 children taken into care *(where one hopes that lessons have been learned so that they won't get molested by toffs or badgered about Satan by xtian loons) but this looks at first sight like some sort of internet child porn thing, rather than anything directly connected to high-level abuse rings.


Makes you bloody weep


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

400 children. Bloody helll.


----------



## laptop (Jul 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/16/660-suspected-paedophiles-arrested-uk
> 
> Big numbers, 660 arrests, over 400 children taken into care (where one hopes that lessons have been learned so that they won't get molested by toffs or badgered about Satan by xtian loons) but this looks at first sight like some sort of internet child porn thing, rather than anything directly connected to high-level abuse rings.





> "Over the past six months we have seen unprecedented levels of cooperation to deliver this result."



I wouldn't be surprised to hear that that cooperation was with GCHQ _etc_. 

Possibly as early as this afternoon, when the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill (DRIP) has its second reading in the House of Lords.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 16, 2014)

This news is sickening.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

laptop said:


> I wouldn't be surprised to hear that that cooperation was with GCHQ _etc_.
> 
> Possibly as early as this afternoon, when the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill (DRIP) has its second reading in the House of Lords.


Laptop, you cynic. But yes. Not that I'd be willing to sacrifice 400 children on the altar of internet privacy if there was no other way of catching the perps. If there really are perps and this isn't another Cleveland.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 16, 2014)

scalyboy said:


> Is it just me or does Gilberthorpe's story not have the ring of truth about it? There was something about the way it worded that sounded to me how it might read if someone was farbricating a sensational story for the tabloids. And Rhodes Boyson doing coke, hmmm. By contrast, Alex Wheatle's account in the Mirror yesterday seemed genuine to me, the unnamed adults men roaming around the childrens' home, no-one quite knowing quite what their legitimate role was.
> 
> I may be wrong. But I reckon the papers' sudden frenzy to run their own scoop may have led to individuals thinking they can make a few bob.



Why assume it's about making money?
When a known arsehole/reprobate starts touting stories that delight the more lurid sections of the tabloids, it's just as likely to be about muddying the waters with disinformation, as a bout lining his pockets.



> Equally - and this may be just me being suspicious - I was dubious about the item claiming MI5 had had it in for Leon Brittan and were, what, concocting, or suddenly making available, these allegations, or had done in the 1980s re. the rape claim. It suggested there was an element of anti-semitism in MI5 and that they objected to a Jewish Home Secretary...but Thatcher's Cabinet had several other Jewish members...Howard was at one stage H.S. as well.



Michael Howard was baptised into Christianity, he was never inducted into Judaism (bar mitzvah'd). Ergo, not a Jew, merely of Jewish ancestry.  Much the same with Riflkind, IIRC.



> It read to me like the sort of thing Fred Holroyd and Colin Wallace recalled doing, working for the 'secret state' re. Ireland in the 1970s - deliberate spread of misinformation, sometimes to deflect attention away, sometimes just to muddy the waters.



Well quite. Why wouldn't they use such a tactic? It's worked so often before.


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 16, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Why assume it's about making money?
> When a known arsehole/reprobate starts touting stories that delight the more lurid sections of the tabloids, it's just as likely to be about muddying the waters with disinformation, as a bout lining his pockets.


Yes - I was thinking, after I had posted that, maybe his motivation is a bit of both? People are complex sometimes. And the disinfo part *might* be on behalf of the secret state, or it might just be an individual's malice. Why do people create computer viruses with no financial gain?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 16, 2014)

Bit of a reworking ofoother news I think, but anyway... 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/48...ation-Exchange-says-Home-Office-whistleblower


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 16, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-28330779
*Cyril Smith: Detective alleged 'prima facie' proof of MP's guilt*



> A senior detective investigating sex abuse claims against Cyril Smith told his boss there was "prima facie" evidence of the MP's guilt.
> 
> The detective's 1970 report to the Chief Constable of Lancashire said the Liberal MP would have been "at the mercy of a competent counsel".
> 
> ...



(...)



> The former MP for Rochdale was interviewed by the detective superintendent, who reported to former chief constable William Palfrey that "it seems impossible to excuse [Smith's] conduct".
> 
> "Over a considerable period of time, while sheltering beneath a veneer of responsibility, he has used his unique position to indulge in a series of indecent episodes with young boys towards whom he had a special responsibility," he wrote.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 16, 2014)

Moved to emerging abuse stories thread.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2014)

I thought it interesting the BBC report says:

"The NCA stressed that none of those arrested was a serving or former MP or member of the government."

Wonder why they felt the need to say that?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> BBC are using some interesting language to talk about the big child porn bust announced today:
> 
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28326128
> ...


It's curious wording.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Jul 16, 2014)

Dan U said:


> there were some notable omissions from the list of professions he gave
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Terrifying how many child abusers hide in plain sight..... people still seem surprised when they read about or hear about abusers working or placing themselves in roles that bring them into close contact with children.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2014)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Terrifying how many child abusers hide in plain sight..... people still seem surprised when they read about or hear about abusers working or placing themselves in roles that bring them into close contact with children.


I am not surprised, it is where I expect those who are attracted to children to be, namely, where there are children!


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Terrifying how many child abusers hide in plain sight..... people still seem surprised when they read about or hear about abusers working or placing themselves in roles that bring them into close contact with children.


Yet jokes about vicars and choirboys, scoutmasters and scouts, were common when I was a child (more years ago than I choose to remember). Did those jokes come out of nowhere, and how did that levity work with real examples? I remember a baffling case in our local paper, which was regarded with horror. How did the two things, the jokes and the horror, sit side by side? Perhaps this is normal, like jokes about war, torture and death.


----------



## Greebo (Jul 16, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> <snip>How did the two things, the jokes and the horror, sit side by side? Perhaps this is normal, like jokes about war, torture and death.


Coping by distancing, gallows humour, if you don't laugh you'd cry ad nauseam.  There's nothing new about that.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Jul 16, 2014)

weltweit said:


> I am not surprised, it is where I expect those who are attracted to children to be, namely, where there are children!



Me neither..



bluescreen said:


> Yet jokes about vicars and choirboys, scoutmasters and scouts, were common when I was a child (more years ago than I choose to remember). Did those jokes come out of nowhere, and how did that levity work with real examples? I remember a baffling case in our local paper, which was regarded with horror. How did the two things, the jokes and the horror, sit side by side? Perhaps this is normal, like jokes about war, torture and death.



Agreed


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 16, 2014)

Greebo said:


> Coping by distancing, gallows humour, if you don't laugh you'd cry ad nauseam.  There's nothing new about that.



Absolutely. Jokes can be a way of talking unpalatable truths. Truths that may not even be realized straight away as truths.


----------



## snadge (Jul 16, 2014)

~Gothika~ comes to mind, an extremely underated film.

We will be fed ~plebs~ and corpses, nothing of note will change


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 16, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> It's curious wording.


Looking at the BBC's more detailed report, one can infer that the protection takes several forms - not just taking the child into care, but taking the suspect into custody and perhaps even simply putting the child on the At Risk register


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 16, 2014)

Does anyone know what happened to the dossier which Colin Wallace/Fred Holroyd sent to Downing Street in the early 1980s, entitled ‘Political and Security Implications Regarding the Disclosure of Security Classified Information to Assist in the Investigation of the Allegations Relating to the Kincora Boys Hostel, Belfast’? Neither the Foot book nor Tam Dalyell's (unanswered) Parliamentary question of June 1990 seem particularly clear on the issue.

Did the Hughes Inquiry receive any of the 1970s material on Kincora supplied with it by Wallace? Having had a cursory look through the scan of a photocopy of the 368 page typewritten Hughes Report released under FoI (so not the easiest to search through) I cannot see any mention of Wallace or the dossier in the list of witnesses and evidence at the back.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 17, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Does anyone know what happened to the dossier which Colin Wallace/Fred Holroyd sent to Downing Street in the early 1980s, entitled ‘Political and Security Implications Regarding the Disclosure of Security Classified Information to Assist in the Investigation of the Allegations Relating to the Kincora Boys Hostel, Belfast’? Neither the Foot book nor Tam Dalyell's (unanswered) Parliamentary question of June 1990 seem particularly clear on the issue.
> 
> Did the Hughes Inquiry receive any of the 1970s material on Kincora supplied with it by Wallace? Having had a cursory look through the scan of a photocopy of the 368 page typewritten Hughes Report released under FoI (so not the easiest to search through) I cannot see any mention of Wallace or the dossier in the list of witnesses and evidence at the back.



I read the Paul Foot book recently. It is unclear what happenedd to the Wallace / Holroyd dossier. At different times it has been ignored, lost, found, declared false, unimportant, etc.

IIRC The Hughes Enquiry received the dossier, but wasnt admitted as evidence.

I cant remember exactly. I have the book here i will have a quick look in a bit. Have a vague memory of the dossier being stolen from somewhere secure (possibly the enquiry itself) and then mysteriously reappearing when a fuss was made


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> I read the Paul Foot book recently. It is unclear what happenedd to the Wallace / Holroyd dossier. At different times it has been ignored, lost, found, declared false, unimportant, etc.
> 
> IIRC The Hughes Enquiry received the dossier, but wasnt admitted as evidence.
> 
> I cant remember exactly. I have the book here i will have a quick look in a bit. Have a vague memory of the dossier being stolen from somewhere secure (possibly the enquiry itself) and then mysteriously reappearing when a fuss was made


From my quick scan through Foot last night, Wallace was at one point told by the Defence Minister's PS that parts of his correspondence & dossier had been found, copied and sent to Hughes, including ‘Political and Security Implications’ - only for Wallace to discover that this was in fact only an expurgated document/memo with the same title (p334 onwards).


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2014)

We really need a tag facility so we can more easily track individual posts and threads.

David Barclay, Mr S. Quinn, Major General Len Garrett, Simon Routh, Lord Trefgarne, David Mercier


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2014)

Lo - an article on the BBC News website today about Kincora cover-ups:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28341109

Plus one from yesterday I missed:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28322972


----------



## the button (Jul 17, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> We really need a tag facility so we can more easily track individual posts and threads.
> 
> David Barclay, Mr S. Quinn, Major General Len Garrett, Simon Routh, Lord Trefgarne, David Mercier


Add Sir Nicholas Fairbairn to that list...

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...irbairn-in-child-abuse-scandal-link-1-3474912


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 17, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> From my quick scan through Foot last night, Wallace was at one point told by the Defence Minister's PS that parts of his correspondence & dossier had been found, copied and sent to Hughes, including ‘Political and Security Implications’ - only for Wallace to discover that this was in fact only an expurgated document/memo with the same title (p334 onwards).



I have it in front of me now, that's right. That chapter (The Secret State) goes into some depth about the dossier.

The dossier was typed up and sent with a letter to the Prime Ministers Office 1/11/84. No copies were made before it was sent. A note was sent the following day acknowledging receipt of the letter. A note was sent 21/11/84 from David Barclay, the PM's private secretary saying that "Mr Wallace's case has been the subject of the most thorough consideration' ... on Kincora 'Mr Wallace has been given every opportunity to make his views known'.

As the book establishes this is not true as Colin Wallace has been bound by the Official Secrets Act. Colin replies and writes back 14/12/84. The dossier is returned to Wallace / Holroyd. Except the dossier returned was not the file sent. It was a copy, annotated in pencil. They assume that the original has been kept at Downing Street, or passed onto the MoD or others. 

Colin's second letter does not receive a reply. 

Colin is then asked to appear before representatives of the Hughes Inquiry. Colin does not want to do this as he is bound by the official secrets act. The point of writing to the Prime Minister is to get permission to tell his story. This is clearly not given, as the only reply he gets is that he has had a chance to tell his story, which he hasn't as it would have been illegal due to the official secrets act, and this is why he did not speak to a previous inquiry, the Terry Inquiry. 

In addition, the terms of reference of both the Terry Inquiry and the Hughes Inquiry are extremely narrow and do not cover the points that Colin wants to make about a military and intelligence cover up at Kincora. His solution is that if the Prime Minister passed the dossier to to the Inquiry Committee, she would do so as head of the Intelligence Services and provide Colin with the authority to disclose what he knew. 

Colin tells the representatives of the Hughes Enquiry that the Prime Ministers Office has copy of the dossier. The committee is then told that the dossier was returned to Wallace / Holroyd. Colin writes to the Prime Minister stating that this is not true, and that they returned a copy and kept the original. To this allegation there is no reply. The Inquiry Committee loses patience with Colin and his official secrets deadlock. Colin wants to talk but cannot find a way to do so legally. 

The dossier is then made available to the Hughes Inquiry. However it is not the original but a memorandum dated March 1982, with the same title but different pagination and variations in the text, which Colin recognised as coming not from the bundle sent to the Prime Ministers office but from the material he produced at Wormwood Scrubs in 1982 for his solicitor in response to the request from the RUC for information for the Terry Inquiry. 

Colin complains about the dossier made available to the Prime Minister not being made available to the Hughes Inquiry. 

Six weeks later, at the end of January 1986, the Hughes Inquiry report was published. A passage in it, seventeen paragraphs long, refers to Colin Wallace.

The report suggests that Colin Wallace was of no interest to them until they received via Fred Holroyd and the Essex police his documents about Kincora, in particular the four page memo dated 8/10/74 which listed Colin's growing concern about Kincora. 

...

The dossier was later stolen and returned in mysterious circumstances:

if, in the wake of the Hughes Inquiry, anyone had been in any doubt about which documents did go to the Prime Ministers office, there was at least some proof. There was no doubt that Fred Holroyd had received a copy of the dossier, and it was complete. He handed the copy, stressing the fact that it was the only one in circulation, to Edward Taylor, Tory MP for Southend. He kept it in the most secure place he could find, a locked cupboard in his office in the Norman Shaw buildings, which are reserved for MPs and HoC staff and guarded by Police 24 hours a day. In the first week of April 1986, Mr Taylor decided to consult the file. It had vanished...

Mr Taylor MP kicks up a fuss, reports the theft to the police and and starts writing to the leaders of all parties, that there had been an unexplained burglary in the HoC and if his office wasn't safe, whose was? 

The result was dramatic. A fortnight after the loss of the file was reported to the police, and only a day or two after Colin's letters had reached their destination, Teddy Taylor walked into his constituency offices in Nelson Street, Southend, and saw the large red file on his desk. He never resolved the mystery of its disappearance...

That is not quite word for word, I am summarising a lot of it. There is much more in that chapter.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2014)

Cheers Dillinger4 - you summarise it more clearly than Foot managed


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 17, 2014)

Former Army Intelligence Officer on Kincora. All roads lead to MI5.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...ys-exarmy-officer-colin-wallace-30438022.html


----------



## scalyboy (Jul 17, 2014)

the button said:


> Add Sir Nicholas Fairbairn to that list...
> 
> http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...irbairn-in-child-abuse-scandal-link-1-3474912


Is the list of names mentioned in this article the same as the one that was posted upthread, as a photo/scan?


----------



## Betsy (Jul 17, 2014)

the button said:


> Add Sir Nicholas Fairbairn to that list...
> 
> http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...irbairn-in-child-abuse-scandal-link-1-3474912



_"In 2000 *the daughter of a prominent Scottish lawyer, who was never publicly named, alleged Fairbairn was part of a paedophile ring.* At the time the claims were angrily rejected by his family. Last night Sir Nicholas’ eldest daughter Charlotte told Scotland on Sunday: “There’s nothing I can say. He’s been dead for 20 years.”_

Wonder where she is now?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2014)

Here's some of the relevant correspondence from and to Fred Holroyd in connection with Colin Wallace's Kincora documents:

(Covering letter, Holroyrd to Thatcher, 1/11/84)


(List of documents attached to above letter, including first item ‘Political and Security Implications’)
  

(Response from PM's PS David Barclay to Holroyd, 21/11/84)
 

(Response by R P Hatfield, General Staff Secretariat 2, MOD, to Holroyd in relation to letter to Lord Trefgarne, 17/3/86)


----------



## kenny g (Jul 17, 2014)

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...e-all-seemingly-lumped-together-30417218.html is a great article as it puts in context the reports we are now hearing. Pretty much reflects some chats with work mates over the last few days.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 17, 2014)

good work Dave & Dillinger.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 17, 2014)

I'd stress that Paul Foot goes into a lot of depth in his book about Colin Wallace. It is a first class piece of investigative journalism and really is worth reading, especially in relation to this thread. To anybody who hasn't read it, you should.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 18, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> I'd stress that Paul Foot goes into a lot of depth in his book about Colin Wallace. It is a first class piece of investigative journalism and really is worth reading, especially in relation to this thread. To anybody who hasn't read it, you should.



As are Lobster's various additions to the narrative.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 18, 2014)

This thread is profoundly depressing, yet the truth must come out.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 18, 2014)

Scallywag "Boys for Questions" is an interesting read.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 18, 2014)

Nonsense like this - matter-of-fact nonsense tossed out as though providing any kind of evidence or context is beneath them - makes me despair:


----------



## laptop (Jul 18, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Nonsense like this - matter-of-fact nonsense tossed out as though any providing any kind of evidence or context is beneath them - makes me despair...



But what would Mossad do with such a collection?

(Though I suppose Shin Bet would have an obvious use for it: blackmailing domestic politicians.)


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 18, 2014)

Lizard porn.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 18, 2014)

I'm idly curious about Icke. He is a thing, regrettably. It was years before I twigged that the lizard thing is probably a fool's mask, allowing him to speak without being taken seriously or sued. People go to his forums for gossip and sometimes he seems to have the real dope. But basically anti-Semitic and weirdly authoritarian while affecting to take an anti-authoritarian stance... I haven't made a serious study and feel contaminated on the rare occasions I go there, but maybe someone else here has looked at it more dispassionately.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 19, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I'm idly curious about Icke. He is a thing, regrettably. It was years before I twigged that the lizard thing is probably a fool's mask, allowing him to speak without being taken seriously or sued. People go to his forums for gossip and sometimes he seems to have the real dope. But basically anti-Semitic and weirdly authoritarian while affecting to take an anti-authoritarian stance... I haven't made a serious study and feel contaminated on the rare occasions I go there, but maybe someone else here has looked at it more dispassionately.


David Icke either

A - Fell for all the nonsense the Discordians ever put out there hook line and sinker,

or

B - Is himself a discordian, and deliberately sowing the seeds of confusion and mistrust of authority by fair means or foul as is the discordian way.

or some mix of he 2, which would mean he was unaware of the entire discordian fictional origins of the illuminati legend etc. but is just naturally inclined to their way of thinking anyway on the validity of viewing truth as something that can be altered by changing the public perception of the situation. Ie convince enough people that black actually is white, and eventually it comes to pass that white becomes known as black and vice versa.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I'm idly curious about Icke. He is a thing, regrettably. It was years before I twigged that the lizard thing is probably a fool's mask, allowing him to speak without being taken seriously or sued. People go to his forums for gossip and sometimes he seems to have the real dope. But basically anti-Semitic and weirdly authoritarian while affecting to take an anti-authoritarian stance... I haven't made a serious study and feel contaminated on the rare occasions I go there, but maybe someone else here has looked at it more dispassionately.


On a similar, though not precisely relevant note I have been idly curious about allegations of satanism. I haven't seen that mentioned much (if at all) on urban75 forums - though I only came to them recently - but elsewhere I have heard tell of allegations from at least one of Savile's victims that they saw him in robes and mask officiating in some kind of ritual. This has made me wonder if the "Satanic Panic" of the late 80s / early 90s was quite as overblown as people have generally assumed, or if there might not have been a kernel of truth to it.
I mean, as a professional psychologist it strikes me that if one is a serial violent child molestor, perhaps even child murderer (and as we know there are plenty of allegations of kids being thrown off boats etc.), then with the inversion of typical morality required to have that lifestyle, perhaps in one's head it is not all that far to satanism. Perhaps satanism might even provide a way of legitimating what one is doing (humans do seem to have this weird need to do this). Just throwing the idea out there really. In fact I'm  assuming it is likely to have been addressed already somewhere on these forums and would appreciate a pointer for the n00b.


----------



## Libertad (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> In fact I'm  assuming it is likely to have been addressed already somewhere on these forums and would appreciate a pointer for the n00b.



You could use the search function, top rhs. of this page.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

Libertad said:


> You could use the search function, top rhs. of this page.



I just did. It wasn't much help. A lot of people saying that SRA is a load of nonsense, without really saying why. I mean, take Ian Watkins for example, it hardly seems implausible that he is a satanist. Or an older case: I guess what really got me thinking about this was reading up for the first time on the 'Beast of Jersey', Edward Paisnel - a guy who clearly thought of himself as possessing some kind of demonic power.

I guess I'm just trying to work out where to draw the line now between conspiracy and conspiracy theory, because the boundary seems to have shifted quite a bit over the last couple of years...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> I mean, take Ian Watkins for example, it hardly seems implausible that he is a satanist.



Speaking as “a professional psychologist” why exactly do you believe that it “hardly seems implausible” that Ian Watkins is a satanist, in lieu of any actual evidence?


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Speaking as “a professional psychologist” why exactly do you believe that it “hardly seems implausible” that Ian Watkins is a satanist, in lieu of any actual evidence?



For the reason I stated above, viz., that it would have provided a way of internally legitimating his horrendous pattern of behaviour. The main alternative explanation for why people do such obviously evil things is that they dissociate from the part of themselves that does it. This is often the case (it's pretty typical with war crimes such as those that occurred in the Holocaust, for example) but I'm not sure that it applies to everyone. Cases such as Watkins and Savile seem to have built so much of their lives around the evil that they did that it seems to me rather to have been an integral part of their selves. Perhaps they saw a religious dimension to that, perhaps not. But as I say, to me it is not at first glance implausible that there might have been a religious dimension.

In the case of Savile the allegations may well be down to dodgy 'recovered memories' but in the case of Watkins there seems a bit more to it: allegations that girls were persuaded (or perhaps just offered) to do 'satanic stuff' for him; that a satanist organisation made threats against Peaches Geldof for naming the two women sentenced alongside him; and just the general imagery that he used, including his band name (I realise that this is pretty common with rock musicians though!).

Turning your question on its head, do you think that it is implausible that Watkins is a satanist? If so, why? Do you believe there is no such thing as satanists?

I certainly don't believe that all, or even most child abuse cases involve satanism, or something like it; but I do think it might be worth asking whether it is genuinely a factor in some of these cases, rather than assuming that the allegations are always invented.


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> On a similar, though not precisely relevant note I have been idly curious about allegations of satanism. I haven't seen that mentioned much (if at all) on urban75 forums - though I only came to them recently - but elsewhere I have heard tell of allegations from at least one of Savile's victims that they saw him in robes and mask officiating in some kind of ritual. This has made me wonder if the "Satanic Panic" of the late 80s / early 90s was quite as overblown as people have generally assumed, or if there might not have been a kernel of truth to it.
> I mean, as a professional psychologist it strikes me that if one is a serial violent child molestor, perhaps even child murderer (and as we know there are plenty of allegations of kids being thrown off boats etc.), then with the inversion of typical morality required to have that lifestyle, perhaps in one's head it is not all that far to satanism. Perhaps satanism might even provide a way of legitimating what one is doing (humans do seem to have this weird need to do this). Just throwing the idea out there really. In fact I'm  assuming it is likely to have been addressed already somewhere on these forums and would appreciate a pointer for the n00b.




When you say "professional psychologist", what do you mean? Research? Clinical?


----------



## Red Cat (Jul 19, 2014)

I don't think that suggesting that it's not implausibe that Ian Watkins was a satanist is that helpful really, but the suggestion that it's not implausible that a minority of people who abuse children unconsciously justify their actions with a fantasy of some kind of inverted religious worship doesn't seem too far out to me. Perhaps a thread which is dedicated to gathering evidence isn't the best place for such musings though.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 19, 2014)

If we're going to do SRA, which as you may recall was an accusation directed at primarily working class families rather than at 'high-level' paedophile rings, can I suggest that we do it on a separate thread rather than shitting this one up with it?


----------



## Red Cat (Jul 19, 2014)

If that's a response to me, I don't recall much about it at all and it's not something I've given any thought to. It's not something I want to 'do'. But I agree with you it should go elsewhere for those that do.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> I don't think that suggesting that it's not implausibe that Ian Watkins was a satanist is that helpful really, but the suggestion that it's not implausible that a minority of people who abuse children unconsciously justify their actions with a fantasy of some kind of inverted religious worship doesn't seem too far out to me. Perhaps a thread which is dedicated to gathering evidence isn't the best place for such musings though.





Bernie Gunther said:


> If we're going to do SRA, which as you may recall was an accusation directed at primarily working class families rather than at 'high-level' paedophile rings, can I suggest that we do it on a separate thread rather than shitting this one up with it?



Yes I think you're both right, and I've been thinking myself that this wasn't the best thread for this (it was late ). Don't particularly feel like starting a new thread though. I'll just keep an eye on the dripfeed of allegations and see if there's anything that could be linked to occult practices, broadly defined. As I said I was mainly just wondering if it had been discussed seriously anywhere else on these forums, but it seems no-one is able to point out a location for that.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> When you say "professional psychologist", what do you mean? Research? Clinical?



Does it make a big difference? I don't really expect to be quizzed about my exact job role on a more-or-less anonymous internet forum. What job do you do?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 19, 2014)

I'm very willing to have the SRA discussion on a separate thread and to provide evidence to support my views on SRA, David Icke etc.

Just not on this one because I think any extended discussion here would be a derail.


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Does it make a big difference? I don't really expect to be quizzed about my exact job role on a more-or-less anonymous internet forum. What job do you do?



You raised the subject of your job as pertinent to your point. If I raise mine, then feel free to quiz me on it.


----------



## Red Cat (Jul 19, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> You raised the subject of your job as pertinent to your point. If I raise mine, then feel free to quiz me on it.



Oh come on, as a psychologist s/he thinks about people for a living. There's no need for such prodding.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> You raised the subject of your job as pertinent to your point. If I raise mine, then feel free to quiz me on it.



Sorry, I was just using my position as a psychologist as a cheap way to add a bit of weight to my random musings. Nothing more. I wasn't too sure of the point of your question to be honest, and I found it a little hostile. Perhaps if you clarify why you were asking it I might give you more details!


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

I admit that I certainly have no specialist insight into the minds of child abusers, if that's what you were trying to imply.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> I admit that I certainly have no specialist insight into the minds of child abusers, if that's what you were trying to imply.



Yeah you _say_ that. I'm saying nothing.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 19, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> Oh come on, as a psychologist s/he thinks about people for a living. There's no need for such prodding.



Clinical, experimental, social, based in health care practice, working in HE, researched focused; each of these would have a substantial impact on the skills and knowledge that a professional psychologist would bring to the discussion. In other words, once the original poster brought it up, it became a legitimate question...one that has since been answered.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2014)

"...speaking as a..."

Mumsnet thataway----------->


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 19, 2014)

Frances Lengel said:


> Yeah you _say_ that. I'm saying nothing.


shouldn't laugh.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

Frances Lengel said:


> Yeah you _say_ that. I'm saying nothing.





Louis MacNeice said:


> Clinical, experimental, social, based in health care practice, working in HE, researched focused; each of these would have a substantial impact on the skills and knowledge that a professional psychologist would bring to the discussion. In other words, once the original poster brought it up, it became a legitimate question...one that has since been answered.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice





brogdale said:


> "...speaking as a..."
> 
> Mumsnet thataway----------->





DotCommunist said:


> shouldn't laugh.



Oh sure, let's all haze the noob. Very mature. I apologise for the slight derail to the thread, and I hope that more experienced members can keep it on topic. Back to lurking now. Peace out.


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 19, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> Oh come on, as a psychologist s/he thinks about people for a living. There's no need for such prodding.



Which is fine. I just thought the defensiveness weird when it was them that raised the subject.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> Which is fine. I just thought the defensiveness weird when it was them that raised the subject.



OK, I can't resist one more reply, sorry...

The defensiveness was mainly because you completely ignored the rest of my post and just asked me what kind of psychologist I was. Seemed a bit passive-aggressive to me.

But also I don't want to be too specific because I don't really want to be identified (I have a fairly significant web presence as a psychologist). On a forum dealing with very sensitive allegations, you will surely be aware that people don't particularly want to be identified, no?


----------



## teqniq (Jul 19, 2014)

Then why claim to be a psychologist in the first place?


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

teqniq said:


> Then why claim to be a psychologist in the first place?


 
I explained that above. Read the thread.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 19, 2014)

I have


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 19, 2014)

Go away Phil.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

teqniq said:


> I have





angelraven said:


> Sorry, I was just using my position as a psychologist as a cheap way to add a bit of weight to my random musings. Nothing more. I wasn't too sure of the point of your question to be honest, and I found it a little hostile. Perhaps if you clarify why you were asking it I might give you more details!



Mea culpa. As I said, it was late


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> For the reason I stated above, viz., that it would have provided a way of internally legitimating his horrendous pattern of behaviour...This is often the case (it's pretty typical with war crimes such as those that occurred in the Holocaust, for example)



There's an awful lot of ground to cover between the generalised claim above and the specific claim that ‘it's not implausible’ that Ian Watkins was a satanist. As I asked before, what evidence to fit the latter into the former do you have?

After all, I could note that _it's not implausible that Ian Watkins is left-handed and a vegetarian_. I have no special knowledge of what his dominant side is or nutritional preferences are, but _as a keen reader of stuff on the internet_ I note also that Jack the Ripper, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Boston Strangler and Jimmy Savile's close friend Uri Geller are all reputed to have been left-handed - and I am sure we can think of a certain notable Austrian with a meat-free diet.

But seeing as I have neither defined ‘left-handed’ or ‘vegetarian’ nor suggested why either might be relevant, it's all just sand in the desert.


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> OK, I can't resist one more reply, sorry...
> 
> The defensiveness was mainly because you completely ignored the rest of my post and just asked me what kind of psychologist I was. Seemed a bit passive-aggressive to me.
> 
> But also I don't want to be too specific because I don't really want to be identified (I have a fairly significant web presence as a psychologist). On a forum dealing with very sensitive allegations, you will surely be aware that people don't particularly want to be identified, no?



It seemed relevant to ask. You brought up the fact you're a psychologist, I assumed you'd be ok talking about it. If you're a clinical psychologist working with abusers or victims of abuse then I'd pay more attention to what you say. If you're a research psychologist looking at, say, visual perception, then less so.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 19, 2014)

I think the satanism stuff is probably complete nonsense and has only served to discredit serious people trying to expose high level paedophilia. Bernie Gunther 's posts on the topic on this thread are very good IMO


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> There's an awful lot of ground to cover between the generalised claim above and the specific claim that ‘it's not implausible’ that Ian Watkins was a satanist. As I asked before, what evidence to fit the latter into the former do you have?



I gave three pieces of evidence (admittedly very circumstantial - but we are talking about plausibility here, not proof) above.

You haven't explained why you find it implausible that he is a satanist (assuming that you do find it implausible).

Why ask for evidence for one and not the other?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 19, 2014)

I apologise for triggering the derail. FWIW, IMHO Icke is never going to be a source of reliable information, though sometimes may lead to leads.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 19, 2014)

Here's a new thread created specifically for the Satanic Ritual Abuse stuff.

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/satanic-ritual-abuse-fundie-horseshit-or-troof.325799/

May I suggest again that it would be good to deal with this potentially contentious subject separately from this mostly excellent thread.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Oh sure, let's all haze the noob. Very mature. I apologise for the slight derail to the thread, and I hope that more experienced members can keep it on topic. Back to lurking now. Peace out.



Absolutely no hazing at all; I'm sorry if it came across that way . I did take care to say that you had answered the question. So I'm really not sure why you're being simultaneously so aggressive ('very mature') and defensive ('I apologise for the slight derail'). Anyway don't go back to lurking...stick with it and enjoy.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 19, 2014)

.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 19, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Here's a new thread created specifically for the Satanic Ritual Abuse stuff.
> 
> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/satanic-ritual-abuse-fundie-horseshit-or-troof.325799/
> 
> May I suggest again that it would be good to deal with this potentially contentious subject separately from this mostly excellent thread.



Could also potentially use the separate thread quoted above to talk about Icke/Project Monarch stuff or any tenuous attempts to link e.g. S&M to satanism, if people really must bring that stuff up, again to keep it out of this thread.


----------



## Red Cat (Jul 19, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Clinical, experimental, social, based in health care practice, working in HE, researched focused; each of these would have a substantial impact on the skills and knowledge that a professional psychologist would bring to the discussion. In other words, once the original poster brought it up, it became a legitimate question...one that has since been answered.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



I guess. But the post struck me as a musing not as something aiming at being an evidenced-based claim, so although the position of psychologist may have been used to give more authority than is usually accorded to psychological musings, usually described derogatively as armchair, I didn't see it as more than that. Anyway, I don't want to derail.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> For the reason I stated above, viz., that it would have provided a way of internally legitimating his horrendous pattern of behaviour. The main alternative explanation for why people do such obviously evil things is that they dissociate from the part of themselves that does it. This is often the case (it's pretty typical with war crimes such as those that occurred in the Holocaust, for example) but I'm not sure that it applies to everyone. Cases such as Watkins and Savile seem to have built so much of their lives around the evil that they did that it seems to me rather to have been an integral part of their selves. Perhaps they saw a religious dimension to that, perhaps not. But as I say, to me it is not at first glance implausible that there might have been a religious dimension.



You're engaging in a moral argument - you're judging their behaviour as evil.  Now, as a punter, that's fair enough, but as a psychologist surely you should be looking beyond moral labels and asking "what enabled them to commit such horrendous acts?".
It's all very well positing that perhaps they were Satanists (and as a Catholic, Savile would probably have been inculcated with enough dogma to be able to visualise his acts as anti-catholicism), but labels like "evil" and "Satanist" excuse those who the labels are used on.  They effectively say "this person's actions lie beyond any norm of behaviour that we can measure or treat".



> In the case of Savile the allegations may well be down to dodgy 'recovered memories'...



There's very little to do with recovered memories with regard to the Savile case.  A significant minority of testimony is reiteration of testimony given at the time of abuse - no need to use bogus psychotherapeutic techniques to "recover" memories from victims.



> ...but in the case of Watkins there seems a bit more to it: allegations that girls were persuaded (or perhaps just offered) to do 'satanic stuff' for him; that a satanist organisation made threats against Peaches Geldof for naming the two women sentenced alongside him; and just the general imagery that he used, including his band name (I realise that this is pretty common with rock musicians though!).



Watkins was and is a _poseur_. He liked to tout himself as more evil than Crowley, but with the dilettante's usual error of knowing so little about Crowley as to not realise that "The Most Evil Man in Britain" wasn't a label Crowley attached to himself, it was one bestowed on him by a tabloid.  He was and is attracted to the "spectacle" of the occult, but not (as far as can be established through any extant organisation) to the *practice* of any occult ideology.



> Turning your question on its head, do you think that it is implausible that Watkins is a satanist? If so, why? Do you believe there is no such thing as satanists?
> 
> I certainly don't believe that all, or even most child abuse cases involve satanism, or something like it; but I do think it might be worth asking whether it is genuinely a factor in some of these cases, rather than assuming that the allegations are always invented.



We need answers to several separate questions, first and foremost: 
What is a Satanist? 
A classic Satanist is exactly what the label implies - an inverted Christian.  Someone who rebels against Christianity by inverting its' customs and practices with blasphemous intent, often for religious gratification.  Most of the sexual symbolism and practice in Satamism is with regard to the blasphemy, not primarily for the sake of personal gratification.
A LaVeyan Satanist is, on the other hand, generally someone who is using the idea of Satanism, and the practice of self-actualisation, to manufacture reasons for indulging in quasi-blasphemous behaviour and sexual behaviour that the practicing individuals see as "outside the norm", hence a lot of LaVey's disciples engage in swinging and bisexualism at the temple, but not at home.  We also see this sort of "decadent" behaviour in some non-Satanic occult groupings - it's basically occultism as an excuse for hedonism, most often employed by middle class and middle-aged people thrill-seeking.
Then we have the Benelists, who draw their archetype of "the adversary" from Gnostic principles. For them Satan isn't coterminous with Jehovah, Satan is _Rex Mundi_ - the king of the world.  They see no need for the sort of hocus pocus or invert Christianity, because their worship is more straightforwardly analogous to standard deity worship - prayer and ceremony that doesn't require having sex with children or making burnt offerings.

So what we're mostly seeing when we're talking about "Satanic" abuse, is abuse dressed up in occult clothing, given a mask as a means of justifying the behaviour to the perpetrator.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 19, 2014)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-lobby-s-influence-Westminster.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 19, 2014)

kenny g said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-lobby-s-influence-Westminster.html



Yes, the story has been turning up all over the place for the past week. Hale is reasonably credible, too.


----------



## Sue (Jul 19, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> There's an awful lot of ground to cover between the generalised claim above and the specific claim that ‘it's not implausible’ that Ian Watkins was a satanist. As I asked before, what evidence to fit the latter into the former do you have?
> 
> After all, I could note that _it's not implausible that Ian Watkins is left-handed and a vegetarian_. I have no special knowledge of what his dominant side is or nutritional preferences are, but _as a keen reader of stuff on the internet_ I note also that Jack the Ripper, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Boston Strangler and Jimmy Savile's close friend Uri Geller are all reputed to have been left-handed - and I am sure we can think of a certain notable Austrian with a meat-free diet.
> 
> But seeing as I have neither defined ‘left-handed’ or ‘vegetarian’ nor suggested why either might be relevant, it's all just sand in the desert.


Is now the time to admit to being a lefthanded, vegetarian..?


----------



## free spirit (Jul 19, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes, the story has been turning up all over the place for the past week. Hale is reasonably credible, too.


This story pretty much confirms for me the original question this thread was based on.

Combined with the multiple other stories about special branch taking the local police dossier in Rochdale on Cyril Smith, and intimidating Naypic staff, and reports in the Guardian recently about senior police officers being afraid for their careers if they attempted to tackle these abuses, and everything else on this thread.... I can't see any other conclusion other than that yes there was a high level establishment plot to at least cover up for these highly placed paedophiles.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 19, 2014)

kenny g said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-lobby-s-influence-Westminster.html



rhodes boyson and kieth joseph again. With peter morrison as well it seems thatcher had a gobsmacking number of proven and strongly alleged child rapists within her inner circle. Plus regular visits from saville and some of the other names doing the rounds. Very nasty smell coming from the Thatcher government.  Surprised the mail are running with it.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 19, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> rhodes boyson and kieth joseph again. With peter morrison as well it seems thatcher had a gobsmacking number of proven and strongly alleged child rapists within her inner circle. Plus regular visits from saville and some of the other names doing the rounds. Very nasty smell coming from the Thatcher government..



The sexual dynamics of those cabinets must be fascinating for cod-psychologists. There was often talk at the time of her school matron like attractiveness to male colleagues. I may be completely wrong, but hearing about the fag system and use of sexual abuse as a form of control in the public school system at the time it is interesting to consider that for some of her colleagues it appears Government was just a progression from their previous experiences.  And at the helm, the daughter of a child molesting small town burgher.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 19, 2014)

Sue said:


> Is now the time to admit to being a lefthanded, vegetarian..?


I am a left handed vegetarian apart from I eat meat.


----------



## Kalfindin (Jul 19, 2014)

kenny g said:


> The sexual dynamics of those cabinets must be fascinating for cod-psychologists. There was often talk at the time of her school matron like attractiveness to male colleagues. I may be completely wrong, but hearing about the fag system and use of sexual abuse as a form of control in the public school system at the time it is interesting to consider that for some of her colleagues it appears Government was just a progression from their previous experiences.  And at the helm, the daughter of a child molesting small town burgher.




I think ultra authoritarian hang and flog em right wing types must be viewed with suspicion as they are clearly over compensating for something. Saying that there are lifestyle paedophiles who use other guises, look at Rolf Harris, Gary Glitter etc, even paedos who pose as lettuce eating, hush puppy wearing Guardian reader types. Devils come in many forms.

God knows how bad it was in previous times.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> even paedos who pose as lettuce eating, hush puppy wearing Guardian reader types. Devils come in many forms.



Maybe also post in "Why the LDs are shit" thread?


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> rhodes boyson and kieth joseph again. With peter morrison as well it seems thatcher had a gobsmacking number of proven and strongly alleged child rapists within her inner circle. Plus regular visits from saville and some of the other names doing the rounds. *Very nasty smell coming from the Thatcher government.*



Courtesy of "Roger Grenville" over on Bone's blog...



> From *a speech by Margaret Thatcher* at National Children’s Home (*George Thomas Society Lecture*) in January 1990 at the Cafe Royal:-
> ‘It is a great privilege to be invited to deliver the inaugural lecture of a society founded by the National Children’s Home, especially one concerned with tackling child abuse but when that society bears the name of George Thomas, it is also for me a great pleasure and a very great honour.
> *George Thomas is admired and loved throughout this country*. As Mr. Speaker, his voice became known in every home. His life has been dedicated to the service of people and especially, through the National Children’s Home, to children. *He has never ceased to proclaim the importance of Christian values in family life and there have been times when that has taken quite some courage*.
> *George has always believed that children must come first because children are our most sacred trust.* They also hold the key to our future in a very practical sense. It will be their ideas and their resourcefulness which will help solve such problems as disease, famine and the threats to the environment and it is their ideas and their values which will shape the future character and culture of our nation. We need to do all we can to ensure that children enjoy their childhood against a background of secure and loving family life. That way, they can develop their full potential, grow up into responsible adults and become, in their turn, good parents.’.​



She will eventually be seen as the queen of the paedos.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2014)

brogdale said:


> She will eventually be seen as the queen of the paedos.


not a title for which there's great competition


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> not a title for which there's great competition


 Good, let's hope it sticks.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 19, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> (...) even paedos who pose as lettuce eating, *hush puppy wearing* Guardian reader types. Devils come in many forms.


That comment may be actionable. Take care.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 19, 2014)

Kalfindin said:


> I think ultra authoritarian hang and flog em right wing types must be viewed with suspicion as they are clearly over compensating for something. Saying that there are lifestyle paedophiles who use other guises, look at Rolf Harris, Gary Glitter etc, even paedos who pose as lettuce eating, hush puppy wearing Guardian reader types. Devils come in many forms.
> 
> God knows how bad it was in previous times.



The bizarre aspect of this appears to be that the hang and flog em right wing types actually got off on hanging and flogging. It was as simple as that. They wanted their sexual tastes replicated in the criminal justice system.

I agree about the lettuce eating aspect though. I can remember a very dubious type wearing Rohan walking gear at a party speaking in vehement defence of  his matey a headmaster of a special school who was being tried, and was eventually convicted, for molesting his pupils. I was young at the time, but can remember the conversation going off course as it started to become apparent he wasn't too concerned if the fellow was guilty, but rather didn't believe his activities should be a crime.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...low-lid-off-paedophile-scandal-at-westminster


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...low-lid-off-paedophile-scandal-at-westminster


 getting warmer...


----------



## angelraven (Jul 19, 2014)

angelraven said:


> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...low-lid-off-paedophile-scandal-at-westminster



Some stuff in there about public servants feeling unable to speak due to the Official Secrets Act. Passed in 1989, a few years after these allegations started to surface in numbers. Call me paranoid but I'm wondering if the drafting of that act, and in particular the removal of the public interest defence, was done in an entirely disinterested way - especially given all the shenanigans at the Home Office.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 19, 2014)

More revelations in the Sunday Mirror ....
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-rent-boy-i-abused-3885690


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 19, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> More revelations in the Sunday Mirror ....
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-rent-boy-i-abused-3885690



Same names again. How long before its all spelt out in public? Must be a few senior people shitting themselves. 
And can we dig up thatchers corpse and throw it into a lime pit with savilles - and rhodes boyson's, cyril smith's and Keith Joseph's?


----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 20, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Same names again.



That doesn't add any confirmation though...




			
				the article said:
			
		

> the victim has come forward *after reading our exclusive story last Sunday*


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> not a title for which there's great competition


Esther Rantzen may yet take that crown


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 20, 2014)

Signal 11 said:


> That doesn't add any confirmation though...



No - but another witness coming forward reinforces the original story - plus the deafening silence from the family and friends of those named.

However - there no mention of this story on the graun or bbc.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 20, 2014)

angelraven said:


> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...low-lid-off-paedophile-scandal-at-westminster



As Hencke says on his blog....



> The fact that MPs want to hear this [audio recording of the Dover customs official claiming he saw the former tory minister on one of Russell Tricker's paedo VTs] should mean that the police will have take this latest claim seriously as they will have to decide whether to hand over the tape to the new child abuse inquiry, summon the customs officer to give evidence to Parliament  or press the police to follow up this incident properly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Same names again. How long before its all spelt out in public? Must be a few senior people shitting themselves.
> And can we dig up thatchers corpse and throw it into a lime pit with savilles - and rhodes boyson's, cyril smith's and Keith Joseph's?


no. thatcher was cremated.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 20, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> no. thatcher was cremated.



Did her snarling visage appear in the clouds afterwards before dispersing - like in the old fu man chu movies?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Did her snarling visage appear in the clouds afterwards before dispersing - like in the old fu man chu movies?


there was a slight smell of hydrogen sulphide, stale urine and whisky which disappeared as the mourners dispersed


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 20, 2014)

brogdale said:


> As Hencke says on his blog....



There is a comment below the article by a Tim Tate which refutes the thrust of Exaro's story and accuses them of over-egging the pudding.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 20, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> There is a comment below the article by a Tim Tate which refutes the thrust of Exaro's story and accuses them of over-egging the pudding.


A concept he is quite familiar with as the author of the 1991 pro-SRA book "Children for the Devil" 


> The ritualistic abuse of children in satanic ceremonies is increasingly coming to light as children in the UK, USA and Europe disclose identical experiences involving torture, cannibalism, animal sacrifice, live burial, murder and the use of drugs snakes and insects in sexual abuse.


----------



## elbows (Jul 20, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> There is a comment below the article by a Tim Tate which refutes the thrust of Exaro's story and accuses them of over-egging the pudding.



Because Tim Tate is one of the writers for a  related customs story in the Telegraph. He may be confusing what he learnt when writing that story with a completely different customers officer and event, or he might be right, impossible for me to judge with the info currently available.


----------



## Blagsta (Jul 20, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Did her snarling visage appear in the clouds afterwards before dispersing - like in the old fu man chu movies?



http://sleafordmods.bandcamp.com/track/liveable-shit


----------



## Wilf (Jul 20, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> More revelations in the Sunday Mirror ....
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-rent-boy-i-abused-3885690


If you take it from that that he was abused in Feb 75 (by 2 Tories 'celebrating' a year in Parliament') a shortlist forms up. They are presumably still living, given that he names the dead party attendees. 

I've been hunting to find a full list of tory new mps for Feb 74 (possibly also oct 74 election, but the specific mention of February in the piece looks like an intentional clue). Can't find one yet, but I've seen a couple of sites that talk about notable new MPs for feb 74 - which include some rather predictable names.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 20, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> no. thatcher was cremated.



Which I thought unusual because she always made out that this lady's not for burning, I think she said? My hearing was always a bit selective whenever she was spouting on, horror that she was!


----------



## elbows (Jul 20, 2014)

Colin Wallace and Kincora getting some more BBC news coverage:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28390411



> "I know that some officers from the security services in Northern Ireland did know and actually reprimanded intelligence officers from raising the matter and also told them they were to desist from any further investigation," he told the BBC's Sunday Sequence programme.
> 
> Mr Wallace said two previous inquiries which looked at Kincora - the Terry Inquiry and the Hughes Inquiry - did not examine evidence relating to the intelligence services.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Which I thought unusual because she always made out that this lady's not for burning, I think she said? My hearing was always a bit selective whenever she was spouting on, horror that she was!


sadly she left the burning till after she was dead






conservative paedophiles being burnt at the stake: an artist's impression


----------



## brogdale (Jul 20, 2014)

> The son of a former Conservative MP has told The Telegraph he believes his father was a “prolific sexual predator” who he fears might have been linked to an alleged Westminster paedophile ring.
> 
> Anthony Atkinson suspects his father David Atkinson’s name may also have been included in a notorious dossier compiled by his fellow Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens. The dossier, handed to the then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in the 1980s, has subsequently been lost or destroyed.



Here.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 20, 2014)

Wilf said:


> If you take it from that that he was abused in Feb 75 (by 2 Tories 'celebrating' a year in Parliament') a shortlist forms up. They are presumably still living, given that he names the dead party attendees.
> 
> I've been hunting to find a full list of tory new mps for Feb 74 (possibly also oct 74 election, but the specific mention of February in the piece looks like an intentional clue). Can't find one yet, but I've seen a couple of sites that talk about notable new MPs for feb 74 - which include some rather predictable names.


the ones at the top of this wikipedia list?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 20, 2014)

free spirit said:


> the ones at the top of this wikipedia list?


That link doesn't go to a Wikipedia list.


----------



## Fez909 (Jul 20, 2014)

free spirit said:


> the ones at the top of this wikipedia list?


Your link is wrong.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 20, 2014)

Wilf said:


> That link doesn't go to a Wikipedia list.


sorry, fixed it now.


----------



## elbows (Jul 20, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Here.



The Daily Mail had something on this the other day, but was mostly focussing on how his wife feels about his gay affairs, rather than anything more sinister:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-Tory-MP-husband-Susans-world-collapsed.html


----------



## Wilf (Jul 20, 2014)

free spirit said:


> sorry, fixed it now.


edit. sorry,, it is working.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 20, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Nope!


Yes it is.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 20, 2014)

free spirit said:


> the ones at the top of this wikipedia list?


Yeah, I got to that mini list, but I was after the full list of Tory newcomers. Apparently that election saw a lot of new mps.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 20, 2014)

elbows said:


> The Daily Mail had something on this the other day, but was mostly focussing on how his wife feels about his gay affairs, rather than anything more sinister:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-Tory-MP-husband-Susans-world-collapsed.html


 Yeah, but the torygraph piece has the 'p' word liberally sprinkled around...and his son says...



> “In the research work that I have done... it is clear that *my father was associated with some very dangerous people.*”


----------



## free spirit (Jul 20, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, I got to that mini list, but I was after the full list of Tory newcomers. Apparently that election saw a lot of new mps.


if anyone has the time, that wiki list of MPs has links to each of the MPs wiki pages, so would be a relatively simple matter to go through and list all the new Tory MPs.

Only 14 labour MPs were unseated, so it might not be that long a list.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 20, 2014)

although, given the no naming rules of the thread / boards that might be a slightly futile effort.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 20, 2014)

free spirit said:


> Only 14 labour MPs were unseated, so it might not be that long a list.



yes, but there would also have been some new tory MPs in previously tory seats, as a result of previous MPs retiring / not standing again for whatever reason


----------



## free spirit (Jul 20, 2014)

Puddy_Tat said:


> yes, but there would also have been some new tory MPs in previously tory seats, as a result of previous MPs retiring / not standing again for whatever reason


around 70MPs in total, so maybe 30 or so tories?



> The figures below set out how many MPs have retired at each election since the war:


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 20, 2014)

hah, look at the '97 spike.


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Jul 20, 2014)

I know this is a stupid question but how do we know the guy from Australia is genuine?


----------



## laptop (Jul 20, 2014)

free spirit said:


> although, given the no naming rules of the thread / boards that might be a slightly futile effort.



Remember, the *rule of thumb* is that identifying someone to the "resolution" of a football team is sufficient for defamation. 

In other words:

_"There is an English footballer who is a rapist"_ - not libel
_"A member of the Imaginary Town Disunited team is a rapist"_ - likely to give all of them cause for libel action
_"One of the forwards of the Imaginary Town Disunited team is a rapist"_ - definitely gives all of them cause for libel action
_"The goalkeeper of the Imaginary Town Disunited team is a rapist" _- is libel, if he isn't, open-and-shut case


----------



## laptop (Jul 20, 2014)

Phew.




			
				A Famous Web Search Engine said:
			
		

> No results found for *"Imaginary Town Disunited "*.


----------



## elbows (Jul 20, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> rhodes boyson and kieth joseph again. With peter morrison as well it seems thatcher had a gobsmacking number of proven and strongly alleged child rapists within her inner circle. Plus regular visits from saville and some of the other names doing the rounds. Very nasty smell coming from the Thatcher government.  Surprised the mail are running with it.



The mirror had a little more detail on what was said about Boyson in the Barbara Castle dossier.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/two-tory-ministers-were-named-3885736



> Two senior ministers in the Thatcher government exposed by the Sunday Mirror last week for indulging in sex parties with underage rent boys were named in a damning paedophile dossier compiled in the 1980s.
> 
> Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson were cited in the “VIP” paedophile document drawn up by Labour’s Barbara Castle. Other MPs, senior policemen, head teachers and clergy were also named.





> Boyson was described in it as secretly involved with the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) group which campaigned to legalise sex with children.
> 
> The dossier contained details of how the one-time Under Secretary for Education raised funds and drove promotions for PIE.
> 
> ...



Oh and:



> At least two alleged witnesses have also named former Tory MP Proctor, 67, as being at parties in statements for the inquiry.
> 
> He was exposed in 1986 for arranging sordid spanking sessions with young men and was found to be leading a double life and living with an 18-year-old male prostitute at a time when the legal age of consent was 21.
> 
> ...


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 21, 2014)

elbows said:


> The mirror had a little more detail on what was said about Boyson in the Barbara Castle dossier.
> Approached for comment last week, Proctor, former MP for Basildon and Billericay, said he was *unable to comment because of a gagging agreement he claims to have signed years ago.*
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/two-tory-ministers-were-named-3885736


BIB. I would understand if he'd been unwilling to comment. Full stop. If there's likely to be a police investigation, he's not going to want to prejudice his position - that's common sense. Otherwise, he's entitled to a private life. But a gagging agreement? With whom, by whose authority, and how enforceable? And what benefit is it to him to make this claim?  This is the sort of thing that drives conspiracy theories.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 21, 2014)

I see Harvey Proctor gets a mention in the Mirror story. I seem to recall an exposure about him using House of Commons meeting rooms for some sort of neo-nazi event, there was a photograph of Harvey along with assorted knuckle-draggers from e.g. League of St George, C88 and (if I recall right) a surprising amount of hyper-masculine teutonic leatherwear on display. It was story (in Private Eye at a guess) that was around long before he became famous for being into S&M with underage males (which happened 1986 or so)

Apparently openly hanging around with assorted neo-nazis was no bar to a successful career in Thatcher's Tory party either (especially if like Proctor you were secretary of the Monday Club Northern Ireland policy committee and also chair of the Monday Club Immigration and Repatriation committee, where it was perhaps a job requirement)

Anyone got a decent link to the Proctor / neo-nazi stuff?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 21, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Anyone got a decent link to the Proctor / neo-nazi stuff?



A few mentions in _Lobster_ over the years (including in an article by Larry O'Hara in #23 on British Fascism 1974-1992). Briefly features in David Leigh's _The Wilson Plot_.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 21, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> A few mentions in _Lobster_ over the years (including in an article by Larry O'Hara in #23 on British Fascism 1974-1992). Briefly features in David Leigh's _The Wilson Plot_.


 ta


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 21, 2014)

I've just checked - here's the drive-by mention of Harvey from the Leigh book (pp213-214), in relation to former MI6 bigwig George (Kennedy) Young's machinations in the Monday Club:


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 21, 2014)

And here's some pages from Dorril/Ramsay's _Smear! Wilson And The Secret State_ covering the same topic:


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 21, 2014)

Plus the relevant notes:


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 21, 2014)

Nick Toczek's pamphlet _The Bigger Tory Vote: The Covert Sequestration of the Bigotry Vote_ (AK Press, 1991) goes into things in more detail. Here's a few pages referencing Proctor:

p5:


pp21-23:
  

pp32-33:


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 21, 2014)

Here's the notes from Toczek:


 

I know I have read stuff elsewhere on Hamilton & Proctor and the Monday Club stuff (and Hamilton's ‘it was all a joke/mistake/Communist entrapment’ defence to the Nazi salute stuff), but can't quite recall where - will have a think about it.

ETA: Apologies - I originally posted up p32 again instead of p40 - now corrected.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 21, 2014)

Just posting, not endorsing:



> Mr Smith added that the paedophile has always been 'deeply hostile towards the police' and has said 'the only good copper is a dead copper'.
> 
> Mr Smith added that the police say it is highly unlikely they would make a deal with the defendant, but they would be willing to speak with him, either before or after his sentencing.
> 
> ...


----------



## Betsy (Jul 21, 2014)

Have just seen this on Twitter...(apologies if it's already been posted)

*Child sex abuse:The audio file that names an ex Tory Cabinet minister*

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...-file-that-names-an-ex-tory-cabinet-minister/


----------



## angelraven (Jul 21, 2014)

> McAuliffe then said, 'Can I just say the names I've got...' before Judge Benson cut him off and sent him down to the cells.


"The name. Give me the wretched name!"
"Bartie Crouch ... Junior!"


----------



## angelraven (Jul 21, 2014)

If only life were more like Harry Potter...


----------



## brogdale (Jul 21, 2014)

Hencke/Exaro report on meeting between May and 6 of the 7 "concerned MPs" wrt the new chair of the CSA inquiry and,apparently, its terms of reference....

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5332/theresa-may-to-consult-before-picking-new-head-of-csa-inquiry


----------



## elbows (Jul 21, 2014)

A;though his name has come up on this thread before, I'm not sure if the recent press reports about the police looking into Tonypandy/George Thomas because a victim came forwards actually got mentioned.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...x-abuse-claims-labour-peer-viscount-tonypandy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-28412049

Meanwhile there have been some stories repeated by the likes of the Daily Mail, from an original story in the Star, about Jill Dando. Of all the 'wacky' rumours flying around the net over the years, this is one where I don't think I'd ever worked out what alleged dots there possibly were to join between her death and paedophile rings, other than random paranoid dot-joining. This latest news does not exactly clear that up or add any great weight to the theory, but perhaps offers some kind of starting point of an explanation for such rumours or who they might have come from.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/389922/Tragic-Jill-Dando-probed-BBC-PAEDO-ring


----------



## elbows (Jul 21, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Hencke/Exaro report on meeting between May and 6 of the 7 "concerned MPs" wrt the new chair of the CSA inquiry and,apparently, its terms of reference....
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5332/theresa-may-to-consult-before-picking-new-head-of-csa-inquiry



There likely won't be a decision before September because parliament is about to go on its summer holidays. I wonder if much else will come out in the press over the summer - they are running out of 'historical stuff we could already read about on the net for years/old rumours' to look at again, but lately there has certainly been some new revelations so who knows if there are many more to come.


----------



## discokermit (Jul 21, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> Esther Rantzen may yet take that crown


has this been posted? hard to keep up. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...P-lovers-links-Elm-House-paedophile-ring.html


----------



## Wilf (Jul 21, 2014)

She's 'horrified and disgusted' now, wonder if she was when this first came out in 2000?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 21, 2014)

From the same article


> *RESIGNATION HURTS, SAYS BARONESS BUTLER-SLOSS*
> *
> 
> 
> ...



My heart bleeds...
*


*


----------



## Wilf (Jul 21, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> My heart bleeds...
> *
> 
> *


Aye, it comes to something when political correctness stops a C of E attending judge having a bit of latitude about a noncey bishop going to prison. Christ, next thing they'll be suggesting the sister of a nonce party attending Attorney General shouldn't investigate whether he stopped an investigation into political nonces.  The legendary integrity of the ruling class means all those moaning minnies can keep their liberal bleating to themselves.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 21, 2014)

discokermit said:


> has this been posted? hard to keep up. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...P-lovers-links-Elm-House-paedophile-ring.html


 Fester Rancid again eh


----------



## Wilf (Jul 22, 2014)

]





Gingerman said:


> Fester Rancid again eh


Good old Esther, giving chapter and verse on Savile

To be honest, if the 'rumours' she heard were as non-specific as she claims she's no more guilty than anyone else who did nothing and a lot less than those who were in authority at the time (though I just don't believe her that she has no memory of Shy Keenan reporting stuff to her - which would put a _very_ different complexion on it).  I just think, as the founder of childline, she could have had the good grace to be mortified rather than coming out with that defensive shit.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 22, 2014)

discokermit said:


> has this been posted? hard to keep up. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...P-lovers-links-Elm-House-paedophile-ring.html


Yeah, I saw that but wasn't going to do it the honour of mention. But since it has been mentioned, that particular brand of tone-deaf self-importance is beyond parody. This in particular made me laugh hollowly:

She distances herself from the late Conservative MP who died at 61 in 1995​...because of course the first thing that sprang to everyone's mind when Fairbairn was mentioned would be "I wonder how Esther is involved in all this?"


----------



## Quartz (Jul 22, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> But a gagging agreement? With whom, by whose authority, and how enforceable?



The real question, of course is whether it's a penis gag or a ball gag.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 22, 2014)

Quartz said:


> The real question, of course is whether it's a penis gag or a ball gag.


Grow up.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 23, 2014)

A bit of good news: Watkins has been refused leave to appeal against the length of his sentence.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 23, 2014)

From Twitter..

 *ExaroNews* ‏@*ExaroNews*https://twitter.com/ExaroNews/status/488254393809395712

Attempts to hack our phones, brazen surveillance of one of our reporters, site mostly down since publishing Dolphin Square. Quite a week.


----------



## elbows (Jul 24, 2014)

That tweet is getting on a bit now. I only point this out because most recently they have been preoccupied with what they've decided is a disinformation campaign that the police and other state agents are complicit in, in regards to changing the details of the 'customs seized child porn video' story.

There were two quite different stories, that I was previously treating as separate historical events. But it seems proponents of each story reckon enough details are the same that the other version of the story is relating to the same event but is a lie.

One version is that an important politician was stopped at customer many years ago, in possession of a child porn video. The other version is that someone else was stopped, and the politician was IN the video.

Exaro support the latter version of the story, but details of what the customs officer said in some audio recording (e.g. whether he named the politician without prompting or whether the journalist/person interviewing him offered the name) are currently in dispute due to comments from a rival journalist who wrote the other version of the story (we discussed this on the thread recently). Exaro have gone massively on the attack on their twitter feed over this. Several MPs now have a copy of the audio recording so some parties out there know the truth about certain details that we cannot right now. Obviously I want to take Exaros word for it, but I suppose I cannot exclude the possibility that they have been fed some shit for one reason or another, so I have to wait and see.


----------



## elbows (Jul 24, 2014)

*Rochdale abuse claims: Force refers itself to police watchdog*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-28457968



> Assistant Chief Constable Ian Wiggett, of GMP, said the force had now referred itself to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).
> 
> He said: "Following the publication of MP Simon Danzcuk's book, 'Smile for the Camera', GMP conducted an assessment of the allegations contained within that book. As a result of the assessment, GMP decided that a criminal investigation was required.
> 
> ...


----------



## 1%er (Jul 24, 2014)

Have I missed something or is it two separate events

I have been reading that a well known peado was stopped with a child-porn tape that showed a Tory MP involved in child sex. This story in the Telegraph claims

"A senior Tory politician said to be part of a child sex ring was allegedly stopped by a customs officer with child pornography videos but got off scot-free, police have been told.

The former MP was driving back to the UK via Dover when a customs officer pulled him over because he was “acting suspiciously”. The border guard, who is now retired, has told detectives that when he searched the MP’s car he found videotapes of children “clearly under the age of 12” taking part in sex acts."


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 24, 2014)

1%er said:


> Have I missed something or is it two separate events
> 
> I have been reading that a well known peado was stopped with a child-porn tape that showed a Tory MP involved in child sex. This story in the Telegraph claims
> 
> ...


See elbows post at #3987, and Exaro tweets:


----------



## 1%er (Jul 24, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> See elbows post at #3987, and Exaro tweets:
> 
> [/MEDIA]


The Needle blog seems to think it is the same story

"A source close to the investigation said that the customs officer was originally approached over claims that a known paedophile had been stopped with a videotape showing the MP at a sex party with underage boys. The customs officer said the report was false, but told police he had stopped the MP in question and seized child pornography videos from him.

The source said: “He viewed the tapes on a video recorder at the border control, and found them to contain pornography involving both underage girls and boys together. He said the children were clearly under the age of 12.

“Unfortunately he can’t remember the exact date when it happened, but he had no doubt about the identity of the MP because he checked his passport. He said he had passed the details of the seizure up the chain of command and had no knowledge of what happened after that."

Misinformation may be going on somewhere


----------



## brogdale (Jul 24, 2014)

> *A criminal investigation is to be launched into an alleged cover-up of child abuse at a school linked to Sir Cyril Smith*.The Liberal Democrat politician, who died in 2010, is alleged to have used his status to sexually abuse young boys with impunity at Knowl View School in Rochdale.
> 
> Despite numerous previous allegations and past police investigations, Smith was never prosecuted.
> 
> ...



From here

e2a : note; specifically _*local *_politicians.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 24, 2014)

Something smells a bit funny about the politician being stopped story. I get that people can be pulled out of an immigration queue for acting suspiciously, but pulled over while driving a car? Must have been looking pretty suspicious behind that wheel! Didn't the customs officer recognise the politician before pulling him over? Seems like there would have to be a tip-off in that case (which is surely how customs catch most traffickers) - no-one is going to risk their career by pulling over a celeb just for 'acting suspicious'! And the implication behind "acting suspiciously" is that the politician was nervous about being caught. But why would he have been? The contents of a video tape can't be detected by random examination using a metal detector or sniffer dog. Unless again he suspected that they had been tipped off. And why look at his videos unless that was also the subject of the tip-off?

Much more prima facie plausible is the Russell Tricker story: known child porn trader is recognised and stopped; contents of his videos are routinely examined; whoa! who's that on the video? Of course this is not actual evidence that the latter story is true ... but I know which one I believe (if they are indeed to be taken as referring to the same incident).


----------



## brogdale (Jul 25, 2014)




----------



## Lurdan (Jul 25, 2014)

*'Cover-up to protect politicians after abuse claims'*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28477179

Doesn't seem to contain anything new.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 25, 2014)

brogdale said:


> From here
> 
> e2a : note; specifically _*local *_politicians.


Before I make this link I'm not suggesting, legally or otherwise, that Farnell is one of the local politicians being investigated.  Any Labour politician would, on the face of it have an obvious interest in pursuing Smith given that he was still the Liberal MP (though when the full story emerges, I suspect there will be some Labourites who either did nothing or formed strange alliances).

Anyway, who knew and who did what seems to be mapping onto the power struggles within Rochdale Labour group. Richard Farnell, who I couldn't fucking stand when I lived there, has returned as council leader, ousting Colin Lambert.  Farnell is a Danczuk ally and Lambert a Jim Dobbin ally (next door Labour MP).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-27753679


----------



## Quartz (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Must have been looking pretty suspicious behind that wheel! Didn't the customs officer recognise the politician before pulling him over? .



Would you recognise all 650 MPs?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 25, 2014)

By the way, has anyone read Danczuk's book?  I really want to given that I was involved in the local Labour Party in the 1980s, but I don't particularly want to give an MP my cash.  I'll probably pursue a library copy.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Would you recognise all 650 MPs?


Apart from the confusion over the videos/stoppage - it was supposed to be a senior tory MP, an ex-minister in fact. So not really any need to be able to recognise all 650 MPs.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Would you recognise all 650 MPs?



If it is the same incident he is supposed to have been a Cabinet minister. Moreover the customs official is quoted as saying that he was able to confirm his identity from his passport - which to me suggests he initially recognised him and then saw his name on the passport. I realise that this is not necessarily implied by the words, but that is what it suggests.

Moreover if a cabinet minister (or even recent ex-cabinet-minister) were pulled over for no very good reason, one would imagine there would be a certain amount of "Don't you know who I am?" and one would also imagine that this would normally work. I am not saying that this story is wrong, just that if he was the one pulled over, it was not just for "acting suspiciously": there must have been a tip-off. And since this one detail is obvious bollocks, it does call the whole story into question to some extent.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> If it is the same incident he is supposed to have been a Cabinet minister.



Again, could you recognise all the cabinet ministers? I can't. And there are often people who look very similar.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Again, could you recognise all the cabinet ministers? I can't. And there are often people who look very similar.


Senior cabinet ministers, yes, of course. And with a passport to confirm.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

Yes, the question of whether he initially recognised him is irrelevant actually, because the first thing they do when they pull you over on a spot check is to look at your passport. Put yourself in the customs officer's shoes: you look at his passport (assuming you hadn't recognised him already), and see that he is a cabinet minister, or used to be. Do you then then (a) say "Have a very nice day, sir" or (b) start going through his bags and watching his videos, based purely on your hunch that he was "acting suspiciously"? Do me a favour...
Of course it's entirely possible that he was set up by the spooks. But the people behind this side of the story are holding something back in that case.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Something smells a bit funny about the politician being stopped story. I get that people can be pulled out of an immigration queue for acting suspiciously, but pulled over while driving a car? Must have been looking pretty suspicious behind that wheel! Didn't the customs officer recognise the politician before pulling him over? Seems like there would have to be a tip-off in that case (which is surely how customs catch most traffickers) - no-one is going to risk their career by pulling over a celeb just for 'acting suspicious'! And the implication behind "acting suspiciously" is that the politician was nervous about being caught. But why would he have been? The contents of a video tape can't be detected by random examination using a metal detector or sniffer dog. Unless again he suspected that they had been tipped off. And why look at his videos unless that was also the subject of the tip-off?
> 
> Much more prima facie plausible is the Russell Tricker story: known child porn trader is recognised and stopped; contents of his videos are routinely examined; whoa! who's that on the video? Of course this is not actual evidence that the latter story is true ... but I know which one I believe (if they are indeed to be taken as referring to the same incident).



Perhaps you're not familiar with customs procedures at ports in the '70s and '80s. I have the misfortune to have been.  Random (and that's what they were, random - most tip-off stops were and possibly still are, cleared through customs, and then busted during a road stop) stops and searches of both foot and vehicle traffic was absolutely commonplace, regardless of what you were driving, or how you were dressed. The other thing is, customs were always very thorough. They'd even flick through the individual pages of books in your luggage or car (until the mid '80s, import and export of currency over a certain amount was an offence, and people often tucked banknotes into books, thinking it was a safe place to hide high-denomination currency), lift the carpet, feel the headlining etc, just on a routine random vehicle stop.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Yes, the question of whether he initially recognised him is irrelevant actually, because the first thing they do when they pull you over on a spot check is to look at your passport. Put yourself in the customs officer's shoes: you look at his passport (assuming you hadn't recognised him already), and see that he is a cabinet minister, or used to be. Do you then then (a) say "Have a very nice day, sir" or (b) start going through his bags and watching his videos, based purely on your hunch that he was "acting suspiciously"? Do me a favour...
> Of course it's entirely possible that he was set up by the spooks. But the people behind this side of the story are holding something back in that case.



It's also entirely possible that the customs officer felt that they couldn't back down and send the minister on his way, because he was acting suspiciously, and the customs officer acted altruistically, against his own interests.
As a psychologist, I'm sure you're aware that altruism informs many seemingly counter-intuitive actions?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 25, 2014)

DLT is up for a retrial


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 25, 2014)

Have I got this right? Since Sloss is no longer running the investigation, and now it's the lengthy hols for our hard working Westminster servants, will it basically not be up and running till at least October? Maybe it will report in a couple of years or so I suppose.

"no stone left unturned" is one thing (and probably that special political classification of phrases known as "a lie"), but giving people a few more months to sort out their stories and throw down a load more stones is pretty useful.

Can't be so important I guess, and there's other stuff in the news now. It's only kids being raped and a big cover up, to think about it you wonder what the fuss was in the first place.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's also entirely possible that the customs officer felt that they couldn't back down and send the minister on his way, because he was acting suspiciously, and the customs officer acted altruistically, against his own interests.


Can you give me an example of the kind of suspicious action that he might have been doing (probably in a car, remember)? Because I can't think of any. (At least none that would encourage me to put my career on the line by making me so sure of his dodginess that I would start rummaging through a cabinet minister's baggage.)


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Have I got this right? Since Sloss is no longer running the investigation, and now it's the lengthy hols for our hard working Westminster servants, will it basically not be up and running till at least October? Maybe it will report in a couple of years or so I suppose.
> 
> "no stone left unturned" is one thing (and probably that special political classification of phrases known as "a lie"), but giving people a few more months to sort out their stories and throw down a load more stones is pretty useful.
> 
> Can't be so important I guess, and there's other stuff in the news now. It's only kids being raped and a big cover up, to think about it you wonder what the fuss was in the first place.


Well what are the details of the inquiry? The govt is appointing it not MPs. It's MP's on holiday not the govt.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Well what are the details of the inquiry? The govt is appointing it not MPs. It's MP's on holiday not the govt.



That's a reasonable point, but the sense of urgency seems to have gone out of the issue, not least in figuring who will even head it up. Now, maybe much is going on behind the scenes but maybe allowing it all to become part of a glacial-speed beauracracy is pretty convinient as well.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Perhaps you're not familiar with customs procedures at ports in the '70s and '80s. I have the misfortune to have been.


Were you a cabinet minister? Sorry but I still can't believe that the same rules applied to them as to the little people.


> They'd even flick through the individual pages of books in your luggage or car (until the mid '80s, import and export of currency over a certain amount was an offence, and people often tucked banknotes into books, thinking it was a safe place to hide high-denomination currency), lift the carpet, feel the headlining etc, just on a routine random vehicle stop.


I can appreciate that they would have done that, but it is still a big jump from that to watching a video. Because the latter would require going away from the car and thus a major delay for the minister. 
Do you actually find the two stories equally believable, or do you just like arguing for the sake of it?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> That's a reasonable point, but the sense of urgency seems to have gone out of the issue, not least in figuring who will even head it up. Now, maybe much is going on behind the scenes but maybe allowing it all to become part of a glacial-speed beauracracy is pretty convinient as well.


I don't know who provides the sense of urgency - but that really is no excuse for not getting your facts right and jumping to conclusions about why and how. Of course, they will try and time anything to suit themselves best - quicker or slower - that's just standard. But we don't know which or why yet. We do know a number 0 if not all - of their motivations though.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> That's a reasonable point, but the sense of urgency seems to have gone out of the issue, not least in figuring who will even head it up. Now, maybe much is going on behind the scenes but maybe allowing it all to become part of a glacial-speed beauracracy is pretty convinient as well.


According to Exaro
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5332/theresa-may-to-consult-on-choice-for-new-head-of-csa-inquiry
May is taking her time with selecting the panel (including probably a survivors' representative) because she wants to avoid any more blunders on the lines of Butler-Sloss. B-S (ha! just noticed the acronym) was apparently nominated by Downing Street. Make of that what you will.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 25, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> DLT is up for a retrial



Ah well, if he gets away with it again at least the whole saga will have bankrupted him.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Can you give me an example of the kind of suspicious action that he might have been doing (probably in a car, remember)? Because I can't think of any. (At least none that would encourage me to put my career on the line by making me so sure of his dodginess that I would start rummaging through a cabinet minister's baggage.)



Just looking tense would be enough, and as for what you'd put your career on the line for, well, that's a reflection on you, but perhaps not illustrative of the population-at-large.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Just looking tense would be enough, and as for what you'd put your career on the line for, well, that's a reflection on you, but perhaps not illustrative of the population-at-large.


 Could even have been a day to look out for 'posh' motors? Weren't there still currency restrictions back then? He might have been driving just the sort of car that was yielding 'hits' back then. My understanding was always that some spotters in Calais had already marked some outfits for going over once in Dover.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> as for what you'd put your career on the line for, well, that's a reflection on you, but perhaps not illustrative of the population-at-large.



Gotta love the gratuitous abuse on this site. Miaow!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Were you a cabinet minister?



No, I was one of what you term "the little people".



> Sorry but I still can't believe that the same rules applied to them as to the little people.



Back then there was no special processing for "important persons" like there is now.  Everyone went through the same processes (or lack of them, if you weren't randomly picked).  In your world, customs officers would require access to a database of VIPs in order to avoid giving any of them offence by daring to search them.  That wasn't something available to customs until the mid '90s.


> I can appreciate that they would have done that, but it is still a big jump from that to watching a video. Because the latter would require going away from the car and thus a major delay for the minister.



How on earth do you think a lot of the individually-imported smut used to get caught at customs, if not through stop-and-search of suspicious people?  Your canny pornography smuggler would strip the videotape from a master video cassette and mail it to the UK, then put it back in a cassette and copy it, he wouldn't take individual cassettes through customs, hence a male with unlabelled video cassettes = person of interest.
And btw, as a former Civil Servant myself at one time (among other things), I can state with confidence that most of us, given the opportunity to make a member of the government sweat, jumped at the chance. The great thing about being a low to middle-level Civil Servant was the fact that you had to fuck up absolutely-spectacularly/do a Geoffrey Prime before they'd sack or demote you, so if you were happy in your position...  



> Do you actually find the two stories equally believable, or do you just like arguing for the sake of it?



I think that both stories are *plausible*, and of course I like arguing for the sake of it!


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

The fact that the evidence got 'disappeared' after it was found, kind of illustrates the futility of doing a spot check on a well-connected VIP. You almost wouldn't want to find anything, because if you did, there'd be no guarantee it would go anywhere, and trying to make it go anywhere might well mean entering a world of pain. And if you didn't find anything, you've wasted their time and made a powerful enemy. Lose-lose. Just wave them through as soon as you recognise them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Could even have been a day to look out for 'posh' motors? Weren't there still currency restrictions back then?



Yep, I made that point earlier. Your "posh" (i.e. mostly wealthier middle-class upward types) often tried on a bit of currency smuggling, because it was so lucrative.  If you took more than the limit out, you could load up on Dollars, Swiss Francs, or on D-Marks, and then clean up at home, selling them at anything from 1.10 - 1.50 times face value.



> He might have been driving just the sort of car that was yielding 'hits' back then. My understanding was always that some spotters in Calais had already marked some outfits for going over once in Dover.



yep.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> The fact that the evidence got 'disappeared' after it was found, kind of illustrates the futility of doing a spot check on a well-connected VIP. You almost wouldn't want to find anything, because if you did, there'd be no guarantee it would go anywhere, and trying to make it go anywhere might well mean entering a world of pain. And if you didn't find anything, you've wasted their time and made a powerful enemy. Lose-lose. Just wave them through as soon as you recognise them.




The evidence has disappeared.  This is fact.
That the evidence "got disappeared" is speculation.
It illustrates porecisely nothing with regard to the VIP because we *don't* know why or how the evidence disappeared, so your comments about futility are...well, futile. they too are speculation.

You need to acquaint yourself with Occam's Razor, and put away the copies of Nexus.  I love conspiracising as much as anyone, but I always apply Occam's Razor when possible.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's also entirely possible that the customs officer felt that they couldn't back down and send the minister on his way, because he was acting suspiciously, and the customs officer acted altruistically, against his own interests.
> As a psychologist, I'm sure you're aware that altruism informs many seemingly counter-intuitive actions?



Yeah because customs and immigration officials are well known for being such lovely altruistic souls


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> The evidence has disappeared.  This is fact.
> That the evidence "got disappeared" is speculation.


Riiiight. I guess they might have accidentally lost it or something


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Gotta love the gratuitous abuse on this site. Miaow!



That's hardly "gratuitous abuse", it's a bit off off-the-cuff character analysis based on your posts.
Or do you, as a psychologist, think that all people react similarly to stimuli - that what you think or do will be broadly similar to what persons A through Z will do?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Yeah because customs and immigration officials are well known for being such lovely altruistic souls



Now you're just being an arse.  You're conflating the organisation with the individuals that staff it.  Individuals, even within closed employment environments such as customs, or the old bill, still react as individuals first, altruism and all.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Riiiight. I guess they might have accidentally lost it or something


Or taken it home and mixed it up with another video's box. Now that would have been embarrassing when they were showing Aunt Marjorie the home movie!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2014)

angelraven said:


> Riiiight. I guess they might have accidentally lost it or something



Like I said, apply Occam's Razor.  It might not give you the answers you *want* but it'll point you towards the answers that are most likely.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Like I said, apply Occam's Razor.  It might not give you the answers you *want* but it'll point you towards the answers that are most likely.


That's exactly what I've been doing! Anyway, enough for the time being, I don't want to derail this thread again: as people pointed out last time, it has generally been quite informative.


----------



## angelraven (Jul 25, 2014)

BTW I can accept that the video in question might be genuinely lost *today*. It's been a long time. But it must have been deliberately sat on, at some level, for a prolonged period of time back in the 80s. Or possibly stolen. You don't just randomly mislay a piece of evidence like that. In fact, first thing I would have done would be to make a copy just in case.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 25, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> DLT is up for a retrial



BBC article here.



Teaboy said:


> Ah well, if he gets away with it again at least the whole saga will have bankrupted him.



That's a disgusting attitude. Have you perhaps considered he might be entirely innocent? Don't you think it's disgraceful that an innocent person could be reduced to penury? Imagine working all your life and amassing a nice nest-egg only to see it disappear in lawyers' fees.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 25, 2014)

Hopefully on acquittal the defandant's lawyers will apply to have costs paid out of central funds. That won't cover everything, though, and someone found not guilty can still be substantially out of pocket.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 25, 2014)

Quartz said:


> That's a disgusting attitude.* Have you perhaps considered he might be entirely innocent*? Don't you think it's disgraceful that an innocent person could be reduced to penury? Imagine working all your life and amassing a nice nest-egg only to see it disappear in lawyers' fees.


 As an assumption about anyone going before the courts, yes. Beyond that formality, to be honest, no.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 25, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Beyond that formality, to be honest, no.



Do you assume everyone brought up before the courts or even just charged is guilty? Do you think lawyers work for free?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 25, 2014)

Wilf, I hope you never serve on a jury.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jul 25, 2014)

I'd rather have someone on a jury who's open and honest about assumptions and prejudices than people who delude themselves of their objectivity.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 25, 2014)

Eh? Who wouldn't? Not that people are mostly aware of their assumptions and prejudices, because those assumptions and prejudices blind them.

(Not excluding myself from that blindness, as you may have been suggesting.  )


----------



## Celt (Jul 25, 2014)

This thread has been a great piece which gave lots of info and very little bitching but since the closure of the previous Saville threads its got quite a flurry of derail.  Please people this thread is important,


----------



## Plumdaff (Jul 25, 2014)

edited - sorry if derailed - glass(es) of wine on a Friday evening


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 25, 2014)

Celt said:


> This thread has been a great piece which gave lots of info and very little bitching but since the closure of the previous Saville threads its got quite a flurry of derail.  Please people this thread is important,


Sorry. Yes, it's important.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 26, 2014)

Judge 'FELL ASLEEP during sex abuse trial' - now alleged victim must repeat harrowing evidence 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/judge-fell-asleep-during-sex-3915489#ixzz38Xufcj00



> The jury was sent home as a probe was launched into claims Recorder Philip Cattan snoozed as the girl gave evidence via video link.



Are they still looking for a judge to head that inquiry ?


----------



## brogdale (Jul 26, 2014)

The "Croydon (S)Advertiser" is running, this week, with a series of reports of alleged abuse at the Shirley Oaks children's home between the 1970s and 1990s. Collectively the allegations of the victims/survivors appear to indicate that the joint council/police investigation "Middleton" did not expose the full extent of abuse suffered by the children.




> Shirley Oaks is one of three Lambeth-run children's homes the Daily Mirror has linked to an alleged paedophile ring thought to involve an *unnamed MP in Tony Blair's government*.
> 
> Those allegations include claims the unnamed politician took boys out of South Vale children's home in West Norwood in the 1980s.
> 
> Some of the people who agreed to speak to the Advertiser this week detailed how they were sexually abused by mysterious figures who were regular visitors to the home.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 26, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Do you assume everyone brought up before the courts or even just charged is guilty? Do you think lawyers work for free?



Given the CPS's calculus for prosecution, whereby a case has to stand a 50/50 chance or better of a conviction to actually be tried, then assuming at least an "evens" likelihood of guilt is understandable, and in line with probability.
As for lawyers, everyone is entitled to a certain level of representation.  If you opt to "go private" because you believe you'll get better service, then that's your own look-out, surely?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 26, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Given the CPS's calculus for prosecution, whereby a case has to stand a 50/50 chance or better of a conviction to actually be tried, then assuming at least an "evens" likelihood of guilt is understandable, and in line with probability.
> As for lawyers, everyone is entitled to a certain level of representation.  If you opt to "go private" because you believe you'll get better service, then that's your own look-out, surely?


Yikes, VP. Not all briefs are equally competent. The Tories have totally wasted legal aid. If I had the money, I'd always go private.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Yikes, VP. Not all briefs are equally competent. The Tories have totally wasted legal aid. If I had the money, I'd always go private.


That depends if the most experienced in that particular field does legal aid work surely? 
Would you not want say Michael Mansfield QC representing you? Not all lawyers are cunts. Some still believe in the concept of justice.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 26, 2014)

MrSki said:


> That depends if the most experienced in that particular field does legal aid work surely?
> Would you not want say Michael Mansfield QC representing you? Not all lawyers are cunts. Some still believe in the concept of justice.


I would want him, Mr Ski. Is he available on legal aid?


----------



## MrSki (Jul 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I would want him, Mr Ski. Is he available on legal aid?


He does legal aid work. He represented Mark Duggan's family in the recent judicial review. Plus plenty of other well deserving causes.


----------



## elbows (Jul 27, 2014)

I believe the Sun on Sunday is the original source for this story, but anyway...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...e-sir-peter-morrison-bodyguard_n_5624475.html



> Margaret Thatcher was told about alleged sex parties with under-age boys held by one of her closest aides claims her former personal bodyguard.
> 
> Barry Strevens, who worked as the prime minister's personal bodyguard, said that he passed on allegations about her confidant Sir Peter Morrison.
> 
> The former senior police officer said that Lady Thatcher appointed Sir Peter deputy party chairman of the Conservatives despite learning of the rumours.





> The former bodyguard said that he first found out about the claims from a senior Cheshire Police officer.
> 
> At the time, Sir Peter was being considered as the replacement for deputy party chairman after Jeffrey Archer had stood down over prostitution claims in 1986.
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Jul 27, 2014)

elbows said:


> I believe the Sun on Sunday is the original source for this story, but anyway...
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...e-sir-peter-morrison-bodyguard_n_5624475.html


 Indy seems to be running the Huff account of the Sun story almost word for word...

that Hamilton denial to protect the dead queen's reputation looks lame, even by their normal duplicitous standards...



> Responding to the claims, Archie Hamilton told the paper that Mr Strevens had gone to Number 10 for a meeting but that he could not recall the mention of underage boys.
> 
> He said: “I remember Barry Strevens coming in and what he actually said at the time was that there were partes at peter Morrison’s home in Cheshire and there were only men who were there.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 28, 2014)

MI5 & Kincora



> In October 1974, Wallace told his superiors that he wanted out of Clockwork Orange. He then wrote a memo explaining in detail that destitute boys were being systematically sodomised by members of Kincora staff and were being supplied for abuse to prominent figures in unionist politics. The abusers – among them MPs, councillors, leading Orangemen and other influential individuals – became potentially important intelligence assets.
> 
> 
> MI5 had come across Kincora through its interest in paedophile “housemaster” William McGrath, also leader of an eccentric loyalist organisation, Tara. The agency didn’t report the scandal, but allowed it to continue while monitoring the abusers. It wasn’t until an _Irish Independent_ expose in 1980 that official notice was taken. An RUC investigation led to the imprisonment of McGrath and two other Kincora staff. Two inquiries were then established in succession by secretary of state James Prior. The first, under complaints commissioner Stephen McGonagle, collapsed on its first day when three of five panel members resigned upon being told they couldn’t delve into any matter which might be the subject of police investigation. The collapse of an inquiry after one half-day session may be a unique occurrence.
> ...


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...-to-be-exposed-1.1875925#.U9ZXa7hbSYF.twitter


----------



## Betsy (Jul 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> *That tweet is getting on a bit now.* I only point this out because most recently they have been preoccupied with what they've decided is a disinformation campaign that the police and other state agents are complicit in, in regards to changing the details of the 'customs seized child porn video' story.
> 
> There were two quite different stories, that I was previously treating as separate historical events. But it seems proponents of each story reckon enough details are the same that the other version of the story is relating to the same event but is a lie.
> 
> ...


Yes,sorry. I realised after I had posted. It was fresh from Twitter which made me think it was 'new' news.


----------



## elbows (Jul 28, 2014)

No worries. 

Anyway I'm still on the fence regarding the customs video thing. I'm a big fan of what Exaro have done to date, but some of the better considered criticisms of them stem from the possibility that they do over-egg things at times and are a tad keen on blowing their own trumpet, especially as time has gone on.

If it really is the same customer officer and audio recording of a February interview with him that several critics think it is, then I'm afraid Exaro really did overcook the story to the extent that I will be annoyed. But at the same time, one really important detail in a transcript of that interview is, according to at least one person who first had the transcript and then later got to listen to the audio, wrong. The transcript indicated that the customers officer didn't say the cabinet ministers name, but apparently this was inaccurate and he did name him rather than simply being fed a name by the journalist.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 28, 2014)




----------



## brogdale (Jul 28, 2014)

kenny g said:


> View attachment 58533



Billie Jean King?


----------



## Fez909 (Jul 28, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Billie Jean King?


It's Cliff Richard's waxwork at "Louis Tusaud's"


----------



## brogdale (Jul 28, 2014)

Fez909 said:


> It's Cliff Richard's waxwork at "Louis Tusaud's"



Should I have put a , or a , or summat?


----------



## Fez909 (Jul 28, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Should I have put a , or a , or summat?


I still think I would have 'corrected' you. I'm way too drunk to pick up on even not-tht-subtle hints.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 28, 2014)

Fez909 said:


> I still think I would have 'corrected' you. I'm way too drunk to pick up on even not-tht-subtle hints.


It was a toss-up between BJK and Shirley Bassey.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 29, 2014)

Fez909 said:


> It's Cliff Richard's waxwork at "Louis Tusaud's"


I would sue if I were him!


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 29, 2014)

kenny g said:


> View attachment 58533



It's official:

http://www.caci-international.co.uk/page/In-the-Press

I'd say he's the star user but, alongside Gillian Taylforth and Martine McCutcheon, the competition is weak.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 29, 2014)

UrbaneFox said:


> It's official:
> 
> http://www.caci-international.co.uk/page/In-the-Press
> 
> I'd say he's the star user, but alongside Gillian Taylforth and Martine McCutcheon, the competition is weak.


Hmmm...


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 29, 2014)

Fez909 said:


> It's Cliff Richard's waxwork at "Louis Tusaud's"



WRONG. It is from the Crap Taxidermy thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2014)

kenny g said:


>


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2014)




----------



## Wilf (Jul 29, 2014)

Betsy said:


> I would sue if I were him!


Must admit, this isn't the context in which I expected the words 'Cliff Richard' and 'would sue' to appear in this thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2014)

does anyone know of any lyrics cliff might have left off the final draft of this beautiful song?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 29, 2014)

What's a paedo's favourite Christmas Carol?

"When A Child Is Porn"

<gets coat>


----------



## 1%er (Jul 29, 2014)

kenny g said:


> View attachment 58533


Does this man have a supper injunction? Is it being challenged


----------



## laptop (Jul 29, 2014)

1%er said:


> a supper injunction?



'Eat soup!'


----------



## MrSki (Jul 29, 2014)

1%er said:


> Does this man have a supper injunction? Is it being challenged


You tube and the person who you may think is in the photo with the term allegations stuck on the end leads to some disturbing viewing. It might be bollocks but...


----------



## ohmyliver (Jul 29, 2014)

laptop said:


> 'Eat soup!'


surely 
First Course
****** ****
main course
**** with ***** and a side of *****

Pudding
**********


----------



## The Boy (Jul 29, 2014)

ohmyliver said:


> surely
> First Course
> ****** ****
> main course
> ...



No fish course?


----------



## ohmyliver (Jul 29, 2014)

The Boy said:


> No fish course?


That's covered by a super supper injunction. If it even existed at all.


----------



## 1%er (Jul 29, 2014)

theneedleblog has some interesting historic info re Sir Keith Joseph & Sir Michael Havers


----------



## free spirit (Jul 29, 2014)

not being funny, but what are half the posts on this page doing on this thread?

celeb outing = another thread, random paedo jokes = shit jokes thread etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2014)

free spirit said:


> not being funny, but what are half the posts on this page doing on this thread?
> 
> celeb outing = another thread, random paedo jokes = shit jokes thread etc.


humour bypass still working i see


----------



## free spirit (Jul 29, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> humour bypass still working i see


just not wanting this thread to go the way of the other one, which it looks in danger of doing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2014)

free spirit said:


> just not wanting this thread to go the way of the other one, which it looks in danger of doing.


the other ONE? which other one? there's been a dozen or more in the last three years which have gone "the way of the other one" not because of jokes but because of clusterfuck arguments.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 29, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> the other ONE? which other one? there's been a dozen or more in the last three years which have gone "the way of the other one" not because of jokes but because of clusterfuck arguments.


the jimmy saville thread you started that got closed a couple of weeks back with this message



> Looks like this thread is done. Please don't carry any of the shit over to the evidence thread.



but you knew that anyway, and my point is made so I'm out of this conversation.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2014)

I know we've already covered a bit about Dolphin Square, but what about Bickinhall Mansions?

Whilst reading _Smear! Wilson And The Secret State_ (Dorril & Ramsay) I've come across what appear to be oblique references to it, such as (I'm paraphrasing here as I haven't had a chance to properly file my annotations) ‘a flat off Baker Street used for orgies’; these in turn seem supported by specific references to Bickinhall Mansions such as at pp270-271, in which...

(i) Wilson is told that Tony Benn is alleged to have smoked cannabis in a flat there during the (first?) election campaign of 1974; and...

(ii) between the 1974 elections, a handbag belonging to the sister of Wilson's political secretary Marcia Williams is stolen from her house, Williams and her sister receive a phonecall from someone saying they have found the bag and to come to Bickinhall Mansions to collects it (having already heard Bickinhall rumours such as the Tokey Benn one, they suspect “a set-up of some kind” so call the police, who go along and retrieve the bag).

There are a few other mentions that seemed to suggest Bickinhall elsewhere in the book, mostly in relation to ‘sex parties’ or ‘orgies’, where the implication is that young women/girls (or young men/boys) were procured for the use of politicians by person or persons unknown.

Whilst we're at it, a couple of sideways mentions of Cyril Smith:



> This ‘MI5 dossier’ alleged South African involvement in the [then prominent anti-Apartheid activist and notable Young Liberal, Peter] Hain frame-up [over a bank robbery he was put on trial for], in the circulation of smear stories against Cyril Smith, in the ‘revival’ of the Scott-Thorpe allegations, and in the procuring of a pornographic film which included a Liberal MP's daughter...


pp303-304, in relation to statements made in Parliament in 1976


> [Express reporter Harry ‘Chapman’] Pincher attributes to Cyril Smith MP the rumour that Smith was alleged to have masturbated a horse.


p376 - Ch 45 note 11


----------



## brogdale (Jul 30, 2014)

Exaro's dogged pursuit of DPP(CPS) evidence relating to Cyril Smith's abusive conduct (finally) pays off...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5334/cps-forced-to-disclose-damning-police-report-on-cyril-smith

...but the disclosure raises more questions about the historic cover-up and the present-day strategy to 'manage' the unfolding revelations.

e2a : also on Hencke's blog



> My  Exaro colleagues Nick Fielding and Tim Wood deserve a big commendation for doggedly pursuing the Crown prosecution Service to force them to release a damning report revealing how the authorities missed their opportunity to prosecute  paedophile MP Cyril Smith while he was alive.
> 
> After using the Freedom of Information Act the CPS has finally  a year later released a police report showing the Rochdale authorities knew what Sir Cyril was up to – but  the Director of Public Prosecutions declined to prosecute,.
> 
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Exaro's dogged pursuit of DPP(CPS) evidence relating to Cyril Smith's abusive conduct (finally) pays off...



The petty way in which the CPS appears to have deliberately released the information to other outlets before Exaro - which fought for the documentation - would seem to amply illustrate how, regardless of the particulars of a case, the state views the public right to know as an imposition, and one to be either obstructed or punished.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 30, 2014)

I bought a copy of 'Smear! Harold Wilson and the Secret State' the other day but I am yet to start it because I am reading a book about corruption in Italy. I might bring it forward.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> I bought a copy of 'Smear! Harold Wilson and the Secret State' the other day but I am yet to start it because I am reading a book about corruption in Italy. I might bring it forward.


I would say it's a pretty good read, and invaluable in bringing material together on a number of topics, but it does suffer a little from what appears to have been the unexpected departure, about one-third in, of the proofreader. Thereafter there is an embarrassingly large number of typos. This does lead the reader to wonder whether there are more grave errors in the substance of the text.

However, it is so extensively annotated that you do at least have the opportunity to double-check sources much of the time, or at least have pointers to where one might corroborate an assertion.

I read it straight after the David Leigh book, which meant I did skip over some of the main body of material covering Frolik, Wigg etc (all amply covered in the Leigh book), as that wasn't my primary interest anyway. The notes at the back were very useful, though.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 30, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> That would be the same Edwina Currie who  gave *Jimmy Saville* the keys to broadmoor.



*Savile charity 'to fight against payouts for victim.*

_A charity set up by Jimmy Savile is to challenge any payouts of compensation to victims of the sex attacker.

The Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust will take its case to the Court of Appeal later this year, victims' lawyers said.

It wants to overturn an agreed settlement scheme, in which the Savile estate, the BBC and the NHS are responsible for paying compensation.

Liz Dux, who represents 176 of the late DJ's victims, said her clients would be "angry and disappointed" by the move.

The charitable trust controls £3.7m and is separate to the Savile estate.

Ms Dux said the estate had its own pot of funds, which is where its share of payouts are to come from.

The victims deserve redress and closure. They have suffered enough.”

She said she could therefore not understand why the trustees were taking the legal action.

"For one, it's going to mean that more precious funds that should have gone to victims are being spent on legal costs, which is exactly what the settlement scheme was designed to avoid," she told the BBC.

"And secondly, the charitable trust is not even responsible for compensating victims - that is for the estate to do."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28558442_


----------



## brogdale (Jul 30, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> The petty way in which the CPS appears to have deliberately released the information to other outlets before Exaro - which fought for the documentation - would seem to amply illustrate how, regardless of the particulars of a case, the state views the public right to know as an imposition, and one to be either obstructed or punished.



It sure does.


----------



## elbows (Jul 31, 2014)

> A former aide to the Duke of Edinburgh has been accused of sexually assaulting a girl in the 1970s.
> 
> Benjamin Herman, 79, is charged with three indecent assaults between 1972 and 1974, during which time he served as an equerry to Prince Philip.
> 
> ...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28579148


----------



## Betsy (Jul 31, 2014)

elbows said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28579148


I am not your  biggest royalist but I think it unfair to have a (big) picture of the Duke of Edinburgh on that news piece. It should have a picture of the accused.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 31, 2014)

Betsy said:


> I am not your  biggest royalist but I think it unfair to have a (big) picture of the Duke of Edinburgh on that news piece. It should have a picture of the accused.


The concept of Monarchy is not founded on notions of "fairness". Almost certainly an error by the normally supine state broadcaster, but funny nonetheless.


----------



## Betsy (Jul 31, 2014)

brogdale said:


> *The concept of Monarchy is not founded on notions of "fairness"*. Almost certainly an error by the normally supine state broadcaster, but funny nonetheless.


Which is all the more reason for others to be scrupulous in theirs.


----------



## laptop (Jul 31, 2014)

Betsy said:


> I am not your  biggest royalist but I think it unfair to have a (big) picture of the Duke of Edinburgh on that news piece. It should have a picture of the accused.



Unless the "error" were to be* illustrative of something the picture editor knows but we mustn't know 



* Counter-factual subjunctive, Your Honour. Says what follows is false. I plead insanity, claim asylum in Sweden and ask that Beefeater to stop twisting my arm now, please.


----------



## 1%er (Jul 31, 2014)

*Paedophile Jimmy Savile ‘Fixes It’ For Young Girl To Meet Prince Philip.*
*Question:* How did paedophile Jimmy Savile sneak a young girl into Buckingham Palace without her parents?


----------



## 1%er (Jul 31, 2014)




----------



## brogdale (Jul 31, 2014)

Betsy said:


> Which is all the more reason for others to be scrupulous in theirs.



Talk like that sees them keeping their heads.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 1, 2014)

*Kincora abuse investigation stopped by MI5 says ex-army officer*

*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28597343*



> Brian Gemmell said a senior MI5 officer told him to stop looking into claims of abuse at Kincora Boys' Home in east Belfast.
> 
> He said he presented a report on the allegations to the officer in 1975.
> 
> ...





> However, after presenting his report to a senior MI5 officer, Mr Gemmell said, he was told to cease his investigation.
> 
> He said: "I was summoned to go and see him. I went up thinking he was going to be pleased with me.
> 
> ...



Don't recall this guy speaking publicly before this. (?)

ETA: Another short interview in the Irish Mirror

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/crime/former-mi5-officer-says-agency-3944741


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 1, 2014)

Rather grim detailed BBC story :

*A survivor's story: Trapped in a subculture of child abuse*

*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-28228902*



> His account of abuse spans several years at different locations. On the surface these episodes of abuse might appear unrelated, but Michael believes they were connected in that an abuser who knew an abuser knew an abuser. And he was effectively passed along that chain.
> 
> "It wasn't quite a paedophile ring," says Michael. "More an affiliation of abusers who all knew each other."


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 1, 2014)

Sometimes I think we should have a thread entitled "How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile *coverup*?" To which I'd have originally answered: "not a lot. The default mode back then was to disregard complaints from children, especially those in care. It wasn't so much conspiracy as a habit of thought." 

Now, I'm not so sure. I don't want to get into lizard territory but it's worth re-examining, particularly wrt Kincora. And Cyril Smith was first accused before he was even an MP, so what is it about the failure to prosecute - or rather, not just the failure but the prevention of prosecution?

Another thing that bothers me is "back then". As if this sort of thing doesn't happen now. I mean, the alleged resort/party disposable-boys-on-tap for toffs sort of thing. Did it ever really happen, and if so, have people lost their taste for it? Do they now go abroad to find boys with "a sweet air of corruption"?


----------



## Betsy (Aug 1, 2014)

It just goes on and on......very depressing.

_*Child abuse probe investigates former Underley Hall School*


Police investigating allegations of historical child abuse are probing activities at a former school in Cumbria.


Underley Hall School, a residential boarding school in Kirkby Lonsdale, closed in 2012.


Cumbria Police confirmed it is looking at the establishment as part of an investigation into abuse claims in residential schools across the county.


The allegations date from the 1970s to the 1990s.


A spokeswoman said detectives were "investigating these reports thoroughly" as part of Operation Tweed.

 'Get to the truth' 
Cumbria County Council said it was one of a number of local authorities from across the country which used the school and said it was "working with police to review any files relating to Underley Hall".


A spokesman said: "Underley Hall was a private school.


"It closed in 2012 following an Ofsted inspection which judged it to be inadequate.


"All children placed at the school by the county council were removed following the inadequate judgement."


Lib Dem MP Tim Farron, whose Westmorland and Lonsdale constituency the school was in, has contacted the Home Office to call for an inquiry after being approached by a former pupil. 


He said: "We must get to the truth about what happened at Underley Hall to make sure that victims receive justice, any perpetrators are held to account for their crimes and that children are protected in the future."


MP Graham Stringer, who represents Blackley and Broughton in Greater Manchester, has also written to the Home Secretary, Theresa May, after he too was contacted by a former Underley Hall pupil who lives in his constituency._

_http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-28600858_


----------



## elbows (Aug 1, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Don't recall this guy speaking publicly before this. (?)



Wording of some press articles about this suggest he may have spoken before, but anonymously.

Anyway....



> First Minister Peter Robinson has said that child sex abuse at Kincora boys' home is a "national scandal" that needs to be fully investigated.
> 
> He said he has written to the prime minister to urge that the east Belfast home is included in the ongoing Westminister child sex abuse inquiry.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28613042


----------



## Quartz (Aug 1, 2014)

The truth *must* out.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 2, 2014)

Cabinet Office Worker One of 660 Arrested (not  Patrick Rock)

A former Cabinet Office digital expert is facing jail after being caught with a huge stash of nearly 400 child porn images.

Sebastian Crump amassed depraved images of child abuse while working as digital communications manager advising the Government on its own website.

Now questions are being asked about why it took six months to emerge that a government official had been arrested over child pornography allegations.

Police discovered indecent images were being streamed from Mr Crump’s home computer IP address in April last year.

But incredibly last November – while he was still being investigated – he received a promotion at the Cabinet Office, where he had previously worked in internal communications.

When Crump, 39, was arrested in January this year Scotland Yard did not publicise the arrest. He was only named when he was charged last month, but even then the Metropolitan Police did not reveal his role at the Cabinet Office.

Details can only now be revealed after he pleaded guilty to four charges of making and distributing indecent images of children.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 5, 2014)

Operation Hydrant


> A national police group is being set up to explore possible links between child sex abuse investigations involving celebrities, elected officials and institutions such as schools and care homes.
> 43 Police forces across the UK have been asked for details of their inquiries.
> 
> The new body has been set up by the Association of Chief Police Officers and will collate and share information, Chief Constable Simon Bailey said.
> ...


If you want to get rid of a problem, set up an inquiry


----------



## Dillinger4 (Aug 5, 2014)

"A Hutton style enquiry"


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2014)

Nah. Operation Hydrant may turn out be flawed in some ways, but it simply isn't appropriate to attach the same criticisms to it that we have towards public inquiries. It's a police thing involving ACPO, and such things come with quite a different set of baggage to inquiries.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 5, 2014)

So, Denning has gone guilty on a range of offences related to abusing kids.

He was a frequenter of Elm Guest House, so if plod has been diligent they will have quizzed him on that.

Perhaps they've put the details in a nice big dossier for MI5 to spirit away, or to be otherwise "unfortunately" mislaid. No matter, such a vanishing could probably be investigated within mere decades.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 6, 2014)

Another example of investigative journalism championing the victims of abuse from Exaro.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5339/cps-to-reinstate-key-charges-after-error-over-elm-guest-house

...and Danczuk.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 9, 2014)

Detectives investigating a Labour MP over child abuse allegations more than 20 years ago were stopped from arresting him, _The Times_ has learnt.
Greville Janner, now Lord Janner of Braunstone, was interviewed by appointment in the company of his solicitor as part of a major investigation into the abuse of boys at homes in Leicestershire in 1991.

A number of sources with knowledge of the case have confirmed that officers had wanted to arrest the Leicester West MP, which would have given them the power to search his home and offices. Legal advice was sought on taking the rare step of arresting an MP and it is understood that the advice from senior counsel was that it was an appropriate course of action. At the last minute the planned arrest was blocked. Arrangements were made instead for Lord Janner to attend a police station by appointment with his solicitor, Sir David Napley.

The decision-making process is being re-examined by Leicestershire police as part of Operation Enamel, which is looking into allegations against Lord Janner and others.

Kelvyn Ashby, the retired officer who was senior investigator on the original case, confirmed that he was in contact with the Operation Enamel team but declined to comment further.

Police executed search warrants at Lord Janner’s home in Golders Green, north London, in December and at his office at the House of Lords in March. A partial file of evidence has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service, which is providing the police with “investigative advice”.

The peer, now 86 and said by friends to be in very poor health, has not been arrested. He has strongly denied the allegations against him in the past.

The new investigation into Lord Janner and others is one of dozens of historic abuse inquiries which come under the umbrella of Operation Hydrant, a nationwide steering group headed by senior police officers and set up to ensure consistent approaches to cases involving “persons of public prominence”.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 9, 2014)

Bishop of Gloucester questioned by police over indecent assault allegations

A senior bishop has been questioned by police on suspicion of indecently assaulting a woman and a girl – days after suddenly stepping down from his post.
The Rt Rev Michael Perham, 66, was due to retire in November after almost a decade as Bishop of Gloucester but withdrew from his role last weekend citing “personal reasons”.

On Tuesday Scotland Yard confirmed that Bishop Perham attended a police station in Gloucestershire to be interviewed over allegations dating from 1980 and 1981.
The investigation is into an alleged indecent assault of a child aged under 18 and indecent assault of a second female aged over 18.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 9, 2014)

1%er said:


> Bishop of Gloucester questioned by police over indecent assault allegations
> 
> A senior bishop has been questioned by police on suspicion of indecently assaulting a woman and a girl – days after suddenly stepping down from his post.
> The Rt Rev Michael Perham, 66, was due to retire in November after almost a decade as Bishop of Gloucester but withdrew from his role last weekend citing “personal reasons”.
> ...


Relates to Perham's time as curate in Addington, Croydon during the late 1970's & early 1980's...

http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/...n-questioned/story-22122629-detail/story.html



> At the time of the alleged incidents, in 1980 and 1981, the Bishop was curate at St Mary’s Church, in Addington - his first full-time post.
> 
> The married father of four was questioned by officers just days after he stood down from his Gloucester post, citing “personal reasons”.
> The investigation is being run by the Metropolitan Police Sexual Offences, Exploitation and Child Abuse Command.



Can't see any reference to any connection with the nearby Shirley Oaks abuse story.


----------



## DocRichard (Aug 10, 2014)

There is a wiki here vipcsa.wikidot.com/here which is drawing together all the information about child sexual abuse by "persons of public prominence" in an orderly way. Pages on cover-ups and police link to 37 events where investigations were frustrated.


----------



## Libertad (Aug 10, 2014)

For your convenience:

http://vipcsa.wikidot.com/


----------



## Lorca (Aug 10, 2014)

more allegations about cyril smith in birmingham here...

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/cyril-smith-investigated-police-after-7588694


----------



## Obnoxiousness (Aug 12, 2014)

Something strange just happened to a BBC news page...

You know that they have the top ten "Most Popular 'Shared' and 'Read'" section at the bottom of each story...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ 

Well, this story about Savile's death, from 2011, is now ranking at number 2 in the most read section...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15507374 

Anyone else see that?  Anyone know why?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 12, 2014)

Obnoxiousness said:


> Something strange just happened to a BBC news page...
> 
> You know that they have the top ten "Most Popular 'Shared' and 'Read'" section at the bottom of each story...
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> ...


Dunno, but the prescience of this quote struck me:

'Presenter Dave Lee Travis told Sky News: "We are all going to be worse off without him around."'


----------



## maomao (Aug 12, 2014)

Obnoxiousness said:


> Something strange just happened to a BBC news page...
> 
> You know that they have the top ten "Most Popular 'Shared' and 'Read'" section at the bottom of each story...
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> ...


Probably got linked on a busy forum somewhere.


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 12, 2014)

There are a lot of these in the comments thread to that article.


> This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.


----------



## friedaweed (Aug 12, 2014)

Obnoxiousness said:


> Something strange just happened to a BBC news page...
> 
> You know that they have the top ten "Most Popular 'Shared' and 'Read'" section at the bottom of each story...
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> ...


I saw that on the page about Robin Williams death. Strange


----------



## laptop (Aug 12, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> There are a lot of these in the comments thread to that article.



Including many from "tobyjug"


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 12, 2014)

laptop said:


> Including many from "tobyjug"


Yes, I noticed that.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 12, 2014)

This happens quite a lot where old stories appear in the most read section so I would not read too much into it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2014)

Obnoxiousness said:


> Something strange just happened to a BBC news page...
> 
> You know that they have the top ten "Most Popular 'Shared' and 'Read'" section at the bottom of each story...
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> ...


lots of people are reading it

next


----------



## brogdale (Aug 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> lots of people are reading it
> 
> next



Hmmm....then how do we account for this being hidden in the BBC imagery on that page?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Hmmm....then how do we account for this View attachment 59486being hidden in the BBC imagery on that page?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 12, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


>



Is "see" where you're going with this...


----------



## 1%er (Aug 12, 2014)

The head of one of the country’s biggest police forces is facing calls to stand down amid a criminal probe in relation to his role in an investigation into a suspected sex offender.

Sir Peter Fahy, chief constable of Greater Manchester Police (GMP), is one of three serving officers to be served with both a criminal and gross misconduct notice following investigations by the police watchdog. Read more here

and

FOURTEEN suspects have been questioned as part of a fresh investigation into alleged child abuse at a residential school where Sir Cyril Smith is accused of targeting young boys.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) confirmed that the men, aged between 35 and 66, were interviewed under caution over a range of allegations including physical and sexual abuse at Knowl View School in Rochdale between 1969 and 1990. Read more here

Also

Cyril Smith & Underley Hall, set up by friend of the paedophile MP

Detectives have launched an investigation into alleged child abuse at a school set up by a friend of the late paedophile MP Cyril Smith.

Former pupils at Underley Hall, a boarding school opened by John Turner in Cumbria in 1976, claim that boys were physically assaulted by staff and sexually abused by a fellow pupil.

Mr Turner, a former headmaster at the notorious Knowl View School in Rochdale where Smith targeted vulnerable young boys, is accused of beating a pupil who complained about being indecently touched by the politician.

Outdoor pursuits teacher John Wadlow was charged in 1997 with sexual offences against children at Underley Hall but killed himself while awaiting trial..


----------



## existentialist (Aug 12, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Hmmm....then how do we account for this View attachment 59486being hidden in the BBC imagery on that page?


*whistles tunelessly*


----------



## elbows (Aug 12, 2014)

Old stories rise to the top of the bbc news charts so often that I'm sure I even saw them experimenting with something that shows the date of the story below its title in the box some weeks ago.

A Jersey abuse inquiry has begun:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-28749649



> The Independent Jersey Care Inquiry has heard from its first witness to have been through the island's care system.
> 
> Giffard Aubin, 79, described harsh punishments, psychological abuse and bullying between 1943 and 1951.
> 
> ...



Jersey was occupied the the Nazis during most of world war two, so even if his better memories of that period are down to him being younger at the time, that last sentence is especially damning of what followed.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 12, 2014)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...e-second-boys-school-linked-to-cyril-smith-mp

Jesus, the ever-expanding picture of Smith's abusive behaviour is beginning to look like Savile's.

Disturbing.


----------



## The Pale King (Aug 14, 2014)

Pardon the _Mail _link

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rious-guest-house-paedophile-Cyril-Smith.html


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2014)

brogdale said:


> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...e-second-boys-school-linked-to-cyril-smith-mp
> 
> Jesus, the ever-expanding picture of Smith's abusive behaviour is beginning to look like Savile's.
> 
> Disturbing.


I suddenly had a quite horrible thought. Suppose these revelations - Savile, Smith, Clifford, Harris, etc., are the lower slopes of a bell curve.

Where the hell might it peak?


----------



## laptop (Aug 14, 2014)

existentialist said:


> I suddenly had a quite horrible thought. Suppose these revelations - Savile, Smith, Clifford, Harris, etc., are the lower slopes of a bell curve.
> 
> Where the hell might it peak?



What is the X-axis? A fame gradient?

In that case we could expect a few Royals further out to the right than Mr Savile.

And I can make a prediction: after several more bishops, further in than the current crop, someone will get their teeth into the more unorthodox 1970s Xtian sects - Children of God etc - and uncover some real horrors. Not exactly news, because everyone who's thought about it has known all along - but no-one much did anything...


----------



## Dan U (Aug 14, 2014)

*Nick Sutton* ‏@suttonnick  36s 
 More
Police investigating an allegation of sexual nature from the 1980s are searching a property owned by Sir Cliff Richard. More on #wato now


Reply

Retweet

Favorite


----------



## Dan U (Aug 14, 2014)

we can finally say that name (allegedly, in context etc)

*Callum May* ‏@callummay  3m
I'm outside Cliff Richard's home in Berkshire. It's being searched by police investigating a historic sex allegation. pic.twitter.com/Otik8zaM4B

Outside his house now


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Aug 14, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28790718


----------



## tufty79 (Aug 14, 2014)

Yup - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28790718


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 14, 2014)

I note they're at pains to say offence rather than offences and allegation rather than allegations.


----------



## Favelado (Aug 14, 2014)

We're all going on a prison holiday.
No more freedom for a year or two.
Tears and crying on my prison holiday.
For a year or twoooo. For a year or two.

We're going where the slopping out is nightly.
We're going where the tree is Yew.
There's someone ringing on my doorbell.
In a uniform that's blueeee..


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 14, 2014)

Not yewtree related - but to do with underage boy in the 80s.

*Danny Shaw* @DannyShawBBC
Re Cliff Richard house search S Yorks Police: "allegation of a sexual nature dating back to 1980s involving a boy..under the age of 16"


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Aug 14, 2014)

Hope he hasn't scarpered to non extradition treaty Island somewhere in the Caribbean.


----------



## angelraven (Aug 14, 2014)

mystic pyjamas said:


> Hope he hasn't scarpered to non extradition treaty Island somewhere in the Caribbean.



According to the BBC article he's in Portugal so one would think, if they got an arrest warrant together quickly, they could theoretically stop him leaving the EU. No idea how likely that is though.

(That may also explain why in his statement he seemed a bit miffed about notice of the search being given to the Press but not him .)


----------



## existentialist (Aug 15, 2014)

laptop said:


> What is the X-axis? A fame gradient?
> 
> In that case we could expect a few Royals further out to the right than Mr Savile.
> 
> And I can make a prediction: after several more bishops, further in than the current crop, someone will get their teeth into the more unorthodox 1970s Xtian sects - Children of God etc - and uncover some real horrors. Not exactly news, because everyone who's thought about it has known all along - but no-one much did anything...


I'd seen the x axis as good old boring time...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 15, 2014)

Today's _Times_ has a report on an abuse survivor's accusations against Nicholas Fairbairn:



> *Minister raped me, says QC’s daughter *
> 
> The daughter of a prominent QC said she was raped at the age of four by Sir Nicholas Fairbairn, who served as Scotland’s solicitor-general under Margaret Thatcher.
> 
> ...



Full C+P due to £wall

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/scotland/article4176635.ece


----------



## Betsy (Aug 15, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Today's _Times_ has a report on an abuse survivor's accusations against Nicholas Fairbairn:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If true, this is truly horrendous.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 15, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> Today's _Times_ has a report on an abuse survivor's accusations against Nicholas Fairbairn:


Seems to have been picked up from a longer story in yesterday's Mail :
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rious-guest-house-paedophile-Cyril-Smith.html


----------



## Dillinger4 (Aug 15, 2014)

ISGP back online


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 15, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Seems to have been picked up from a longer story in yesterday's Mail :
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rious-guest-house-paedophile-Cyril-Smith.html


Cheers


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 17, 2014)

I thought Simon Danczuk was one of the good guys? 
MP's ferocious attack on a serving Chief Constable


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Aug 17, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I thought Simon Danczuk was one of the good guys?
> MP's ferocious attack on a serving Chief Constable



Have a look at some of the other stuff he's written for e.g. the Telegraph.


----------



## lazythursday (Aug 17, 2014)

Danczuk treated a friend of mine really badly some years back. In my view he's a calculating, unprincipled populist. While he's shown some guts over the child abuse stuff, his initial interest must primarily be due to its potential in smearing local Lib Dems in tarring them with the Cyril Smith brush. Rochdale is a Lib/Lab marginal with a really vicious local political culture. And I don't doubt he is enjoying being painted as a crusader for justice, must be worth a few votes.

His views on welfare reform are quite shockingly right wing.


----------



## laptop (Aug 18, 2014)

Odd phrasing here:



> A paedophile at the centre of a forthcoming historical abuse inquiry advised the Home Office on changes to the residential child care system.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28793654



"Forthcoming historical" what?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2014)

laptop said:


> Odd phrasing here:
> 
> 
> 
> "Forthcoming historical" what?


they're investigating his noncing activities


----------



## laptop (Aug 18, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> they're investigating his noncing activities



Or will be. In the future, they'll be looking at his past. That'll be it.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 22, 2014)

A letter sent by Tom Watson’s original PMQ source, Peter McKelvie, to Lord Mandelson alleges that the Labour front bench were made aware of allegations of child rape against Sir Peter Morrison around 1993/1994.

* A British Aerospace Trade Union Convenor said a member said he was raped by Peter Morrison as a child  – the Convenor went to the National HQ of the union who put it to Labour front bench. Peter Mandelson (name redacted in original) was saying that the Tory Front Bench had been approached. “*


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Alexis Jay Rotherham report puplished.



> About 1,400 children were subjected to "appalling" sexual exploitation in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013, a report has found.
> 
> Children as young as 11 were raped by multiple perpetrators, abducted, trafficked to other cities in England, beaten and intimidated it said.
> 
> The report was commissioned by Rotherham Borough Council in 2013.



1400 ffs


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

> These failures occured despite three reports between 2002 and 2006 "which could not have been clearer in the description of the situation in Rotherham".
> 
> She said the first of these reports was "effectively suppressed" because senior officers did not believe the data. The other two were ignored, she added.


(...)


> The report concluded: "No one knows the true scale of the child sexual exploitation (CSE) in Rotherham over the years.
> 
> "*Our conservative estimate* is that approximately 1,400 children were sexually exploited over the full inquiry period, from 1997 to 2013."


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/26/rotherham-children-sexually-abused-report


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 26, 2014)

Just heard this about Rotherham on the radio. 
This is unforgivable, no excuses for the perpetrators, social services and of course south Yorkshire police.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

> Prof Alexis Jay, who wrote the report, said she found examples of "children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone".
> 
> Jay said: "They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten and intimidated." She said she found girls as young as 11 had been raped by large numbers of men.



jesus


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2014)

and what about all the other rotherhams around the country?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> and what about all the other rotherhams around the country?



..and here's how the political elite will use this story to deflect attention from other more proximate tales...



> The report said: "*By far the majority of perpetrators were described as Asian by victims*." But, she said, councillors seemed to think is was a one-off problem they hoped would go away and "several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist".
> 
> She added: "Others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so."


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> ..and here's how the political elite will use this story to deflect attention from other more proximate tales...


yeh. but when we get to deal with the ruling class nonces i suppose that by far the majority of the perpetrators will be white. paedos don't come in only one colour you know.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 26, 2014)

> Rotherham council, which commissioned the report, said it accepted the findings, including the statement that failures "almost without exception" were attributed to senior managers in child protection services, elected councillors and senior police officers.



as per


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. but when we get to deal with the ruling class nonces i suppose that by far the majority of the perpetrators will be white. paedos don't come in only one colour you know.


 of course; that's why I said they'd use it...yeah?


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Alexis Jay Rotherham report puplished.
> 1400 ffs


I really don't know how to process this. The reported stories are all about a particular class of perps. That may well be biased but if it is, it suggests that the problem is even greater.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> of course; that's why I said they'd use it...yeah?


yeh. but it's not going to cut any mustard when more people of the stature of gary glitter or rolf harris or, dare i say, other "entertainers" who have homes abroad, start getting sent down.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 26, 2014)

The victims already broken and in care then failed and abandoned by the service charged by the system with their care and then the police chose to ignore the pleas and statements of the children.
The excuse, they didn't want to appear racist!
Trust the system, pah! This is yet another case of complicity and cover up!


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

Shaun Wright the Labour Council Cabinet Member with responsibility for Children and Young People’s services between 2005 and 2010 is now South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner. 

So that's all right then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Shaun Wright the Labour Council Cabinet Member with responsibility for Children and Young People’s services between 2005 and 2010 is now South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner.
> 
> So that's all right then.


no early morning knocks on his door then


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Shaun Wright the Labour Council Cabinet Member with responsibility for Children and Young People’s services between 2005 and 2010 is now South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner.
> 
> So that's all right then.


ffs


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> and what about all the other rotherhams around the country?





> 15:12:
> Prof Jay says she *would not be surprised if similar situations of widespread abuse might arise in other towns*.



Like Oxford etc.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 26, 2014)

The BBC were quick of the mark to show Cliff's house being searched at the behest of SYP. 
Will they be as swift filming and naming the police and council officers who have been complicit and guilty of conspiracy in keeping the original crimes hidden?
Yeah!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Like Oxford etc.


she'd clearly seen my post


----------



## Quartz (Aug 26, 2014)

I've just read the article on the abuse in Rotherham. 

 and  really don't cover it.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Interesting that Exaro recently revealed that Rochdale are consistently refusing to consider compensation for their former children in "care" that were victims of abuse. Almost like these councils could see the tsunami of claims coming their way.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

Is Rotherham unique? I don't think so. Are they at the cutting edge of self-examination? Just possibly. 
The horror, and the casual acceptance of horror..


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

The publication of this report probably helps explain the timing and bizarre theatricality of the Cliff bust by SYP.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> The publication of this report probably helps explain the timing and bizarre theatricality of the Cliff bust by SYP.


How so? Deflection or what?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> How so? Deflection or what?


 Attempting to gain some credit knowing the child-abuse shit-storm was about to engulf them.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

(Noted that common denominator is South Yorkshire Police, those impeccable upholders of British (TM) values.)


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> The publication of this report probably helps explain the timing and bizarre theatricality of the Cliff bust by SYP.



The trouble with coincidences is they require a lot of planning!


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 26, 2014)

I am originally a Rotherham lad. I have supported Rotherham utd since 1968.
I am this afternoon shamed by my hometown. It is unforgivable.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> The trouble with coincidences is they require a lot of planning!


 When it comes to arse-covering, obfuscation or out-right conspiracy the OB are willing to put in a great deal of effort.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

CEO Howard League for Penal Reform, Frances Cook 
tweets: 



> *I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist, but police must have been complicit in such large scale child sexual abuse*


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> CEO Howard League for Penal Reform, Frances Cook
> tweets:


She is one of my heroes.
Wow. Just wow.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Shaun Wright the Labour Council Cabinet Member with responsibility for Children and Young People’s services between 2005 and 2010 is now South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner.
> 
> So that's all right then.



Apparently so...



> Council chief executive Martin Kimber said he did not have the evidence to discipline any individuals working for the council despite the report saying there had been “blatant” collective failures by its leadership at the time.
> 
> Mr Kimber said: “*Officers in senior positions responsible for children’s safeguarding services throughout the critical periods when services fell some way short of today’s standards do not work for the council today.*
> 
> “To that extent, I have not been able to identify any issues of professional practice related to current serving officers of this council that would require me to consider use of disciplinary or capability procedures.”


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

Dear god in heaven. Nothing to see here, move along. At the very least he could say this doesn't happen now. Does he say that? Does he?


----------



## Quartz (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Interesting that Exaro recently revealed that Rochdale are consistently refusing to consider compensation for their former children in "care" that were victims of abuse. Almost like these councils could see the tsunami of claims coming their way.



I'm not sure financial compensation is relevant at this point. I'm thinking more along the lines of arrests, and - if found guilty - dismissals, forfeitures of pensions, and lengthy prison sentences.  After that we can talk about financial compensation.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Quartz said:


> I'm not sure financial compensation is relevant at this point. I'm thinking more along the lines of arrests, and - if found guilty - dismissals, forfeitures of pensions, and lengthy prison sentences.  After that we can talk about financial compensation.


I'm not sure that you're thinking like the local state does.


----------



## Quartz (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I'm not sure that you're thinking like the local state does.



I'm damn sure I'm not.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Quartz said:


> I'm damn sure I'm not.


Exactly.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> ..and here's how the political elite will use this story to deflect attention from other more proximate tales...


 
And in response we should pretend that there is no racial element to this at all should we? Or to put it another way if all of the perps were white working class men and the victims Asian girls (and it is girls who were abused) we'd all be so quick to dismiss any suggestions that race was a factor would we?


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

Smokeandsteam said:


> And in response we should pretend that there is no racial element to this at all should we? Or to put it another way if all of the perps were white working class men and the victims Asian girls (and it is girls who were abused) we'd all be so quick to dismiss any suggestions that race was a factor would we?


Oh just listen to yourself. Hasn't it occurred to you that the race of the people arrested might be a function of those arresting them?


----------



## Quartz (Aug 26, 2014)

The stories I've read (BBC & Guardian) indicate that the perpetrators were of multiple ethnicities.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Oh just listen to yourself. Hasn't it occurred to you that the race of the people arrested might be a function of those arresting them?


In other words, I'm suggesting there may be a lot more victims out there.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 26, 2014)

Sick And Malicious Edits On Teresa Cooper’s Wiki Page by ‘Westminster’ Source.

Victor Montagu MP, Previously The 10th Earl Of Sandwich, raped and abused his Son and others


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2014)

Quartz said:


> The stories I've read (BBC & Guardian) indicate that the perpetrators were of multiple ethnicities.



Perhaps best to look to the actual report before we make any sweeping statements...


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Perhaps best to look to the actual report before we make any sweeping statements...


 No, I don't 'like' this but I like its honesty. Please let's not feed racism with this story.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> No, I don't 'like' this but I like its honesty. Please let's not feed racism with this story.


Are you saying that if minorities are involved it should be played down? That appears to the the attitude of some staff who failed to report this abuse.

Racists will use it for their own means, but most right thinking people will see it for what it is.


----------



## cantsin (Aug 26, 2014)

Smokeandsteam said:


> And in response we should pretend that there is no racial element to this at all should we? Or to put it another way if all of the perps were white working class men and the victims Asian girls (and it is girls who were abused) we'd all be so quick to dismiss any suggestions that race was a factor would we?



not sure what yre getting at here ? Priests, public school staff, BBC Variety show all stars,  - racial groups, or all part of localised / micro power structures ?


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

1%er said:


> Are you saying that if minorities are involved it should be played down? That appears to the the attitude of some staff who failed to report this abuse.
> 
> Racists will use it for their own means, but most right thinking people will see it for what it is.


No, I'm absolutely not saying that. I'm saying that we need to be sure that the people prosecuting these cases are themselves free of prejudice. Maybe they focus on minorities? I mean, it does happen, doesn't it?
The upshot of what I'm saying is that the problem may perhaps be far far worse than we imagine. With a dose of racism on the side.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 26, 2014)

It will be interesting to see how many people who failed in their legal duty or their duty of care are held to account.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

Worth reading the report in full since it comprehensively undermines a lot of the lazy ways this is being reported. As one example I haven't seen this section referred to at all although in a lot of ways it seems rather more relevant than the race of the perpetrators :


> 8.16 - One of the common threads running through child sexual exploitation across England
> has been the prominent role of taxi drivers in being directly linked to children who
> were abused. This was the case in Rotherham from a very early stage, when
> residential care home heads met in the nineties to share intelligence about taxis and
> ...


(...)


> 8.21 - The Safeguarding Unit convened Strategy meetings from time to time on allegations
> involving taxi drivers. We read some of the most serious, from 2010, and were struck
> by the sense of exasperation, even hopelessness, recorded as the professionals in
> attendance tried to find ways of disrupting the suspected activity. Strategy meetings
> ...


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Worth reading the report in full since it comprehensively undermines a lot of the lazy ways this is being reported. As one example I haven't seen this section referred to at all although in a lot of ways it seems rather more relevant than the race of the perpetrators :
> 
> (...)


Can you give us a link to the full report?


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

Its here on the Guardian site :
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...otherham-children-sexually-abused-full-report

also available in a (slightly eccentrically OCR'd) plain text version :
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1280062/independent-inquiry-cse-in-rotherham.txt


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

Thanks.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Can you give us a link to the full report?


http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/downloads/file/1407/independent_inquiry_cse_in_rotherham


----------



## TopCat (Aug 26, 2014)

I can't bring myself to read it.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 26, 2014)




----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

How is it relevant that the abusers were of Pakistani origin? What about other people abusing children? Hit me with the clue stick.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 26, 2014)

And Private Eye for all its other virtues is still astoundingly racist. (And sexist, but that's another story.)


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

> Today, (Friday, 16 November, 2012) Labour candidate Shaun Wright has been elected as Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) in South Yorkshire.
> 
> Shaun has previously held positions as a local councillor in Rotherham, and more recently as Vice Chairman of the South Yorkshire Police Authority.
> 
> ...



No doubt his future CV's will include references to his role in promoting local small business and recreational facilities.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 26, 2014)

He was also the cabinet member for children and young people's services from 2005 to 2010, some interesting news articles about him here.

So for years he has been "well placed" to know what was going on


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 26, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> How is it relevant that the abusers were of Pakistani origin? What about other people abusing children? Hit me with the clue stick.


 

....presumably because of the perception and operating assumption held by those at the coal-face of the system - as mentioned several times in the report - that it was this particualr factor that underlay the perpetrators apparent impunity from the law or any sanction by those in authority to restrain this terror being perpetrated on the victms and their families....same as its relevant to mention Cyril Smith and other high level nonces were MP's or Lords etc...


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

1%er said:


> So for years he has been "well placed" to know what was going on


Indeed - although as this report makes clear it wasn't that nothing at all was being done - rather that efforts to deal with the situation began too late and never caught up, were abysmally managed and that frequently efforts by one agency were undermined by another. I gather there are further reports to come including one specifically about the role of the Police and the CPS. That should be interesting reading although something tells me it may be more 'diplomatic' in it's criticism.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2014)

What the report actually says about issues of ethnicity :


> Within the Council, we found no evidence of children's social care staff being influenced by concerns about the ethnic origins of suspected perpetrators when dealing with individual child protection cases, including CSE [Child Sexual Abuse]. In the broader organisational context, however, there was a widespread perception that messages conveyed by some senior people in the Council and also the Police, were to 'downplay' the ethnic dimensions of CSE. Unsurprisingly, frontline staff appeared to be confused as to what they were supposed to say and do and what would be interpreted as 'racist'. From a political perspective, the approach of avoiding public
> discussion of the issues was ill judged.





> There was too much reliance by agencies on traditional community leaders such as elected members and imams as being the primary conduit of communication with the Pakistani-heritage community. The Inquiry spoke to several Pakistani-heritage women who felt disenfranchised by this and thought it was a barrier to people coming forward to talk about CSE. Others believed there was wholesale denial of the problem in the Pakistani-heritage community in the same way that other forms of abuse were ignored. Representatives of women's groups were frustrated that interpretations of the Borough's problems with CSE were often based on an assumption that similar abuse did not take place in their own community and therefore concentrated mainly on young white girls.





> Both women and men from the community voiced strong concern that other than two meetings in 2011, there had been no direct engagement with them about CSE over the past 15 years, and this needed to be addressed urgently, rather than 'tiptoeing' around the issue.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 27, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Oh just listen to yourself. Hasn't it occurred to you that the race of the people arrested might be a function of those arresting them?


 
What?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 27, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Interesting that Exaro recently revealed that Rochdale are consistently refusing to consider compensation for their former children in "care" that were victims of abuse. Almost like these councils could see the tsunami of claims coming their way.



I'm utterly unsurprised by this, as many local authorities have historically avoided doing so, too.


----------



## ibilly99 (Aug 27, 2014)

Apparently there's  a new big Yewtree name in the offing ..



*Vernon *  @lecrin     ·    Aug 25 
Stand by your beds people. Operation Yewtree set to shock once more. And no, I'm not saying who. You'll know before long.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 27, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Apparently there's  a new big Yewtree name in the offing ..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


<editor: nope>


----------



## quiquaquo (Aug 27, 2014)

_pretty straight sort of guy _


----------



## mango5 (Aug 28, 2014)

Leave out the cryptic  comments please


----------



## Quartz (Aug 30, 2014)

And the abuse continues to this day.   (Daily Mail link)


----------



## toggle (Aug 30, 2014)

Quartz said:


> And the abuse continues to this day.   (Daily Mail link)



A  horrific case. but the article you've linked to doesn't show how ti's linked to any of the major abuse scandals/investigations or investigatory failures that are being discussed.


----------



## Quartz (Aug 30, 2014)

toggle said:


> A  horrific case. but the article you've linked to doesn't show how ti's linked to any of the major abuse scandals/investigations or investigatory failures that are being discussed.



You're right in detail but wrong in general: there is no direct link but it shows how the culture of child abuse extends throughout society to this day. It's not limited to a particular social stratum. It's not linked to a particular racial grouping. It's not limited to a particular sex. It's _there_ and it's wrong.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Aug 30, 2014)

I agree. But this thread is not about abuse in general, it is about abuse in particular: How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring? Abuse exists across social divisions. But this is about a very particular kind of abuse. Highly organised by powerful people who use their position and influence in order to hide their crimes.


----------



## elbows (Aug 31, 2014)

Just catching up with any other non-Rotherham stuff from recent weeks that didn't get a mention on this thread.

Charles Napier has been charged with 21 counts of indecent assault:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28852916


----------



## elbows (Sep 3, 2014)

Police delay sending details to the CPS of up to 180 charges (involving 50 victims) related to networks involving politicians, with the suspicion that this is being done to avoid the present 'media frenzy'.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ys-200-charges-over-claims-of-child-sex-abuse


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2014)

elbows said:


> Police delay sending details to the CPS of up to 180 charges (involving 50 victims) related to networks involving politicians, with the suspicion that this is being done to avoid the present 'media frenzy'.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ys-200-charges-over-claims-of-child-sex-abuse


Yeah, way more important to worry over the  alleged perpetrators' media treatment than pursue justice for the alleged victims of CSE. Sounds like the Met have been accessing training from the SYP.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 5, 2014)

So May has chosen a new chair to replace Butler-Sloss...

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...ce-butler-sloss-chair-child-sex-abuse-inquiry

Looks like an attempt to select a "safe pair of hands", that can chair &relate to media, but with no connection whatsoever to matters related to CSE.

The advisors look as though there are some genuinely useful folk, but I'm sure that a trusted city figure can be relied upon to steer the report clear of the most dangerous waters for the establishment.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 5, 2014)

This round of "six degrees of separation" bingo is already well underway. So far Fiona Woolf has been "linked" to Harriet Harman and Leon Brittan.

The fact that she had been "linked" to Brittan was put to Simon Danczuk on the R4 World at One and he was invited to say why he wasn't opposing her appointment. Hilariously it appeared that this was because Theresa May had been kind enough to ring him last night to discuss it.


----------



## laptop (Sep 5, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> This round of "six degrees of separation" bingo is already well underway...



First Urbanite to discover that she's their Nth cousin M times removed wins a pack of Hobnobs.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 5, 2014)

fucking ludicrous appointment - shes has absolutely no background in the field and is about as establishment friendly as they come - as well as being the in charge of the irredeemably corrupt and self serving City of London Corporation. Well connected child rapists will be sleeping very easily in their four poster beds.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 7, 2014)

> *New boss of investigation into VIP child abuse claims is linked to Leon Brittan: The Mail On Sunday exposes family friendship of SECOND inquiry chief with the ex-MP accused of abuse file cover-up*
> 
> The new chairman of a long-awaited Government inquiry into historic child sex abuse was facing calls to resign last night after The Mail on Sunday discovered her astonishing links to Leon Brittan – a key figure embroiled in the scandal.
> 
> ...



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-chief-ex-MP-accused-abuse-file-cover-up.html


----------



## ibilly99 (Sep 7, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-chief-ex-MP-accused-abuse-file-cover-up.html


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-chief-ex-MP-accused-abuse-file-cover-up.html



I know it's the Mail, but a lot of that is pretty desperate stuff...especially the Harman point. That said, the Governorship of school allegedly facing accusations does look like a clear conflict of interests.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2014)

After the No campaign's spectacular 'pissing on their own chips' by digging out Brown to remind Labour voters just what a heap of excrement NL were(are)...they've struck comedy gold with Moyes pitching in....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/s...nce-referendum-football-legends-unite-4173636


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 7, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-chief-ex-MP-accused-abuse-file-cover-up.html


was about to post this...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 7, 2014)

So shes mates amd neighbours with leon brittain?

jesus fucking christ. It took them - what - four weeks? to make this appointment. did they think nobody would notice?

Their blatant footdragging and deliberate sabotaging of the enquiry   is staggering.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 7, 2014)

I think they thought the nasty Rotheram business would make the people forget


----------



## ibilly99 (Sep 12, 2014)

Was Edward Heath a paedophile - the reliable needleblog suggests he might have been.

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/edward-heath-the-paedophile-prime-minister/


----------



## Celt (Sep 12, 2014)

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/child-abuse-accusations-against-ex-deputy-7762559




> Information given to an historic child abuse investigation about a former deputy headmaster of a North Wales children’s home would have “supported” 38 offences if he was still alive.
> 
> [URL='http://dailypost.co.uk/all-about/Operation-Pallial']Operation Pallial





> , which is investigating allegations of abuse in the care system in North Wales, told 19 people that the information they provided about Peter Norman Howarth “would have been supportive” of offences including indecent assault.
> 
> Howarth, who worked at Bryn Estyn in Wrexham between November 1973 and July 1984, died in HMP Wakefield in April 1997. The home has since closed...


[/URL]


----------



## laptop (Sep 14, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Was Edward Heath a paedophile - the reliable needleblog suggests he might have been.
> 
> http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/edward-heath-the-paedophile-prime-minister/



Not sure about "reliable". But:



> detective Sergeant, Brian Wallace



That rings a faint bell...


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2014)

Most blogs like that aren't very careful to distinguish between issues related to the size of the 'gay closet' in the Tory party, and paedophilia. 

Certainly when it comes to Heath, there isn't much in the public domain that any of us can use to draw conclusions beyond the likelihood that he was gay. Some are desperate to use his love of yatching to connect him with various stories about abuse at a matching-child 'charity', Jersey and other stuff. But its all rather tenuous, worthy of further exploration by anyone in a position to dig deeper, but who exactly is in such a position? Not me, so I keep an open mind about that stuff.


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2014)

Sorry for another Daily Mail link but some parts of Gyles Brandreths updated book are quite interesting. For now I will skip the bit where he details the stuff that happened to him at boarding school, since although it raises some issues there is something else here that is going to grab more attention....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-reveals-years-abuse-endured-prep-school.html



> The first, and only, official acknowledgement of my predecessor’s possible involvement in child abuse came my way in 1996, when William Hague, then Secretary of State for Wales, came up to me in the Commons to let me know that he had ordered an inquiry into allegations of child abuse in care homes in North Wales between 1974 and 1990 — and that Morrison’s name might feature in connection with the Bryn Estyn home in Wrexham, 12 miles from Chester.





> Was there a cover-up? The story would certainly have been embarrassing. At the beginning of Margaret Thatcher’s premiership, Morrison was in the Whips’ Office. He went on to become a junior minister, then a minister of state, and in 1990 became Mrs Thatcher’s parliamentary private secretary.
> 
> He was a force to be reckoned with — at the heart of the Establishment, close to the PM, and, throughout this period, his sister, now Dame Mary Morrison, was a friend and lady-in-waiting to the Queen.



Brandreth goes on to find all sorts of cover-up possibilities unthinkable, but I think he said enough there to give fresh life to the Morrison & Hague dimensions.


----------



## Casually Red (Sep 14, 2014)

while weve heard of kincora before it also appears that a number of young girls were abused by police and military while in care homes outside belfast

_"Aside from Kincora, which I have referred to previously, I have also met recently with a group of women who have alleged that they were sexually abused by members of the security forces in Lissue Children's Hospital in Lisburn." Ms Long also voiced similar concerns about the east Antrim home.
"These allegations are of an extremely sensitive nature but involve the security forces and others in the abuse of young and vulnerable girls," she said.

Ms Long (below) added:* "I do not believe abuse which took place in Northern Ireland involved only victims and perpetrators from Northern Ireland.*_

_*"There have been suggestions of children being moved between different locations where abuse took place and also perpetrators – largely members of the security forces and senior public figures – who visited several homes and locations of abuse*._

_http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...-in-northern-ireland-in-the-70s-30565691.html_


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 14, 2014)

Horrors. 
Do you think UK security services were/are uniquely concupiscent and corrupt? No, me neither.


----------



## 1%er (Sep 15, 2014)

The Waterhouse inquiry

The North Wales child abuse scandal was the subject of a three-year, £13 million investigation into the physical and sexual abuse of children in care homes in the counties of Clwyd and Gwynedd, in North Wales, including the Bryn Estyn children's home at Wrexham, between 1974 and 1990.

In 1996, the then Secretary of State for Wales, William Hague, ordered a Tribunal of Inquiry into allegations. Were the "Terms of Reference" so narrow that no one in a position of power or outside the "care" system was looked into?

The inquire led to eight prosecutions and seven convictions, all former care workers.

This document a pdf gives details of a number of reports including:
The Cartrefle inquiry
The Jillings inquiry
The Waterhouse Report


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2014)

Covered extensively on this thread already. First mentioned in october 2012


----------



## elbows (Sep 17, 2014)

Exaro news got excited that the details in Brandreth's updated book would cause problems for the tories at their conference. But I haven't noticed much fallout since the Mail reported the detail. Not even here, where opportunities to scrutinise Hague aren't usually missed.


----------



## 1%er (Sep 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Covered extensively on this thread already. First mentioned in october 2012


I covered it "again" as it came up in the posts above with regard to Brandreth's updated book and as you point out it was almost a years ago, so some may have forgotten about it.

Good to see you have become the thread policeman, evening officer  I will consider myself well and truly told off and meteorically slapped on the back of my legs.


----------



## 1%er (Sep 26, 2014)

More news about Lord Janner of Braunstone (Greville Janner former Labout MP)

Labour peer Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC is an appalling reminder of the establishments apathy toward victims of child abuse.

How can this man, who currently has over 20 outstanding allegations of child sexual abuse against boys as young as 7 years old, remain a Queens Council, a status conferred by the Crown?

The answer is simple. Greville Janner is an establishment figure who has been, and still is, protected by the establishment.
More here

The Police Were Forbade From Investigating Lord Janner In 1989, an investigation into child abuse allegations against a prominent politician 25 years ago was blocked, one of the country’s most senior police officers has revealed.
More here

Lord Janner, Too Ill To Face Justice But Well enough To Legislate?

Lord Janner was attending the House of Lords and claiming expenses every other day right up until Dec 2013 when police raided his home.

Then he got dementia.

When the police sent a criminal file containing evidence of over 20 allegations of child sexual abuse to the CPS they decided not to prosecute, not because there was not enough evidence but because he was too ill and it was therefore “not in the public interest”.

And yet, Lord Janner can still attend Parliament and vote on legislation if he wishes too.

Lord Janner is too ill to be accountable to the law of the land but he is well enough to make the law of the land.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 26, 2014)

1%er said:


> How can this man, who currently has over 20 outstanding allegations of child sexual abuse against boys as young as 7 years old, remain a Queens Council, a status conferred by the Crown?



Because we presume innocence until proven guilty.



> Lord Janner, Too Ill To Face Justice But Well enough To Legislate?
> 
> Lord Janner was attending the House of Lords and claiming expenses every other day right up until Dec 2013 when police raided his home.
> 
> Then he got dementia.



How convenient. I would like to see this diagnosis confirmed.



> Lord Janner is too ill to be accountable to the law of the land but he is well enough to make the law of the land.



Not now he's got dementia, though? Right? Right?


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 26, 2014)




----------



## 1%er (Sep 26, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Because we presume innocence until proven guilty.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was just quoting from the links I posted.

The presumption of innocents seems to depend on the person being accused on this board  (who is the "we" in your first line   )


----------



## 1%er (Sep 26, 2014)

Janet Boateng: Former chair of Lambeth social services committee





Paedophile network abused 200 children


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 29, 2014)

Mirror update on ongoing story :
Police investigating claims minister in Tony Blair government abused vulnerable children in the 80s


> The Metropolitan Police has launched Operation Overview in response to Mirror reports about the politician, who was a rising Labour star at the time (...) Detectives are examining claims that photographs of the man with a convicted paedophile and vulnerable youngsters – taken during a caravan holiday – vanished after they were handed to police.



And a David Hancke blog about Alan Franey - Tory deputy leader of Welwyn Council and formerly General Manager at Broadmoor and friend of Jimmy Saville - who is facing a no confidence motion today over what is said about him in the official report into Saville's activities at Broadmoor. He is apparently expected to survive this vote.
http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...-who-gave-jimmy-savile-the-keys-to-broadmoor/


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 29, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> . He is apparently expected to survive this vote.
> http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...-who-gave-jimmy-savile-the-keys-to-broadmoor/


i'd hope so too. he can be put to death later.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 29, 2014)

1%er said:


> More news about Lord Janner of Braunstone (Greville Janner former Labout MP)
> 
> Labour peer Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC is an appalling reminder of the establishments apathy toward victims of child abuse.
> 
> ...


qc = queen's counsel, not council. janner is not a committee (i think).


----------



## brogdale (Sep 30, 2014)

Holy shit....again...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5377/catholic-school-s-child-psychotherapist-exposed-as-paedophile

And Exaro are saying that tomorrow they intend to reveal the author's clash with Gove, in his then role as Sec State for Ed.


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Holy shit....again...
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5377/catholic-school-s-child-psychotherapist-exposed-as-paedophile
> 
> And Exaro are saying that tomorrow they intend to reveal the author's clash with Gove, in his then role as Sec State for Ed.



There is a trace of how the press reported this back in 1996 here:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/CATHO...EX+PROBE;+Ex-pupils+complain+to...-a061340069


----------



## Dan U (Sep 30, 2014)

Dr Fox nicked.

The DJ, rather than the Tory MP


----------



## Dan U (Sep 30, 2014)

Does anyone know who the Labour Minister is supposed to be? I've taken my eye off following this for a bit. 

If i google will i get the usual madness? not expecting anyone to post a name directly on this thread obv


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2014)

Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think you will find much of the usual madness when searching for someone that fits that bill. Unless I overlooked someone I think this one, if it leads to a case that allows us to mention a name and at least have a bit of a conversation about it, will break new ground. In that it will be one of the few political ones that wasn't heavily rumoured and even insinuated about in print at the time, and therefore hasn't been subject to the same internet scrutiny of historical shit in recent years, neither wacky or sensible. Whether there were any word of mouth rumours within small subsets of society at the time I cannot say. If a great swathe of the media world knew the gossip at the time then they did a better job than with many cases of not insinuating about it in a smutty way.

There are some very early, tentative signs that this may be starting to change though, at least one or two blogs may now be sniffing around without actually claiming anything specific or even making links between their interest in that person and other recent news.


----------



## 1%er (Sep 30, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> qc = queen's counsel, not council. janner is not a committee (i think).


As pointed out in post 4251 "I was just quoting from the links"


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2014)

I double checked what I'd just been saying about a lack of historical rumours in relation to the recently reported labour minister case. I was almost right, there are some vague signs that rumours have probably existed for a very long time, but have rarely been committed to print/internet in the way others were. So it might be possible to find a few very brief mentions on some corners of the net, but with pretty much no detail and easy to completely miss due to lack of context or evidence, and by virtue of being extremely hard to distinguish from other sloppy, mostly-fact-free dot-joining type 'guilt by association' stuff.

The mirror story has probably encouraged a few to hint in a more obvious way, but no twitter storm or anything close, nor anything I can touch right now.


----------



## Dan U (Sep 30, 2014)

Thanks as ever elbows


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 30, 2014)

Dan U said:


> Dr Fox nicked.
> 
> The DJ, rather than the Tory MP


HuffPo:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/30/dr-fox-arrested-sex-offences_n_5907448.html


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2014)

Franey survived the no confidence vote as expected. No details of voting numbers that I can see, and a shameful lack of press attention.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/09/alan-franey-survives-jimmy-savile-no-confidence-vote/#


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 30, 2014)

A lot of anti-Semitism out there on teh interwebs. Vile and distracting. Race isn't an issue but power is.


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2014)

So is anyone here familiar with how abuse relating to Lambeth council has been reported over the years? Its only been in recent years that I've been aware of how the likes of the Mirror occasionally report on it in the post-Savile context.

I mean these days other recent Mirror stories relating to Lambeth have mostly focussed on the murder of Bulic Forsythe and the removal of Clive Driscoll from the case. These have all been posted on this thread before but I guess I may as well try to link to them all again, along with the most recent article.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-mp-cover-up-claim-detective-1785273
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bulic-forsythe-killed-protect-paedophile-3578788
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-blairs-minister-accused-helping-3822224
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/alleged-labour-politician-paedophile-ring-3830709
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-investigating-claims-minister-tony-4342268

Probably missed a few but those give a good overview of the various strands of suspicion of cover-up that people have long been focussing on without getting into who the politician in question is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2014)

1%er said:


> As pointed out in post 4251 "I was just quoting from the links"


a cut and paste odyssey


----------



## 1%er (Sep 30, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> a cut and paste odyssey


Not really, just a flavor of what was in the links


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> A lot of anti-Semitism out there on teh interwebs. Vile and distracting. Race isn't an issue but power is.



Sadly yes, which is one of the reasons it's rare for me to link to some blogs that cover the topic of this thread. That and homophobia, both of which are used not just to reinforce the existing prejudices of writers, readers and/or commenters on the blogs, but also as an easy mechanism for sloppy dot-joining of certain people to events or known/suspected offenders. That they happen to turn out to be sort of right for the wrong reasons in some cases will only re-inforce their ugly worldview.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 30, 2014)




----------



## bluescreen (Sep 30, 2014)

(deleted)


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 30, 2014)

elbows said:


> So is anyone here familiar with how abuse relating to Lambeth council has been reported over the years? Its only been in recent years that I've been aware of how the likes of the Mirror occasionally report on it in the post-Savile context.
> 
> I mean these days other recent Mirror stories relating to Lambeth have mostly focussed on the murder of Bulic Forsythe and the removal of Clive Driscoll from the case. These have all been posted on this thread before but I guess I may as well try to link to them all again, along with the most recent article.
> 
> ...


If a tenth of this is true it's beyond appalling.


----------



## keybored (Sep 30, 2014)

Dan U said:


> Dr Fox nicked.
> 
> The DJ, rather than the Tory MP


I always thought he looked like he had a bit of crab about him.


----------



## ibilly99 (Oct 1, 2014)

Doing it for the kids


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 4, 2014)

> *Child sex claims, a police 'cover-up' and troubling questions for a Labour peer: This special report reveals the full extent of the deeply disturbing allegations against ex-MP Greville Janner*
> 
> Lord Janner is a life peer after representing Leicester as an MP for 30 years
> Had his home searched last year as part of high-profile paedophile probe
> ...


----------



## Betsy (Oct 5, 2014)

*Twelve more public figures including politicians and police are being investigated by over claims of historic sex abuse*

_At least another dozen people 'to be considered over allegations of abuse'_
_Policeman, politicians and civil servants among the new 'suspects' _
_Source said suspects have 'more to lose' than celebrities arrested already_
_Metropolitan Police said Operation Yewtree had made no further arrests _
_Force does not discuss ongoing investigations before arrests are made _
_Twelve more public figures including senior policeman and politicians are being investigated over claims of historic sex abuse, sources have revealed. 

Civil servants and local authority chiefs are also among the suspects being considered by police across the UK it was claimed, over allegations of abuse between the Fifites and the Eighties. 

Their names have been passed on to Operation Yewtree among other forces by the investigative reporter who exposed the sustained abuse of children by Jimmy Savile in a documentary two years ago.

Mark Williams Thomas said that unlike those arrested already, new suspects are not celebrities but law makers and enforcers. _

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-investigated-claims-historic-sex-abuse.htmlhttp://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail

http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 7, 2014)

BBC Northern Ireland's _Spotlight_ programme has a special on Kincora, apparently featuring new evidence on the MI5 angle, tonight. 

Trailer:


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 7, 2014)

Meanwhile, in probably entirely unconnected news, this cropped up, apparently from South Belfast UPRG, via the News Letter's Sam McBride:


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Exaro report the Met's attempt to shape-up and ship-out their paedo unit in advance of the over-arching CSA inquiry.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5381/operation-fernbridge-loses-chief-as-pressure-mounts-on-met


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 7, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> BBC Northern Ireland's _Spotlight_ programme has a special on Kincora, apparently featuring new evidence on the MI5 angle, tonight.
> 
> Trailer:



The Northern Irish part of my Twitter feed is currently blowing up about this...

See Lyra McKee and Mick Fealty for a taste, or check hashtags #SpotlightNI and #kincora.

Should be on iPlayer soon:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04kp7l8


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 8, 2014)

MI5 again. Who would have thought?

Anyway, it will be instructive to see if the reactionary press goes to town on MI5 and the relevant loyalist factions nearly as much as they did on the BBC, Muslims or what they define as "political correctness". I doubt it. For Britains biggest bullies, the outrage about victims will probably be in strict proportion to their political usefulness.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 8, 2014)

Separate issue entirely, but wouldn't want to start another thread on it, related to Irish politics/history.

That TARA group mentioned in the doc. It's an odd name for loyalists if it's named after the hill of Tara where once the high kings of Ireland were crowned. Maybe it means something else, does anyone know? And the "For God and Ireland" banners. How does that sentiment fit in with virulent loyalism?

Is it that they wanted to take back all Ireland for protestantism and the British crown?


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 8, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Is it that they wanted to take back all Ireland for protestantism and the British crown?


Pretty much, including reclaiming the symbols of Irish culture. There's a lot of fascinating detail in Chris Moore's now out of print book about Kincora. (Obviously it's necessary to draw a distinction between TARA's stated views and the practical role of William McGrath, it's leader and ideologue, as an agent of the Security Services. However he'd scarcely be the first to hold eccentric right wing political and religious views).

ETA: McGrath held a version of British Israelite views and among some British Israelites there was a tradition that the Hill of Tara was the site of the Ark of the Covenant. They had even conducted excavations to find it many years before. The choice of name may have had implications beyond its specifically Irish symbolism.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 8, 2014)

Thanks Lurdan, never a dull moment with occult weirdness.

Anyway, I've been waiting to see how the press and other reactionaries would react to last nights revalations about MI5. Fuck all.

And now this

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...oliticians-at-top-of-westminster-9587642.html

Will they go to war on Gove, or do some victims matter more than others? I think by now we know.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Thanks Lurdan, never a dull moment with occult weirdness.
> 
> Anyway, I've been waiting to see how the press and other reactionaries would react to last nights revalations about MI5. Fuck all.
> 
> ...


That's from July. It's gove talking on the hoof and he later had to take it back. You'd be far better off directing your interests at where has the promised inquiry gone since it was set up (you remember it being set up right? And a wonky chair? And another one?)


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 8, 2014)

Yes, sorry Butchers. Should have checked the date. Overall I'm skeptical that the inquiry will go too near Mi5. Also it needs to be hoofed suffieciently to prevent anything too damaging before the General Election.

Most notably, the government only caved in to an inquiry when Leon Brittan was found out with regard to the paedo file. Then they say "ok, time to clear the air and look at EVERYONE" precisely because the attention was very much on them. Classic smokescreening.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 9, 2014)




----------



## elbows (Oct 10, 2014)

> *Mark Williams-Thomas* @mwilliamsthomas · 5m5 minutes ago
> Police advise me Op.Enamel investigation into allegations of child sexual abuse by Lord Greville Janner is very much a 'live investigation'
> 
> *Mark Williams-Thomas* @mwilliamsthomas · 4m4 minutes ago
> CPS re Op.Enamel: "We have been sent some case material which we are reviewing-have not received a full file requesting a charging decision"


----------



## Quartz (Oct 10, 2014)

The BBC report that Paul Gambaccini is not going to face charges.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 11, 2014)

Quartz said:


> The BBC report that Paul Gambaccini is not going to face charges.


At last. Must be incompetence on part of police and/or CPS that has kept him in limbo for a year. That shouldn't happen to anyone; it's a sort of torture.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2014)

Former Sec. State for Ed. claims she hadn't seen the Cyril Smith evidence sent to her department...



> The Guardian first came across questions around the Department for Education’s involvement two weeks ago after seeing a letter from a QC who is leading an inquiry ordered by Rochdale council into allegations of a cover up around Knowl View.
> 
> The letter sent by Neil Garnham QC said that Shephard’s office had been sent “the Digan dossier”.
> 
> When approached for a comment, Shephard said *she had contacted her former department and confirmed that it had received the dossier. “I have checked with the Department for Education. There was correspondence [about Knowl View] in 1995. They can find no evidence that I personally received it nor that I was personally involved in responding to it,*” she said.



That's alright, then?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2014)

how much unseeing is going on with  these people. They'll need some extra pairs of eyes to turn blind


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> how much unseeing is going on with  these people. They'll need some extra pairs of eyes to turn blind



Comment about Blunkett as Home Secretary deleted.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> how much unseeing is going on with  these people. They'll need some extra pairs of eyes to turn blind


 Yep...



> *They can find no evidence that I personally...*



ffs


----------



## Quartz (Oct 14, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Former Sec. State for Ed. claims she hadn't seen the Cyril Smith evidence sent to her department...



That's *very* careful wording.


----------



## 1%er (Oct 14, 2014)

What is "Operation Brancaster" and how does it differ from all the other operations the police seem to have going? Is it just looking at politicians, politically linked figures and Westminster?

(Operation Fairbank turned into Operation Fernbridge [Elm guesthouse] and Operation Cayacos [Peter Righton])

Operation Brancaster:
Man, 67, arrested in Dorset connected to Westminster ‘paedophile ring’ inquiry. A 67-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of historic child abuse following an investigation into claims of a paedophile ring with links to parliament. The unnamed suspect is being questioned at a police station in Dorset, Scotland Yard said.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2014)

1%er said:


> What is "Operation Brancaster"






			
				Press Association said:
			
		

> He is being investigated as part of an inquiry named Operation Brancaster which was sparked by MP Tom Watson.
> 
> In 2012 he used Prime Minister's Questions to claim that a file of evidence used to convict a man called Peter Righton of importing child pornography in 1992 contained "clear intelligence" of a sex abuse gang.



The proper, focused search on www.parliament.uk hasn't worked for more than a year. 

Back in a minute...


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2014)

Search term would be *hansard questions watson righton *- I very much doubt that the mention of Righton is a red herring

Is it this?



> *24 Oct 2012 : Column 923*
> ...
> *Mr Tom Watson (West Bromwich East) (Lab):* The evidence file used to convict paedophile Peter Righton, if it still exists, contains clear intelligence of a widespread paedophile ring. One of its members boasts of his links to a senior aide of a former Prime Minister, who says he could smuggle indecent images of children from abroad. The leads were not followed up, but if the file still exists I want to ensure that the Metropolitan police secure the evidence, re-examine it and investigate clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and No. 10.
> 
> ...



Now, I have to follow Cameron in looking at more Hansard...

OR is that just a stalling answer to say "I'm so shocked I'm speechless: I'm going to have to read what you just said, in the morning"?


----------



## 1%er (Oct 14, 2014)

laptop said:


> The proper, focused search on www.parliament.uk hasn't worked for more than a year.
> 
> Back in a minute...


So it is an offshoot of Cayacos that was set up to look at Peter Righton?


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2014)

1%er said:


> So it is an offshoot of Cayacos that was set up to look at Peter Righton?



Still not clear. What is this source?



> This arrest falls under a strand called Operation Brancaster, which was originally assessed as part of Operation Fairbank, and subsequently reached the criminal threshold.
> 
> http://crimeandjustice.co.uk/2014/1...suspicion-of-historical-child-abuse-offences/


----------



## 1%er (Oct 15, 2014)

laptop said:


> Still not clear. What is this source?


My original source was a small piece a friend sent me from the London evening standard.

My post 4300 [just above] was a question based on your post 4299 where you mention "Righton" as I thought Cayacos was about him.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 15, 2014)

Is it me, or is the silence about the "Spotlight" Kincora doc not deafening?

I thought the info on the MI5 aspect of the cover up was new. If so, it's cast iron evidence of systemic intel facilitation of child rape to go along side their part in the Cyril Smith case (and others, doubtless)

As I said at the time...funny how everyone can kick up a fuss to attack the BBC or what they define as "political correctness", but police and intel always get a free pass.

Some victims matter more than others, depending on political use.


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2014)

1%er said:


> My original source was a small piece a friend sent me from the London evening standard.
> 
> My post 4300 [just above] was a question based on your post 4299 where you mention "Righton" as I thought Cayacos was about him.



Sorry, I meant: "what is this source I am about to reference, below:". I know nothing of http://crimeandjustice.co.uk ... so take it with a pinch of salt.


----------



## 1%er (Oct 15, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I thought the info on the MI5 aspect of the cover up was new. If so, it's cast iron evidence of systemic intel facilitation of child rape to go along side their part in the Cyril Smith case (and others, doubtless)


I don't think MI5 involvement and cover up is new, its been talked about for years I believe. Spooks couldn't give a shit about kids being raped, they want leverage over people with power and influence, that's their trade.


----------



## 1%er (Oct 15, 2014)

A whistleblower has claimed Scotland Yard tried to discredit her after she told an officer that one of Tony Blair’s ministers was suspected of child sex abuse.

Anna Tapsell said the alleged Met plot to smear her – in a bid to destroy her credibility as a witness – included snooping into her finances.

More here


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 15, 2014)

1%er said:


> I don't think MI5 involvement and cover up is new, its been talked about for years I believe. Spooks couldn't give a shit about kids being raped, they want leverage over people with power and influence, that's their trade.



I was wondering if it was new info in regards to kinkora. Yes, its generally known about but doesnt invoke rage nearly as much as culpability of other organisations.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 15, 2014)

Exaro reporting proposed changes to the canon 'law' of the CoE regarding safegurading...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5383/clergy-to-be-given-training-on-safeguarding-children-in-coe

Yeah, good and all that, but ffs...



> Safeguarding procedures at the CoE have previously allowed bishops to keep allegations of child sex abuse away from the authorities



well...no; they've just offered an institutional 'cop-out' to salve the conscience of those clergy complicit in covering up abuse..

and...



> A CoE spokesman said: "These measures are part of a wider approach by the church based on what survivors of sexual abuse want us to do. The whole impetus is on tackling the problem from the survivor's point of view."



How fucking novel.

Cunts.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2014)

Napier re-arrested.


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Napier re-arrested.



So he's the 67-year-old Dorset man referred to above?

(Age from http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...abuse-charge/story-21466085-detail/story.html)


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2014)

laptop said:


> So he's the 67-year-old Dorset man referred to above?
> 
> (Age from http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...abuse-charge/story-21466085-detail/story.html)


Yep.


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 15, 2014)

.....weird coincidence Napier crops up......totally at random this evening I open a book of Francis Wheen's articles....he was one of Napier's pupils...

...the MP is John Whittingdale which has been mentioned on here before....and whose main concern about Napier's repeated offending seems to be that it upset his mum....


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 16, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...totally at random this evening I open a book of Francis Wheen's articles...



Have you no shame?


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 16, 2014)

....not in the lavatory no....which is where I keep the book...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 16, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ....not in the lavatory no....which is where I keep the book...


The _Wheenatarium_, if you will.


----------



## laptop (Oct 16, 2014)

Commons adjournment debate scheduled for 
*Wednesday 22 October*


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2014)

CSA inquiry stuff announced today. Details soon. Exaro going to have a dedicated section for it.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 21, 2014)

Terms of Reference:

https://childsexualabuseinquiry.independent.gov.uk/terms-of-reference/

Will only cover England & Wales - so no looking into (for example) Kincora...


----------



## Betsy (Oct 21, 2014)

_*Fiona Woolf urged to step down from abuse inquiry over Leon Brittan links*


Lawyer who replaced Butler-Sloss in official inquiry into alleged paedophile politicians says ‘no close association’ with Tory peer
The second head of the government’s child abuse inquiry is facing calls to stand down over her social links to Lord Brittan, who was home secretary when a dossier about alleged Westminster paedophiles went missing from his department.


Fiona Woolf, a prominent QC and Lord Mayor of London, was brought in after Lady Butler-Sloss resigned from her role leading the inquiry when it emerged that her late brother Lord Havers was attorney general at the time of some of the historical allegations.


Ministers had hoped that Woolf would be able to draw a line under the previous controversy but a row erupted on Tuesday when it was revealed that Brittan was one of her neighbours, with whom she had dined five times since 2008. Woolf had also had coffee on “a small number of occasions” with Brittan’s wife (most recently last year), sat on a prize-giving panel with her and sponsored her for a fun run._
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...ed-step-down-abuse-inquiry-leon-brittan-links


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 22, 2014)

they just can't help themselves can they.


----------



## elbows (Oct 22, 2014)

There is a hilarious line in a BBC article about this.



> The BBC's home affairs correspondent Tom Symonds said Mrs Woolf had insisted she was not a member of the establishment but acknowledged that she must convince the public and victims of abuse that this was the case.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29703282

Why yes, it should be trivial to prove that the Lord Mayor of London is in no way part of the establishment


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 22, 2014)

calls for a her to step away from the investigation today. Twice in a row?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 22, 2014)

Whilst this is reported as a conflict of interest about his role as _Home_ _Secretary_, there's also a pretty massive elephant in the room.  Hard to tell whether this means they are confident _that_ issue won't go any further and force her to resign at a later date - or whether it's yet another fuck up.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 22, 2014)

or maybe just dragging thier heels as long as possible by appointing obviously unsuitable choices- or is that a bit tin foil


----------



## The Pale King (Oct 22, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> or maybe just dragging thier heels as long as possible by appointing obviously unsuitable choices- or is that a bit tin foil


 
Maybe, maybe not. Some Sir Humphrey might have suggested they offer up a couple of sacrificial lambs to look responsive. The next name forward will be the one they really want. Or is my tinfoil rustling?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 22, 2014)

'So M'lady, when you were appointed as a non-member of the establishment, to look at the conduct of Leon Brittan, the man you had 5 dinners with, whose wife you worked with, did you ever discuss the rape allegations he was interviewed under caution for?'  Yeah, fantastic appointment.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2014)

What i don't understand is why a stink is being made about this now and not when she was appointed - all of this shit about her being connected with leon brittain, that she has zero background in this are and the fact that shes the fucking lord mayor of london was already known and commented on. Why did the likes of Demchuk  agree to her appointment in the first place? 

She is so obviously a totally wrong appointment - even worse than butler schloss - that it does look a deliberate delaying ploy. After the shit storm first broke it was a week or so before butler-schloss was in place, than it took a mystifying 6 weeks or so to appoint Woolf. Now - if she steps down - it'll be fuck knows how long before they appoint the next person (lord hutton? The royal corgis?) - neatly delaying the whole thing well beyond the next election.


----------



## Idaho (Oct 22, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> or maybe just dragging thier heels as long as possible by appointing obviously unsuitable choices- or is that a bit tin foil


It seems all too plausible.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 22, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Why did the likes of Demchuk  agree to her appointment in the first place?



Demchuk who?

eta Simon Danczuk? If so don't think he did. Soz if I got that wrong.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-29724783


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2014)

Buckaroo said:


> Demchuk who?
> 
> eta Simon Danczuk? If so don't think he did. Soz if I got that wrong.
> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-29724783



Thats the fella. No he didn't oppose her appointment when it was made (a month or so ago). now he is - quoting reasons that were known - and commented on - at the time.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 22, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Thats the fella. No he didn't oppose her appointment when it was made (a month or so ago). now he is - quoting reasons that were known - and commented on - at the time.



Oh ok right, well he's a Blaggard then. Maybe he was keeping his powder dry?


----------



## elbows (Oct 22, 2014)

Timing of the political calendar had a lot to do with it. Parliament was getting ready for its summer holiday & conference season, and the previous Brittan & Butler-Sloss shitstorm had its pace affected by that. Then everything went on hold, now it is back.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 22, 2014)

Buckaroo said:


> Oh ok right, well he's a Blaggard then. Maybe he was keeping his powder dry?


Danczuk was interviewed on the radio the day Woolf was appointed and raised no objections - he let slip that Theresa May had rung him the evening before the announcement was made to sound him out. The flattery of her doing so was evidently nicely gauged to appeal to his vanity. On the radio (this mornings Today programme I think) they played the recording of his initial response before asking asked him why he'd changed his mind.

This time round there is an interesting note of skepticism in some of the reporting about the criticism of Woolf which there wasn't about Butler-Sloss. Following yesterday's Home Affairs Committee session with her, Keith Vaz (an even bigger egoist than Danczuk but with rather better political antenna) is urging a degree of caution before coming to any conclusions and essentially leaving it to Woolf to address the concerns raised. Unless anything more damaging comes to light I wouldn't be surprised to see her staying. (And I suspect the Government wouldn't be entirely unhappy if she acted as a lightning rod for what will be inevitable criticism).

Personally I can't see what difference it makes who chairs this inquiry, or what political posturing takes place around establishing it.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> I can't see what difference it makes who chairs this inquiry



It demonstrates their fear.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 22, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Danczuk was interviewed on the radio the day Woolf was appointed and raised no objections - he let slip that Theresa May had rung him the evening before the announcement was made to sound him out. The flattery of her doing so was evidently nicely gauged to appeal to his vanity. On the radio (this mornings Today programme I think) they played the recording of his initial response before asking asked him why he'd changed his mind.
> 
> This time round there is an interesting note of skepticism in some of the reporting about the criticism of Woolf which there wasn't about Butler-Sloss. Following yesterday's Home Affairs Committee session with her, Keith Vaz (an even bigger egoist than Danczuk but with rather better political antenna) is urging a degree of caution before coming to any conclusions and essentially leaving it to Woolf to address the concerns raised. Unless anything more damaging comes to light I wouldn't be surprised to see her staying. (And I suspect the Government wouldn't be entirely unhappy if she acted as a lightning rod for what will be inevitable criticism).
> 
> Personally I can't see what difference it makes who chairs this inquiry, or what political posturing takes place around establishing it.



Thanks for that, sorry I'm rubbish at the quotes but I was listening this morning and I didn't hear the initial response thing, I'll have a look for it. Not that it might make much difference like you say.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 22, 2014)

Buckaroo said:


> Thanks for that, sorry I'm rubbish at the quotes but I was listening this morning and I didn't hear the initial response thing, I'll have a look for it. Not that it might make much difference like you say.


I went to find the bit I'd heard - it was actually yesterdays PM (starting about 33m in) not this mornings Today programme. (Sadly it didn't include the part about Theresa May ringing him - I heard that when it was originally broadcast). Vaz's interview was on the World at One today.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 22, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Thats the fella. No he didn't oppose her appointment when it was made (a month or so ago.





Lurdan said:


> Danczuk was interviewed on the radio the day Woolf was appointed and raised no objections - he let slip that Theresa May had rung him the evening before the announcement was made to sound him out. The flattery of her doing so was evidently nicely gauged to appeal to his vanity. On the radio (this mornings Today programme I think) they played the recording of his initial response before asking asked him why he'd changed his mind.





Lurdan said:


> I went to find the bit I'd heard - it was actually yesterdays PM (starting about 33m in) not this mornings Today programme. (Sadly it didn't include the part about Theresa May ringing him - I heard that when it was originally broadcast). Vaz's interview was on the World at One today.



Just out of interest if anyone knows, did Simon Danczuk oppose or not oppose Woolf's appointment a month ago?


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 22, 2014)

Buckaroo said:


> Just out of interest if anyone knows, did Simon Danczuk oppose or not oppose Woolf's appointment a month ago?


There's a chunk of Danczuk's original response on yesterdays' PM programme starting about 33m.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04lsmhq

He was also quoted on the original BBC report of her appointment :


> "Although I would not have looked to high office in the Square Mile to find someone to challenge the establishment, Fiona Woolf is a smart and capable woman and she has my support.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29076504


----------



## laptop (Oct 22, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> What i don't understand is why a stink is being made about this now and not when she was appointed - all of this shit about her being connected with leon brittain, that she has zero background in this are and the fact that shes the fucking lord mayor of london was already known and commented on. Why did the likes of Demchuk  agree to her appointment in the first place?
> 
> She is so obviously a totally wrong appointment - even worse than butler schloss - that it does look a deliberate delaying ploy. After the shit storm first broke it was a week or so before butler-schloss was in place, than it took a mystifying 6 weeks or so to appoint Woolf. Now - if she steps down - it'll be fuck knows how long before they appoint the next person (lord hutton? The royal corgis?) - neatly delaying the whole thing well beyond the next election.





brogdale said:


> It demonstrates their fear.



It's now _completely impossible_ to have any kind of report before the election.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2014)

Worth noting that it was Teresa may who made both these appointments - whatever you make think of her she is not stupid, not part of the eton old chums circle and is very politically astute.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Worth noting that it was Teresa may who made both these appointments - whatever you make think of her she is not stupid, not part of the eton old chums circle and is very politically astute.



Irrespective of her intelligence, education, factional allegiance or political abilities her actions will first and foremost be those that best protect the state.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2014)

well - yeah. my point is that this looks like it might well be a deliberate fuck up.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 22, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> There's a chunk of Danczuk's original response on yesterdays' PM programme starting about 33m.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04lsmhq
> 
> He was also quoted on the original BBC report of her appointment :
> ...




Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, who led calls for an overarching inquiry into alleged abuse, backed the appointment of Ms Woolf but called on her to bring "a sense of urgency" to the investigation.
'Victims' voices'
He said the inquiry had lost momentum due to delays after the resignation of Lady Butler-Sloss.
"I'm pleased the Home Secretary has finally got this moving," said the Labour MP.
"Although I would not have looked to high office in the Square Mile to find someone to challenge the establishment, Fiona Woolf is a smart and capable woman and she has my support.


Simon Danczuk said the role could not go to someone who was "too connected" to the Establishment and former home secretary Leon Brittan, and who did not have the confidence of the public or the survivors of child abuse.
The MP told Jo Coburn on the Daily Politics that many survivors were "suspicious of the government's handling of this" and he accused the government of unnecessary delays.

Kaka Tim Lurdan . Yep he's a cunt!


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 22, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> well - yeah. my point is that this looks like it might well be a deliberate fuck up.



Was Simon D duped/flattered into it, as suggested above, or was he pretty well aware all along of the direction all this was likely to go?? </speculation/tinhat ... >


----------



## elbows (Oct 22, 2014)

laptop said:


> It's now _completely impossible_ to have any kind of report before the election.



I'm currently forcing myself to watch Woolfs entire commons select committee appearance. Her performance is pretty shit, and includes spilling a glass of water and being questioned about leading a trade delegation to Bahrain months after an amnesty international report said that children were tortured in that country.

Anyway in regards to the timing, she said that an interim report is due by the end of March, which prompted Vaz to point out that due to fixed parliamentary terms and next years election, parliament and the committee won't be able to scrutinise it until May. She initially misunderstood this line and said she was happy with that. In any case the sort of contents she indicated will be in that report are not terribly interesting, or at least not the sort of thing you'd feel the need to bury until after an election for party political reasons.

Personally I rather want the justice system to deal with any living high-profile offenders it can before this inquiry gets anywhere near to drawing conclusions. Because this inquiry is extremely unlikely to be the vehicle by which the public learn about living political offenders in a manner that allows us to talk about them without having to speak in riddles. And the inquiry will find it much easier to avoid acknowledging the most damning of specific power abuses, coverups and institutional failures if the justice part of the system hasn't reached a stage where stuff becomes accepted public knowledge, with the facts we need to draw conclusions rather than simply have strong suspicions.


----------



## elbows (Oct 22, 2014)

At one point she also claimed to be the voice of the citizen, which a committee member picked up on and asked her about. Her response included "I think I could convince the general public that I am an ordinary citizen", delivered with a smile.

She hasn't even met the panel in the flesh yet. Keeps using the phrase 'the victim community'.


----------



## elbows (Oct 23, 2014)

I also just love the way the committee and Vaz keep expressing how perplexed they are that Woolf sent a draft of her letter to the home office before the final one was sent to the home secretary. They asked her for a copy of the first draft of the letter, and she failed to commit to doing so, with excuses including 'it was done by email'. 

Anyway the reason I just love the above is that that if you look at the letters on the website that all of the panel members wrote, its bloody obvious that the first several paragraphs of each letter are pretty much identical. Clearly a template was used that would satisfy the legal requirements of relevant inquiry acts, but given some of the sentences in question it rather undermines the sincerity of the statements and adds an additional comedy layer to the notion of independence.

https://childsexualabuseinquiry.independent.gov.uk/letters/



> I am honoured to have been asked to become a member of the independent panel inquiry which will consider the extent to which State and non-State institutions may have failed in their duty of care to protect children from sexual abuse and exploitation in England and Wales over many years. This is a major inquiry and I am determined that it will examine all the issues and all the organisations, and will ask all the questions, that are necessary to enable it to report fully.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 23, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Was Simon D duped/flattered into it, as suggested above, or was he pretty well aware all along of the direction all this was likely to go?? </speculation/tinhat ... >


I don't think it's necessary to listen to many interviews with him to work out that he's not a very sophisticated or subtle political operator.

The funny thing was that Woolf's 'links' to Brittan (and initially also to Harriet Harman, although those were so tenuous they didn't go much further), had been found by google researchers and posted to Twitter by lunchtime on the day she was appointed. These Twitter postings were not just mentioned on the radio lunchtime news, they were actually put to him in the same radio interview in which he set out what he had decided was his initial position of qualified support for her.

The Mail on Sunday then picked up the content of those Twitter posts and published them that weekend - claiming credit for the investigative work and including, of course, a quote from our man :

Revealed: New boss of investigation into VIP child abuse claims is linked to Leon Brittan - Mail



> Last night Labour MP Simon Danczuk – who has led calls for a public inquiry into historic child sex abuse in the wake of revelations about high-profile figures such as Sir Jimmy Savile – questioned Mrs Woolf’s appointment. ‘If it’s found that Fiona Woolf is close to the Brittans, her position is untenable and she needs to be clear about what her relationship is with Leon Brittan, who is one of the most significant figures in terms of suggestions of a cover-up,’ he said. ‘Surely the Home Office was aware of this before they suggested appointing her?’



Five days later Danczuk raised his newly found concerns in Parliament (and made some more headlines)

MP's concern over abuse probe chief Fiona Woolf - BBC site



> Simon Danczuk told MPs: "I am disturbed by the apparent links between the new chair and Lord Brittan, who is alleged to be at the heart of the paedophile scandal and cover-up."



For me the problem isn't the fact that he's changed his view (why shouldn't he ?). It's the fact that he only appears to have done so as part of his persona as 'prominent campaigner' on this issue.

However I freely confess I'm strongly prejudiced against him. For me his very right wing political views (on the 'strivers' v 'skivers' agenda for example) aren't in any way mitigated by the fact he's taken up CSE and historical abuse as a cause.


----------



## elbows (Oct 26, 2014)

More pressure on Woolf, from victims and their representatives:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/oct/25/lady-woolf-child-abuse-inquiry-vitims-no-confidence



> Pressure on Lady Woolf to step down as the new head of the government inquiry into child abuse has intensified after a lawyer representing almost 50 victims said a number would not participate because of their concern about how it was going to be run.





> “We’ve heard from many survivors who are extremely distressed. They are saying it’s going to be a whitewash, that it doesn’t want to speak to the victims and that’s just a paper exercise. They are worried it’s not going to get to the truth of what happened.”
> 
> Victims are dismayed that Woolf, who is to stand down as Lord Mayor of London next month, will be taking up another demanding job, separate from her role heading up the inquiry.
> 
> ...





> One law firm has already drawn up plans to seek a judicial review of Woolf’s appointment. Millar suggested that that remained a possibility for her clients too. She said many had been upset by Woolf’s recent appearance before Vaz’s committee.
> 
> “One of the things that angered our clients was when Fiona Woolf started talking about the victim community,” Millar said. “There is no victim community; they are survivors of child abuse. They do not live in a communal state. They are a disparate range of people whose interests are not homogenous. Quite often they are isolated from other people, including each other, and they’re not all talking and saying ‘we want this we want that’. However, all the clients I’ve spoken with are unanimous that they don’t want Fiona Woolf to chair this inquiry because the perception of her is someone too close to the establishment.


----------



## Quartz (Oct 26, 2014)

Looks like Denis MacShane is in trouble. As is the Home Office. It seems they ignored warnings.



> ROTHERHAM’s horrific abuse concerns were raised with the Home Office and the town’s MP but never acted on, The Yorkshire Post can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 26, 2014)

How about an internet petition demanding they appoint Micheal Mansfield to head the inquiry? 
The blatant footdragging on this is fucking outrageous - and pretty much confirms they are massively covering this shit up. Thats what the story should be - thats the sort of shit that would a lot of people very angry.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 26, 2014)

Catherine Bennet writing about this in the graun. The article doesn't really go deep - but far more interesting are the comments below - virtually unanimous in seeing the whole thing as a massive establishment coverup. 

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...d-sex-abuse-inquiry-fiona-woolf?commentpage=1


----------



## newbie (Oct 26, 2014)

> _Second member of Fiona Woolf inquiry admits controversial links with Lord Brittan_
> _
> 
> The Telegraph_ can disclose that Dame Moira Gibb – who was appointed to sit on the panel on Tuesday along with a number of other experts – has admitted a close personal friend worked with Lord Brittan during part of the period which will be closely scrutinised by the inquiry.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ts-controversial-links-with-Lord-Brittan.html


----------



## teqniq (Oct 26, 2014)

Whitewash extravaganza.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 26, 2014)

If she steps down then it can be delayed a bit more. The main thing is for nothing too awkward to come out this side of the election.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 26, 2014)

If I read right, "Scope" of report gives plenty of examples of instutuions that may come under the microscope. MI5 not listed, despite being up to their neck in the C Smith and Kincora cases. Maybe it was just them, no way theyd have known about Elm House and lord knows what else. No siree. If"national security" is to be a blag for obfuscating on systemic child rape, it should be made explicit and plainly from the off. "We only look so far. We only care so much".


----------



## elbows (Oct 26, 2014)

newbie said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ts-controversial-links-with-Lord-Brittan.html



I feel the need to point out that 'the Telegraph can disclose' means, in this case, that they actually bothered to read the letters that are on the inquiry website for anyone to see.

Here are the two letters in question:

Download letter 1 (PDF size 80KB)
Download letter 2(PDF size 64KB)


----------



## newbie (Oct 26, 2014)

well the article does say that, but your fact checking is a degree of magnitude better than mine.

the comments to a rather odd article in the same paper about Woolf are interesting (& disturbing, bizarre, odd and frankly nuts in equal measure), particularly the one currently at the top, which hasn't been vaped despite making quite open allegations.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...d-about-historic-sex-abuse.html#disqus_thread


----------



## elbows (Oct 26, 2014)

newbie said:


> well the article does say that, but your fact checking is a degree of magnitude better than mine.



I'm not complaining about the article being mentioned here, just that the media are often pompous about their sources even when the info is public, and often don't invite the rascal multitude to view the source material themselves on the occasions where it is available. And that Telegraph article was a great example of that shit.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 26, 2014)

And the Needle, via the Mail and the Mirror, casts a questionable light on the PR consultant for a third member of the panel, Sharon Evans. Here the focus is on him rather than on the panel member and the story is framed in a sensationalist manner but the cosiness is still disturbing. 
http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/10/26/james-saville-doing-pr-for-csa-inquiry/


----------



## laptop (Oct 26, 2014)

newbie said:


> the one currently at the top, which hasn't been vaped despite making quite open allegations.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...d-about-historic-sex-abuse.html#disqus_thread



Someone's asleep at the wheel - or there's no cover at night? Will be gone at 10am?


----------



## Betsy (Oct 26, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> *How about an internet petition demanding they appoint Micheal Mansfield to head the inquiry? *
> The blatant footdragging on this is fucking outrageous - and pretty much confirms they are massively covering this shit up. Thats what the story should be - thats the sort of shit that would a lot of people very angry.


Apparently there are two already. I heard Michael himself say so on the radio the other day. He said he was busy with the Hillsborough Inquiry but it could be worked out.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 26, 2014)

Note : It's now 2 years since Tom Watson made his claim at PMQ and Cameron put on his "I'm listening seriously" face.

2 years later, still no big rush to get to the bottom of things.


----------



## Betsy (Oct 26, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Note : It's now 2 years since Tom Watson made his claim at PMQ and Cameron put on his "I'm listening seriously" face.
> 
> 2 years later, still no big rush to get to the bottom of things.


Gosh! 2 years!!...how time flies!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 26, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> Catherine Bennet writing about this in the graun. The article doesn't really go deep - but far more interesting are the comments below - virtually unanimous in seeing the whole thing as a massive establishment coverup.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...d-sex-abuse-inquiry-fiona-woolf?commentpage=1



The article i linked to has disappeared from the guardian website (although the link still works) and the comments have been closed.(  )

Editted add - actually they've probably turned the comments off cos the moderator wants to go to bed and cant risk a  libel lawyers paradise below the line ...


----------



## laptop (Oct 27, 2014)

laptop said:


> Someone's asleep at the wheel - or there's no cover at night? Will be gone at 10am?



Gone. Oddly, another "oldest comment" has replaced it.

And a bunch of utterly nutterly racist and conspiraloon posts follow it...



The published allegations that a Minister lost a file about paedophile activity have, though, clearly served hacks as a proxy for the allegation it made...


----------



## quiquaquo (Oct 27, 2014)

Has this been posted yet? http://www.johnmannmp.com/corridors...b4-9564-0c9b4e61bdae&Order=LatestConversation


----------



## AnIdiot (Oct 28, 2014)

Expat (ex-director of Richmond social services) denies being either a witness, or under investigation in Richmond paedophile cover-up.

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/n...richmond_paedophile_ring_coverup#.VE92WIusVTF


----------



## The Pale King (Oct 29, 2014)

Leon Brittan named as a possible abuser in parliament by Labour MP Jimmy Hood:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uiry-former-Home-Secretary-named-Commons.html

...Sorry for the Mail link, couldn't see it on the BBC. It was in a debate about the Miners' Strike.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> Leon Brittan named as a possible abuser in parliament by Labour MP Jimmy Hood:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uiry-former-Home-Secretary-named-Commons.html
> 
> ...Sorry for the Mail link, couldn't see it on the BBC. It was in a debate about the Miners' Strike.


Tele carried it as well...emphasis on condemnation of Hood. 



> A Labour MP was last night embroiled in a row over the use of parliamentary privilege after he told the Commons that Lord Brittan, the former home secretary, had been accused of “improper conduct with children”.
> 
> Jim Hood, the Labour MP for Lanark and Hamilton East, was denounced by Conservatives after he used a debate about coal miners to discuss reports about Lord Brittan.


----------



## The Pale King (Oct 29, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Tele carried it as well...emphasis on condemnation of Hood.



Yeah the Mail also avoided any discussion of whether they might be substance to the allegations and parlayed it into a thing about whether Woolf should resign from the enquiry or not.

It's interesting to me that this just popped out in a debate about something else though - like everybody knows, but no-one wants to confront it head on.


----------



## Quartz (Oct 29, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> Leon Brittan named as a possible abuser in parliament by Labour MP Jimmy Hood:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uiry-former-Home-Secretary-named-Commons.html






			
				Daily Mail said:
			
		

> The remarks from Jim Hood, who said there were ‘reports about child abuse being linked with’ the Conservative politician, were criticised as ‘disgusting’ by business minister Matthew Hancock.



Yes, the remarks are indeed disgusting, and that's why they should be investigated.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2014)

However much Hood's comments are rubbished, that _should_ mean the end of Woolf as the inquiry chair. Words like 'untenable' come to mind (though I'd perhaps go with 60/40 for her clinging on).


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 29, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Yes, the remarks are indeed disgusting, and that's why they should be investigated.



Have a think about why the use, or even misuse, of Parliamentary privilege might be the ONLY way, sometimes, to bring widely-rumoured stuff to peoples' attention.

Then people start to have the opportunity to assess the credibility, or not, for themselves.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2014)

Apart from the immediate protestations in the chamber from Hancock etc., the tory response to this has been very muted. Hmmmm


----------



## Quartz (Oct 29, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Have a think about why the use, or even misuse, of Parliamentary privilege might be the ONLY way, sometimes, to bring widely-rumoured stuff to peoples' attention.



I'm sorry but you'll have to indulge me and explain; I've got too much blood in my alcohol stream.


----------



## free spirit (Oct 30, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Have a think about why the use, or even misuse, of Parliamentary privilege might be the ONLY way, sometimes, to bring widely-rumoured stuff to peoples' attention.
> 
> Then people start to have the opportunity to assess the credibility, or not, for themselves.


think you've misread that post William.


----------



## elbows (Oct 30, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> Yeah the Mail also avoided any discussion of whether they might be substance to the allegations and parlayed it into a thing about whether Woolf should resign from the enquiry or not.



There isn't much else they or other media can do to be honest. Almost the only choice the media have on this at the moment is whether to report it at all or not (most don't seem to have). They can report exactly what he said using his parliamentary privilege, but they can't really expand on it at all. And since he gave no useful details, it's no surprise the Woolf thing is the only angle they can run with.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 30, 2014)

elbows said:


> There isn't much else they or other media can do to be honest. Almost the only choice the media have on this at the moment is whether to report it at all or not (most don't seem to have). They can report exactly what he said using his parliamentary privilege, but they can't really expand on it at all. And since he gave no useful details, it's no surprise the Woolf thing is the only angle they can run with.


Yes...that explains the lack of any real response from the tories...that would give the media a reportable angle.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 30, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/30/re-written-letter-child-abuse-inquiry



> The head of the government’s inquiry into historic child sexual abuse allegations repeatedly re-wrote a letter to Theresa May, the home secretary, to play down her links with former home secretary Lord Brittan, it has emerged.



RE-written SEVEN times - with the assistance of the home office. So they were fully aware she was chums with brittain, but they still wanted her to head the enquiry - despite having no background in the field. Fucking stinks. Surely they have to drop her now?


----------



## quiquaquo (Oct 31, 2014)

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/home-affairs/141029 Fiona Woolf to KV re ev follow-up.pdf


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 31, 2014)

The Pale King said:
			
		

> Leon Brittan named as a possible abuser in parliament by Labour MP Jimmy Hood:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uiry-former-Home-Secretary-named-Commons.html







			
				Daily Mail said:
			
		

> The remarks from Jim Hood, who said there were ‘reports about child abuse being linked with’ the Conservative politician, were criticised as ‘disgusting’ by business minister Matthew Hancock.






			
				Quartz said:
			
		

> Yes, the remarks are indeed disgusting, and that's why they should be investigated.





William of Walworth said:


> Have a think about why the use, or even misuse, of Parliamentary privilege might be the ONLY way, sometimes, to bring widely-rumoured stuff to peoples' attention.
> 
> Then people start to have the opportunity to assess the credibility, or not, for themselves.






			
				freespirit said:
			
		

> think you've misread that post William.



Probably yes, on reflection, at least the latter part of Quartz's post. But let's find out ...




			
				Quartz said:
			
		

> I'm sorry but you'll have to indulge me and explain



OK. I was thinking that you were agreeing with Michael Hancock who was quoted (approvingly?) by the Daily Mail in finding Jim Hood's remarks 'disgusting' -- was I wrong?

So I decided to go out on a limb and defend Jim Hood's use of parliamentary privilege there. That was all I was doing really, for the reason I gave -- sometimes it can be the only way to get widely known rumours out.

In doing that though, I didn't properly take in that you thought that the allegations should nevertheless be investigated anyway -- I now take it that that's what you meant.

Hope I've clarified things  a bit more now. Apols for misunderstandings.


----------



## laptop (Oct 31, 2014)

Woolf steps down: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29855265


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2014)

laptop said:


> Woolf steps down: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29855265


They will need to get a foreigner in, anyone else will stink of the establishment that covered up the abuse


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2014)

laptop said:


> Woolf steps down: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29855265



She 'jokes' just now, on R4, that only a "hermit" could fulfil her former role. FFS


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 31, 2014)

brogdale said:


> She 'jokes' just now, on R4, that only a "hermit" could fulfil her former role. FFS


What is she saying?  That by being a part of the establishment you're bound to be friends with many paedophiles?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2014)

Sort of prejuding the judging clearing/_mistakes were  made_ thing.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 31, 2014)

brogdale said:


> She 'jokes' just now, on R4, that only a "hermit" could fulfil her former role. FFS



The glib self assurance had me swearing at the radio; she showed herself resolutely incapable of understanding what the problems with her appointment were.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2014)

To lose one chair is a misfortune, two is carelessness ....Oscar Wilde still relevant


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 31, 2014)

marty21 said:


> To lose one chair is a misfortune, two is carelessness ....Oscar Wilde still relevant



It will happen if you appoint enquiry chairs to solve your problems (those of increasing mistrust and political illegitimacy), rather than address the actual problems of abuse; like Woolf and Butler-Sloss, the government just don't get it.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2014)

Just heard...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> It will happen if you appoint enquiry chairs to solve your problems (those of increasing mistrust and political illegitimacy), rather than address the actual problems of abuse; like Woolf and Butler-Sloss, the government just don't get it.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Honestly, I think they do get it...all too well. They know what the stakes are here.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2014)

Maybe it's time to let an external body in? Irish  state? Or Belgium?


----------



## quiquaquo (Oct 31, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe it's time to let an external body in? Irish  state? Or Belgium?



With their history in these matters?

You’d be better off with Iranians at this point although a few politicians would end up swinging from cranes. Make TB one of them and you can count me in.


----------



## quiquaquo (Oct 31, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Just heard...



Is that the fires of Hell in the background? If that isn't the face of evil what the fuck is.


----------



## The Pale King (Oct 31, 2014)

Let's have a commonwealth jurist in who won't rest until we touch the bottom of this swamp.


----------



## Quartz (Oct 31, 2014)

marty21 said:


> OK. I was thinking that you were agreeing with Michael Hancock who was quoted (approvingly?) by the Daily Mail in finding Jim Hood's remarks 'disgusting' -- was I wrong?



I was most definitely not agreeing with Hancock; I was using Hancock's own words against him.



> So I decided to go out on a limb and defend Jim Hood's use of parliamentary privilege there. That was all I was doing really, for the reason I gave -- sometimes it can be the only way to get widely known rumours out.



I too was defending Hood.


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2014)

So, the Tories pick 2 chairs from the establishment to chair an enquiry into claims of an establishment cover up of child abuse 

#seemslegit


----------



## quiquaquo (Oct 31, 2014)

The perfect candidate: _"The Police, Heaven forbid"_


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2014)

marty21 said:


> So, the Tories pick 2 chairs from the establishment to chair an enquiry into claims of an establishment cover up of child abuse
> 
> #seemslegit


 
Good piece from Crick on C4News tonight examining the extent of the damage to May...revealed that Vaz is going to question her next week, and specifically about the degree to which she was personally involved in Woolf's letter re-drafting. Hmmm who could possibly gain from any of this?


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 31, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe it's time to let an external body in? Irish  state? Or Belgium?



Vatican city, those guys know how to investigate child abuse. This needs people with experience.


----------



## little_legs (Oct 31, 2014)

R4 reported today that the victims were only advised 4 days in advance that they were due to meet Woolf. One of the victims complained that he was unable to get assurances from the Home Office that his travel expenses would be reimbursed. 

Did anyone listen to R4's PM interview with a Lib Dem MP Tessa Munt? She apparently suffered abuse herself. Like Woolf, she complained about _the problem of social media_. She also said that she advised T. May back in July that in order to prevent the nominees being hounded by the social media, May should ask the public to direct their complaints/objections to the Chief Constable of Norfolk.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 1, 2014)

Listening to "Any questions/answers" on R4 it's really evident that the political elite are using the Butler-Sloss/Woolf debacle/delay to introduce the idea that the notion of the enquiry, as presently established, is somehow unworkable. Anxious to shift focus away from the palace of westminster, they seem to be using their chair fuck-up as a pretext for sowing the seeds for breaking up the enquiry into an number of lesser parts.

Interestingly the original letter from the 120 MPs to Theresa May, was actually quite specific about the task of their proposed enquiry in the first paragraph...



> Dear Home Secretary,
> 
> We are writing to ask you to set up a full, properly resourced *investigation into the failure of the Police to follow the evidence* in a number of historical cases of child sexual abuse."


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 1, 2014)

Everytime (not often enough) the role of police is highlighted or questioned, we need to keep mentioning MI5. They are escaping attention even more. What are the national security considerations for intervening to protect child-rapists?


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 1, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Is that the fires of Hell in the background? If that isn't the face of evil what the fuck is.



He's going to be found dead soon, isn't he?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 1, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> He's going to be found dead soon, isn't he?


At the very least, he'll have a stage army of Harley St docs ready to testify his heart/dementia/A N Other Condition make it impossible for the police to interview him.  Maybe he'll be able to sign up Janner's team for half price now their work is done.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 1, 2014)

Is Lord Hutton doing anything right now?


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 1, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> He's going to be found dead soon, isn't he?



or be found to be suffering from dementia.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 1, 2014)

The Pale King said:


> Let's have a commonwealth jurist in who won't rest until we touch the bottom of this swamp.


Yeah, sure they'd be able to find someone far flung who will never have broken bread with the nonce ministers...but we shouldn't expect an imported elite, establishment figure to be any less likely to steer the enquiry away from elite crimes than their sister/friend attempts so far. It's only since the victim's groups have started mentioning folk like Mansfield etc. that the rattled elite have come up with the wheeze of a elite from somewhere else. 

Incidentally, on last night's Newsnight Mansfield pretty much agreed that he would do it.


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 1, 2014)

The Mail comes out with a stout defence of Brittan qouting from a contemporary Private Eye investigation of the claims against him by none other than Paul Foot.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...P-uses-Commons-privilege-link-Tory-abuse.html


----------



## brogdale (Nov 1, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> The Mail comes out with a stout defence of Brittan qouting from a contemporary Private Eye investigation of the claims against him by none other than Paul Foot.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...P-uses-Commons-privilege-link-Tory-abuse.html



I suppose this is all they've got left...after all, he is still (inconveniently) alive. So, posit him as the victim of (anti-semitic) spook smears and there is a possibility of closing down debate with no hope of disproving the story.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 1, 2014)

MI5 blackmail motif again ^ neither makes basis for alleged blackmail true or false.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 1, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, sure they'd be able to find someone far flung who will never have broken bread with the nonce ministers...but we shouldn't expect an imported elite, establishment figure to be any less likely to steer the enquiry away from elite crimes than their sister/friend attempts so far. It's only since the victim's groups have started mentioning folk like Mansfield etc. that the rattled elite have come up with the wheeze of a elite from somewhere else.
> 
> Incidentally, on last night's Newsnight Mansfield pretty much agreed that he would do it.


Fuck it, I'll do it. I'll be out of a job soon and could do with the work


----------



## Wilf (Nov 1, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> The Mail comes out with a stout defence of Brittan qouting from a contemporary Private Eye investigation of the claims against him by none other than Paul Foot.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...P-uses-Commons-privilege-link-Tory-abuse.html


Moncrieff as the head of press association was of course the ideal man to spin a pro-Brittan version of events.

I notice the story also says Brittan has been 'in hospital this week'. It begins.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 2, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> He's going to be found dead soon, isn't he?


I think you are right on the money here.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 2, 2014)

Exaro report a "gear change" in the Met's investigation into allegations of CSE involving Tory ministers at Dolphin Sq.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...gation-into-child-sex-abuse-at-dolphin-square


----------



## marty21 (Nov 2, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Exaro report a "gear change" in the Met's investigation into allegations of CSE involving Tory ministers at Dolphin Sq.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...gation-into-child-sex-abuse-at-dolphin-square


I used to know Dolphin Square very well! Loads of MPs, Lords, etc live there


----------



## newbie (Nov 2, 2014)

and it's next door to St Georges Sq where the peoples princess worked in a playgroup in about 1980!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 2, 2014)

newbie said:


> and it's next door to St Georges Sq where the peoples princess worked in a playgroup in about 1980!



This is still in their front window...sniff, snuffle...flowers....land-mines....


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 2, 2014)

Looks like she was doing the deliveries that day.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 2, 2014)

I think the daily mail article is actually quite revealing in its own way. It highlights that were widespread rumours doing the rounds about leon brittain being a nonce during the mid 80s - and that the media were on to that and that the senior figures felt they had to respond. The article's version - that it was an Mi5 smeer job - also points to the fact that the spooks had a hand in spreading the stories - which of course doesn't mean that they were not true (indeed if the allegations were bollocks - why would brittain have been worried?) . Either way it surely only strengthens the case for a proper investigation and that  Mi5/specail branch  should be very much part of its focus.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 2, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...buse-report-inquiry-home-office?commentpage=1

heat being turned up on May - she might lose her job over this. She looks like the fall guy - tasked with protecting the guilty and having to take the flak for it.


----------



## kenny g (Nov 2, 2014)

The Mail article stating it is unbelievable someone would be driven to a brothel by their Special Branch security. Sorry, but no it isn't.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 2, 2014)

No, it isn't indeed, and probably claimed it on expenses.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 2, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/society/...buse-report-inquiry-home-office?commentpage=1
> 
> heat being turned up on May - she might lose her job over this. She looks like the fall guy - tasked with protecting the guilty and having to take the flak for it.


 Hmmm



> Norman Baker, a Home Office minister, told MPs: “The [Wanless] review *has had access to all material identified which would relate to child abuse and which the department still holds. *The home secretary has now received the report of the review and is considering its findings ahead of the full report being published.”
> 
> Baker told the Guardian there was “no reason why it should not be published” and that he would be pressing May about it in the Commons on Monday. However, he warned that the report probably raised more questions than it answered as *the team did not have access to documents protected by the Official Secrets Act.*



Maybe Wanless has found something in the 1984 records that doesn't accord with...



> Lord Brittan said in a statement: "It has been alleged that when I was Home Secretary I failed to deal adequately with the bundle of papers containing allegations of serious sexual impropriety that I received from the late Geoff Dickens MP.
> 
> “This too is completely without foundation - as evidence from the Home Office's own report supports. As I made clear in the statement that I issued on 2 July, I passed this bundle of papers to the relevant Home Office officials for examination, as was the normal and correct practice.
> 
> “I wrote to Mr Dickens on 20 March 1984 informing him of the conclusions of the Director of Public Prosecutions about these matters (as set out in the Interim Report of the Independent Review set up by the Home Office).”


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 2, 2014)

well who are these relevant officials ffs? How come everyone had knowledge of stuff but never examined any evidence? This is lies.

On a side note I read yesterday an article from a loon site referenced on the 'satanism panic peado ring: panic or bollocks' thread that claimed Class War activists had rescued some children from being decapitated in a satanic ritual cult. I mean, wtf.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 2, 2014)

Brittan claims he passed the bundle of papers on, but did he follow it up at all?or just hope that it got lost somewhere?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 2, 2014)

marty21 said:


> Brittan claims he passed the bundle of papers on, but did he follow it up at all?or just hope that it got lost somewhere?




this is what gets me about the whole thing- so many eyes who were aware of the existence of, had handled but apparently nobody ever read anything in these files. Right.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 2, 2014)

This delay from May is probably down to the Home Office re-drafting; they've only had 5 attempts so far, so at least 2 more to go?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 2, 2014)

Bottom line is they've got to keep all this all wrapped up for 186 days; May is doing sterling work so far.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 2, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Moncrieff as the head of press association was of course the ideal man to spin a pro-Brittan version of events.
> 
> I notice the story also says Brittan has been 'in hospital this week'. It begins.



So, a matter of days after May receives the Peter Wanless report, the Lord is in hospital....hmmm.

And...if that daily mail tosh had any basis in fact, you'd kind of expect that the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee would want to be looking at that...particularly as the Chair is Brittan's cousin.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 2, 2014)

brogdale said:


> you'd kind of expect that the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee would want to be looking at that...particularly as the Chair is Brittan's cousin.


 I wish fate would stop taking the piss.


----------



## The Pale King (Nov 3, 2014)

brogdale said:


> So, a matter of days after May receives the Peter Wanless report, the Lord is in hospital....hmmm.
> 
> And...if that daily mail tosh had any basis in fact, you'd kind of expect that the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee would want to be looking at that...particularly as the Chair is Brittan's cousin.



I should have lost the capacity to be surprised by this stuff but that is still gobsmacking. Good spot brogdale


----------



## brogdale (Nov 3, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Bottom line is they've got to keep all this all wrapped up for 186 days; May is doing sterling work so far.


 Here's a little glimpse of the mind-set of the tory back-benches...



> *Sir Bill Cash,* the Conservative, says that if May wants to turn the inquiry into a statutory one, *it would have to start again from scratch.* Wouldn’t it be better to give it statutory powers from the beginning?
> 
> May says her advice is different. It could be converted into a statutory inquiry. But the request would have to come from the chair, she says.



Delay, delay....


----------



## Quartz (Nov 3, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Bottom line is...



An unfortunate choice of words.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 3, 2014)

Quartz said:


> An unfortunate choice of words.


Just don't. This isn't billy bunter ffs.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 3, 2014)

...and Straw joins in with the process....



> *Jack Straw*, the Labour former home secretary, says May should consider Dominic Grieve’s proposal for the Home Office to appoint a chair from abroad.



I assume, if he weren't dead, Straw would suggest his old mucker from Chile?


----------



## marty21 (Nov 3, 2014)

isn't there precedent for having someone from abroad?, we've had peace envoys from abroad for the Northern Ireland thing


----------



## brogdale (Nov 3, 2014)

Watson has taken every opportunity today to support May. He is strongly giving the impression that he believes May's intentions are honourable. Hmmm



> 4m ago16:13
> 
> Labour’s *Tom Watson* thanks May for putting survivors at the heart of this. It was a very personal statement, and will be appreciated. What will be done to ensure the panel can get information from the intelligence services?
> 
> May says it is her intention that all government agencies, including the intelligence services, should provide information to the panel. She is in the process of *establishing a protocol* that will enable this to happen.



Talk about devil in the detail.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 3, 2014)

marty21 said:


> isn't there precedent for having someone from abroad?, we've had peace envoys from abroad for the Northern Ireland thing


Quite possibly, but it would be a brilliant way of helping to conceal the fact they had "one of us" in control...instead of some loose-cannon who might actually let the cat out of the bag.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 3, 2014)

It's OK Leon...



> 6m ago16:25
> 
> May says there are two reasons by the Wanless report is not being published today. First, she wants people to be able to study it separately from today’s statement. And, second, she has asked for an assurance that it is addressing the terms of reference.
> 
> (*That suggests that she has demanded some kind of rewrite.*)



ffs


----------



## marty21 (Nov 4, 2014)

and now Norman Baker has resigned - putting some pressure (but not much more) on May - a Lib Dem Minister resigning isn't in the league of a Tory minister going


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2014)

marty21 said:


> and now Norman Baker has resigned - putting some pressure (but not much more) on May - a Lib Dem Minister resigning isn't in the league of a Tory minister going



Good attack mode from Mann...



> John Mann MP ✔ @JohnMannMP
> Follow
> Useless Norman Baker, invisible and silent Minister for child abuse resigns. His only act was to delay Wanless report
> 
> 10:33 PM - 3 Nov 2014


----------



## Wilf (Nov 4, 2014)

Also, of course, a conspiraloon over David Kelly.... but then of course happy to work for the organisation he believes murdered him.  They must be very good Ministerial Cars.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Also, of course, a conspiraloon over David Kelly.... but then of course happy to work for the organisation he believes murdered him.  They must be very good Ministerial Cars.


They are - only problem is that they break down 6 months before the next general election due to a build up of _principles_ somewhere in the system.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 4, 2014)

A little treat



P.S. Keep watching till 0.25. It's worth it.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 4, 2014)

And from all good retailers

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Always-Tomo...id=1415107708&sr=1-2&keywords=the+reform+club


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2014)

Wilf said:


> And from all good retailers
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Always-Tomorrow-VINYL-Reform-Club/dp/B00BFNS4VI/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1415107708&sr=1-2&keywords=the reform club


 but not from Our Price, eh?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 4, 2014)

brogdale said:


> but not from Our Price, eh?


I don't think you can put _any_ price on hearing a minister singing songs about 'tramps' and 'dogs on a string'.


----------



## 1%er (Nov 5, 2014)

In the 5th draft of Fiona Woolf's letter to Theresa May she makes a strange admission that I didn't see elsewhere.


> In my capacity as Lord Mayor my steward has been Colin Tucker, a former solicitor from Edinburgh. In 1989 Mr Tucker was prosecuted for fraud and acquired. He was later struck off as a solicitor. In 1983 he was involved in an inquiry into an allegation of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in Scotland, conducted by WA Nimmo Smith QC and JD Friel, Regional Procurator Fiscal of North Strathclyde. The inquiry, which concerned allegations that senior figures in the Edinburgh legal fraternity, including judges, were engaged in sexual relations with under age boys, found no Evidence of wrongdoing. For the sake of completeness I attach a link to the full report and the conclusions are found at pages 106-107 of the report.(https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment data/file/2288 13/0377.pdf). I can confirm that I have never discussed this issue with Mr. Tucker and was unaware of his prior history until this matter was brought to my attention.


(what appears to be a link isn't a working link)

Neither his name of the fact that he was struck off as a solicitor appear in the published final draft of her letter. Interesting that someone with his background can pop-up as the steward to the Lord Mayor of London, friends in high places I guess as his history must have been known to his employers


----------



## brogdale (Nov 5, 2014)

1%er said:


> In the 5th draft of Fiona Woolf's letter to Theresa May she makes a strange admission that I didn't see elsewhere.
> (what appears to be a link isn't a working link)
> 
> Neither his name of the fact that he was struck off as a solicitor appear in the published final draft of her letter. Interesting that someone with his background can pop-up as the steward to the Lord Mayor of London, friends in high places I guess as his history must have been known to his employers



Interesting.
I can't vouch for this source, but this blogger does appear to have had a good old dig around Tucker....

https://ianpace.wordpress.com/2014/...agic-circle-affair-and-wider-networks-part-1/

This stuck out..


> Amongst other matters, this affair demonstrates the importance that the inquiry incorporates Scotland as well (and Northern Ireland, where the Kincora Boys’ Home scandal is said to have involved intelligence operatives from the mainland).


----------



## 1%er (Nov 5, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Interesting.
> I can't vouch for this source, but this blogger does appear to have had a good old dig around Tucker....
> 
> https://ianpace.wordpress.com/2014/...agic-circle-affair-and-wider-networks-part-1/
> ...


Thanks for that, my interest was sparked by something Paul Flynn said about 2 discrepancies in her letters, the first being her relationship with the Brittan's, but he didn't really expand on the 2nd issue in his question to May about the re-drafts, so I went to look at them (they can be found here PDF).

Also the report she mentions "The inquiry into an allegation of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in Scotland"  can be read here (PDF)


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 6, 2014)

Seems like some new claims to keep at bay till after the election.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/westminster-child-abuse-scandal-coalition-4576718

Note the ever present theme of apparent police reticence to investigate.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Seems like some new claims to keep at bay till after the election.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/westminster-child-abuse-scandal-coalition-4576718
> 
> Note the ever present theme of apparent police reticence to investigate.



Unless I'm being dim (quite possible) this shoddy journalism leaves me confused. Who exactly questioned the Minister? And who is reporting that response?



> Asked if he had been to the school, the minister only said: “Not only have I never been investigated, but there has been no allegation made and nor are there any grounds for any allegation.”



Aside from the obvious line of inquiry you have to say that the Police should be concerned about why a minister might be at the (boarding?) school in the first place, and in a position to offer an unaccompanied child a pill.


----------



## laptop (Nov 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Unless I'm being dim (quite possible) this shoddy journalism leaves me confused. Who exactly questioned the Minister? And who is reporting that response?



The lawyers have clearly been at the copy. It may not have been shoddy before that.

The _Mirror_ rang up the accused minister and asked (_inter alia_) "have you ever been to school X?"

We could now learn quite a lot by examining requisitions for special upholstery cleaning in the Houses of Parliament?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2014)

Meanwhile "Nick" speaks to Exaro about his (alleged) abuse at the hands of two former tory MPs...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...of-how-mps-liked-to-inflict-pain-during-abuse


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 7, 2014)

http://www.retfordtimes.co.uk/Basse...paign-expose/story-23781159-detail/story.html



> Mr Mann alleges that there has been systematic abuse of under-16s by MPs dating back decades which he believes has been covered up by successive governments.
> 
> “There have already been some arrests but I predict more, including so-called ‘Honourable’ Members of Parliament,” he said.
> 
> ...


----------



## benedict (Nov 9, 2014)

Peter Hayman identified as among Dolphin Square abusers by Exaro source 'Nick'. 

Also David Hencke has some commentary on latest developments.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 9, 2014)

This is getting interesting.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5399/revealed-peter-hayman-paedo-spy-tinker-tailor-soldier-pie



> One of the VIPs who sexually abused boys at an apartment complex near Parliament has been identified as a former deputy director of MI6.
> 
> The disclosure of his identity has been provided to Scotland Yard for its new investigation into historical allegations that MPs and other prominent people carried out child sex abuse at Dolphin Square.



http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5398/ex-mi6-chief-named-as-sexual-abuser-of-boys-at-dolphin-square


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2014)

1%er said:


> In the 5th draft of Fiona Woolf's letter to Theresa May she makes a strange admission that I didn't see elsewhere.
> (what appears to be a link isn't a working link)
> 
> Neither his name of the fact that he was struck off as a solicitor appear in the published final draft of her letter. Interesting that someone with his background can pop-up as the steward to the Lord Mayor of London, friends in high places I guess as his history must have been known to his employers


i also wonder who acquired him and for how much


----------



## brogdale (Nov 9, 2014)

Some of those front pages about Hayman make for interesting reading...how about this effort from Lizzy Butler-Sloss's brother...


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 10, 2014)

"Sir Michael Havers - naming the diplomat would achieve nothing" so said the pillar of the establishment who considered himself above reproach.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 10, 2014)

FYI:


----------



## brogdale (Nov 10, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> FYI:



Good stuff.


----------



## Quartz (Nov 10, 2014)

Well, that goes a long way to explaining why the secret services would assist in a cover-up: the senior people do look after their own.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 11, 2014)

David Steel was also leading the charge against Hayman being named under parliamentary privilege ( when not studiously ignoring Cyril Smith )

Lobster attempted to link him in to PIE back in the day

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1061097929&postcount=4922

....coincidentaly I picked up an old copy printing his rebuttal to this in which he points out that his contact with Campbell Dunn was entirely in his capacity as a leading legit figure in the gay rights movement ....


----------



## happie chappie (Nov 11, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908

There's a surprise


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908
> 
> There's a surprise





> Peter Wanless's report said it was "not possible" to say whether files were removed to cover up abuse - but found "nothing to support" such a concern.


 Yeah, funny that no-one left a file note actually saying "we destroyed these to cover up..."


----------



## Wilf (Nov 11, 2014)

Having looked into the matter, I can confirm that the cupboard was bare. If there was anything in the cupboard, it must have been removed from the cupboard, but I don't know anything about that.  The police sometimes put things in cupboards and then taken them out, but I don't know anything about that either.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 11, 2014)

Danczuk says its a whitewssh, set up to fail. I accept the analysis. This government has actively covered up the rape of children, possibly facilitating further such crimes. They serve foul criminality at their absolute core and it shames this country that they anywhere near power.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 11, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908
> 
> There's a surprise


jimmy hill


----------



## Betsy (Nov 11, 2014)

_*Don Hale - Barbara Castle Dossier -11th Nov14 *

Don Hale talking to BBC Today Radio 4 about the Barbara Castle Dossier he was given by Barbara Castle, and the subsequent visits by Sir Cyril Smith and Special Branch which resulted in the confiscation of the files.
In it he says he believes_

__


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2014)

Despite the report, it's chair and his own Home Secretary saying no such thing, Dave claims...



> There will be lessons to learn from this report and people should study it closely. But I think it is important that *it says there was not a cover-up.* So some of the people who have been looking for conspiracy theories I think will have to look elsewhere.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2014)

Although I never expected the Wanless report to be very interesting, I am going to read almost all of it anyway.

The best I can hope for is that some extra details about various matters we have heard about in the past may get a mention. I suspect there won't be that many, so I am going to start off by copying and pasting things that catch my eye, and will change approach if it starts to get too much.



> 29. HMRC had made a specific search in relation to a border stop because Tom Bateman from the Today programme asked HMRC questions about information relating to a specific case relating to the importation of a video tape seized at Dover in 1982 which it was said contained images of child abuse.
> 
> 30. HM Customs and Excise was taken over by the Inland Revenue to form a new department, HMRC, with effect from 18 April 2005. HMRC understand that it was HM Customs and Excise’s policy to dispose of forfeited material but that material retained as evidence for criminal or other legal proceedings would be held at the Queen’s Warehouse. HMRC further understand that on 5 July the Dover Queen’s Warehouse was searched by Border Force and no record of the 1982 seizure or the seized goods themselves could be found.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 11, 2014)

happie chappie said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908
> 
> There's a surprise


What a load of complete bollox eh? It's like they've given up any pretence of actually giving a fuck, just so long as everything remains completely buried.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2014)

And before I post any more contents, I certainly do not accept the idea that these particular reports are clearly a whitewash. Lets be clear about what specific concerns these reports were looking at:

The Dickens dossier. 
The number of missing home office files they counted upon relatively recent investigation.
Home office funding of PIE.

Personally I never considered the latter two to be the likely source of much in the way of smoking guns etc, even in a world where it would be possible to completely get to the bottom of them via these reports.  I am openminded about the Dickens dossier. On balance given the nature of the man I would not be surprised if the bulk of it consisted of stuff that fell well below exciting press descriptions, both then and now, of 'high level paedophiles'. But its also quite feasible that there was at least something highly inconvenient in there, even if it consisted of an extreme minority of the material. Since I hold out very low hopes of the dossier ever turning up, we are reliant on at least some of the original sources for material supplied to Dickens (e.g. letters from constituents) coming forwards again now in modern times. Granted my ability to talk about this in full is still somewhat limited by not being able to describe in the fullest of terms what the most lurid of public suspicions about the dossier and what happened to it actually consist of, despite recent use of parliamentary privilege. 

With that in mind, the main reason I don't consider this report to be a whitewash is that it does not pretend to be doing the broader subject justice in any way. If it were even possible to use such an inconclusive report to 'draw a line' under the couple of very specific lines of questioning from the press etc that prompted the report in the first place, it would still fail to whitewash the broader question of high-level abuse of children.

I'll try to put it one more way for absolute clarity on my position. I'm not heavily critical of the current reports because of their inevitably limited potential, and not for sinister reasons. The real action is elsewhere, and even there it is not quite possible for me to yet speak of present-day coverups. Mostly because from the very small number of press sources that appear to keep us somewhat informed about some of the police investigations, we tend to get a picture of things being right on the edge in terms of number of witnesses/victims coming forwards. Only if we get a few more in various cases, and their existence becomes known to the press and reported, will I be able to make any claims about present whitewashes as opposed to the now unavoidable echo's of historical ones.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2014)

Hence the importance of the likes of the words of 'Nick' being given coverage by Exaro in relation to Dolphin Square - he knows how hard it will be for his evidence to police to go anywhere if others don't come forwards too.

Also this reported change earlier today:

*Mark Conrad* @markconradhack · 7h7 hours ago
HASC: MPs ask how are we going to find out whether cover-ups (of abuse by high-profile ppl) took place? Wanless: the testimony of survivors.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2014)

The likes of the BBC article linked to earlier fail to report clearly the conclusions of the review of review 2 which covered this matter. So here it is.



> Review 2 concluded that on the balance of probabilities, the alleged funding of PIE did not take place. While this represents the judgement of the original reviewer it is not a fully satisfactory answer to whether the Home Office ever directly or indirectly funded PIE. *We cannot offer categorical assurance one way or the other. It is possible that a Special Branch inspired payment might have taken place *- the official records offer no direct evidence to suggest it did, and no other civil servant we have had contact with has corroborated Mr Hulbert's memory, but the records are insufficiently complete to rule it out entirely.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2014)

Been too busy to see if the press has properly picked up on this from earlier today yet, which I've taken from a BBC live updates page ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-30001825 )



> MPs have so far focused mainly on appointments for the panel which is conducting the wider inquiry into child abuse, from which chairwoman Fiona Woolf recently resigned. The Home Affairs Committee chair, Labour's Keith Vaz, sums up the victims' groups' evidence as "strongly" supportive of putting the inquiry on a statutory footing.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 11, 2014)

> Responding to the report, Theresa May said she wanted "their consideration of how the police and prosecution authorities" handled any files they received, and *whether any material was passed to MI5 - and if so what action was taken.*



...OK now that's a can marked "...may contain worms"..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...OK now that's a can marked "...may contain worms"..
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908


bound to be loads of evidence of that lying around...yeah right.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...OK now that's a can marked "...may contain worms"..
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908



Indeed. I've been looking for more on that since its a much more interesting direction, albeit one mostly likely to be met mostly with more 'there is nothing in our files relevant to that'. The most I've come up with so far in easily quotable print is from this Telegraph article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-could-have-covered-up-paedophile-claims.html



> The Home Secretary said that apart from the overarching child sex abuse – which is still without a chairman after the resignation of Fiona Woolf last month – she had asked police and MI5 to carry out further reviews of how they handled allegations of child sex abuse.
> 
> And in a further development, Scotland Yard has been asked by Mrs May to look into claims by an investigative journalist that Special Branch officers confiscated a dossier containing a list of 16 MPs and peers allegedly involved in promoting a paedophile group.
> 
> Don Hale said he was given the file by Barbara Castle, the former Labour Cabinet minister, which detailed the activities of a controversial group called Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).



That article also does a fair job of illustrating again how May was quite careful to say the right things today, in stark contrast to Cameron who completely messed it up again.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 11, 2014)

elbows said:


> I am openminded about the Dickens dossier. On balance given the nature of the man I would not be surprised if the bulk of it consisted of stuff that fell well below exciting press descriptions, both then and now, of 'high level paedophiles'. But its also quite feasible that there was at least something highly inconvenient in there, even if it consisted of an extreme minority of the material.



..we know one name definitely not on it because he gave it to....Leon Brittan...

John Mann on Ch 4 News 11.11.14 estimated there were allegations against "...around 25 prominent politicians - some alive, some dead..." by Police under I assume Operation Fairbridge  ( I lose track ) .....of which he was "personally aware of 7" and from talking to others "half ...around 12...." being subject to current investigation by police..


----------



## Wilf (Nov 11, 2014)

Perhaps an obvious point is that Wanless was only reviewing the way the home office had previously handled the files, it wasn't a search _for_ the files.  A no holds barred attempt to trace it all back would have involved him interviewing dozens of people, now retired, who would have been involved, ran the stores, checked things in and out - as well as the more senior/active players. Something forensic. He clearly did none of that.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 12, 2014)

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/very-good-interview-with-don-hale-on-lbc-radio/

This is fascinasting, important and somewhat nauseating, among many other things,  it supports the notion that the cover up is essentially ongoing, not least in view of the upcoming general election. 

ETA I tried to link direct to interview but couldnt, link within Needle piece should work.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 12, 2014)

Nothing new, but a bit more detail on liz lynne making sure she never had to see or hear Martin Diggan's evidence about smith in Rochdale:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/12/police-allegation-lib-dem-abuse-coverup-claim


----------



## 1%er (Nov 12, 2014)

Tim Hulbert Alleges That Home Office Funding For PIE Was Requested By Special Branch

Tim Hulbert, a consultant who worked for the Home Office in the 1980’s, on BBC Radio 4 12th Nov. He claimed that the Paedophile Information Exchange received HO funding.


----------



## Mation (Nov 12, 2014)

1%er said:


> Tim Hulbert Alleges That Home Office Funding For PIE Was Requested By Special Branch
> 
> Tim Hulbert, a consultant who worked for the Home Office in the 1980’s, on BBC Radio 4 12th Nov. He claimed that the Paedophile Information Exchange received HO funding.


And there - after that allegation - the interview ended extremely abruptly.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Perhaps an obvious point is that Wanless was only reviewing the way the home office had previously handled the files, it wasn't a search _for_ the files.  A no holds barred attempt to trace it all back would have involved him interviewing dozens of people, now retired, who would have been involved, ran the stores, checked things in and out - as well as the more senior/active players. Something forensic. He clearly did none of that.



That isn't strictly true, but to be honest the full report is so lacking in really interesting results that I'm loathe to encourage anyone to spend the time reading the full thing to get a more accurate picture. I think I only got about half way through all the documents myself. Certainly it was not no-holds-barred, for a number of reasons, some reasonable and some inexcusable really. The only reason I was not going mad about this before was because as I indicated earlier, I didn't really see this particular set of reviews as being likely to yield interesting stuff in the first place - wouldn't go as far as to call these angles red herrings, but potentially not far off that in some ways, at least compared to the real horrors from the past that presently and at the time had no paper trail to cover up in the first place.

I'm sure my attitude is also partly sponsored by the fact that some of the historical rumours might not be based on anything real, leaving the modern-day establishment figures with an impossible task of disproving something. A task that makes even the very difficult task of proving something in a court of law seem easier to pull off by comparison. As I've said in the past, I'm therefore going to try really hard to judge stuff in a different way - if there were effective coverups in the past then I would expect there are incidents of the powerful abusing kids that really did not make it into the press or the popular rumour mill at the time, and a serious attempt to find justice now should therefore at some point result in people I'm not expecting/anticipating will be busted, or complaining about still being protected, being prosecuted. 

Anyway, returning to the reviews, one reason why I would actually advise people to read some of the full documents is if you really want to get a much more detailed grasp of the sorts of things that Geoffrey Dickens was actually passing on to the home office over the years. It's obviously an incomplete picture, but its still helpful when trying to estimate the sort of things likely to be in the missing 'dossiers', and comparing this to the language he used publicly and the way the press reported on such things at the time. In this particular respect the original interim review conducted   by a 'HM Customs & Revenues officer' in April 2013 may be the most useful document. Pages 6-7 give background info on him and how the press reported stuff related to him. Pages 14-20 give examples of stuff that he sent to the Home Office at various moments, that still survive to the extent that some comment can be made about their contents.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/372926/Interim_Report_-_Annex_E.PDF

( Taken from the full set of docs at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-peter-wanless-and-richard-whittam-qc-review )


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 14, 2014)

The Methave just put out a very brief statement saying Operation Fairbank is now looking into homicide.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 14, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The Methave just put out a very brief statement saying Operation Fairbank is now looking into homicide.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30052726


----------



## 1%er (Nov 14, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The Methave just put out a very brief statement saying Operation Fairbank is now looking into homicide.


More information about it here [Exaronews]"Operation Midland", one of at least 8 operations now running under operation Fairbank

Sky news
Detectives examining accusations of historical sexual abuse have launched a new investigation into “possible homicide”.

Scotland Yard said officers from Operation Fairbank, which is looking into claims there was a paedophile ring with links to government, have received allegations concerning “serious non-recent sexual abuse”, said to have taken place more than 30 years ago.

A spokesman said: “Our enquiries into this, over subsequent weeks, have revealed further information regarding possible homicide.

“Based on our current knowledge, this is the first time that this specific information has been passed to the Met.”

The new investigation has been titled Operation Midland.

e2a: I think the list of names I sent out via PM sometime ago were about Dolphin Square.


----------



## Betsy (Nov 14, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30052726


I have just been listening to one of the alleged victims on 5 Live radio and he was pleading for people to come forward including the drivers who ferried them back and forth and people who worked in the establishments where they were taken to.


----------



## quiquaquo (Nov 14, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The Methave just put out a very brief statement saying Operation Fairbank is now looking into homicide.



Not surprised tbh, there was a rumour that those video tapes seized at Dover decades and destined for one of the usual suspects might have involved snuff stuff in the Netherlands.

Depraved bastards.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 14, 2014)

Cut and paste from another messageboard:

The (anonymous) individual who has made this (homicide) accusation  has just been interviewed as the lead story on World At One. He didn't discuss the murder story, but claimed that he had been introduced by his father to a paedophile ring in the 70's which included top politicians, police and military men.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2014)

Notable that the OB feel the need to make this statement...



> Police stress the homicide investigation, Operation Midland, is at an early stage. It is not thought that the alleged incident involved any of the senior politicians of three decades ago claimed to have been part of the paedophile ring.



Early stage, but already enough evidence to speculate who is not involved, eh?


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 14, 2014)

In 1990 German Carole Kasir, who ran the guest house at the time of the allegations, was found dead in her flat at the age of 47.

The coroner's inquest concluded that, a diabetic, she had suffered an insulin overdose and had committed suicide.

However, there were claims that she had been murdered to stop her talking about what she knew.

The Yard said : “At this early stage in this inquiry, with much work still to do, it is not appropriate to issue appeals or reveal more information.

“Detectives from the Child Abuse Investigation Command are working closely with colleagues from the Homicide and Major Crime Command concerning this information, which is being looked at under the name of Operation Midland.”

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...-to-vip-paedophile-abuse-network-9861344.html


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2014)

R5 playing the BBC "Nick" interview again now; very moving and a very brave man.

BBC journo said they had list of those identified by "Nick", but for obvious reasons they were not going to reveal, but they did say that the list included individuals who were "senior military and political figures' and some others that "Nick" described as "more important than that."

Hmmm


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 14, 2014)

*Police are investigating "possible homicide" linked to what has been described as a paedophile ring involving powerful people in the 1970s and 1980s.*

By Tom Symonds
Home Affairs correspondent

14 November 2014 Last updated at 13:32


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30052726

The group is alleged to have included senior figures in public life, the military, politics and law enforcement.

In a statement Scotland Yard said inquiries were at an early stage.

A key witness who has spoken to police has told the BBC that he was abused for nine years as a boy.

He has appealed for others who may have evidence to come forward.

The Metropolitan Police said detectives were made aware of allegations regarding possible homicide during the last month.

The Met's statement said officers from its child abuse investigation command were working closely with colleagues from the homicide and major crime command.

"At this early stage in this inquiry, with much work still to do, it is not appropriate to issue appeals or reveal more information," the force said.

"We will not be giving a commentary as this inquiry develops, and it is important that officers are allowed to pursue their work without interference.

"We will not comment upon speculation as to the identity of any person or locations that may or may not feature in this inquiry."

'Very powerful people'

Speaking anonymously to the BBC but using the name "Nick", the alleged victim said he had given three days of video-taped evidence to detectives.

His accounts are being assessed as part of Operation Midland, a new Scotland Yard investigation which is under the umbrella of its inquiry into historical abuse, Operation Fairbank.

Nick, now in his 40s, says that he was first abused by his own father before being "handed over" as a young boy to the group.

"They were very powerful people and they controlled my life for the next nine years," Nick added.

"They created fear that penetrated every part of me, day in day out. You didn't question what they wanted, you did as they asked without question and the punishments were very severe."

Nick said the group was "very organised" and would arrange for chauffeur-driven cars to pick up boys, sometimes from school, and drive them to "parties" or "sessions" at locations including hotels and private apartments in London and other cities.

The children were not usually allowed to speak with each other and Nick says he struggled to work out the identities of the abusers. He has given the names of some of those he believes were involved to the police and the BBC.

'No fear'
The BBC has agreed not to reveal any of these names because of the ongoing police investigation and because of the need for further evidence to corroborate his account.

"They had no hesitation in doing what they wanted to do," Nick said. "Some of them were quite open about who they were. They had no fear at all of being caught, it didn't cross their mind."

When a child "stepped out of line", he said that abusers would inflict brutal and painful punishments.

He said: "[The abuse] destroyed my ability to trust. It's pretty much wrecked any relationships I have had. Intimacy for me is a pretty much a no-go area."

Nick said he had one motivation for speaking to the BBC - to encourage other alleged victims or those who unwittingly assisted the abusers to come forward.

"They need to find the strength that we as survivors have done," he said. "People who drove us around could come forward. Staff in some of the locations could come forward. There are so many people who must have had suspicions.

"We weren't smuggled in under a blanket through the back door. It was done openly and people must have questioned that and they need to come forward."

Nick says his torment suddenly came to an end when he went to a pre-arranged place to be picked up by a driver and no-one arrived.

He went the next day, worried that he would be punished for a diary mistake. Again there was no car waiting. He never saw his abusers again and says he still has no idea why.




***** here's hoping they're not lining up another Steve Messham / McAlpine scenario *****


----------



## treelover (Nov 14, 2014)

If this is true and there is no doubt it could be, then surely this sort of debased behaviour will have been going on for many many decades with elites, my friend who has fostered for many years says it is it endemic, that it goes back through families and maybe centuries.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 14, 2014)

Oh for gods sake.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ***** here's hoping they're not lining up another Steve Messham / McAlpine scenario *****



AFAIK, "Nick's" story emerged from Exaro...so unless we believe them to be part of "they"...hopefully not.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 14, 2014)

Curious:

_*MPS Statement - Operation Midland *
_
_The material on this page is for media organisations only. Please do not publish links to this page.
This page was last updated on 14-Nov-2014 12:17 _
_
 Over the past month, detectives working on Operation Fairbank within the Met's Specialist Crime and Operations Unit have been made aware of allegations concerning serious non-recent sexual abuse, said to have occurred over 30 years ago.

Our inquiries into this, over subsequent weeks, have revealed further information regarding possible homicide. Based on our current knowledge, this is the first time that this specific information has been passed to the Met.

At this early stage in this inquiry, with much work still to do, it is not appropriate to issue appeals or reveal more information.

Detectives from the Child Abuse Investigation Command are working closely with colleagues from the Homicide and Major Crime Command concerning this information, which is being looked at under the name of Operation Midland.

We will not be giving a commentary as this inquiry develops, and it is important that officers are allowed to pursue their work without interference.

We will not comment upon speculation as to the identity of any person or locations that may or may not feature in this inquiry.

We have taken the decision to release this statement today following a number of media enquiries requesting an update on Operation Midland. _​


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> In 1990 German Carole Kasir, who ran the guest house at the time of the allegations, was found dead in her flat at the age of 47.
> 
> The coroner's inquest concluded that, a diabetic, she had suffered an insulin overdose and had committed suicide.
> 
> ...



The Standard run the risk of potentially confusing people and conflating info by mixing old copy about about Elm Guesthouse (Operation Fernbridge) stuff with this latest stuff regarding murder accusations that originally came up under Operation Fairbank (broad scoping exercise) that has recently spun off into Operation Midland (specific stuff related to Dolphin Square abuse). There really isn't enough detail at the moment but a couple of things about the way this murder stuff is being reported makes me think that the Carole Kasir suicide is certainly not the most likely candidate, we are talking about another set of abuse here, and any links between the two haven't been established even in rumourville.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ***** here's hoping they're not lining up another Steve Messham / McAlpine scenario *****



It's almost impossible for that scenario to happen again. Very unlikely that the media would make that mistake again. And the Messham stuff appears to have had its origins in sloppy or dodgy journalistic behaviour some decades before the final BBC McAlpine storm (see much earlier discussions in this thread relating to Messham and photos). Plus every victim is different, and none that have gone public since Messham have had quite the same modus operandi or history as Messham.

Plus the Messham storm kicked off before we were really into 'serious police investigations mode', the impact of which on the media is hard to overstate.


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2014)

Plus the entire concern that the Messham/McAlpine stuff would be used to prevent justice from occurring has a flaw.  In that its only really valid if we think there will be no serious police investigations, and that trial by media is the only option left, and the Messham stuff made that impossible. But we aren't actually at that stage at all, still way too early to conclude the police investigations have been a dud. And if at some point that did become the case, I don't think the BBC McAlpine stuff actually precludes responsible journalists from digging deeper and keeping stories and quests for justice alive if they smell a rat/modern coverup.

As for whether the Messham stuff put off victims from coming forwards, it didn't feature anything that should directly make people less comfortable talking to the police. It did feature stuff that might make people more wary of journalists (not necessarily a bad thing) or of naming names in public themselves, especially without corroborative evidence. Granted the overall feeling of a victim being under pressure wouldn't have helped, but thankfully we've seen multiple victims of multiple celebrities find some justice via the courts in recent years since then, which should undo damage on that front, and certainly changed the 'tune' of how this stuff featured in the media.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2014)

brogdale said:


> R5 playing the BBC "Nick" interview again now; very moving and a very brave man.
> 
> BBC journo said they had list of those identified by "Nick", but for obvious reasons they were not going to reveal, but they did say that the list included individuals who were "senior military and political figures' *and some others that "Nick" described as "more important than that."*
> 
> Hmmm


Apart from what (I thought) I heard on R5, I can't find any reference to this bit by Tom Symonds. Anyone?


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2014)

Just been reading various other blogs and news stories to catch up with anything else thats been going on recently. One blog post alerted me that I should have kept reading the Wanless report documents, because if I'd made it as far as annex D I would have seen this handy list of additional search terms that were used when searching for documents in archives.



> Peter Wanless/Richard Whittam QC Review
> 
> List of additional names/places for searches
> 
> ...



Nothing that hasn't come up here before really but useful to have it in such concise form.

( https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa..._data/file/372921/Annex_D_-_What_we_asked.pdf )


----------



## SW9 (Nov 14, 2014)

Can anyone pm me the names please?


----------



## quiquaquo (Nov 14, 2014)

Another piece of filth, excuse the Mail link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...derage-sex-case-girl-reveals-meeting-him.html


----------



## Quartz (Nov 14, 2014)

Chris Denning convicted again of sex abuse against boys.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 14, 2014)

...OK, a clumsy analogy perhaps, but in the broader sense the credibility of the witnesses identifications is the main line of attack for anyone needing to get in the way of this story…

the 2 quotes raise the issue of his recall of people after suffering the trauma of his experience and after the passage of time involved….also whether a child abuser announcing themselves as “Lord X” or “Sir Buffton Tuffton” was laying a false trail at the time….

….also he is clearly very scared of being got at …

from the Exaro piece

"...Nick agreed despite remaining fearful of his alleged abusers..."

"..Nick sought assurances that his identity would be tightly contained within the Met..."

..people who come out and say highly embarrassing stuff can end up saying & doing apparently quite strange and compromising things …( ….David Shayler anyone… )

…..he does actully mention Elm Guest House in that piece aswell…


----------



## quiquaquo (Nov 15, 2014)

Of course he's worried. They can kill anyone whenever they wish. And they certainly have.


----------



## laptop (Nov 15, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> excuse the Mail link



2 March 2011


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 15, 2014)

....you were right Elbows...no link at all to that old case it appears... ( ...I was even starting to wonder about the Jill Dando case last night as sleep encroached....! )
*

Westminster child abuse gang 'linked to boy’s murder'*

PAUL GALLAGHER  Author Biography , NIGEL MORRIS   Friday 14 November 2014

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...abuse-gang-linked-to-boys-murder-9862454.html

Detectives investigating allegations of an organised paedophile ring involving former government ministers and senior police officers are examining links to a possible murder, Scotland Yard confirmed today.

The Met said detectives from its Operation Fairbank historic child abuse investigation command were now working with homicide officers in a new investigation called Operation Midland.

The Independent understands the victim is a boy and the person alleged to be responsible for his death in the 1980s is not a politician.



*Did VIP abusers murder a boy? *

By REBECCA CAMBER and STEPHEN WRIGHT FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 13:36, 14 November 2014
*
Police probing an alleged VIP paedophile ring are examining its links to a number of suspected murders.*

Scotland Yard announced yesterday it is investigating a 'possible homicide' more than 30 years ago centring on a block of luxury flats long popular with MPs.

The explosive allegation could even extend to _*a series of murders*_ related to child sex abuse 'parties' involving senior politicians, spy chiefs and prominent military and legal figures.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...dence-possible-murder-linked-allegations.html


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 15, 2014)

A comment on a Needle piece (up yesterday i think) claims to have witnessed such a murder.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 15, 2014)

> *'I watched Tory MP MURDER a boy during depraved Westminster VIP paedophile party'*




http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-watched-tory-mp-murder-4636497


----------



## gawkrodger (Nov 15, 2014)

wow

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-watched-tory-mp-murder-4636497


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 15, 2014)

> ...Nick claims the first death was of a boy aged ten or 11 who was deliberately run down by a car.
> 
> Another chilling allegation is that he was in the same room in the 1980s when a 12-year-old boy was strangled by a Tory MP.
> 
> ...


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 15, 2014)

....struggling to get my head round all this....my initial thoughts run to that whole Lord Boothby-Ronnie Kray nexus of boys-for-favours involving organised crime elements in bed with politicians  - whether this was an established and on-going pattern of behaviour involving multiple participants rather than a single bad-apple or he started it and it developed from that …

….arranging for accidents, getting rid of bodies etc etc lifts it into a whole new level to an extent…..if so who got the franchise after the twins were put away..?

also interested in what sort of connections “Nick’s” father had to bring that about his recruitment


----------



## quiquaquo (Nov 16, 2014)

Franchise got nationalised probably...

Who was that politician that always drank whisky?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2014)

DaveCinzano said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-watched-tory-mp-murder-4636497


Shit.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 16, 2014)

Dicken's friend speaks out, says he thought he was on a hit list and wouldn't go to the Met or Special Branch as he feared it had been infiltrated

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mp-who-exposed-suspected-westminster-4636399


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 16, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ....struggling to get my head round all this....my initial thoughts run to that whole Lord Boothby-Ronnie Kray nexus of boys-for-favours involving organised crime elements in bed with politicians  - whether this was an established and on-going pattern of behaviour involving multiple participants rather than a single bad-apple or he started it and it developed from that …
> 
> ….arranging for accidents, getting rid of bodies etc etc lifts it into a whole new level to an extent…..if so who got the franchise after the twins were put away..?
> 
> also interested in what sort of connections “Nick’s” father had to bring that about his recruitment



Here's one for the link-makers at the less rigorous end of the market, letter from boothby to Ronnie Kray:



> "Thank you for your postcard. I very nearly went to Jersey myself, as I have never been there, and hear from so many people that it is quite delightful.
> 
> "If you are free tomorrow evening between six and seven, do come round for a drink and a chat."



Haut de la Garenne was being used as a childrens home at this point.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 16, 2014)

So is this Nick guy the sole source for these new allegations about the child-murdering Tory MP?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> So is this Nick guy the sole source for these new allegations about the child-murdering Tory MP?



It would seem so, at present...though he has, of course, asked others who might be witness to come forward.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 16, 2014)

If his allegations are true - and it seems that the police are taking him seriously - then you can understand the reluctance of any other witnesses to come forward.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> So is this Nick guy the sole source for these new allegations about the child-murdering Tory MP?



The Mirror piece says someone else has corroborated parts of his story.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 16, 2014)

Can't really see that we will ever learn the truth of it, though. Which part of the establishment isn't infected with corruption? Not denying that there are many good and decent people doing their jobs conscientiously. Most of them, in fact. But there are others, aren't there?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2014)

Recently read Ballard's "Super-Cannes"...thought I was reading fiction.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Can't really see that we will ever learn the truth of it, though. Which part of the establishment isn't infected with corruption? Not denying that there are many good and decent people doing their jobs conscientiously. Most of them, in fact. But there are others, aren't there?



I'd imagine that the Met will be working very hard indeed to look for evidence in this case....just enough to persuade the CPS there is insufficient to proceed with any prosecutions.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 16, 2014)

This does crystallise my earlier concern about the trajectory of these stories – its incredibly difficult - there are dark places the public just don’t want to go which is when the denial reaction can kick in…what you might call the “next level” stuff……the jump from lone-nuts to the systemic…..MPs at snuff-parties is just that sort of inflexion point where it could go either way…. this is no way related to how much publicity or how ”open” the events are –it can even be one of the biggest news-stories in history - the JFK case…I would argue…

It happens so often - people become psychologically receptive to a Warren Commission, a Jean La Fontaine, a David Aaaronovitch or Richard Webster to soothe them back to sleep ….it was all a bad dream….nothing to see here….any slight inconsistency or failing in proving the unthinkable’s the point where the “sheeple” can get herded away from the “conspiraloons” , most grab onto an incinsistency in order to “check out” of the Hotel California when the steely knives start appearing…

It happened with the whole ritual abuse issue – child abuse yes, Dennis Wheatley stuff – no
the Dutroux case - had 100,000 people demonstrating in the street at one point and then Regina Louf & the X-Dossiers / widespread evil elite paedo networks – no….…Welsh Care Homes….yes, McAlpine – spectacular derailment….that’s got to be a worry and makes “Nick” very vulnerable and exposed – hence his pleas for people to come forward…if they don’t we’ve got a serious problem here…

The Jersey South Coast connection is “interesting” to say the least – but then I’m a pretty credulous loonspud by nature…and appreciate the brain filters and critical thinking of the more hard-headed posters on here...

….and by a very odd coinkydinck there was a story last week about a millionaire businessman mysteriously doing a “Robert Maxwell” off his Sunseeker yacht off the South Coast – the first version led with his conviction for paedophilia & “depraved abuse” in the 60’s before it was quickly pulled & that whole element entirely redacted…apparently a straight-forward and entirely legitimate bit of editing under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act “4 year rule” for spent convictions  – but some legal eagle or other must have been on the phones mighty quick to get that sorted…..


----------



## tbtommyb (Nov 16, 2014)

can someone pm me names/good links to what the 'next level' is suspected to be?


----------



## SW9 (Nov 16, 2014)

And me please


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 16, 2014)

tbtommyb said:


> can someone pm me names/good links to what the 'next level' is suspected to be?



tbtommyb you is what the next level suspected to be.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2014)

A bit baffling, this, from the Daily Vile, as I can't see where it's originally reported.


> Police were told a Cabinet minister and prominent MPs were abusing children 26 years ago at a block of luxury flats used by politicians but nothing was done, a senior MP revealed yesterday.
> 
> Fears of a cover-up of an Establishment paedophile ring deepened last night as an MP said he handed over evidence in 1988 of ‘abuse parties’ at Dolphin Square and other London locations, but an investigation was shelved by Scotland Yard.
> 
> ...



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...buse-Scotland-Yard-investigation-shelved.html


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 17, 2014)

Noel Edmonds speaks


> TV host Noel Edmonds believes the Royal Family and Margaret Thatcher were as much to blame as the BBC for failing to stop Jimmy Savile’s “unspeakable” crimes.
> 
> Edmonds, who worked with Savile at the Corporation, said the whole establishment was implicated for allowing the paedophile DJ to flourish.
> 
> ...


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-royal-family-margaret-thatcher-4641034

Blimey.


----------



## Betsy (Nov 17, 2014)

*From Twitter*

*John Mann MP*  @JohnMannMP     ·   5h 5 hours ago 
At least one former MP being investigated for child abuse is employing Political insiders for PR 'advice'

 *John Mann MP*  @JohnMannMP     ·   5h 5 hours ago 
Some of those accused of child abuse are paying a lot of money for PR and lobbying

 *John Mann MP*  @JohnMannMP     ·   6h 6 hours ago 
Two more Notts child abuse victims came forward at my surgeries last week as did a name already given to me over Dolphin Square/ Saville.

 *John Mann MP*  @JohnMannMP     ·    Nov 14 
Met inquiry into Lambeth child abuse murder. Reported to police several times over the last year


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 17, 2014)

...loking back through the files seems reasonable to assume these latest murder revelations tie back to the Sidney Cooke stuff...


*The net closes: Ex-Tory chief faces child sex arrest over claims girl was raped and boys were abused

Feb 16, 2013 22:30 By Justin Penrose*

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-tory-faces-child-sex-1714162

Police are preparing to arrest a former Tory Cabinet minister after a woman came forward to claim she had been raped by him as a girl.

Detectives are also investigating claims that he abused boys.

*We can reveal that the former minister is suspected of being part of a VIP paedophile ring that was regularly handed boys by child rapist and killer Sidney Cooke for vile sex orgies.*

The former high-ranking MP, who we cannot name, is under investigation by Scotland Yard’s paedophile unit.


...still "preparing" obviously...forgot one of the MP's was a woman...( allegedly )


*Female MP abused boy in care*

A FORMER female MP was involved in a paedophile network at the heart of government, police have been told.

By: James FieldingPublished: Sun, January 12, 2014

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/453381/Female-MP-abused-boy-in-care

She is alleged to have forced a boy in care to perform a “vile”  sex act at one of a series of drug-fuelled parties in Westminster in the Eighties where boys and girls as young as 13 were allegedly abused.

Last night her alleged victim told the Sunday Express: “I want justice.”

Andrew Ash, now 45, said he has given Scotland Yard the name of the former MP. We cannot name her for legal reasons.

Mr Ash claims he was frequently ferried down to London from the North of England, where he was in care, to take part in sex parties.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

List of former female mp's in the 1980's. 

http://www.qub.ac.uk/cawp/UK bios/UK_bios_80s.htm


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Noel Edmonds speaks
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-royal-family-margaret-thatcher-4641034
> 
> Blimey.



It does raise questions about MI5 and vetting procedures for hanging around with Royals and being given keys to Broadmoor. Media not so keen on that angle.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

Didn't MI5 had an office at the BBC and vetted all presenters etc back in the 80's?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

Drip, drip, drip.... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...buse-Scotland-Yard-investigation-shelved.html



> Police were told a Cabinet minister and prominent MPs were abusing children 26 years ago at a block of luxury flats used by politicians but nothing was done, a senior MP revealed yesterday.
> 
> Fears of a cover-up of an Establishment paedophile ring deepened last night as an MP said he handed over evidence in 1988 of ‘abuse parties’ at Dolphin Square and other London locations, but an investigation was shelved by Scotland Yard.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

Incidentally the most voted comment (720 times) in the above article is this:



> Jon Cooper, Cornwall, a day ago
> 
> I don't know why anybody is having a hard time believing this? it's very well known the best way to get people in power to do what they are told is to have some terrible secret held over them.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Nov 18, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Didn't MI5 had an office at the BBC and vetted all presenters etc back in the 80's?



*THE BLACKLIST IN ROOM 105*


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 18, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Didn't MI5 had an office at the BBC and vetted all presenters etc back in the 80's?


This?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/7777548/BBC-wanted-more-vetting-from-MI5.html


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

Thanks. Interesting piece. So either:

1. MI5 were inept and had no idea about Savile's behaviour.
2. They knew about Savile but decided not to do anything about it.
3. Something else....


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 18, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Thanks. Interesting piece. So either:
> 
> 1. MI5 were inept and had no idea about Savile's behaviour.
> 2. They knew about Savile but decided not to do anything about it.
> 3. Something else....


The Room 105 vetting involved the weeding out of potential lefties, not much more than that. Savile would not, I imagine, be on the radar.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 18, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Thanks. Interesting piece. So either:
> 
> 1. MI5 were inept and had no idea about Savile's behaviour.
> 2. They knew about Savile but decided not to do anything about it.
> 3. Something else....


 
Something else...knew about Saville and some of what they knew was very useful to them?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

MI5 don't vet people who spend 30+ years in Royal circles and hang around with Prime Ministers? Maybe not, maybe he'd been around so long they didn't continue to check him and were unaware of the ongoing gossip.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Something else...knew about Saville and some of what they knew was very useful to them?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



Jimmy Savile a 'spook'? It sounds ridiculous I admit. But he did know an awful lot about an awful lot of people.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 18, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Jimmy Savile a 'spook'? It sounds ridiculous I admit. But he did know an awful lot about an awful lot of people.


 
Not he's a spook but he knew stuff which was of more use to spooks being kept quiet than him being pursued....anyway this is all just wild speculation on my part...I  just have a gut feeling that there is next to nothing that a security service can't countenance keeping quiet under the guise of protecting the national interest.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

From last year.



> The former officer said: “It was clear a cover-up had taken place.
> 
> “The investigation showed that[Sidney] Cooke would pick up rent boys and take them back to flats or garages where large groups of men were waiting to abuse them.
> 
> ...



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-tory-faces-child-sex-1714162


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2014)

With the info currently in the public domain, linking recent murder revelations with the Sidney Cooke stories is understandable and might be the right link to make.  Might not though, or the overlap between groups may be on a lesser level than it is tempting to think.

I find it somewhat hard to keep thinking about all this stuff with the present level of detail, although I remain very happy that a couple of sections of the press are able to find stuff to keep running with. If the police investigations don't show signs of getting somewhere by this time next year I can't see me maintaining the tune I've been humming in this thread so far though.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 18, 2014)

Betsy said:


> Think this has only just gone on-line.....
> 
> _*Leon Brittan was given second paedophile dossier*
> 
> ...



Perhaps worth bumping this post as a reminder they've lost two Dickens dossiers, not one.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 18, 2014)

Top of the Tele...


> The father of an eight-year-old boy murdered in the 1980s claims that his son may have died at the hands of a Westminster paedophile ring - and that Scotland Yard helped “cover up” the crime.
> 
> Vishambar Mehrotra, a retired magistrate, recorded a male prostitute saying in a telephone call that his son may have been abducted and taken to a now notorious guesthouse in 1981.
> 
> He took the recording to police at the time but claims they refused to investigate an allegation implicating “judges and politicians”. Mr Mehrotra said it had been a “huge cover-up”.





> He added: “I recorded the whole 15-minute conversation and took it to police. But instead of investigating it, they just pooh-poohed it and I never heard anything about the tape again. The whole thing went cold.
> 
> “At that time I trusted the police. But when nothing happened, I became confused and concerned.
> 
> ...


----------



## Betsy (Nov 18, 2014)

Deleted post.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 19, 2014)

From the Telegraph article that brogdale quoted above, disturbing details of another missing boy: 





> Martin’s brother said on Tuesday that police should reopen the investigation into the teenager’s disappearance. Kevin Allen, 51, said he had always suspected a cover-up after police told him all the case files had been lost in a freak flood.


I dunno - freak flood, freak fire - this re North Wales:


> 21.79 The other complaints of physical abuse have been so diffuse that, in general, it would
> be invidious to single out individuals. Thus, of the 49 members of staff referred to in paragraph
> 21.58, 31 were named by only one complainant and a further nine by only two or three. *An
> additional problem has been the absence of any Community records of most of their residents
> ...


*Lost in Care*
Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into the Abuse of Children in Care in the Former County Council Areas of Gwynedd and Clwyd since 1974
--
More on the Lightfoot Street fire at the Needle


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 19, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Perhaps worth bumping this post as a reminder they've lost two Dickens dossiers, not one.



Also remember that Leon Brittan's Private Secratary, who Leon Britan said he gave the dossier to, was Sir Brian Cubbon. A man with links to MI5 & MI6 and the person responsible for putting through requests to tap CND members phones in the 80's.

All roads lead to MI5.

Edit: Cubbon is currently a member of the  Charter Compliance Panel of the Press Complaints Commission


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 19, 2014)

its almost like its one big cosy club of cunts ....


----------



## elbows (Nov 19, 2014)

One of the problems I have with the Dickens dossiers, is we've actually got no idea how packed with high-profile names they actually were, or in what context. He was not short on hyperbole at times, and yet he also didn't complain publicly that nothing had been done with the dossiers.

The Barabara Casle dossier interests me more because at least we have one person making specific claims about how many political names were in it (16).

Speaking of which, I had missed this story from a week ago that police are searching the Castle archives at the Bodleian library. However I'm a bit confused because they said Don Hale made claims this week (but the claims I read were a good while ago) and they say its the Dickens Dossier they are searching for, and previously I didn't have much clue about the extent of any overlap between the Dickens Dossier(s) and the one Hale said Castle gave him. But since the subject appears to be focussed on PIE supporters,perhaps Dickens was the source for the stuff Castle passed on after all. I will try to fill in some gaps now, though I don't expect to find much.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ssier-on-alleged-child-sex-abuse-9857200.html


----------



## elbows (Nov 19, 2014)

Not much to add accept an ITV piece put it more clearly than that independent article.

http://www.itv.com/news/granada/201...mps-library-searched-in-hunt-for-abuse-files/



> The 'Castle Dossier' was produced just 12 months after the 'Dickens Dossier' was handed to the Home Office by former Littleborough and Saddleworth MP Geoffrey Dickens. He believed high profile figures in Westminster and other areas of public life were abusing children.
> 
> It's a belief Barbara Castle shared. She campaigned tirelessly against paedophilia and child abuse, and had asked numerous Home Secretaries what had happened to the 'Dickens Dossier'.
> 
> ...


----------



## Celyn (Nov 20, 2014)

It doesn't seem as though the people in possession of cunts are the main problem.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 20, 2014)

huh


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 20, 2014)

Jim Hood names Leon Britain as kiddy fiddler in Parliament.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 20, 2014)

You can understand why people believe in conspiracy theories with shit like this going on


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 20, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Jim Hood names Leon Britain as kiddy fiddler in Parliament.



Hood did no such thing - he said there were accusations against him.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 20, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> You can understand why people believe in conspiracy theories with shit like this going on



Lord Boothby was having an affair with Ronnie Kray in the 60's. Lord Boothby liked rent boys. So did Ronnie Kray - he had a few 'under his wing'. Tom Driberg MP & MI5 spy was also friends with Ronnie Kray. The Mirror got whiff of an enquiry by Scotland Yard into Boothby and Kray and ran the story - just after the policeman in charge had told top officials that there 'was no enquiry'. All this just after the Profumo scandal.

The Mirror was forced to retract the story and pay damages. Boothby said,



> I have never been to all-male parties in Mayfair. I have met the man alleged to be King of the Underworld (Ron Kray) only three times, on business matters. I am not, and never have been, homosexual.'



According to Christine Keeler in her book Boothby had,


> a "penchant was for rubbing himself, while naked, up against their private parts".



Here's Boothby, Kray and Leslie Holt (rent boy, croupier and east end cat burglar)







All a conspiracy theory - if you lived back in the day...


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 20, 2014)

Boothby was well connected all over the place in the 60s.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 21, 2014)

Update from Tom Watson.

https://medium.com/@tom_watson/a-quick-update-on-the-child-abuse-inquiry-8b1a422ce199


----------



## laptop (Nov 21, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Update from Tom Watson.
> 
> https://medium.com/@tom_watson/a-quick-update-on-the-child-abuse-inquiry-8b1a422ce199



And the payload, for those who don't follow links or read beyond the first par if they do:




			
				Tom Watson said:
			
		

> The worst thing that those campaigning for justice could do is allow their comments or private thoughts to stand up stories that make headlines in newspapers but do not assist the police with their inquiries.
> 
> The new allegations are more serious than anything previously reported. Campaigners should proceed with caution, keeping their critical faculties alert at all times. Above all, beware of reporters looking for easy headlines.


----------



## 1%er (Nov 21, 2014)

Michael Shrimpton QC in court yesterday charged with making Bomb hoax calls (He is a specialist in National Security and Constitutional Law, Strategic Intelligence and Counter-terrorism, he was formerly an Adjunct Professor of Intelligence Studies in what was then the Department of National Security, Intelligence and Space Studies at the American Military University, teaching intelligence subjects at Masters level to inter alia serving intelligence officers).

Shrimpton telephoned Philip Hammond who was then the Defence Secretary just before the London Olympics to tell him that a bomb stolen from a sunken Russian submarine had been smuggled into the country and could be used to blow up the opening ceremony of the London Olympics and kill the Queen.

In his 2014 book called Spyhunter: The Secret History of German Intelligence he made a number of claims: 
This from Chapter 25 The 1970s The Heath Government:

Britain has had some dodgy Prime Ministers, but few have been dodgier, or grumpier, than Sir Edward Heath. The old curmudgeon was an exception to the rule that spies should be charming, intel-speak for disarming. He had allies of course, not just in the government, Tony Barber being the foremost, but in the Cabinet Office. In 1973 he arranged for the appointment of Lord Normanbrook’s old Private Secretary, Sir John Hunt, later Lord Hunt of Tamworth, as Cabinet Secretary. A paedophile, like Heath himself, Hunt was the fifth German spy, and the first Catholic, to be made Cabinet Secretary. The paedophile ring which supplied teenage boys to them both was coordinated by a Leeds nightclub operator turned BBC disc-jockey, Jimmy Savile. Savile’s involvement in paedophilia was suppressed by the BBC and the Cabinet Office for decades, for political reasons. They weren’t protecting Savile so much as Heath and Hunt. Other names may emerge in due course. At the time of writing the police are busily engaged in arresting every celebrity they can find, including Rolf Harris, in the hope of diverting attention from Number 10 and the Cabinet Office. A strong supporter of EEC membership, John Hunt played a key role in rigging the result of the 1975 referendum on withdrawal from the EEC.

[Is he a friend of David Icke? It's a funny old world full of strange fish  lol ]


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

I'm not entirely sure what the point of posting Shrimptons words here are supposed to be. In any case he has form for blaming German intelligence for a host of terrorist attacks including the Brighton bombing, 9/11 and Pan Am Flight 103, along with a load of drivel about Madeleine McCann. And he must have been banging on about Heath etc before 2014 as there are various similar quotes from at least 2013 if not earlier to be found on the web.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

1%er said:


> ...In his 2014 book called Spyhunter: The Secret History of German Intelligence he made a number of claims:
> This from Chapter 25 The 1970s The Heath Government:
> 
> Britain has had some dodgy Prime Ministers, but few have been dodgier, or grumpier, than Sir Edward Heath. The old curmudgeon was an exception to the rule that spies should be charming, intel-speak for disarming. He had allies of course, not just in the government, Tony Barber being the foremost, but in the Cabinet Office. In 1973 he arranged for the appointment of Lord Normanbrook’s old Private Secretary, Sir John Hunt, later Lord Hunt of Tamworth, as Cabinet Secretary. A paedophile, like Heath himself, Hunt was the fifth German spy, and the first Catholic, to be made Cabinet Secretary. The paedophile ring which supplied teenage boys to them both was coordinated by a Leeds nightclub operator turned BBC disc-jockey, Jimmy Savile. Savile’s involvement in paedophilia was suppressed by the BBC and the Cabinet Office for decades, for political reasons. They weren’t protecting Savile so much as Heath and Hunt. Other names may emerge in due course. At the time of writing the police are busily engaged in arresting every celebrity they can find, including Rolf Harris, in the hope of diverting attention from Number 10 and the Cabinet Office. A strong supporter of EEC membership, John Hunt played a key role in rigging the result of the 1975 referendum on withdrawal from the EEC.
> ...



He does come across as a little OTT, but every pebble hits the beach, as they say..

The Express did report back in January (and Exaro i think but cant find link) thanks to Andrew Ash who was abused at Dolphin Square parties, that they were organised by a paedophile ring involving David Smith, Jimmy Savile’s former chauffeur, who killed himself last year before he was due to stand trial for sex offences.




> He says they were organised by a paedophile ring involving David Smith, Jimmy Savile’s former chauffeur who killed himself last year before he was due to stand trial for sex offences.
> 
> He said: “It wasn’t just politicians, there were also a number of celebrities, including Jimmy Savile, who seemed to have a lot of good links to MPs and powerful businessmen.



Another report suggests that people were filmed coming in and out of the building where boys were dropped off, but that no prosecutions ever came about.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

Im curious as to how they are going to play this one. People have come forward and spoken to police, yet there's still been no high profile arrests, despite footage having been found of prominent MP's  at said parties and the boys they abused identifying them 30 years later. 

Im sure they are discussing which people to throw to the wolves and how much they can say without it all going tits up. Personally i feel the cover up is still going on.We've Special Branch pretending to be journalists and MI5 officers sitting in on Met interviews with victims. It still stinks.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> He does come across as a little OTT, but every pebble hits the beach, as they say..



A little OTT? In addition to the idiotic theories I already mentioned, he was popular with birthers for a while due to some gimpstain theory about the CIA DNA testing Obama and failing to match him with certain relatives.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2014)

He's a joke who can only do damage.  People should know better by now.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

True, he's bonkers - but my point still stands that his comment about Savile being involved in a paedophile ring involving top politicians wasnt so far off the mark. By luck or judgement.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> He's a joke who can only do damage.  People should know better by now.



Which people?


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> True, he's bonkers - but my point still stands that his comment about Savile being involved in a paedophile ring involving top politicians wasnt so far off the mark. By luck or judgement.



You must have seen some evidence I haven't then, because for me political paedophile ring Savile links are FAR from established.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Which people?


The person who posted it with no comment and you for taking it seriously. If we're going to post up just any old loons claims then why are we not posting the filth from icke and other places? Because we're supposed to be doing something a bit more critical than that aren't we?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

elbows said:


> You must have seen some evidence I haven't then, because  political paedophile ring Savile links are FAR from established.



I didnt say it was established (although im not sure how you decide when something is 'established' or not) - i said his comment was on similar lines as the evidence given by victim Andrew Ash who has said that Jimmy Savile was at sex parties with MP's and VIP's and that his chauffeur David Smith was the person involved in the procuring of young boys.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> True, he's bonkers - but my point still stands that his comment about Savile being involved in a paedophile ring involving top politicians wasnt so far off the mark. By luck or judgement.


So, in 2014 he made a claim that many others have made before him  - and this one is supposed to stand out how and why? What makes it different from some bloke down the pub mouthing off?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I didnt say it was established (although im not sure how you decide when something is 'established' or not) - i said his comment was on similar lines as the evidence given by victim Andrew Ash who has said that Jimmy Savile was at sex parties with MP's and VIP's and that his chauffeur David Smith was the person involved in the procuring of young boys.


His book was published _after _andrew ash made the claim. Maybe he was quite aware of the slew of allegations and decided to use some of them? Really.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> The person who posted it with no comment and you for taking it seriously. If we're going to post up just any old loons claims then why are we not posting the filth from icke and other places? Because we're supposed to be doing something a bit more critical than that aren't we?



I didnt take it seriously. I simply pointed out that the comment about Savile being in a paedophile ring was similar to evidence given by a victim. That is all.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> So, in 2014 he made a claim that many others have made before - and this one is supposed to stand out how and why? What makes it different from some bloke down the pub mouthing off?





butchersapron said:


> His book was published _after _andrew ash made the claim. Maybe he was quite aware of the slew of allegations and decided to use some of them? Really.



Maybe so. Jesus, I just pointed out that what he said was similar to something that had been said. Get over yourself. Im not wasting any more time with you, life's too fucking short.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I didnt take it seriously. I simply pointed out that the comment about Savile being in a paedophile ring was similar to evidence given by a victim. That is all.



...and that _every pebble hits the beach._ As you would expect given all the claims he made were already publicly made by others previously. That's not what we would think of as corroborating really is it? I could repeat the exact same claims right now and it wouldn't add a single thing to the weight of those claims.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Maybe so. Jesus, I just pointed out that what he said was similar to something that had been said. Get over yourself. Im not wasting any more time with you, life's too fucking short.


Why don't you just do some basic fact checking? Why don't you take this seriously? It's a serious business.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

Because Butchers, unlike you, other people make mistakes.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Thing is the conspiracy idiot QC's suggestion wasn't just that Savile was in a ring, it was that he coordinated it.

Savile certainly fancied himself as a fixer and loved to mix with powerful people and make use of any power that came from such contacts. But given the very large number of Savile victims who have come forwards, I kinda would have hoped that if he had lots of links to political paedophile rings, parties, etc, more victims of political paedophiles would have come forwards than has been the case so far. Don't get me wrong, I don't rule anything out, especially as Savile seemed to have more than one modus operandi when it came to abusing kids. But on the face of it the one he is most associated with isn't a brilliant fit for the sort of impression of paedophile party abuse we have gleaned so far.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Plus when considering evidence of who was at parties where abuse took place, we have to be careful about our impressions of the 'party format'. We are probably dealing with more than one scene, different sizes of parties, and some parties where paedophilia was not the central theme, but rather something a subsection of guests were involved with, with varying degrees of blatancy.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 21, 2014)

elbows said:


> But given the very large number of Savile victims who have come forwards, I kinda would have hoped that if he had lots of links to political paedophile rings, parties, etc, more victims of political paedophiles would have come forwards than has been the case so far.



Tv faces & celebs would have been easy to remember, MP's not so. Could that be a determining factor?


----------



## 1%er (Nov 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> What makes it different from some bloke down the pub mouthing off?


Something you'd know about more than most.

You seem to like appointing yourself as thread policeman, butcherspetticoat the ultimate arbiter


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

elbows said:


> Thing is the conspiracy idiot QC's suggestion wasn't just that Savile was in a ring, it was that he coordinated it.
> 
> Savile certainly fancied himself as a fixer and loved to mix with powerful people and make use of any power that came from such contacts. But given the very large number of Savile victims who have come forwards, I kinda would have hoped that if he had lots of links to political paedophile rings, parties, etc, more victims of political paedophiles would have come forwards than has been the case so far. Don't get me wrong, I don't rule anything out, especially as Savile seemed to have more than one modus operandi when it came to abusing kids. But on the face of it the one he is most associated with isn't a brilliant fit for the sort of impression of paedophile party abuse we have gleaned so far.



It was said that Savile's driver was said to be the person 'fixing the boys' for people. It should be noted that Smith had already been convicted of various offences back in the 1960's. Savile couldnt _have not known_ about what his driver was up to, so if the victim is not mistaking David Smith's and Jimmy Savile's identity, its safe to assume that he had some knowledge of what was going on re: supplying of boys to VIP's and MP's. No, it doesn't mean he was the 'kingpin' - but it would surely be enough to suggest he was involved in a paedophile ring?


----------



## laptop (Nov 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Why don't you just do some basic fact checking? Why don't you take this seriously? It's a serious business.



True. People who aren't prepared to think about the difference between corroboration and mindless repetition muddy the waters in _precisely _the way that Tom Watson warns against.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

Ok, im sorry. Please move on you're not doing my anxiety disorder any good. Ill be taking an extra tablet tonight!


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> It was said that Savile's driver was said to be the person 'fixing the boys' for people. It should be noted that Smith had already been convicted of various offences back in the 1960's. Savile couldnt _have not known_ about what his driver was up to, so if the victim is not mistaking David Smith's and Jimmy Savile's identity, its safe to assume that he had some knowledge of what was going on re: supplying of boys to VIP's and MP's. No, it doesn't mean he was the 'kingpin' - but it would surely be enough to suggest he was involved in a paedophile ring?



It's on my list to look at him further, including studying all his prior convictions, which appear to  number 22 and includes ones in the 1980's. If he was a fixer for powerful people, they didn't stop him being convicted on multiple occasions. When linking him to Savile we also have to consider the time period that he was actually Savile's driver, associate etc. I am too ill informed at the present moment to continue in this direction, but I will return to it when better prepared.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Ok, im sorry. Please move on you're not doing my anxiety disorder any good. Ill be taking an extra tablet tonight!



If it makes you feel any better at all, consider that any particular desire to hose this thread down right now might also be due to a variety of other things having been posted here with increased frequency in more recent times by people other than you. Stuff that may make a few of us feel the need to unjoin some of the more poorly joined dots to say the least.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 21, 2014)

Perhaps there should be a separate "Most hilarious paedophile conspiracy theories" thread some of the bullshit could be consigned to. Or perhaps a separate  thread about the resurgent homophobic and antisemitic smears that seem to have originated in Tory Party factional infighting in the 1980s and are now floating to the surface, like rancid turds, as 'evidence of the konspiracy'.

In the meantime my 'nudge nudge, wink wink' detector appears to be on the blink - what do Tom Driberg, Lord Boothby and Ronnie Kray have in common beyond being unpleasant characters and reportedly engaging in gay sex ? And what have they to do with paedophile rings ? Or am I supposed to have just answered my own question ?


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

My research on 'Saviles driver' came to an abrupt end when it became clear that nobody could work out if he had ever formally worked for the BBC, and there were repeated suggestions that he had not actually been a driver for Savile. I have hazy memories that there may be some other link between him and Savile, but I can't find anything right now, not least because his death dominates the search results.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Perhaps there should be a separate "Most hilarious paedophile conspiracy theories" thread some of the bullshit could be consigned to. Or perhaps a separate  thread about the resurgent homophobic and antisemitic smears that seem to have originated in Tory Party factional infighting in the 1980s and are now floating to the surface, like rancid turds, as 'evidence of the konspiracy'.



I've brought this side of things up on various occasions, including one of the only times I've ever felt the need to backup something that David Cameron was getting at (when faced with Philip Schofields list if I recall). Factors such as the size of the tory 'gay closet' during the period in question, and the evolution of the age of consent, are further ingredients of the horrid brew you are describing there, and that stuff was what Camerons insufficient daytime tv soundbite about a gay witch-hunt was getting at.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

Lurdan said:


> Perhaps there should be a separate "Most hilarious paedophile conspiracy theories" thread some of the bullshit could be consigned to. Or perhaps a separate  thread about the resurgent homophobic and antisemitic smears that seem to have originated in Tory Party factional infighting in the 1980s and are now floating to the surface, like rancid turds, as 'evidence of the konspiracy'.
> 
> In the meantime my 'nudge nudge, wink wink' detector appears to be on the blink - what do Tom Driberg, Lord Boothby and Ronnie Kray have in common beyond being unpleasant characters and reportedly engaging in gay sex ? And what have they to do with paedophile rings ? Or am I supposed to have just answered my own question ?



It was just an attempt to show that what is 'untrue' at the time can be true 50 year later.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

I thought this interesting as the quote I remember seeing on here and elsewhere is usually a little shorter and missing the names included on the same page. Those of Norman Tebbitt and the snippet about Teresa Gorman's agent...  

Edwina Currie's diary entry re: Sir Peter Morrison,






The same Norman Tebbitt who fairly recently commented,



> "At that time I think most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected and if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system than to delve too far into it.
> 
> "That view, I think, was wrong then and it is spectacularly shown to be wrong because the abuses have grown."
> 
> Asked if he thought there had been a "big political cover-up" at the time, he said: "I think there may well have been. But it was almost unconscious. It was the thing that people did at that time."


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 21, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> It was just an attempt to show that what is 'untrue' at the time can be true 50 year later.


If only I had another 50 years. However my reaction to a lot of this stuff is 'just kill me now'.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2014)

elbows said:


> My research on 'Saviles driver' came to an abrupt end when it became clear that nobody could work out if he had ever formally worked for the BBC, and there were repeated suggestions that he had not actually been a driver for Savile. I have hazy memories that there may be some other link between him and Savile, but I can't find anything right now, not least because his death dominates the search results.



Curiously there's this about Ray Teret....


----------



## Zabo (Nov 22, 2014)

Today's Guardian

"The security services are facing questions over the cover-up of a Westminster paedophile ring as it emerged that files relating to official requests for media blackouts in the early 1980s were destroyed.

Two newspaper executives have told the _Observer_ that their publications were issued with D-notices – warnings not to publish intelligence that might damage national security – when they sought to report on allegations of a powerful group of men engaging in child sex abuse in 1984. One executive said he had been accosted in his office by 15 uniformed and two non-uniformed police over a dossier on Westminster paedophiles passed to him by the former Labour cabinet minister Barbara Castle.

Cyril Smith bullied his way into my office. I thought he was going to punch me. He was sweating and aggressive and wanted to take the files away saying it was a load of nonsense and that Barbara Castle just had a bee in her bonnet about homosexuals. I refused to give him the files.

The very next day two non-uniformed officers, about 15 uniformed officers and another non-uniformed person who didn’t introduce himself, came to the office waving a D-notice and said that I would be damaging national security if I reported on the file.”

Full text

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/22/media-gagged-westminster-child-abuse-ring


----------



## Sirena (Nov 22, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Curiously there's this about Ray Teret....


I remember his shows on Radio Caroline.  Three o'clock in the afternoon, they were the highlight of my young days...


----------



## brogdale (Nov 22, 2014)

Exaro report Operation Midland's trawl through 200+ missing boys from the 70's/80's...






...and...

this...





Jesus.

Keeping up the good work.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 23, 2014)

> The worst thing that those campaigning for justice could do is allow their comments or private thoughts to stand up stories that make headlines in newspapers but do not assist the police with their inquiries.
> 
> The new allegations are more serious than anything previously reported. Campaigners should proceed with caution, keeping their critical faculties alert at all times. Above all, beware of reporters looking for easy headlines.



I sort of assumed this story was floated by the investigation to try & get some more witnesses to come forward to help corroborate “Nick”s story


..we know Savile did connect to Cyril Smith…

Pair met at a medieval banquet in Worsley, Greater Manchester
In 1973, Smith appeared on Savile's TV show Clunk Click
Savile later appeared with Smith in a Liberal Party political broadcast

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-position-access-young-boys-Jimmy-Savile.html

…..and Smith to Peter Righton….

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-victim-links-notorious-paedophile-1815932

…and Cyril was acting as the network’s enforcer – rushing around confiscating dossiers as & when required…presumably a pretty intimidating presence when in a bad mood….

…2 sources place him at Elm Guest House …..David Issett and a boy who worked there Danczuk tracked down….

…when you start mapping it out you can join David Steel to Smith, Ian Campbell Dunn & Peter Hayman…to Clegg ( bit of a dotted line that one )…who links to Brittan..it just goes on & on…



…as regards deep historical background…how horribly resonant is this…

The super-cop who busted London's child brothels


….one evening in 1882, he met a woman called Mary Jeffries, who told him proudly about the brothels she owned and the number of girls she trafficked, adding that no one could touch her as she ‘only did business with gentlemen of the highest rank in life’.
Never one to shirk a challenge, Minahan took to hanging around outside her brothels watching these gentlemen of the highest rank coming and going - and writing everything down in his notebook.
The first inkling that this might not be a great career move came when his notebook was stolen from his locked desk.
When Minahan reported what he’d witnessed to his superior officer, he was transferred again - this time to the even more distant suburb of Highgate. He was demoted to sergeant and had his pay cut in half.

Minahan decided that he’d had enough. He offered his resignation and appealed directly to the Home Secretary, Sir William Harcourt. What Minahan didn’t know was that Harcourt, even by Victorian standards, was a colossally creepy pervert - he’s believed to have had an incestuous gay relationship with his own son.
Not only that, he was one of Mrs Jeffries’ most regular customers.
Harcourt, predictably enough, told him to get lost - whereupon ‘the black cloak of vengeance settled upon the broad bones of Jeremiah’s shoulders’, as O’Donnell puts it in her distinctively florid way.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2014)

That degree of dot joining allows everyone on the planet to be linked to everyone else.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2014)

The D-notice story interests me. I've often complained when the term is used as shorthand for a range of things, or it is extremely lazily assumed by some that whenever there are rumours about someone that the press won't touch at a particular moment, it simply must be because of a D-Notice or a super-injunction. Well thats clearly bollocks, but it does not mean the D-Notice system was never abused. 

At the moment it remains unclear to me whether the term is being used properly in the recent stories though, or whether the denials are plausible because it was actually some other mechanism that was used to silence the press in cases such as this. I had previously been thinking on the basis that if you abuse the D-Notice system so blatantly to protect individuals within the establishment, as opposed to using them for reasons of national security that resonate with 'responsible gentlemen of the press', you run the risk of bringing the system into disrepute with the very people you need to keep on-side with it. And that if the truth about this comes out at any point, you've destroyed the 'powerful illusions' about press freedom that go hand in hand with our version of democracy and freedom.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)

In the case of David Hale's story when he was passed Barbara Castle's dossier, it seems whether the D-Notice was real or not, the term was certainly, at least according to him used, alongside his office in Lancashire being raided by London police, to put the creepers up him and stop what he was doing.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> Minahan decided that he’d had enough. He offered his resignation and appealed directly to the Home Secretary, Sir William Harcourt. What Minahan didn’t know was that Harcourt, even by Victorian standards, was a colossally creepy pervert - he’s believed to have had an incestuous gay relationship with his own son.
> Not only that, he was one of Mrs Jeffries’ most regular customers.
> Harcourt, predictably enough, told him to get lost - whereupon ‘the black cloak of vengeance settled upon the broad bones of Jeremiah’s shoulders’, as O’Donnell puts it in her distinctively florid way.



It is actually Harcourts son Loulou who has the best documented record on the paedophilia front:



> If the outward trappings of Loulou's life and career were conventional, the private side was less so. The Harcourts were an apparently contented couple with a son and two daughters, but Loulou's true romantic and sexual interests lay elsewhere. He was an enthusiastic practising paedophile, absorbed by children of both sexes. A great friend was Reginald (Reggie) Brett, 2nd Viscount Esher, Edwardian eminence grise and professional confidant - not least - of the King, as well as many prominent politicians. They saw much of each other: Reggie was Secretary to the Board of Works while Loulou was Commissioner. Reggie shared his friend's sexual tastes but preferred boys to girls. He had a long affair with his own second son, Maurice, who also supplied a number of Eton schoolfriends. Loulou also seduced Maurice, as well as Reggie's young daughter Dorothy (the "Brett" of DH Lawrence), putting her off men for life. (Loulou was not a physically attractive man; many found him repulsive.)
> 
> Reggie became concerned about his friend, believing his indiscretion and high public profile might lead to eventual exposure. Both men were Fellows of Eton, and, according to James Lees Milne's excellent biography of Esher, The Enigmatic Edwardian (1986), boys there were warned to avoid taking walks alone with either Lord Harcourt or Lord Esher.
> 
> ...



From a long piece at http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/scandals-in-the-house-1579987.html


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 23, 2014)

elbows said:


> That degree of dot joining allows everyone on the planet to be linked to everyone else.



...true, which was sort of what was on my mind but contrariwise how else do you try to understand the morphology of a network of individuals....


----------



## laptop (Nov 23, 2014)

elbows said:


> That degree of dot joining allows everyone on the planet to be linked to everyone else.



I'm sure I've met people who've met Savile. And you've "met" me. Be very afraid!


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...true, which was sort of what was on my mind but contrariwise how else do you try to understand the morphology of a network of individuals....



Nick Clegg is closer to Leon Brittan than I am to you, but that doesn't mean Nick Clegg is dodgy, well not in that sense of the word any way  Whether you could link David Steel to Cyril Smith by virtue of not only knowing him but turning a blind eye to his interest in abusing young boys is slightly more tangible, although still unproven.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> In the case of David Hale's story when he was passed Barbara Castle's dossier, it seems whether the D-Notice was real or not, the term was certainly, at least according to him used, alongside his office in Lancashire being raided by London police, to put the creepers up him and stop what he was doing.



Indeed, and I am quite willing to eliminate my previous assumptions, although I'm sure we'll still have to face people using the term inappropriately in future.

Sadly its a Mail article which spells out the Hale D-Notice stuff in the most detail, but I'll have to link to it anyway as its important:



> At this point, the officer produced a document, signed by a judge. It showed that his previous remark about not printing the story had not been a request, but an order. The document handed to Hale was a D-notice — a relic of wartime censorship that could be served on newspaper editors, allowing the Government to block any story that threatened national security.
> 
> ‘If you don’t comply with this notice, we will arrest you for perverting the course of justice,’ the detective barked. ‘You will be liable for up to ten years in prison.’



( http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...paedophile-lobby-s-influence-Westminster.html )


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 23, 2014)

elbows said:


> It is actually Harcourts son Loulou who has the best documented record on the paedophilia front:
> 
> 
> 
> From a long piece at http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/scandals-in-the-house-1579987.html




a book for the list,ta



> The House appointed a committee (in the way that, as you may note, the House always does)



indeed


----------



## laptop (Nov 23, 2014)

laptop said:


> I'm sure I've met people who've met Savile. And you've "met" me. Be very afraid!



And I've also met a past Secretary of the D-Notice Committee - an affable Admiral. So you're a spook too.

As I've said before, there are only a handful of formal D-Notices. Those I've seen forbid reporting such stuff as anything about GCHQ (ha!) and the whereabouts of named Soviet defectors.

It's possible that the cops were delivering a letter from the Secretary of the Committee - a different thing. Or just some flimflam that _looked_ like such a letter.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2014)

Anyways one of the biggest discrepancies with the D-Notice stuff is whether its a legal thing which would be signed by a judge and carry the risk of perverting the course of justice if ignored. Nearly everything I've read in the past suggests it was an informal thing that editors mostly went along with for reasons other than the legal.

For example the wikipedia entry for the 1967 D-Notice affair is a reasonable start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-notice_affair

In the absence of further explanation, I am inclined right now to assume that the term D-Notice may have been used as a broader term to refer to more than just the work of the actual D-Notice committee.


----------



## laptop (Nov 23, 2014)

laptop said:


> It's possible that the cops were delivering a letter from the Secretary of the Committee - a different thing. Or just some flimflam that _looked_ like such a letter.



Indeed:




			
				Guardian said:
			
		

> A spokesman for the D-notice system said: “If Don Hale was ‘served’ with anything purporting to be a ‘D-notice’, it was quite obviously a fabrication.”



It is possible that the Secretary spokesman is not lying.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)

Although if you like a game of join the dots....

You might remember that Colin Peters (Former Foreign Officer Barrister) was a name on the Elm Tree guesthouse list. He was convicted of sex offences and running a paedophile ring back in 1989 along with other men.

Curiously there is this FOI attempt to release information about his arrest along with another man, Alistair Laing, back in 1967/68 in Naples, when they both worked for HM Diplomatic Service. The record for this piece of information is not due to be opened until January, 2056.

Alistair Laing after leaving the civil service then worked on an art history book with ex-Spy, academic, traitor and art historian, Anthony Blunt. Who co-incidentally is also on the Elm Tree Guesthouse list.

None of them know Jimmy Savile afaik


----------



## laptop (Nov 23, 2014)

elbows said:


> Anyways one of the biggest discrepancies with the D-Notice stuff is whether its a legal thing which would be signed by a judge and carry the risk of perverting the course of justice if ignored.



It's not. It's signed by the Secretary of the Committee.



elbows said:


> Nearly everything I've read in the past suggests it was an informal thing that editors mostly went along with for reasons other than the legal.



It is. Very British informal pressure. Like "signing the Official Secrets Act" - you're bound by it whether you've signed it or not and even if you have failed to discover that it exists.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)

So what is used when then actually lawfully forbid a paper to print something?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)




----------



## brogdale (Nov 23, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


>



Blimey.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)

Jimmy Savile linked to Elm Tree guesthouse

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4855/met-detectives-told-of-jimmy-savile-s-link-to-elm-guest-house


----------



## laptop (Nov 23, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> So what is used when then actually lawfully forbid a paper to print something?



An injunction. From a court. 

(It's a "superinjunction" if it forbids mention of itself.)


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 23, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


>




Good old spanking Harvey Proctor days turned over by News of the Screws - ended up with a shirt shop in Ricchmond.


----------



## ibilly99 (Nov 23, 2014)

_Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them_

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-consultant-House-Commons-lunch-meetings.html


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Good old spanking Harvey Proctor days turned over by News of the Screws - ended up with a shirt shop in Ricchmond.



I suspect we've not heard the last of Mr Proctor.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 23, 2014)

> *Theresa May says sexual abuse claims are tip of iceberg*
> Allegations of child sexual abuse that have emerged so far are only the "tip of the iceberg", Home Secretary Theresa May has said.
> 
> Institutions to protect children "were not doing so", she said, adding that "as a society" we must "get to the truth" about the extent of child abuse.
> ...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30167914


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 23, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


>




Most pertinent for me was "...all sorts of interesting positions in MI6"


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 23, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> _Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them_
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-consultant-House-Commons-lunch-meetings.html



Unbelievable isn't it??


----------



## Belushi (Nov 23, 2014)

ibilly99 said:


> Good old spanking Harvey Proctor days turned over by News of the Screws - ended up with a shirt shop in Ricchmond.



A shirt shop a lot of his MP friends put up the money for http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...se-on-proctors-shop-the-retailer-1445666.html


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 23, 2014)

Not a direct connection, but nauseating enough. I wonder if it will generate as much complaint as a picture of a house with some flags on it.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/top-tory-mp-wines-dines-4677844?ICID=FB_mirror_main


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 23, 2014)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5413/mp-paedophiles-were-untouchables-ex-special-branch-officer


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 24, 2014)

More arrests imminent as more abuse survivors come forward:


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 24, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30167914



May's rhetoric is interesting. It continually places abuse as a *past* problem, even while acknowledging that it still happens. I can't help but think she's constructing a historical and political discourse that lays off blame as heavily as possible on other causes than central government policy and (consistent lack of) funding.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 24, 2014)

> *Westminster paedophile ring: Cop warned brother of missing Martin Allen questions would get him 'hurt'*
> *The brother of a missing teenage boy claims he told a senior policeman that he suspected a top-level cover-up – and was warned: “Stop talking like that, you might get hurt.”*
> 
> *Kevin Allen’s 15-year-old younger brother Martin vanished in November 1979, writes Nick Dorman in the Sunday People.*
> ...



The cops are up to their necks in this shit.


----------



## laptop (Nov 24, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> The cops are up to their necks in this shit.



Maybe. But the quotes as presented don't give me confidence that Kevin is someone with a deep appreciation of just how nearly impossible a missing person inquiry is. 

_*HOW *_has his brother's disappearance "been linked to notorious Elm Guest House in Barnes"?

Maybe they cops are covering up. And maybe Kevin is angry that they don't have magic powers.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 24, 2014)

laptop said:


> Maybe. But the quotes as presented don't give me confidence that Kevin is someone with a deep appreciation of just how nearly impossible a missing person inquiry is.
> 
> _*HOW *_has his brother's disappearance "been linked to notorious Elm Guest House in Barnes"?
> 
> Maybe they cops are covering up. And maybe Kevin is angry that they don't have magic powers.



If Kevin is telling the truth about what he was told it says nothing good about the police; at best it shows them using intimidation to shut up someone making a fuss at worst it points to a really appalling conspiracy. All of this is true whether or not he knows how difficult a missing persons enquiry is.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 24, 2014)

From May this year.



> Murmurings of a paedophile network operating in Suffolk from the 1970s to the 1990s have grown louder over the last five years. Over the last decade there have been a number of investigations in the county into claims of children being abused many years ago.
> 
> [...]
> 
> ...



It's pretty obvious we're looking at a large ring of paedophiles across the UK that were supplying boys not only to other paedophiles working in places of abuse, but also to VIP's, celebrities and politicians. Note that at the time it was (and i paraphrse an article i read but dont have to hand) 'quite common for boys to be moved around the system, from home to home'. Five boys for instance from Birmingham care homes found their way to Haut de le Garenne in Jersey where they were abused. Four of them have been contacted and still live on the island. One has not been found.

Note later in the article mentions of Islington Council which was Margaret Hodge, Stephen Twigg etc., and the massive cover up of abuse that led to the shredding and hiding of documents by the Director of Social Services, Lyn Cusack. We're possibly looking at the likes of Nick Rabet and Bernie Bain, both of whom died before being prosecuted (Both in Thailand where Rabet was arrested for dealing with a suspected 300 children, before he then overdosed). Despite knowing of this the police chose not to request access to Rabet's computer in Thailand which they knew he had used to send e-mails. Abraham Jacob who was Islington's Social Services Senior Care Worker was jailed in 1986 for running a child prostitution racket. He had a previous conviction for indecency, which he didn't disclose at interview. He'd previously worked for Lambeth Social Services.

One of Islington's victims, Demitrious Panton was labelled "a liar and a fanatcist" by Bain, a quote that was then repeated by Margaret Hodge and one which she was later forced to apologise for. Hodge went on to become Labour's 'Children's Minister', with Twigg working under her.Nobody was ever prosecuted, with people moving on into other jobs.

Many people were arrested at the time and dots were joined but where they led meant police either failed to investigated through choice, or were put under severe pressure from those above them not to do so. I suspect that the scale of this will be massive, taking in care homes all over the country and links to paedophile rings in Europe, perhaps especially Amsterdam where paeophiles in the 70's and 80's had a pretty easy life compared to now.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 24, 2014)

laptop said:


> And maybe Kevin is angry that they don't have magic powers.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 24, 2014)

laptop said:


> Maybe they cops are covering up.



jerfink


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 24, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I suspect that the scale of this will be massive, taking in care homes all over the country and links to paedophile rings in Europe, perhaps especially Amsterdam where paeophiles in the 70's and 80's had a pretty easy life compared to now.



...…this 2 year old Daily Star story was one of the first post-Savile Westminster stories iirc…and ahead of the curve…..was broaching the International angle…

”….wealthy men from Belgium….” flying into RAF Northolt to attend orgies..etc

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/279380/TORY-PAEDO-COVER-UP

...covered all the way back on Page 7 of the thread….

…some off the quotes are pretty germane, not to say chilling….

“….The vulnerable teen who spoke to detectives vanished just weeks after blowing the whistle….”

“The married Cabinet minister the boy named held a series of high-level posts in government.
A Whitehall security source said he received extra vetting from MI5 prior to taking up high office after rumours about his private life.”


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 25, 2014)

Excellent interview with a survivor, pretty skeptical about how things are going. Don't be put off that it's Artist Taxi Driver interviewing, he's not shouty in this. Part 2 should be easy to find.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 25, 2014)

...talking of the Daily Star....they ( Don Hale et al ) seem to be putting out some original stuff not just parroting the latest Mail / Mirror articles

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/lat...ed-to-Westminster-politicians-paedophile-ring

By Don Hale / Published 23rd November 2014

Babes In The Wood killer Ronald Jebson worked as a chauffeur ferrying innocent youngsters to be abused at sick orgies, it was claimed.

A former cellmate of Jebson's said the pervert boasted of his role in delivering children to be "auctioned" for abuse by high-ranking officials.

Jebson, now 75, has spent the last 40 years in jail. He was convicted in 1974 of killing a friend's eight-year-old daughter and in 2000 confessed to strangling Susan Blatchford, 11, and her pal Gary Hanlon, 12, in 1970. Their deaths - for years one of Britain's most notorious unsolved cases - became known as the Babes In The Wood case after he left their bodies huddled together in woodland.

The cellmate - known as "Billy" to protect his anonymity - said he is speaking out now due to constant denials of a cover up over a Westminster paedophile ring.

He said he was deliberately placed in the next cell to Jebson on C-Wing in HMP Frankland, near Durham, about 15 years ago, to extract further information about his past.

Billy explained: "I was encouraged to get Jebson to talk about his past in return for favours and protection.

"We got to know each other quite well, and chatted when our cell doors were open. One day, I was being pressed by a screw to get him to talk. He hid around the corner to listen whilst I leant on the doorframe.

"I couldn't believe it when Ronnie started blabbing. He said he worked for a luxury limousine company on the south side of London. He said it was linked to the Westminster set, and claimed they had all sorts of posh cars, including Rolls Royces.

"He said the clients were all well-to-do, prominent people, including politicians, but said they were also paedophiles. Ronnie said many of the victims came from poor backgrounds.

"He said he often collected the children on a Friday and would take them to a large property in Surrey, to London addresses, or to a large house in the country owned by a Lord.

"He would have to collect the kids again and take them back for Monday. He said the parents knew what was happening and were paid huge sums of money.

"One time he said he went to a 'big do' where there were many other chauffeurs downstairs in the kitchen. They were getting something to eat and drink and were told to enjoy themselves.

"He said there were some very influential people there, and although they were told to stay downstairs, he says he was curious and went to have a look. He said it was incredible. All the children were stark naked and only partially covered by small bibs or aprons, and were being auctioned off."

Billy, who said Jebson's driving career was in 1973/74, has been out of jail for more than 10 years, but remains worried about possible reprisals for speaking out.


http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/lat...ed-to-Westminster-politicians-paedophile-ring

By Jerry Lawton / Published 22nd July 2014

Michael McAuliffe, 50, was about to be sentenced over images of child abuse when he offered to co-operate with detectives in return for a lenient jail term.

In a letter to the judge via his lawyers he agreed to blow the whistle on a 1970s VIP paedophile ring.

Judge Peter Benson adjourned sentencing to give detectives a chance to question McAuliffe.

The judge told Bradford Crown Court: “If some good can come out of this we should offer them an opportunity to hear what he might be able to say.”

McAuliffe then shouted from the dock: “The names I have got are...’’

But the judge stopped him and ordered him to be taken to the cells.


...the mention of apron-wearing at upper class orgies sent me rifling through Anthony Summer's Honeytrap fwiw...where he refers to parties organised by a group calling themselves the Steering Wheel Club featuring similalry attired ladies...unlikely to be of any significance but I like filling in background detail...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Nov 26, 2014)

As much as I would like to see everybody who has ever been in a Tory cabinet spending the remainder of their vile lives picking bits of broken glass out of their food in the "Beast Wing" at Belmarsh ...

Are we going to _automatically_ believe every single thing that every one of the people coming forward now as witnesses and survivors says?

I'd think human nature and past experience says _*some*_ of them will be bullshitters.

Also, just for the sake of argument, assuming for a moment that we're _not_ going to believe everything anyone says to confirm the picture of high-level child-rape conspiracy uncritically (and then play "join the dots" with it) then what critical standards should we apply?


----------



## elbows (Nov 26, 2014)

The standard I'm aiming for is not dissimilar to the standards of the CPS and police investigations, which in practice means waiting some years to see if enough witnesses and victims come forwards with enough collaborative detail about the modus operandi of the offenders.


----------



## elbows (Nov 26, 2014)

Plus as I've said several times before, I'm also looking for perpetrators who were NOT the feature of historical rumours to be busted.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 26, 2014)

.....pure unadulterated bullshitters / fantasists / time-wasters are probably ( one would hope ) easy enough for competent investigators to trip up through basic interview technique..although more difficult for "spectators" to take a view on...

...where you go down the rabbit-hole is having to unscramble issues like  : the testimony of genuinley troubled or even traumatised victims of _*some type*_ of abuse being able to identify all the who/what/where etc elements that need to be made legally watertight, that fact they seem to be going after stuff from decades ago where building up all the supporting evidence is going to be that much more difficult , dealing with criminal low-lifes who may genuinley be involved or have knowledge about this type of underground activity but who also make rotten witnesses , have all sorts of incentives to incriminate others or fabricate / embroider a story...

...corroboration also becomes problematic once the sensational front page stories get disseminated into public consciousness - as this blog post addresses...

Exaro News Is Playing A Dangerous Game With Its Paedophile Murder Story

http://barristerblogger.com/2014/11/16/exaro-news-playing-dangerous-game-paedophile-murder-story/

the first effect of broadcasting Nick’s detailed allegations is that anybody wishing to make a false allegation has now been given not just rumours, which in truth have been flying around on the internet for years, but a detailed and apparently first-hand description of exactly how another witness says the abuse took place. This, of course, flies in the face of good policing practice in which the account of one witness is never given to other potential witnesses precisely because of the danger of contamination.




elbows said:


> That degree of dot joining allows everyone on the planet to be linked to everyone else.



...but yeah..thinking about the whole dot-joining thing......I had a chill down my back when I realised I was at school with "Dave"...one of the Elm Guest House victims.....there’s no doubt its him….really brings it all home to you...but for a pure accident of birth could have ended up in exactly the same position.....his younger brother Peter wasn't so lucky and commited suicide....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...phile-victim-I-forced-wear-fairy-costume.html

.....I remember him very well....as a bit of a cocky, disruptive little so-and-so but no worse than a lot of others.....but exactly as the article says......_"They would pick out the pretty boys, especially the ones who looked young for their age"_.......small stature, with very long eye-lashes...


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2014)

> The family of a missing boy have been told by police that he may have been abducted, abused and murdered by a paedophile ring of leading establishment figures.
> 
> Martin Allen, the son of the chauffeur of a Australian high commissioner, went missing aged 15 from King's Cross on his way to home in Kensington in November 1979.
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2014)

...and...


> The case of Martin Allen’s disappearance was closed in the 1980s, but reopened in 2009 and shut again last year. Mr Allen and his brother, Jeffrey, 61, said that *police claimed in 2009 that files has been destroyed by a flood.*
> 
> “We had to give evidence over again to the police,” Mr Allen said. “But then later, when the case was still open, the *two detectives on it told us that a retired police officer had withdrawn the files and gone to Spain.*
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 26, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> As much as I would like to see everybody who has ever been in a Tory cabinet spending the remainder of their vile lives picking bits of broken glass out of their food in the "Beast Wing" at Belmarsh ...
> 
> Are we going to _automatically_ believe every single thing that every one of the people coming forward now as witnesses and survivors says?
> 
> ...



Since we're not privvy to any police reports on those they have interviewed everything else on this thread is largely assumption and/or guesswork (perhaps with the exception the good with of a few news outlets in covering the story and in depth such as Exaro)

So I guess you either apply those standards in full or you don't. 

I'm not sure which of those people who have come forward you could consider "bullshitters". Ben Fellows, yes, but as with all bullshitters their story falls apart very quickly once people start asking questions to which they don't have more specific answers. I'm sure those interviewed by Exaro in the presence of The Met have very credible stories to tell.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 26, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> .....pure unadulterated bullshitters / fantasists / time-wasters are probably ( one would hope ) easy enough for competent investigators to trip up through basic interview technique..although more difficult for "spectators" to take a view on...
> 
> ...where you go down the rabbit-hole is having to unscramble issues like  : the testimony of genuinley troubled or even traumatised victims of _*some type*_ of abuse being able to identify all the who/what/where etc elements that need to be made legally watertight, that fact they seem to be going after stuff from decades ago where building up all the supporting evidence is going to be that much more difficult , dealing with criminal low-lifes who may genuinley be involved or have knowledge about this type of underground activity but who also make rotten witnesses , have all sorts of incentives to incriminate others or fabricate / embroider a story...
> 
> ...



I agree with all of this - aside from making a little note about Exaro's interview with 'Nick'. I agreed with the blog when I first read it (a few days ago) But I'd imagine that there were many more details left out that anyone claiming to have been abused would be able to make mention of. I'd be very surprised if Exaro who sat in with his interview with The Met, were not advised about what they should and shouldn't put. Although Im sure it's quite possible that a mistake has been made.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 26, 2014)

From the BBC


> A former children's homes boss has been found guilty of 26 charges of sexually abusing youngsters in Wrexham.
> 
> John Allen, 73, of Needham Market, Suffolk, denies 40 counts of sexual abuse against 19 boys and one girl in the late 1960s up to the early 1990s.
> 
> ...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-30209106


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2014)

elbows said:


> Plus as I've said several times before, I'm also looking for perpetrators who were NOT the feature of historical rumours to be busted.



Which would either stand up a lot of the current and past stories, or help to separate fact from fiction.
My major worry with regard to *any* testimony, whether by known quantities or newly-brought-to-light perpetrators or victims, is that human memory is very easily warped, polluted or otherwise tainted. Just the act of reading a bit of newspaper sensationalism can have an effect on victim and perpetrator testimony, and the ongoing coverage provides (pardon the pun) coverage that the lawyers of any paedophiles brought to court will use in order to demonstrate that witness testimony is hopelessly tainted by decades of media _schlock_.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2014)

Suppose I've only kept up with these issues as general news stories, indeed urban is my main source when it comes to more in depth stuff.  For those who have done detailed research, what are the chances of all this translating into an arrest of a senior political/establishment figure?  My guess is we are still hovering around zero.  _Just_ possible a tory mp from the 80s, long since abandoned by their party could get it.  There are possibilities, no more than that, that local councillors and even senior-ish civil servants might do time.  However it seems inconceivable that a former or current cabinet member will do time.  Not quite a waste of time, but not much good comes out of the whole process for survivors.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 26, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Suppose I've only kept up with these issues as general news stories, indeed urban is my main source when it comes to more in depth stuff.  For those who have done detailed research, what are the chances of all this translating into an arrest of a senior political/establishment figure?  My guess is we are still hovering around zero.  _Just_ possible a tory mp from the 80s, long since abandoned by their party could get it.  There are possibilities, no more than that, that local councillors and even senior-ish civil servants might do time.  However it seems inconceivable that a former or current cabinet member will do time.  Not quite a waste of time, but not much good comes out of the whole process for survivors.



Most of the names that have been touted as being involved, are dead. So even if they were guilty there's obviously going to be no arrests. As of the others - well the police are slow to act. Whether that's because they are 'lining their ducks up' as it were, or because they are under pressure not to start charging politicians, I don't know. There was an article the other day about Leon Brittan saying that some of the allegations made in the past were in fact an MI5 plot to smear him as he wanted to "shake up" the organisation, and because he was Jewish. Edit: Brittan at the time made play of this  to other journos as IIRC it was reported in Private Eye.

One name mentioned was apparently captured on a video tape at a party and in the same frame as someone who has claimed he was abused. As a result the figure concenred had no option but to admit they were present. Again, what this means as far as prosecutions go is down to the police and if they feel it's worth pursuing or if they get the MI5 collywobbles.

It's clear that arrests were made in the past of known paedophiles and people at care homes who were involved in some sort of child sex ring. Several retired police have said they knew prominent abusers were involved but they were "scared off" investigating. I suspect that much of the information from those original enquiries went missing and is not available to police today - hence the length of time its taking to put the missing pieces back together - and the appeal last week for retured detectives to come forward with any information.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 26, 2014)

That article up there criticising Exaro is a good read.

The more that this story sprawls further into conspiracy theory, the more certain elements of it reflect aspects of the SRA hysteria of the 80s and early 90s.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 26, 2014)

Get tae fuck.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Most of the names that have been touted as being involved, are dead. So even if they were guilty there's obviously going to be no arrests. As of the others - well the police are slow to act. Whether that's because they are 'lining their ducks up' as it were, or because they are under pressure not to start charging politicians, I don't know. There was an article the other day about Leon Brittan saying that some of the allegations made in the past were in fact an MI5 plot to smear him as he wanted to "shake up" the organisation, and because he was Jewish. Edit: Brittan at the time made play of this  to other journos as IIRC it was reported in Private Eye.
> 
> One name mentioned was apparently captured on a video tape at a party and in the same frame as someone who has claimed he was abused. As a result the figure concenred had no option but to admit they were present. Again, what this means as far as prosecutions go is down to the police and if they feel it's worth pursuing or if they get the MI5 collywobbles.
> 
> It's clear that arrests were made in the past of known paedophiles and people at care homes who were involved in some sort of child sex ring. Several retired police have said they knew prominent abusers were involved but they were "scared off" investigating. I suspect that much of the information from those original enquiries went missing and is not available to police today - hence the length of time its taking to put the missing pieces back together - and the appeal last week for retured detectives to come forward with any information.


 Suppose I'm almost wanting to gauge their _anxiety_.  A generation of politico-rapists will have gone through 20-30 years of hearing their names whispered, touched on in private eye and now in corners of the internet.  It's obvious they will have shit themselves in the post-Savile world as a few (entertainment) household names were interviewed and, what, about 4 have done time?  At the same time they won't quite have shaken off the idea the law doesn't apply to people like them - though they'll be thinking about the dirt they will threaten to dish if the police do go for them.  Anyway, working on the assumption that the 'big beasts' will never see the inside of cell, never mind a police station, I'd just like some reassurance that they are not getting a good night's sleep.


----------



## sotsialenru (Nov 26, 2014)

спасибо я даже не знала)
Интернет магазин одежды SOTSIALEN.RU


----------



## campanula (Nov 26, 2014)

I work for a solicitor (as a gardener)who has made a career out of child abuse cases - his case loads run into thousands...but the emphasis always seems to be based around compensation rather than any attempt to bring perpetrators to justice. He is dealing with over a dozen schools in Norfolk and Suffolk where there is a three cornered narrative involving the schools (board, trustees and management), the insurance companies and the legal process which generally allows for monetary compensation - (approx £40,000 would be an average payout). While a financial settlement could be seen as better than years of disbelief, this paying off and settlements with various non-disclosure clauses does not lead to any real sense of justice.
The solicitor (and, I am sure, the courts) have full awareness that a number of claimants have not suffered any abuse but accepts a more sweeping generalisation. I have very mixed feelings about this and cannot help feeling that everyone, from the courts, the schools and other institutions and certainly the whole legal process benefit from what continues to be a cover-up.


----------



## maomao (Nov 26, 2014)

sotsialenru said:


> спасибо я даже не знала)
> Интернет магазин одежды SOTSIALEN.RU


Добро пожаловать. Это говорит английский сайт.


----------



## 1%er (Nov 26, 2014)

The channel 4 Documentary "The Paedophile Next Door" aired last night (25th Nov2014) can be viewed here, for people who don't have access to British TV.
I have not had the chance to watch it so can not comment on its content.


----------



## elbows (Nov 26, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Most of the names that have been touted as being involved, are dead. So even if they were guilty there's obviously going to be no arrests.



The one upside to the number that escaped justice by dying is that it potentially gives the various non-police inquiries something to get their teeth into. We might actually get to hear about some of their offences and the ways in which they exploited their power to commit them, in the same way that various Savile inquiries have at least been able to start touching on such stuff when it came to him. We've seen a preview of this via some Cyril Smith stuff, but they'll have to go a lot deeper than they have so far in order for anyone to think we've really explored the issues properly. 

And if various institutions prove unwilling to deliver frank narratives about the crimes of even deceased people, then I can make a judgement about their sincerity, levels of elite fear, fresh coverup etc based on that. Phew, I don't have to rely only on thinking I actually already know which of the still living suspects are actually guilty, and that any failure to prosecute particular individuals is concrete proof of a fresh coverup.


----------



## elbows (Nov 26, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Suppose I've only kept up with these issues as general news stories, indeed urban is my main source when it comes to more in depth stuff.  For those who have done detailed research, what are the chances of all this translating into an arrest of a senior political/establishment figure?  My guess is we are still hovering around zero.  _Just_ possible a tory mp from the 80s, long since abandoned by their party could get it.  There are possibilities, no more than that, that local councillors and even senior-ish civil servants might do time.  However it seems inconceivable that a former or current cabinet member will do time.  Not quite a waste of time, but not much good comes out of the whole process for survivors.



It will be some time yet before my hopes go permanently down and hover around zero, although there are some days where they do. I also have to try to remember that many of the factors that reduce the chances of it happening aren't sinister. There aren't likely to be that many cabinet level abusers to choose from because not that many people have been a minister. And given the fact that the whole era of abuse gained fresh attention because Savile died, its sadly not surprising that death or infirmity will be a legitimate excuse for non-prosecution in some cases.

Thats not to dismiss the multitude of more sinister reasons why things may not be properly explored, ranging from how effective at destroying all useful evidence, including witnesses, past coverups were, to the various potential levels of spookery that might be involved in the full story.

Right now I can't do justice to the full question of how much good for survivors comes from everything that is happening post-Savile. But I will say that the desire to focus on perpetrators with the very highest levels of power in the land, whilst very understandable and interesting for a number of reasons, is probably given a prominence which is quite out of whack with the actual number of offenders with other levels of power, and their respective victims. Certainly, as with various celebrity cases, it is important the survivors, victims of the future, and indeed potential perpetrators of tomorrow, receive examples showing that those who had silly amounts of power to throw around are not always immune from prosecution. So it is a nervous time waiting to see if enough victims come forwards and the forces of coverup prove weak enough that we get some high level prosecutions. But meanwhile much good is still being done by the new climate for justice that is resulting in court action against 'lesser individuals'. After all, there are many ways to gain enough power over someone to be able to abuse them, and enough other institutions beyond the political to act as enablers of abuse.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 26, 2014)

Heck of a lot of confirmation bias going on there elbows, especially given the absence of concrete, tested evidence.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 26, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Heck of a lot of confirmation bias going on there elbows, especially given the absence of concrete, tested evidence.



What?


----------



## elbows (Nov 26, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Heck of a lot of confirmation bias going on there elbows, especially given the absence of concrete, tested evidence.



My stance over the course of the thread is mostly, and to a tedious extent, grounded by the need for concrete, tested evidence. I may wander a tad at times because peoples concerns must be taken seriously, victims must not be discouraged, there are various questions to be answered, historical rumours and their modern incarnations are an interesting subject in themselves, etc. To discuss all possibilities properly, I will likely sometimes go beyond employing only assumptions that are completely safe and up to proper evidence-based standards. But not to the extent that I could demand that the justice system operate with such flexibility when it came to evidence too, or go around shouting that failure to prosecute automatically equals cover-up.


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 26, 2014)

If someone as insignificant (in the overall scheme of things) as Rebekah Brooks can walk despite clear evidence and admission of wrongdoing, don't expect a more seriously connected political figure to do time for anything. It'll all be blamed on the dead or on political minnows in the town hall.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 27, 2014)

elbows said:


> My stance over the course of the thread is mostly, and to a tedious extent, grounded by the need for concrete, tested evidence. I may wander a tad at times because peoples concerns must be taken seriously, victims must not be discouraged, there are various questions to be answered, historical rumours and their modern incarnations are an interesting subject in themselves, etc. To discuss all possibilities properly, I will likely sometimes go beyond employing only assumptions that are completely safe and up to proper evidence-based standards. But not to the extent that I could demand that the justice system operate with such flexibility when it came to evidence too, or go around shouting that failure to prosecute automatically equals cover-up.


 
Fair enough but I think one needs to draw a distinction between what is known and what remains unproven.

For instance, I find it very difficult to believe that young boys were snatched off of the street or else passed on to abusers by their parents for monetary reward and then murdered for sexual gratification by groups of people at Elm Guest House or anywhere else for that matter, regardless of the alleged offenders' social status, without any significant alarm being raised at the time or subsequently.

This whole thing is starting to take on a moral panic dimension, which seems rather odd.

Paedophile rings, if that is what you want to call them (when concerted abuse is probably more accurate, IMO) are well evidenced at the moment in a number of different scenarios.

What these purported historic cases seem to show, by contrast, is a degree of scale and secret organisation which runs counter to common sense.

Rotherham was a paedophile ring, if you want to use that term effectively.  Savile, also, was a coordinated paedophile.

I fully accept that I may be wrong on this point, but the idea of a shadowy cabal, protected by the security services, abusing and murdering at will in recent history seems absurd.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 27, 2014)

brogdale said:


> ...His brother Kevin, 51, has said he was called by Detective Chief Inspector Diane Tudway of the Metropolitan Police on Friday, who told him she was investigating whether Martin’s disappearance is linked to an alleged ring made up of MPs and senior figures of authority.
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...y-vip-paedophile-ring-say-police-9883509.html



Apropos of nothing, I believe that Diane Tudway is the wife of former National Coordinator Domestic Extremism Det Ch Supt Adrian Tudway. Can anyone confirm?


----------



## free spirit (Nov 27, 2014)

Diamond said:


> I fully accept that I may be wrong on this point, but the idea of a shadowy cabal, protected by the security services, abusing and murdering at will in recent history seems absurd.


and yet we have an ex deputy director of MI6, and the prime ministers private secretary accused directly amongst others, and multiple credible reports (by former newspaper editors) of the use of D notices, intimidation by special branch, local police investigations being quashed or taken over and dropped by special branch etc.

Not to mention the multiple accounts of basically the same thing happening to abused kids from different parts of the country in terms of the paedo sex parties in the same few locations in London, and the widespread abuse happening in their home areas never gets properly investigated, with obvious signs of the investigations that do happen being subverted  / not published / organisations like scallywag being shut down by unlikely alliances of powerful politically connected london types and local Welsh coppers.

I suppose the way to look at this when it comes to motivations for covering up actual murders of one or more of the kids involved would be to put yourself in the shoes of any of those who were witnesses to it. Either they're abused kids who'll be treated as CTer nutjobs if they went public with these allegations, or they'd be senior figures who's lives would be entirely wrecked if they were to go to the police and inform them about what they'd witnessed while participating in a paedophile orgy. And let's not forget that several did come forward, 20-25 years ago, and were treated as CTer nutjobs, as were those publishing their allegations before the establishment conspired to use the courts to shut them down and bankrupt them.

Either a hell of a lot of those raising their concerns now are lying, which would include former newspaper editors, former coppers etc as well as those who're alleging they were abused, or this actually did happen, and by the looks of things, to a far greater extent than I'd have thought likely to be credible when I started this thread.

Here's a former editor of the Mirror explaining how Peter Morrison escaped public exposure / trial in his lifetime, to give an idea of how it seems to have worked, with powerful people like him somehow able to pull rank with arresting officer, get the matter kicked upstairs where they knew that it would then be hushed up.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 27, 2014)

Somewhere in this thread there'll be a link to an article with an explanation that still seems to resonate for me.

Basically explaining that the prevailing attitude among the upper ranks of the security services and special branch at the time was that protecting the establishment was the priority, and if that meant covering up a few indiscretions involving no mark kids from children's homes in the provinces, then so be it.... especially as it then gave those who'd done the covering up a hold over those they then held the incriminating files on, and could then rely on them to do their bidding when they needed something.

Bearing in mind these were old cold war warriors who'd learned their trade at the height of the cold war, and saw their role primarily as being to prevent a communist take over, and ensure continuity of their preferred flavor of UK government at all costs.

And also remember these are the same types who'd later think nothing of allowing generations of undercover coppers to sleep with, form relationships with, and even have children with political activists from the groups they were infiltrating. It's all justifiable means to an end for these fuckers, and I'd imagine that having this sort of dirt on someone who was the deputy chairman of the tory party, and later Thatchers private secretary and election campaign manager, would have seemed pretty valuable to them.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 27, 2014)

One of the more intriguing aspects of this situation for me, assuming that those doing the covering up were doing it at least in part to give them a level of control over those who's crimes they'd covered up..... is what did they then do with that control over those high up political assets?

On that point, I'd have to make the link between the cover ups involving Morrison, and the incredibly bad campaign he's supposed to have run for Thatchers re-election (as leader), and part he played in her decision to step down after asking the opinions of individual cabinet members.

Having someone who's that badly compromised in charge of the prime ministers campaign for survival seems pretty suspicious to me, particularly when he does such a terrible job of it. 

All of which is very much CTer territory, but I think it's more stretching credibility to assume that those who've covered up his crimes haven't then used it to influence his actions in any way as a result, than it is to think that they would have used their hold over him to influence his actions when he was in a position to determine the fate of a prime minister who was never really considered to be one of them / the establishment.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

Yeah right, never mind the fact she was burnt out as a political force and that she valued loyalty over competence.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

> The headmaster of an elite London school where the US paedophile William Vahey abused more than 60 boys dismissed a complaint about his worrying conduct on a field trip as “unfair pressure” by “vindictive parents”, an independent report in to his criminality has revealed.
> 
> After an eight-month inquiry into the sex abuse scandal at Southbank International school in London, where Vahey worked from 2009 to 2013, the senior barristerHugh Davies QC concluded Vahey’s systematic abuse was the result of serious failures and “straightforward errors” by the leadership at the £25,000-a-year school.
> 
> ...



http://www.theguardian.com/society/...rious-failures-southbank-international-school


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 27, 2014)

OK, it's the Sun but it still makes me shudder. (story from the graun)

*The Sun had 7ft safe with 30 years of ‘eye-popping’ unprintable stories, court told*


> Unprintable tales of explosive scandals involving politicians and celebrities were stored in a “wild-west-style” safe in the Sun’s newsroom if they could not be used, a court has heard.
> 
> The tabloid’s former deputy news editor Ben O’Driscoll, 38, said more than 30 years of unpublished stories were stored in the 7ft-high safe.
> 
> ...


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 27, 2014)

free spirit said:


> Somewhere in this thread there'll be a link to an article with an explanation that still seems to resonate for me.
> 
> Basically explaining that the prevailing attitude among the upper ranks of the security services and special branch at the time was that protecting the establishment was the priority, and if that meant covering up a few indiscretions involving no mark kids from children's homes in the provinces, then so be it....



...I think that was the Norman Tebbit statement...

"At that time I think most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected and if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system."

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...bbit-theresa-may-cover-up-child-abuse-dossier

also seems a fitting time for a mea culpa as I alluded to that Female MP story....from catching up with the Savile master-thread on DIF :

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1062311199&postcount=82007
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1062314963&postcount=82029







...this is quotable aswell in terms of where we are now..

*Child Sex Abuse: Will the police finally catch the perpetrators ?*

Posted on November 24, 2014 by david hencke

The extraordinary revelations at the weekend by my Exaro colleague Mark Conrad and the Sunday People should finally dispel fears that the police have no intention of investigating the VIP paedophiles and now possible murderers in the Westminster paedophile scandal.

I could tell until this weekend  many in the mainstream media  were sceptical ( and some still are) that such horrendous acts involving MPs could ever have taken place in the 1970s and 1980s without the Westminster lobby knowing. Some, including one of my long-standing former colleagues on the Guardian, emphatically told me no MP could possibly be involved in the murder of a young boy.I’ll spare his blushes until there is an arrest.

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/20...ll-the-police-finally-catch-the-perpetrators/


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 27, 2014)

Diamond said:


> That article up there criticising Exaro is a good read.
> 
> The more that this story sprawls further into conspiracy theory, the more certain elements of it reflect aspects of the SRA hysteria of the 80s and early 90s.



As someone who followed "the Satanic Panic" and subsequent events, including the La Fontaine report, fairly closely (friends were affected by some of the backlash on occultism), frankly I can't see *any* reflection of "certain aspects". Even psychologically, the profile of both abusers and victims are different. There's no evidence of therapist-derived "recovered memories" with regard to the historic paedo thing either, something that was a massive factor in getting social workers and others in authority to "believe" in SRA.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 27, 2014)

the sra stuff and todays post saville revelations, cyrill etc the whole foul shitstorm- was discussed in depth on another thread. Diamonds just grasping for an analysis to feel superior with. The SRA stuff was taken up in a separate thread specifically so as not to muddy the waters on this one


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 27, 2014)

free spirit said:


> One of the more intriguing aspects of this situation for me, assuming that those doing the covering up were doing it at least in part to give them a level of control over those who's crimes they'd covered up..... is what did they then do with that control over those high up political assets?


Make money?


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 27, 2014)

This doesn't relate specifically to high level paedophile activity but perhaps sheds a couple of lumens on why it's so hard to get any comprehensive picture. Gojam attempts to track down the follow-up from a conviction of possession of an alleged snuff movie and meets typical Brit bumbling.
http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/the-underfunding-of-ceop-and-the-police/


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 27, 2014)

Here we go
*Rebecca Keating* @RebeccaKeating
Sir Paul Beresford says Home Office must decide if the child abuse inquiry is "speedy... but of no depth" or "will go on for years"


----------



## Diamond (Nov 27, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> the sra stuff and todays post saville revelations, cyrill etc the whole foul shitstorm- was discussed in depth on another thread. Diamonds just grasping for an analysis to feel superior with. The SRA stuff was taken up in a separate thread specifically so as not to muddy the waters on this one



Wait a second - I didn't make the link first.

It was drawn out in detail in that barrister's blog a page or so back that another poster linked to.

I'm not going to reinterpret that barrister's stuff, mainly because he makes a set of very lengthy and detailed arguments better than I could, so it's best to go directly to source and read them (assuming you have the time and inclination and weren't looking to simply take a lazy, cheap pop at me...), but the one thing I would note is that when we've got to the stage where there are allegations of mass paedophilic orgies featuring the murder of children as part of the central purpose of proceedings and which are protected by secret and quasi-secret groups of people in positions of power, then we're getting fairly close to SRA style claims.

Hell, you just need to lop the Satanic element off of it and replace it with another descriptor - Tory Ritual Abuse / Establishment Ritual Abuse / White Middle Aged Men Ritual Abuse.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

Diamond said:


> but the one thing I would note is that when we've got to the stage where there are allegations of mass paedophilic orgies featuring the murder of children as part of the central purpose of proceedings and which are protected by secret and quasi-secret groups of people in positions of power, then we're getting fairly close to SRA style claims.
> 
> Hell, you just need to lop the Satanic element off of it and replace it with another descriptor - Tory Ritual Abuse / Establishment Ritual Abuse / White Middle Aged Men Ritual Abuse.



Certainly one of the reasons I won't treat the missing Dickens 'dossiers' as some kind of holy grail is that he got quite into hyperbole about Satanism at times during his campaigning.

The extent to which modern accusations resemble SRA style claims really depends what additional emotive words someone may attach too readily to the stories we are hearing. I'll use some of your words as an example because they are fresh and right in front of us:

'mass paedophilic orgies' - depends what threshold is used to justify use of the word mass. We have heard a number of plausible stories about a couple of different party scenes, both in the last several years and historically via old Scallywag articles, with partial overlap. The exact scale of the parties is often not well described, often because the articles understandably focus on the details of the abuse rather than the broader party picture. I've spoken before of the possibility of a number of different types of parties, with different central characteristics, which would affect whether the parties were paedophilic as a whole or fair to call orgies. Likewise I've no reason to speak of 'one ring of elite paedophiles' as opposed to considering something far more complex and at least partially fragmented.

'murder of children as part of the central purpose of proceedings' - the recent murder accusations are quite a new feature. Historical stories have focussed on two other sorts of murder - murder of victims or 'people on the trail' as part of cover-ups well after the abuse event. And the death of boys due to sadism and doping being taken too far in specific instances, by the likes of Sydney Cookes gang. The latter is actually a better fit for your words 'central purpose of proceedings' than the recent accusations are. I have no way to judge the current accusations, but if tempted to judge them by the motives the accuser has ascribed to the murders, I have to consider the possibility that he may have misjudged the motives and even gotten certain details wrong, but is still describing something real.

Anyway unless other victims have come forwards since the pleas for them to do so, we are still at a point where it doesn't sound like enough 'party victims' have spoken to police that we can have confidence we're going to learn more in court about such abuse, let alone murder. If more victims fail to come forwards then we are left with our individual inclinations of what to believe, ranging from 'no more victims came forwards because there are no victims' to 'they are too intimidated to come forwards or long since are long since deceased'.

Snuff movies remain in a similar state for me - the possibilities are worth exploring and their existence is plausible, especially if we don't get carried away with a sense of how many were ever made. And there are one or two known historical stories, rumours and attempts at investigation that throw up various details that could be something, or could be nothing. And certainly even if snuff movies don't exist, we'd expect some people to believe they do, once the idea of them is out there.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> This doesn't relate specifically to high level paedophile activity but perhaps sheds a couple of lumens on why it's so hard to get any comprehensive picture. Gojam attempts to track down the follow-up from a conviction of possession of an alleged snuff movie and meets typical Brit bumbling.
> http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/the-underfunding-of-ceop-and-the-police/



What seems to be missing to me from analysis of the failings of that line of inquiry is any sense of what country the possible snuff movie was filmed in. Thats going to make quite a difference to how the authorities in the UK treat it, and the operation already had an international dimension given that the video seems to have come from an internet site that Russian authorities provided relevant visitor info to this country (and presumably others) about.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Here we go
> *Rebecca Keating* @RebeccaKeating
> Sir Paul Beresford says Home Office must decide if the child abuse inquiry is "speedy... but of no depth" or "will go on for years"



Several other tweets of relevance there too:



> *Rebecca Keating* @RebeccaKeating · 4 hours ago
> MPs have been given stern warning at the start of the child abuse inquiry debate not to compromise any police investigations #HoC
> 
> *Rebecca Keating* @RebeccaKeating · 3h3 hours ago
> Simon Danczuk names Sir Edward Garnier as MP who warned him "challenging Lord Brittan on child abuse would not be a wise move"


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

> "The night before my appearance at the committee I had an encounter with the right honourable learned Member for Harborough [Sir Edward Garnier].
> 
> “After the 10pm vote he drew me to one side outside the chamber and warned me to think very carefully about what I was going to say the following day.
> 
> “He told me that challenging Lord Brittan on child abuse would not be a wise move and that I might even be responsible for his death as he was unwell.





> Sir Edward was the Coalition's solicitor-general from May 2010 to September 2012.
> 
> Sir Edward, who has known Lord Brittan for 40 years, declined to comment when Mr Danczuk’s remarks were put to him by the _Telegraph _on Thursday afternoon.
> 
> ...



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ing-Lord-Brittan-over-child-abuse-claims.html

And just to clarify we had heard about the warning some months ago, its the warners  name and the justification for it thats new.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

Some press about Garnier from December 2012:



> According to Quentin Letts, Sir Edward Garnier QC was “stupendously rude – a real collector's item” to his fellow Tory MP Therese Coffey during the Leveson debate in the Commons yesterday. Letts is spot on. Coffey, an advocate of an unfettered press, intervened when Garnier, a libel lawyer, decided to share with the House the fact that he is currently representing “a well-known claimant whose reputation has been grievously damaged in the recent past”. He didn’t name Lord McAlpine, but that’s who it is. Coffey wished to point out that McAlpine’s grievance was with TV, not the press, a perfectly fair and valid point. Garnier was having none of it: “I think I might be permitted to know a little more about that case than my hon. Friend does”, he said. When Coffey dissented, Garnier snapped: “Would she stop mumbling?” Good to see that old-fashioned, gentlemanly courtesy is alive and well on the Tory benches.



http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...r-edward-garnier-and-the-art-of-good-manners/


----------



## brogdale (Nov 27, 2014)

I'm figuring that nothing here from Goldsmith is new? elbows ?



> Richmond MP Zac Goldsmith said during the debate that Scotland Yard had since confirmed that Cyril Smith had been a visitor.
> 
> He told MPs how a child protection campaigner had been told by Mrs Kasir before she died 30 years ago that “that boys had been brought in from a local children’s home—Grafton Close, also in Richmond—for sex, and that she had photographs of establishment figures at her hotel.
> 
> ...


----------



## free spirit (Nov 27, 2014)

elbows said:


> Yeah right, never mind the fact she was burnt out as a political force and that she valued loyalty over competence.


She needed a margin of 56 votes to win outright, and came up just short on a 52 vote majority.

I don't think it's a massive stretch to imagine that a half decent campaign could have swung 2 more MPs in her favour, maybe one that had Thatcher and her campaign team actually out campaigning immediately before the vote rather than Thatcher being off at some meaningless thing in Europe, and Morrison sitting on his hands in his room having apparently decided that there was no point in campaigning.

I'm not saying it's definite that he was put in there as a puppet to fuck up her chances in the leadership election, but it looks extremely suspicious to me that someone who was as badly compromised as him was placed in that position, and then ran an abortion of a campaign for her, and persuaded her not to fight on after being just 4 votes off a first round win. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, looks like a duck etc then sometimes it's fair to conclude that it it probably is a duck.


----------



## elbows (Nov 27, 2014)

If you are interested in that theory then you simply can't skirt round the question of whose decision it was to give him that role. As far as I know the versions of history available to us put Thatcher squarely in that frame. And if colleagues were guilty of anything it was the usual mistake they were guilty of with Thatcher, they didn't have the guts etc to try to clue her into aspects of reality that were well within her blind spots, of which there were many. 

For example:



> Morrison, readers are told, “_was the first backbencher to urge Mrs Thatcher to stand for the party leadership. The Morrisons were so intimate with Mrs T that women in the family even gave her fashion tips. And over the years, no political colleague was more close to her than Peter ... The red-haired Old Etonian with an Oxford law degree soon climbed the slippery Westminster ladder with her help_”.
> 
> Yes? Yes yes? Yes yes yes? “_Yet despite a smooth ride to the  top and a knighthood in 1988, many colleagues were surprised when Mrs Thatcher chose Morrison as her  Parliamentary Private Secretary (PPS) in 1990 ... For, by then, rumours were spreading about bachelor Morrison’s unorthodox private life: his love of the bottle and his dangerous sexual appetite for young men_”.
> 
> ...



( from http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/mail-discovers-paedophile-20-months-late.html )


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2014)

free spirit said:


> I'm not saying it's definite that he was put in there as a puppet to fuck up her chances in the leadership election, but it looks extremely suspicious to me that someone who was as badly compromised as him was placed in that position, and then ran an abortion of a campaign for her, and persuaded her not to fight on after being just 4 votes off a first round win.



She did initially decide to fight on after the initial vote - but the rest of the cabinet went in one by one to tell her it was over and she resigned. And even had she scraped over the winning line after the first vote im not sure that would have been enough to save her - she needed to win decisively. (anyway - derail)


----------



## free spirit (Nov 28, 2014)

Kaka Tim said:


> She did initially decide to fight on after the initial vote - but the rest of the cabinet went in one by one to tell her it was over and she resigned. And even had she scraped over the winning line after the first vote im not sure that would have been enough to save her - she needed to win decisively. (anyway - derail)


there was obviously a significant movement against her, not disputing that, just querying the exact form that movement against her took - ie if it was all entirely above board, or if there were also some underhand tactics involved to ensure she was removed. Worth remembering how close the vote actually was to a Thatcher victory.

The presence of this obviously badly compromised person at the heart of her campaign who then went on to barely lift a finger to attempt to get her re-elected, to the point that the likes of Alan Clarke are left fuming at his lack of effort.... well that raises suspicions in my mind, not sure about other people.

These cover ups happened for a reason, not everyone doing the covering up would have been an active paedophile themselves, so why did the coverups happen, was it really just about protecting the establishment (in which case exactly who was Peter Morrison to the establishment, he doesn't seem that worth protecting just in his own right), or were there more sinister motives involved.

The way I look at it, those who've had their activities covered up would then be in debt to those who did the covering up, who'd probably have retained the ability to uncover it / reinstate the investigations / throw them to the wolves if they didn't play ball, so they know their card is marked, and they then have to do their bidding when the time comes. If someone who's obviously in that position then ends up in the position of running the prime minister's re-election campaign, it seems pretty unlikely to me that those with the dirt on him would chose not to use it at that decisive point in UK politics (assuming they weren't on Thatchers side).

btw I'm taking it as read that there actually was a cover up of his and others activities.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 28, 2014)

> Morrison, readers are told, “_was the first backbencher to urge Mrs Thatcher to stand for the party leadership. The Morrisons were so intimate with Mrs T that women in the family even gave her fashion tips. And over the years, no political colleague was more close to her than Peter ... The red-haired Old Etonian with an Oxford law degree soon climbed the slippery Westminster ladder with her help_”.


it's not so much that he was given the position that I find suspicious, as that someone with that level of background with Thatcher, and that level of experience, would end up running such a piss poor campaign for her re-election.

From his Independent obituary.



> Morrison suddenly seemed to lose his touch, hitherto a very certain one, in party matters. He took far too much for granted and was singularly lacking in the pursuit of doubtful votes in the leadership challenge mounted by Michael Heseltine in 1990: Alan Clark claims to have found him asleep in his office at a critical point when the walls of the Thatcher battle order were crumbling. When Thatcher went down, Morrison went down with her.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

> Alan Clark claims to have found him asleep in his office at a critical point


 Just as likely that his alcohol habit had got the better of him? But that may possibly have been related to other pressures, as you suggest.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 28, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Just as likely that his alcohol habit had got the better of him? But that may possibly have been related to other pressures, as you suggest.


that's it, did he just happen to turn into an incompetent raging alchoholic at the defining moment of his career, or was there something else involved that triggered his descent into alcoholic incompetence?

I think it's at least worth considering, along with the wider question of 'what motivated those who covered up for these high level paedophiles? What was in it for them?'


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

post deleted


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 28, 2014)




----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> Certainly one of the reasons I won't treat the missing Dickens 'dossiers' as some kind of holy grail is that he got quite into hyperbole about Satanism at times during his campaigning.
> 
> The extent to which modern accusations resemble SRA style claims really depends what additional emotive words someone may attach too readily to the stories we are hearing. I'll use some of your words as an example because they are fresh and right in front of us:
> 
> ...


 
As far as I understand, one of the main characteristics of the various SRA episodes was the manner in which the allegations developed over the course of the relevant investigation.  In other words, the alleged events became incrementally more extreme and, to a certain extent, the consequent, more bizarre allegations could never have been believed without that unfolding process.  That unfolding essentially lent any given SRA investigation a degree of verisimilitude as it allowed the investigators (counsellors/police/lawyers) to believe that they were peeling back the layers to unveil an important hidden truth.

That was all very understandable - the problem was that it was epistemologically problematic and lead to some very wrong conclusions and, in some cases, wrongful convictions.

The resulting lesson is, IMO, that one consistently has to try and look at what is being claimed or revealed by an investigation in isolation.

We have got to the stage now where the following allegations are being aired:


Boys were being picked up by chauffeurs to be escorted to abuse sessions.
There is the suggestion that the boys were being picked up from their homes with the complicity of their parents, probably for money.
These sessions took place at at least two separate locations in London.
There was commonly more than one adult present.
For some of these adults the infliction of pain was central to their enjoyment of the abuse.
At least one boy died at one of these sessions for that reason.
The adults were powerful or had powerful connections and were protected by the police/security services.
One of the boys was run down in a car on a London street by one of the adults and died as a form of intimidation.
I think it is pretty clear that there is an escalation going on there so I think it's appropriate to start asking questions about how these allegations are developing and their essential validity.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

As an aside, I had no idea that Dickens had a stab at SRA too - it seems he had or claimed to have another dossier on that too.  Very interesting...

I wonder whether we might be dealing with the same set of mechanics in any even more intimate way than I had previously thought...


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

What are you suggesting, Diamond? Yes, there is clearly an escalation of claims. This could be accounted for simply by virtue of earlier (admittedly shocking) claims being believed and preparing the ground for more grave/outlandish claims.  Are you suggesting that the progression of claims is in itself an indicator of falsehood? I would disagree. If someone has a grave/outlandish claim they are unlikely to put it forward until there is already established a degree of open-mindedness on the part of the listener. 

Yes, obviously I realise this cuts both ways, but I don't think the escalation argument necessarily demolishes some of the more incredible claims.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

The bottom line is that I don't think we know enough about how these claims came to light - whether they were revealed or evolved, for instance, and, if it is more the latter, under what conditions?

SRA proved how easy it is for vulnerable people to come up with constructs that adhere to a sensationalist narrative when being questioned (or more accurately coached) by authority figures.  It also demonstrated how easy it is for large groups of people to indulge in and subscribe to a sensationalist narrative even when it spirals into the realm of pure fantasy.

It's also interesting that Dickens was so centrally involved in pushing the SRA narrative while also pushing the Westminster abuse narrative.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> The bottom line is that I don't think we know enough about how these claims came to light - whether they were revealed or evolved, for instance, and, if it is more the latter, under what conditions?
> 
> SRA proved how easy it is for vulnerable people to come up with constructs that adhere to a sensationalist narrative when being questioned (or more accurately coached) by authority figures.  It also demonstrated how easy it is for large groups of people to indulge in and subscribe to a sensationalist narrative even when it spirals into the realm of pure fantasy.
> 
> It's also interesting that Dickens was so centrally involved in pushing the SRA narrative while also pushing the Westminster abuse narrative.


I agree that we don't. Your posts on this thread suggest that we do.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

Er, I think Dickens's pursuit of the SRA narrative was later. But it indicates a taste for sensationalism I suppose. Basically we have victims and it's them rather than Dickens or other intermediaries that we should be listening to.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I agree that we don't. Your posts on this thread suggest that we do.


 


bluescreen said:


> Er, I think Dickens's pursuit of the SRA narrative was later. But it indicates a taste for sensationalism I suppose. Basically we have victims and it's them rather than Dickens or other intermediaries that we should be listening to.


 
The current problem, as sketched out by that barrister's blog, is that all of a sudden the claims have leapt up the scale of extremity and now sit fairly close to some of the less extreme SRA stuff, while at the same time the source of the claims appears to want to have them mediated through Exaro, who also provided a journalist to sit in on the source's police interview.

On top of that, this is the biggest story going for Exaro.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> The current problem, as sketched out by that barrister's blog, is that all of a sudden the claims have leapt up the scale of extremity and now sit fairly close to some of the less extreme SRA stuff, while at the same time the source of the claims appears to want to have them mediated through Exaro, who also provided a journalist to sit in on the source's police interview.
> 
> On top of that, this is the biggest story going for Exaro.


Sharing your questioning of Exaro. Not that I necessarily distrust them, but I don't automatically trust them either.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> The current problem, as sketched out by that barrister's blog, is that all of a sudden the claims have leapt up the scale of extremity and now sit fairly close to some of the less extreme SRA stuff, while at the same time the source of the claims appears to want to have them mediated through Exaro, who also provided a journalist to sit in on the source's police interview.
> 
> On top of that, this is the biggest story going for Exaro.


You're dismissing claims because we don't know enough about them whilst lambasting others for even letting them into the _research further_ ledger because we don't know enough about them. It's an odd inconsistent stance.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Sharing your questioning of Exaro. Not that I necessarily distrust them, but I don't automatically trust them either.


I trust them, that's why we have to be very careful. Equally, diamond doesn't trust them which is why he needs to be very careful about chucking anything they come up with out.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

They're heavily invested in this. So I think they must believe it. I find that more credible than the alternative narrative that they are establishment stooges.


----------



## laptop (Nov 28, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> They're heavily invested in this. So I think they must believe it. I find that more credible than the alternative narrative that they are establishment stooges.



Two of the three that I know are very far from being socialists. But no, it's not plausible that they're stooges. 

(Unless, that is, one subscribes to the join-the-dots paranoia that holds that because _I_ have met a past Secretary of the D-Notice Committee, _you_ are a stooge...)


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 28, 2014)

Or patsies. Surely they are too smart to fall for anything like that.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Exaro don't have to completely buy into every detail that every witness tells them in order to report on things in the way they have been doing for some years now.

They are clearly interested in many things. Keeping the stories alive to maintain pressure. Encouraging other witnesses and victims to come forwards, and supporting them when they do. Placing pressure on police & CPS where it looks like decisions not to prosecute or investigate further are taken too lightly. The opportunity to do proper investigative reporting of stories that they are not in competition with too many other media entities over. Drawing attention towards their own publication. In my book the main things they've been guilty of so far actually happened quite a while ago - encouraging too much optimism about how imminent certain arrests were ages ago. And at times stretching too few details into a few too many stories. They will have to make a lot more serious mistakes before I'd begin to be at a point of judging them to be doing more harm than good.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> Exaro don't have to completely buy into every detail that every witness tells them in order to report on things in the way they have been doing for some years now.
> 
> They are clearly interested in many things. Keeping the stories alive to maintain pressure. Encouraging other witnesses and victims to come forwards, and supporting them when they do. Placing pressure on police & CPS where it looks like decisions not to prosecute or investigate further are taken too lightly. The opportunity to do proper investigative reporting of stories that they are not in competition with too many other media entities over. Drawing attention towards their own publication. In my book the main things they've been guilty of so far actually happened quite a while ago - encouraging too much optimism about how imminent certain arrests were ages ago. And at times stretching too few details into a few too many stories. They will have to make a lot more serious mistakes before I'd begin to be at a point of judging them to be doing more harm than good.


_Report _key word here.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I agree with all of this - aside from making a little note about Exaro's interview with 'Nick'. I agreed with the blog when I first read it (a few days ago) But I'd imagine that there were many more details left out that anyone claiming to have been abused would be able to make mention of. I'd be very surprised if Exaro who sat in with his interview with The Met, were not advised about what they should and shouldn't put. Although Im sure it's quite possible that a mistake has been made.



Since its right on present topic direction to finally respond to this...

Yes, and even without advice from the Met I reckon they are probably well-versed in the sorts of detail it is responsible to leave out when an investigation is at this stage in relation to potential prosecutions and discovery of victims.

They even said this in one of their articles about 'Nick':



> Exaro has also withheld many details of the deaths to avoid hindering the police investigation.



There are ways things can go wrong in future, in theory, but not many (or perhaps any) of them in my mind involve anything Exaro has said so far. And part of the reason I reject fears about a repeat of the McAlpine-Messham stuff is that such an outcome required a specific set of attributes in order to go that way. The media actually naming the alleged perpetrator, combined with not having received the name from multiple independent victims/witnesses, plus an apparent case of mistaken identity, quite possibly caused by dubious practices by a journalist many years earlier. And at a time when a bunch of police investigations into historical abuse by political perpetrators were not up and running.

Plus the politicians didn't use the accusations of murder to undermine the credibility of investigations. May had enough of a clue to use the revelations as an opportunity to make the right noises and use the language of taking things very seriously.

They can't get the outcome they ultimately seek, of being able to 'draw a line under things' (bleurgh), simply by relying on elements of the press to mess things up, or of too many 'fantastical' tales emerging.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> You're dismissing claims because we don't know enough about them whilst lambasting others for even letting them into the _research further_ ledger because we don't know enough about them. It's an odd inconsistent stance.



I'm not _lambasting _anyone - not sure where you got that impression from but please don't misrepresent my posts.

Nor is my stance inconsistent in the slightest.

I am not dismissing any claims, I am simply saying that when we have reached the stage that we have now, and given what we do and do not know about the circumstances in which these claims have arisen, it is perhaps wise to focus a bit more on the process that produced them while still keeping an eye on their substance.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

It seems to me that there are broadly three categories of knowledge here:

(i) What has been proven - that Peter Hayman was a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange, that he was a member of the establishment and that the establishment protected him as best it could using contemporaneous legislation.

(ii) What is claimed - roughly in ascending order, coordinated child sex abuse by members of the establishment, that was protected by the security services and involved the murder of those children.

(iii) Further speculation - that the information under category (ii) was used as a tool to influence those in power.

Of category (i), there is nothing more to say, of category (ii), the focus should be upon a detailed examination of its contents and, more to the point, how these claims came about, while category (iii) should be treated as being so contingent as to be of little use whatsoever.

The problem with conspiratorial thinking is that it outstrips itself at such speed that one can construct almost any theory with remarkable results because of an increasing readiness to accept the kind of contingent thinking that lends itself to category (iii).


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 28, 2014)

There are people that are still claiming Savile victims made it up for compensation, I think I would rather believe victims until it is proven otherwise tbh


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> I am not dismissing any claims, I am simply saying that when we have reached the stage that we have now, and given what we do and do not know about the circumstances in which these claims have arisen, it is perhaps wise to focus a bit more on the process that produced them while still keeping an eye on their substance.



One of the interesting things about the current process and the substance, as far as what is presently available in the public domain (as opposed to e.g. what the police know so far) is that in many areas its not substantively different to that that could have been learnt by studying historical rumours. Thats a useful thing to know that came out of exploring those rumours a long time ago on this thread. Exceptions to this are that we now have quite a list of dead names, and a list of names that include some still alive, in relation to one very specific line of inquiry. And there is at least one new rumour that, as far as I know, hadn't made it into print before recent times.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

This is an admittedly rather barmy website (with an impressively old school approach) but it provides an interesting take on things and apparently sprung up in opposition to the original SRA panic:

http://www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/dickens.htm

It claims that there were 7 dickens dossiers in total and that they sprawled from allegations against Hayman and the PIE, through to the current day Westminster abuse scandal and along the way took in apparently homophobic accusations at Buckingham palace before ending up at SRA and the procedure used to look into it.

The picture they paint of Dickens is of a very opinionated, bigoted, energetic and unreliable character.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> (i) What has been proven - that Peter Hayman was a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange, that he was a member of the establishment and that the establishment protected him as best it could using contemporaneous legislation.



Various authorities are content to use the language of proven facts when describing a bunch of Cyril Smith stuff, so I think its quite reasonable to add these to the list. For example:



> On 27 November 2012, the Crown Prosecution Service said that Smith should have been charged with crimes of abuse more than 40 years earlier. In a statement, Greater Manchester Police said the boys "were victims of physical and sexual abuse" by the ex-Rochdale MP. Smith was never charged although investigations were undertaken in 1970, 1998, and 1999. The method of assessing the probability of a conviction has changed since 1970, and the decision not to charge Smith then necessitated the outcome of the 1998 investigation. Following the sexual abuse allegations, Rochdale Council removed a Blue plaque to Smith from the town hall.[4][5]
> 
> Greater Manchester Police Assistant Chief Constable Steve Heywood said in a statement: "Although Smith cannot be charged or convicted posthumously, from the overwhelming evidence we have it is right and proper we should publicly recognise that young boys were sexually and physically abused."[6]



(taken from wikipedia to save time http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith )

There are lots of other Cyril Smith strands that we may or may not ever learn enough about to add to the proven pile.



> of category (ii), the focus should be upon a detailed examination of its contents and, *more to the point*, how these claims came about



More to the point of where we are at right now with this particular discussion maybe, but surely not more to the point of investigations than the content. Either the content becomes strong enough to lead to prosecutions or official narratives about the crimes of deceased perpetrators, or it doesn't. Because if there is one difference between how the police etc will treat reports of sex crimes now compared to how they often did before the post-Savile shitstorm, its that the reality (or the impression) that early investigational work will excessively focus on the credibility and motives of the victim was part of the historical problem that must now be overcome.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> This is an admittedly rather barmy website (with an impressively old school approach) but it provides an interesting take on things and apparently sprung up in opposition to the original SRA panic:
> 
> http://www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/dickens.htm
> 
> ...



Although I've been happy to share various thoughts on Dickens the person in this thread, the bottom line for me is that we should probably think of him as mostly a conduit for forwarding material his constituents and other members of the public sent to him, to higher offices.

I've not looked at that link yet, since not in the mood to look at anything barmy right now. But the report that came out recently into allegations of coverup/missing home office files, or one of the previous investigations into this issue, certainly went into detail about some of the correspondence of Dickens that could still be found on file. And one of those cases did involve someone who was upset that 'their son had become homosexual as a result of experiences when working at Buckingham Palace'.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 28, 2014)

Out of interest, have there been any women suspected of being involved in these paedo rings? 

And that does sound a bit mental tbh elbows


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

It's definitely worth a read actually - going through it now, it's well evidenced and well reasoned.  Whoever wrote it clearly knows their stuff, presumably because they were at the receiving end of Dickens' SRA ire nearly 20 years ago.

I had no idea that Dickens was the main political proponent of SRA in the UK before I raised it in relation to these abuse allegations - it simply struck me that similar questions were starting to arise.

e2a - amusing to add that that website has Dickens and Cyril Smith collaborating on a Bananarama charity single...


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Dickens also featured in my posts several times prior in this thread because some time ago when I briefly had a cheap subscription to online historical archive of crap newspapers like the Express, a couple of stories about him caught my eye. It was possible to add a little more meat to the bones of how he was treated on the occasions he was making a real nuisance of himself by doing stuff like '(ab)using parliamentary privilege' in regards Peter Hayman.

In particular, that when he scheduled a press-conference to talk about such stuff, he instead had to turn it into a press conference about the affair he had been having, and how he was leaving his wife (he went back to her later if I recall). Exquisite timing, though I doubt I'll ever find out exactly how the press came to be aware of the affair, and there are explanations which are no more sinister than the usual press expose thang.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> Although I've been happy to share various thoughts on Dickens the person in this thread, the bottom line for me is that we should probably think of him as mostly a conduit for forwarding material his constituents and other members of the public sent to him, to higher offices.
> 
> I've not looked at that link yet, since not in the mood to look at anything barmy right now. But the report that came out recently into allegations of coverup/missing home office files, or one of the previous investigations into this issue, certainly went into detail about some of the correspondence of Dickens that could still be found on file. And one of those cases did involve someone who was upset that 'their son had become homosexual as a result of experiences when working at Buckingham Palace'.



That would be dossier number 3, according the website linked to:

*



			DOSSIER NUMBER 3: 
 Vice Ring At The Palace Dossier 
Nov 25th 1983
		
Click to expand...

*


> It is only four months since Dickens sent his Dossier of Shame (Dossier 2) to Hailsham.  On November 25th 1983 he claims that a homosexual vice ring is operating inside Buckingham palace and he has handed the dossier to the Home Secretary, Leon Brittan.  Dickens said the Home Secretary had promised to investigate the allegations against ten men .  This dossier seems an adjunct to the previous two but is still a form of gay-bashing for Dickens.  It does not appear to directly concern PIE or paedophillary but rather  homosexuality.  Dickens' informant appears to be a young man who has kiss-and-tell stories about gay trystes at the Palace.  Dickens says his informant was 16 at the time (and therefore would then have been under age) but this kind of activity does not constitute a vice-ring.  Did Brittan look into it? Did the police Look into it?  These are valid questions.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Out of interest, have there been any women suspected of being involved in these paedo rings?
> 
> And that does sound a bit mental tbh elbows



Theres been one reported victim who included abuse of a type that wasn't described in detail in the article, committed by a drunk female at one of the parties. I forget off the top of my head what 'rank' she was said to be, quite possibly MP.

As for the mental stuff, its an example of attitudes relating to homosexuality muddying the waters for sure. There were other details I didn't mention that could link it to other stuff that has a more solid foundation though, its rather unclear, and the report was a bit nervous about going into any detail that could identify the potential victim, whether or not they were an actual victim.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> That would be dossier number 3, according the website linked to:



Regarding the Royal case specifically, see pages 16 & 17 of this for a start, i.e. the  report stuff I've just been going on about thats relevant to this case. And the last three paragraphs of page 25, and page 26 for Leon Brittans reply to Dickens about this matter in particular.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/372926/Interim_Report_-_Annex_E.PDF


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> Regarding the Royal case specifically, see pages 16 & 17 of this for a start, i.e. the  report stuff I've just been going on about thats relevant to this case. And the last three paragraphs of page 25, and page 26 for Leon Brittans reply to Dickens about this matter in particular.
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/372926/Interim_Report_-_Annex_E.PDF



The website that I linked to has a transcript of the letter so I am aware of its contents.  Useful link nonetheless.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

Thinking more about Dickens involvement here, there are so many potentially awful consequences of his actions on SRA.

What is apparent most clearly from the "paedophile rings" uncovered recently is that children and teenagers in care are exceptionally vulnerable to abuse.

Which rather begs the question, how many children and teenagers were abused in care because of Dickens' obsession with sexual deviancy, having been removed from their family because of his politicking?


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> The website that I linked to has a transcript of the letter so I am aware of its contents.  Useful link nonetheless.



Well thats certainly one area where that website tries too hard, it describes those Brittan replies in a manner that multiplies their significance and scope too much. Hopefully you can tell that I've been uninterested in inflating the importance of Dickens 'dossiers' for a long time. But given how meticulous that site comes across as being when is as it puts names and dates of all different sorts of Dickens dossiers, its a bit odd that they want to describe the response from Brittan as being a response to 'the Westminster Dossier'. As part of a balanced diet the site appears to be fine for adding to the picture.

Another reason for people to rebalance the importance of Dickens dossiers in their mind is that it's fairly likely that sections of the press have, at times, been using aspects of the Dickens dossier story and cover-up as placeholders or providers of innuendo for stories they cannot tell properly and people they cannot name at the moment. Other ways to achieve the same result have been gifted to them recently, so perhaps the importance attached to Dickens stuff will diminish.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> Well thats certainly one area where that website tries too hard. Hopefully you can tell that I've been uninterested in inflating the importance of Dickens 'dossiers' for a long time. But given how meticulous that site comes across as being when is as it puts names and dates of all different sorts of Dickens dossiers, its a bit odd that they want to describe the response from Brittan as being a response to 'the Westminster Dossier'. As part of a balanced diet the site appears to be fine for adding to the picture.
> 
> Another reason for people to rebalance the importance of Dickens dossiers in their mind is that it's fairly likely that sections of the press have, at times, been using aspects of the Dickens dossier story and cover-up as placeholders or providers of innuendo for stories they cannot tell properly and people they cannot name.



Oh come on!

That is truly magical thinking.

"The papers can't say what they mean but they are indicating the truth to me by saying something else and I have insight into what that truth really is."

That's semantically preposterous.

e2a - are you saying that website is factually incorrect because, if so, I would be interested to know on what basis?


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> That is truly magical thinking.
> 
> "The papers can't say what they mean but they are indicating the truth to me by saying something else and I have insight into what that truth really is."
> 
> That's semantically preposterous.



Those who have been paying attention know that whilst the situation created at times is indeed preposterous, what I am describing has in fact actually been happening. Except you do a great disservice to the picture I am describing by repeatedly using the word 'truth'. I am not claiming that the press know a truth, and that I also know it to be true. What Im saying is the press know a story, or rather a collection of stories. So do lots of other people, because the internet exists, and a lot of the stories have been around a long time. And sections of the press will try to hint at the story, or wink at those readers who already think they are in the know, or attempt to create pressure that would change the situation in a manner that let them say a little more of the story.

And indeed in this case, more of the stories have come out over time, although not to the extent that the innuendo is gone. But not long ago it reached so far that it looked like we wouldnt have to speak in silly riddles about it anymore at all, but that hasnt quite proven to be the case, hence my waffle. I probably haven't adjusted to the latest reality and am being a bit more cautious than I need to be right now, but since I don't have parliamentary privilege or a good legal team, I'm not about to misspeak now.

But to be clear, I'm talking about one specific name, and when I speak of press innuendo I am certainly making some comparisons to the kind of hideous homophobic sneering that certain publications have had a field day with when certain politicians have almost been dragged out of the closet by sustained rumour. Regardless or not of whether any of it is true, I can observe it as a phenomenon without concluding that there is no smoke without fire.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> Those who have been paying attention know that whilst the situation created at times is indeed preposterous, what I am describing has in fact actually been happening. Except you do a great disservice to the picture I am describing by repeatedly using the word 'truth'. I am not claiming that the press know a truth, and that I also know it to be true. What Im saying is the press know a story, or rather a collection of stories. So do lots of other people, because the internet exists, and a lot of the stories have been around a long time. And sections of the press will try to hint at the story, or wink at those readers who already think they are in the know, or attempt to create pressure that would change the situation in a manner that let them say a little more of the story.
> 
> And indeed in this case, more of the stories have come out over time, although not to the extent that the innuendo is gone. But not long ago it reached so far that it looked like we wouldnt have to speak in silly riddles about it anymore at all, but that hint quite proven to be the case, hence my waffle. I probably haven't adjusted to the latest reality and am being a bit more cautious than I need to be right now, but since I don't have parliamentary privilege or a good legal team, I'm not about to misspeak now.
> 
> ...



So, to be clear, you are talking about rumour and innuendo?


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

> e2a - are you saying that website is factually incorrect because, if so, I would be interested to know on what basis?



On what basis can the site use the few Dickens letters, both to and from him, to make the claim in big red letters 'Allegations against Leon Brittan utterly false'?

They do a fine job of alerting people to all the overblown dodgy crap of Dickens, and all the reasons that undue emphasis should not be attached to tales of his dossiers being suppressed. I was simply complaining that they over-egged the extent that the letters prove their own case against Dickens.

They said quite specifically that the dossier was just another collection of third-hand tittle-tattle sent to him in letters which didn't stand the test of law.

That is certainly true of some of the material he gave to the Home Office. However there is much that is not covered by the material available, and even the letter they have transcribed includes the following:



> I am now able to tell you that, in general terms, the view of the Director of Public Prosecutions is that two of the letters you forwarded could for a basis for enquiries by the police and they are now being passed to the appropriate authorities.



In other words, for me even if 99% of what Dickens forwarded to the home office was useless, there is no need to pretend that it was 100%. Because even in some fucked up world where most victims were actually fakes, its not right to use that to make the genuine ones vanish from the picture.


----------



## Diamond (Nov 28, 2014)

elbows said:


> On what basis can the site use the few Dickens letters, both to and from him, to make the claim in big red letters 'Allegations against Leon Brittan utterly false'?
> 
> They do a fine job of alerting people to all the overblown dodgy crap of Dickens, and all the reasons that undue emphasis should not be attached to tales of his dossiers being suppressed. I was simply complaining that they over-egged the extent that the letters prove their own case against Dickens.
> 
> ...



At the very least that website raises serious questions about the provenance of the person, Dickens, who initially made these allegations and the style in which he chose to advance them.

I was not aware of any of this until earlier this afternoon and it has been widely overlooked and / or ignored in the reporting to date, perhaps on the recommendation of those now conducting the multiple inquiries that relate to his allegations.

I was too young to experience the SRA stuff first hand but did a fair bit of research into it a few years ago as a matter of interest - were you aware of the allegations then and, if so, what was your view on Dickens at the time and subsequently?


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> So, to be clear, you are talking about rumour and innuendo?



Yes, very much so. For the sake of any possible victims out there, those certainly aren't the only words I would use to describe this stuff though, words like allegation and accusation should also be used, and names of specific police operations mentioned.

One of the notable characteristics of the Savile abuse and its implications for society, the media, and a range of authorities and institutions, was the degree to which rumours about his offending existed over large swathes of time. So there are important lessons to be learnt on that front, and clear reasons why the pursuit of other high-profile, historical offenders have made use of historical rumours as starting points, or at least not dismissed them out of hand if they've come up in the course of investigations. We can discuss rumours sensibly without implying that they are proof of anything.


----------



## elbows (Nov 28, 2014)

Diamond said:


> I was too young to experience the SRA stuff first hand but did a fair bit of research into it a few years ago as a matter of interest - were you aware of the allegations then and, if so, what was your view on Dickens at the time and subsequently?



Nothing I historically knew of SRA and the way its been reported over the years involved Dickens, and I doubt I experienced the initial reporting of it first hand, was too young or not paying attention.

But long-time participants in this thread were well aware of Dickens, including some of his downsides and his position on the political and rhetorical spectrum, many many months before the 'Dickens dossiers' became something of a press fixation. If memory serves me correctly, a lot of our attention would have been on the naming of Peter Hayman in parliament by Dickens. A lot of the posts about him were probably by me, and I expect a lot of my recent comments about the possible low quality of his dossiers would have been entirely absent because the dossiers were not where our attention was. Since Hayman is the one instance that met your criteria for proven earlier, you can probably imagine why Dickens naming of him, and the consequences, would have been considered interesting.

I believe there were a number of occasions on the thread where certain commentators in the media, and historical articles, made comparison to the SRA stuff and false panic, including considering what might happen in the wake of Savile. They tended to draw suspicion here when they appeared to be overdoing it and pushing for an atmosphere which would, whilst perhaps saving some innocent people from damaging and false accusations, not likely encourage the exposure of historical abuse in the manner the Savile revelations clearly deem necessary.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 30, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...interview-no-doubt-one-politician-abused-kids


----------



## laptop (Nov 30, 2014)

_Mirror_ has the perfect tabloid story:



> *VIP paedophile ring 'abused teenage boy INSIDE Buckingham Palace and Balmoral Castle' *


----------



## elbows (Nov 30, 2014)

Here are the Exaro versions of that palace story:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5420/revealed-buried-files-link-buckingham-palace-to-paedophilia
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5419/buckingham-palace-drawn-into-scandal-over-paedophile-ring

Fun timing considering we were just discussing this stuff yesterday, and I linked to the page that has all the reports earlier this month. At least Exaro were honest enough to admit where & when the info came from, and that the media hadn't noticed this stuff at the time.

I can take the story a bit more seriously now that there is a Peter Hayman link. But since the parents and the son declined to comment to Exaro, and we just have some friend of the family adding words to the story, I'm still finding it rather hard to rule out possibilities that could be more complicated than the term abuse would do justice to.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2014)

The Sunday Express is carrying a story that associates of Willie McRae believe he was murdered by security forces because he had information on a Westminster paedophile ring.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/541793/SNP-activist-killed-over-child-sex-files

For those who don't know of him, MacRae was a solicitor and well-known SNP activist who died in mysterious circumstances in 1985.  There have been many theories about his death (some remarkably nutty), but it remains the case that there are also curiosities.  He was said to have committed suicide by shooting himself in the head on a remote Highland road.  However, the gun was found some distance from his body - 60 feet - too far to have fallen from his hand, seems also to have been fired twice, and had no fingerprints, although MacRae had not been wearing gloves.  He had also changed a tyre some miles back on the remote road (a separate incident from the slashed tyres in the Express story - that's a new revelation.  Or new to me).  It is questioned why he'd do that only to drive on a few miles before shooting himself (the spot he was found now has a cairn to mark his death, but at the time of his death was no more significant than any other place on the road).  The briefcase he was known to have been carrying when he left Glasgow was not found. And so on.  (I have a book somewhere on the case.  He was a friend of a friend).

Whatever the truth of the claim he was about to expose the paedophile ring, the Sunday Express in Scotland carries the claim on its front page.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 30, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> They're heavily invested in this. So I think they must believe it. I find that more credible than the alternative narrative that they are establishment stooges.



Investment doesn't necessarily imply belief (for even a journeyman journo, belief is the last thing you want - what you seek is detachment). It could as likely imply that they have access to material that's currently _sub judice_, or material that they can't report until they've confirmed it. For journos, tracking down witnesses and victims just a couple of years after a crime is hard enough. Standing up a 30+ year-old case is exponentially more difficult.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 30, 2014)

Diamond said:


> (ii) What is claimed - roughly in ascending order, coordinated child sex abuse by members of the establishment, that was protected by the security services and involved the murder of those children.



The "Establishment" paedophile network isn't particularly characterised by claims of murder, so your point (such as it is) is badly made. Whereas it *is* characterised by claims of sexual abuse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 30, 2014)

Diamond said:


> This is an admittedly rather barmy website (with an impressively old school approach) but it provides an interesting take on things and apparently sprung up in opposition to the original SRA panic:
> 
> http://www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/dickens.htm
> 
> ...



SAFF was set up and run by someone who was a direct victim of Dickens, and of Roger Cook's attempted monstering. He also had his shop torched as a result of the ensuing media coverage. It's not just barmy, it's credulous and biased too. Chris is a well-meaning fruitcake.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 30, 2014)

elbows said:


> Nothing I historically knew of SRA and the way its been reported over the years involved Dickens, and I doubt I experienced the initial reporting of it first hand, was too young or not paying attention.
> 
> But long-time participants in this thread were well aware of Dickens, including some of his downsides and his position on the political and rhetorical spectrum, many many months before the 'Dickens dossiers' became something of a press fixation. If memory serves me correctly, a lot of our attention would have been on the naming of Peter Hayman in parliament by Dickens. A lot of the posts about him were probably by me, and I expect a lot of my recent comments about the possible low quality of his dossiers would have been entirely absent because the dossiers were not where our attention was. Since Hayman is the one instance that met your criteria for proven earlier, you can probably imagine why Dickens naming of him, and the consequences, would have been considered interesting.
> 
> I believe there were a number of occasions on the thread where certain commentators in the media, and historical articles, made comparison to the SRA stuff and false panic, including considering what might happen in the wake of Savile. They tended to draw suspicion here when they appeared to be overdoing it and pushing for an atmosphere which would, whilst perhaps saving some innocent people from damaging and false accusations, not likely encourage the exposure of historical abuse in the manner the Savile revelations clearly deem necessary.



With regard to SRA, Dickens got most of his information from (as mentioned previously on this thread) a small clique of UK "concerned Christians" who worked in church voluntary social welfare organisations or in the social services. His SRA "dossiers" mostly re-hashed or geographically-relocated stories from the US, or iterated parts of UK abuse investigations from what were extremely-poorly conducted interrogations of children If you've had the misfortune to read even a random selection of the transcripts (from the few recordings that weren't "lost" or destroyed), you can see a thick web of leading questions that informed what the children then reported. The likes of Diane Core (founder of the Childwatch charity) and Valerie Sinason (an academic pyschologist of little repute outside of synthesising abuse scares) lent the dossiers spurious credibility, but they were shite. Chris Bray lost his business, and an acquaintance lost his job, and later drank himself to death, because of the witch's brew Dickens and his cohorts stirred up. Dickens' credulity may have spoiled as many or more lives than the abuse he "reported" did.


----------



## elbows (Nov 30, 2014)

This is one of many reasons why I keep saying that I'm looking for prosecutions that were not the subject of historical rumour, and why I treat all the historical rumours with a variety of suspicions, whilst not ruling them out.

Diane Core (Childwatch) probably needs more attention since she's been quoted in a variety of articles regarding abuse post-Savile.


----------



## elbows (Nov 30, 2014)

Her attitude towards reality and facts versus feelings and suspicions doesn't seem to have improved, at least as of March this year.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Did-...ec-Alexander/story-20818518-detail/story.html



> THE founder of a children's charity believes a paedophile former police chief who was jailed for raping his own daughter may have abused others.
> 
> Ex-Humberside Police chief superintendent Alec Alexander was jailed for ten years in 2008 for raping and abusing his daughter Sarah and possessing almost 66,000 indecent images of children.





> "I know that Alexander has other victims, I have a gut feeling," said Mrs Core.
> 
> "I know he's got victims elsewhere. If two or three of them could have the courage to come forward."
> 
> ...





> She described Alexander as "very cold, no emotion at all, quite calculating", adding: "The man is vile and this is the tip of a very nasty iceberg. I suspect his activities run very deep and very wide."


----------



## elbows (Nov 30, 2014)

Actually maybe she has only been quoted once in recent times in relation to political paedophiles. In the Daily Mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...er-detailing-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html



> A child abuse campaigner who worked closely with Mr Dickens said the missing dossier could have toppled the government of the day.
> 
> Dianne Core, who founded the charity Childwatch in the 1980s, would not reveal the names of the alleged Westminster paedophiles she believes were in the file.
> 
> But she claimed some belonged to Mrs Thatcher’s government – and called on David Cameron to help end the cover-up. ‘This file will never see the light of day because it could have brought a government down. It will have been shredded and burned,’ she said.


----------



## AnIdiot (Nov 30, 2014)

Anonymous now seem to be on the case: https://twitter.com/hashtag/OpDeathEaters?src=hash


----------



## laptop (Nov 30, 2014)

amster said:


> Anonymous now seem to be on the case: https://twitter.com/hashtag/OpDeathEaters?src=hash



I can feel this going well already


----------



## el-ahrairah (Nov 30, 2014)

amster said:


> Anonymous now seem to be on the case: https://twitter.com/hashtag/OpDeathEaters?src=hash



not sure i find that particularly reassuring.


----------



## AnIdiot (Nov 30, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> not sure i find that particularly reassuring.



nor me


----------



## elbows (Dec 1, 2014)

Even by their standards its shit in so many ways.



> What the UK media depicts as "child sex" has left children missing the lower half of their bodies.





> Unlike in Gabon, the UK media is following the direction of the Paedophile Information Exchange and telling you these people are child lovers who need understanding and tolerance. They are telling you this is sex. Who controls the words controls your thoughts.





> The CSA inquiry in the UK is an attempt to depict a powerful cult as a string of isolated incidents of "sex abuse". The complicit UK media is running a huge propaganda campaign to conflate torture and murder with "paedophilia" and call for understanding of "paedophilia". This is not a group of sad paedophiles who need help and understanding. This is a torture and death cult with a powerful global human trafficking network. We demand that torture and murder be called torture and murder, not sex. This is an international cult and needs to be investigated as one, not simply as an endless series of isolated incidents confined to the UK. We call upon our comrades globally to help us investigate and demand an end to to the trafficking networks with arrests at the top not just the bottom. We demand an end to human trafficking and abuse complicity worldwide.



http://pastebin.com/1fjmHCnr


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 1, 2014)

This reads like a cross between nambla propaganda and conspiraloonery


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 1, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> not sure i find that particularly reassuring.


I'm certain I don't.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 1, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> The "Establishment" paedophile network isn't particularly characterised by claims of murder, so your point (such as it is) is badly made. Whereas it *is* characterised by claims of sexual abuse.


 
My point was clearly made but I suspect that you choose to misunderstand it. To be clear, it is - in recent days the claims of an establishment paedophile ring have developed to encompass the murder of children.  Because of the gravity of such claims, we should look to their associated epistemology before we take them seriously.



ViolentPanda said:


> SAFF was set up and run by someone who was a direct victim of Dickens, and of Roger Cook's attempted monstering. He also had his shop torched as a result of the ensuing media coverage. It's not just barmy, it's credulous and biased too. Chris is a well-meaning fruitcake.


 
What do you make of this guy's take on the current claims then?  For ease of reference, his analysis is here:

http://www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/dickens.htm

And for the not so curious it is summarised at the top of that page by the following:



> WE TOLD YOU SO!  Dickens 'Westminster Dossier' was just another collection of third-hand anecdotal tittle-tattle sent to him in letters which didn't stand the test of law.  Allegations against Leon Brittan utterly false


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 1, 2014)

Diamond said:


> My point was clearly made but I suspect that you choose to misunderstand it.



It's fairly easy to misunderstand. You said "....coordinated child sex abuse by members of the establishment....involved the murder of those children". *Not* "some of those children" or "a few of those children", but  "involved the murder of those children".



> To be clear, it is - in recent days the claims of an establishment paedophile ring have developed to encompass the murder of children.  Because of the gravity of such claims, we should look to their associated epistemology before we take them seriously.



Claims of Establishment paedophile rings occasionally killing their victims aren't just recent, they're historic too




> What do you make of this guy's take on the current claims then?  For ease of reference, his analysis is here:
> 
> http://www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/dickens.htm
> 
> And for the not so curious it is summarised at the top of that page by the following:



I make of it that a bloke I knew (I donated to SAFF back when it was called "Sorcerers' Apprentice Fighting Fund" and was a way of raising money to take the fight to the likes of Dickens) pretty much went fruitcake 25 years ago when he had his livelihood burned out from under him, and was and is persistently persecuted by local evangelical Christians. He shapes stories to fit his perceptions of how things "are". This is bucket rather than pinch of salt stuff.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 1, 2014)

Don Hale in the _Star_ yesterday:

_Labour’s John Mann, who has campaigned to uncover details of a Westminster paedophile ring operating in the 1970s and 80s, said he expected police to swoop in the New Year.

The news came as it emerged former policemen who have investigated the abuse network have been warned they could be arrested for breaching the Official Secrets Act if they speak out now.

There are calls for the retired officers to be given an amnesty from prosecution if they reveal what they know.

We can reveal that ex-Special Branch detective Tony Robinson says he received warnings about repeating facts relating to disgraced Liberal MP Cyril Smith and over his monitoring of other politicians.

Tony, 81, now retired and in poor health, said he was “shocked and surprised” by warnings from his old bosses at Lancashire Police.

He said they told him his knowledge was still protected by the Official Secrets Act (OSA), adding that he should not speak to the media.

Tony, who retired more than 20 years ago, said: “I took this call from a man at my old HQ telling me not to speak about things from years ago.
“I could hardly believe it.

"They have not been in touch for years and then to threaten me or point out that I am still covered by the OSA was ridiculous.

“The whole incident has stressed me out – I’m not well and can’t be doing with all this.”

Tony was the officer who found Cyril Smith’s prosecution files “deliberately hidden” in a Special Branch safe in Preston in the early 1970s [...]_​

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/412932/Two-MPs-face-child-sex-abuse-arrest

FYI Tony Robinson was one of the former Special Branch officers interviewed on camera by Peter Taylor in his 2002 series, _True Spies_.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/true_spies/2351169.stm

Transcripts of his contributions:

http://issuu.com/bristlekrs/docs/avt015_ts-vid001_2_3_-_true_spies_-


----------



## elbows (Dec 1, 2014)

Much as I believe it has been very useful at times for people to speak to the media, and may well be in future if investigations go nowhere, I'm more interested in them speaking to official investigators at this stage. So calls for an amnesty regarding the official secrets act sometimes confuse me - are they actually at risk if they tell the authorities what they know, as opposed to telling the media? Because I really don't imagine an amnesty that leaves them completely free to talk to the media happening, and it really isn't clear to me how much of an issue it is.


----------



## elbows (Dec 1, 2014)

I see John Allen got life. I was avoiding talking about it till sentencing was done, but I expect there are still some limits because others are due in court next year.

I note that what some consider to be the 'juicy' bit of the North Wales care home stuff, that boys were supplied from there to parties, has been in the news in recent days and the NCA have now come out and denied they are investigating him for supplying boys to others.



> Meanwhile, a National Crime Agency spokesman denied it was investigating Allen in connection with supplying boys to child sex parties for prominent political figures at Dolphin Square in central London, which was reported in the Sunday Times.
> 
> "We do not have any evidence to suggest that John Allen supplied children for others," said the spokesman.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-30268731

The main thing we'd heard about this angle in the past was Peter Morrison visiting one of the North Wales homes, although we'll have to wait a while to see if anything comes of that. And one victim who gave a video interview to Sky news some years back, which spoke of bring driven down to London for the parties. But the likes of the Mirror are reporting details that suggest a link between the North Wales stuff and Lambeth:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prolific-child-abuser-john-allen-4727494

Too much in there to quote it all, but here is a small sample:



> Margaret Thatcher's former aide Sir Peter Morrison is suspected of abusing boys in Allen's care in Wales while a former minister in Tony Blair's government is currently being probed over his alleged visits to Carroll's Angell Road children's home in Lambeth, south London.





> Official papers from that year show a boy placed in a Lambeth home was abused by Carroll, known as MJC, while two of the boy's brothers went to a Bryn Allen Community in Wales where youngsters were attacked by Allen.
> 
> The internal Lambeth council document, dated 23 September, 1998, states: "Additional information not yet in a statement is that the third brother of witness 1 and 2 was placed at Bryn Allen Community not Angell Road.
> 
> "However he has confirmed that he knew MJC who used to visit John Allen at the community.





> Another document dated September 18, 1998, reveals officers from Merseyside's Operation Care, who successfully investigated Carroll, were aware of the links.
> 
> It states: "Operation care (sic) has suggested a tie-up between Lambeth children and the enquiry in North Wales. North Wales Police say that Lambeth was informed of this in 1991."





> Carroll took boys on camping trips to the Caernarfon, north Wales, where he ran the Ozaman charity in the 1980s and later opened a hotel near Wrexham, where many children from the North Wales homes were abused.



Like I said, plenty more in the full article, but upon initial inspection not much we can get our teeth into beyond the links between Allen and Carroll.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 1, 2014)

elbows said:


> Even by their standards its shit in so many ways.
> 
> What the UK media depicts as "child sex" has left children missing the lower half of their bodies.
> 
> http://pastebin.com/1fjmHCnr



I think what they are doing is massively conflating that particular quote with the disturbing death of Vishal Mehrotra who has been linked to the events at Elm Tree Guesthouse.



> Part of Vishal’s body was found in woodland in West Sussex in February 1982, seven months after he disappeared. There was no trace of his legs, pelvis or lower spine or of his outer clothes or Superman underwear.



Although there's been no concrete proof his death was linked to events there. Full article


----------



## elbows (Dec 1, 2014)

Thanks for the link. At least its possible to work out how they leapt to that conclusion. Unlike the totally bizarre comments about the media somehow being soft on people by describing them only as paedophiles, and the suggestion that paedophiles are pittied rather than demonised by the press. Quite who that message is going to resonate with given its staggering detachment from reality is beyond me.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 1, 2014)

There's some useful stuff on the always excellent Spotlight On Abuse website re: Vishal's disappearance. Tragic and curious even if you chose to discount the Elm Tree Guesthouse angle that has been suggested by various people. 

Here


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 2, 2014)

More on John Allen and supposed links to Tory and Labour governments



> Two notorious paedophiles were at the centre of a nationwide network of abusers which allegedly included both Labour and Tory politicians, a Mirror investigation has found.
> 
> Detectives suspected 16 years ago that the children's home abuse ring spanned the country and involved hundreds of victims.
> 
> ...



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prolific-child-abuser-john-allen-4727494


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2014)

Thats the same one I linked to yesterday evening.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 2, 2014)

Apologies, it was early


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2014)

elbows said:


> Thanks for the link. At least its possible to work out how they leapt to that conclusion. Unlike the totally bizarre comments about the media somehow being soft on people by describing them only as paedophiles, and the suggestion that paedophiles are pittied rather than demonised by the press. Quite who that message is going to resonate with given its staggering detachment from reality is beyond me.



That is why I thought it reminded me of Nambla given its emphasis on how this abuse had nothing to do with 'child love'.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 3, 2014)

Apols if this has already been posted.  But 
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/541793/SNP-activist-killed-over-child-sex-files


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

articul8 said:


> Apols if this has already been posted.  But
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/541793/SNP-activist-killed-over-child-sex-files


you love the tory press, don't you


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> you love the tory press, don't you


Whut? Not sure what you are suggesting here: that the Tory press is deliberately muddying the water? Hardly - Willie McRae's death has been a mystery for years. Are you pointing to a larger story of disinformation?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Whut? Not sure what you are suggesting here: that the Tory press is deliberately muddying the water? Hardly - Willie McRae's death has been a mystery for years. Are you pointing to a larger story of disinformation?


i'm pointing to articul8's apparently uncritical acceptance of a story in a paper notable for its constant hysteria and support for the political right.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 3, 2014)

It is an interesting article - and very shocking if true.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 3, 2014)

articul8 said:


> It is an interesting article - and very shocking if true.


Danny posted it/related a week ago.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 3, 2014)

ok fair enough, hence my apologies - I haven't read 160 pages of this thread.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm pointing to articul8's apparently uncritical acceptance of a story in a paper notable for its constant hysteria and support for the political right.


It's entirely speculative like almost everything on this subject. Was curious about the emphasis on Tory.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

articul8 said:


> It is an interesting article - and very shocking if true.


it would be shocking. a true article in the express?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> It's entirely speculative like almost everything on this subject. Was curious about the emphasis on Tory.


how else would you describe the politics of the express?


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> how else would you describe the politics of the express?


Of course they are Tory. I am probably being thick but don't understand how this relates to spinning out this story.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

I mean, what is the Tory advantage here?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Of course they are Tory. I am probably being thick but don't understand how this relates to spinning out this story.


articul8 poses as a socialist. yet he uncritically accepts a tissue of supposition from a paper antipathetick to his political beliefs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I mean, what is the Tory advantage here?


there is a tension between the political beliefs articul8 affects and the political position espoused by the express. how many more times do you want me to say it before it seeps through your skull?


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

OK, your comment was about articlul8 rather than the Express. Now I understand.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 3, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> articul8 poses as a socialist. yet he uncritically accepts a tissue of supposition from a paper antipathetick to his political beliefs.


in this case I think the claim bears further investigation


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

articul8 said:


> in this case I think the claim bears further investigation


which claim, your claim of socialism or their claim of some malign conspiracy behind the death of this gentleman?


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

I put it back at you, Pickman's model, what is your theory of why the Express would be spinning out this story now? Chaff? That's assuming there is no basis for their speculation, of course - and supposing for a moment that there was some basis, why would they publish the story, except to sell papers? In which case, their Torytude is irrelevant really. The Mirror is just as bad.​


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I put it back at you, Pickman's model, what is your theory of why the Express would be spinning out this story now? Chaff? That's assuming there is no basis for their speculation, of course - and supposing for a moment that there was some basis, why would they publish the story, except to sell papers? In which case, their Torytude is irrelevant really. The Mirror is just as bad.​


because they paid for it


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> because they paid for it


LOL. Why pay for something you can get for free?
We should always ask ourselves why these Tories - or any news medium for that matter - are telling us this shit. Because it sells papers is an obvious answer, but not always an adequate one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> LOL. Why pay for something you can get for free?
> We should always ask ourselves why these Tories - or any news medium for that matter - are telling us this shit. Because it sells papers is an obvious answer, but not always an adequate one.


i am pleased to see you come round to my view of the veracity of the story.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 3, 2014)

Hmm. Although I'm not convinced that McRae committed suicide, I never said I believed their wilder claims. What interested me more was your theory of why they are making stuff up. 
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/the-death-of-willie-macrae-1.688252?14733


----------



## tim (Dec 4, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> The Sunday Fail bravely posts an article about dead people (possibly forgetting that Jeremy Thorpe is still alive).




He isn't anymore! So, lots of 70's Liberal stuff may emerge


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Dec 5, 2014)

Does this go here?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-30350179


----------



## albionism (Dec 5, 2014)

From Edwina Currie's diary:


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 6, 2014)

The DM is going with a story that is not news to anyone on this thread - it's just a re-statement with helpful photos.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ver-says-author-book-Cyril-Smith-scandal.html

The temperature is rising but.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 6, 2014)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5419/buckingham-palace-drawn-into-scandal-over-paedophile-ring

barking mad site blates


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 6, 2014)

> Two members of Theresa May’s panel inquiring into child sex abuse are facing calls to resign after being accused of sending threatening or insulting emails to victims who had criticised the inquiry.
> 
> Lawyers for one abuse survivor have written to the home secretary to complain of a string of unsolicited communications, including an allegedly threatening email sent two days before an official meeting that both panellists and an abuse survivor were due to attend



Is it ok to say this is SM? He named loads of people om twitter. He needs real help. I don't know what to help him. I wish i could.


----------



## mango5 (Dec 7, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Is it ok to say this is SM? He named loads of people om twitter. He needs real help. I don't know what to help him. I wish i could.


I dunno if it's OK to say this.  laptop?


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 7, 2014)

I'm looking at this with a tired head so try to forgive me if this is nothing BUT....on www.exaronews.com there is a 'securedropbox' feature. Now firstly they should be compelling submitters to be using Tor and not relying on SSL. Even the Guardian does this and they're very poor at security (https://securedrop.theguardian.com/).

What mainly concerns me is there is no valid SSL certificate. This _could_ be an indicator that a 3rd party is intercepting it's traffic....in a rather cack handed way. I.e anything sent or any contact made would be eavesdropped on or even modified/deleted.

This could be just a technical fuck up but jesus fucking wept of all of the sites not to have a valid cert?!


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 7, 2014)

Boris Sprinkler thoughts?


----------



## laptop (Dec 7, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Is it ok to say this is SM? He named loads of people om twitter. He needs real help. I don't know what to help him. I wish i could.



The Guardian's lawyers have OKd naming several people involved. I'm too tired to work out whether there are any missing dots.

The story is so badly written that it's not impossible it's had a thorough going-over.

I'd be very wary of naming anyone else - not _necessarily _on legal grounds, but in case the _Guardian_ have _any_ good reason - such as the mental health of a source - for not doing so.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 7, 2014)

DrRingDing said:


> Boris Sprinkler thoughts?


Pm me the link


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Dec 7, 2014)

I'd suggest that the CA root certificate model is broken when you're talking about state actors.

Unfortunately so, probably and for some situations, is Tor.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 7, 2014)

More Smith revelations from another ex-cop

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/lat...ked-to-paedo-brothel-murder-probe-says-ex-cop


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 7, 2014)

*'Willie Whitelaw ordered police to scrap inquiry into VIP child sex abuse ring': Police launch probe into sensational new cover-up claims*

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aunch-probe-sensational-new-cover-claims.html

Detectives are investigating claims that former Conservative Home Secretary William Whitelaw ordered police to drop an investigation into a VIP paedophile ring.
Whitelaw allegedly told a senior Metropolitan Police boss to quash a year-long investigation into a gang accused of abusing 40 children, the youngest of whom was six.
*The alleged intervention came in 1980* after a newspaper revealed the country’s chief prosecutor was considering 350 offences against the gang, including allegations it ‘obtained young boys for politicians, prominent lawyers and film stars’.

...chronology suggests not this one then...







Whitelaw was Home Sec until 1983, this probe was spiked in 1984 presumably when the Home Sec was...( wait for it )...

Leon Brittan ( 1983-1985 )

...although WW is "a name" that has been seen floating on the surface of the contaminated rumour flow he got an interesting mention from an ex Bryn Estyn poster on DIF who :

..was 'shipped out' of Bryn Estyn after witnessing certain events. Spent years in the system as a result... 



> I, and others know that they got worried when I ended up in the Care system as I was removed as far into the system as was possible.. Seriously heavy Political Animals took a personal and direct interest in my case inasmuch as the Home Secretary of the time looked in on me on two occasions.





> In 1978... Whitelaw



...which ofcourse raises something of a query as 1978 makes it Merlyn Rees , so either the name or date is incorrect.....although ofcourse its easier to mix up 1978 / 79 than Rees / Whitelaw...




* ‘MP ‘was at snuff film lad’s murder'; Exclusive: VIP Paedophile Horror’*

Mike Sullivan and Tom Morgan,
The Sun, December 6th, 2014

http://ianpace.wordpress.com/2014/0...ber-15th-2014-and-links-to-newspaper-reports/

DETECTIVES probing the Westminster paedophile ring are investigating bombshell evidence that an MP was involved in the murder of a child in a snuff movie.

A young boy sold for sex is said to have died in a torture session filmed at Amsterdam’s notorious Blue Boy vice club.

Allegations that the unnamed MP was present can be revealed today as The Sun exposes the sinister web at the heart of the scandal.

The claims mean police are now investigating FOUR child murders linked to the alleged abuse ring.

Informants said the MP was present at the murder after going to Holland for sex with boys supplied by paedo fixer Warwick Spinks.

Met detectives are now re-examining files on Spinks amid claims he was a regular visitor to Elm Guest House, where the alleged systematic abuse of children sparked the original VIP inquiry in 2012.

Boys were allegedly taken to the guest house, in Barnes, South-West London, and the upmarket Dolphin Square flats near Westminster, to have sex with MPs including Cyril Smith, and VIP figures.

They included a police chief, an MI5 man, two pop stars and Soviet spy Anthony Blunt.

Yesterday it emerged that police who investigated Spinks in the 1990s were told a boy had died at the Amsterdam club while the MP was present.

A source said: “Officers were told Spinks knew the MP and arranged a tour to Amsterdam. While there he went to the Blue Boy bar, where Spinks was running a brothel.

“The MP was said to have been present when a boy died during an orgy which was being filmed. The information was not confirmed and the MP’s identity never surfaced.

“However, clear evidence that boys were tortured was discovered.”

Spinks was jailed in 1995 for sex offences, including abducting a boy of 14 and taking him to Amsterdam to be abused in a brothel.

Evidence from the Spinks investigation is now being analysed by the Met’s three-pronged probe into networks of VIP paedophiles. Police never found the snuff films, and have been hampered by the loss of files amid claims of an establishment cover-up. The team are already probing three other alleged child murders, one by a Tory MP.

The families of two boys believed to have been murdered by Sidney Cooke’s paedophile gang are also urging police to investigate possible links to the VIP ring.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 14, 2014)

DrRingDing said:


> I'm looking at this with a tired head so try to forgive me if this is nothing BUT....on www.exaronews.com there is a 'securedropbox' feature. Now firstly they should be compelling submitters to be using Tor and not relying on SSL. Even the Guardian does this and they're very poor at security (https://securedrop.theguardian.com/).
> 
> What mainly concerns me is there is no valid SSL certificate. This _could_ be an indicator that a 3rd party is intercepting it's traffic....in a rather cack handed way. I.e anything sent or any contact made would be eavesdropped on or even modified/deleted.
> 
> This could be just a technical fuck up but jesus fucking wept of all of the sites not to have a valid cert?!



I asked them. Next day it was tweeted that they had taken it down. Draw your own conclusions..


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 14, 2014)

From the horses mouths... Great read

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5429/protected-paedophile-mps-and-prominent-people-say-police


----------



## Quartz (Dec 14, 2014)

And

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips


----------



## free spirit (Dec 14, 2014)

It's all coming out now, floodgates have either opened or are bulging, cracked and on the verge of spilling open and letting the whole torrid affair spill out into public.

Which one of them will crack first and turn grass on the rest of them?


----------



## laptop (Dec 14, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> I asked them. Next day it was tweeted that they had taken it down. Draw your own conclusions..



I emailed one of them. It's still there. Not inspiring confidence in their admin abilities...


----------



## laptop (Dec 14, 2014)

Quartz said:


> And
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips



That links to extracts from a discussion among (mostly retired) cops:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5429/protected-paedophile-mps-and-prominent-people-say-police


----------



## free spirit (Dec 14, 2014)

laptop said:


> I emailed one of them. It's still there. Not inspiring confidence in their admin abilities...


it looks to have a valid SSL certificate as of 10th December 2014, so on the contrary it looks like they responded and resolved the issue quickly after being notified about it.


----------



## laptop (Dec 14, 2014)

free spirit said:


> it looks to have a valid SSL certificate as of 10th December 2014, so on the contrary it looks like they responded and resolved the issue quickly after being notified about it.



I didn't check beyond seeing that Firefox tells me https://dropbox.exaronews.com/ (following link from http://www.exaronews.com/content/tell-us-in-confidence ) is untrusted: 



> The certificate is not trusted because no issuer chain was provided.



Is Firefox wrong then?


----------



## free spirit (Dec 14, 2014)

laptop said:


> I didn't check beyond seeing that Firefox tells me https://dropbox.exaronews.com/ (following link from http://www.exaronews.com/content/tell-us-in-confidence ) is untrusted:
> 
> 
> 
> Is Firefox wrong then?


I'm not getting that on firefox either. Are you sure it's not a chached version you're looking at?

Certfied by Geotrust.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Dec 14, 2014)

Have a look here:

https://sslcheck.globalsign.com/en_US/sslcheck?host=dropbox.exaronews.com#93.95.227.25

edited to use better (slower) SSL checker site.


----------



## laptop (Dec 14, 2014)

free spirit said:


> Are you sure it's not a chached version you're looking at?



Yes, I did a forced reload.



free spirit said:


> Certfied by Geotrust.



Odd.


----------



## laptop (Dec 14, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Have a look here:
> 
> https://sslcheck.globalsign.com/en_US/sslcheck?host=dropbox.exaronews.com#93.95.227.25
> 
> edited to use better (slower) SSL checker site.



Ah!

From that:



> *Server configuration does not include all intermediate certificates*
> *Users may receive strong browser warnings and experience slow performance*



Which appears, on the face of it, to be what Firefox is restating to me.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 14, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Have a look here:
> 
> https://sslcheck.globalsign.com/en_US/sslcheck?host=dropbox.exaronews.com#93.95.227.25
> 
> edited to use better (slower) SSL checker site.


That gave it an F rating when I tried it, which doesn't sound good, though it does show the SSL certificate.

That though is the extent of my knowledge on the subject of website security.


----------



## happie chappie (Dec 14, 2014)

If anyone's interested in how the establishment covers up sex scandals they could do worse than listen to Tom Mangold's investigation into the Jeremy Thorpe affair which was only broadcast on Thorpe's death and which Mangold first started working on 35 years ago.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04wz633

I know Jeremy Thorpe wasn't a paedophile by the way. But there's a lot of relevant stuff in the programme nonetheless.


----------



## Roadkill (Dec 14, 2014)

I've not posted on this thread but have been watching with interest, and on catching up with the last few pages just noticed this:



elbows said:


> Her attitude towards reality and facts versus feelings and suspicions doesn't seem to have improved, at least as of March this year.
> 
> http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Did-...ec-Alexander/story-20818518-detail/story.html





> "There's a suppurating boil in the city of Hull that needs lancing and those people who put a plaster on it every five months to keep it from opening – one day they won't be able to stop it opening up and letting all its filth out."



I know nothing about Core and can't comment on her credibility.  However, some time ago I heard a tale about abuse centred on a children's home here, involving boys being trafficked to London and elsewhere, and which is likely to come out into the open before too long.  The person who told me about it is in a position to know some of what is happening behind the scenes, although he is prone to a conspiracy theory and I take much of what he says with a pinch of salt.  I couldn't help noticing some time ago, though, that a news story linked to further up the thread (can't find the post at a quick search - will go back and look in more detail when I've time) talks about boys being brought to London from children's homes up north.  The story was illustrated with a photo credited to the _Hull Daily Mail_.  My informant also hinted at children from the same home(s?) being taken to Scarborough, where there've been well publicised allegations of a paedophile ring operating in the 70s and 80s, possibly involving Jimmy Savile.

It seems highly likely that there'll be more revelations about abuse in and linked to children's homes in various parts of the country.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if one of them was in Hull.  Will keep my ear to the ground.


*e2a*  This is the story I mentioned.  I was wrong about the photo credit, which is to a local news agency rather than the HDM, but still seems to hint at a connection here.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 16, 2014)

Michael Mansfield QC to head inquiry into government's shortcomings vis a vis CSA. This comes from the Daily Mail, so apologies.


> Theresa May's troubled child abuse inquiry suffered a fresh setback last night as it emerged that a rival investigation is to be held by a top human rights lawyer.
> 
> Michael Mansfield QC, who represented Mohamed Al Fayed at the inquests into the deaths of Princess Diana and Al Fayed’s son Dodi, has been appointed as the judge of a new ‘people’s tribunal’ on historic abuse claims.
> 
> ...


----------



## ska invita (Dec 16, 2014)

VIP paedophile networks 'shut down police investigations which got too close', retired officers claim
Almost 30 former detectives have turned whistleblower in an online forum to expose how undercover operations were suddenly “canned” by powerful figures

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vip-paedophile-networks-shut-down-4807293

bit tabloidy but hey


----------



## laptop (Dec 16, 2014)

ska invita said:


> VIP paedophile networks 'shut down police investigations which got too close', retired officers claim
> Almost 30 former detectives have turned whistleblower in an online forum to expose how undercover operations were suddenly “canned” by powerful figures
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vip-paedophile-networks-shut-down-4807293
> ...



It's a writeup of the board postings at http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5429/protected-paedophile-mps-and-prominent-people-say-police - handlily digested from the person who doesn't have time to decode it from plod-board-ese.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 17, 2014)

Ben Fellows charged with perverting the course of justice. Going back to 2012.



> An actor from Solihull is being held in custody after being charged with perverting the course of justice.
> Ben Fellows, of Redstone Farm Road, Olton, who is understood to have been living on the Spanish island of Lanzarote in recent months, is due to appear before Southwark Crown Court on December 29.
> 
> The 40 year-old was arrested at Birmingham International Airport in the early hours of Monday morning by officers from West Midlands Police on behalf of Metropolitan Police.
> ...


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 17, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Ben Fellows charged with perverting the course of justice. Going back to 2012.


Mind how you go, commenting on this.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2014)

November and December 2012 pretty clearly indicates this is on the Clarke stuff - two links:

First one outlines that the Met cleared Clarke in december of that year - second one talks of exaro/Hencke's role. Both posted earlier i think but useful to have a reminder.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 17, 2014)

Yes, no comments should be made either way.


----------



## treelover (Dec 17, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Michael Mansfield QC to head inquiry into government's shortcomings vis a vis CSA. This comes from the Daily Mail, so apologies.




Who is funding this?, such tribunals don't come cheap, even though very welcome.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 17, 2014)

treelover said:


> Who is funding this?, such tribunals don't come cheap, even though very welcome.


I don't know and the article doesn't say.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 17, 2014)

treelover said:


> Who is funding this?, such tribunals don't come cheap, even though very welcome.


We the people.


----------



## treelover (Dec 17, 2014)

> Questions have also been raised about its funding. Organisers say they hope to raise money from the public, partly by selling wristbands carrying the slogan ‘sweep away the secrecy’.



from the article

Ah, its not been sorted yet and apparently Liz Davies has resigned from the steering committee


----------



## elbows (Dec 17, 2014)

Catching up on other reported stuff of the last week or so that I don't think got a mention in this thread yet.

The Lord Janner investigation is far from dead, two sources have told Exaro in this December 8th article that it has restarted, and witnesses are being reinterviewed. Several authorities appear to have decided that they can't just leave  it alone, and that if they have enough evidence for prosecution but Janners lawyers claim he is unfit to stand trial, they will insist on an independent medical assessment.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5424/lord-janner-faces-re-opened-police-probe-into-child-sex-abuse


----------



## elbows (Dec 17, 2014)

In this December 5th article regarding operation Pallial, we learn that some victims of North Wales care home abuse are receiving letters from government lawyers saying that so far ten deceased people would have been prosecuted if they were still alive (out of 120 potential suspects, 40 of whom are dead).

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/operation-pallial-ten-suspected-paedophiles-8229876


----------



## elbows (Dec 17, 2014)

Probably because it and the original April story are Daily Mail stories, I think I had completely missed this Elm Guest House angle:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tor-guest-house-used-VIP-paedophile-ring.html



> Two former police officers are being investigated over claims they sexually abused a former child actor at a guesthouse allegedly frequented by VIPs and politicians, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> Lee Towsey claims two undercover officers, who were themselves investigating abuse claims, sexually assaulted him at the Elm Guest House in South-West London.





> In an interview with The Mail on Sunday in April, Mr Towsey said he had sex with two officers who were gaining intelligence on the guesthouse prior to the June 1982 raid.
> 
> Mr Towsey worked as a masseur at the guesthouse but was 16 at the time of the offences, which was under the age of homosexual consent then. He said: ‘The first came in April and I had sex with him.
> 
> ...





> Metropolitan Police detectives launched the investigation after Mr Towsey reported the allegations to police in early 2013. It referred the matter the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), but the watchdog decided not to investigate and sent the case back to the Met.
> 
> The Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards is now leading the investigation, Operation Yvonne, into the former officers, who were police constables at the time of the alleged offence.
> 
> Scotland Yard has refused to release their names.



Like some other aspects of Elm Guest house and elsewhere, we can see issues of gay age of consent and sex work complicate the broader picture of these places/events. I suppose the main way to deal with that properly is the very specific details of each case of potential abuse, and thats a level of detail we don't have in too many cases yet, and wouldn't expect to have at this stage beyond those victims who have given detailed horrific accounts to the media.

But obviously with this particular story, if it goes anywhere we have the link to other revelations of recent years regarding police undercover work.


----------



## treelover (Dec 18, 2014)

> VIP sex ring’ detectives investigate murder of three boys
> Metropolitan police on alleged Westminster paedophile ring case say they are following up claims it was linked to killings
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/18/police-claims-vip-sex-ring-murder-three-boys




New major Guardian news article


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 18, 2014)

treelover said:


> New major Guardian news article


Basically just says the lead investigating copper believes the claim made by Nick.



elbows said:


> In this December 5th article regarding operation Pallial, we learn that some victims of North Wales care home abuse are receiving letters from government lawyers saying that so far ten deceased people would have been prosecuted if they were still alive (out of 120 potential suspects, 40 of whom are dead).
> 
> http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/operation-pallial-ten-suspected-paedophiles-8229876



76 year old from Wrexham charged with 14 offences as a result of pallial - link i have says 14 _further _charges - and that the offences were 2010-2014. Not sure if those dates are a mistake.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Basically just says the lead investigating copper believes the claim made by Nick.
> 
> 
> 
> 76 year old from Wrexham charged with 14 offences as a result of pallial - link i have says 14 _further _charges - and that the offences were 2010-2014. Not sure if those dates are a mistake.


BBC R5 also leading with the story...also mentioning "military establishments".

tbh that Met statement, if reported correctly, does seem extraordinary...


> Scotland Yard has said claims by a witness that a “VIP” sex abuse ring murdered three boys are “credible *and true*”.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 18, 2014)

brogdale said:


> BBC R5 also leading with the story...also mentioning "military establishments".
> 
> tbh that Met statement, if reported correctly, does seem extraordinary...



That does seem astonishingly prejudicial.

If I were inclined to the vast cover-up/conspiracy theory of events I'd be interested to know a bit more about the circumstances of that statement...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2014)

Diamond said:


> That does seem astonishingly prejudicial.
> 
> If I were inclined to the vast cover-up/conspiracy theory of events I'd be interested to know a bit more about the circumstances of that statement...


Yeah.
The telegraph report uses a slightly different quote...



> Detective Superintendent Kenny McDonald, the lead officer for the operation, said:
> 
> "Nick has been spoken to by experienced officers from the child abuse team and from the murder investigation team and they and *I believe what Nick is saying is credible and true*, hence why we are investigating the allegations that he has made."



Still, apparently, surprisingly prejudicial language.

e2a : BBC report inc interview with McDonald


----------



## Diamond (Dec 18, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Yeah.
> The telegraph report uses a slightly different quote...
> 
> 
> ...



Ok, so maybe just an example of poor reporting of a poorly judged statement.

Still, if there is a cover up of various scandals that is about to be revealed, it'll be interesting to observe the precise way the veil is drawn back.

With the antiquity of the allegations and the probable lack of hard, contemporaneous evidence, it will be very difficult to prosecute anyone. Statements like that won't make it any easier.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 18, 2014)

BBC R4 leading with it. I have a very bad feeling about this. 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30534235


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 18, 2014)

Condom Face "dismissive" of Historical Sex Abuse Claims according to Sky News.



> An MP leading the campaign to uncover allegations of sexual abuse involving political figures in the 1980s has accused David Cameron of being "dismissive" of the issue.
> 
> Simon Danczuk has told Sky News he believes there is a "schism" in the Cabinet over the issue.
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Condom Face "dismissive" of Historical Sex Abuse Claims according to Sky News.


_*If *_there is any "_schism_" it will revolve around how best to limit the damage from the inevitable, managed reveal.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 18, 2014)

brogdale said:


> _*If *_there is any "_schism_" it will revolve around how best to limit the damage from the inevitable, managed reveal.


Indeed. They're circling the wagons... again.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 18, 2014)

brogdale said:


> _*If *_there is any "_schism_" it will revolve around how best to limit the damage from the inevitable, managed reveal.



Again, on the assumption that there is a wide range of stuff to come out, there are ways of revealing it that offer the opportunity for some comparatively good PR/brand distinction.

Very risky game to play tho...


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 18, 2014)

I think it's more likely that Danczuk means that May returns his calls and Cameron doesn't.


----------



## Dan U (Dec 18, 2014)

Cynically I wonder if any of this is a message re further police cuts which are currently being negotiated.


----------



## elbows (Dec 18, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> BBC R4 leading with it. I have a very bad feeling about this.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30534235



I don't have a bad feeling about it. Its a desperate plea for more info. It suggests that not enough people and info have emerged since 'Nick' first made his pleas for people to come forward via the media.

Personally I'd place the fear that badly chosen words by the police might scupper criminal proceedings very far down my list of concerns as it relates to both high-profile child sex abuse prosecutions in general and any specific Dolphin Square instances of such. The biggest threat of it being scuppered would come from a failure of people to heed these appeals for information, and so although I am dismayed that the police clearly still haven't got enough victims and info, I see it as a good thing that they are making the appeal now with such strong emphasis on believing victims.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 18, 2014)

The Sky news thing I saw this afternoon actually had a guy being interviewed who was originally from North Wales who claimed to have been taken to London and abused during the 70's-80's.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 18, 2014)

elbows said:


> I don't have a bad feeling about it. Its a desperate plea for more info. It suggests that not enough people and info have emerged since 'Nick' first made his pleas for people to come forward via the media.
> 
> Personally I'd place the fear that badly chosen words by the police might scupper criminal proceedings very far down my list of concerns as it relates to both high-profile child sex abuse prosecutions in general and any specific Dolphin Square instances of such. The biggest threat of it being scuppered would come from a failure of people to heed these appeals for information, and so although I am dismayed that the police clearly still haven't got enough victims and info, I see it as a good thing that they are making the appeal now with such strong emphasis on believing victims.


I hope you are right. I see the appeal as genuine. Just that it can be blown off course by malign influences. For anyone who hasn't followed these stories it's very hard to believe these claims. That disbelief can easily be harnessed.


----------



## elbows (Dec 18, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Still, apparently, surprisingly prejudicial language.



I suspect that there is a little more flexibility at certain specific key stages of police work, on occasions where altering the tone of the message is seen as crucial.

For example, when a young person goes missing, the police may decide to release all sorts of information about the possible victim, perpetrator, and various other details, that we might otherwise only expect to learn during or after a trial, or not at all when it comes to some privacy/protection of minors issues. Eg people that could be named by all and sundry, suddenly un-nameable in the press.

I don't have too hard a time wondering whether this might not also apply to pleas for potential victims to come forwards at some vital stage of an investigation. And since one of the historical phenomenon often seen as having being at work in prior coverups and failures to prosecute serial sex offenders was the failure to believe victims, its no surprise that any mistake they may make on this front at this stage of the game is likely to be in the opposite direction.

It is entirely understandable that people should be cynical in the face of a massive correction on this front, but its been one of the most obvious and sustained phenomenon in the post-Savile era, and although I would not go quite so far as to take it purely at face value, I believe it to be genuine on at least some levels. How far that genuine desire reaches we are not yet really able to conclude, but attempts to manage the situation won't put me off cheering on occasions where fresh milestones are reached.


----------



## elbows (Dec 18, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> I hope you are right. I see the appeal as genuine. Just that it can be blown off course by malign influences. For anyone who hasn't followed these stories it's very hard to believe these claims. That disbelief can easily be harnessed.



I tend to see any malign influences as operating on different levels to this stuff.

For example I only really expect to see disbelief being harnessed successfully if there really don't end up being enough victims coming forwards to attempt any prosecutions.

And plenty of the malign influences that can supper things at this earlier stage are ghosts, echoes from the past. The damage done to victims by the abuse itself, the fear that power can project, both on a personal abuse of power level and from institutions and structures of power. The numerous ways this can make victims unable to talk to the police in 2014, including being dead. And of course I cannot utterly forget the possibility of the victims we seek not existing, for its still almost as hard today as it was on day one of this thread to judge the scale of elite abuse. A picture of wider abuse by those on lower levels of power has always been somewhat easier to grasp, and thats proving to be the case again this time around. These echo are one of the reasons I'm not quick to assume any fresh cover-ups, since in most cases so far its been almost impossible to judge the age of any bad smells - fresh coverup or the unalterable present-day consequences of historical coverups? If there is genuine will at various levels of the state to correct this stuff, they too have a battle on their hands in dealing with these consequences of the past, so I'm entirely unsurprised to hear the police overcompensating for past sins.


----------



## Betsy (Dec 18, 2014)

Saw this on Twitter tonight...had a quick search on here but neither John Oliver's name or that of Mark Sedwill came up so hope it hasn't already been posted....

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/all-about/the-oval
*Home Office ordered to answer questions on missing Westminster child abuse files from Guildford man John Oliver 

*_ 
*The Home Office must respond to the request of Guildford resident John Oliver by the middle of January next year*


A Freedom of Information (FoI) request submitted by a Guildford resident about 114 missing files detailing allegations of historic child abuse in Westminster must be answered by the Home Office.

John Oliver wrote to the department on July 8 this year asking about the files, on the same day its top civil servant, Mark Sedwill, told the Home Affairs Select Committee that he did not know if other files were also missing.

The 114 files contained allegations of abuse at Westminster, but during his select committee appearance Mr Sedwill said he was unable to confirm if other files next to the missing child abuse allegations were also missing or not.

“I couldn’t believe that one of the most important administrators in the country hadn’t thought to have this checked – something that the most junior member of his clerical staff would do as a matter of course," said Mr Oliver.

Mr Sedwill said he was “concerned” but insisted people “should not assume there was anything sinister” about the missing files - and confessed that he did not know the titles or contents of the documents, which dated from 1979 to 1999.

Despite sending the FoI request on July 8, Mr Oliver had still not received a response by the end of September.

It was revealed on Thursday that the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) - which monitors the operation of the Freedom of Information Act - had issued a formal decision ordering the Home Office to respond.

Mr Oliver reacted by saying: “I am grateful for the help of the Commissioner’s Office. Despite [Home Secretary Theresa] May’s assertion that no stone will be left unturned, I’m beginning to wonder if they would rather the stones were buried."

As well as the FoI request, Guildford MP Anne Milton has also written to the minister of state at the Home Office with responsibility for child abuse matters, Mike Penning.

Despite contacting him in early November, she too has not had a response.

The ICO decision requires the Home Office to respond by January 13 2015. 

Failure to comply may result in the ICO sending written certification of this fact to the High Court and it being dealt with as a contempt of court.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are aware of the ruling by the Information Commissioner’s Office and will respond within the given period.”_

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/home-office-ordered-answer-questions-8274231


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 19, 2014)

...this is real FOAF stuff but I met up with an ex colleague yesterday, I showed him the Evening Standard front-page









....he said one of his co-worker's dad's was a policeman & working on the case.....and his view was ( paraphrasing ) ...its all bullshit, there are people coming forward but timewasters and that it was a massive diversion ( 80 officers or so ) from the stuff happening now...

...that's all 3-4th hand ofcourse, paraphrased but the gist anyway fwiw...


----------



## treelover (Dec 19, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> BBC R4 leading with it. I have a very bad feeling about this.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30534235




Main item last night on all BBC Tv News, its in the open now.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...this is real FOAF stuff but I met up with an ex colleague yesterday, I showed him the Evening Standard front-page
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
A large number of people are certainly benefitting indirectly from all these inquiries.

Simply put, focusing on historical child abuse distracts from present failures and, in a worse case scenario, may help perpetuate them.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> A large number of people are certainly benefitting indirectly from all these inquiries.
> 
> Simply put, focusing on historical child abuse distracts from present failures and, in a worse case scenario, may help perpetuate them.



Sorry but how does that actually work? 

If you are giving credence/authority to historical victims of abuse won't that empower current/recent victims? 

Placing the accounts of the abused in a credible centre stage (whenever that abuse occurred be it yesterday or in the last century) is vital in tackling the individual cases of abuse and exposing cultures of abuse (be they in families, communities or organisations).

Louis MacNeice


----------



## laptop (Dec 19, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> If you are giving credence/authority to historical victims of abuse won't that empower current/recent victims?



1) It's always been a worry that a focus on "organised" abuse distracts attention from the vast majority of abuse, which is opportunistic by step-fathers, brothers, uncles and others - fine upstanding Daily Mail readers, a lot of them.

2) The focus on "organised" abuse _could _even detract from the credence given to those reporting the above mundane abuse - these reports don't fit the narrative

3) Certainly, it distracts public attention from the biggest (and arguably most damaging) part of the problem and that _could _leave mundane abusers feeling they can get away with it more easily, or reinforce their denial that what they do is damaging

4) Most definitely, it diverts resources from investigating reports of mundane abuse


----------



## teqniq (Dec 19, 2014)

laptop said:


> 1) It's always been a worry that a focus on "organised" abuse distracts attention from the vast majority of abuse, which is opportunistic by step-fathers, brothers, uncles and others - fine upstanding Daily Mail readers, a lot of them.
> 
> 2) The focus on "organised" abuse _could _even detract from the credence given to those reporting the above mundane abuse - these reports don't fit the narrative
> 
> ...


Those are fair points but regardless of how long ago the alleged offences occurred, if charges can be bought and people are found guilty they should pay the highest price imo, particularly because they are or were in positions of power and responsibility and to some extent could be seen as people to be held in high regard.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 19, 2014)

....also difficult to swallow gripes about diverting resources when it's not like they didn't have opportunities a-plenty to investigate all this when it wasn't "...a long time ago..."


----------



## laptop (Dec 19, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ....also difficult to swallow gripes about diverting resources when it's not like they didn't have opportunities a-plenty to investigate all this when it wasn't "...a long time ago..."



Obviously, to get to where we want to be we'd prefer not to start from where we are...


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 19, 2014)

...I meant gripes from those who didn't do their jobs properly in the first place just to be clear.....we'll see what Operation Yvonne turns up ofcourse as an indicator in terms of how far they are prepared to go in the current investigation in shining a spotlight onto the whole issue of how these investigations were conducted at the time....


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

o





laptop said:


> 1) It's always been a worry that a focus on "organised" abuse distracts attention from the vast majority of abuse, which is opportunistic by step-fathers, brothers, uncles and others - fine upstanding Daily Mail readers, a lot of them.
> 
> 2) The focus on "organised" abuse _could _even detract from the credence given to those reporting the above mundane abuse - these reports don't fit the narrative
> 
> ...


 
Yep, that's pretty much the main line of reasoning I was thinking of.

But I think there are a few other things worth exploring as well in contrast - sort of supply side (the investigators) v demand side (those insisting on the investigation).

Geoffrey Dickinson was definitely on to something with the Hayman affair and may well have been on to other things but what seems fairly clear is that he made as much political capital out of those matters as he possibly could, eventually ending up with the SRA allegations.

Tom Watson may well be on to something but he is also making plenty of political capital out of this and will continue to do so the longer it continues.

The PM can also do well by seeming to distance himself from a seedy, historic establishment and pretending to be a reforming influence by announcing numerous inquiries into these allegations - inquiries being one of his major political tools (no surprise there given his PR background etc).

The press also does well by constantly breaking new scoops on a salacious scandal.  Indeed some elements of the press may only have one horse to ride and they're going to flog it until it gives up the ghost.

And to bring this all back home - all of this noise distracts from the _proven_ abuse scandals that have emerged over the course of the last year to the convenience of those at fault there.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Tom Watson may well be on to something but he is also making plenty of political capital out of this and will continue to do so the longer it continues.


That's not necessarily a bad thing because: 1) it keeps the whole thing alive and 2) it chips away at the Tory façade.



> Geoffrey Dickinson



It's Geoffrey _Dickens_ (as in the author).


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> That's not necessarily a bad thing because: 1) it keeps the whole thing alive and 2) it chips away at the Tory façade.
> 
> 
> 
> It's Geoffrey _Dickens_ (as in the author).


 
Right you are.

On the first point though - I think that aspect is worth drawing out a bit more...

How many people want there to be victims of paedophile Tory MPs and why and what does that say about the way this story has developed/is developing?


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> How many people want there to be victims of paedophile Tory MPs and why and what does that say about the way this story has developed/is developing?


That's not even remotely what I'm suggesting. The Tories (especially Cameron) want this story/issue to drop off the radar - so to speak. It suits them (and their pals in MI5/6) to have this kicked into the long grass.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> That's not even remotely what I'm suggesting. The Tories (especially Cameron) want this story/issue to drop off the radar - so to speak. It suits them (and their pals in MI5/6) to have this kicked into the long grass.



I can see why you might take that point of view but I think that you're mistaken.

The overarching inquiry as well as the underlying police investigations are, on balance, probably politically expedient for the Tories (and maybe all the political parties) in the run-up to the next general election to the extent that they serve as a distraction technique.

Those named and proven so far, Cyril Smith and Peter Hayman, were not Tory MPs in the first instance and, even were some to be discovered, it would be eminently possible, though decidedly risky, for the current Tory party to draw a line of distinction between them then and them now, possibly even profiting by assuming the mantle of being truth-telling moral crusaders reforming British institutions guided by a "British Values" moral compass...bullshit ad infinitum etc...


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> I can see why you might take that point of view but I think that you're mistaken.
> 
> The overarching inquiry as well as the underlying police investigations are, on balance, probably politically expedient for the Tories (and maybe all the political parties) in the run-up to the next general election to the extent that they serve as a distraction technique.
> 
> Those named and proven so far, Cyril Smith and Peter Hayman, were not Tory MPs in the first instance and, even were some to be discovered, it would be eminently possible, though decidedly risky, for the current Tory party to draw a line of distinction between them then and them now, possibly even profiting by assuming the mantle of being truth-telling moral crusaders reforming British institutions guided by a "British Values" moral compass...bullshit ad infinitum etc...


You're all over the place.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

The overarching inquiry was sought by Tory MPs last July and convened on a timetable that anticipates the publication of its interim findings shortly prior to the next general election.

If you're looking for conspiracies and sharp practices, that should raise an eyebrow or two...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> The overarching inquiry *was sought by Tory MPs last July* and convened on a timetable that anticipates the publication of its interim findings shortly prior to the next general election.



Incorrect. The 124 co-signatory MPs came from all three main parties, (and virtually all of the parties with parliamentary representation), with Labour MPs making up the largest sub-set.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...n-parliament-to-address-child-sex-abuse-in-uk

Nino's right; you're all over the place with this distraction theory shit.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> And to bring this all back home - all of this noise distracts from the _proven_ abuse scandals that have emerged over the course of the last year to the convenience of those at fault there.



Can you just confirm which emerged proven scandals you mean before I wade into this latest chapter of the conversation? Cheers.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Incorrect. The 124 co-signatory MPs came from all three main parties, (and virtually all of the parties with parliamentary representation), with Labour MPs making up the largest sub-set.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...n-parliament-to-address-child-sex-abuse-in-uk
> 
> Nino's right; you're all over the place with this distraction theory shit.



Not in the first instance.

The charge was led by Zac Goldsmith and Tim Loughton initially and then others jumped on the bandwagon.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

elbows said:


> Can you just confirm which emerged proven scandals you mean before I wade into this latest chapter of the conversation? Cheers.



Among others, the main one would be the events in Rotherham.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Not in the first instance.
> 
> The charge was led by Zac Goldsmith and Tim Loughton initially and then others jumped on the bandwagon.


Also factually incorrect. The 7 originators included 2 tory, 2 LD, 2 Labour and Caroline Lucas.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2014)

A primary reason I don't tend to attach much emphasis to the political party origins of these abuse inquiries etc is that the overriding motivating forces go so far beyond the westminster bubble and their petty little games. The rattling sound of skeletons that should be confronted became rather loud post-Savile. Politicians of whatever stripes are responding in largely predictable ways, but they aren't really in the driving seat to the extent necessary to believe in some of the cynical partisan politics angles some might like to file all this abuse stuff under. And a whole bunch of 'party first' responses are sort of driven off-limits by the fact there are probably offenders of all political stripes who may be exposed. For this and other reasons we should be more worries about scenarios where MPs from all the parties are united, than in ones that involve a particular party trying to make political capital out of it. Some individual MPs will, but we can judge them as individuals rather than part of larger political set-pieces.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Also factually incorrect. The 7 originators included 2 tory, 2 LD, 2 Labour and Caroline Lucas.



http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...sa-may-to-set-up-inquiry-into-child-sex-abuse



> Former children's minister Tim Loughton and Conservative backbencher Zac Goldsmith are calling for a national inquiry into historical cases of child sex abuse.
> 
> Goldsmith has co-ordinated a high-powered cross-party group of seven MPs to sign a joint letter to Theresa May, home secretary, urging her to set up an independent panel to investigate repeated failures by police and other authorities in a wide variety of cases



First two paras of Exaro's own report on its inception.  Not sure how that is inconsistent with what I have stated above.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Not sure how that is inconsistent with what I have stated above.



This was/is inconsistent with the facts...


Diamond said:


> *The overarching inquiry was sought by Tory MPs last July*


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

Yep, still don't see the inconsistency there to be frank.


----------



## elbows (Dec 19, 2014)

Yes it is misleading to place too much emphasis on who was co-ordinating the calls for an overarching inquiry, at the expense of other MPs who were giving it their backing. Its bloody obvious that the likes of Tom Watson have been rather energetic about these issues for a long time.

Anyway if I were one of a number of MPs across party bounds that shared the same objective of getting the government to act on something in particular, I might think it a good idea if the person who formally contacts the relevant minister were from the same party as the minister.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Yep, still don't see the inconsistency there to be frank.


Oh


----------



## Diamond (Dec 19, 2014)

elbows said:


> A primary reason I don't tend to attach much emphasis to the political party origins of these abuse inquiries etc is that the overriding motivating forces go so far beyond the westminster bubble and their petty little games. The rattling sound of skeletons that should be confronted became rather loud post-Savile. Politicians of whatever stripes are responding in largely predictable ways, but they aren't really in the driving seat to the extent necessary to believe in some of the cynical partisan politics angles some might like to file all this abuse stuff under. And a whole bunch of 'party first' responses are sort of driven off-limits by the fact there are probably offenders of all political stripes who may be exposed. For this and other reasons we should be more worries about scenarios where MPs from all the parties are united, than in ones that involve a particular party trying to make political capital out of it. Some individual MPs will, but we can judge them as individuals rather than part of larger political set-pieces.



What role, if any, do you think the whips played in this?


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 19, 2014)

http://nyenquirer.uk/operation-hibiscus-truth-not-whole-truth/

*North Yorkshire Police statement:  Operation Hibiscus*

For some time now, despite intimidation and threats from the Police and Scarborough Borough Council, the North Yorks Enquirer has been pursuing the truth.

We have consistently alleged that there was a major paedophile-ring operating in Scarborough from 1947 until about 2009 and that it included Jimmy Savile and Peter Jaconelli, the Mayor of Scarborough. We have alleged that his ring was the most successful paedophile ring in British criminal history, was connected to the Westminster paedophile ring, operated far beyond North Yorkshire, had international connections and was involved in trafficking and enticing young people into prostitution. It was successful because Jaconelli was protected by North Yorkshire Police, because he was a Scarborough Borough Councillor, County Councillor, millionaire businessman, Mayor, leading Scarborough Citizen who was a School Governor and ran the local Judo Club.

Operation Hibiscus, the investigation into these allegations, has now reported. North Yorkshire Police has now been forced to publicly admit that the most successful and longest-running paedophile-ring in British criminal history peacefully co-existed with North Yorkshire Police in Scarborough for forty years. It included Britain`s most prolific rapists and sex offenders Jimmy Savile and Peter Jaconelli, was connected to the Westminster paedophile-ring and operated openly with the full knowledge of North Yorkshire Police. The Force’s failure to arrest any of the members over the course of fifty years of relatively open offending, despite numerous complaints and reports, was inexcusable, a national scandal and deeply corrupt.
We believe that, over the course of its existence from 1947 until about 2009, the ring had thousands of victims and was much bigger and worse than the Rotherham or Rochdale rings.


North Yorkshire Police have today published this statement.

*Press Release Operation Hibiscus:*

Investigation into allegations of historic sexual abuse by the late Scarborough mayor Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Savile
North Yorkshire Police can today [Thursday 18 December 2014] confirm the findings of an investigation into allegations of historic sexual abuse made against the late Scarborough mayor Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Savile.
Operation Hibiscus began on 14 February 2014. It was instigated following the broadcast of the regional TV news programme Inside Out, which prompted 35 people  to come forward with reports of historic sexual abuse by Jaconelli and Savile.

32 of the cases related to Jaconelli for reported offences that occurred between1958 and 1998, and five to Savile that occurred between 1979 and 1988.
Each individual case was investigated by a team of experienced detectives. The victims have been directed to, and offered the support from, specialist victim support agencies.
The investigations have now come to a conclusion.

Sufficient evidence has been uncovered to suggest that, had they been alive today, files would have been submitted for consideration by the Crown Prosecution Service regarding potential criminal charges against Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Savile, relating to young people.
However, it should be noted that it has not been possible to pursue those lines of enquiry which would have involved interviews with the individuals concerned, during which they may have disputed the allegations against them.

The reported offences linked to Jaconelli ranged from indecent assault, inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, gross indecency and rape.
For Savile, the reported offences ranged from sexual assault (or indecent assault under current law) to rape.
The investigation team has contacted the victims to explain the findings of the inquiry, and to ensure that they have continued access to all available support as victims of sexual abuse.

Assistant Chief Constable Paul Kennedy, of North Yorkshire Police, said: “The findings of Operation Hibiscus clearly suggest that there would have been sufficient evidence from 35 individual victims for the Crown Prosecution Service to consider criminal charges against Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Savile, had they been alive today.
“The available information indicates that, historically, the police missed opportunities to look into allegations against these men whilst they were still alive.
“Today, North Yorkshire Police apologises to the victims who made the brave decision to come forward during the past 18 months.”

very long article continues at link : http://nyenquirer.uk/operation-hibiscus-truth-not-whole-truth/


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> http://nyenquirer.uk/operation-hibiscus-truth-not-whole-truth/
> 
> *North Yorkshire Police statement:  Operation Hibiscus*
> 
> ...



Thorough reporting, but summed-up by the conclusion...


> The full truth has yet to come out.  Nor will it, so long as North Yorkshire Police is continually allowed to investigate itself.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 20, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Sorry but how does that actually work?
> 
> If you are giving credence/authority to historical victims of abuse won't that empower current/recent victims?
> 
> ...



Absolutely! How do you learn what to look for/what to avoid/how to shape the best practice possible for child protection if you don't analyse previous errors, whether single individual cases, or massive clusterfucks.
Yet again, Santayana's maxim is right.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 20, 2014)

Diamond said:


> If you're looking for conspiracies and sharp practices, that should raise an eyebrow or two...



Huh? There is a conspiracy and because I say there's a conspiracy, it doesn't necessarily make me a conspiraloon.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 20, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> That's not even remotely what I'm suggesting. The Tories (especially Cameron) want this story/issue to drop off the radar - so to speak. It suits them (and their pals in MI5/6) to have this kicked into the long grass.





Diamond said:


> I can see why you might take that point of view but I think that you're mistaken.
> 
> The overarching inquiry as well as the underlying police investigations are, on balance, probably politically expedient for the Tories (and maybe all the political parties) in the run-up to the next general election to the extent that they serve as a distraction technique.
> 
> Those named and proven so far, Cyril Smith and Peter Hayman, were not Tory MPs in the first instance and, even were some to be discovered, it would be eminently possible, though decidedly risky, for the current Tory party to draw a line of distinction between them then and them now, possibly even profiting by assuming the mantle of being truth-telling moral crusaders reforming British institutions guided by a "British Values" moral compass...bullshit ad infinitum etc...



The best method of kicking something into the long grass is to announce a major inquiry with terms of reference that don't really allow it to fully cover all the worst aspects of the situation, but broad enough to mean that no other inquiry will ever be held, and no actual power of arrest or prosecution, then use various means to delay the start of that inquiry until after the public outrage has moved on a bit, then allow it to fizzle out and eventually report that yes some bad stuff happened, but it was all a long time ago and things have changed now, and maybe recommend a bit of tinkering at the edges, and find a few high profile scapegoats such as those from the entertainment industry, former pop stars and the like.

So Theresa May is playing a blinder here in defense of the establishment.


----------



## elbows (Dec 20, 2014)

Except the inquiries aren't getting in the way of the police investigations, and the prosecution of celebrities really hasn't reduced the pressure.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 20, 2014)

Note the careful headline:

Former newspaper boss tells police of VIP paedophile cover-up claim



> A former local newspaper executive who claims that he was issued with an official warning in the early 1980s against reporting on an allegedly powerful paedophile ring has been interviewed by police.
> 
> In a sign of growing concern that there has been a cover-up of the involvement of politicians in the sexual abuse of children, Hilton Tims, 81, was approached by officers and asked to tell all that he knows about the affair.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 20, 2014)

May wants to disband the over arching panel. I.e stopped.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

elbows said:


> Except the inquiries aren't getting in the way of the police investigations, and the prosecution of celebrities really hasn't reduced the pressure.


police forces are regional, so the regional police are investigating the regional activities, but it's only really the overarching inquiry that's actually in a position to investigate the entire thing, the cover up angle, the national and international links between the regional activities, the involvement of MI5, special branch etc.

Other than maybe the MET, but the chances of them fairly investigating their own historic coverups are fairly slim.

Besides, I wasn't saying it was guaranteed to be successful, but that would seem to be the play that's happening here. Throw the celebrities to the wolves, botch the setting up of an inquiry so the story becomes who got appointed to head it as opposed to what's being investigated, let the inquiry plod along for a bit, then apparently pull the plug on it just as it's about to start a series of regional meetings with abuse survivors and representatives.

This bit from the terms of reference for the inquiry is pretty much the key bit for me. Dig too deep, threaten anyone or any organisation too big that the police / CPS have declined to prosecute, and they can be firmly told that they're exceeding their remit.



> It is not part of the Inquiry’s function to determine civil or criminal liability of named individuals or organisations.



So individuals who are accused by victims during this inquiry of actually carrying out abuse directly will be investigated by the police, but those who facilitated the cover up(s) can rest pretty easy, the inquiry may recommend improvements to how things were done, but not specifically investigate them or prosecute them as potential criminals for their activities in covering this up.

If for example they got more information indicating that MI5 or special branch were involved in covering up these crimes on a systemic level, and started to follow that line of inquiry they'd soon get told to wind their necks in and stick to their remit.

But no other inquiry will ever be established that will specifically investigate those allegations.

And so the inquiry itself becomes window dressing to hide the establishment cover up that's still going on, while the government can claim to have done what it can to investigate the claims via establishing this inquiry.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

> police forces are regional, so the regional police are investigating the regional activities, but it's only really the overarching inquiry that's actually in a position to investigate the entire thing, the cover up angle, the national and international links between the regional activities, the involvement of MI5, special branch etc.



Is this right?

In fact after reading the rest, no need for an inquiry anyway. This thread is pretty much dead.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Is this right?
> 
> In fact after reading the rest, no need for an inquiry anyway. This thread is pretty much dead.


well, it's not right as in there were alternative options, it could have been led by the national crime agency for example, or there could have been an inquiry with the specific terms of reference to actually allow it to investigate and assign liability to / prosecute those agencies and individuals found to have been involved in covering this up / facilitating it.

eta or maybe the IPCC, or possibly another police force being brought in to investigate the MET / special branch's role in this.

But if it's not right as in what's actually happening now, feel free to point to the counter evidence / explain your point.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

I do not have to. You claimed it was fact. I'm not ever doing this juvenile ABC with anyone ever again after this. _You _make a claim, _you _support it. No one else need do anything to undermine it.

But it seems even asking you to support this claim (or this type of claim) is too much.

That's _why _the thread is dead.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I do not have to. You claimed it was fact. I'm not ever doing this juvenile ABC with anyone ever again after this. _You _make a claim, _you _support it. No one else need do anything to undermine it.
> 
> But it seems even asking you to support this claim (or this type of claim) is too much.
> 
> That's _why _the thread is dead.


which bit? 

The bit about regional police forces carrying out regional investigations? Surely you're not questioning the basic role of regional jurisdictions for police forces in the UK are you?

Obviously they can collaborate with other police forces to have joint investigations etc. but ultimately that would involve the met investigating the london angle, which means the MET investigating the MET's past failings if they were actually to investigate that angle on the situation.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

I can't quote it directly due to formatting errors, but I've just seen that the panel are publishing their meeting minutes.

They seem to have spent the first 3 meetings without a chair, having a rotating facilitator instead, and taking advice from the HIllsborough inquiry, and the Rotherham inquiry, and seeking evidence from a similar Australian inquiry, basically taking advice on how best to approach the inquiry, and setting up the series of regional open meetings that began last week in Manchester, and are planned for the first couple of months of next year.

In the absence of the chair, they seem to be taking it fairly seriously and taking the right sort of advice on how to go about things, and have appointed Professor Jay, who led the Rotherham inquiry, to be part of a sub group to determine the methodology they need to use.

Interestingly, the first reference point for that sub group is to

1 - An exercise to define institutions which should be considered by the inquiry.

So in the absence of an establishment figure as chair, this inquiry actually looks to be keen to establish it's own working methodology, and determine which organisations it should be investigating. Maybe it is capable of developing some legs and doing some useful work if it carries on in this vein.

I wonder what could be motivating Theresa May to consider disbanding the panel.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

free spirit said:


> which bit?
> 
> The bit about regional police forces carrying out regional investigations? Surely you're not questioning the basic role of regional jurisdictions for police forces in the UK are you?
> 
> Obviously they can collaborate with other police forces to have joint investigations etc. but ultimately that would involve the met investigating the london angle, which means the MET investigating the MET's past failings if they were actually to investigate that angle on the situation.


The bit i have now quoted three times:



> police forces are regional, so the regional police are investigating the regional activities, but it's only really the overarching inquiry that's actually in a position to investigate the entire thing, the cover up angle, the national and international links between the regional activities, the involvement of MI5, special branch etc.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> The bit i have now quoted three times:


yes, and what specifically are you querying?

There are 2 sections to that quote, if you could at least state which of the 2 sections you're specifically querying it'd help to know what you're getting at.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

There is one section. It's wrong. Entire.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> There is one section. It's wrong. Entire.


I'd forgotten how much of an irritating prick you are to debate with.

if you have a point to make spit it out ffs.

how is it wrong to state that regionalised police forces aren't in a position to investigate an long running national high level paedophile network and cover up that appears to at least have involved special branch, and probably MI5 (or some members of each) amongst others, and allegedly reached to some of the highest levels of power in government.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

With regard to the overarching stuff- blagger - and May caught up with you today - making all your assumptions dust:



> police forces are regional, so the regional police are investigating the regional activities, but it's only really the overarching inquiry that's actually in a position to investigate the entire thing, the cover up angle, the national and international links between the regional activities, the involvement of MI5, special branch etc.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

According to those minutes, there is some form of national police co-ordination lead for child protection and abuse investigation, led by the Chief Constable of Norfolk, but I can't find any more info about this, and I think it's more of a formalised method of different forces collaborating on cases that spread across more than one forces area.

There is also an inquiry that actually does have proper legal powers under the auspices of the childrens commissioner, but that inquiry specifically only focuses on abuse within families. I'd not realised the children's commissioner had those sorts of legal powers, so that could have been an alternative route for this inquiry to have taken.

And there is CEOPs within the NCA, that really has the remit to work at a national level, and has done so in co-ordinating national arrests from it's work on internet based child abuse, but AFAIK they're not involved in co-ordinating this investigation into historic abuse.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> With regard to the overarching stuff- blagger - and May caught up with you today - making all your assumptions dust:


I'm still none the wiser wtf you're on about.

Have you got a problem with actually explaining yourself?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

Oh god - reluctant as i am to, but here we go



> police forces are regional, so the regional police are investigating the regional activities, but it's only really the overarching inquiry that's actually in a position to investigate the entire thing, the cover up angle, the national and international links between the regional activities, the involvement of MI5, special branch etc.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Oh god - reluctant as i am to, but here we go


Thanks for that enlightening post, it really helped to progress the discussion.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 21, 2014)

free spirit said:


> Thanks for that enlightening post, it really helped to progress the discussion.


Look at the words. The words that you posted.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Look at the words. The words that you posted.


I know what I posted, I don't know what you're getting at due to not being a mind reader, and you being shit at ever explaining yourself.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

btw, you missed this bit in your quote.



> Other than maybe the MET, but the chances of them fairly investigating their own historic coverups are fairly slim.



The MET have led on operation Yewtree, which did involve other forces as well, and operation Fernbridge, and a couple of other spin off investigations.

Maybe I'll be proved wrong, but as yet I'm not aware of them investigating the role special branch allegedly played in the long running cover ups, intimidation of witnesses and those investigating it. Though they are showing signs of investigating some of those higher up the food chain than I'd expected them to, I'm still sceptical that the MET won't close ranks, and shut these lines of inquiry down if they reach too high - and 2 heads of those investigations in a row have ended up resigning from those roles, which raises the question of whether they jumped or were pushed for overstepping the line.

The loss of 2 heads of those inquiries doesn't really point to them having the full backing of the MET hierarchy in how far those investigations are being pushed.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 21, 2014)

free spirit said:


> well, it's not right as in there were alternative options, it could have been led by the national crime agency for example, or there could have been an inquiry with the specific terms of reference to actually allow it to investigate and assign liability to / prosecute those agencies and individuals found to have been involved in covering this up / facilitating it.
> 
> eta or maybe the IPCC, or possibly another police force being brought in to investigate the MET / special branch's role in this.
> 
> But if it's not right as in what's actually happening now, feel free to point to the counter evidence / explain your point.



We have an adversarial system, not an inquisitorial one and, IMO, we're all the better for it.

The idea of an inquiry firmly establishing criminal liability is a bit scary from my point of view and it's rather worrying that you think that might be a good thing.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 21, 2014)

Diamond said:


> We have an adversarial system, not an inquisitorial one and, IMO, we're all the better for it.
> 
> The idea of an inquiry firmly establishing criminal liability is a bit scary from my point of view and it's rather worrying that you think that might be a good thing.


criminal or civil liability.

Half the people are dead so will never be able to be tried in court, and similarly the organisations that enabled this to go on for so long without being discovered are very unlikely ever to face a criminal prosecution for it by the CPS (the CPS being one of those organisations that could itself be held liable potentially).

If the inquiry were able to assign liability to those organisations, then the victims would at least be in a position to claim compensation from them. Without this, it would be left to the victims themselves to fund a civil legal action that would actually have to do all the investigation and prove that liability themselves in court, against the likes of the MET. That's a very unequal fight.

eta - this inquiry also had no legal power to compel witnesses to attend AFAIK, whereas for example, the investigation into abuse within families under the children's commissioner's authority had the threat of 6 month jail terms and large fines for anyone who refused to appear before them. 

That is a massive difference, and as there was already the precedent set for such an inquiry to be held in that way under the auspices of the children's commissioner, it begs the question as to why this route wasn't followed this time if they wanted the inquiry to really be taken seriously.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 21, 2014)

Not sure if there's anything significantly new here, but...to see "five rings" specified catches the attention.


> Police are investigating claims that up to *five paedophile rings operated at the heart of Westminster* with the involvement of “highly influential” politicians.
> 
> A Labour MP who has handed a dossier of evidence to Scotland Yard said he now believed the complexity of child abuse networks at the heart of government in the Seventies and Eighties had been seriously underestimated.
> 
> ...


----------



## quiquaquo (Dec 21, 2014)

Exaro site seems down right now (17.00 Sunday). http://www.exaronews.com/


----------



## brogdale (Dec 21, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Exaro site seems down right now (17.00 Sunday). http://www.exaronews.com/


OK now..and with 3 new pieces...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5438/theresa-may-to-scrap-panel-for-inquiry-into-child-sex-abuse

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...-to-try-to-identify-victims-from-missing-boys

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ions-ex-police-to-submit-dossier-to-met-chief


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 21, 2014)

......the Savile case has prompted 2 inquiries....

the IPCC seems to be following the ignore the wood, focus on the trees and ideally individual rotten apples model  :

....I'm not totally clear exactly what triggers them to act & how proactive they are, the statement linked below refers to both :

_The IPCC *directed* Sussex Police to refer the conduct of two of the officers late last year.

This investigation follows a referral from North Yorkshire Police_


*IPCC update statement on investigations related to Jimmy Savile*
Sep 19, 2014

https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/ipcc-update-statement-investigations-related-jimmy-savile

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has a _*number of investigations*_ in progress related to Jimmy Savile, concerning different police forces.

Metropolitan Police Service

The IPCC requested the MPS review its Savile-related material and consider whether any matters raised in the HMIC Savile report published in 2013 should be recorded and referred to the IPCC as conduct matters against individual officers.

....secondly there was also the *HM Inspectors of Constabulary Savile report* ……Mistakes were made…that appeared to have the more overarching remit…

https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...intelligence-material-concerning-jimmy-savile

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May): On 7 November 2012 I formally commissioned Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) to conduct a review to assess police knowledge of and response to the historical allegations made against Jimmy Savile and related individuals, and potentially into similar allegations against other individuals.

In particular, I asked that the review establish clearly which forces received reports or allegations in respect of Savile and related individuals prior to the launch of Operation Yewtree on 5 October 2012. For each of those forces, I asked HMIC to review the extent to which the allegations were robustly investigated and whether there were any police failings in doing so.

*HMIC conducted enquiries in all 43 police forces in England and Wales, and liaised with HMIC Scotland and the States of Jersey Police.*


…..Special Branch is also regional….

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Branch#United_Kingdom



http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ions-ex-police-to-submit-dossier-to-met-chief

.....Hogan-Howe did at least show a willingness to bang the table with "6" over the Gareth Williams case...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-spy-gareth-williams-death-probe-7722839.html


…fuck….this is a MUST READ….direct from that private ex-police-only forum….

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5434/police-discuss-submitting-statements-on-paedophile-cover-up

.”….that boy that was run over was alleged to be Jason Swift…”








....glass tables...sounds like we're back to Boothby / Kray territory...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 21, 2014)

Betsy said:


> Saw this on Twitter tonight...had a quick search on here but neither John Oliver's name or that of Mark Sedwill came up so hope it hasn't already been posted....
> 
> *Home Office ordered to answer questions on missing Westminster child abuse files from Guildford man John Oliver*
> _
> ...



Interesting questions in the FOI request. Be interesting to hear their response. Just about the only report of this i can find is on the GetSurrey website.



> Mr Oliver's Freedom of Information request to the Home Office on July 8:
> 
> _“114 files are missing or destroyed. How many of these were given unique file titles and how many were held as sub-files under a main file heading? Please list how many unique file headings there were, how many files were held as sub-files under a main subject heading, how many main subject headings there were and how many of the 114 files were held under each main heading._
> 
> ...


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> May wants to disband the over arching panel. I.e stopped.



...well til after the election ( no interim report before then ) but if its reconstituted with proper powers to summons & testimony given under oath that's a good thing you would hope...

...and re John Mann throwing his dossier into the ring....

*Five Westminster paedophile rings probed by Scotland Yard*

By David Barrett, Home Affairs Correspondent  5:32PM GMT 21 Dec 2014


Police are investigating claims that up to five paedophile rings operated at the heart of Westminster with the involvement of “highly influential” politicians.

*Mr Mann, who has spent months sifting evidence from members of the public, met Scotland Yard and handed over evidence on 22 politicians, including three serving MPs and three members of the House of Lords.*

Although some on the list are now dead, it also contains the names of other figures who are still alive but no longer active in the Westminster scene, Mr Mann said.

*“There are at least five paedophile rings which involved MPs,” he said.
*
“Each of them involved at least one MP, some involved more, and these were groups of people who knew about the activities of one another.

“In some cases I believe they committed abuse together.”

*Fourteen of the individuals identified by Mr Mann were Conservative politicians, five were Labour and three were from other parties.

Thirteen former ministers were among the list, Mr Mann said.*

continued :   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...paedophile-rings-probed-by-Scotland-Yard.html


----------



## free spirit (Dec 22, 2014)

out of 22 politicians alleged to be involved, 13 were cabinet ministers?

That strikes me as an incredibly high percentage of the politicians being cabinet ministers.

Also if true, that's an incredibly high percentage of the 56 cabinet members in thatchers cabinet, or I guess maybe that's including cabinets before thatcher?


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2014)

*EXCLUSIVE: ‘I was warned off’ says detective involved in historic paedophile probe*

A FORMER police chief told how his superiors tried to stop a major paedophile investigation, warning: “Don’t open the box, you will never get the lid back on.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/54...phile-ring-investigation-detective-warned-off

Retired Detective Chief Superintendent Roger Gaspar said Scotland Yard top brass feared what Operation Hedgerow would unearth when it was launched in August 1987.

He told the Sunday Express he was denied extra resources and was told to “deal with what he had” throughout the two-year inquiry.

Mr Gaspar, who now lives on the Essex coast, also suggested a paedophile unit should be set up to investigate abuse in the late 1980s, but the request was turned down.

The operation centred on a north London paedophile ring in Kilburn and dealt with 653 claims by 150 boys and young men.

Over 20 were arrested and 14 men convicted.

According to reports at the time the ring was “used by highly placed civil servants and well known public figures”, but police lacked the “evidence or manpower to pursue them in court”.

continued at link ; http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/54...phile-ring-investigation-detective-warned-off


----------



## elbows (Dec 22, 2014)

free spirit said:


> out of 22 politicians alleged to be involved, 13 were cabinet ministers?
> 
> That strikes me as an incredibly high percentage of the politicians being cabinet ministers.
> 
> Also if true, that's an incredibly high percentage of the 56 cabinet members in thatchers cabinet, or I guess maybe that's including cabinets before thatcher?



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-dossier-handed-to-scotland-yard-9938374.html



> Mr Mann told the newspaper the dossier names 12 former ministers, several of whom he believes were “definitely child abusers” and at least two of which are alleged to have assaulted boys at the Dolphin Square “abuse parties”.
> 
> He believes that the evidence presented against half of those on the list is “very compelling” and that some could “definitely be prosecuted”.



Sounds like it includes cases that he hasn't got very compelling evidence for yet.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2014)

...massive throbbing dribbling knob-end John Humphries on R4 this morning....( to Peter Saunders )

"...well I have a slight problem with you calling yourselves "survivors" of abuse...I mean you all survived didn't you...can we agree on victims....?"


http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04vddwq
0810
Dozens of victims, social workers and child protection experts have signed a letter urging the home secretary to scrap the current public inquiry into child abuse and rethink its structure.   Its expected Theresa May will announce she's disbanding the expert panel that's been continuing the inquiry's work while the government looks for a new chairman.  The new inquiry is to have legal powers to compel witnesses to give evidence. We hear from *Peter Saunders, chief executive of The National Association for People Abused in Childhood* and Tim Loughton, Former Children's Minister and Member of the Home Affairs Select Committee.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2014)

elbows said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-dossier-handed-to-scotland-yard-9938374.html
> 
> Sounds like it includes cases that he hasn't got very compelling evidence for yet.



...what I want is for the first bastard eventually dragged in & looking at a long stay on the nonce wing to start singing like a canary for a plea-bargain & take all the other c**ts down with them...or does that only happen on US cop shows....?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 22, 2014)

free spirit said:


> out of 22 politicians alleged to be involved, 13 were cabinet ministers?
> 
> That strikes me as an incredibly high percentage of the politicians being cabinet ministers.
> 
> Also if true, that's an incredibly high percentage of the 56 cabinet members in thatchers cabinet, or I guess maybe that's including cabinets before thatcher?



Ministers, not *cabinet* ministers.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 23, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Ministers, not *cabinet* ministers.


oh. Well spotted.

I've just counted up and can't believe there's something like 112 ministers these days.

I say something like 112 as I really can't be fucked to do a recount to be sure, suffice to say there's fucking loads of them.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 23, 2014)

free spirit said:


> criminal or civil liability.
> 
> Half the people are dead so will never be able to be tried in court, and similarly the organisations that enabled this to go on for so long without being discovered are very unlikely ever to face a criminal prosecution for it by the CPS (the CPS being one of those organisations that could itself be held liable potentially).
> 
> ...



Whether a system is inquisitorial or adversarial is largely irrelevant as to liability.

Liability is a question of a substantive test, whereas the route you use to determine liability is a matter of procedure, not substance.

Furthermore, you seem to assume that the matter is proven, or, at the very least, almost certainly likely to be proven, which is, at best, unclear.

But the really important point on inquisitorial v adversarial is that, without proper oversight or appropriate checks and balances, the inquisitorial system lends itself to mission creep far more readily than the adversarial system does, especially when those under investigation are dead and cannot defend themselves in personam.

My opinon is that inquiries of the kind favoured by the current government undermine the rule of law.

They are sops that quell public opinion or address special interest groups in a manner that is of little utility and encourage the peculiar form of litigation that they generate - _i.e. _a lot of lawyers getting wealthy by addressing an investigation with such a massively wide and ill-defined scope as to be essentially meaningless in its conclusions (while being unable to act on them also!).

Distraction from more important, present issues very well done...


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

What "more important, present issues" do you think these might be?


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

(Cos, yanno, the allegation that an MP raped someone and the polis/Special Branch covered it up is so last year.)


----------



## Diamond (Dec 23, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> What "more important, present issues" do you think these might be?



As I have already set out earlier in this thread, the most obvious one would be the Rotherham CSA events.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

What has Rotherham to do with any of this? All there is in common is an unwillingness to listen to children.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 23, 2014)

You asked me to identify what present issues that this inquiry might distract from.

I answered in a fairly direct fashion.

Not sure where the confusion arises from there.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

Yes, you answered directly but failed to explain the connection. You might as well have said obscene spending on arms, or child poverty. Or are you just a racist jerk?


----------



## Diamond (Dec 23, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Yes, you answered directly but failed to explain the connection. You might as well have said obscene spending on arms, or child poverty. Or are you just a racist jerk?



Case A - CSA in the 80s has generated 165 pages of comment.

Case B - CSA now has generated 50 pages of comment.

And please substantiate your racist query with something resembling a coherent argument, rather than a pathetic insult.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

To be fair, the common theme that links Rotherham and the allegations against pols is the persistent allegation of police corruption. That is seriously worthy of investigation.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

Diamond said:


> Case A - CSA in the 80s has generated 165 pages of comment.
> 
> Case B - CSA now has generated 50 pages of comment.
> 
> And please substantiate your racist query with something resembling a coherent argument, rather than a pathetic insult.


Right. So we may now take participation in threads on urban as evidence of anything other than participation in threads on urban? As for the allegation of racism - I cite the utter irrelevance of Rotherham to the allegations of a high level UK paedophile ring. There was nothing AFAIK high level about it, unless you know different.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 23, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Right. So we may now take participation in threads on urban as evidence of anything other than participation in threads on urban? As for the allegation of racism - I cite the utter irrelevance of Rotherham to the allegations of a high level UK paedophile ring. There was nothing AFAIK high level about it, unless you know different.



That's a pretty incoherent post to be fair but I think I can see what you are getting at.

What I'm saying is that there is no direct link, nor is there any conspiracy to distract people directly from Rotherham on to the 80s stuff.  I find that equally as incredible an idea because it falls into CT epistelomogy, which never makes any sense to me at all for simple, practical reasons.

What I do think, though, is that people who are really fired up about child sexual abuse (CSA) should probably direct their efforts to where CSA has been recently _proven_ rather than depart on quixotic adventures, as presently seems to be the case.

Or to put it simply - Rotherham has no link to Westminster and that is precisely the problem.  (no one cares for Rotherham and vice versa etc...)


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

Yes. I do see the common thread of CSA. But silly me. Of course it's impossible that Westminster politicians could have been corrupt. It's that chimera that has been leading us all this merry dance with disappearing dossiers, vanishing witnesses, Special Branch intimidation and other such nonsense. Of course we are living in a spy novel fantasy. None of this could have possibly happened and there is no evidence for it whatsoever. Thanks for putting me right. I appreciate your authority and insight. 

I do query your assertion that no one cares for Rotherham.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...sexual-abuse-scandal-tip-iceberg-police-chief


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 23, 2014)

Which, you can't deny, is a dog-whistle. So don't pretend otherwise.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 23, 2014)

*Westminster paedophile ring: Was second man killed over child abuse cover-up?*

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/westminster-paedophile-ring-second-man-4858393

Two men may have been murdered as part of an establishment cover-up into child sex abuse allegations, an MP sensationally claimed today.

A council official and a caretaker may have been killed to stop them exposing a Westminster paedophile ring, Labour’s John Mann said.

The murder claims centre on Daily Mirror revelations seven months ago about Lambeth Council official Bulic Forsythe, who died in February 1993 in suspicious circumstances. He had vowed to expose a paedophile ring allegedly linked to a future minister in Tony Blair’s government.

Bulic told a witness he suspected vulnerable youngsters were being assaulted by an organised gang at one children’s home said to have been visited by the Labour politician.But days later Bulic, 42, was beaten to death in his flat which was later set on fire. The case has remained unsolved for 21 years.

Mr Mann today said social services manager Bulic - and an unnamed council caretaker - could have been killed to silence them.

*The caretaker died in a “suspicious” fire, Mr Mann said, adding that the worker “was providing information and tapes relating to sex abuse and sex parties” in the run-up to his death.*

He claimed the deaths were “undoubtedly linked” to child abuse at Westminster and “potentially linked to the wider scandal” involving other high-profile figures.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 23, 2014)

*Charles Napier jailed for 13 years for child sex abuse*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30591158

23 December 2014 Last updated at 14:59

Former teacher Charles Napier has been sentenced to 13 years in prison for sexually abusing 21 boys between 1967 and 1972.

Napier pleaded guilty to the offences at Southwark Crown Court in November.

He admitted 28 indecent assault charges and one indecency offence on a child. All his victims were under 16.

Napier, who is the half-brother of Conservative MP John Whittingdale, was arrested in 2013 as part of Operation Cayacos, one strand of Scotland Yard's wider investigation into historical child abuse.


----------



## laptop (Dec 23, 2014)

free spirit said:


> I say something like 112 as I really can't be fucked to do a recount to be sure, suffice to say there's fucking loads of them.



124 at http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/government-and-opposition1/her-majestys-government/ (select "A-Z") though that includes Whips.

(I didn't actually count, I searched the sourcecode for "<td rowspan=".)


----------



## free spirit (Dec 23, 2014)

laptop said:


> 124 at http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/government-and-opposition1/her-majestys-government/ (select "A-Z") though that includes Whips.


I'd excluded the whips, wasn't sure if they classed as ministers or not.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 23, 2014)

Diamond said:


> As I have already set out earlier in this thread, the most obvious one would be the Rotherham CSA events.


The problem is, there were 2 other threads that were dealing with other non-connected child abuse cases / the reporting of those cases, while this thread deliberately wasn't as it was focussed on uncovering evidence or otherwise of there being a high level political paedophile ring  / network and associated cover ups.

Unfortunately the other 2 threads ended up being locked for some reason (bickering and infighting I assume), leaving only this one, and Rotherham doesn't really belong in this thread.

There is however this 50 page thread that does exclusively focus on Rotherham, so if you want to discuss Rotherham maybe that'd be the better place to do it.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 23, 2014)

free spirit said:


> The problem is, there were 2 other threads that were dealing with other non-connected child abuse cases / the reporting of those cases, while this thread deliberately wasn't as it was focussed on uncovering evidence or otherwise of there being a high level political paedophile ring  / network and associated cover ups.
> 
> Unfortunately the other 2 threads ended up being locked for some reason (bickering and infighting I assume), leaving only this one, and Rotherham doesn't really belong in this thread.
> 
> There is however this 50 page thread that does exclusively focus on Rotherham, so if you want to discuss Rotherham maybe that'd be the better place to do it.



You thoroughly misunderstand the point I was trying to make, which is remarkable because it was pretty plainly made in the first instance.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 27, 2014)

So, is Charles Napier going to spill the beans over what he knows. He claims he's remorseful, but I'm waging not THAT remorseful.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 27, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> So, is Charles Napier going to spill the beans over what he knows.



Quite possibly...not that we'd ever find out what the beans were.


----------



## elbows (Dec 28, 2014)

Its never been clear to me what people think the likes of Charles Napier actually knows. Certainly we get headlines from time to time that he might hold the key to unlocking some huge network, but I've never heard anything that really points in that direction. The nature of his offending doesn't seem to involve politicians, so I assume its PIE stuff that holds the most interest. Certainly as treasurer he may know some interesting things, but for me in many ways a lot of the PIE stuff is easy repeating of tabloid stuff past, as opposed to a key to unlocking high-level abuse.

Links to Peter Righton are the other possibility of interest, but aside from the Righton stuff being a major part of the Tom Watson speech that launched the westminster side of the post-Savile story, its not clear to me where this angle is supposed to lead either. I suppose from what we know so far it looks like there could be a story here about paedophiles within various institutions trying to help each other out, and it is very important that this be looked at properly. But there are certainly limits to our assumptions on this front, not least because yet again we are dealing with people who were prosecuted in the past, so clearly were not receiving utter immunity by virtue of having powerful mates.

I'll throw the above stances away in a heartbeat if something interesting emerges, but I have no particular reason to think it will.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 31, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30638168

Thoughts on this report?


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 31, 2014)

That they are redefining how bullies get sex. 

Sorry. That sounds flippant. I mean this has been going on a long time and what's changing is society's attitude.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 31, 2014)

next they'll be telling us that the pope is catholic. let me guess - for you this shows that we should ignore the links between centres of political power and paedophilia because grooming?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 31, 2014)

Dame Butler-Sloss on Radio 4's Today programme this morning is worth a listen to. Towards the end she provides a spirited defence of the establishment as trusted protectors of society; in doing so she also marginalises the victims of child abuse specifically (and I'd argue all victims more generally). The combined lack of critical self awareness and entitlement is powerful.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 31, 2014)

Yes, I heard that too. Carry on as you were, old chaps!


----------



## Diamond (Dec 31, 2014)

First, I think the charity is probably overstating its case - the claim that literally every town in the nation exhibits child abuse is incredible and smacks of an organisation that either doesn't understand its scope or, more likely, is trying to widen it to improve its prominence.

Second, there is an underlying point about an escalation of claims.  This is what I've been going on about for some time now.  The greater the claim, the more sufficient the need for evidence, otherwise you're set to ride a runaway train of suspicious rumours and vague conspiracy theories.  That is exhibited here with this charity and also with the suggestions of a historic high level paedophile ring.

Third, and finally, there is something weirdly salacious about all these matters and that is a bit troubling - that people would _like_ this to be true rather than false.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 31, 2014)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Dame Butler-Sloss on Radio 4's Today programme this morning is worth a listen to. Towards the end she provides a spirited defence of the establishment as trusted protectors of society; in doing so she also marginalises the victims of child abuse specifically (and I'd argue all victims more generally). The combined lack of critical self awareness and entitlement is powerful.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



Opened up with a series of lies about not wanting the role, not knowing of the Dickens' dossier and then asking listeners to sympathise when her integrity was doubted...."*no-one looks at the reality, they look at how they feel about things...". *She then attempted a mealy-mouthed defence of her proteaction of the CoE Bishop, denied she was part of the establishment and then attempted to 'contextualise' establishment CSA in the "different views of the time". 

More of this needed on the media.
*
*


----------



## el-ahrairah (Dec 31, 2014)

Diamond said:


> First, I think the charity is probably overstating its case - the claim that literally every town in the nation exhibits child abuse is incredible and smacks of an organisation that either doesn't understand its scope or, more likely, is trying to widen it to improve its prominence.


 
I don't know the organisation in question, but I doubt any organisation involved in trying to support child abuse victims or prevent child abuse would disagree with the statement that you disagree with.  just because you don't want it to be true doesn't mean that things really are that bad. 

You expand a lot of energy on trying to stop people listening to survivors and the charities that support them.  That's pretty troubling, imo.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 31, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> I don't know the organisation in question, but I doubt any organisation involved in trying to support child abuse victims or prevent child abuse would disagree with the statement that you disagree with.  just because you don't want it to be true doesn't mean that things really are that bad.
> 
> You expand a lot of energy on trying to stop people listening to survivors and the charities that support them.  That's pretty troubling, imo.



I'm writing on an online message board - if you think that expends a lot of energy then perhaps you should get out more.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Dec 31, 2014)

avoidance noted.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 31, 2014)

Diamond said:


> First, I think the charity is probably overstating its case - the claim that literally every town in the nation exhibits child abuse is incredible and smacks of an organisation that either doesn't understand its scope or, more likely, is trying to widen it to improve its prominence.
> 
> Second, there is an underlying point about an escalation of claims.  This is what I've been going on about for some time now.  The greater the claim, the more sufficient the need for evidence, otherwise you're set to ride a runaway train of suspicious rumours and vague conspiracy theories.  That is exhibited here with this charity and also with the suggestions of a historic high level paedophile ring.
> 
> Third, and finally, there is something weirdly salacious about all these matters and that is a bit troubling - that people would _like_ this to be true rather than false.


Don't know if they are overstating their case. It's certainly the case that tolerance has lessened and that's all to the good. Frex (and this is anecdotage that can easily be dismissed) at my school back in the last century the caretaker had a hut where he'd receive girls aged 12-13. They'd emerge swaggering and 'everyone knew' what had been going on, and basically those girls were regarded as no better than they ought to have been. It appals me now, looking back, and I'm astounded no member of staff took action. I have other anecdotes, but can't imagine that my small market town was particularly like Royston Vasey. 

No comment about the second paragraph except that people are bound to pile in even if it's true and the piling in isn't evidence of untruth. It can be a function of Thank God Now Someone Will Believe Me.

As for the last point, yes: there is something weirdly salacious, which is what attracted villains in the first place. It shouldn't stop us from discussing it.


----------



## Diamond (Dec 31, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> avoidance noted.



I'm really not sure what your point is so it's necessarily hard to respond directly to, therefore I focused on your sniping.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 31, 2014)

But yeah, none of this has anything to do with the thread title. /derail


----------



## brogdale (Dec 31, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Opened up with a series of lies about not wanting the role, not knowing of the Dickens' dossier and then asking listeners to sympathise when her integrity was doubted...."*no-one looks at the reality, they look at how they feel about things...". *She then attempted a mealy-mouthed defence of her proteaction of the CoE Bishop, denied she was part of the establishment and then attempted to 'contextualise' establishment CSA in the "different views of the time".
> 
> More of this needed on the media.



Possible to watch her lying here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30640879


----------



## brogdale (Dec 31, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Possible to watch her lying here.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30640879


Note how she checks herself at 1.21.

e2a: ...and 3.35..."*...bearing in mind..."*


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 31, 2014)

> "I do believe the establishment has in the past looked after itself, partly because people did not really recognise the seriousness of child abuse and they did not think it was so important, and it was important to protect members of the establishment.
> 
> "So I would want to go in with a knife and cut the whole thing open and expose it, as to what happened,* bearing in mind, of course, that the views of those people are not the views of people today and that is a difficulty*."


 Wtf do the words in bold mean? 

E2A reference: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30640879


----------



## brogdale (Dec 31, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Wtf do the words in bold mean?
> 
> E2A reference: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30640879



Speaks volumes about how she would have conducted the inquiry.


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Waaa-hey!



> A woman who claims that an American investment banker loaned her to rich and powerful friends as an underage “sex slave” has alleged in a US court document that she was repeatedly forced to have sexual relations with *Prince Andrew*.
> 
> The accusation against the Duke of York is contained in a motion filed in a Florida court this week in connection with a long-running lawsuit brought by women who say they were exploited by Jeffrey Epstein, a multi-millionaire convicted of soliciting sex with an underage girl after a plea deal.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rew-named-us-lawsuit-underage-sex-allegations



Even better:



> , another close associate of Epstein who is also accused in the lawsuit, * Alan Dershowitz*, told the Guardian that the woman’s accusations against himself were “totally false and made up”.



(For some grim value of "better".)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Dame Butler-Sloss on Radio 4's Today programme this morning is worth a listen to. Towards the end she provides a spirited defence of the establishment as trusted protectors of society; in doing so she also marginalises the victims of child abuse specifically (and I'd argue all victims more generally). The combined lack of critical self awareness and entitlement is powerful.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



I enjoyed the Lord Mayor of London claiming not to be a member of the establishment as well.


----------



## elbows (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I enjoyed the Lord Mayor of London claiming not to be a member of the establishment as well.



And for bonus giggles they made her a dame in the new years honours.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 2, 2015)

Has Leon Brittain said much about the Dickens dossier? other than yes he saw it and handed it over to someone else. Nothing about following it up or anything?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 2, 2015)

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rew-named-us-lawsuit-underage-sex-allegations

well they are only allegations so far, im sure nothing will come of it mind


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rew-named-us-lawsuit-underage-sex-allegations
> 
> well they are only allegations so far, im sure nothing will come of it mind



I suppose the 'new' aspect to this news story is the actual naming, but to my untrained eye, little appears likely to come of it. 



> The duke had previously been accused of meeting Epstein’s young victims and possibly being aware of their sexual exploitation. However, *this is the first time he has been named in a court document as a participant in any sexual activity with one of the young women allegedly trafficked by Epstein.*
> 
> As the claim has only just been lodged, and as *the duke is not a named party to it*, he has not had the opportunity to formally file a defence or denial to the claims.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 2, 2015)

the bbc is now reporting ' buckingham palace in untrue claims shocker '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30659629


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> the bbc is now reporting ' buckingham palace in untrue claims shocker '


it would be nicer to hear about buckingham palace in true claims shocker.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 2, 2015)

wouldnt it just


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> wouldnt it just


i'm not saying they're liars but if they said today was, say, friday i would check the calendar to be sure.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 3, 2015)

laptop said:


> Waaa-hey!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like Dershowitz never makes anything up. Boom!
http://electronicintifada.net/conte...or-alan-dershowitzs-new-book-israel-hoax/4787


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Like Dershowitz never makes anything up. Boom!
> http://electronicintifada.net/conte...or-alan-dershowitzs-new-book-israel-hoax/4787


 
But it's given the state broadcaster another angle with which to fearlessly report the royal noncery...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 3, 2015)

So the bbcs angle is that prince andrew is in the clear cos somone else, also accused of noncery,  claims its all lies?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Kaka Tim said:


> So the bbcs angle is that prince andrew is in the clear cos somone else, also accused of noncery,  claims its all lies?


 No, because he's royal.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Tele speak to victim of Peter Morrison. Keeping the story close to Thatcher...drip, drip.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nt-raped-boy-and-police-covered-crime-up.html


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Tele speak to victim of Peter Morrison. Keeping the story close to Thatcher...drip, drip.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nt-raped-boy-and-police-covered-crime-up.html



They have another piece which contains far more of the victims story:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...m.-You-trusted-people-more-in-those-days.html


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

elbows said:


> They have another piece which contains far more of the victims story:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...m.-You-trusted-people-more-in-those-days.html


good.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2015)

Another positive development reported by Exaro.







"*...the same former Conservative cabinet minister..."*


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 11, 2015)

I think many of us have suspected the government was trying to scupper the abuse inquiry.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5448/home-office-mandarins-are-seeking-to-subvert-abuse-inquiry


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> I think many of us have suspected the government was trying to scupper the abuse inquiry.
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5448/home-office-mandarins-are-seeking-to-subvert-abuse-inquiry



I can't see it simply in those terms. A very large part of the story involves victims, certain panel members and others having a go at each other, and displaying everything from a complete lack of trust to counterproductive personal defensiveness. 

There are some good, or at least understandable, explanations for this, but its a complication that is rather hard to solve in a country where there is already a sizeable gap between how the elites decide to deal with things, and what people including some victims want to see happen.

There are some bloody good reasons why some victims cannot sustain the levels of trust necessary to make progress. Quite what can be done about it quite the question, given that some victims were damaged by past experiences to the extent that it will be impossible to satisfy them, even if we had some kind of brilliant open inquiry that really wasn't afraid to leave no stone unturned.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 11, 2015)

As the politics surrounding the inquiry becomes ever more clotted I think we need to be a little more sensitive to the politicking that is going on. Saying that 'mandarins' are trying to bounce May into a course of action is itself a political intervention. Neither we nor Exaro (and nor I'd imagine the independent panel members) have any real idea how the meeting with opponents of the independent panel which is being complained about was set up. It might have been May's own idea - there have been instances where she seems to be trying to defuse and incorporate criticism by 'consulting' it. (Seemingly the exact opposite of what she is often accused of in relation to this inquiry. But then those complaints often have as their sub-text 'I haven't been consulted'). Putting it in the way the Exaro article claims some of the independent panel members are, as the fault of devious obstructive 'Sir Humphries', is all part of the attempt to persuade May to do what they want. Whether or not there is any truth to the suggestion is not the fundamental reason why it is being said.

I think we have also long since reached the point where it's necessary to be a little more careful in distinguishing between victims of abuse and the representatives and 'champions' of victims of abuse. While it would be great if we could accept that all of the latter are motivated by selfless considerations and are being honest in what they say, sadly that would be hopelessly naive.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2015)

Exaro have certainly been consistent in writing pieces that give the impression of mostly supporting the inquiry in its original format, and the panel as is. They are making little attempt to tell the whole story on this front.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 11, 2015)

elbows said:


> I can't see it simply in those terms. A very large part of the story involves victims, certain panel members and others having a go at each other, and displaying everything from a complete lack of trust to counterproductive personal defensiveness.
> 
> There are some good, or at least understandable, explanations for this, but its a complication that is rather hard to solve in a country where there is already a sizeable gap between how the elites decide to deal with things, and what people including some victims want to see happen.
> 
> There are some bloody good reasons why some victims cannot sustain the levels of trust necessary to make progress. Quite what can be done about it quite the question, given that some victims were damaged by past experiences to the extent that it will be impossible to satisfy them, even if we had some kind of brilliant open inquiry that really wasn't afraid to leave no stone unturned.


I can and I'm seeing this purely in terms of how power is being exercised at the highest levels. Given the amount of power and influence held by the security services and the close relationship they enjoy with the Tory party, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that highly placed civil servants and others will do all they can to delay, prevaricate and obfuscate in order to frustrate any attempt to get at the truth and put the guilty in the dock. The establishment doesn't want an inquiry. That is something on which all of us can agree.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> The establishment doesn't want an inquiry. That is something on which all of us can agree.



No, I can't agree with that either!

There are stages where the establishment fights against such things, but if the smell doesn't go away then they eventually have to move on to a phase of having some kind of inquiry so they can do that thing with the narrative where they 'draw a line under events of the past'.

I am not for a minute suggesting that such a strategy involves a full and frank disclosure of every aspect of the truth, as opposed to the deliberate narrowing of the scope of inquiry. But in order to achieve even its minimum requirements as far as enabling the line to be drawn, at least a certain standard of credibility is required at the offset. But when it comes to this abuse inquiry, they have been unable to gain sufficient momentum before credibility is undermined at these early stages, forcing repeated attempts to salvage the credibility before the main event. I partly put it down to the particular ineptitude of the current regime, along with the timescales involved, the nature of the offences, the way victims have been failed historically, and the levels of fear that the prospect of certain revelations going public probably foster.

Perhaps my relatively relaxed attitude towards this issue is down to the fat that at this point I'm far more interested in the police investigations, since these are the ones that may in theory bring specific people to account. I'd rather any inquiry not get far into its work before the justice system side of things concludes.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 14, 2015)

Exaro release latest interview with the 'third' victim of alleged abuse at Dolphin Sq...

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5453/video-darren-calls-on-police-to-arrest-dolphin-square-abusers


----------



## elbows (Jan 14, 2015)

elbows said:


> Its never been clear to me what people think the likes of Charles Napier actually knows. Certainly we get headlines from time to time that he might hold the key to unlocking some huge network, but I've never heard anything that really points in that direction. The nature of his offending doesn't seem to involve politicians, so I assume its PIE stuff that holds the most interest. Certainly as treasurer he may know some interesting things, but for me in many ways a lot of the PIE stuff is easy repeating of tabloid stuff past, as opposed to a key to unlocking high-level abuse.
> 
> Links to Peter Righton are the other possibility of interest, but aside from the Righton stuff being a major part of the Tom Watson speech that launched the westminster side of the post-Savile story, its not clear to me where this angle is supposed to lead either. I suppose from what we know so far it looks like there could be a story here about paedophiles within various institutions trying to help each other out, and it is very important that this be looked at properly. But there are certainly limits to our assumptions on this front, not least because yet again we are dealing with people who were prosecuted in the past, so clearly were not receiving utter immunity by virtue of having powerful mates.
> 
> I'll throw the above stances away in a heartbeat if something interesting emerges, but I have no particular reason to think it will.



Quoting myself from late December because the victim known as Darren, across multiple Exaro articles, links Napier to Righton and Righton to trafficking people for Dolphin Square abuse. So there is the kind of alleged detail about links that I said I'd never heard at the time of the above post. The level of political interest in Righton makes more sense if this was the setup, but its too early for me to confidently claim that this is the missing link - I don't have the investigative powers to even begin to do it justice and find it highly unlikely I can glean anything further from internet research on this one for now.

My normal instincts would still be to get into some of the detail of what Darren is saying, and see what further questions or possibilities it raises. But in this case I don't think I can do it properly, not without potentially insinuating things that are unfair to Darren and others. I can say that I'm not comfortable with the level of detail Exaro have published on this one - when Exaro came up in this context before I defended them on that point, but not this time. Because there does seem to be a heck of a lot of details published that are the kind of thing the police could use to check whether fresh victims stories match details given by previous victims. Do I really need to know the details about different rooms at this point?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 15, 2015)

elbows said:


> No, I can't agree with that either!



You do surprise me! 



> There are stages where the establishment fights against such things, but if the smell doesn't go away then they eventually have to move on to a phase of having some kind of inquiry so they can do that thing with the narrative where they 'draw a line under events of the past'.



This doesn't exclude the very real possibility that they can sabotage the inquiry process. Some victims are afraid to come forward because they rightly fear reprisals. The perps believe themselves to be above the law. For decades these people have abused and murdered children for their pleasure. This belief comes from their privileged positions and the sense of entitlement that comes with those positions. They will do all they can to interfere with both the inquiry process and the police investigation.



> I am not for a minute suggesting that such a strategy involves a full and frank disclosure of every aspect of the truth, as opposed to the deliberate narrowing of the scope of inquiry. But in order to achieve even its minimum requirements as far as enabling the line to be drawn, at least a certain standard of credibility is required at the offset. But when it comes to this abuse inquiry, they have been unable to gain sufficient momentum before credibility is undermined at these early stages, forcing repeated attempts to salvage the credibility before the main event. I partly put it down to the particular ineptitude of the current regime, along with the timescales involved, the nature of the offences, the way victims have been failed historically, and the levels of fear that the prospect of certain revelations going public probably foster.



Ineptitude? There have already been two attempts by May to install a chair. I would suggest that her selections were flawed from the outset. She knew exactly what she was doing by nominating Butler-Sloss and Woolf.


----------



## elbows (Jan 16, 2015)

Lots of possibilities there, some of which I have plenty of time for and others somewhat less so. What I can't do is treat those possibilities as facts.

I can be plenty cynical about the political classes without buying into the idea that May appointed those people knowing that there would be a backlash which would result in them being unable to do the job.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 16, 2015)

elbows said:


> Lots of possibilities there, some of which I have plenty of time for and others somewhat less so. What I can't do is treat those possibilities as facts.
> 
> I can be plenty cynical about the political classes without buying into the idea that May appointed those people knowing that there would be a backlash which would result in them being unable to do the job.


That's not quite what I was saying. May knew that Butler-Sloss and Woolf had close connections with the establishment. How could she not know? She knew these women would be unpalatable to the members of the panel. Her class always looks after their own. That alone suits those who were responsible for the murders and abuse of children (especially the security services). I recall what she said when Woolf was forced to stand down and I paraphrase "No one will be suitable because they all have a connection to the establishment". I found that rather revealing.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 16, 2015)

Children's Home Sex Abuse Accused Found Dead



> A former children's home manager has been found dead weeks before he was due to stand trial over alleged historical sex abuse.
> 
> John Stingemore, 72, was found at his home in St Leonards-on-Sea, East Sussex, on Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> ...


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jan 16, 2015)

first of many i expect.


----------



## elbows (Jan 16, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> That's not quite what I was saying. May knew that Butler-Sloss and Woolf had close connections with the establishment. How could she not know? She knew these women would be unpalatable to the members of the panel. Her class always looks after their own. That alone suits those who were responsible for the murders and abuse of children (especially the security services). I recall what she said when Woolf was forced to stand down and I paraphrase "No one will be suitable because they all have a connection to the establishment". I found that rather revealing.



Thanks for the explanation, sorry for misunderstanding it earlier.

I didn't find that comment revealing because we know what form inquiries take in this country. Thats also why I'm not sure about the idea they are trying to scupper the inquiry - they are simply trying to have the usual sort of inquiry on their usual terms, involving the usual sorts of people. I apply the same to the choice of panel members, they are also the usual sort of people - people who may not all be establishment themselves, but are considered 'responsible members of society' who might from time to time challenge the establishment on certain levels, but certainly not on others. I'll have to double-check but it didn't seem to me that panel members were the ones leading the charge against the choices of chair either. Some of them might of complained about chairs later, but they didn't start momentum on that front and so I disagree that May knew her chair choices would be unpalatable to the panel.


----------



## elbows (Jan 16, 2015)

Also one of the biggest rifts that has formed is between certain panel members and some victims/victim support groups. The latest instalment of that particular saga seems to involve the panel cancelling a listening event with survivors because of complaints that there is insufficient support available for victims who attend, and the panels continued jitters about the future of the inquiry:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...nquiry-panel-cancel-listening-event-survivors


----------



## elbows (Jan 16, 2015)

Plus the panel now being discredited in the eyes of some victims and their representatives is not, in my opinion, a direct result of obvious and deliberate government deeds.

The fact that some victims have been damaged by past abuse and coverup in a manner that makes it very hard to satisfy them now. Even if the establishment had good intentions (I'm not suggesting it has such intentions) they would find it hard to satisfy this group, so the actual reality falls well short and means that inquiries and structures need to have systems in place to support the people and deal with their complaints, concerns and lack of faith as best as can possibly be managed.

But no, one or two members of the panel responded very poorly to the accusations and abuse that they got, often online. And then compounded matters further by coming across as overly keen to defend their own personal honour and place in society and on the panel, along with the reputation of the panel as a whole, when it looked like the inquiry and panel in its current form may be replaced.


----------



## elbows (Jan 16, 2015)

So I guess what I'm getting at is that I'd be far more likely to agree that our official inquiry systems are not well suited to delivering justice to victims or winning their trust, than the idea that this particular one has been deliberately setup to fail at the earliest of stages.


----------



## elbows (Jan 16, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Children's Home Sex Abuse Accused Found Dead



Doh. I suppose its not terribly shocking because earlier in the legal process there were doubts as to whether he was fit to stand trial due to some serious health problems, although they did eventually decide he was fit to stand trial. Having said that its too early for me to assume he died from poor health, but it still makes news of his death less shocking to me even if it doesn't tun out to be the cause of death.

With the information available publicly so far I think its a bit hard to say whether we've definitely been robbed of any potentially interesting links to the high-level paedophile stuff as a result of Stingemores death. We know of at least one victim who alleged abuse at both Grafton and Elm, but I don't think we know whether Stingemore was alleged to have anything to do with a link between the two places, rather than 'simply' abusing people at Grafton. We know that this victim is the same one that was told by the CPS that they were going to drop certain charges against Stingemore, that he was the only victim who alleged abuse at Elm, and that the Elm investigation was being handled separately and it was too early to say whether there would be prosecutions on that front. I believe this is the CPS charge dropping decision that Exaro campaigned against and that was eventually reversed but I've forgotten the precise details of that right now. I think one of the dropped charges was related to conspiracy, so I can't rule out the possibility that something interesting may have emerged at his trial. I think there is a priest still due to go on trial in relation to Grafton so the death of Stingemore may not suddenly result in many previously unreportable things becoming reportable.


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jan 20, 2015)

One of my friends posted this on FB:

https://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/the-mysterious-death-of-mike-smith/


----------



## elbows (Jan 20, 2015)

That may be the sloppiest dot joining ever.


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jan 20, 2015)

elbows said:


> That may be the sloppiest dot joining ever.



It was on Facebook, so it must be true!


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 20, 2015)

It's beyond parody. The Coleman Experience blamed the Joos for most things. It hasn't posted anything for weeks. Rumour has it they were shut down and I shan't weep.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 20, 2015)

el-ahrairah said:


> first of many i expect.


Hope.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 21, 2015)

Roy Harper accused of abusing an 11 year old in the mid-1970s and indecently assaulting a girl aged 16 in 1980:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-30907325


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2015)

So that's what that Led Zeppelin song is about.

Hats back on.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2015)

Johnny Vodka said:


> One of my friends posted this on FB:
> 
> https://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/the-mysterious-death-of-mike-smith/



If you're a true friend, get them sectioned. Coleman is a full-on conspira-nutter, and some of his audience are hardcore anti-Semites.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> It's beyond parody. The Coleman Experience blamed the Joos for most things. It hasn't posted anything for weeks. Rumour has it they were shut down and I shan't weep.



TBF, we "front wheel skids" (as one of the commenters on that vapid stream-of-consciousness dot-joining exercise called us) are pretty perfidious.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 21, 2015)

You're certainly not but some of the names going around are beyond perfidious.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2015)

Fellows formally charged -  still called 'child star' in headline despite story suggesting it's nonsense. I thought the quality Telegraph was above these games? Anyway, reporting restrictions now lifted.


----------



## laptop (Jan 21, 2015)

Whose bright idea was it to put a bunch of abuse surviors in a room with Ben Emmerson QC and no Chair?

One of them isn't happy. 



> In a statement on Tuesday night Emmerson said: “These allegations of bullying and intimidation are entirely baseless. As the Home Office will confirm, Ms Evans’ complaints have already been fully investigated and dismissed as unfounded. The advice that I gave Ms Evans was legally correct and entirely necessary in the circumstances.”
> 
> A statement from the panel, excluding Evans, said: “The panel has full confidence in the integrity, advice and impartiality of counsel to the inquiry. We accept the advice provided was robust but do not accept any statements about bullying. We reject any suggestion that the panel has been intimidated


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Fellows formally charged -  still called 'child star' in headline despite story suggesting it's nonsense. I thought the quality Telegraph was above these games? Anyway, reporting restrictions now lifted.



The _Telegraph_ papers are pretty much empty of any decent journalists, and are running an _Express_-type operation, relying on agency copy and a handful of staffers to keep the paper and the website current. They're about as "quality" as a shit-stained pair of kecks, and about as original as Douglas Murray's opinions.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 21, 2015)

The Telegraph has been going down the pan for a while. It was always the Torygraph but once upon a time had pretensions to journalism. They have sacked or lost so many real journalists that BuzzFeed is a plausible alternative. It's Page One all over again.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 21, 2015)

Lol. 10 great films about newspapers Torygraph listicle doesn't mention The Front Page and all that wrestling over ownership vs readership, revenue vs real journalism.


----------



## 1%er (Jan 21, 2015)

Is the Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse being deliberately undermined, anyone got a view on that?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 21, 2015)

1%er said:


> Is the Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse being deliberately undermined, anyone got a view on that?


 No need to undermine, just let it work like Chilcot and we'll know about the paedo tories by 2022.


----------



## elbows (Jan 21, 2015)

1%er said:


> Is the Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse being deliberately undermined, anyone got a view on that?



A few of us discussed it a couple of pages back, from this post onwards: #4983

My views and posts on this and other related issues tend to deliberately turn down the cynicism because I don't want it to get in the way of other phenomenon that may be at work. I'm actually capable of being just as cynical about some of these issues, but these are just possibilities to me, rather than possibilities that I'm leaning heavily towards.


----------



## 1%er (Jan 21, 2015)

elbows said:


> A few of us discussed it a couple of pages back, from this post onwards: #4983
> 
> My views and posts on this and other related issues tend to deliberately turn down the cynicism because I don't want it to get in the way of other phenomenon that may be at work. I'm actually capable of being just as cynical about some of these issues, but these are just possibilities to me, rather than possibilities that I'm leaning heavily towards.


I was thinking that the failure to appoint a Chair must make it very difficult, if not impossible, for the panel to even set-out or agree on its methodology and therefore unable to move forward effectively.

I'll go back and look at the posts you mentioned


----------



## brogdale (Jan 21, 2015)

1%er said:


> I was thinking that the failure to appoint a Chair must make it very difficult, if not impossible, for the panel to even set-out or agree on its methodology and therefore unable to move forward effectively.
> 
> I'll go back and look at what you mentioned



..and then there's the Maxwellisation years to factor in...


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jan 21, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Coleman is a full-on conspira-nutter



As if you can't tell just from that article.   I'm disappointed Deirdre Barlow wasn't linked in somehow.


----------



## elbows (Jan 22, 2015)

Labour calling for the inquiry to be rebooted:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30931850

May says she will announce new powers and chair by the end of the month.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 22, 2015)

_*Number 10's secret sex file: Uncovered after 34 years 

document that told Thatcher of the 'unnatural' sexual behaviour of Westminster figures*_

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...scovered-probably-seen-Margaret-Thatcher.html

Academic found paperwork still classified on national security grounds
It contains 'PREM SECURITY' in title - which means it was for Mrs Thatcher
Thatcher's aide Sir Bernard Ingham says he 'could not recall the file'
But he and PM were aware of abuse claims aimed at a minister, he said
Cabinet Office say file remains secret but may be released to abuse inquiry


----------



## AnIdiot (Jan 22, 2015)

Just spotted on Twitter that Leon Brittan may have popped his clogs today.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 22, 2015)

yup- confirmed on bbc


----------



## articul8 (Jan 22, 2015)

will this open the floodgates?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 22, 2015)

articul8 said:


> will this open the floodgates?



For crocodile tears and tributes from his contemporaries? Probably.
For evidence about his alleged unnatural lusts? Probably not.


----------



## laptop (Jan 22, 2015)

Daily Fail said:
			
		

> It contains 'PREM SECURITY' in title - which means it was for Mrs Thatcher



Idiots. I'm not even, yet, a Public Record Office user - and I an fairly sure PREM simply means it's a paper to or for the Prime Minister's office.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 22, 2015)

articul8 said:


> will this open the floodgates?


 I was just about to post the same question. There's potential for more to come out about him, certainly, but the same balance of forces is in place over the wider issue.  Can't see newspaper editors and others who have stuff really becoming emboldened by his death.  Things might fray round the edges though and one thing might lead to another, who knows.


----------



## elbows (Jan 22, 2015)

I see Exaro published a letter to the panel from a victim yesterday:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5459/commentary-skulduggery-besieges-inquiry-into-child-sex-abuse

The letter writer has a more complex opinion and questions than the headline and Exaro's apparent editorial stance on these matters suggest. And obviously different victims have different opinions about the panel and other aspects of this inquiry.

I wait with interest to see what new powers, if any, the inquiry is given. Since May said the announcement would happen before the end of Jan, I don't have too long to wait.


----------



## elbows (Jan 22, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I was just about to post the same question. There's potential for more to come out about him, certainly, but the same balance of forces is in place over the wider issue.  Can't see newspaper editors and others who have stuff really becoming emboldened by his death.  Things might fray round the edges though and one thing might lead to another, who knows.



Yeah, I don't see editorial stances changing much because the legal advice they are given about living people won't change.

I think the evidence so far regarding those publications that have shown some real interest in consistently covering such stories or doing at least la little investigation of their own, is roughly as follows:

They are only going to name the dead, or those formally investigated by the police. We don't yet know if they will decide to go further if, given the passage of a fair bit more time, it turns out there aren't going to be any high-profile political prosecutions. There have been occasional signs of pressure being applied by well-timed articles, so I'd think it somewhat reasonable to expect a bit more campaigning, investigative journalism and salacious scandal articles from more than just Exaro if nothing happens on the prosecutions front without this pressure.


----------



## elbows (Jan 22, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Fellows formally charged -  still called 'child star' in headline despite story suggesting it's nonsense. I thought the quality Telegraph was above these games? Anyway, reporting restrictions now lifted.



With reporting restrictions lifted, thats one less gap between 'legally irresponsible' internet chat and what can be said by publications. Many more to go.


----------



## 1%er (Jan 22, 2015)

Tim Tate is on the byline of the original _Daily_ _Telegraph_ story

“Almost a year ago I interviewed a very senior detective who was handling the Brittan investigation. He was very clear that the Customs Officer (referred to above) had made a clear and credible statement about stopping Brittan at Dover, and seizing child pornography video tapes from him. The Customs Officer stated that he viewed the tapes and was able to describe what was on them.

That statement is – or should be – still held at the Metropolitan Police station from which the investigation was conducted.

I believe that it is essential that the historic child abuse enquiry – assuming it survives – is given a copy of the statement.” – *Tim Tate*

Telegraph story here


----------



## elbows (Jan 22, 2015)

Pretty sure Tim Tate was rather vocal in criticising the Exaro version of the customs story too. I remember being somewhat disappointed with the way Exaro handled that criticism (I don't think they addressed most of it, but could be mistaken), but then I forgot to keep looking for any further comments from either side on that one. Seeing him in the blog comments again reminded me of this, I'll try to get rid of my rust on this stuff over the weekend.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 24, 2015)

So is there anything to this?

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.../salford-academic-stumbles-top-secret-8492134



> A university lecturer has unearthed a previously top-secret file held at the National Archives which could contain allegations of ‘unnatural sexual’ behaviour by establishment figures in the 1980s.
> 
> Dr Chris Murphy, from Salford University, stumbled upon the potentially ‘extremely significant’ file by chance – weeks after a Home Office review into historic child abuse allegations failed to find any documents relevant to its investigation.
> 
> ...


----------



## laptop (Jan 24, 2015)

J Ed said:


> So is there anything to this?
> 
> http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.../salford-academic-stumbles-top-secret-8492134



All depends what's in the file. As I read the stories, Dr Chris Murphy has found its entry in the PRO catalogue but it's not been released. Yet. 

Oh, and whether it turns out still to exist...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 24, 2015)

All a bit unsatisfying these reports.  It says the bloke 'unearthed' the file, whereas he presumably read it and may have copied it.  He clearly has more detail than was reported here.  Presumably he passed that level of detail on to Danczuk.  I can understand the paper being a bit coy about some of this detail, they'll have had lawyers restraining the story.  The academic may well have had to sign up to some kind of agreement to get access to the archive in the first place.   Same time nobody with any official status looks like they are willing to go out on a limb and publish stuff.  Certainly not Danczuk.  It's all a bit more info, a bit more pressure, more evidence that the Wanless inquiry was an intended joke, but nothing that's going to force the hand of the establishment to even give up a couple of sacrificial lambs.


----------



## elbows (Jan 24, 2015)

Some blogs have speculated that the file relates to Peter Hayman. I think they are probably jumping to conclusions, but that possibility is feasible.

Sky say the police have already seen the file:

http://news.sky.com/story/1413807/police-already-aware-of-secret-file-content



> A Met Police spokeswoman told Sky News: "(We) can confirm we have now had sight of the file, the majority of which we were already aware of in terms of content.
> 
> "At this time there are no ongoing inquiries by police in relation to the file."



I'm interested in and want to see such files. But they don't excite me that much in terms of potential prosecutions and revelations, I think they are more likely to be interesting in terms of demonstrating the government and intelligence service attitude to this sort of thing.


----------



## laptop (Jan 24, 2015)

Wilf said:


> It says the bloke 'unearthed' the file, whereas he presumably read it and may have copied it.



Nope. As I said, he found it in the catalogue.

The _Manchester Evening News_ report is over-egging the pudding a bit, but much less so than others:



> A Cabinet Office spokeswoman said classifications of filed are ‘reviewed periodically’.
> 
> She added: “In this case, the file was kept closed and retained as it contained information from the security services and advice from the Law Officers.” Asked whether it would be released to the current institutional child sex abuse inquiry, the spokeswoman said: “We are clear that any files that are pertinent to the historical child sex abuse inquiry will be made available to the panel.”



His point - and it's a good one - is that he:



> stumbled upon the potentially ‘extremely significant’ file by chance – weeks after a Home Office review into historic child abuse allegations failed to find any documents relevant to its investigation.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 24, 2015)

laptop said:


> Nope. As I said, he found it in the catalogue.
> 
> The _Manchester Evening News_ report is over-egging the pudding a bit, but much less so than others:
> 
> ...


Ah. I had an image of dusty archives and half moon spectacles.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 24, 2015)

...latest from Sunday People...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/leon-brittan-abused-children-westminster-5038101


An alleged victim of a Westminster paedophile ring claimed to police that Leon Brittan abused him more than a dozen times.

The witness known as Nick said he also saw most of his friends molested by the former Home Secretary who died on Wednesday aged 75.

Making the bombshell claims, Nick first spoke to investigative website Exaro last year and identified Mr Brittan as being present at VIP abuse parties.

Police are also examining claims based on Nick’s evidence that Mr Brittan was present when two unidentified men, who were part of the network, murdered a boy in a physical beating following sexual abuse around 1981 or 1982.

And they have received further allegations he sexually abused boys at the Carlton Club in the St James’s area of London, as well as Dolphin Square and elsewhere.

The Sunday People has published a number of stories in the past 12 months into the allegations made about Mr Brittan.

The paper decided not to name him because of on-going police investigations into the claims.


...and the Star....

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/421888/Leon-Brittan-depravity

Police were looking into allegations made about the top Tory politician when he died of cancer last week.

Award-winning investigator Mark Williams-Thomas, the man who exposed Jimmy Savile as a paedophile, confirmed: “Police took the allegation very seriously.”

Lord Brittan’s apparent sexual deviancy has been rumoured for decades. But today, for the first time, the Daily Star Sunday can reveal what is actually known to authorities.

We can disclose that Brittan’s alleged victim said he was abused while at primary school.

And we can report sickening testimony from a social worker who describes seeing photos taken in the 1970s of Brittan dressed in kinky outfits with naked boys sitting on his lap.

Brittan is said to have abused children at Elm Guest House, a boarding house in Barnes, west London, run as a brothel in the 1970s and 1980s.

Documents placed online in recent years – but until today unsupported by independent evidence – said he was one of a number of high-profile attendees.


----------



## laptop (Jan 25, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Ah. I had an image of dusty archives and half moon spectacles.



I'm not sure how much dust there is...

It's fairly common for the archives to reveal things because they point to the existence of a document, even though the thing itself is still under lock and key.


----------



## 1%er (Jan 25, 2015)

Tim Tate interviewed on The politics show, Bristol Community Radio BCFM
Youtube (can't embed for some reason).


----------



## Roadkill (Jan 25, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Ah. I had an image of dusty archives and half moon spectacles.



Nah, the National Archives isn't like that. 

The interesting thing is that this file made it into the public catalogue (which it has: it's here).  Obviously TNA's catalogues do include secret files, both held by them and retained by government, but AFAIK that sort of thing often doesn't show up on the catalogue available to the public - or to staff without the requisite security clearances.  The fact that this one has suggests either a cataloguing error (someone forgot to tick the 'secret' box, in effect!) or, conceivably, a deliberate leak.


----------



## laptop (Jan 25, 2015)

Thanks for digging that out, Roadkill.



Roadkill said:


> The fact that this one has suggests either a cataloguing error (someone forgot to tick the 'secret' box, in effect!) or, conceivably, a deliberate leak.



Mildly interesting:



> Closure status: Closed Or Retained Document, Open Description



Could be an accidental failure to tick "Closed Description" or whatever it's properly called - or a decision.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 25, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> The fact that this one has suggests either a cataloguing error (someone forgot to tick the 'secret' box, in effect!) or, conceivably, a deliberate leak.



Without seeing the content there's no way of knowing whether 'unnatural sexual proclivities' refers to sexual abuse, or indeed even to things which are illegal as distinct from being embarrassing. In 1980 it could quite easily have been referring to homosexuality. The 'security implications' of homosexuality was widely discussed after Anthony Blunt was outed in 1979 as the 'fourth man'.


----------



## Roadkill (Jan 25, 2015)

laptop said:


> Could be an accidental failure to tick "Closed Description" or whatever it's properly called - or a decision.



The former sounds as likely as any other scenario, doesn't it?  

It's a good thing that its existence is common knowledge.  I've heard tell of people digging up things in archives they suspected were supposed to be secret, mentioning it to staff, and then finding later that they've mysteriously disappeared.  At least that can't happen in this case.


----------



## Roadkill (Jan 25, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Without seeing the content there's no way of knowing whether 'unnatural sexual proclivities' refers to sexual abuse, or indeed even to things which are illegal as distinct from being embarrassing. In 1980 it could quite easily have been referring to homosexuality. The 'security implications' of homosexuality was widely discussed after Anthony Blunt was outed in 1979 as the 'fourth man'.



Oh definitely.  It may well turn out to be a storm in a teacup.  AFAIK it has been passed to the enquiry, though, which might suggest at least some of it is relevant.

*edit* Not passed to the enquiry, but police have looked at it.


----------



## elbows (Jan 27, 2015)

I forgot to keep up with Telegraph Peter Morrison stories from early January. There was another one after we mentioned them on this thread a few page back, touching on a possible link to a murder.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...tcher-aide-accused-of-raping-teenage-boy.html



> Scotland Yard is investigating a possible link between one of Margaret Thatcher’s closest aides and the unsolved murder of an eight-year-old boy in the 1980s.





> Last week a 46-year-old man told the Telegraph that Morrison raped him when he was 14, and claimed Scotland Yard covered it up.
> 
> The alleged victim said he was walking in the tiny village of Harting in 1982 when the MP “appeared out of nowhere”, gave him some money and later lured him to London.
> 
> ...



So its a sort of double geographic potential link. As usual its intriguing but I can't do anything with it unless it's explored and evidence or other missing pieces gathered.


----------



## 1%er (Jan 28, 2015)

It would seem the Ben Emmerson QC Counsel to the Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, feels that the panel as currently set up cannot continue due to the actions of Sharon Evans. She (Sharon Evans) has breached her contract and has also committed a series of breaches of confidentiality making it untenable for the panel to carry on effectively. He explains his reasoning in this video, which is his evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee 26th January 2015. The last 25 minutes (approximately) is the most interesting, the first hour deals with what is really a distraction and deals mainly with the allegations made by Sharon Evans against Ben Emmerson.

Theresa May has said she will make a statement about how things will continue with regards to the Inquiry by the end of January (this Saturday) and it looks to me that she will disband the current inquiry and set up something else.


----------



## elbows (Jan 28, 2015)

Also on that topic:



> *An internal Home Office report has been released showing the Home Office did decide that Evans had breached confidentiality. *The home affairs committee published it on its website. In it Mary Calam, a Home Office director general, told Evans:
> Such breaches of confidentiality are extremely serious. They must inevitably undermine the trust of Panel members in each other and therefore the ability of the Panel to operate effectively. They also undermine the confidence of survivors and others who engage with the Panel on the basis that information they provide and discussions they have with Panel members will remain confidential.
> 
> Calam also said that Emmerons had not bullied Evans, although Calam said he accepted Evans found his conduct “very distressing”.



http://www.theguardian.com/politics.../david-camerons-tax-speech-politics-live-blog


----------



## laptop (Jan 28, 2015)

elbows said:


> Also on that topic:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics.../david-camerons-tax-speech-politics-live-blog



Blimey.

Emmerson told the Home Affairs Committee:




			
				Ben Emmerson QC said:
			
		

> It may be that in some areas Mrs Evans finds it difficult to distinguish between an accurate statement and an inaccurate one ...
> 
> Her conduct has been a massive distraction and has caused a great deal of damage in the final stages of this interim inquiry ...



That's QC-speak for "massive fruitloop". Of course she was upset when he told her so during the panel meeting, which he would have done forcefully.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 28, 2015)

Hencke is reporting a further 'setback' for May in attempting to 're-boot' the CSA inquiry...

https://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2...ng-serving-judges-to-child-sex-abuse-inquiry/


> I have learnt from a reliable source that Theresa May’s plans to appoint two highly qualified  women judges on the short list to chair the Child Sex Abuse inquiry have been blocked by Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, Lord Chief Justice.



It's almost as though they're now looking to get through to April, and then it will fall to someone else...


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 29, 2015)

*Sky News Newsdesk*
@SkyNewsBreak
Ministry of Justice says information relating to three judge-led inquiries into institutional abuse went missing in the post


----------



## brogdale (Jan 29, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> *Sky News Newsdesk*
> @SkyNewsBreak
> Ministry of Justice says information relating to three judge-led inquiries into institutional abuse went missing in the post


wtf


----------



## articul8 (Jan 29, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> *Sky News Newsdesk*
> @SkyNewsBreak
> Ministry of Justice says information relating to three judge-led inquiries into institutional abuse went missing in the post


? Is this different from the Duggan/Rodney/Hamill stuff?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 29, 2015)

brogdale said:


> wtf


This might not be related on reflection as the next bit of info says Mark duggan files were among the missing. I think i may have jumped the gun at seeing the word abuse.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 29, 2015)

articul8 said:


> ? Is this different from the Duggan/Rodney/Hamill stuff?


It's the same stuff. Ignore.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 29, 2015)

No this is a different matter entirely just breaking. Home Affairs Select Committee apparently published letters on its website on Monday containing names of abuse victims. Row both over publication and over how the letters were passed to them by a panel member. Just reported on Sky News.

ETA: actually two different stories. This one was about unredacted correspondence from victims and details about panel members being put online by the Home Affairs Select Committee. This presumably follows their session with panel members last Tuesday. The 3.15 Sky News report said a victim had received threats as a result. That wasn't repeated at 4.15. Vaz is apparently personally contacting the people named to apologise.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 29, 2015)

The Graun has an article on this unwitting release of email correspondence on the committee website, which included personal details and disparaging remarks about some of the victims. In the affectless tones of officialdom, the committee issued a statement





> “Last week, some material from the independent panel inquiry into child sexual abuse came into the committee’s possession in the course of our inquiry.
> 
> “The material included directions to panel members about how they should answer questions from the committee, as well as email exchanges between panel members about the panel’s external communications strategy.
> 
> “These emails included the names of third parties. At the request of the individuals concerned the material has been redacted to remove references to these individuals. The names of all these individuals were already in the public domain.”


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/29/child-sex-abuse-victims-emails-commons-committee


----------



## elbows (Jan 29, 2015)

Leaving aside for a moment the Sharon Evans/Ben Emmerson spat which takes up the bulk of the document in one way or another, I think its important to look at what was said about victims groups. It touches on some issues which have been lurking and aren't so easy to talk about.

Barbara Hearn said the following:



> [redacted] and [redacted] like every other survivor and group of survivors will have their opinions about what is right or wrong and it is not for us to judge that or act and respond to one group while ignoring another. As I said at our meeting with the Home Secretary there is not one single survivors voice and we will not be able to please all. The inquiry has been developed by the Panel on the basis of collective responsibility, as Ben is regularly reminding us. We cannot isolate a member now.
> 
> We know that ' the taking of evidence' means something quite different to a lawyer, to a researcher, to a member of the public and to the media. This is unfortunate but a reality. Clearly some attendees at listening events thought that they were giving us their evidence of abuse and Sharon reflected this in what she said. However this is not evidence to the inquiry in a form which would lead to a determination in the manner a Judge would envisage.





> I do think the matter of how many survivors and who x or y represents is a very messy and thorny area. The underlying competitive tone of the mail from [redacted] is unhelpful. By their own words [Redacted]is “[Redacted]". Therefore it does not represent 200 organisations concerned with child sexual abuse. We do not know how many of their groups speak about CSA and I have asked before that we discuss this with them to be sure we are not getting drawn into the business of adult rape or domestic violence etc which is outside our remit. We also need to know how many of their members are from the other nations, to be sure we are not responding to ideas and needs of the other nations or Ireland where there is a different policy and legal framework for handling CSA. The failures we are committed to identify and address will not necessarily fit if we do not take care who we listen to. The art of exaggeration is a core skill for those who need funding. I understand it but it should not be applied in the situation we find ourselves in. It is important that the Inquiry whether Judge or Panel is sure who it is vesting faith in and what the person(s) are actually representing. We do not want to fall foul of the same fault officials have done in taking the voice of individual survivors who represent no-one but themselves by their own admission or who know other survivors but have no mandate to represent them. I do believe the [Redacted] represent an important cohort and are the right organisation for us to work with but exactly who they represent in our territory also needs to be clear and correct.



She was saying this in the context of defending Sharon Evans, and I don't think she or some others on the panel are beyond the same whiff of competitiveness that she identifies above. But it still usefully describes a couple more fronts in which relations between the panel, the inquiry, victims and victims groups can go wrong.

I would suggest that some of these problems are made far worse by having some panel members deciding that there is a choice to be made of which groups to work with. If you are worried about the ugliness of competition, why are you talking like you have to choose particular groups to be more closely affiliated with than others? It is easy to understand her point that they won't be able to please everyone, just spend a little time reading what some victims say online for proof of that, but the panel picking favourites is hardly the answer.

Its hard to imagine a credible panel that didn't have victim representation on it, but its notable that panel members from precisely that charity/structured support/victim representation world are the ones that have ended up being most embroiled in these issues. I suppose it's hardly surprising, since even if they worked out how to be perfect panel members and separate their duty from the rest of their life and sense of self, they are the ones who are going to be known and targeted first by any non-panel victims/groups that want to have a go at the inquiry in certain ways. But the evidence so far is that it would perhaps be best to exclude panel members with those outside interests from aspects of the panels work that may involve such choices about how to respond to and work with victims/groups.

I get the distinct impression that in addition to any feelings towards the Home Office generated by leaving the panel in limbo for too long, this issue of competition and animosity between different victims and groups, on and off the panel, has sometimes been fought via the Home Office as well. e.g. when the home secretary meets victims and/or organisations directly, and they make their opinions loudly known about who should or shouldn't be the chair, on the panel etc, it's made some people on the panel rather twitchy.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 30, 2015)

*Top British diplomat was focus of secret Government file sent to Margaret Thatcher about 'unnatural' sexual behaviour*

The file, which has just been released to the National Archives, names the late Sir Peter Hayman as the subject of a file prepared for then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
Sir Peter died in 1992 after a career working as a diplomat including as High Commissioner to Canada. He also worked for intelligence service MI6.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aret-Thatcher-unnatural-sexual-behaviour.html


----------



## elbows (Jan 30, 2015)

The speculation was right then, makes sense. 

Some other publications coverage of this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-peter-hayman-named-in-dossier-10014295.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31062904

Just another little piece to add to the picture of how such allegations were treated historically. Take the way Dickens was treated when he named Hayman in parliament, the way Hayman was treated by the law, and the language in this file and I think one picture that was quite bloody clear enough already just becomes even clearer. Its a shame the pictures that remain very murky and unclear indeed have not rapidly approached similar levels of revelation.


----------



## 1%er (Jan 31, 2015)

You couldn't make it up.



> Lynne Featherstone MP, Minister of State for Crime Prevention, being questioned by Keith Vaz, chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, on 20th Jan 2015. This session was just prior to the HASC session with four members from the independent panel inquiry into child sexual abuse. It had been reported that intimidation of the panel members had occurred, and Vaz was asking the responsible minister for clarification.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 31, 2015)

maybe this is relevant, maybe not ( mail linky)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...investigators-ignored-TWO-YEARS.html#comments

vicar caught with kid vids, kills himslef late last year before his bail date

the mail focuses on the fact that the data from the site wasnt used for a couple of years, despite the Candians chasing it seemingly regular basis. Given the furore over incidents like this, it does seem strange/ incompetent that not much seems to have been done about it until the arrest of the vicar in May 2014. a surprisingly low key article for the mail, given they knew about the arrest & background - they were doorstepping parents at the school in May 2014.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 2, 2015)

Gojam has the Hayman paper trail over on The Needle. I haven't worked my way through it yet but on first glance it seems that the authorities' first thought was 'national security' and to hell with anything or anyone else.


----------



## elbows (Feb 3, 2015)

The Guardian detail some of Thatchers handwriting on the Hayman documents:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/02/thatcher-peter-hayman-named-paedophile-archives


----------



## elbows (Feb 3, 2015)

Also it appears to be several days into February and yet Theresa May has still failed to name a new chair for the inquiry.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 3, 2015)

elbows said:


> Also it appears to be several days into February and yet Theresa May has still failed to name a new chair for the inquiry.


 Yep, and there's about 34 'working' days left for Teresa May until there is the dissolution of this parliament. Pretty obvious strategy, really.


----------



## teqniq (Feb 3, 2015)

Not, I feel a huge surprise:

Westminster child abuse scandal: KGB and CIA kept secret dossiers on Britain's VIP paedophiles


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 4, 2015)

New Zealand high court judge named as new chair of child abuse inquiry - Guardian



> Justice Lowell Goddard, a New Zealand high court judge, is to be the new head of the official inquiry into child abuse, the home secretary, Theresa May, has announced.
> 
> Goddard, who has already conducted one inquiry into the police handling of child abuse in New Zealand, said she was well aware of the scale of the “crucial inquiry” that now faced her.





> “The inquiry will be long, challenging and complex,” Goddard said. “The many, many survivors of child sexual abuse, committed over decades, deserve a robust and thorough investigation of the appalling crimes perpetrated on them. It is vitally important that their voices are now being heard.”
> 
> Goddard, who will arrive in Britain next week when she will face a confirmation hearing before the Commons home affairs committee, said she was committed to “leading a robust and independent inquiry that will act on these matters without fear or favour and will hold those responsible to account”.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 4, 2015)

> Justice Goddard is past Chair of the _Independent Police Conduct Authority_ and now sits in the Wellington High Court.  Officially, she has overseen significant change, as the Authority publicly portrayed itself as a transparent investigative and reviewing agency of serious complaints against the Police.  The reality is different.  Justice Goddard held up and covered up a number of serious complaints.  Perhaps this is not surprising given her history.When deputy Solicitor General, Lowell Goddard refused to release evidence that former judge Michael Lance was guilty of throwing a police prosecution of his son Simon’s business partner, claiming it was not in the public interest to do so.  The police inspector at the time sought release of the file.  Judge Lance later became Goddard’s deputy judge at the IPCA – demonstrating a level of audacity even rare by New Zealand standards.  Lance retired in disgrace shortly afterward when it was reported he was keying cars parked in front of his Takapuna apartment.  (Lance was prosecuted in a judge alone trial and let off.)



valid source or not: http://www.kiwisfirst.com/judge-file-index/high-court-justice-lowell-goddard/


doesn't appear to be a loon site


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 4, 2015)

> The IPCA became even a more opaque agency under Justice Goddard, with legal exemptions of disclosure to the _Official Information Act_ and _Privacy Act_.  Much of its work is cloaked by tight secrecy.



so its still establishment, just kiwi establishment.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 4, 2015)

If past form is anything to go by 'twitter research' will have 'comprehensively  demolished' her reputation some time this afternoon.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 4, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> If past form is anything to go by 'twitter research' will have 'comprehensively  demolished' her reputation some time this afternoon.


Here's a go: she uses sex abuse investigations to climb the ladder.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Here's a go: she uses sex abuse investigations to climb the ladder.


Sometimes I wonder if we're being gamed by TBTB


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2015)

Good riposte from Hencke to Lawson's partisan piece in the ST...


----------



## Ming (Feb 4, 2015)

Why can't 'proper journalists' do this kind of research? Rhetorical  qu...


----------



## laptop (Feb 4, 2015)

Ming said:


> Why can't 'proper journalists' do this kind of research? Rhetorical  qu...



Erm, David Hencke is a very proper journalist. His faults are a proper journalist's faults. It's the _Guardian_'s loss he doesn't work there any more, though.


----------



## Ming (Feb 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> Erm, David Hencke is a very proper journalist. His faults are a proper journalist's faults. It's the _Guardian_'s loss he doesn't work there any more, though.


Fair point (hadn't heard of him). I just hope that the fact there's still a really dodgy head of the investigation gets mentioned in the main stream press. I'm very cynical. Maybe it will.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 5, 2015)

In a written Commons statement Francis Maude confirms that following the discovery of the file about Hayman a further four 'relevant' files have been found among Cabinet Office papers.


> The files were found in a separate Cabinet Office archive of sensitive, historic papers. This archive, colloquially known as the Cabinet Secretaries’ file, was closed in 2007. It is largely uncatalogued and un-registered; a programme to review it has been underway since last year but remains in progress. Officials assure me that the available titles have now been searched and more detailed searches are ongoing. My officials will work with the Inquiry to ensure it has the assurance it requires that all papers held by the Cabinet Office have been fully examined and that relevant papers are correctly identified and disclosed.


One of the files had been already been marked for destruction


> pending further checks by the Cabinet Office and The National Archives. The Cabinet Office already has in place a process for reviewing its files scheduled for destruction. I am ensuring that relevant departments have a similar process in place.


An assurance that will undoubtedly be interpreted in a variety of ways


----------



## 5t3IIa (Feb 5, 2015)

Goddard is on Today this morning.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2015)

Amongst the news around the Goodard appointment there were some other (potentially) very significant announcements from May...


> May also confirmed *she was to disband the current inquiry panel*, which has been repeatedly hit by leaks of confidential information and allegations of bullying. *A new statutory inquiry is to be set up with a fresh panel and terms of reference.*
> 
> The home secretary told MPs that the inquiry was now likely to examine cases earlier than its current 1970 cut-off date, with survivors’ groups pressing for *cases as far back as 1945 to be included*. However she made clear *the investigation would not extend beyond its current geographical remit of England and Wales*.



They really don't want to go near Kincora, do they?


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> They really don't want to go near Kincora, do they?


Might that not be something to do with the fact that Kincora is already in the remit for the existing inquiry into Historical Institutional Abuse in Northern Ireland ?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Might that not be something to do with the fact that Kincora is already in the remit for the existing inquiry into Historical Institutional Abuse in Northern Ireland ?


Quite. They wouldn't want the Kincora stuff to go anywhere near a statutory enquiry; far better that it is all dealt with in a 'controlled' manner. As Villiers said last October...


> "All government departments and agencies who receive a request for information or documents from the Inquiry will *co-operate to the utmost of their ability in determining what material they hold that might be relevant*," she said.


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 14, 2015)

Tom Watson on tomorrow's Sunday Politics

...Brillo mentioned the other week he wanted Watson to come back on to cover this issue...although no detail about if they will or not  ( Neil is bound to be highly irritating )...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 16, 2015)

What's that, 'where are the articles on the alleged MI5 involvement in a coverup over Kincora?'

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...-childrens-home-northwen-ireland-sexual-abuse


----------



## elbows (Feb 16, 2015)

I wait with interest to see what happens in that court case.

Meanwhile, catching up on recent news items I hadn't had a chance to read in the last week or so:

A would-be Tory MP got the cold shoulder after mentioning that Brittan was a paedophile at a Speakers dinner party. He got the info from a brother owner.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...speaker-s-dinner-leon-brittan-is-a-paedophile

A summing up article by Exaro of where the Fernbridge investigation is at, framed around the death of Brittan by leading with the story that detectives were planning to write to him, and others named on the guest list, to ask them if they ever attended Elm Guest House.

At this point I should let out a mighty cry that its taking them this long to take that step.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5495/leon-brittan-faced-met-questions-over-elm-guest-house-visits

Its worth reading that one for the recap and summary of various things, and for some facts they chuck in nearer the end. I won't try to mention them all here, I'll just pick a few.

Three other living conservatives were on the list. The couple of Labour ones are dead.

Exaro reveal that two of the charges faced by Stingemore, before he died, related directly to Elm Guest House. Shit. When he died I probably pointed out that I had no knowledge to suggest the charges he faced related to the link between the childrens home and Elm Guest House, as opposed to the childrens home in isolation. Now, assuming Exaro are not wrong, it sounds like his death really did rob us of an opportunity to learn something about the links and get beyond the info thats existed in the public domain for a long time. So I say shit again.

Oh well. Perhaps we'll still get to find out the detail later. The trial of Tony McSweeney has begun, so although I'm not necessarily expecting to find out the detail during this trial, perhaps there is detail the likes of Exaro will share with us once such a trial is safely over.


----------



## elbows (Feb 16, 2015)

Well looking at Exaro's tweets from the trial today, it looks like there is going to be plenty about Stingemore in it despite his death. Too many for me to quite properly really.

https://twitter.com/ExaroNews


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 24, 2015)

elbows said:


> There is quite a section in the 2nd pdf where the panel complain about a variety of insurance-related matters, but I have run out of quoting oomph for tonight.



Eight tonight:

Insurance and Child Abuse



> With a growing number of compensation claims arising from cases of historic sexual abuse and more recent high profile cases of sexual grooming, Tim Whewell investigates the key role which insurance companies play. In representing the local authorities where scandals occurred, insurers naturally seek to limit liability but are they doing so at a cost to victims? Lawyers say they have to battle to get access to files and other information - causing further distress and delaying help for those damaged by abuse. Some say the fight is getting harder as insurance companies have toughened their approach in recent years. And, with a national inquiry into historic cases of child sex abuse, how much influence did insurance companies have on the way some past investigations were carried out? File on 4 talks to senior local authority insiders who say they were told to alter their approach to abuse investigations to protect the insurers' interests. But was that at the expense of children at risk?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Eight tonight:
> 
> Insurance and Child Abuse



Fuck me! 

I'm pretty sure this was a matter of public knowledge 20-30 years ago in London and elsewhere with care scandals, that municipal insurers were putting a headlock on local authorities with regard to premiums.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2015)

'Darren' claims Righton murdered a man with down's syndrome after making him dig six 'graves'.

Just passing it on.


----------



## Dan U (Feb 26, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> 'Darren' claims Righton murdered a man with down's syndrome after making him digg six 'graves'.
> 
> Just passing it on.



about as bleak as it gets


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 26, 2015)

wow.  that's pretty bleak indeed.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2015)

Dan U said:


> about as bleak as it gets


So true, and yet you almost have to steel yourself mentally for the prospect that the truth (when it finally comes out) might yet be worse.


----------



## Dan U (Feb 26, 2015)

brogdale said:


> So true, and yet you almost have to steel yourself mentally for the prospect that the truth (when it finally comes out) might yet be worse.



the follow on link on the bottom of that article is pretty detailed. you would assume the police have been and looked for these alleged graves?


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2015)

Unlike other possible murders we have heard about, to kill Andrew would come with much greater additional risk, since presumably the fact he 'worked' at that location would be known. But given the frequent ineptitude of various authorities and institutions, let alone any deliberate cover-up, I cannot take this cynicism too far right now. Not enough ability to cross-check any of these details with any other source or evidence at the moment anyway, so will just have to wait.


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2015)

Dan U said:


> the follow on link on the bottom of that article is pretty detailed. you would assume the police have been and looked for these alleged graves?



Its hard to say, I don't think we've heard as much as expected about Operation Cayacos (Righton & associated network) in the last year. Exaro raised expectations just like they did with Fernbridge, in this article from a year ago:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...evel-charges-in-paedophile-ring-linked-to-mps

I'll do a recap of what we have heard about Cayacos since then, once I've checked my facts.

In the meantime, this information from Tom Watson in April 2014 is useful for background relating to Righton living at the cottage on Lord Henniker's estate:



> Then there’s the matter of child abuser Peter Righton. I’m working with a number of courageous and dedicated former child protection workers who are concerned that Righton, after his conviction, retired to a cottage on the estate of Lord Henniker.
> 
> Henniker continued to allow his estate to be used by the Islington Suffolk project that gave holidays to vulnerable children from Islington. Many of the children were in the care system at a time when Islington was thought to have had a major problem with child abuse in its care homes. The retired social workers tell me that even despite the Chief Constable of Suffolk visiting personally to warn Henniker that Righton was a career paedophile, and would put the dozens of young boys who visited Thornham Magna at risk, he ignored this advice and Righton lived there until his death in 2008



(from http://labourlist.org/2014/04/in-praise-of-simon-danczuk/ )


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 26, 2015)

....and here...

Peter Righton’s Diaries: Benjamin Britten, Peter Pears and Michael Davidson

https://ianpace.wordpress.com/2014/...min-britten-peter-pears-and-michael-davidson/


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2015)

Since you mention Benjamin Britten, this article from late 2012 is an interesting example of a number of phenomenon. I am too tired to talk about them now, but I expect it won't be hard to guess what I'm on about.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/21/britten-boys-obsession-cannot-ignore


----------



## Dan U (Feb 27, 2015)

can't recall if there was a specific thread for this, and a search isn't clear

Gary Glitter got 16 years today.

Sentencing remarks are here, not the nicest of reads so linking not quoting

http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/?news_id=40042


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 27, 2015)

16 years, well that's something i guess.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 27, 2015)

el-ahrairah said:


> 16 years, well that's something i guess.


Possibly some dark humour on the part of the judge


----------



## ibilly99 (Feb 27, 2015)

el-ahrairah said:


> 16 years, well that's something i guess.



maybe he would have preferred the fictional ending...


----------



## laptop (Feb 27, 2015)

I know it's not strictly to do with "high-level" stuff. But bbc.co.uk/news/uk is currently burdened with three nonce convictions and an inquiry:

*Gary Glitter jailed for 16 years*
*Priest found guilty of sex abuse*
*Man who raped boy at nursery jailed*
*
Sir Cliff Richard police inquiry 'significantly expanded'
*


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 27, 2015)

el-ahrairah said:


> 16 years, well that's something i guess.


Well, I don't know. Maybe it's just me but I reckon some people need locking up for the safety of the community and for other offenders pointing and jeering is enough. I haven't followed the case so don't know which category is appropriate here.


----------



## Buckaroo (Feb 27, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> Well, I don't know. Maybe it's just me but I reckon some people need locking up for the safety of the community and for other offenders pointing and jeering is enough. I haven't followed the case so don't know which category is appropriate here.



Punishment may be an appropriate category. I reckon he could take pointing and jeering at this stage in his career.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 28, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> Punishment may be an appropriate category.








They don't deserve punishment. They deserve gunishment.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Feb 28, 2015)

ibilly99 said:


> maybe he would have preferred the fictional ending...




According to Jordan Jones,"if you're against the death penalty, you're obviously a paedo lover" - it's amazing how many fuckwits post comments on youtube.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2015)

Hencke is angry, and with good reason.



> The trial reveals two shocking facts. First it shows that yet *another paedophile Roman Catholic priest – McSweeney will be sentenced on March 27 – has escaped justice for some 35 years and been able to work as a pillar of the community *across the East of England.





> Second is *the shame it has heaped on Richmond Council which failed to act at the time to halt these crimes and has been in denial ever since this investigation began.* It is quite clear from the court proceedings that Stingemore when in charge of Grafton Close was able unchecked to take boys out of the children’s home to his Bexhill flat where they were abused and employ his paedophile friend McSweeney – who also accompanied boys to his flat – without anyone taking much notice.





> One might be tempted not to heap blame on the authority if it was not for the attitudes of leading political figures and officials to recent  events. *Sir David Williams, the former Liberal Dem leader in the wake of this scandal told me he did not believe there was any child sexual abuse in Richmond and it had all been got up by the press. Tell that to the jury at Southwark Crown Court. Two other prominent Liberal Democrats  councillors at the time now peers Tim Razzall and Jenny Tonge appeared to be in denial or did not want to talk about it. And  Louis Minister, then Richmond’s  director of social services, now retired in Malta, denied he had ever heard of Elm Guest House and said he knew nothing of what happened at Grafton Close. Only with a trial imminent did he recover his memory loss.* And there are leading Richmond Tories who knew at the time- an issue I am still investigating.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 1, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Hencke is angry, and with good reason.


What a shower of cunts.


----------



## 1%er (Mar 1, 2015)

On the world news round-up they just has a story about Savile and said that there have now been 41 different investigations/inquires into his sexual abuse at state institutions, including NHS hospitals, secure hospitals for the criminally insane, children's homes, the BBC and somewhere else I can't remember atm. The reporter interviewed an ex-director of social services who said (words to the effect) "despite the massive number if separate reports, no-one has been held to account, made to take responsibility or has faced disciplinary action.........................."

In light of this, do people here think that anyone "alive" will be held accountable or responsible, even face criminal charges from the information provided to and the findings of the governments CSA inquiry or will it just come up with a number of recommendations that the government of the day will say they support and will implement? 

This inquiry, if it does its job, will looking into National and local governments and many of their departments and highlight failings in there legal obligations and duty of care, it will inquire into the police services to look for failings, their legal obligations, failure to act, corruption and the duty of care, the same for hospitals, children's homes, schools etc. etc. 

Organizations that I would expect the vast majority of the British public have confidence and trust in. What will be the reaction if the walls come tumbling down and it shows these institutions have been failing in there duties for years, if not decades?  I don't think any inquiry, however "Independent" would be allowed to undermine and discredit so many public institutions.

I think it is interesting that the police have set up a national strategic coordinating group called, Operation Hydrant. its brief is "to act as an information, advice and good practice-sharing hub for forces investigating historic child abuse cases which involve institutions and prominent individuals". It is an "information, advice and good practice-sharing hub" that is its job apparently. It is not a task force and will not be leading any investigations, that is a matter for individual forces. 

It sounds to me like a filtering committee to ensure they have an input into what is said and provided by individual forces to the inquiry, what reason is there for a national police group when the onus to provide information to the inquiry and any investigations arising from it are a matter for individual force, I wonder if government departments, social service departments, education departments, hospitals etc. around the country are setting up similar groups.


----------



## elbows (Mar 2, 2015)

I think the main fault with the picture you paint there is that you have the police investigations/prosecutions and the government inquiry the wrong way round in the order of things.

Yes its likely that some people who've not found justice any other way will present specific allegations to the inquiry. But inquiries in the past were ill equipped to deal with this sort of thing, and there is only so much they could do to change that this time around. It will be a problem, because for some people the most outrageous coverups and failings of past inquiries were to do with specific allegations that the judge, insurers, or various legal concerns wouldn't allow to go public. We'll just have to see what happens.

But in the meantime we already have specific police inquiries, which may or may not lead to prosecutions of anyone of public prominence from the political world. I don't expect the inquiry to be our direct conduit to learning of further specific allegations against living people. It might lead to more police investigations, regardless of what the inquiry and its participants actually say at any point, because simply having a detailed examination in public of the past may encourage yet more victims to come forwards.

As for institutional credibility, I think various Savile investigations undermined a lot of credibility across a fairly broad spectrum already. The main automatic protector of their reputations in the face of this is the passage of time - some of the sorts and scales of institutions involved already fell out of favour some decades ago and if not extinct have gone through multiple structural changes. Throw in all the other stuff that some people used to get away with more blatantly, that played into certain standards of what was considered acceptable decades ago, and there is some insulation between the eras of offending in question and the credibility of institutions today.

My main hope for the inquiry being able to bring us a reasonable reflection of past truth, is also related to time. The inquiry could get into a lot of detail about specific deceased offenders if it so chooses. The fact there are less people still around to hold to account may at least hold this advantage.


----------



## elbows (Mar 5, 2015)

Harvey Proctors house searched:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31744282

Operation Midland is still crawling forwards then.


----------



## elbows (Mar 5, 2015)

Exaros version of the Proctor story:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5510/police-raid-harvey-proctor-s-home-under-operation-midland


----------



## Dan U (Mar 5, 2015)

Procter was interviewed on Today about 8.10 (ish) which I thought was a bit unusual


----------



## elbows (Mar 5, 2015)

Those interested have probably already seen stories about his denial to the media, but for the sake of completeness of this thread here it is:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31754908

I've nothing to say about it right now, both because of the present limitations on what can be said about these matters legally, and because I am too bloody tired.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 5, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Procter was interviewed on Today about 8.10 (ish) which I thought was a bit unusual


Me too; but just think how convenient it would be for those seeking to defuse/discredit the claims of victims if someone like Procter were 'hung out to dry' for a bit but, ultimately, completely exonerated. It would even be convenient for such people that Procter _had _previously been convicted for sexual offences...that would now be legal.(I think)


----------



## Dan U (Mar 5, 2015)

Thought crossed my mind brogdale esp as Naughtie seemed keen to restate his denials in plain English for him


----------



## elbows (Mar 6, 2015)

I don't really think he is the ideal character to use for that, because even given the change in the age of consent for same sex activities, there are still aspects of his historical story that are incompatible with 'public morals' in 2015.

Sorry for the Mail link, but this is what I'm on about:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...lice-investigating-VIP-abuse-search-home.html



> Proctor, who represented Basildon and nearby Billericay, was an outspoken hard-right Tory but left Parliament after pleading guilty to gross indecency. The MP – who was given the nickname ‘Wacko’ – would order rent boys as young as 17 to call him ‘Sir’ or ‘Keith’ and pretend he was a headmaster as he caned them.
> 
> He was fined just £1,450 but the case signalled the end of his career because his confession followed years of vehement denials.
> 
> Two months before his court appearance it was revealed how Proctor was caught by security staff on holiday in Morocco with a naked 15-year-old local boy hiding under his bed.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 6, 2015)

How convenient for the Party that Mr Proctor is suddenly pushed back out into the limelight/crosshairs !


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 6, 2015)

Interestingly, Proctor's connection to known neo-Nazis was never once mentioned.


----------



## elbows (Mar 6, 2015)

I seriously believe its really not fair to victims/alleged victims to talk about these things in such conspiratorial terms. Writing such things off as having suspicious timing etc is hardly appropriate given that people who have made allegations against him will see this as their chance to find justice.

Whats bloody convenient about it, really?


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 6, 2015)

His connection to various far-right groups was well-known and he was a prominent member of the Monday Club. Nothing conspiratorial about that. One of the worst kept secrets of the 1970s were the numbers of NF members who were also members of the Monday Club (that he had allegedly purged in 1973). Indeed, you could go to Conservative Clubs and expect to rub shoulders with fash.


----------



## elbows (Mar 6, 2015)

Sorry for not being clear, it wasn't that stuff I was complaining about. It was the idea that it is somehow well convenient for him to be thrust into the spotlight now.

As for the Monday club, I doubt its the last we have heard about that.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 6, 2015)

elbows said:


> I seriously believe its really not fair to victims/alleged victims to talk about these things in such conspiratorial terms. Writing such things off as having suspicious timing etc is hardly appropriate given that people who have made allegations against him will see this as their chance to find justice.
> 
> Whats bloody convenient about it, really?


You're probably right but, that said, I've not seen anything suggesting that specific allegations have been made against Procter. There are, I suppose, reasons why the OB might investigate even if no specific allegations had be made against him?


----------



## elbows (Mar 6, 2015)

There will be specific allegations against him, of that much I am extremely confident. They had a warrant to search his home, this isn't some vague fishing operation. But of course we have no idea if they will find enough evidence to go after a prosecution or proceed much beyond the current step.


----------



## laptop (Mar 6, 2015)

elbows said:


> I seriously believe its really not fair to victims/alleged victims to talk about these things in such conspiratorial terms. Writing such things off as having suspicious timing etc is hardly appropriate given that people who have made allegations against him will see this as their chance to find justice.
> 
> Whats bloody convenient about it, really?



Yes, and in any case the conspiracy is, as so often the case, too bloody intricate.

Many, many voters have trouble remembering the names of politicians. The take-home message for them is "Tory nonce". And it is by such ill-informed people that elections are decided.


----------



## elbows (Mar 8, 2015)

So Cyril Smith stuff made the front page of the Mail on Sunday. I'm sick of linking to the Mail so here is a different report of the matter:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ws/cyril-smith-cabinet-office-accused-8795701



> The Cabinet Office has been accused of attempting to cover up information about Whitehall's knowledge of Cyril Smith's child abuse at the time he was granted a knighthood.
> 
> The documents revealed that Margaret Thatcher was made aware of allegations involving the Liberal MP before he was given the honour.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 8, 2015)

So being a sadistic child molester " ... does not, in all the circumstances, render him unsuitable" for a knighthood.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2015)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5516/police-raid-leon-brittan-s-properties-in-london-and-yorkshire

"*No arrests have been made*."

No shit...


----------



## elbows (Mar 8, 2015)

brogdale said:


> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5516/police-raid-leon-brittan-s-properties-in-london-and-yorkshire
> 
> "*No arrests have been made*."
> 
> No shit...



Well, Eton educated Field Marshal Edwin Noel Westby Bramall, Baron Bramall KG, GCB, OBE, MC, JP, DL, is still alive.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 8, 2015)

"Eton educated Bramall was staff officer to Lord Mountbatten"


----------



## elbows (Mar 8, 2015)

I would perhaps make more of that if it had been for longer, and if I was less limited in what I could say.

Its described on the following site as:



> staff offr to Lord Mountbatten for re-organising MOD 1963-64



http://www.debretts.com/people-of-today/profile/6625/Edwin-Noel-Westby-BRAMALL

He is also widely reported to have hit lord Janner some years ago during an argument about Lebanon and Israel.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 12, 2015)

DP


----------



## ska invita (Mar 13, 2015)

1%er said:


> I think it is interesting that the police have set up a national strategic coordinating group called, Operation Hydrant.


Designed to pour cold water on the fire by the sounds of it


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 15, 2015)

The Mirror following on from an Exaro story have located a 'dungeon' in Pimilico.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vip-paedophile-scandal-police-pinpoint-5336701


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 16, 2015)

Breaking news on the BBC website 





> *Met probed over abuse 'corruption'*
> 
> The police watchdog is to investigate alleged corruption in the Metropolitan Police dealing with claims of child sex offences from the 1970s to the 2000s.
> 
> The Independent Police Complaints Commission said the allegations were of "historic, high-level corruption of the most serious nature".


 http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31907201

I'm guessing it links back to ... 

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 16, 2015)

wonder how much money it takes to turn you back on kids being abused. The fucking scum


----------



## Betsy (Mar 16, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Breaking news on the BBC website  http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31907201
> 
> I'm guessing it links back to ...
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips


It just goes on and on...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 16, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> wonder how much money it takes to turn you back on kids being abused. The fucking scum



I suspect that a lot of the time it doesn't take money, just the cops' responses being conditional on the respective class of abuser and victim.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 16, 2015)

Just remind me again. 

Does the IPCC have any remit to investigate wrongdoing committed by spooks or security service personnel?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 16, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I suspect that a lot of the time it doesn't take money, just the cops' responses being conditional on the respective class of abuser and victim.


That, and their own culpability.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 16, 2015)

Finally. 

The law it would seem is akin to the 'mills of God', in that they grind exceeding slow. One must now hope that they grind exceeding fine. 

It is more than time that this was brought to an end. If the news reports/speculation is correct, this is beyond explosive. Fucking good job that this will not be reported until long after the election, to the relief of all parties I should imagine.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 16, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just remind me again.
> 
> Does the IPCC have any remit to investigate wrongdoing committed by spooks or security service personnel?



i shouldn't think so, spooks are not policemen.


----------



## BigMoaner (Mar 16, 2015)

fucking hell


----------



## tommers (Mar 16, 2015)

Yes.   My thoughts exactly.


----------



## elbows (Mar 16, 2015)

Sounds like Newsnight have an 'exclusive' relating to this tonight. I doubt I'll be shocked by any revelations even if they are actually new, but hopefully they've got something that can increase attention on the broader story as well as specific example(s).


----------



## elbows (Mar 16, 2015)

Too tired to recap it properly now but it was pretty clear that the main pressure they were trying to excerpt was in relation to getting cast-iron assurances that anybody coming forwards won't have official secrets act problems.


----------



## elbows (Mar 16, 2015)

And no need for me to recap since the Cyril Smith scrapped investigation despite visual evidence and arrest is presently the lead story on the bbc news website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31908431

Many revelations worthy of quoting but I found the bogus assurances the police were given at the end of having their investigation shutdown were quite revealing.



> The team was called together at Gilmour House and told by a senior officer - whom they had never met before - to hand over their notebooks, photographs and video footage.
> 
> They were read passages from the Official Secrets Act to deter them from speaking out, according to one account.
> 
> There was a row at the police building but the inquiry was closed and officers were assured Smith "would not be playing a role in public life any more". In fact, he continued as MP for Rochdale until 1992.


----------



## elbows (Mar 16, 2015)

One more quote I think:



> Smith is said to have been one of those caught on camera, another being a senior member of Britain's intelligence agencies.
> 
> According to an account given to the BBC, Smith was later seized at a property in Streatham, south London, where he had reportedly been taking part in a sex party with teenage boys.
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Mar 16, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just remind me again.
> 
> Does the IPCC have any remit to investigate wrongdoing committed by spooks or security service personnel?



It's even worse than that, what was announced appears to be the met investigating themselves and the IPCC being reliant on the met investigation for info. This was mentioned on newsnight.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 16, 2015)

Sure but that's always the case right? The IPCC is in effect a reputation management service for dirty cops. 

However it doesn't have even nominal powers to deal with child raping spooks getting their mates to sort out such 'difficulties' ...


----------



## elbows (Mar 16, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Sure but that's always the case right? The IPCC is in effect a reputation management service for dirty cops.
> 
> However it doesn't have even nominal powers to deal with child raping spooks getting their mates to sort out such 'difficulties' ...



As I understand it the IPCC has at least two different modes of operation, and this is the even crapper one as it doesn't involve outside forces investigating the force suspected of wrongdoing. Thats the only point I was making, not trying to suggest the IPCC is any good and yes, the spooky stuff is highly likely to remain in the shadows. But it seems quite plausible that there were other channels between political power and police than the purely spooky routes, and we'll at least get a glimpse of some of those.

Meanwhile the Guardian has a vaguely useful summary of some of the jigsaw pieces in terms of police investigations into politicians and related matters:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/16/westminster-paedophile-ring-innuendo-evidence


----------



## laptop (Mar 16, 2015)

elbows said:


> It's even worse than that, what was announced appears to be the met investigating themselves and the IPCC being reliant on the met investigation for info. This was mentioned on newsnight.



FWIW:



> Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: "It is worrying that this is not a fully independent investigation. Instead the Met will lead this work with oversight from the IPCC.
> 
> "Surely this should be done by an independent investigator or, at the very least, an alternate force."
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31907201



Judicial inquiry, 2018... put it in your diary now


----------



## weltweit (Mar 16, 2015)

Victims must be fed up to their back teeth, another investigation into an investigation, more years roll by with still no arrests.


----------



## laptop (Mar 16, 2015)

elbows said:


> Meanwhile the Guardian has a vaguely useful summary of some of the jigsaw pieces in terms of police investigations into politicians and related matters:
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/16/westminster-paedophile-ring-innuendo-evidence



And the BBC has a list of *fifteen* live inquiries: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28194271

(plus the Met's Fairbank which has reported that Fernbridge was feasible and necessary.)


----------



## Patteran (Mar 17, 2015)

elbows said:


> Sounds like Newsnight have an 'exclusive' relating to this tonight. I doubt I'll be shocked by any revelations even if they are actually new, but hopefully they've got something that can increase attention on the broader story as well as specific example(s).



Cops surveilling & videoing abuse & not intervening. I must be naive, because that rattled me. The state, covert & overt, allowing the powerful to rape the vulnerable - and possibly not just allowing, but enabling.
I realise I'm not adding anything to the analysis. But fuckin hell - the class system laid bare.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 17, 2015)

The evidence has been in for some time that state apparatus have been used to protect people who fuck kids, and therefore have facilated the fucking of kids.

If that's their attitude to victims of such horrendous crime, what hope for the rest of us. The moral legitimacy of the British state is sub zero. In similar fashion to the wording of the US declaration of independence, its not our right to overthrow it, it's our duty.


----------



## BigMoaner (Mar 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Victims must be fed up to their back teeth, another investigation into an investigation, more years roll by with still no arrests.



imagine _knowing_ what went on and being up against all these powerful, protected fuckers. blood boils.


----------



## BigMoaner (Mar 17, 2015)

.


----------



## BigMoaner (Mar 17, 2015)

fucking hell the murder stories are bone chilling. throttling an 8 year old to death ffs.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Just remind me again.
> 
> Does the IPCC have any remit to investigate wrongdoing committed by spooks or security service personnel?



Nope. The only "scrutiny" is internal, with a mild dusting of political oversight/"scrutiny" from the Intelligence & Security Committee, which is like charging a sheep with oversight of wolves.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> wonder how much money it takes to turn you back on kids being abused. The fucking scum



Probably none. Those who have qualms are aware that they may be "dealt with", so it's good old-fashioned self-interest at play.


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 17, 2015)

Latest story is the met were told to back off doing cyril smith as a matter of national security!

		When was Cyril Smith important? All I remember is a fat bloke being a professional Yorkshire man hardly near the reigns of power. Unless he could bring others down with him can't see any reason for the powers to be caring if he got done. Or am I missing something?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2015)

Patteran said:


> Cops surveilling & videoing abuse & not intervening. I must be naive, because that rattled me. The state, covert & overt, allowing the powerful to rape the vulnerable - and possibly not just allowing, but enabling.
> I realise I'm not adding anything to the analysis. But fuckin hell - the class system laid bare.



Yep.
With probably the baldest example being Kincora.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> Latest story is the met were told to back off doing cyril smith as a matter of national security!
> 
> When was Cyril Smith important? All I remember is a fat bloke being a professional Yorkshire man hardly near the reigns of power. Unless he could bring others down with him can't see any reason for the powers to be caring if he got done. Or am I missing something?



Smith had a fair few fingers in local pies,and in parliamentary committees.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 17, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> ...Or am I missing something?



It's probably got something to do with him being connected to all kinds of other high-profile people who did have their hands on the levers of power and they were afraid that if he was bought to court he would talk.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 17, 2015)

i think it's the 'bringing others down' dylanredefined 

if it is true, as reported, that a senior member of the intelligence services was present you can see he was pretty keyed in to a wider network.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 17, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> Latest story is the met were told to back off doing cyril smith as a matter of national security!
> 
> When was Cyril Smith important? All I remember is a fat bloke being a professional Yorkshire man hardly near the reigns of power. Unless he could bring others down with him can't see any reason for the powers to be caring if he got done. Or am I missing something?



What Newsnight / Exxaro seem to be suggesting is that he attended many sadistic child-buggering parties with senior spooks/cops and other VIPs and had threatened to name them (or it was assumed that there was some sort of implicit Mutual Assured Destruction pact among the Westminster child-raping toff community in general)

Smith may have been a Yorkshireman and only an honorary toff by virtue of being an MP, but presumably others (given that at least one senior spook is mentioned) went to Eton or someplace like that and we can't be having people who went to Eton being charged with raping care-home kids as though they were _common_ nonces can we now?


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 17, 2015)

Oh right wondered why.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> imagine _knowing_ what went on and being up against all these powerful, protected fuckers. blood boils.



There's a massively-high rate of suicide (about 2.5x population norm) among care-leavers who've been abused in care or have alleged abuse in care (same thing as far as I'm concerned, most of the time). The survivors *know* that this is a waiting game - that "The Establishment" is waiting until so few are left that their testimony can be smothered.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 17, 2015)

Yes, it's a _keep your hands away from that piece of string_ situation, _do not pull it._


----------



## Patteran (Mar 17, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yep.
> With probably the baldest example being Kincora.



I guess that without really thinking about it I'd categorised Kincora as a one-off, as another rotten episode in the Irish war, filed alongside troops on the streets & collusion, etc. Nasty shit that the British state employed when feeling threatened, rather than standard operating procedure in the nation's capital.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Mar 17, 2015)

Patteran said:


> I guess that without really thinking about it I'd categorised Kincora as a one-off, as another rotten episode in the Irish war, filed alongside troops on the streets & collusion, etc. Nasty shit that the British state employed when feeling threatened, rather than standard operating procedure in the nation's capital.



Do you really think they just made up some new innovative 'nasty shit' with no previous experience?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Patteran (Mar 17, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Do you really think they just made up some new innovative 'nasty shit' with no previous experience?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



No, I don't. But colonial powers act differently at home & abroad, in war & in peace. And I was shocked to hear that cops were blind eyeing abuse in London under spook orders. I accept that may be naive.

Edited to add - 'one off' was sloppy - I meant a rare occurrence, not a unique occurrence.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 17, 2015)

_for the good of the realm_


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> _for the good of the realm_


----------



## quiquaquo (Mar 17, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> Latest story is the met were told to back off doing cyril smith as a matter of national security!
> 
> When was Cyril Smith important? All I remember is a fat bloke being a professional Yorkshire man hardly near the reigns of power. Unless he could bring others down with him can't see any reason for the powers to be caring if he got done. Or am I missing something?



Don't get it either. If Smith and Savile knew very important names to be involved and at the same time were out of control as revelations now show us why didn't the security services just kill them if they were such a risk?

Really don't get why they weren't killed if everything was meant to be hushed up.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 17, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> Don't get it either. If Smith and Savile knew very important names to be involved and at the same time were out of control as revelations now show us why didn't the security services just kill them if they were such a risk?
> 
> Really don't get why they weren't killed if everything was meant to be hushed up.


Because they were providing _new _info. Why don't supermarkets kill all their customers?  Or bosses their workers? Or the state their killers in ireland? This is how it works.


----------



## laptop (Mar 17, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Because they were providing _new _info. Why don't supermarkets kill all their customers?  Or bosses their workers? Or the state their killers in ireland? This is how it works.



Yes.

It seems to me that within the security services the point was to _collect_ information on people's "little peccadilloes" and to keep it: it was _currency_.

And for the Whip's Office, for that matter.

Come that important funding vote...


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 17, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> Really don't get why they weren't killed if everything was meant to be hushed up.



 Though you know your bosses hate you if you have to make cyril smith disappear. Not like you could just dump in a boot of an escort was it?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Mar 17, 2015)

Patteran said:


> I guess that without really thinking about it I'd categorised Kincora as a one-off, as another rotten episode in the Irish war, filed alongside troops on the streets & collusion, etc. Nasty shit that the British state employed when feeling threatened, rather than standard operating procedure in the nation's capital.


Naw, not that Kincora


----------



## weltweit (Mar 17, 2015)

Where to post the information about the pervy judges looking at porn on their work computers?
It doesn't warrant a new thread, but I am glad they got their comeuppance!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 17, 2015)

its strange, but lizards aside, some of what the Ickeans have been banging on about seems to be coming true. then again, its the law of averages that some shit will stick I spose.

anyway, it looks like their fourm is being upgraded

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/index.php



 

or may be not...


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 17, 2015)

The notororius Scallywag Magazine which led the charge 20 years ago with this particular hare is now all available online and by reading a few issues you can get to most of the names that are in the frame. Be warned though it is like swimming in a sewer crawling through his accusations and highly un-pc innuendoes. 

http://www.thedossier.info/scallywag-magazine.htm


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 17, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> its strange, but lizards aside, some of what the Ickeans have been banging on about seems to be coming true. then again, its the law of averages that some shit will stick I spose.
> 
> anyway, it looks like their fourm is being upgraded
> 
> ...



He's lost his first libel for £117,000 - so mods over their will be reviewing their untouchability no doubt.

http://www.richardwarman.ca/


----------



## tommers (Mar 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Where to post the information about the pervy judges looking at porn on their work computers?
> It doesn't warrant a new thread, but I am glad they got their comeuppance!


If nothing else it shows that they're too stupid to be judges.


----------



## Ming (Mar 17, 2015)

How are they not being prosecuted? It's out in plain sight. Do the establishment think 'if we can get away with this publicly the plebs will know they don't stand a chance'. Blows my mind.


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Where to post the information about the pervy judges looking at porn on their work computers?



Not here. It's irrelevant. All it shows is that some middle-aged men don't understand how the internet works. Hardly a surprise really.


----------



## tim (Mar 17, 2015)

Ming said:


> How are they not being prosecuted? It's out in plain sight. Do the establishment think 'if we can get away with this publicly the plebs will know they don't stand a chance'. Blows my mind.



Assuming your talking about the wanking judges, they won't be prosecuted because looking at pornography involving consenting adults isn't a crime. However, doing so on your workplace laptop is clearly a disciplinary issue which is shy they've been fired.


----------



## Ming (Mar 17, 2015)

tim said:


> Assuming your talking about the wanking judges, they won't be prosecuted because looking at pornography involving consenting adults isn't a crime. However, doing so on your workplace laptop is clearly a disciplinary issue which is shy they've been fired.


No I meant the lack of prosecution of paedophiles in Parliament.


----------



## tim (Mar 17, 2015)

Ming said:


> No I meant the lack of prosecution of paedophiles in Parliament.



In the case of Cyril Smith and the others because nobody wad bothered enough. This wasn't just the BBC and parliament. In the 70's and 80's most schools had their share of perverse and sadistic teachers. We had a vicious thug; at least one pair of wandering hands and and one who had a fling with a sixth former in the neighbouring girls school.


----------



## Ming (Mar 17, 2015)

tim said:


> In the case of Cyril Smith and the others because nobody wad bothered enough. This wasn't just the BBC and parliament. In the 70's and 80's most schools had their share of perverse and sadistic teachers. We had a vicious thug; at least one pair of wandering hands and and one who had a fling with a sixth former in the neighbouring girls school.


It still seems to be the case. You hear the expression 'power defends itself' but the lengths it'll go to boggles the mind. I work in psychiatry. It makes me wonder if the mindset is in place before these cunts get power or its more sociopathic. Getting stinking drunk on power over time. Never getting challenged when they cross a line. Going a bit further, etc. There's a great book about psychopath's in the workplace called Snakes in Suits by Robert Hare and Paul Babaik that's worth a read. The implications are scary.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 18, 2015)

would I be right in assuming these coppers who've come forward are the same / some of the same who were quoted a while back discussing if they should come forward in some private coppers forum?

Sorry if that's a bit oblique, I can't remember where that came from, maybe exaro a few months back?


----------



## elbows (Mar 18, 2015)

Ming said:


> How are they not being prosecuted? It's out in plain sight. Do the establishment think 'if we can get away with this publicly the plebs will know they don't stand a chance'. Blows my mind.



What is available to the public is more than enough to warrant a variety of investigations. It's not enough to be sure there is enough evidence to prosecute anyone. Thats partly because of the passing of time, the passing of victims, the effectiveness of past coverup. But also that a lot of whats in the public domain isn't terribly high quality on its own, a starting point for investigation rather than the conclusive smoking gun in many cases. The police have already stated in at least one case that they find the victims testimony credible, but generally the last we heard is that there isn't much other evidence successfully secured yet, and its probably still likely that not enough victims have come forwards to do the sort of thing that was done with the trials of certain celebrities.

Stuff is rumbling on though, I can still hold out hope for prosecutions, especially given certain homes were searched recently, demonstrating that the investigations are not dead. I still think the powers that be need at least one prosecution in order to be able to do their standard 'draw a line under it and move on' thang. I'm not betting on getting one though. But at a minimum we are almost certain to learn some more stuff about some aspects of coverups.

I'm not at all happy with the situation, and I am impatient too, but the stories aren't going away and so I expect we'll get something.


----------



## Zabo (Mar 18, 2015)

Interesting comments this morning from Geoffrey Robertson QC. He said the only person who can decide whether or not the OSA can be used is the Attorney General and not the Prime Minister who has no legal powers - this relates to the newly launched 'immunity' petition to Cameron from Tom Watson M.P.

Robertson also stated that since the striking off of Section Two of the Act in 1989 it is improbable that anybody would be prosecuted. Moreover, he stated that the Attorney General would see no reason why evidence should not be given that would serve the Public Interest in exposing serious crimes.

He likened the modern day interpretation of the Act as a licence to bully.

I don't know about you but I feel we are being fed disinformation on a daily basis. Will this bastard Establishment ever crumble?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 18, 2015)

free spirit said:


> would I be right in assuming these coppers who've come forward are the same / some of the same who were quoted a while back discussing if they should come forward in some private coppers forum?
> 
> Sorry if that's a bit oblique, I can't remember where that came from, maybe exaro a few months back?



I'm guessing you mean this stuff?

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5429/protected-paedophile-mps-and-prominent-people-say-police

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5434/police-discuss-submitting-statements-on-paedophile-cover-up

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ions-ex-police-to-submit-dossier-to-met-chief

Summary thread:

http://www.exaronews.com/content/child-sex-abuse-fernbridge-and-fairbank-exaro-story-thread


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 18, 2015)

free spirit said:


> would I be right in assuming these coppers who've come forward are the same / some of the same who were quoted a while back discussing if they should come forward in some private coppers forum?



I don't think it's safe to assume that, but it's certainly possible - probable, even.  There must be quite a few ex-coppers - and a few still serving - who were involved in the halted investigations of paedophile rings, or at least knew about them.  Or, for that matter, who just saw things in their line of work, such as that retired copper who recounted a year or two ago how, as a young constable in Leeds, he encountered Jimmy Savile in his car with a girl who might well have been under-age and was told to 'bugger off if you want to keep your job.'  Hopefully the exposure all this is getting now will encourage more of them to come forward.

It's not only coppers either: care home staff, social workers, teachers, civil servants who dealt with the politicians involved, government drivers - all of them might have heard things, been told things, seen things, and either not really understood their implications or simply kept quiet for various reasons.  Again, hopefully some of them will speak out now.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 18, 2015)

Its like punching fog isn't it? Never ending enquiries, evasions, the official secrets act, the libel laws, foot dragging. Its clear they want to stretch  this out for as long as possible. The only political pressure seems to be coming from  a couple of backbench MPs. Its clear that  a large part of the truth is already well known to senior politicians - yet they react to each new revelation with a "well i never!" and set up another  inquiry. I.e - The collusion of the met in covering up and or/enabling child rape (and murder?) has been an obvious feature of the case for years - yet only now have the less than fearsome bloodhounds of IPCC been set on the case. And the role of the spooks in all this continues to go unmentioned.

We need a hardcore VIP noncesquad on this with unrestricted powers who could begin by rounding up all the senior spooks past and present and waterboarding the cunts whilst going through their files -  starting at "Brittan. L" and carrying on from their.

The fact that anything like such a scenario is outside the bounds of reasonable probability highlights just how corrupt, corrupting, devious and unaccountable the establishment is. And who has the real power in the land. Will a change of government make any difference? When do we get the angry mob with pikes and torches marching on Whitehall and Thames house?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Mar 18, 2015)

tim said:


> In the case of Cyril Smith and the others because nobody wad bothered enough. This wasn't just the BBC and parliament. In the 70's and 80's most schools had their share of perverse and sadistic teachers. We had a vicious thug; at least one pair of wandering hands and and one who had a fling with a sixth former in the neighbouring girls school.


Yes, exactly this. Perhaps those that were born later find this difficult to understand but those of us at school in the 60s-70s will understand. I look back on my school days, memories are hazy but I certainly recall teachers who acted then how they could not act now. Some, would lose their rags & lash out, we would get slapped on legs/arms/heads, some would throw board rubbers at us & laugh when it hit us. Just par for the course, nobody complained. Others were really kind, I recall one or 2 male teachers who were perhaps too 'kind'. I remember one at primary school, had kids, always the same girls back to is house after school. The flip side was as teachers did not have to worry about 'suspicious' behaviour, the genuinely kind ones would pick us up & cuddle us when we cut our knees in the playground & wipe our tears away.

I must admit all this does make me rack my brains to think back. Certainly I recall incidents with other kids Dad's & older siblings that I did not like but the memory is hazy. But fact is then adults did not talk about sex to young kids & 'sex talks' at secondary school where we watched films & so on were all very embarrassing & sniggery, we learn't more in the playground from other kids who seemed to know more than most. It would not even have occurred to me as a child to report any incident really, we were told about 'nasty men' that would do 'hurtful things' to us, but that was it really.

& the background was the 'liberated' late 60s & onwards into the 70s. Talk of lowering the age of(hetro)consent to 14, legalising gay sex between men over 21 & the argument that it should be at least 16 anything could be discussed....But not much on radio or tv. I recall reading 'underground' newspapers like Oz where the publishers were briefly jailed after an obsenity trial relating to the 'schoolkids edition'(do your own reasearch)& we talked endlessly among ourselves through the night as we smoked dope. Exchange of ideas was on a much more personal level, we did not have information streamed at us 24/7 as we do now.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 18, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I don't think it's safe to assume that, but it's certainly possible - probable, even.  There must be quite a few ex-coppers - and a few still serving - who were involved in the halted investigations of paedophile rings, or at least knew about them.  Or, for that matter, who just saw things in their line of work, such as that retired copper a year or two ago who recounted how, as a young constable in Leeds, he encountered Jimmy Savile in his car with a girl who might well have been under-age and was told to 'bugger off if you want to keep your job.'  Hopefully the exposure all this is getting now will encourage more of them to come forward, especially
> .



There was a journalist from Rochdale on PM yesterday (I can't recall his name) who offered a bit of an insight in to this.

He was investigating Smith in the 80s and had been leaked a load of Home Office docs which detailed some of the arrests etc. He confronted Smith about it and Smith essentially laughed in his face and threatened him. Two days later 2 Special Branch officers and about 14 uniformed Met Police turned up at his office and (according to him) bashed him around a bit, demanding the papers and threatening him with prison for perverting the course of justice. They ransacked his offices, took the papers and left. 

He contacted South Yorkshire Police who genuinely seemed to know fuck all about it.

He went on to say he now knows of at least ten ex Special Branch and other Police who want to speak about but have previously threatened with the Official Secrets Act. He claimed that as recently as a few weeks ago, at least one had a call from 'the intelligence services' reminding him about the OSA and how nice his pension currently was...

His view was, if this threat was removed, people will speak.


----------



## Mation (Mar 18, 2015)

Dan U said:


> He went on to say he now knows of at least ten ex Special Branch and other Police who want to speak about but have previously threatened with the Official Secrets Act. He claimed that as recently as a few weeks ago, at least one had a call from 'the intelligence services' reminding him about the OSA and how nice his pension currently was...
> 
> His view was, if this threat was removed, people will speak.


Is that the first we've heard in the mainstream media about a current/ongoing cover-up of the high-level stuff?


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 18, 2015)

Mation said:


> Is that the first we've heard in the mainstream media about a current/ongoing cover-up of the high-level stuff?



 How does an mp buggering little boys come under the official secrets act?
Signed it so military secrets stuff that might upset diplomatic relationships covered etc. Covering up crimes is not. Cops should know this stuff.


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 18, 2015)

Dan U said:


> There was a journalist from Rochdale on PM yesterday (I can't recall his name) who offered a bit of an insight in to this.
> 
> He was investigating Smith in the 80s and had been leaked a load of Home Office docs which detailed some of the arrests etc. He confronted Smith about it and Smith essentially laughed in his face and threatened him. Two days later 2 Special Branch officers and about 14 uniformed Met Police turned up at his office and (according to him) bashed him around a bit, demanding the papers and threatening him with prison for perverting the course of justice. They ransacked his offices, took the papers and left.
> 
> ...



Time for a British version of Belgium's White March.

_On October 20 about 300,000 people (estimates range from 275,000 to 325,000, around 3% of Belgium's population)[1][2] marched through Brussels. Many Belgians who lived outside Brussels came to the city to take part in the march. This demonstration, called the "The White March", was the largest one Brussels had ever seen. Everyone was carrying something white: a balloon, a cloak, etc.; some had painted their face white. White was meant symbolically, as the color of hope. This symbolism had grown after Queen Fabiola wore white at the funeral of her husband. During the march, the fire brigade turned their hoses on the Federal Parliament buildings to symbolically cleanse it. With the demonstration, the Belgian public opinion wanted to indicate something had to change in Belgium and that the justice system and the police had to show more attention to children_

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_March


----------



## elbows (Mar 18, 2015)

Mation said:


> Is that the first we've heard in the mainstream media about a current/ongoing cover-up of the high-level stuff?



I didn't heard the interview that Dan U mentioned, but I can tell from the detail that it was almost certainly Don Hale.

His story has received press attention on a number of occasions since he first spoke out last summer. I haven't heard him mention recent threats, so I can't comment on that yet, but will try to find out.

Meanwhile here is a story from when he first spoke out:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/jul/15/daily-star-sunday-cyril-smith


----------



## imperator777 (Mar 18, 2015)

Disturbing likeness
https://chrisukorg.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/3.png?w=630

https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=B111GB0D20140806&p=harvey+proctor


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 18, 2015)

Dan U said:


> There was a journalist from Rochdale on PM yesterday (I can't recall his name) who offered a bit of an insight in to this.
> 
> He was investigating Smith in the 80s and had been leaked a load of Home Office docs which detailed some of the arrests etc. He confronted Smith about it and Smith essentially laughed in his face and threatened him. Two days later 2 Special Branch officers and about 14 uniformed Met Police turned up at his office and (according to him) bashed him around a bit, demanding the papers and threatening him with prison for perverting the course of justice. They ransacked his offices, took the papers and left.
> 
> ...



Yes, I should have mentioned journalists.  elbows is right: I'm sure that's Don Hale.  I'm sure, too, that plenty of other journalists both local and national have run across things in the past that they've not been able or willing to publish but who might now speak out if the threat of prosecution is removed.


----------



## Mation (Mar 18, 2015)

elbows said:


> I didn't heard the interview that Dan U mentioned, but I can tell from the detail that it was almost certainly Don Hale.
> 
> His story has received press attention on a number of occasions since he first spoke out last summer. I haven't heard him mention recent threats, so I can't comment on that yet, but will try to find out.
> 
> ...


Ah yes, I heard him on the Today programme a few months ago on that; no mention of very recent threats then though.

Disappointing to see from that link that he took an OBE.


----------



## machine cat (Mar 18, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> How does an mp buggering little boys come under the official secrets act?



The journalist in question was in possession of classified Home Office documents. They had him bang to rights and there was nothing he could do. There's an interview with him out there somewhere...


----------



## Mation (Mar 18, 2015)

I've just listened elbows - it's about 8 or 9 minutes in - and it was Don Hale. He said that ex police, MPs and ex Special Branch are still, currently, being threatened with the Official Secrets Act, not just one person (was the implication, imo). But he wasn't asked more about that so it wasn't clear (to me) how specific he was being.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b055g8z9


----------



## laptop (Mar 18, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> How does an mp buggering little boys come under the official secrets act?
> Signed it so military secrets stuff that might upset diplomatic relationships covered etc. Covering up crimes is not. Cops should know this stuff.



The public interest in exposing crime *might* be a *defence*. It's not grounds for there being no charge.

The security services are involved. What they do is secret. The demise of Section 2 may not, therefore, be much help. 



> *Official Secrets Act 1989
> *
> *1. Security and intelligence.*
> 
> ...


----------



## Dan U (Mar 18, 2015)

Mation said:


> I've just listened elbows - it's about 8 or 9 minutes in - and it was Don Hale. He said that ex police, MPs and ex Special Branch are still, currently, being threatened with the Official Secrets Act, not just one person (was the implication, imo). But he wasn't asked more about that so it wasn't clear (to me) how specific he was being.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b055g8z9



yeah thats it.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 18, 2015)

laptop said:


> The public interest in exposing crime *might* be a *defence*. It's not grounds for there being no charge.
> 
> The security services are involved. What they do is secret. The demise of Section 2 may not, therefore, be much help.



So how does the 'lawful authority' bit work in the case of child-raping toffs do you think?


----------



## teqniq (Mar 18, 2015)

Not the same as it would for the likes of us, apparently.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 18, 2015)

Well, apparently, but what I mean is, could let's say for example the Home Secretary provide such authority by saying:

'As Home Secretary I'm telling you that it's now OK to provide testimony about anything you know regarding child-raping toffs that you've previously been threatened with the OSA to make you keep quiet about'

.. and make it stick?


----------



## laptop (Mar 18, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> So how does the 'lawful authority' bit work in the case of child-raping toffs do you think?



"That would be a matter for you, Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury. The Crown argues that it means a written authorisation by a senior person in the Security Services. The defence argues that there is an implicit authority on the grounds of the interests of justice or, alternatively, a human right. I find the defence's argument entirely tendentious and unconvincing, but you must decide."


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 18, 2015)

Sure. As regards the 'public interest' argument, but I guess what I'm getting at is that if someone specific has the power to provide such written authority, preferably someone identifiable like Theresa May, rather than a clandestine figure known only as 'Z' or perhaps 'Uncle Touchy', might there not be some sense in applying public pressure on the specific point of giving that lawful authority in an unambiguous enough manner?


----------



## laptop (Mar 18, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Well, apparently, but what I mean is, could let's say for example the Home Secretary provide such authority by saying:
> 
> 'As Home Secretary I'm telling you that it's now OK to provide testimony about anything you know regarding child-raping toffs that you've previously been threatened with the OSA to make you keep quiet about'
> 
> .. and make it stick?



"That could be unwise, Home Secretary. By the way, did you know we found some more photos of the goat?"

But probably. Fucking nightmare to draft the authorisation.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 18, 2015)

Interesting and worrying to see that members of the security services, or people purporting to be them, are apparently still threatening and intimidating people into not grassing.

Not so historic a cover up after all it'd seem.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 18, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I'm guessing you mean this stuff?
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips
> 
> ...


that's what I was remembering, cheers.


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 18, 2015)

machine cat said:


> The journalist in question was in possession of classified Home Office documents. They had him bang to rights and there was nothing he could do. There's an interview with him out there somewhere...



AFAIK there are several, but a good long quote from him here, of which this is part:



> After the visit from Cyril Smith came the visit from Special Branch. There was a knock on the door of the office at around 8:00 one morning. It was amazing. Three SB men with London accents came inside. Some of the uniformed men stayed outside. They all flashed warrant cards. They showed me two pieces of paper. One looked like a search warrant with a warning. They were a rough bunch.
> 
> One of them said, “I have a D-Notice here and a search warrant signed by a judge. This is in response to a call made to Leon Brittan’s department. That was how they put it. They didn’t say they came from the Home Office.
> 
> ...


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 19, 2015)

Old news but maybe pertinent as to the ferocity of the cover up and the seeming desire from the spooks to keep the id on it.

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/20885?userlanguage=ga&save_prefs=true

A good review of the Kincora scandal.


----------



## unrepentant85 (Mar 19, 2015)

imperator777 said:


> Disturbing likeness
> https://chrisukorg.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/3.png?w=630
> 
> https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=B111GB0D20140806&p=harvey+proctor


Where is the drawing/picture on the left from?


----------



## laptop (Mar 19, 2015)

> A cold case unit is to investigate claims police released MP Cyril Smith after child pornography was found in the boot of his car.
> 
> It is understood the Liberal MP, who died in 2010, was stopped on the M1 in Northamptonshire during the 1980s.
> 
> ...


----------



## laptop (Mar 19, 2015)

unrepentant85 said:


> Where is the drawing/picture on the left from?



It has a Press Association copyright notice on it, but (on design grounds alone) I think this has been added since it was drawn.


----------



## unrepentant85 (Mar 19, 2015)

laptop said:


> It has a Press Association copyright notice on it, but (on design grounds alone) I think this has been added since it was drawn.


Did a quick image search, its original artists impression of suspected abductor.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 19, 2015)

Link?


----------



## unrepentant85 (Mar 19, 2015)

It led me here..... https://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2013/07/13/3698/


----------



## elbows (Mar 19, 2015)

The state of Janner-related matters:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-31961706



> Last year it was reported that in 1989 a detective sergeant was told not to arrest Mr Janner or search his home.
> 
> The Independent Police Complaints Commission has said more investigation is needed into the claims.
> 
> ...





> A file relating to the investigation of Lord Janner is being considered by the Crown Prosecution Service.
> 
> Greville Janner, who was Labour MP for Leicester North West and then Leicester West, has not been arrested.
> 
> Detectives executed a search warrant at a property in Barnet, north London, in December 2013.


----------



## 1%er (Mar 19, 2015)

I assume there is zero chance of the ICAI being streamed like the Leveson Inquiry, has there been any comment about it being streamed in the UK press?


----------



## elbows (Mar 19, 2015)

1%er said:


> I assume there is zero chance of the ICAI being streamed like the Leveson Inquiry, has there been any comment about it being streamed in the UK press?



Probably too early for that sort of thing. There is no date for when that process starts, nor has any decision been made public about how evidence will be taken (e.g. lawyer examination or not), and how exactly they will decide which evidence to hear publicly and which to hear privately. 

Looking at their website I see they've been reasonably clever at trying to setup a new panel that won't be subject to the same flaws as the last one was. A small panel of 'professionals/experts', and then two tiers of victim stuff - a 'Victims and Survivors consultative panel' and a 'Victims and Survivors wider network'. Obviously there are ways this could still go wrong, but I guess I will judge it on how well it turns out these different parts end up working with each other, and whether any of it ends up being weak and merely paying lip-service to the idea of including victims.


----------



## laptop (Mar 20, 2015)

elbows said:


> Looking at their website I see they've been reasonably clever at trying to setup a new panel that won't be subject to the same flaws as the last one was. A small panel of 'professionals/experts', and then two tiers of victim stuff - a 'Victims and Survivors consultative panel' and a 'Victims and Survivors wider network'.



I am surprised that I've not heard some people complaining about not being at centre stage any more.

But it would seem to have a better chance of working without so much damage in the middle...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 20, 2015)

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...r-news/police-chief-urges-child-abuse-8874482

Whistleblower here claims to have been told to keep trap shut in last 4 weeks. If its true, then the cover-up is ongoing.

Note also the plain clothes seargent who just happened to be at the scene of allaeged abuse when the whistleblower turned up.


----------



## elbows (Mar 20, 2015)

If thats the bit you want to highlight then this is probably the better article to link to:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ester-news/gmp-covered-up-cyril-smith-8870179


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 20, 2015)

Sorry Elbows, yeah.


----------



## elbows (Mar 21, 2015)

Still a lack of victims coming forwards by the sounds of it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31998446


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 21, 2015)

Establishment politicians are so much less likely to be known and 100% identifiable by children, other estsblishment types even less so. A victim is less likely still to come forward if they were murdered at the time.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 21, 2015)

I was reading this and wondering who it was. Thankfully the articles give enough clues to work it out with a reasonable degree of certainty. 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/award-winning-author-abused-council-3852554

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-blairs-minister-accused-helping-3822224


----------



## teqniq (Mar 22, 2015)

Mystery royal 'was part of suspected paedophile ring being investigated by Scotland Yard but the inquiry was shut down for national security reasons'

Fail link


----------



## brogdale (Mar 22, 2015)

Exaro report a February commons vote that saw the coalition vote down John Mann's attempted amendment to the OSA ensuring immunity in the case of whistle-blowing on CSE.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...-to-lift-official-secrets-act-for-csa-scandal


----------



## laptop (Mar 22, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Mystery royal 'was part of suspected paedophile ring being investigated by Scotland Yard but the inquiry was shut down for national security reasons'
> 
> Fail link



Looks like a pure cuttings-job catchup to me... has anyone spotted anything new in it?


----------



## teqniq (Mar 22, 2015)

laptop said:


> Looks like a pure cuttings-job catchup to me... has anyone spotted anything new in it?


I thinks it's actually lifted from this Mirror piece which they do actually link to.


----------



## elbows (Mar 22, 2015)

laptop said:


> Looks like a pure cuttings-job catchup to me... has anyone spotted anything new in it?



Its main claim is new as far as I know. Sure we have heard from former detectives etc before, and whispers about royalty and MPs are hardly new. But this is a specific example, and many other historical child-abuse stories in the media over the years are far broader when discussing royal connections, e.g. leaving plenty of room open for it to be a member of buckingham palace staff rather than a member of the family. In that sense, this one is different.

Likewise although we are well used to all manner of activities being conducted or hushed up in the name of national security, this is again a specific example where previously we didn't have as many examples of this language used as justification as you might guess.

I'm talking about the story as a whole containing new stuff, rather than a particular copy of it such as the Mail's being new. They love nicking stories off other papers, though do often at least reference the original.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 22, 2015)

Sounds pretty specific.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 22, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Mystery royal 'was part of suspected paedophile ring being investigated by Scotland Yard but the inquiry was shut down for national security reasons'
> 
> Fail link


mystery royal?

I wonder if the name involved will ever come out. Time frame is late 80s according to the mirror article, at least that's the time frame of the investigation being pulled.


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 22, 2015)

free spirit said:


> mystery royal?
> 
> I wonder if the name involved will ever come out. Time frame is late 80s according to the mirror article, at least that's the time frame of the investigation being pulled.



Probably Mountbatten as I alluded to in #5223 - favourite Uncle and mentor of Prince Charles as supposedly was Laurens Van der Post another of his close acquaintances. 

There is a good review of this over at Indymedia.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/11/518690.html


----------



## free spirit (Mar 22, 2015)

ibilly99 said:


> Probably Mountbatten as I alluded to in #5223 - favourite Uncle and mentor of Prince Charles as supposedly was Laurens Van der Post another of his close acquaintances.
> 
> There is a good review of this over at Indymedia.
> 
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/11/518690.html


I wondered that, but the timeframe doesn't really match given that he was killed in 1979, and these allegation relate to an investigation in the late 80s.


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 22, 2015)

I think we can safely rule the Queen out.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 22, 2015)

Can't be that many male Royal family members to rule in or out. Savile would probably have known.


----------



## ibilly99 (Mar 22, 2015)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 22, 2015)

Nothing new under the sun? 

http://clevelandstreetscandal.com/


----------



## treelover (Mar 22, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> I was reading this and wondering who it was. Thankfully the articles give enough clues to work it out with a reasonable degree of certainty.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/award-winning-author-abused-council-3852554
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-blairs-minister-accused-helping-3822224




That Alex Wheaton article about the Childrens Home, 'Shirley Oaks' is truly heart breaking, it just looks like it was systemic and even the professionals not involved but who had a duty of care seem callous and disinterested to the extreme, I just hope that as some will have met their maker and will never face justice, they were made known of their inhumanity.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 22, 2015)

Seems the SA Intelligence Services had an interest in the Liberal Party. 



> The evidence was given to Mr Steel during the weekend by Lieutenant-Colonel Frederick Cheeseman, who describes him- self as a former intelligence officer in the United States Air Force. Colonel Cheeseman, aged 48, told Mr Steel that he has seen 15 dossiers on prominent Liberals at the headquarters of the Bureau of State Security (BOSS) in Pretoria. They included a mass of detail about Mr jeremy Thorpe, Mr Cyril Smith and Mr Richard Wainwright, and possibly Mr Steel, according to a prominent Liberal Party official last night. Colonel Cheeseman said he was briefed in Pretoria recently of the potential use of the documents. He was asked how they could be used to disrupt the Liberal Party.



https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/author/theneedleblog/


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 22, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Seems the SA Intelligence Services had an interest in the Liberal Party.
> 
> 
> 
> https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/author/theneedleblog/


https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=G6UMAAAAIBAJ&pg=3913,4028616&hl=en


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 23, 2015)

While Theresa May claims that the Official Secrets Act 'shouldn't' prevent people coming forward with evidence of cop/spook-facilitated child-raping toffs, according to Exaro the Tories and LibDems blocked an attempt to create a legal exemption protecting such whistleblowers.

http://exaronews.com/articles/5529/ministers-block-move-to-lift-official-secrets-act-for-csa-scandal


----------



## teqniq (Mar 23, 2015)

Yeah I saw that somewhere else. If any evidence of delay tactics/cover-up was needed this would be a very good indicator. Give the public the impression that robust lines of inquiry are being pursued, attempt to install a 'safe pair of hands' to chair the inquiry in the meantime slip this one in under the radar and hope it wont be noticed.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 23, 2015)

Has anyone seen this? The BBC were preparing a hatchet-job on Panorama to "debunk claims" of a Westminster paedophile network. Apparently the producers had chosen David Aaronovitch to front it. I can hear the sound of wagons being circled over and over again.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5527/bbc-at-war-over-panorama-on-claims-of-vip-paedophile-network


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 23, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Has anyone seen this? The BBC were preparing a hatchet-job on Panorama to "debunk claims" of a Westminster paedophile network. Apparently the producers had chosen David Aaronovitch to front it. I can hear the sound of wagons being circled over and over again.
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5527/bbc-at-war-over-panorama-on-claims-of-vip-paedophile-network



That stinks doesn't it? And Aaronovitch playing the useful idiot for the establishment again.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 23, 2015)

Kaka Tim said:


> That stinks doesn't it? And Aaronovitch playing the useful idiot for the establishment again.


Aye and apparently Aaronovitch claims he wasn't approached. Interesting. No?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Nothing new under the sun?
> 
> http://clevelandstreetscandal.com/


you did read in that bit the section where it said 'the existence of his establishment remained unknown to the authorities'? what we're talking about is something which WAS known to the authorities - for example, margaret thatcher knew about 'sir' cyril smith's activities.


----------



## laptop (Mar 23, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Nothing new under the sun?
> 
> http://clevelandstreetscandal.com/






			
				Steenking work web filter said:
			
		

> This Websense category is filtered: Sex.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 23, 2015)

laptop said:


>



Late 1800's sex.


----------



## laptop (Mar 23, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Late 1800's sex.



Classical literature, then. I shall complain to the IT creatures.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 24, 2015)

Just in case this was missed first time round. There is of course no evidence Bill Clinton was fucking under age girls. I wouldn't want to sully his good name.



> Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender at the centre of a scandal that has seen allegations levelled at Prince Andrew that he had sex with an teenager, possessed up to 21 phone numbers for former President Bill Clinton stored in his computer, it has been claimed.
> 
> Epstein’s relationship with Mr Clinton has been previously reported on and it is known that between 2002-2005 he flew on the financier’s private jet on numerous occasions, both on charitable endeavours to places such as Africa, as well as to Epstein’s private Caribbean island, Little St James. It would later be alleged in court that Epstein organised orgies on that same private island in the US Virgin Islands.



Link


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you did read in that bit the section where it said 'the existence of his establishment remained unknown to the authorities'? what we're talking about is something which WAS known to the authorities - for example, margaret thatcher knew about 'sir' cyril smith's activities.



Yeah I agree. I just thought the general comparison was of interest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Just in case this was missed first time round. There is of course no evidence Bill Clinton was fucking under age girls. I wouldn't want to sully his good name.
> 
> 
> 
> Link


how the fucking fuck can ANYONE, even potus, have fucking TWENTY-ONE phone numbers?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> how the fucking fuck can ANYONE, even potus, have fucking TWENTY-ONE phone numbers?



lol he's a popular guy.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Mar 24, 2015)

ibilly99 said:


>




The bit at 00.51.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> how the fucking fuck can ANYONE, even potus, have fucking TWENTY-ONE phone numbers?



most dealers i've known keep two or three but get hopelessly confused over who they've given what to.  i wonder how often clinton got a call from his latest fucktoy on a phone he thought was only for talking the president of japan.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 24, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Has anyone seen this? The BBC were preparing a hatchet-job on Panorama to "debunk claims" of a Westminster paedophile network. Apparently the producers had chosen David Aaronovitch to front it. I can hear the sound of wagons being circled over and over again.
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5527/bbc-at-war-over-panorama-on-claims-of-vip-paedophile-network


I'm not sure I have much faith in auntie spotting active noncery even when its going on by an employee right under thier noses


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 25, 2015)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 25, 2015)

And as a brief aside a little information on the Duke of Rutland. My bold..



> His ancestral home is Belvoir Castle in the northern part of Leicestershire. In the summer of 2005, the Duke purchased the Manners Arms Country Hotel and Restaurant. The Manners Arms was built for the 6th Duke of Rutland as a hunting lodge during the 1880s. The Duchess was heavily involved with the renovation work they carried out on the property. The Duke's holdings also include Haddon Hall, which is occupied by his brother Edward and Edward's family. *The Sunday Times Rich List 2013 estimated his personal fortune at £125m, but he had to sell a painting to keep Belvoir Castle maintained.*
> 
> The Duke is a high-profile supporter of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and has hosted fundraising events at Belvoir Castle. In 1999, he stood for UKIP when the House of Lords had to elect 92 hereditary peers. He stood again in a House of Lords by-election in 2005.



I hate having to sell a painting to keep my Castle in order. Put's a real downer on my day. What. What.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 27, 2015)

3 more investigations; up to 17 now....



> The police watchdog has launched three further investigations into claims that corrupt police officers covered up allegations relating to a VIP child sex abuse ring.
> 
> The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said it was looking at 17 allegations of a police coverup in relation to child sex offences from the 1970s to the 2000s.
> 
> The watchdog said it was examining claims police dropped an investigation into alleged child sex abuse committed by *MPs, judges, celebrities, police, actors and religious figures*.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 29, 2015)

http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/29/enoch-powell-named-in-sex-abuse-probe-5126476/


----------



## brogdale (Mar 30, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/29/enoch-powell-named-in-sex-abuse-probe-5126476/


Sufficiently dead, I suppose.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 30, 2015)

> *A monstrous slur against my friend: The allegations against Enoch Powell are lies beyond contempt, writes SIMON HEFFER*
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...inst-Enoch-Powell-monstrous-lie-contempt.html



Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?


----------



## agricola (Mar 30, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?



True, though in this case he probably isnt wrong and it is somewhat odd that the Church has managed to leak and confirm one name without leaking, for instance, the names of members of the senior clergy (who were much more Establishment than Powell was at the time) who have had allegations of that kind made against them.


----------



## discokermit (Mar 30, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Sufficiently dead, I suppose.


he'll never be dead enough.


----------



## laptop (Apr 4, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/29/enoch-powell-named-in-sex-abuse-probe-5126476/



He loved Greek. Say no more.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 4, 2015)

Allegations that david steele's office tried (and failed) to buy off witnesses to Cyril smith's noncery:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-cyril-smith-labour-simon-danczuk-david-steel

Steele's defence on his failure to give a shit (from last year) was distinctly shitty.  'I had no locus in the matter'. What a vile cunt. From 7-35 here:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-cyril-smith-labour-simon-danczuk-david-steel


----------



## brogdale (Apr 4, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Allegations that witnesses to Cyril smiths noncery were bought off by david steele's office:
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-cyril-smith-labour-simon-danczuk-david-steel


To be fair to the couple who witnessed the monstrous peado, there was an attempt to buy them off.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> To be fair to the couple who witnessed the monstrous peado, there was an attempt to buy them off.


sorry, yes, I'll edit - exactly that (I had read the story, but somehow still managed to summarise it incorrectly )


----------



## teqniq (Apr 7, 2015)

Kincora historic VIP paedophile ring - shock revelations



> A Kincora abuse victim from Northern Ireland has told Channel 4 News how he was also abused at London's Elm Guest House and Dolphin Square at the hands of "very powerful people"....


----------



## Wilf (Apr 7, 2015)

Windsor details to be wiped from Virginia Roberts court case
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/07/prince-andrew-jeffrey-epstein-florida


----------



## teqniq (Apr 7, 2015)

> “These unnecessary details shall be stricken.”



Unnecessary to whom one wonders.


----------



## elbows (Apr 7, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Kincora historic VIP paedophile ring - shock revelations



Here is more detail on earlier parts of his story, before the VIP stuff but including the move to England:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...ms-former-resident-richard-kerr-30997734.html


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 7, 2015)

Tom Bateman has 3 tweets tonight:

1
2
3

Essentially:
Cabinet Office file on honours inquiry into Cyril Smith . Official was told boys "were not of perfect character" 
Cabinet Office file on Cyril Smith. Official was told lack of "corroboration" and "boys put their heads together" 

+links the docs.


----------



## laptop (Apr 7, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Unnecessary to whom one wonders.





> Allegations that Roberts was also made to have sex with Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard law professor and another friend of Epstein, were also struck from the case by Marra. The judge said a legal attempt by Dershowitz to intervene in the case was now unnecessary.



Judge, translated: "You're trying to bring Dershowitz into my courtroom? Just. Fuck. Off."

Too tired to find the other thread this should be on.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Tom Bateman has 3 tweets tonight:
> 
> 1
> 2
> ...




is there any more clear cut bit of phrasing that means 'working class oikies'? the language these people use....I recall an excerpt from someones diaries quoted on here where it was noted that people knew someone was an 'enthusiastic' peadophile. Just like that, as if it needs an intensifier. And related in the terms of salacious winkiness that one might apply to someones fetish for high heels or something.


----------



## treelover (Apr 8, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Kincora historic VIP paedophile ring - shock revelations



That Ch4 package was heart rending and very very revealing, the crimes go deeper, more obscene and more catastrophic with every moment of that film.

Our thanks should go to that man in the film who opened up his memories, toxic as they were.


----------



## elbows (Apr 8, 2015)

Exaro has sort of jumped the shark for me with this set or articles about Carole Kasir. Quite a lot of tabloid-type writing in these, and dwelling on details that are not really relevant or illuminating.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5532/carole-kasir-boasted-about-vips-who-visited-elm-guest-house
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ractious-family-life-and-failed-relationships
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5534/revealed-carole-kasir-and-her-squalid-life-at-elm-guest-house

Yuck. Her squalid life indeed, squalid bloody journalism!


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 12, 2015)

Long article about endemic child rape at Gordonstoun 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/12/child-abuse-at-prince-charles-former-school-scotland


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> That Ch4 package was heart rending and very very revealing, the crimes go deeper, more obscene and more catastrophic with every moment of that film.
> 
> Our thanks should go to that man in the film who opened up his memories, toxic as they were.



Very brave too . The bodies are piled up around that case . Stuff emerging now about the ira killing of the rev Robert Bradford mp right in the middle of when that case was coming out . He was a close associate of McGrath and was supposedly looking into the case when he was assassinated . What was very odd about it was his special branch bodyguards weren't touched...a priority target for the Provos..and even odder they never fired a shot either . Despite a caretaker...witness...being killed at the scene . Local tabloid over here has been fingering stakeknife aka Fred scappittici , top British mole in the Provos as one of the button men .

Can't do links on this iPad thing but if you google Robert Bradford kincora it throws up a lot of interesting stuff . Including about the terry report . Doubt very much they'll ever go near this stuff because the can of worms is simply far too big .


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 13, 2015)

Apologies for the Express link but they have an 'intelligence source' confirming some of that Kincora story above.


> The ex-intelligence officer said MI6 was ordered to watch the Kincora care home in Belfast in the 1970s because one of its housemasters, William McGrath, was the leader of paramilitary group Tara.
> 
> Spies witnessed terror-related arms deals but also found evidence of an international paedophile gang trafficking victims to Brighton, London, Amsterdam and Vienna.


 http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/569866/Child-sex-abuse-ring-kept-secret-British-spies-MI6


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 13, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Apologies for the Express link but they have an 'intelligence source' confirming some of that Kincora story above



Colin Wallace, or a new one?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 13, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Colin Wallace, or a new one?



Good point. 

They're not naming the source, but it could be him.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 14, 2015)

Exaro say that an unreported vote back in Feb took place in which MPs voted down an amendment that'd allow giving CSA evidence without OSA prosecution

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...-to-lift-official-secrets-act-for-csa-scandal

Here's the MPs who voted to continue to protect child raping toffs using the Official Secrets Act

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5530/how-mps-voted-on-move-to-change-official-secrets-act-over-csa

As you can see, OSA protection for child-raping toffs is a particularly popular policy among the tories but by no means unique to them.


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 14, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Good point.
> 
> They're not naming the source, but it could be him.



There's a few more prepared to talk now, one went public on the issue last year .


----------



## Casually Red (Apr 14, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Apologies for the Express link but they have an 'intelligence source' confirming some of that Kincora story above.
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/569866/Child-sex-abuse-ring-kept-secret-British-spies-MI6



What I find odd about that tale is there's no mention at all of McGrath himself being an agent . Its been common knowledge over here for many years that he was . For example even prior to the troubles ,during the 60s he was smuggling bibles , religious stuff and propaganda and the like into eastern Europe . After the trouble broke out he was behind all sorts of disinformation campaigns and manipulating  loyalist groupings . He was one of theirs the entire time .


----------



## hot air baboon (Apr 16, 2015)

*Law chief drops child abuse case against peer*

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article4412975.ece

Sean O’Neill Crime Editor
Last updated at 12:15AM, April 16 2015

A veteran Labour politician is to escape charges for the second time over alleged child sex crimes in a decision that will prompt anger at prosecutors and claims of an establishment cover-up.
Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions, will announce today that it would not be in the public interest to put on trial Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC, the former MP for Leicester West, for historical abuse allegations.


scan of Times artcile on the Icke forum :


http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1062462632&postcount=396




*Labour's Janner will not be charged over alleged child abuse: 
Prosecutors say it is not in public interest to put peer, 86, on trial because of his age and dementia*

Lord Janner will not face prosecution despite credible evidence against him of historic child sex offences, prosecutors will announce today.
Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions, will say it is not in the public interest to put the Labour peer on trial because of his age and advanced dementia.
The 86-year-old former MP for Leicester West faces claims he preyed on young boys at care homes in his constituency in the 1970s.
Detectives have interviewed more than 20 men who claim they were abused, but have been unable to speak to Lord Janner because of his poor health.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ay-not-public-peer-86-trial-age-dementia.html


----------



## Chilli.s (Apr 16, 2015)

DPP says justice not in the public interest? 

Right, thats all cleared up then.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 16, 2015)

inconveniently alive


----------



## teqniq (Apr 16, 2015)

Ffs [emoji35]


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 16, 2015)

shameless shit


----------



## nino_savatte (Apr 16, 2015)

It's the Ernest Saunders get-out clause. Cunt.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 16, 2015)

brogdale said:


> inconveniently alive


at the moment


----------



## teqniq (Apr 16, 2015)

Doubtless there are one or two people who wish he'd hurry up and croak


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

To put some meat on those bones - the CPS have said that on three occcassions (1991, 2002, 2007) the claims against Janner passed their evidential basis test but were not pursued. If they had been - as they should have been - he would have faced 22 charges of indecent assault and buggery against 9 individuals over 20 years. For starters i expect. And the CPS says that the allegations relate to Leicester childrens's homes based grooming and assaults.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

That's the Lord Janner who was able to make a speech in the H of L in Feb 2013 and didn't go on leave from the House till Oct 2014.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 16, 2015)

he must  have degenerated fast. Mentally I mean. on other fronts that ship had sailed some time ago


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

Leicestershire police looking for legal way around this apparently.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

Milord in action, Feb 2012. Have a feeling there's a convention that you can use notes in Parliament, but not read things out:

"Lord Janner of Braunstone: My Lords, in my career and personal life I have been proud to work and continue to work for both Jews and Arabs in Israel and the neighbouring countries. I have spent much time building bridges between their communities, working together on their similarities and differences, and discussing how we live and more importantly how they can live happily together. This is why I believe it is essential that we work to support Israel and Palestine to create a two-state solution in which the Jews have their state, Israel, and the Arabs have their own state, Palestine.

The role of civil society is important for the continuing encouragement, stability and reconciliation of both Israel and Palestine, but this cannot be achieved without both parties emerging together through a combination of political agreements in conjunction with mutual trust and respect throughout all levels of society. Sadly, I feel at the present moment this mutual trust and respect do not solely exist.

We cannot ignore that both Israel and Palestine have a right to exist. It is important for the Palestinian people, but Hamas is still a strong influence within the region and is not there to benefit its people. It is not the Government; it is a terrorist group that uses its own citizens as shields to hide their operations and that publicly announces the annihilation of the State of Israel. That is impossible and very sad. We must acknowledge Israel’s right to defend its own country, and, for peace, Hamas cannot have power of influence or status within Palestine. Whether you say shalom or salaam, the word is peace—the single word to which we must always return."

I'm not dismissing the way dementia can affect different people at different rates, but it's pretty obvious this is a Saunders.  IN passing, he's also a self important fuck.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Leicestershire police looking for legal way around this apparently.



i.e - i expect last line may prove to be important:


Force 'disappointed' by decison not to prosecute suspected child abuser

_He said: “Thanks primarily to the courage of 25 victims who have made a complaint and the complete professionalism of the investigation team, we have built a case that the DPP has acknowledged is the result of a thorough investigation, evidentially sufficient and gives rise to a realistic chance of conviction.

“There is credible evidence that this man carried out some of the most serious sexual crimes imaginable over three decades against children who were highly vulnerable and the majority of whom were in care.

“I am extremely worried about the impact the decision not to prosecute him will have on those people, and more widely I am worried about the message this decision sends out to others , both past and present, who have suffered and are suffering sexual abuse.

“We are exploring what possible legal avenues there may be to challenge this decision and victims themselves have a right to review under a CPS procedure.”_


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 16, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> _“I am extremely worried about the impact the decision not to prosecute him will have on those people, and more widely I am worried about the message this decision sends out to others , both past and present, who have suffered and are suffering sexual abuse.
> _



Not to mention the message it sends out to us all regarding the establishment.  There is quite clearly a public interest in prosecuting to prove that it's the same rule for everyone, unless of course he is compltyly mentally shot, but the quote from the police suggests they think otherwise.


----------



## yardbird (Apr 16, 2015)

Some dementia sufferers retain a fairly good long-term memory. 
My ma did.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 16, 2015)

Teaboy said:


> Not to mention the message it sends out to us all regarding the establishment.  There is quite clearly a public interest in prosecuting to prove that it's the same rule for everyone, unless of course he is compltyly mentally shot, but the quote from the police suggests they think otherwise.




is this what 'no cover up' looks like?


----------



## Chilli.s (Apr 16, 2015)

Its just another example of whats obviously a justice system that functions differently if one has power, loadsamoney or influence.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

Wiki mentions he was diagnosed in 2009. That's just 12 months after he completed his book, Jewish Parliamentarians. 

There's the obvious point that people with alzheimers can carry on with their normal lives. However, someone with a diagnosis could carry on voting in the Mother of Parliaments for 5 years after his diagnosis, but then was deemed unfit to engage with a court process a few months later.  Yeah. 

Maybe Injury-Consultants-for-you should pick up on this: 'Need a diagnosis fast?'


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Apr 16, 2015)

Radio 4's 'The World at One', had Uri Geller on defending the CPS decision! But to be fair he does have experience in being the voice of reason when it comes to child abuse allegations against the rich and famous.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Radio 4's 'The World at One', had Uri Geller on defending the CPS decision! But to be fair he does have experience in being the voice of reason when it comes to child abuse allegations against the rich and famous.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Fucking hell!  Is this like some Ancient Mariner thing he has to do?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Apr 16, 2015)

My Nan developed dementia in her late 80s. She became increasingly angry & confused, she became unable to care for herself & in the end would not get out of bed. She went into a care home & became much happier because she had people around her to talk to. She lasted about 18mnths in the care home, got taken to hospital with a urinary infection & that was it. The root of it all appeared to me to be complete loss of short term memory. If you cannot remember anything from a few seconds ago then you are not going to be able to function, you will live your life in total confusion. I can't see how anybody could fake this unless there was a complete cover up by those who normally spent time with them. So dementia is not just being 'mentally shot' it appears to me to be fairly specific, ie short term memory loss causes complete inability to function.

So Janner either has dementia, or he does not. If he does not & he is faking it then there must be collusion from his friends & relatives. In order to put him on trial then it needs to be established that he is faking it & then those around him should be nicked as well.

If he does have it & the evidence of his guilt is overwhelming then does the English legal system allow him to be put on trial if he is unable to instruct his defence council, presumably not?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

You could imagine a scenario where a rich public figure had so much support he could 'potter' in and out of parliament and maintain the pretence that he was still an active politico.  However it's hard to see someone diagnosed in 2009 still making a minimally scripted public speech 5 years later.  He was (and I think still is) the patron of various anglo-Israeli or Jewish groups.  

Real issue is that he wasn't prosecuted years ago.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 16, 2015)

SaskiaJayne said:


> If he does have it & the evidence of his guilt is overwhelming then does the English legal system allow him to be put on trial if he is unable to instruct his defence council, presumably not?



That's pretty much exactly it: if you're not able to understand what's going on and to instruct counsel, then you're deemed unfit to stand trial.  That's fair enough tbh, though whether Janner really is so ga-ga that he can't be tried is perhaps a different matter...



Wilf said:


> Real issue is that he wasn't prosecuted years ago.



Indeed.  Yet another investigation nobbled by orders from on high to back off...


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> That's pretty much exactly it: if you're not able to understand what's going on and to instruct counsel, then you're deemed unfit to stand trial.  That's fair enough tbh, though whether Janner really is so ga-ga that he can't be tried is perhaps a different matter...
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.  Yet another investigation nobbled by orders from on high to back off...


On high are going to in investigate why on high backed off though. See you in 5 years.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 16, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> On high are going to in investigate why on high backed off though. See you in 5 years.



Well yes, of course, which is partly why they're dragging their feet about it!


----------



## quiquaquo (Apr 16, 2015)

To be fair to the CPS if they had gone after Brittan and Janner and Keith Joseph previously it would/could have caused a lot of anti Semitic problems. Of course they were are guilty as fuck child abusing filth that needed decades in jail but the potential racist backlash would have caused huge issues. Unfortunately above the law whatever the police may correctly believe.

May they burn in hell.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> Well yes, of course, which is partly why they're dragging their feet about it!


They''ve not even began to drag their feet yet, they want to a lord to look at the failing once a new parliament is elected...2019 we'll find that there were failings that would not happen now. 

This never ends.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> To be fair to the CPS if they had gone after Brittan and Janner and Keith Joseph previously it would/could have caused a lot of anti Semitic problems. Of course they were are guilty as fuck child abusing filth that needed decades in jail but the potential racist backlash would have caused huge issues. Unfortunately above the law whatever the police may correctly believe.
> 
> May they burn in hell.


wtf are you on about. How are you even posting here still? Anti-semitic post after anti-semitic post.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> To be fair to the CPS if they had gone after Brittan and Janner and Keith Joseph previously it would/could have caused a lot of anti Semitic problems. Of course they were are guilty as fuck child abusing filth that needed decades in jail but the potential racist backlash would have caused huge issues. Unfortunately above the law whatever the police may correctly believe.
> 
> May they burn in hell.


So, are you saying they shouldn't have gone after Brittan and Janner?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

Wilf said:


> So, are you saying they shouldn't have gone after Brittan and Janner?


He's saying a jew conspiracy based on false claims of pogroms stopped it.

I_t's like a muslim mirror._


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Apr 16, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> To be fair to the CPS if they had gone after Brittan and Janner and Keith Joseph previously it would/could have caused a lot of anti Semitic problems. Of course they were are guilty as fuck child abusing filth that needed decades in jail but the potential racist backlash would have caused huge issues. Unfortunately above the law whatever the police may correctly believe.
> 
> May they burn in hell.



What links Brittan, Janner and Joseph are the allegations of child abuse not their ethnicity or religious affiliation...unless you are suggesting that their Jewishness somehow particularly enabled or encouraged the alleged abuse?

Louis MacNeice

p.s. Hadn't see BA's post...he highlights a probably more likely anti-semitic accusation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> To be fair to the CPS if they had gone after Brittan and Janner and Keith Joseph previously it would/could have caused a lot of anti Semitic problems. Of course they were are guilty as fuck child abusing filth that needed decades in jail but the potential racist backlash would have caused huge issues. Unfortunately above the law whatever the police may correctly believe.
> 
> May they burn in hell.


inshallah no doubt.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 16, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> What links Brittan, Janner and Joseph are the allegations of child abuse not their ethnicity or religious affiliation...unless you are suggesting that their Jewishness somehow particularly enabled or encouraged the alleged abuse?
> 
> Louis MacNeice


I think he's suggesting rotherham etc that not prosecuting would be to invite anti-muslim pogroms.That these and and others were drummed up anti-muslim cases. And trying to make a messed up analogical case.

Either way, ugh.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

qqq - what's your take on the councillors and officials of Rotherham and Rochdale - 'Couldn't do right for doing wrong'?

edit - beaten to it.


----------



## elbows (Apr 16, 2015)

Wilf said:


> That's the Lord Janner who was able to make a speech in the H of L in Feb 2013 and didn't go on leave from the House till Oct 2014.



What exactly was the October 2014 thing? Perhaps thats when he officially took leave, but I'm pretty sure most publications say he hasn't been to the Lords since police raised his home in December 2013.

I'm quite prepared to believe he is unfit to stand trial now. I am at least pleased to see the language being used today, i.e. details about missed opportunities to prosecute on at least 3 prior occasions.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

elbows said:


> What exactly was the October 2014 thing? Perhaps thats when he officially took leave, but I'm pretty sure most publications say he hasn't been to the Lords since police raised his home in December 2013.
> .


 It's from his wiki, which links to this:

http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-janner-of-braunstone/880

Yes, I think you are right on the timings.  Last report of him being 'active' in the Lords was the Feb 13 speech I mentioned. Maybe the official leave of absence thing was something he or his brief decided he'd need if he was going to claim to be too ill to face a court case.  I'm not even going to be bothered with 'allegedly'.

Edit: the link shows the various boards and presidential positions he has.  Can't really draw anything from his seeming refusal to resign from any of them, but it would be interesting to know whether he stopped appearing and corresponding with all and sundry.


----------



## hot air baboon (Apr 16, 2015)

*Ex-Cop 'Forced To Release Five Paedophiles'*

http://www.lbc.co.uk/ex-police-officer-breaks-silence-on-cyril-smith-108099

Thursday 16 April 2015

LBC EXCLUSIVE 

In an exclusive interview, the ex Met officer known as "John" broke the Official Secrets Act to tell LBC an operation into a paedophile gang in the late 1970s was shutdown after the men said they were connected to the former Liberal MP.

The operation centred around a cafe near a school in east London. Police were alerted to potential abuse by concerned parents who said men were taking young children in and out of the cafe at break time and after school.

You can hear the full, exclusive interview at 5 o'clock tonight with Iain Dale at Drive on LBC.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

I feel I'm on slightly dodgy ground with this, people with alzheimers should be able to live life to the full.  However, I do find it interesting that, according to the link h took on the Vice-Presidency of the The Jewish Leadership Council in 2010 - a year after his diagnosis.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 16, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I feel I'm on slightly dodgy ground with this, people with alzheimers should be able to live life to the full.  However, I do find it interesting that, according to the link h took on the Vice-Presidency of the The Jewish Leadership Council in 2010 - a year after his diagnosis.



People who are very probably child abusers should get no special dispensation just because they have alzheimers


----------



## Quartz (Apr 16, 2015)

Wilf said:


> However, I do find it interesting that, according to the link h took on the Vice-Presidency of the The Jewish Leadership Council in 2010 - a year after his diagnosis.



Is that an honorary post or an active one?

But is it possible for him to have a fair trial? Could they do what they did for Margaret Moran? Then at least they could strip him of his titles if he's deemed to have committed the acts.


----------



## agricola (Apr 16, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I feel I'm on slightly dodgy ground with this, people with alzheimers should be able to live life to the full.



Ernest Saunders did.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> People who are very probably child abusers should get no special dispensation just because they have alzheimers


Oh, I agree.  Just that the implication could be taken from what I was saying that someone with alzheimers couldn't be doing things, active in life.  Anyway, the biggest issue is why he wasn't prosecuted years ago - and the secondary, but still important issue is whether he could still have been prosecuted say over the last 2 years when he was still 'working'.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Is that an honorary post or an active one?
> 
> .


 almost certainly the former, maybe with a few ceremonials.  Just making the point he wasn't obviously 'winding down'.

He's a self important me-me-me self promoter.  Must have been a shock to the system when he had to retreat behind the walls of his mansion, literally and metaphorically.


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 16, 2015)

He'll either get the unmarked grave of Leon Brittan treatment or an exalted place on the Mount of Olives a la Robert Maxwell - my money's on the latter. 

Full CPS statement.

http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2015/04/the-decision-not-to-prosecute-lord-janner-statement-from-the-dpp.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 16, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> To be fair to the CPS if they had gone after Brittan and Janner and Keith Joseph previously it would/could have caused a lot of anti Semitic problems. Of course they were are guilty as fuck child abusing filth that needed decades in jail but the potential racist backlash would have caused huge issues. Unfortunately above the law whatever the police may correctly believe.
> 
> May they burn in hell.



Fear of cries of anti-Semitism had nothing to do with non-prosecution - in fact 2 of the 3 you mention were non-observant and thoroughly culturally-neutral, and so would have been open to accusations of hypocrisy (both from the media and from Jews) if they suddenly tried to play the anti-Semitism card. What very obviously had a lot to do with non-prosecution was a deliberate and long-standing policy by the secret state and the police to mask the misbehaviour of the powerful.
BTW, "Jewish" is no more a race than "Muslim",whatever Gobineau said otherwise.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 16, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> wtf are you on about. How are you even posting here still? Anti-semitic post after anti-semitic post.



I'm still waiting for him to explain his comments about my "history", and how it might make me Islamophobic.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 16, 2015)

Saville was unfit to stand trial by dint of being dead, that did not stop a detailed and fairly public investigation, possibly enough to satisfy victims that their voices had been heard. Why not the same sort of treatment for Janner? but now, not waiting till he dies!


----------



## maomao (Apr 16, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Saville was unfit to stand trial by dint of being dead, that did not stop a detailed and fairly public investigation, possibly enough to satisfy victims that their voices had been heard. Why not the same sort of treatment for Janner? but now, not waiting till he dies!



The Savile stuff hit the papers _because_ he was dead. It's not so easy to say stuff about living people, especially those rich enough to afford lawyers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Saville was unfit to stand trial by dint of being dead, that did not stop a detailed and fairly public investigation, possibly enough to satisfy victims that their voices had been heard. Why not the same sort of treatment for Janner? but now, not waiting till he dies!


it's very simple. the police protect paedophiles.


----------



## maomao (Apr 16, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's very simple. the police protect paedophiles.


The police protect the rich whether they're paedophiles or not is more like it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

maomao said:


> The police protect the rich whether they're paedophiles or not is more like it.


it's not just rich paedophiles tho is it


----------



## maomao (Apr 17, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not just rich paedophiles tho is it


Isn't it? Which poor paedophiles, unconnected to rich and/or powerful paedophiles, have they been protecting?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

maomao said:


> Isn't it? Which poor paedophiles, unconnected to rich and/or powerful paedophiles, have they been protecting?


rotherham ring any bells?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

maomao said:


> The police protect the rich whether they're paedophiles or not is more like it.


like they protected alan green or keith best do you mean? or jeremy thorpe?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

maomao said:


> Isn't it? Which poor paedophiles, unconnected to rich and/or powerful paedophiles, have they been protecting?


incidentally how rich was savile in the 1970s when knowledge about his proclivities seems to have been fairly widespread in media circles?


----------



## maomao (Apr 17, 2015)

I don't really want to spam this thread to fuck with a silly argument so briefly:

Rotherham - incompetence, lack of concern for teenage girls who they saw as bringing it on themselves and according to some papers a reluctance to act against the Pakistani community all explain that better than police 'protecting' paedophiles because they were paedophiles.

Don't know who alan green is, Best was treated extremely lightly for fraud (my mate's dad did longer for embezzling a few grand) and Thorpe's murder plot was essentially swept under the carpet.

My original statement was perhaps over simplistic but can be read as 'the legal system protects the powerful and the establishment, most of whom tend to be rich and vice versa'. Would prefer not to be dragged into a game of semanticks on an 'important' thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

maomao either you're ignorant of the complaints agsinst syp alleging corrupt relationships between officers and paedophiles widely reported last month or you know and you'te lying about it. i would prefer to think the former.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

maomao said:


> I don't really want to spam this thread to fuck with a silly argument so briefly:
> 
> Rotherham - incompetence, lack of concern for teenage girls who they saw as bringing it on themselves and according to some papers a reluctance to act against the Pakistani community all explain that better than police 'protecting' paedophiles because they were paedophiles.
> 
> ...


oh - and regardless of what you want to argue the police are in no way shorthand for the legal system so your ex post facto explanation er bollocks.


----------



## hot air baboon (Apr 17, 2015)

...not just the Leics police aghast by the look of this Times article header....." an eleventh hour volte face" apparently....
*

Law chief blocked child sex abuse trial of peer*

Sean O’Neill Crime Editor
Last updated at 12:01AM, April 17 2015

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4414257.ece



> Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions, personally overruled senior lawyers to block a prosecution of the Labour peer Lord Janner on child abuse charges.
> Lead counsel appointed to the case recommended that Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC, who has advanced dementia, should be charged with 16 sex offences against nine alleged victims spanning three decades from the 1960s. Until last month Leicestershire police, who investigated the case and interviewed 25 alleged victims, believed that the Crown Prosecution Service would press charges.


----------



## laptop (Apr 17, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Milord in action, Feb 2012. Have a feeling there's a convention that you can use notes in Parliament, but not read things out...





> MPs address their speeches to the Speaker or their deputy, using notes only.



The attitude to Lords is more relaxed - though AIUI they're not supposed to read the entire speech. Now I've looked into it I am less clear what the difference is.

Janner would have learned the key points of the speech you quote by heart before the Alzheimers is alleged to have set in


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 17, 2015)

Note especially the final 3 paragraphs.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 17, 2015)

A bit more detail on the who and when of the case against him being dropped:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/...gations-were-not-passed-to-me-former-dpp-says

Ed- Prime Minister Material - Miliband announces that he's 'shocked'.  Labour got around to suspending him last Thursday, but he remains a Peer (naturally).


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2015)

Its becoming obvious that while those considered once untouchable (national treasures like rolf USED to be, light entertainers of respectable character once above it etc..) are fair game, theres just a level they are refusing to touch. An politico-aritorcrat layer who are to be allowed a free noncery pass. How much that ties into the OSA, kincora and the 'deep state' I don't even know. But its fucking rank and stinks of 'for the realm, dear boy'


----------



## Wilf (Apr 17, 2015)

Not just a rhetorical question, I really can't remember, but has a single MP, Minister or inner circle adviser faced a court over any kind of noncery in living memory?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 17, 2015)

It is at least quite apt that the current dpp is called 'Saunders'.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 17, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Its becoming obvious that while those considered once untouchable (national treasures like rolf USED to be, light entertainers of respectable character once above it etc..) are fair game, theres just a level they are refusing to touch. An politico-aritorcrat layer who are to be allowed a free noncery pass. How much that ties into the OSA, kincora and the 'deep state' I don't even know. But its fucking rank and stinks of 'for the realm, dear boy'


Yes, and the ones who are raping kids today will still get away with it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Yes, and the ones who are raping kids today will still get away with it.




theres a line from one od Edwina Curries political diaries where she pens breathlessly about someone who was known as an 'enthusiastic peadophile'. In arch, my school diaries style. Quite the scandal. But nothing to lose your shit over.

these people.


----------



## elbows (Apr 17, 2015)

I may as well post the actual quote from her book since you've made reference to it a few times of late and I don't like to see Peter Morrison go un-named.



> ‘One appointment in the recent reshuffle,’ she wrote, ‘has attracted a lot of gossip and could be very dangerous: Peter Morrison has become the PM’s PPS [Parliamentary Private Secretary].
> 
> ‘Now he’s what they call a “noted pederast”, with a liking for young boys. He admitted as much . . . when he became deputy chairman of the party  but added: “However, I’m  very discreet” — and he  must be!’
> 
> ‘She [Thatcher] either knows and is taking a chance, or doesn’t; either way, it’s a really dumb move. It scares me, as all the Press know, and as we get closer to the election, someone is going to make trouble very close to her indeed.’


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2015)

elbows said:


> I may as well post the actual quote from her book* since you've made reference to it a few times of late* and I don't like to see Peter Morrison go un-named.



thanks for that. Its just amongst the litany of wrong the attitude displayed in the writing style still managed to shock me. They just don't give a shit.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 17, 2015)

**


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 17, 2015)

Am a bit surprised that anyone who saw the footage of Janner shown on TV last night (he was being helped across the street) seriously doubts that he has Alzheimer's.I agree with Wilf that the incredible thing is that the police are only now,when it is too late,getting a case together a quarter of a century after the Beck case led them to bring him in for questioning.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 17, 2015)

The obvious point about the currie quote is she only sees it as a political threat, no obvious concern about children being raped. But the even more bizarre one is that in leaving it in her diaries she doesn't even care that people know that. Maybe her and Esther 'everybody knew about Jimmy' Rantzen - the founder of Childline - should do one of those laugh a minute tours together, like George Best and Rodney March did.


----------



## teqniq (Apr 17, 2015)

Damage limitation

Lord Janner child abuse allegations were not passed to me, former DPP says



> A former director of public prosecutions has criticised Crown Prosecution Service officials for failing to present him with new evidence in 2007 of the Labour peer Lord Janner’s alleged abuse of children.
> 
> Lord Macdonald QC said that instead of passing on allegations of serious sexual offences against Janner, local CPS officials in Leicestershire dropped the pursuit of charges without consulting headquarters in London.
> 
> His comments shed more light on how Janner escaped prosecution for eight years, following a third police inquiry into claims that he abused a number of young boys.


----------



## elbows (Apr 18, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The obvious point about the currie quote is she only sees it as a political threat, no obvious concern about children being raped. But the even more bizarre one is that in leaving it in her diaries she doesn't even care that people know that. Maybe her and Esther 'everybody knew about Jimmy' Rantzen - the founder of Childline - should do one of those laugh a minute tours together, like George Best and Rodney March did.



Her position is somewhat more nuanced and/or slippery than that, for example these related quotes. I can't access the full article but the start is enough for now.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1153409.ece



> EDWINA CURRIE, the former Conservative minister, has claimed that a leading Tory MP during Margaret Thatcher’s era had sex with underage boys — and senior party members had covered up for him.
> 
> Currie, 66, said this weekend she had heard that Sir Peter Morrison, Thatcher’s parliamentary private secretary and deputy chairman of the party, had sex with 16-year-old boys when the age of consent was 21.
> 
> ...



Elsewhere it is reported that in an interview with a social work magazine in 1989, she said that many house of commons colleagues didn't believe child abuse was real, they thought that it was made up by social workers.

It is certainly possible with these attitudes, and with other observations, to see how a mix of factors such as historic laws on homosexuality and age of consent, gentleman club atmosphere, public school attitudes, the size of the political closet, the games and the gossip politicians and journalists were used to indulging in, along with in some cases simple naivety or straightforward rank-closing all contributed to the hideous environment that could enable such abuse. 

Some of those factors are gone or greatly diminished or offset now. Others are not, or have evolved in complex ways. If abuse continues at high levels today, it is either much less blatant or at least a different sort of blatant. All the same we've still seen fairly recent examples of MPs closing ranks, but I still suspect the equation has changed somewhat. Even offenders who enjoy the risk-taking aspect tend to take calculated risks, and I would struggle to claim that the risk calculations now are the same as they were 20+ years ago for so many reasons.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 19, 2015)

LBC audio of retired police officer breaking official secrets act to reveal police were pulled from case after 5 pedophiles were set free following them naming Cyril Smith. Also that Dolphin Square was well known about by certain parts of the police. 

http://lbc.audioagain.com/player_po...d=2015-04/17/ead4c55455ad0b7369c851c56958cfea


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 19, 2015)

Can only the defamed person take action in a personal libel and if so is Janner open season now for allegations if he is unfit mentally to stand trial ?


----------



## Dan U (Apr 19, 2015)

Didn't realise Jay Rayner was an actual journalist before being a food critic and occasional urban75 poster 

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...greville-janner-25-years-ago?CMP=share_btn_tw

Awkward reading for Vaz amongst others


----------



## brogdale (Apr 19, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Didn't realise Jay Rayner was an actual journalist before being a food critic and occasional urban75 poster
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...greville-janner-25-years-ago?CMP=share_btn_tw
> 
> Awkward reading for Vaz amongst others


Indeed.

Of all the things about this sorry tale I'm getting increasingly angry about the statement from Janner's family (via his solicitor)...


> Lord Janner is a man of great integrity and high repute with a long and unblemished record of public service.
> 
> He is *entirely innocent of any wrongdoing*.



Safe in the knowledge that he has been protected from the course of justice they feel comfortable calling those alleging abuse liars. Fuckers.


----------



## Dan U (Apr 19, 2015)

Yeah agreed brogdale 

If it is possible for him to do the decent thing, it would be to stfu at this point


----------



## shygirl (Apr 19, 2015)

The arrogance and gross insensitivity of the family's statement is beyond my understanding.  Shame on them.


----------



## Chilli.s (Apr 19, 2015)

Well they would say that wouldn't they. The ultimate reward from the system, placed above the law. All social status intact, big pension etc. etc.

Sickening, especially for the poor victims.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 19, 2015)

As an aside to the point Rayner makes about Keith Vaz he may not have been 'party to' the rumours but he would have been more aware of them than most given his position as a celebrated Leicester lawyer.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 19, 2015)

No idea he posted on here. Under what name?


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 19, 2015)

FFS....

https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/janner-request-to-keep-seat-in-lords/


----------



## laptop (Apr 19, 2015)

ibilly99 said:


> FFS....
> 
> https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/janner-request-to-keep-seat-in-lords/



He's listed as on "leave of absence" since 13 October 2014...

Wondered yesterday why he wasn't on the list of Lords (which IIRC until recently included all..)


----------



## nino_savatte (Apr 19, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Didn't realise Jay Rayner was an actual journalist before being a food critic and occasional urban75 poster
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...greville-janner-25-years-ago?CMP=share_btn_tw
> 
> Awkward reading for Vaz amongst others


Rayner was writing articles for the Graun and Indy back in the late 80s.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 19, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> No idea he posted on here. Under what name?


sorry didn't mean to suggest Rayner posted on here I was referring to his very recent article helpfully linked to above.


----------



## Dan U (Apr 19, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> No idea he posted on here. Under what name?


Jay Rayner? His own iirc. On tapatalk or I would tag him


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 19, 2015)

Never any shortage of ex-journalists and ex-policemen to speak up when the market conditions are right for them to sell their stories.

I've read Rayner's piece twice - is there a single fact beyond his involvement which wasn't previously in the public domain, or a single 'point' which hasn't been made elsewhere in the last week ? I can't see one. Well unless you count the nonsensical implication that he played a more significant role in getting the allegations about Janner into print than any of the other journalists who covered the Beck trial (and who also didn't follow the allegations up after Janner had denied them in Parliament and made a visible point of employing high-powered lawyers).

Rayner says he will explain 'what went wrong', but doesn't, and hovers around an explanation as to why the story wasn't followed up. But, rather than clearly state the obvious (and less marketable) truth that even if journalists had believed there was something to follow up, there was no obvious financial or career advantage to doing so, and potentially some legal and financial risk, we are instead favoured with a piece of distraction about something different, how Janner's political friends rallied round him.



> That was it. The story was dead. The _Independent on Sunday_ was not a paper to be cowed by pressure from above, but it was simpler than that. Clearly Janner was set up. I don’t even recall being taken off the story. It was just never spoken of again.



Translation into plain English: the story wasn't believed. But that wasn't because various notables rallied around Janner. It was because journalists didn't believe Beck or the defence witness who testified that Janner had abused him.

I don't see the action of 24 year old Rayner filing the story and moving on as being especially open to criticism. His activities today are a different matter. The spectacle of 48 year old Rayner exploiting his anodyne recollections, both for money and for some brand building on twitter would be repulsive enough, but he manages to out-do himself by employing the same distraction. Suddenly the story isn't about Janner's alleged abuse it's about Keith Vaz. Don't get me wrong - I defer to no-one in my loathing of Vaz. But the story isn't *about* him any more than it's *about* Jay Rayner.


----------



## gosub (Apr 19, 2015)

Duncan2 said:


> Am a bit surprised that anyone who saw the footage of Janner shown on TV last night (he was being helped across the street) seriously doubts that he has Alzheimer's.I agree with Wilf that the incredible thing is that the police are only now,when it is too late,getting a case together a quarter of a century after the Beck case led them to bring him in for questioning.



Agree that there should be outrage over the failure to bring him to book in the past. Though I am finding appalling senior police officers and the Home Secretary attacking the decision not to charge this time,  the idea of courts trying people who don't have a clue what's going on is a disturbing one.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 19, 2015)

I guess Rayner would say that the story is,in part,about Vaz in view of his castigation of the Home Office's incompetence with regard to the current child abuse inquiry.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 19, 2015)

Duncan2 said:


> I guess Rayner would say that the story is,in part,about Vaz in view of his castigation of the Home Office's incompetence with regard to the current child abuse inquiry.


He says exactly that in paragraph 11. And if he'd just made the point that would be fair enough. However he leads up to it with the references to Vaz in paragraphs 6 and 10, including the old trick of saying Vaz "clearly hadn’t been party to the rumours circulating in his home town" and thus danging the possibility of exactly the opposite. That whole strand of his story is clearly structured around making a point about Vaz. Which he does far more clearly than any point he makes about Janner or about 'what went wrong'.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 19, 2015)

must admit i thought Rayner did make it reasonably clear what in his view 'went wrong' the first time there was a missed opportunity to arraign Janner in 1992.Janner had done such valuable work in pursuing perpetrators of war crimes that his powerful colleagues Vaz and others simply refused to consider the possibility that Beck's allegations could contain even a grain of truth.They were eventually to endorse him in the H of C.Rayner himself, perhaps naively and ,certainly ,wrongly assumed that the evidence against Janner,such as it was, would be presented in Court at some stage and anyway the sub judice rule meant he had to sit on what he knew for years.Much later Beck was found very Guilty and with five life sentences to serve out no one in their right mind was going to publicise as fact anything further he might have to say about the great and and the good.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 19, 2015)

Duncan2 said:


> must admit i thought Rayner did make it reasonably clear what in his view 'went wrong' the first time there was a missed opportunity to arraign Janner in 1992.Janner had done such valuable work in pursuing perpetrators of war crimes that his powerful colleagues Vaz and others simply refused to consider the possibility that Beck's allegations could contain even a grain of truth.They were eventually to endorse him in the H of C.Rayner himself, perhaps naively and ,certainly ,wrongly assumed that the evidence against Janner,such as it was, would be presented in Court at some stage and anyway the sub judice rule meant he had to sit on what he knew for years.Much later Beck was found very Guilty and with five life sentences to serve out no one in their right mind was going to publicise as fact anything further he might have to say about the great and and the good.



mmm, well there are one or two minor problems with Rayners account. Rayner is referring to a pre-trial hearing. Before the trial started in September 1991 the CPS issued 'guidance to editors' on behalf of the Attorney General warning them about prejudicing the trial, and the trial judge initially imposed reporting restrictions. Various newspapers and the Press Association challenged these restrictions and on the 8th day of the trial they were lifted by the Court of Appeal.

During the trial the allegations against Janner were aired in court. Beck gave evidence about them as did a defence witness. And they were fully reported (indeed the attempt to impose reporting restrictions may have had a small 'Streisand effect'). Here for example (courtesy of the Spotlight on Abuse site) is the report in the Guardian about the testimony of the defence witness :


Spoiler: Guardian report 9th November 1991












Lots of other cuttings at that site and four pages of transcribed press reports at Ian Pace's blog starting here.

Rayner twice mentions the fact that rumours about Janner were circulating in Leicester "for some years". Indeed he appears to imply - without stating as much - that he knew about these at the time of the Beck trial, and that they were credible enough to take notice of. Which rather begs the question that if this was true why did both he and the the rest of the press lose interest in the story.


> I don’t even recall being taken off the story. It was just never spoken of again.


Rayner's answer - that Janner had denied the allegations and fellow MPs had denounced them, doesn't address this at all. The press had successfully challenged an attempt to stop them reporting the allegations. Yet I don't recall seeing anything that suggests the press made any significant effort to investigate them.

The reason, I believe, is that they treated them the same way they had treated allegations made during a trial in 1986 that Willie Whitelaw (then Leader of the House of Commons) was also leader of the 'Sons of Lucifer', a satanic cult. They did not believe them. Neither Rayner, nor the journalists who actually covered the trial, were obliged to sit on anything because of sub-judice rules. Like a lot of Janner's parliamentary colleagues, they did not find them credible and so didn't look into them. Why they didn't find them credible in 1991 is interesting but it's scarcely the real issue in the Janner affair.

The real issue is why, given what evidence was available, as the CPS now acknowledges, he was not charged in 1991 or 2007, and why Police did not pursue an investigation in 2002.

In the scale of the things contributing to how this happened, the role of one self-important windbag in Parliament defending a colleague by making what even then looked like foolish suggestions to reform the Contempt of Court Act, has about as much significance as what another self-important windbag did at the time as a freelance journalist. It was background noise to the real failings then and it is even more annoying background noise now.


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 19, 2015)

One of Janner's alleged victims has spoken out.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ay-decision-not-prosecute-beggars-belief.html


----------



## Wilf (Apr 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> the idea of courts trying people who don't have a clue what's going on is a disturbing one.


 In which case why could he then walk back into the Lords and exercise his judgement voting, to provide a theoretical majority of 1 to pass some important bill?


----------



## gosub (Apr 19, 2015)

Wilf said:


> In which case why could he then walk back into the Lords and exercise his judgement voting, to provide a theoretical majority of 1 to pass some important bill?



shouldn't be able to.  A leave of absence was an odd thing to go for, as you don't come back from dementia (unless you are Ernest Saunder's) and now, when they publicly strip him of his seat (how can they they not).  yet more disgrace.


----------



## newbie (Apr 20, 2015)

ibilly99 said:


> FFS....
> 
> https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/janner-request-to-keep-seat-in-lords/



for those that didn't read the comments there's a rather good _Challenge to CPS decision on Greville Janner's trial for alleged child abuse_, originally posted on this blog, which links to a well researched VIP child abuse wiki.


----------



## bemused (Apr 20, 2015)

Wilf said:


> In which case why could he then walk back into the Lords and exercise his judgement voting, to provide a theoretical majority of 1 to pass some important bill?



Janner was diagnosed in 2009 and only stopped voting in November 2013. I never took any of the suggestions of high level cover ups seriously, I just don't think politicos are any good at keeping secrets. However, the more I read about this case the more it stinks of it. He's had multiple investigations over the years, the Director of the CPS seems to have overruled her own experts advice and see announce not proceeding during a General Election when it's going to get buried. 

I don't know if he's guilty or not, or how far his illness has progressed; the fact he doesn't want to give up his Lords seats suggests not that far.


----------



## gosub (Apr 20, 2015)

ibilly99 said:


> FFS....
> 
> https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/janner-request-to-keep-seat-in-lords/




Thats a good piece of journalism, surprised it hasn't been picked up on by the other papers, but then CPS woman did just arrange trials for a shed loads of journos, so scores to settle presumably take priority.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 20, 2015)

gosub said:


> but then CPS woman did just arrange trials for a shed loads of journos, so scores to settle presumably take priority.


On which note in today's Times (paywalled) :

*Revealed: link between DPP and Janner’s son*



Spoiler: Times article text



Sean O'Neill Crime Editor
Last updated at 12:01AM, April 20 2015

The principal legal adviser to the director of public prosecutions is a barrister who worked in the same chambers as the son of Lord Janner of Braunstone until late last year, _The Times_ has learnt.

The Crown Prosecution Service has confirmed that Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions (DPP), consulted Neil Moore — who was based at the 23 Essex Street chambers where Daniel Janner, QC, works — before concluding that it was not in the public interest to prosecute the veteran Labour peer on child abuse charges.

Senior police officers privately raised concerns with the DPP about Mr Moore’s involvement in the decision-making process.

The CPS said the decision was made by Mrs Saunders alone and that Mr Moore informed her that he had been in chambers with Lord Janner’s son before discussing the case. A spokesman said Mr Moore was a barrister of the highest integrity and had not spoken to Mr Janner for two years.

The potential for a conflict of interest will add to the pressure on Mrs Saunders over the Janner case after significant political interventions at the weekend. Theresa May, the home secretary, said she was “very concerned” at the decision not to prosecute, while a previous DPP, Lord Macdonald of River Glaven, QC, said it would have been better to have concluded the case “in the full public glare of a courtroom”.

Mrs Saunders announced last week that Lord Janner, 86, should not be charged because his dementia meant that he could not follow court proceedings and was therefore unfit to stand trial.

The professional link between her senior adviser and a member of Lord Janner’s family will add to the perception that she has mishandled a hugely sensitive case. The investigations into historical abuse allegations involve teasing out an area of public life swirling with allegations and conspiracy theories. CPS lawyers are working closely with the police on dozens of historical cases, but there are concerns that the DPP has lost the confidence of victims, detectives and policymakers.

Simon Danczuk, the Labour candidate in Rochdale who campaigns for abuse victims, said that Mrs Saunders “is now seen as a roadblock to justice and it’s hard to see how her position remains tenable”.

_The Times _disclosed last week that Mrs Saunders had overruled one of the country’s leading experts in child abuse cases by deciding not to charge Lord Janner. A prosecution and a possible “trial of the facts” in the defendant’s absence were recommended by Eleanor Laws, QC, who had been instructed by the CPS to work with Leicestershire police on the case.

Miss Laws felt Lord Janner could be charged with 22 offences against nine alleged victims between the 1960s and 1980s at children’s care homes in Leicestershire. Mrs Saunders agreed there was sufficient evidence to charge the peer but ruled with “deep regret” that his dementia was too severe for a trial to take place.

A CPS spokesman said: “It is the DPP’s job to make these extremely difficult decisions, and that is what the DPP has done. As the ultimate decision-maker, the DPP receives advice from internal and external lawyers but the decision is based, ultimately, on her own assessment of the relevant law and circumstances of the case.”

The spokesman said Mr Moore had acted properly at all times and there should be no questions over his integrity. Mrs May was made aware of concerns about the DPP’s decision at the beginning of last week when Sir Clive Loader, the Leicestershire police and crime commissioner, wrote asking her to intervene. The Home Office said the letter was “private correspondence”. It is understood that Mrs May has passed it to the attorney-general.

A number of the alleged victims in the Janner case are considering lodging civil claims against the peer and local authorities in Leicestershire who were responsible for the children’s homes. Some are also planning to exercise their right to appeal against the DPP’s decision. Although there was sufficient evidence to bring charges in relation to nine people, police say they identified 25 possible victims.

Lord Janner’s family said he was “a man of great integrity” who was “entirely innocent of any wrongdoing”.

_The Sunday Times_ reported that a signed letter from Lord Janner, who is on leave of absence from the Lords, was received by parliamentary clerks on April 9.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 20, 2015)

bemused said:


> Janner was diagnosed in 2009 and only stopped voting in November 2013. I never took any of the suggestions of high level cover ups seriously, I just don't think politicos are any good at keeping secrets. However, the more I read about this case the more it stinks of it. He's had multiple investigations over the years, the Director of the CPS seems to have overruled her own experts advice and see announce not proceeding during a General Election when it's going to get buried.
> 
> I don't know if he's guilty or not, or how far his illness has progressed; the fact he doesn't want to give up his Lords seats suggests not that far.


I was just pointing out the obvious contradiction of putting forward medical evidence about incapacity whilst still being in a position to vote on national legislation (and theoretically be the 1 lord that swung a tight vote). In practice he's unlikely to be seen in the lords, but it does show his fucking brass necked hubris that he could still feel entitled to cling onto his 'Lordship'.  In turn that also highlights the nature of the Lords, an amateur, cosy arrangement where the retired powerful still get a chance to do a 'job' entirely on their own terms.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 20, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Translation into plain English: the story wasn't believed. But that wasn't because various notables rallied around Janner. It was because journalists didn't believe Beck or the defence witness who testified that Janner had abused him.



From my own experience, belief is seldom a primary factor.
A more accurate translation (IME) might be: The lawyers and accountants did a cost/benefit analysis with regard to Janner possibly taking them to court, and worked out that standing up the story could be a lot more expensive than standing it down. A lot of the time it boils down to pure economics, and on a paper that didn't have muscle of the likes of the Scott Trust or Rothermere's billions standing behind it, standing down a story with the potential to bankrupt the paper can *seem* like a rational decision.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 20, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> From my own experience, belief is seldom a primary factor.
> A more accurate translation (IME) might be: The lawyers and accountants did a cost/benefit analysis with regard to Janner possibly taking them to court, and worked out that standing up the story could be a lot more expensive than standing it down. A lot of the time it boils down to pure economics, and on a paper that didn't have muscle of the likes of the Scott Trust or Rothermere's billions standing behind it, standing down a story with the potential to bankrupt the paper can *seem* like a rational decision.


The press were clearly aware of Janner hiring high-powered legal representation from the start (they were intended to be aware) and I'm certain you're correct that the dynamic you describe was a main motive for press caution later on. In 1991 I'm not convinced that was the case.

The Beck case was one of the first of its kind and the focus was entirely on him as that years candidate for 'most evil man in Britain' (he was undoubtedly a reasonable candidate for the 'honour'), and more widely on care home staff. It remained on him through the ongoing consequences of the investigation into his activities, the subsequent reports, the scandals over compensation etc.

My belief that his testimony about Janner was not taken as credible  - that it was 'a good story' but not a true one - derives from the positive tone of the press coverage after Janner's commons statements. They range from a piece by Craig Seton in the Times ‘The ‘Janner diversion’ that failed to save Beck from justice’ which clearly takes his side to a more distanced but positive profile of Janner by Ian Katz in the Guardian which focuses on the irony of an MP with a 'healthy appetite for the oxygen of publicity' being 'silenced' by contempt of court laws. (All December 4th 1991). Jenner still clearly had a lot of credit as a well-connected campaigning MP. Probably didn't hurt that he had also been an NUJ member and that apparently one of his many causes had (perhaps ironically enough) been journalistic freedom.

What is also notable is the sympathy for Janner's 'plight' in the coverage of the rejected proposal to amend contempt of court laws - proposals which the press would not have been in favour of. 

Journalists love to claim that they "knew [insert surprising revelation from past] all along" and that if it wasn't for those pesky [insert name of laws] they could have told us. Sometimes it's true. Personally I don't buy it in this case. But of course that's just my opinion.

There is a somewhat more persuasive account (imo) of the journalistic 'groupthink' at the time by Dani Garavelli in todays Scotsman. She had been a junior reporter at the Leicester Mercury at the time of the Beck case.



> As part of his defence, Beck claimed he had acted to protect a 13-year-old from Janner, who had groomed and abused the boy over two years. The evidence against Janner amounted to allegations made by Beck and the boy, a witness who overheard Beck telling the boy to stop seeing the MP, and affectionate, but not sexually explicit, letters written by Janner to the boy.





> The development opened up many dilemmas for a regional newspaper. On the one hand, the claims were explosive. On the other, Janner was a highly respected figure. Not only was he an MP, but he had co-founded the Holocaust Education Trust. In journalistic terms, he was an important contact. And, he hadn’t been charged with anything. Ultimately the Mercury, like everyone else, had no choice but to play it straight, reporting only what was said in court.





> In the end, the Beck jury was told the Janner allegations were a “red herring” and he was exonerated. The narrative was he had been the victim of a smear campaign by Beck, and other Leicestershire MPs, including Keith Vaz, rallied to his defence. At the time, this made sense. Beck’s guilt was never in doubt and Janner had not been charged. Countless cover-ups later, it seems naive. As indeed it was. It has now emerged the original allegations were never properly investigated. Derbyshire Chief Constable Mike Creeden, then a DS with the Leicestershire force, says orders came from on high that Janner should not be arrested nor his home searched.



At the time it "made sense". Well doesn't it always.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 20, 2015)

double post


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 20, 2015)

gosub said:


> Thats a good piece of journalism, surprised it hasn't been picked up on by the other papers, but then CPS woman did just arrange trials for a shed loads of journos, so scores to settle presumably take priority.



Who writes The Needle?


----------



## gosub (Apr 20, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Who writes The Needle?


don't know, was referring to the Sunday Times piece that he/she scanned


----------



## teqniq (Apr 21, 2015)

Further questions raised about whether or not Lord Janner is fit to stand trial



> Lord Janner of Braunstone, the Labour peer ruled too unwell with dementia by the prosecuting authorities to face child abuse charges, could face further police inquiries after the House of Lords confirmed that he signed an official document just eleven days ago.
> A letter sent to the clerk of the parliaments that has been released to the Guardian shows Janner’s signature appeared on a request for a leave of absence from the House of Lords on 9 April.
> 
> A spokesman for the House of Lords said on Monday that the signature matched previous examples from the peer and there was no reason to believe that it was signed by someone else....









E2a his actual signature has been blanked out to avoid 'identity theft'


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 21, 2015)

In the end, the Beck jury was told the Janner allegations were a “red herring” and he was exonerated. The narrative was he had been the victim of a smear campaign by Beck, and other Leicestershire MPs, including Keith Vaz, rallied to his defence. At the time, this made sense. Beck’s guilt was never in doubt and Janner had not been charged. Countless cover-ups later, it seems naive. As indeed it was. It has now emerged the original allegations were never properly investigated. Derbyshire Chief Constable Mike Creeden, then a DS with the Leicestershire force, says orders came from on high that Janner should not be arrested nor his home searched

The above is from Dani Garavalli's article quoted by @Lurdan.The fact that Janner was not arrested when the Beck allegations came to light does not of course mean that he was not questioned by police at that time.


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 21, 2015)

The ever prolific Cathy Fox has gathered together a wealth of Frank Beck and the Leicestershire child abuse case.

https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/child-abuse-in-leicestershire-working-document-frank-beck/


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 22, 2015)

Duncan2 said:


> The above is from Dani Garavalli's article quoted by @Lurdan.The fact that Janner was not arrested when the Beck allegations came to light does not of course mean that he was not questioned by police at that time.


Not clear about the date but my understanding is that he and his solicitor went to Leicester Police station by appointment where he was interviewed. A story last September in the Times (see below) said


> The 1989-91 inquiry was limited to an interview at Leicestershire police headquarters during which Lord Janner gave “no comment” answers.



This was during the investigation into Beck. According to Mick Creedon, then a Detective Sergeant involved in it, the scope of the investigation concerning Janner himself was specifically limited to that one interview. He also stated that there had been concerns about the credibility of the main evidence against Janner, which had been given by a former care home resident, because he was giving it to support Beck. (This was the witness who later testified for the defence during the trial).



Spoiler: Text of Times story



Child sex inquiry into MP ‘blocked by senior police’
Mick Creedon said there were concerns about the credibility of the evidence

*Sean O’Neill* Crime Editor
Last updated at 12:01AM, September 25 2014

An investigation into child abuse allegations against a prominent politician 25 years ago was blocked, one of the country’s most senior police officers has revealed.

Mick Creedon, chief constable of Derbyshire, told _The Times_ that he was a detective sergeant in 1989 when he was ordered to limit his inquiries into Greville Janner, a leading Labour backbench MP. Mr Creedon said there was “credible evidence” against the MP, now Lord Janner of Braunstone, QC, that warranted further investigation, but he was given orders forbidding an arrest or a search of his home or offices.

“The decision was a clear one — he will be interviewed by appointment and there won’t be a search of his home address or his constituency office or his office in the House of Commons,” Mr Creedon said.

The order was “conveyed” by a superintendent but Mr Creedon believes it came from chief officers. He added: “It was a decision made by people more senior than me.”

The allegations against Lord Janner, 86, who was a senior Labour backbencher and president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, surfaced during the police investigation into Frank Beck, the manager of Leicester children’s homes who died in jail after being convicted of abusing boys in his care.

A former resident of one home alleged that he had had a two-year sexual relationship with the MP when he was a teenager in the 1970s. The alleged victim later aired the allegations in public when he gave evidence at Beck’s trial in 1991.

However, Mr Creedon said there were concerns about the credibility of the evidence against Lord Janner, notably that the key witness was in thrall to Beck despite being the victim of abuse.

The alleged victim also gave evidence for Beck. None of the other hundreds of residents interviewed made any allegations against the MP.

The witness had produced affectionate letters that were allegedly from the MP, some on House of Commons notepaper, and provided a detailed description of the inside of the MP’s Hampstead home. Mr Creedon said: “I look at this now, as a chief constable, as a senior investigating officer, in the light of many inquiries before and since — and one of the lines of inquiry could have been to search the house.

“My view has always been that the allegations were very serious, there was enough evidence to put a file before the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service], and as investigating officers our job was to search out as much evidence as possible to prove or disprove the offence. My interpretation of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act would be that under the circumstances it would have been justified to search the house [and] offices.”

He said he did not know who made the decision to limit the investigation.

The 1989-91 inquiry was limited to an interview at Leicestershire police headquarters during which Lord Janner gave “no comment” answers.

A file was sent to the CPS, which decided there was insufficient evidence to bring charges.

When the allegations became public during Beck’s trial in 1991, the jury was told they were a “red herring” and not relevant to the case. Lord Janner later said there was “not a shred of truth” in the allegations against him.

Those allegations are central to a new police investigation into Lord Janner and others, called Operation Enamel, which has led to warrants being obtained to search the peer’s home in north London and his office in the House of Lords.

The peer, who is in poor health, has never been arrested and has not been interviewed by detectives from the new investigation. His lawyers did not respond to requests for comment.



Beck's trial concluded on 29th November 1991. Janner made his first Commons statement on Monday 2nd December. (Hansard Report here). And his second more detailed statement the following day in an adjournment debate about changing the law on contempt of court. (Hansard Report starts here - there are 3 pages of it). Three days later, on Friday 6th, Leicester police stated “On the advice of the Crown Prosecution Service, no further action is to be taken.” (Press Association report dated 7th). The CPS decision had presumably been taken before Beck's trial.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 22, 2015)

No doubt George Carman should not have been discussing the matter but in his article linked to above Rayner claimed that he was discussing the evidence against Janner and that he was very surprised that no charges were brought as a result.


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 23, 2015)

Janner's silk and his own son and now part owner of his flat likes to defend wrongun's.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Stuart-Hall-case-slash-potential-payouts.html

http://www.23es.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Daniel-Janner-QC-Barrister-CV-5.3.2015.pdf


----------



## Wilf (Apr 23, 2015)

So, if I've got the timeline right on Milord Jannerrapecunt:

Rapes kids - forever
Writes book - 2008
Diagnosed with alzheimers - 2009
Dec 2012 - delivers speech in Lords
Dec 2013 - house raided
Oct 2014 - 'on leave'
March 2014 - has mental capacity to pass his mansion to the kids, one of whom is linked to the DPP
April 2015 - Milord will not be charged, due to mental capacity
April 2015 + a few days - It's okay, I'm fine! Can I come back to work?

Well, what I draw from this is alzheimers need not be detrimental to your childraping, political or financial career.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 24, 2015)

Lord Greville Janner child sex abuse file 'lost' by Home Office - Daily Mirror



> Details of the 1986 Janner file are buried in the appendix to the Wanless report, which investigated the missing sex abuse dossiers.


(...)


> The title of the lost Janner file – “Greville Janner MP [redacted] re evidence in child abuse cases” – is thought to have concealed the name of a second person. It was recorded as “not found” and “presumed transferred to MoJ [Ministry of Justice] but not located”.



At first site the 1986 date is interesting - Janner was supposedly first named in January 1991 in a statement to police made by the man who gave evidence at Frank Beck's trial. In February Beck is reported to have made the same allegation to police. On February 7th 1991 at a pre-trial hearing Beck shouted out "”There has been a conspiracy. There is an MP called Greville Janner who has been abusing children … the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) know about it and it is wrong it is not being made public.” [Craig Setons report in the Times Dec 4th 1991] and the allegation became public. 

So 1986 is an interesting date - unfortunately looking at the entry in the Wanless Report (Annex I - 114 File Schedule - the list of missing files) (available here) it becomes evident that this is not a file about Janner but one containing correspondence either written or forwarded by him. The redaction policy (described in a schedule) is to remove names of individuals and there is a redacted name in this entry. However the names of MPs who had written or forwarded the correspondence contained in many of the files are listed first in the title and are unredacted. Not for the first time The Mirror is trying rather desperately to find an exclusive angle.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 24, 2015)

Apparently the expert in 'mental health' who gave evidence at Barry George's trial for the killing of Jill Dando is the same one declared Janner unfit to stand trial.

The conspiracy theorists will love that one!


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 24, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Apparently the expert in 'mental health' who gave evidence at Barry George's trial for the killing of Jill Dando is the same one declared Janner unfit to stand trial.
> 
> The conspiracy theorists will love that one!




ah, a freddy patel with a psychiatry qual


----------



## laptop (Apr 24, 2015)

Wilf said:


> So, if I've got the timeline right on Milord Jannerrapecunt:
> ...
> April 2015 + a few days - It's okay, I'm fine! Can I come back to work?



Strictly: "Can I go on pulling  a sickie?" - see above.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 24, 2015)

laptop said:


> Strictly: "Can I go on pulling  a sickie?" - see above.


Yeah, I got that really. It's just nice (if that's the right word) to explore the dishonesty in his position.  If he has such a long term debilitating condition, so bad that it stopped a prosecution, he should  be leaving parliament.  If I've got it right, still being a member but not attending doesn't even bring him any financial benefits.  They have to walk through the door, turn on their heels and walk out to get £300 each day - something he now can't do.  It's the 'I'm too ill to stand trial', but unable to give up on his active title that turns the stomach. Well, that and raping kids.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 25, 2015)

Another Janner story in the Daily Mail - this one reprinting two statements given by the witness who testified about Janner at Frank Beck's trial in 1991. (They are reprinted at the bottom of the Mail story - they are also copied at the needleblog albeit in slightly the wrong order).

The rape of justice: Damning new evidence of Labour peer Lord Janner's child sex abuse covered up by police and social workers for over 20 years - Daily Mail

The first thing that strikes me is that this Mail story appears to break new ground in making unambiguous allegations about Janner. I imagine this is one consequence of the CPS judgement that Janner is unfit to stand trial. It makes it a little difficult for him to sue for libel.

The reprinted statements make crystal clear the allegations against Janner in the early 90s.

Note that both statements were made after Frank Beck's trial and conviction (in 1992 and 1993 respectively). It is not made clear in the article who they were made to or why. I rather suspect that there is a reason for that. It's possible that the first statement was made in connection with the Kirkwood Inquiry into abuse in Leicester children’s homes that was set up after the trial. However my belief is that the second statement, which details the initial approach to the witness by the Police, was made in connection with Frank Beck's appeal against conviction. And it is very possible that both were made to Beck's lawyers in that context. (Beck died before his appeal could take place. Interestingly at one point it was announced that Mike Mansfield would be acting for him).

What is said about Janner in the statements speaks for itself. It only emphasises the utter failure at the time to take the allegations against him seriously. One can speculate as to many possible reasons why this was so but one obvious one was that the witnesses testimony denies that Beck - the person who was being investigated and then tried - was an abuser. The CPS would not have regarded this as very helpful, and in light of the other evidence about Beck, clearly they questioned its veracity. A major plank of Beck's defence was that he was being set up as a fall guy to cover up crimes committed by Janner, and this was the most important evidence in support of that. The Prosecution at the trial attacked the allegations made about Janner as a 'red herring' by Beck - which it undoubtedly was - and as untrue - which doesn't follow at all. Beck might have been using them as a 'smokescreen' precisely because he knew them to be true.

I mention this because the Mail article effectively does the reverse of the Prosecution - in the interests of a simplified narrative they play down the role of Beck in order to play up Janner. Indeed they do so in what appears to be an entirely mendacious way



> In the late Eighties, Leicestershire detectives, including Mr Creedon, were tipped-off that a paedophile ring led by Janner and a man called Frank Beck was operating in local children’s homes.
> 
> They duly launched an inquiry, carrying out (among other things) the interviews detailed in the boy’s second witness statement.
> 
> Yet at some point the detectives were, as we know, told to drop inquiries into Janner.





> Exactly who gave this order is unclear, and that may now be a matter for the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
> 
> The investigation did not end, however. Instead, the police went after Beck, a children’s home manager. In 1991, he was put on trial at Leicester Crown Court, where he was given five life sentences, plus a further 24 years, after being found guilty of 17 counts of abuse.



This version of events is contradicted by everything on the public record about the Beck case - indeed it is contradicted by the second witness statement which makes it plain that the witness was approached by an officer who was investigating Beck not "a paedophile ring led by Janner and a man called Frank Beck". Taking these two witness statements together with the contemporaneous reports it's clear that the allegations about Janner emerged during the course of the investigation into Beck. (The statements also do not support the Mail's assertion that Beck and Janner were part of a paedophile ring. The witness testifies that the relationship with Janner began two years before he met Beck, when he was living at a different children's home). 

Beck is indeed dead, and as such is 'last weeks cunt'. But I don't think anyone could read the Kirkwood report and conclude that Beck was just 'small fry' who was prosecuted 'instead' of Janner as the Mail implies. Nor that the CPS were wrong to focus on convicting Beck. But that doesn't excuse the failure to take the allegations against Janner seriously.

The Kirkwood report is online as a pdf here.


----------



## ibilly99 (Apr 25, 2015)

No one is bothering to use the word alleged in the context of the released evidence anymore - but as he is unfit to stand trial he's also unfit to defend himself from libel. The Mail to it's credit has led the charge in this case.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 29, 2015)

Kelvyn Ashby, the former detective who was in charge of the 1991 investigation into the allegations against Janner, has given several interviews including one featured in a Mail story on Sunday, and another in yesterday's Leicester Mercury. Taking these two together gives a fairly clear picture of the investigation. (The Mail story doesn't include some things that are in the Mercury story. By an odd coincidence they contradict elements of the Mail's stories about Janner).

From the Mercury :


> Mr Ashby, who held the rank of detective inspector at the time, said his investigation was provoked by an encounter in a court with Frank Beck, the disgraced Leicestershire children's home boss. Beck, who was later given five life sentences for abusing children in his care, urged Mr Ashby and his colleague Mick Creedon – the current chief constable of Derbyshire – to investigate the MP. Beck named a former children's home resident – a man by then – whom he alleged Greville Janner had sexually abused. The detectives traced the person and interviewed him.



This was the witness who testified about Janner for the defence at Becks trial, and who made two further statements after the trial which the Mail reprinted last Sunday. Ashby describes the efforts to corroborate what the witness told them.

From the Mail:


> 'He gave us an account of Janner's house, how many rooms it had and the layout of the furniture. When we visited, Janner had long since moved but the house was exactly as the alleged victim said it was. I was in no doubt he had been in that house.


The witness had described a journey to Scotland with Janner.


> 'We looked at the Scottish tour and believed him, we established Janner stayed in those hotels but could not prove the boy was with him. But we had the note, his testimony, and the fact a boy had been taken out of care to stay in London with an MP."


(...)


> 'Mick and I believed an arrestable offence had been committed and that once we arrested him we could search his house and see if there was any material that helped corroborate what the alleged victim said."



But they were not allowed to do that.

From the Mercury :


> "But the message came back from above – and I can't say who because I don't know – 'this man is an MP, you can't arrest him, you have to invite him in for interview'. I think that was an honest decision and was not due to any outside influence. We contacted him and invited him to a police station in Leicester to answer allegations of child abuse. We had a long list of questions to ask him. He came with a legal representative and we went through the interview process, which was recorded. Every question we asked he said he was acting on legal advice and wasn't going to answer. At the end of that we prepared a file, which eventually went to the director of public prosecutions. We were later told there wasn't going to be a charge. I don't know why, that wasn't my world.





> "We had an allegation against Greville Janner by this man and some corroborative evidence, including our opinion that the boy had been to his house. If I had been in the Crown Prosecution Service I'm not sure I'd have charged him on the basis of that evidence."


----------



## gosub (Apr 29, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Kelvyn Ashby, the former detective who was in charge of the 1991 investigation into the allegations against Janner, has given several interviews including one featured in a Mail story on Sunday, and another in yesterday's Leicester Mercury. Taking these two together gives a fairly clear picture of the investigation. (The Mail story doesn't include some things that are in the Mercury story. By an odd coincidence they contradict elements of the Mail's stories about Janner).
> 
> From the Mercury :
> 
> ...



what would be nice would be some perverting the course of justice charges against historic obsticles


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 29, 2015)

One of the firms of lawyers acting for victims alleging abuse by Janner has formally requested a review of the decision not to prosecute under the CPS 'Victims Right to Review Scheme'.

Leicester Mercury
BBC


----------



## elbows (Apr 30, 2015)

Bramall questioned: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32538551


----------



## two sheds (May 3, 2015)

Interesting article by Harvey Proctor denying involvement:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...n-westminster-i-dont-believe-it-10221263.html


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2015)

two sheds said:


> Interesting article by Harvey Proctor denying involvement:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...n-westminster-i-dont-believe-it-10221263.html


The vermin won't be happy with Proctor. They've done their best to kill this story for the duration of the campaign...they don't want punters being reminded of noncery at this point.


----------



## Duncan2 (May 3, 2015)

Brave of Proctor to make common cause with Brittain imo.


----------



## Casually Red (May 3, 2015)

it's interesting he states the politicians he names "are but a few" of those like him, wrongly accused . We can draw the conclusion he's talking about all of them pretty much, including smith . Its all a conspiracy by assorted "nutters" according to him .

Which is pretty much what he was insisting for years in the 80s when faced with his previous criminal allegations , until he had no choice but to fess up to them . And he wasn't even charged when that kid that was found under his bed in Tunisia .


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 4, 2015)

two sheds said:


> Interesting article by Harvey Proctor denying involvement:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...n-westminster-i-dont-believe-it-10221263.html


Curious turn of phrase, in the circumstances:



> ...wired a witness for sound...


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 4, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Curious turn of phrase, in the circumstances:


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2015)

Jesus; have just listened to part II of "Dave's story" on "The World at One"...harrowing and, according to the Met, credible.

Well worth a listen.


----------



## J Ed (May 15, 2015)

Tory MP Victor Montagu escaped child sex abuse trial in 1970s


----------



## elbows (May 15, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Tory MP Victor Montagu escaped child sex abuse trial in 1970s



Wow, the stench of deference runs thick through the details of that story.

Ah, the Monday Club again.



> Montagu was a leading figure in the establishment. He was an MP for South Dorset from 1941 to 1962 and became a member of the Monday Club, a rightwing political pressure group in the 1960s. He inherited his father’s seat and became the 10th Earl of Sandwich in 1964, a title he renounced to stand for parliament again as an independent.


----------



## newbie (May 15, 2015)

I'm catching up with this thread so have only just read the Proctor article, which has a new comment, posted only an hour ago that's perhaps worth reading.


----------



## tim (May 15, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Not just a rhetorical question, I really can't remember, but has a single MP, Minister or inner circle adviser faced a court over any kind of noncery in living memory?



Harvey Proctor, far Right Tory MP, was convicted in the late 80's for spanking rent boys.


----------



## Barking_Mad (May 16, 2015)

Two parts to this. This is the first









> "Today you will hear the story of David who says he was abused by powerful businessmen, lawyers, senior military figures and former Conservative politicians, many of whom are now dead.
> 
> Over the next few days - our reporter Becky Milligan will examine David's story. She will explain how difficult it can be to get to the truth of what happened forty years ago."



http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02qmvpm

Part 2: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02qpw96


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2015)

I dont blame anyone for being cynical about operation hydrant earlier in this thread, but I was pleased to see them release some stats the other day, giving some sense of scale.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32812449



> Of the 1,433 suspects identified, 216 are now dead and 261 are classified as people of public prominence, with 135 coming from TV, film or radio.
> 
> Of the remainder:
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2015)

I suppose I may as well provide background on the source of that data, the NPCC, since probably not everyone is yet aware that they are the new version of Acpo.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30277356 (story from December 2014)



> The chief constable of Thames Valley Police has been appointed the chair of the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC), a newly created association representing senior police officers.
> 
> Sara Thornton will head the body which is replacing the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo).
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2015)

Police Scotland provided their own breakdown, not sure if any other forces have yet, not had time to look.



> Police Scotland has 58 separate investigations that meet criteria for Operation Hydrant.
> The earliest recorded date of offending is 1947, whilst the most recent is 2013.
> A total of 110 suspects, of which 80 are named. Twenty-six of the named suspects are deceased.
> 99 persons are suspected of abuse within institutions.
> ...




http://www.scotland.police.uk/whats...eration-hydrant-child-sex-abuse-investigation


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2015)

And Cyril Smith was back in the news, with something related to the angle that I presume is of most intrigue to people here, the security services.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-32824951



> A police force says laws relating to the security services prevent it from divulging information it holds on Cyril Smith.
> 
> It is understood the Liberal MP, who died in 2010, was stopped on the M1 in Northamptonshire during the 1980s.
> 
> ...





> He alleged Smith was stopped on suspicion of a driving offence, but quickly released after he made the phone call.
> 
> Despite being taken into the police station, the material said to have been found in his boot disappeared, Mr Danczuk said.
> 
> ...



Our walls are completely transparent*

*but the spooks brought along a smoke machine, mkay.


----------



## teqniq (May 25, 2015)

Petition on 38 Degrees

REMOVE LORD JANNER FROM PARLIAMENT AND FORCE HIM TO STAND TRIAL


----------



## J Ed (May 26, 2015)

http://news.sky.com/story/1490565/abuse-survivor-cops-stood-guard-as-i-was-raped



> A woman has told Sky News how uniformed police officers stood guard as abusers sexually assaulted her as a young girl.
> 
> Waiving her right to anonymity, Esther Baker, 32, spoke exclusively to Sky News about her tormented childhood that saw her sexually abused by men at various locations.
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (May 26, 2015)

J Ed said:


> http://news.sky.com/story/1490565/abuse-survivor-cops-stood-guard-as-i-was-raped


Doesn't matter how many times you hear these stories of abuse...each one has the power to shock and depress in equal measure. Poor girl/woman.


----------



## J Ed (May 26, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Doesn't matter how many times you hear these stories of abuse...each one has the power to shock and depress in equal measure. Poor girl/woman.



I agree completely, and it seems so incredibly wrong for us to know that this happened and similar must still be happening without society grounding to a shuddering halt of revulsion or something. Yet it doesn't, and the cover up was and is a multi-partisan affair over which all seem to have closed ranks.

Now being reported in the Guardian


----------



## DotCommunist (May 27, 2015)

Kincora came up in my reading yesterday- a man in a prison with Loyalist and 'ordinary' crims- he was a kincora nonce, . One of the Shankhill butchers nearly knifed the bloke but was talked out of it.

I can't believe they're going to get away with covering this up again. Lord fucking Janner. Cyril Smith found in my county with child porn and let off. Leon Brittan buried in a secret location.


----------



## brogdale (May 31, 2015)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5571/three-women-name-former-liberal-democrat-mp-as-paedophile






Also posted in LD shit thread.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jun 1, 2015)

.....odd snippet from The Pencourt File (1978) - Roger Penrose & Barry Courtiour - early book on "The Wilson Plot" & other shenanigans...

...a strange era - wherein S African secret police BOSS loom large as an actor in UK political dirty tricks ( Peter Hain frame-up etc ) and also ofcourse would overlap with the Monday Club....


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 1, 2015)

Later - suggests BOSS mugging all sorts of people:


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 1, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> .....odd snippet from The Pencourt File (1978) - Roger Penrose & Barry Courtiour - early book on "The Wilson Plot" & other shenanigans...
> 
> ...a strange era - wherein S African secret police BOSS loom large as an actor in UK political dirty tricks ( Peter Hain frame-up etc ) and also ofcourse would overlap with the Monday Club....


Let's not forget The Freedom Association either. They were behind the so-called 'rebel' tour of South Africa in the early 80s. TFA has close ties to the security services.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 2, 2015)

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...se-to-be-included-in-uk-inquiry-31269605.html



> The British security service MI5 shielded and blackmailed child sex abusers involved in a paedophile ring at a notorious Belfast care home, the High Court heard on Monday.
> 
> Counsel for one victim claimed new evidence of the extent of state collusion and cover-up in the Kincora scandal must now be examined by a wider Westminster inquiry.
> 
> ...


----------



## J Ed (Jun 2, 2015)

These are the people who have to have access to all our communications in order to _stop _paedophiles, right? Tbh as far as that aspect goes it looks like they just want the process of recruiting touts without the legwork.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 2, 2015)

J Ed said:


> http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...se-to-be-included-in-uk-inquiry-31269605.html



C4's useful report on the judicial review to get Kincora included in Goddard's inquiry...

http://bcove.me/ep6a4msr


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2015)

Link of (some) stories published by Scallywag magazine

http://www.scribd.com/doc/260882775/The-Child-Sexual-Abuse-Investigations


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 16, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Link of (some) stories published by Scallywag magazine
> 
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/260882775/The-Child-Sexual-Abuse-Investigations


I've been reacquainting myself with some of those articles. I still find it interesting that McAlpine never threatened to sue Scallywag.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 16, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> I've been reacquainting myself with some of those articles. I still find it interesting that McAlpine never threatened to sue Scallywag.


Perhaps it was because the _omerta_ surrounding child sexual abuse was such that there was little benefit in creating publicity by suing about an article which no-one was going to take all that seriously at the time, and far less likely to act on. Which is, in fact, exactly what happened


----------



## happie chappie (Jun 16, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> I've been reacquainting myself with some of those articles. I still find it interesting that McAlpine never threatened to sue Scallywag.



They'd be little point in suing a small circulation magazine with no money.

It'd have only drawn more attention to the allegations, particularly if the hearing took place in open court where the proceedings could be reported by the media.

Perhaps could have sought an injunction and applied to have all remaining copies pulped as, IIRC John Major did re the Claire Latimer allegations?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 21, 2015)

With routine apologies for the source, Milord Janner attended Parliament on 'official business', up to 2 months after being determined too ill to be interviewed.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-questions-child-abuse-allegations.html


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2015)

Danczuk doing a bit of grandstanding on Janner:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/22/labour-lord-janner-danczuk-miliband
He has also, of course, waited till after the election to say anything. It does remind you though that Janner hasn't yet been expelled by Labour, just suspended.    And it's not as if they are worried about due process or him to taking them to court.  A minor detail in the bigger picture, but a reminder the parties still can't give voice genuine outrage over abuse in their ranks.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 23, 2015)

When are they going to name some [living] Tories?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 23, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> When are they going to name some [living] Tories?


Post mortem, I imagine.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 23, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> When are they going to name some [living] Tories?


the one they did passed on quickly and was buried in a secret location. Nothing screams innocence more than that eh. Like having your coffin given a huge concrete jacket. Nothing to see here guv.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the one they did passed on quickly and was buried in a secret location. Nothing screams innocence more than that eh. Like having your coffin given a huge concrete jacket. Nothing to see here guv.


Must be a niche opportunity there, funeral directors teaming up with construction companies to provide the ultimate service for ex-cabinet ministers.

"Would Milord like a lightly protected tomb, 12 feet down in the public cemetery, or the full lead lined package in Area 51?"


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> When are they going to name some [living] Tories?


In the scales of these things, Danczuk's done a positive job, most notably on the Cyril Smith stuff. However he somehow manages to maintain a high profile as an abuse crusader without taking too many personal risks. He will have had a lot of detail sent to him, but he never quite pushes the button in terms of naming the living.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 23, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Post mortem, I imagine.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> In the scales of these things, Danczuk's done a positive job, most notably on the Cyril Smith stuff. However he somehow manages to maintain a high profile as an abuse crusader without taking too many personal risks. He will have had a lot of detail sent to him, but he never quite pushes the button in terms of naming the living.


Yes, odd that. Sometimes I think he's more interested in promoting himself and his wife than owt else.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 23, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the one they did passed on quickly and was buried in a secret location. Nothing screams innocence more than that eh. Like having your coffin given a huge concrete jacket. Nothing to see here guv.


Yes, how convenient.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jun 23, 2015)

*Labour peer Lord Janner 'violated, raped and tortured' children in PARLIAMENT, claims Simon Danczuk in bombshell debate*

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...NT-claims-Simon-Danczuk-bombshell-debate.html

Labour MP makes string of allegations against the peer Lord Janner
He said police wanted to bring 22 historic abuse charges against him
But prosecutors announced in April that he was too ill to stand trial
Mr Danczuk warned Ed Miliband about allegations in October 2014

By TOM MCTAGUE, DEPUTY POLITICAL EDITOR FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 16:50, 23 June 2015 | UPDATED: 17:30, 23 June 2015

.....must be the first time we've seen someone openly turn fire onto their own party...it was pretty obvious Tom Watson was pointing the finger at Tories, likewise Danczuk with the Cyril Smith case...


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 25, 2015)

Wrexham - presumably more to come through Griffiths running two childrens homes.

(I expect the pro wrestler angle will have the usual minds running overtime)


----------



## existentialist (Jun 25, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Wrexham - presumably more to come through Griffiths running two childrens homes.
> 
> (I expect the pro wrestler angle will have the usual minds running overtime)


3 convicted out of the 7, awaiting verdicts on the other 4.

I wonder where on the bell curve we are right now...?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 25, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Wrexham - presumably more to come through Griffiths running two childrens homes.
> 
> (I expect the pro wrestler angle will have the usual minds running overtime)


Curious that this report finds space to mention the former occupations of some defendants, but not of ex-Met copper and more recently civil servant of unknown hue Edward Huxley (a resident of Britain's "second richest village", apparently)


----------



## Wilf (Jun 25, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> *Labour peer Lord Janner 'violated, raped and tortured' children in PARLIAMENT, claims Simon Danczuk in bombshell debate*
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...NT-claims-Simon-Danczuk-bombshell-debate.html
> 
> ...


I think so, yes, in terms of fair play to Danczuk.  My only point is I wish he'd stop dealing with this as an MP, just about sticking within parliamentary conventions, only providing details after the police have done their bit etc.  Various police forces and victims are in ongoing contact with him. With a slightly different mindset he could have gone a bit further and pushed the envelope a bit more, whilst still taking a 'responsible' line.


----------



## elbows (Jun 25, 2015)

Wilf said:


> He will have had a lot of detail sent to him, but he never quite pushes the button in terms of naming the living.



Pushing that button is a trap that can be used to do way more harm than good. I dont think its entirely out of self-interest that he doesnt leap over that line, although thats certainly a consideration too.

I'm frustrated in many ways, and I want something to happen that vastly ramps up the pressure to prosecute someone. I cant think of that many things that fit the bill, not even if I were someone with privileged access to info and detail. So rather reluctantly I have to wait, and if I were in the position to press that button, I wouldnt do it now, it would be after it had become clear there werent going to be any prosecutions. I'm less optimistic than I was in the past about the chances of prosecution, but that phase hasnt totally slipped away yet so the waiting game continues.

Attacking the decision not to prosecute Janner makes a lot of sense and I'm really disappointed that the fallout from that DPP decision hasnt involved intense scrutiny as to why at least a trial of the facts wasnt considered a suitable option.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jun 26, 2015)

Paedo Files: a look at the UK Establishment child abuse network by Tim Wilkinson, from Lobster Magazine


----------



## adidaswoody (Jun 26, 2015)

There's a black bmw driving around our area that is trying to get kids in the boot, they've been stopped in the act on a few occasions, just letting people know if there from around the Dudley area..!


----------



## Diamond (Jun 26, 2015)

Dillinger4 said:


> Paedo Files: a look at the UK Establishment child abuse network by Tim Wilkinson, from Lobster Magazine



The author doesn't understand what a leading question is, evidently.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 27, 2015)

Mail and Guardian both reporting that the independent review of the CPS decision not to prosecute Janner has concluded there should be a hearing of the allegations. The review is expected to be published next week and while not binding is likely to be accepted according to the Guardian.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Must be a niche opportunity there, funeral directors teaming up with construction companies to provide the ultimate service for ex-cabinet ministers.


Sounds like a job for Sir Robert McAlpine.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 27, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The author doesn't understand what a leading question is, evidently.



Neither does your mum.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 27, 2015)

SpineyNorman said:


> Neither does your mum.



Not true, as my acquaintance in the Vice Squad found out.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 27, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not true, as my acquaintance in the Vice Squad found out.


Tell me more.


----------



## Casually Red (Jun 27, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> .....odd snippet from The Pencourt File (1978) - Roger Penrose & Barry Courtiour - early book on "The Wilson Plot" & other shenanigans...
> 
> ...a strange era - wherein S African secret police BOSS loom large as an actor in UK political dirty tricks ( Peter Hain frame-up etc ) and also ofcourse would overlap with the Monday Club....



They also did a fair bit of business with loyalists. Who in turn are heavily enmeshed in that kincora business . There was a plot to bump off Red Ken at one point in the 80s , and iirc the cops who were meant to go over and do it were tied up with people entangled with the south Africans . The loyalists also shot and Injured a south African lecturer at Queens university , on the orders of BOSS


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 27, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Tell me more.



Ma Diamond crossed my palm with silver, and my lips are sealed.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 27, 2015)

Exaro exploring the freemasonry link between Janner & senior filth in the cover-up.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jun 27, 2015)

Galloway interviewed Mark Watts of Exaro on the second half of his show today ( Ep.78)...

...generally pretty uninteresting...mentioned Cameron's _*extreme*_ reluctance to countenance an over-arching inquiry.....as if we didn't know...

http://rt.com/shows/sputnik/269905-us-war-weapons-congress/




brogdale said:


> Exaro exploring the freemasonry link between Janner & senior filth in the cover-up.



...talking of which...this one isn't showing as posted yet :

*Paedophile Mason ran lodge set up for GCHQ*

ONE OF Britain’s most influential paedophiles was the head of a Masonic lodge founded and frequented by GCHQ spies.

By JAMES FIELDING
PUBLISHED: 19:10, Sat, May 23, 2015 | UPDATED: 19:35, Sat, May 23, 2015

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/579523/Paedophile-Mason-lodge-GCHQ


Keith Harding, former membership secretary of the Paedophile Information Exchange (Pie) was made Worshipful Master of the Mercurius Lodge in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, in 2011. 

The child molester, who died last summer, presided over ceremonies and rituals from an ornate throne.

Harding was convicted of an indecent assault against four children aged eight and nine in 1958 and classified a Schedule-1 offender, which meant the offence remained on his criminal record all his life.

His name was also on a list of about 400 Pie members seized by police in 1984, the year the organisation disbanded.

The Sunday Express revealed earlier this month how Harding met MPs Cyril Smith and Leon Brittan in the 1980s when he ran a north London antiques store.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 28, 2015)

About fucking time

Lord Janner to face trial after DPP ruling overturned


----------



## Ming (Jun 28, 2015)

teqniq said:


> About fucking time
> 
> Lord Janner to face trial after DPP ruling overturned


He'll have to ramp up the 'Saunders' defence a bit though.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 28, 2015)

Ming said:


> He'll have to ramp up the 'Saunders' defence a bit though.



A couple of substantial "consultancy" fees to Alzheimers' specialists should secure him the same sort of consideration as the blessed St. Ernest.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 28, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> A couple of substantial "consultancy" fees to Alzheimers' specialists should secure him the same sort of consideration as the blessed St. Ernest.


It would be interesting to know if he's well enough to have had discussions with solicitors since his diagnosis.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jun 28, 2015)

Hard to imagine how they can have this particular trial of facts without opening the mother of all cans of worms as the Rt Hon Member for Bassetlaw suggests in the Guardian's piece.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 28, 2015)

Wonder if he's been well enough to put his assets in his wife's name?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2015)

From what I can tell, the main reason for a trial of facts is where a defendant is deemed to be unfit to plead.

Given a combination of Janner's age, possible infirmity, and the likelihood that there might well be people in The Establishment (perhaps friends of the sort of person who decides someone is unable to plead while he continues to take an active role in the House of Lords) who'd rather nothing happened...given all that, would the trial of facts still proceed if Janner were to find himself being recommended to his Maker?

Because, as I understand it, with ordinary trials, the death of the defendant is the end of the process.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 29, 2015)




----------



## Lurdan (Jun 29, 2015)

The CPS public statement on Janner :
Greville Janner to be prosecuted for child sexual offences



> The review concluded that it was in the public interest to bring proceedings before the court.
> 
> In reaching that conclusion, the review agreed that although there is sufficient evidence to prosecute, it is right to assume that Greville Janner will inevitably be found unfit to plead and therefore not fit to instruct his legal team and not fit to challenge or give evidence in a trial. Therefore the most likely outcome of a "trial of the facts" would be an absolute discharge, which is neither punishment nor conviction.


(...)


> The case is first listed at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 7 August 2015.


(...)


> The CPS has also received a draft of Sir Richard Henriques' report which the DPP commissioned on the handling and decision making in relation to previous allegations made against Greville Janner in 1991, 2002 and 2007. It is now being finalised, but it is clear that it will confirm the DPP's view that the CPS decisions in 1991 and 2007 were wrong as well as concluding that the handling of the case previously by both police and prosecutors was unsatisfactory.



Likely to be a good deal of legal commentary being offered about this. From one such piece by Joshua Rozenberg in the Guardian 


> It will be interesting to see whether the courts allow the case to proceed as far as a trial of the facts. Janner’s lawyers are likely to argue that this would be an abuse of process. And the courts may stop the case if it concludes that the former MP is unfit to plead. Whatever happens, it is highly unlikely that Janner will ever be seen in court – not even at the hearing currently listed for 7 August.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 29, 2015)

Yes - brief summary of how this stands from the BBC's Legal Correspondent:

A judge will now decide if Lord Janner is fit to take part in trial.  If he is, he will. If not he will face a 'trial of the facts'. Under this process there is no finding of guilt and no conviction. Only outcomes are hospital or supervision order or absolute discharge


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 29, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Yes - brief summary of how this stands from the BBC's Legal Correspondent:
> 
> A judge will now decide if Lord Janner is fit to take part in trial.  If he is, he will. If not he will face a 'trial of the facts'. Under this process there is no finding of guilt and no conviction. Only outcomes are hospital or supervision order or absolute discharge


Actually I think that is from the news story rather than the short piece by the legal affairs correspondent


> Analysis By Clive Coleman, legal affairs correspondent
> 
> There are only three possible outcomes from a trial of the facts. They are a hospital order, a supervision order or an absolute discharge. The jury can only make a finding that the defendant did the particular physical act. There cannot be a verdict of guilty.
> 
> ...





> A trial of the facts would most likely be strenuously opposed by Lord Janner's legal team, who would argue it was an abuse of the court process to subject him to any sort of trial where there had been so much adverse pre-trial publicity.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 29, 2015)

That was two twitter posts by him ran together - thought they summed it up quite nicely for those who may think from the headlines that we just proceed to normal criminal trial. I certainly did before reading further.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 29, 2015)

Not very impressed with a lot of the media reporting of this, given that the possibility of a trial of the facts has been discussed for some time. The assumption that the victims will, rather than may, get an opportunity to give evidence is rather foolish given that there will undoubtedly be a legal challenge to that happening.

Interesting article here about the technical aspects of fitness to plead hearings and of what a trial of the facts entails. 



> It is no longer for a jury to decide whether the defendant is fit to enter a plea; that determination is solely for the judge (...)



I've seen the opposite being suggested this morning, presumably as a result of confusing the issue of whether a defendant is fit to plead with whether a defendant was insane at the time an offense was committed.



> *Funding*
> 
> From the point at which a defendant is declared unfit, legal aid funding is withdrawn. This is important to know, and is sometimes overlooked by the parties and indeed the court, with the result that a defence team may continue to work without the prospect of being paid.





> In place of a legal aid funded defence, an advocate is appointed by the court and paid out of central funds. The court must consider who is the best person to put the case for the defence. This person might be the person who had up until the fitness hearing been representing the defendant; but it is not necessarily so, and the court must make this consideration afresh.


So the State picks up the full costs of a trial of the facts. No doubt it would be deeply cynical to suggest this played any part in the original CPS decision.

*



			Role of the Court Appointed Advocate
		
Click to expand...

*


> In a trial of fact, the role of a court appointed advocate is different from that of defence counsel. The advocate does not act on behalf of the defendant and may not put forward a positive defence. The extent of the brief is to test the evidence only in such a way as appears available on the papers: _R v Antoine_ [2001] 1 AC 340 HL. If there is no evidence to support a specific defence, this may mean that the advocate is required to professionally forget any instructions as to that defence which were given by the defendant in his previous role as defence counsel.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 29, 2015)

It may well be that his legal team manage to stop the process going ahead. However, if it does go ahead and he is found to have 'undertaken the acts', I wonder how much that provides ammunition for the victims seeking damages?  Even if he isn't fit to plead or instruct counsel now, the abuse would have taken place at a point when he was compos mentis.


----------



## elbows (Jun 29, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Not very impressed with a lot of the media reporting of this, given that the possibility of a trial of the facts has been discussed for some time.



I'm not catching your drift. DPP Saunders didnt want a trial of facts, as demonstrated not just by her decision but by her words on Newsnight in April. Her decision is now overturned, and thats newsworthy and quite different to what looked like happening until this news started to leak at the end of last week.



> She added: "Dementia itself isn't a bar to either a trial or a trial of the facts, but you have to look at... the need to have a trial of facts for the public protection."
> 
> In Lord Janner's case, Ms Saunders said she decided there was "no ongoing risk to the public" - based on the opinions of four medical experts.


(from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32435396 )

So she was basically saying that there would only be the need for a trial of facts if he still posed a risk of offending.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 29, 2015)

elbows said:


> I'm not catching your drift. DPP Saunders didnt want a trial of facts, as demonstrated not just by her decision but by her words on Newsnight in April. Her decision is now overturned, and thats newsworthy and quite different to what looked like happening until this news started to leak at the end of last week.
> 
> 
> (from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32435396 )
> ...


It astonishes me that the pinnacle of the legal establishment STILL doesn't seem capable of recognising the needs of the (alleged) victims in these situations. 

It's surely nothing to do with whether he is capable of buggering children today, but whether or not he has already done so?


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 29, 2015)

elbows said:


> I'm not catching your drift. DPP Saunders didnt want a trial of facts, as demonstrated not just by her decision but by her words on Newsnight in April. Her decision is now overturned, and thats newsworthy and quite different to what looked like happening until this news started to leak at the end of last week.
> 
> 
> (from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32435396 )
> ...


Don't disagree with that at all - my dissatisfaction was with the assumption that there will be a trial of the facts. There may be one but that is a decision for the Court not the CPS and legal arguments will be made against it taking place.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 29, 2015)

I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but if you wanted to construct a process where a member of the establishment was finally subjected to a kind of process, but in a way that never put them at risk of prison and meant they would never spill the beans about other high profile offenders, it would be this.


----------



## elbows (Jun 29, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Don't disagree with that at all - my dissatisfaction was with the assumption that there will be a trial of the facts. There may be one but that is a decision for the Court not the CPS and legal arguments will be made against it taking place.



Ah right. Personally I kind of like that assumption being splashed around the news, because it creates additional pressure to ensure it actually happens.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 29, 2015)

Well, there WILL be a trial of facts - unless there is a successful challenge from his lawyers. The process has begun.


----------



## elbows (Jun 29, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but if you wanted to construct a process where a member of the establishment was finally subjected to a kind of process, but in a way that never put them at risk of prison and meant they would never spill the beans about other high profile offenders, it would be this.



I think the 'spill the beans' stuff is seriously over-rated in some sections of the public imagination (for lack of a better term).

I wouldnt say its never a factor, but there are a lot of stories of abuse where this isnt much of a factor. Plus ranks are closed for all sorts of other reasons.

Just look at all the stuff people imagined might be the case with Max Clifford & information. Didnt save his neck.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 29, 2015)

elbows said:


> I think the 'spill the beans' stuff is seriously over-rated in some sections of the public imagination (for lack of a better term).
> 
> I wouldnt say its never a factor, but there are a lot of stories of abuse where this isnt much of a factor. Plus ranks are closed for all sorts of other reasons.
> 
> Just look at all the stuff people imagined might be the case with Max Clifford & information. Didnt save his neck.


Yeah, I don't see it conspiracy terms, but this is an interesting case for the police to appeal the original decision and pick up on public anger.  Whilst there's the Frank Beck link it's a relatively safe case to put in front of this limited form of trial.  We don't know what victims will say if they ever end up in court, but the whole process is likely to focus on Janner alone I'd have thought.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 29, 2015)

elbows said:


> Ah right. Personally I kind of like that assumption being splashed around the news, because it creates additional pressure to ensure it actually happens.


Take the point but the existence of public pressure, based on what will be argued has been prejudicial coverage, will also presumably form part of defence arguments that a trial of the facts would be unfair 

I imagine the less cautious Daily Mail articles will be cited in that context.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jun 29, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Well, there WILL be a trial of facts - unless there is a successful challenge from his lawyers. The process has begun.


The judge could decide off his own bat that a trial of the facts is unnecessary. He is not obliged to order such a hearing after finding that the defendant is unfit to stand trial.

I hope the victims' solicitors are controlling their expectations. There is still a strong possibility that they will not have the opportunity to give evidence. 



Wilf said:


> Yeah, I don't see it conspiracy terms, but this is an interesting case for the police to appeal the original decision and pick up on public anger.


The huge amount of noise generated by the police, Exaro et al has actually made no difference. The victims had a right to this review from the outset and exercised it.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 29, 2015)

Nice input from people who seem to be far more clued up on the legal stuff, stuff that I was hitherto unacquainted with. Thanks.


----------



## Quartz (Jun 29, 2015)

elbows said:


> Just look at all the stuff people imagined might be the case with Max Clifford & information. Didnt save his neck.



He got a prison sentence, but isn't he serving it at a pretty cushy prison?


----------



## Quartz (Jun 30, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Wonder if he's been well enough to put his assets in his wife's name?



As someone with dementia, he'll likely come under the Office of the Public Guardian and his appointed guardians are expressly forbidden from benefiting. At least that was the case when I was a guardian for my late aunt.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 30, 2015)

I think I read someplace that he's legally passed the management of his affairs to to his children.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 17, 2015)

What's this then?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 17, 2015)

brogdale said:


> What's this then?




I've seen that punted about on the facebooks and wondered the same thing.

This link may be FB only, perhaps 60 mins have a version up on their own page but I have to head out for a while.


----------



## elbows (Jul 18, 2015)

I haven't done any proper digging yet or even the most basic fact checking. But I'm afraid despite my respect for the investigative side of Exaro, I wouldn't rule out hyperbole at this stage.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 18, 2015)

It's hard to glean much from the trailer.

For those that can't see, one of the main things (seems new, at least to me) is the account of a chauffeur for the Australian embassy. There's also a plod on camera talking about being instructed from high up to drop investigation (we already know of this sort of thing, but I dont know the specifics laid out in this doc. Could be new, or more detail on old, or neither)

We also get Zac Goldsmith saying the genie is out of the bottle. Yeah, it was out of the fucking bottle when Tom Watson made his speech the better part of 3 years ago, but they've done a damn good job of keeping it as close to screwed back on as possible. The child-fuck facilitating cunts.


----------



## unrepentant85 (Jul 18, 2015)

What is the legal aspect? Can Australian media name and shame without fear of being done for libel?


----------



## Wilf (Jul 18, 2015)

From the tone of it and the lack of a single focus I'd guess a lot of background and very few (living) names named.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 19, 2015)

Wilf said:


> From the tone of it and the lack of a single focus I'd guess a lot of background and very few (living) names named.



That would be my guesstimate as well, but it may well raise a bunch of new questions and give the issue a badly needed reboot. Operation Long-grass has been way too successful of late.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 19, 2015)

It's airing at 11.30am GMT in 10 mins. Going off Twitter the stream has been blocked though, & names have apparently been named, whether still alive who knows?


----------



## J Ed (Jul 19, 2015)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11749287/Senior-Labour-MP-accused-of-child-sex-abuse.html



> A senior Labour MP has been reported to police by Parliamentary colleagues over allegations he sexually abused boys, it has been claimed.
> Two MPs reportedly passed on their concerns to police after hearing accusations against the unnamed MP stretching back at least a decade.
> The accusations are latest in a string of claims that senior Westminster figures have been involved in child sex abuse, but are believed to be the first time a sitting MP has been implicated.
> 
> ...



I wonder who it is...


----------



## Favelado (Jul 19, 2015)

Yes me too. PM me all your ideas.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jul 19, 2015)

There's a torrent about of the Au 60 Minutes prog.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 19, 2015)

He must be well high up . There's an allegation here he even assaulted the cops when they caught him at it red handed .

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ian-police-sex-attacks-corruption-claims.html


----------



## J Ed (Jul 19, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> He must be well high up . There's an allegation here he even assaulted the cops when they caught him at it red handed .
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ian-police-sex-attacks-corruption-claims.html



Read some comments that he was a member of cabinet, no idea if that is based on anything concrete though


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 19, 2015)

If these allegations are true he must have considered himself bulletproof . Immune . Which he was...if the allegations are true . Which leads us to a bigger picture .


----------



## Rob Ray (Jul 19, 2015)

ITT: People who have all done a quick Google, come up with a very senior name and are now trying to hint at it without getting in legal trouble.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 19, 2015)

If I read that Mail thing right it is a current Lab Mp who was already an MP in the late 80s - and assuming late 80s means by the 87 election - this takes you close:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)#Current_elected_MPs

(go to the list of current Lab Mps, which can be filtered by date of first election.  I'm on a very crappy laptop which keeps crashing, but it looked like 19 names fit the bill as described above)


----------



## J Ed (Jul 19, 2015)

Wilf said:


> If I read that Mail thing right it is a current Lab Mp who was already an MP in the late 80s - and assuming late 80s means by the 87 election - this takes you close:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)#Current_elected_MPs
> 
> (go to the list of current Lab Mps, which can be filtered by date of first election.  I'm on a very crappy laptop which keeps crashing, but it looked like 19 names fit the bill as described above)



Then if you limit it to ones who were in cabinet...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 19, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Then if you limit it to ones who were in cabinet...


Yes, shortlist becomes... short. Certainly someone who had the influence to make it all go away, at a time when Labour were not in power. Whether that was just the prevailing attitudes about defending the establishment full stop or if it was a measure of the MP being personally powerful/ex cabinet, we'll have to see.  The name is certainly going to get out - and Labour will have to respond by suspending him, having not done that with Janner.

edit: what i meant to say is that _*if *_there is a confirmed police investigation Labour will have to suspend him.  And even if the investigation opens a whole can of worms about previous inaction by the party on this individual, it would be strategically good for Lab to take a hard line.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 19, 2015)

If true then not a big surprise to me at all considering past behaviour.


----------



## laptop (Jul 19, 2015)

unrepentant85 said:


> Can Australian media name and shame without fear of being done for libel?



No.

They would have to have an argument about whether the alleged libel was significantly distributed in the UK. The law on this is unsettled - read very, very expensive.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 19, 2015)

Assuming 'ex cabinet' (by the late 80s) takes you to a _very _short list. So specific that I'd guess the mail and telegraph are not saying that for fear of being accused of naming the mp.  Anyway, I suspect the name will end up in the public domain soon enough.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 19, 2015)

http://www.9jumpin.com.au/show/60minutes/videos/4361923189001/

Just up. Don't know what the content is. Seems to be in segments.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 19, 2015)

Stopping short of naming the living, though gave some details. Just briefly went for it on Brittan.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 19, 2015)

http://www.9jumpin.com.au/s…/60minutes/videos/4361743463001/

A plausible witness describes mass child abuse rape by UK elites, in a forest, assissted by the police.

Should be shared widely IMO, in case anyone is so fucking stupid as to still trust our establishment.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 19, 2015)

Guardian has a version of the story (of the 2 mps making a complaint about the rapey mp) which mentions also accusations of charging constituents to take on cases.  I didn't get an immediate cross reference when I looked that up, but it might well do if someone was to look long and hard.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 19, 2015)

Oh this story is interesting

Greville Janner: Keith Vaz was among MPs who defended Labour peer against child sex abuse allegations


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 19, 2015)

.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 19, 2015)

The story about a Lab MP accused by a tory, which was in The Sun today, cites the accused as charging fees for casework. This alone could narrow it down, and is the sort of thing that should see the cunt hounded out of office prior to an appointment with a lamp-post.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 19, 2015)

Given the lack of progress through official channels I'd personally like to see them all named and dragged through the streets. Same time, I think we should think about Editor's position and not do any naming here,


----------



## Wilf (Jul 19, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The story about a Lab MP accused by a tory, which was in The Sun today, cites the accused as charging fees for casework. This alone could narrow it down, and is the sort of thing that should see the cunt hounded out of office prior to an appointment with a lamp-post.


Yeah, gets it down to a shortlist of 650.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 19, 2015)

Chilcott is a likely template for the public enquiry in to establishment paedophilia which I refer to as "Operation Long-grass"

6 years since it was set up and not a thing.

The hope of the child-fucker elite and their stooges in government will be that nothing emerges from the latest inquiry till next decade.

It's over a quarter of a decade since Tom Watson first raised this issue at Prime Ministers Questions.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jul 19, 2015)

'


----------



## Rob Ray (Jul 19, 2015)

Not to be a party pooper or anything guys...

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 20, 2015)

........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Bloody hell that's  one serious amount of dots 

No intention of joining them up though


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 20, 2015)

Ben Fellows appears to be in court today. Exaro are ITA. Usual rules apply about talking about case.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 20, 2015)

Paul "I am pondscum and think that because I did E a lot it makes it socially acceptable for me to be a reactionary piece of shit" Staines has an article on his blog today about a particular Labour MP which makes no specific allegations but hints very strongly at something.


----------



## TopCat (Jul 20, 2015)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ace-sex-abuse-trial-over-severe-dementia.html

Interesting.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 20, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Paul "I am pondscum and think that because I did E a lot it makes it socially acceptable for me to be a reactionary piece of shit" Staines has an article on his blog today about a particular Labour MP which makes no specific allegations but hints very strongly at something.


It's all a bit "I know something you don't, ner ner ni ner ner", isn't it?


----------



## brogdale (Jul 20, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Paul "I am pondscum and think that because I did E a lot it makes it socially acceptable for me to be a reactionary piece of shit" Staines has an article on his blog today about a particular Labour MP which makes no specific allegations but hints very strongly at something.


Irrespective of the eventual outcome, that piece is pretty fucking shabby...even by the usual standard of Staines' output. Unless the tory MPs mentioned employ child reseachers, I'm not sure what the (implied) sexual orientation of the Labour MP has to do with an allegation of paedophilia.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 20, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Irrespective of the eventual outcome, that piece is pretty fucking shabby...even by the usual standard of Staines' output. Unless the tory MPs mentioned employ child reseachers, I'm not sure what the (implied) sexual orientation of the Labour MP has to do with an allegation of paedophilia.


Quite. But then he's (proudly) a right-wing reactionary - what do the social insights of the last 40 years matter to him?


----------



## J Ed (Jul 20, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Quite. But then he's (proudly) a right-wing reactionary - what do the social insights of the last 40 years matter to him?



The comments on his blog would be very popular on Stormfront or one of the racist subreddits.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 22, 2015)

*BREAKING NEWS: Senior Westminster figures from 1970s and 1980s including former Home Secretary Leon Brittan named in government child abuse files*

PUBLISHED: 18:02, 22 July 2015

_Senior Westminster figures from the 1970s and 1980s have been named in government files related to child abuse, it emerged tonight.

The men include former Home Secretary Leon Brittan, ex-diplomat Sir Peter Hayman, former minister Sir William van Straubenzee and Sir Peter Morrison, who was an aide to Margaret Thatcher.

The Cabinet Office confirmed that documents relating to the men, who have all since died, exist after a series of requests from Sky News.

While in January this year, top British diplomat and former MI6 worker Sir Peter Hayman was the focus of a secret Government file about his 'unnatural' sexual behaviour.

This most recent file reveals there were further Government papers relating to him. 

_
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...1980s-named-government-child-abuse-files.html

.....have we got a new name here...

....cute timing aswell...day after Parliament broke up for the Summer...


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 22, 2015)

I'm old enough to remember William van Straubenzee's existence -- mostly though I remember because of the unusual name.

No, I don't think he's been mentioned in this thread (? - or anywhere else?).


----------



## brogdale (Jul 22, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> *BREAKING NEWS: Senior Westminster figures from 1970s and 1980s including former Home Secretary Leon Brittan named in government child abuse files*
> 
> PUBLISHED: 18:02, 22 July 2015
> 
> ...


Significant as it sounds like *evidence *that fatch knew about Morrison. Their queen was a paedo protector.


----------



## elbows (Jul 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Significant as it sounds like *evidence *that fatch knew about Morrison. Their queen was a paedo protector.



Need to know more about the file(s) in question before being able to say that is evidence of that. We don't know what era of government the Morrison stuff is from, as far as I can tell from the press articles so far. Conflation may be occurring.

As for the naming of Straubenzee, it offers the opportunity to play 'hunt for possible hints in obituaries'. Oh, here we are:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/obituary-sir-william-van-straubenzee-1124329.html



> During these years he acted also as secretary of the all-party committee on Church Affairs and as honorary secretary of the Federation of Conservative students (FUCUA). Affable, if slightly pompous, he got on particularly well with his young charges.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 22, 2015)

*Jail those who turn a blind eye to child abuse, says Cameron*


----------



## brogdale (Jul 22, 2015)

elbows said:


> Need to know more about the file(s) in question before being able to say that is evidence of that. We don't know what era of government the Morrison stuff is from, as far as I can tell from the press articles so far. Conflation may be occurring.



Agreed, but it's getting close all the same; cabinet office.


> The papers pertaining to Brittan, which are among a number shown to police, are contained in a store of Cabinet Office papers at the National Archives, known as “the cabinet secretary’s miscellaneous papers” and will be passed on to an ongoing independent inquiry into child abuse within state and non-state institutions led by Justice Lowell Goddard. The papers are described by the Cabinet Office as largely uncatalogued and unregistered, and were accumulated over several decades up to 2007. No further details have so far been revealed.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 22, 2015)




----------



## shygirl (Jul 22, 2015)

Still waiting for a senior Labour ex-mp to be named.


----------



## shygirl (Jul 22, 2015)

Doubt it ever will be tho', cos it would put Blair in the frame for inaction.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 23, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm old enough to remember William van Straubenzee's existence -- mostly though I remember because of the unusual name.



.....rang a bell with me but turns out that was more to do with links to the Royal Family - (  "....all roads...") where a Thomas of that ilk is described as part of the younger Royal's "inner-circle" in various breathless Telegraph articles :

Royal wedding: William and Kate's inner circle


...Today's Times story :


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 23, 2015)

*Citizens Electoral Council of Australia*
*Media Release  Thursday, 23 July 2015*

Craig Isherwood‚ National Secretary
PO Box 376‚ COBURG‚ VIC 3058
Phone: 1800 636 432
Email: cec@cecaust.com.au
Website: http://www.cecaust.com.au


*60 Minutes exposes organised paedophilia among highest ranks of British elite*
_60 Minutes_’ explosive 19 July feature, “Spies, Lords and Predators”, reported that the recent blizzard of revelations of paedophile rings operating among the elite of the British Establishment constitutes the “biggest political scandal Britain has ever faced”. Presenter Ross Coulthart stated right at the show’s outset, “There is a paedophile gang operating at the _highest levels_ of the British Establishment” (his emphasis), and, although _60 Minutes_ did not dwell on the point, that includes the Royal Family itself. However the Royal involvement shone through in an 18 July article by the UK’s ExaroNews, which _60 Minutes_ credited as a co-producer of its show, while a 24 June press release by the CEC had been even more explicit in naming the Royals.

_60 Minutes_ reported the first-hand allegations of a number of child abuse survivors, who identified the prominent Establishment figures who abused them when they were children in the 1970s and 80s.

One survivor, Richard Kerr, fell victim to this paedophile ring as a nine-year-old in the 1970s, when he was sent to the Kincora Boys Home in Belfast, Northern Ireland, run by notorious paedophiles. From Kincora, Kerr, like many others, was trafficked all over the UK to be abused by powerful men. To _60 Minutes_, he identified among his abusers former member of parliament Cyril Smith, and former deputy head of MI6 Sir Peter Hayman. The latter was a member of an organised gang called the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which campaigned openly in the 1970s for the age of consent to be lowered to as young as four.

The CEC’s 24 June release also identified the paedophile ring operating out of the Kincora boys’ home, in connection with the murder gangs that British intelligence coordinated in Northern Ireland, under the command of Brigadier General Frank Kitson, to orchestrate terrorism and civil war. Though his troops opened fire on unarmed civilians in the infamous “Bloody Sunday” massacre of 30 January 1972, killing 13 civilians and wounding 13 more, the Crown showered honour after honour upon him, including an OBE for his work in Northern Ireland, while the Queen personally inducted him into her ultra-elite Order of the Bath. Still alive, he retired in 1982 as Commander-in-Chief, UK Land Forces. The CEC release emphasised the unique significance of the Kincora story:

“Despite pleas from many quarters to do so, British Home Secretary Theresa May has staunchly refused to include the Kincora case in the new child abuse inquiry to be headed by New Zealand Judge Lowell Goddard, even though the present, local inquiry in Northern Ireland into Kincora under Anthony Hart QC lacks the legal powers to compel crucial witnesses to testify. Why the steadfast refusal to include Kincora? Because there is abundant evidence now even in the public domain that MI5, MI6 and other British intelligence agencies know that not only was one of Kitson’s paramilitary ‘pseudo-gangs’ (Tara) at the centre of that affair, but that other, leading members of the British establishment were personally involved in the abuse, including Lord Mountbatten himself, Surveyor of the Queen’s Pictures Sir Anthony Blunt, and numerous other high society figures from Ireland and England.”

_60 Minutes_ did not name these individuals, but ExaroNews in its 18 July article reported that Richard Kerr had identified some of the same figures which the CEC had:

“Among those who were part of the cover-up of a paedophile network linked to Kincora boys’ home in Belfast, Northern Ireland, according to Kerr, were:


Lord Mountbatten, a cousin of the Queen, great-uncle to Prince Charles, chief of the defence staff from 1959 to 1965 …;
Sir Maurice Oldfield, director of the Secret Intelligence Service, better known as MI6;
Sir Anthony Blunt, master of the Queen’s pictures, former officer in the Security Service, or MI5, who became a Russian spy;
Sir Knox Cunningham, Unionist/Ulster Unionist MP, parliamentary private secretary to Harold Macmillan as prime minister, and member of the Conservative party’s national executive committee 1959-66. …
“An intelligence source told Exaro that Mountbatten mixed with paedophiles who went to parties in the Republic of Ireland. Mountbatten is also understood to have visited Kincora, although why remains unclear.”

It was very clear to the CEC, who had named Mountbatten himself as a paedophile in its 24 June release. Among other things, Mountbatten had welcomed the notorious paedophile Jimmy Savile into the Royal family, and he became a regular at Buckingham Palace and a mentor and advisor to Prince Charles. According to British press accounts, Savile molested as many as 1000 children, many of them helpless patients in hospitals. He was also, according to some accounts, a necrophiliac, who proclaimed that the 5 days he had spent alone with his mother after her death were the “happiest days of my life.”

_60 Minutes_ also identified as a high-ranking paedophile one of Margaret Thatcher’s many paedophile protégés, Sir Leon Brittan, whom she appointed Home Secretary and whose department was responsible for investigating, and therefore covering up, paedophile complaints. Brittan, for instance, “lost” extensive documentation on high-level paedophilia presented to him by MP Geoffrey Dickens in the early 1980s. _60 Minutes_ also named Lord Greville Janner, a sitting member of the House of Lords who until recently the Public Prosecutor had declined to prosecute on the grounds of his claimed dementia, even though he had voted in Parliament over 200 times since the onset of his alleged mental debility. _60 Minutes_ also interviewed a member of PIE, which gave the viewer a skin-crawling glimpse into the mindset that openly justifies, in fact promotes, the sexual exploitation of children.

The UK authorities have covered up this paedophile network for decades, because it exists at the dark heart of where real power is wielded in Britain’s anti-democratic, elitist system—in the Crown itself. This scandal threatens the entire British oligarchical power structure, and there are already indications that the Goddard inquiry into the scandal will simply continue the cover-up, as demonstrated by present Home Secretary Theresa May’s refusal to include the Kincora Boys Home in the inquiry, which would expose the overlap between the paedophile networks and MI6/MI5 and the Royals. A cover-up was also signalled by Goddard’s forecast that the inquiry would take 5-10 years to conclude—the typical British Establishment ploy to drag such things out until the uproars which caused them have died down and key witnesses have disappeared, died, or been terrorised into silence.

_60 Minutes_ indicated its intention to follow up on its explosive report. But if you really want to get to the bottom (or the top!) of this Satanic evil which permeates the British Establishment, stay tuned for more revelations from the CEC.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 23, 2015)

Some repeat points, but in the light of some recent stuff:

Leon Brittan is now being consistently cited as a paedophile in more credible fashion than was the case immediately after his death.If it is the case that he was a paedophile, a follow up question is: Who knew?

It's reasonable to assume that party leaders will have been told of suspicions by security services at the times he was a prominent party member (he was moved to Europe of course)

William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith would be in the frame. 

Alert the mods and delete if you want (for the names I just spelled out), it's the stark issue that anyone with rudimentary capabilities can figure out. It was all very well to rip the BBC to bits and haul individuals over the coals about Savile wasn't it?

That's why this has to have the lid kept on as much as possible. Any decent mainstream "journalist" would be on to this by now, unless they were being stopped from upstairs.

The implications that serving senior cabinet ministers effectively facilitated child rape should be the kind of thing to bring down a government. 

We'll see how desperate they and the rest of the establishment are to cling on.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 23, 2015)

The former Labour minister story...dragging the war criminal in....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/blair-government-briefed-police-paedophile-6123122#


----------



## brogdale (Jul 27, 2015)

Nice holiday pic.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 27, 2015)

brogdale said:


> The former Labour minister story...dragging the war criminal in....
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/blair-government-briefed-police-paedophile-6123122#


Interestingly, John Mann was a Labour councillor in Lambeth when that was happening. Funny how he says fuck all about it, but is happy to smear Jeremy Corbyn for "inaction" over paedophile grooming gangs in Islington. Anyone would think he had ulterior motives...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 27, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Interestingly, John Mann was a Labour councillor in Lambeth when that was happening. Funny how he says fuck all about it, but is happy to smear Jeremy Corbyn for "inaction" over paedophile grooming gangs in Islington. Anyone would think he had ulterior motives...



Mann apparently reported it to police in 1989, but nothing was done. Im fuzzy on the details of what he did between then and all this blowing up again.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 27, 2015)

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  1h1 hour ago
Ben Fellows trial resumes at Old Bailey: Ken Clarke in witness box.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  8m8 minutes ago
Asked by his counsel how upsetting it was, Ben Fellows replies: “Not upsetting at all. It was weird, but not upsetting.”

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  3m3 minutes ago
After making alleg of indecent assault by Ken Clarke, Ben Fellows says, “I was very scared, frightened for my family and for our lives.”


----------



## nino_savatte (Jul 27, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Mann apparently reported it to police in 1989, but nothing was done. Im fuzzy on the details of what he did between then and all this blowing up again.


I stand corrected, but he's still a cunt.


----------



## SW9 (Jul 29, 2015)

Looks like some big news re that senior Labour MP is about to break.


----------



## BigMoaner (Jul 29, 2015)

SW9 said:


> Looks like some big news re that senior Labour MP is about to break.


on twitter? where?


----------



## SW9 (Jul 29, 2015)

Yeah, all over twitter right now.


----------



## SW9 (Jul 29, 2015)

sorry, looks to be false info


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2015)

SW9 said:


> sorry, looks to be false info


who is the secior labour mp who can relax?


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jul 29, 2015)

Janner will now be charged with 22 counts of secual offences against children
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5603/lord-janner-charged-with-child-sex-abuse-in-reversal-for-dpp


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jul 29, 2015)

SW9 said:


> sorry, looks to be false info


Exaro are saying a man has been arrested in the investigation into the child sexual abuse Esther Baker went public about suffering.  She alleged a Lib Dem MP, who has not been publicly named, was one of the several men who abused her - however the man who has been arrested is not a current or former MP.
That might be what caused the confusion.


----------



## shygirl (Jul 30, 2015)

brogdale said:


> The former Labour minister story...dragging the war criminal in....
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/blair-government-briefed-police-paedophile-6123122#



Tick, tock


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 30, 2015)

Ben fellows got a not guilty earlier. 

Here we go again.


----------



## laptop (Jul 30, 2015)

I'm drumming my fingers on the desk waiting for a corruscating statement from Ken Clarke.

All we have so far is the BBC noting that 'In the trial at the Old Bailey Mr Clarke - the MP for Rushcliffe - described the claims as "preposterous"... "off the Richter scale" and "like Martians landing"...'

Which, given various antics of Mr Fellows that were not on trial, I am inclined to believe. On the face of it.


----------



## elbows (Jul 30, 2015)

Several performances in the dock that probably had the benefit of reality on their side still managed to be crap or at least unsatisfactory by the sounds of it. The reporting was a bit hit and miss too, e.g. I never quite figured out whether other members of the Cook Report team thought Fellows had ever worked on the program. (Cook claimed he can't have ever worked on the program because Cook doesn't remember him at all).

In any case I suspect that what really gave that verdict legs is that this was a perverting justice case rather than a libel one, and that changes the parameters substantially. Especially when the police had reassured Fellows in various ways that were probably helpful to the defence case. 

As far as I know the specific details of Exaro's theory that it was a case of mistaken identity didn't get a good showing in the trial, neither side went with that angle.

Anyway I guess I can throw almost everything to do with this story back in the useless pile now. Not that it ever got far from that pile at any point.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 31, 2015)

elbows said:


> In any case I suspect that what really gave that verdict legs is that this was a perverting justice case rather than a libel one, and that changes the parameters substantially. Especially when the police had reassured Fellows in various ways that were probably helpful to the defence case.



The bizarre ‘Joanna Lumley porn career’ side note for one 

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ed-of-attempting-to-pervert-course-of-justice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 31, 2015)

Fellows found not guilty. It's all very 1984 doublethink.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ed-of-attempting-to-pervert-course-of-justice


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 31, 2015)

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  26m26 minutes ago
Ben Fellows verdict: for those still struggling to get their heads round it, a four-tweet summary of what it does – and does not – mean…

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  19m19 minutes ago
1. Ben Fellows is NOT guilty of attempt to pervert course of justice by making his claim about Ken Clarke to police.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  16m16 minutes ago
2. That was all the jury had to determine. The verdict does NOT mean that the claim made by Ben Fellows was true.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  14m14 minutes ago
3. And the verdict does NOT mean that any of the witnesses from The Cook Report was lying.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  12m12 minutes ago
4. Defence case was: DCI Paul Settle PRESSURED Ben Fellows into making statement, having given him false assurances.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 1, 2015)

....it's a DM news BOGOF !...the paedo scandal and the Labour leadership story in one...


*A blind eye to child abuse: Whistleblowers warned Labour leadership favourite Jeremy Corbyn of paedophiles preying on boys on his doorstep - but claim he did NOTHING*

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ft-wingers-implicated-paedophile-scandal.html

Social workers warned Corbyn that child abuse was rife in his Islington constituency in 1992

‘We'd been seeing so many 12 to 15-year-olds who were being sexually exploited, we could hardly believe it,’ Liz Davies, one of the five social workers, recalled this week

Corbyn never wrote to Davies, or telephoned, to acknowledge their meeting, or thank her for seeking to blow the whistle




In 1992, social workers told Jeremy Corbyn (pictured that year)
that organised child abuse was rife in his Islington constituency


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 1, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ‘We'd been seeing so many 12 to 15-year-olds who were being sexually exploited, we could hardly believe it,’ Liz Davies, one of the five social workers, recalled this week


 
How many Liz Davieses were there in late 80s/early 90s Islington Labour?!


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2015)

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...-investigate-second-claim-of-indecent-assault

Is Clarke terminally ill or something?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 1, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ...
> 
> *A blind eye to child abuse: Whistleblowers warned Labour leadership favourite Jeremy Corbyn of paedophiles preying on boys on his doorstep - but claim he did NOTHING*


 I have a feeling the Tories are not likely to be picking up on this line of attack (at least not in public).


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 1, 2015)

Not til he's leader anyway.....I was rather more wondering who in the Labour leadership hierarchy was urging them on to run the story !  ( and a nasty brutish farrago the Islington affair is to be sure )


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 2, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> Not til he's leader anyway


not even then. if it happens. You know the old proverb about the log in your own eye?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 2, 2015)

Oaten pic


----------



## brogdale (Aug 3, 2015)

Heath.

https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/invest...ruption-linked-child-sexual-abuse-allegations


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 3, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Heath.
> 
> https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/invest...ruption-linked-child-sexual-abuse-allegations



Surprised that Heaths name hasn't come up before tbh.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 3, 2015)

Kaka Tim said:


> Surprised that Heaths name hasn't come up before tbh.


There must be a bingo card out there somewhere....


----------



## laptop (Aug 3, 2015)

Kaka Tim said:


> Surprised that Heaths name hasn't come up before tbh.



20+ other mentions on this thread (not excluding the possibility of a reference to Chadwell Heath).


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 3, 2015)

Haute le Garenne - Savile, etc.. etc... 

Just as a matter of interest on a related subject, this in yesterday's Guardian on D-Notices


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 3, 2015)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 3, 2015)

This on Heath by The Needle Blog


----------



## brogdale (Aug 3, 2015)

Is that a young Ken Clarke (back row 2nd from left)?
He was a whip for Heath '72 to '74.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 3, 2015)

And this piece on McGowan playing Savile on stage. Interesting read. https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/02/apocalypse-now-then/


----------



## gosub (Aug 3, 2015)

Kaka Tim said:


> Surprised that Heaths name hasn't come up before tbh.


The cynic in me thinks that means investigations have come too close to someone powerful still alive.  it was obvious this would rumble on til he was in the frame.  The well can be capped now.
Amazing how atrocious these figures from 30 years ago were, and nobody said anything.  Not like now......oh hang on, faulty logic in there somewhere.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 3, 2015)

gosub said:


> The cynic in me thinks that means investigations have come too close to someone powerful still alive.  it was obvious this would rumble on til he was in the frame.  The well can be capped now.
> Amazing how atrocious these figures from 30 years ago were, and nobody said anything.  Not like now......oh hang on, faulty logic in there somewhere.



Quite. Id be very surprised if there wasn't some orchestration of these revelations from someone somewhere.


----------



## elbows (Aug 3, 2015)

gosub said:


> The cynic in me thinks that means investigations have come too close to someone powerful still alive.  it was obvious this would rumble on til he was in the frame.  The well can be capped now.
> Amazing how atrocious these figures from 30 years ago were, and nobody said anything.  Not like now......oh hang on, faulty logic in there somewhere.



As far as I'm concerned nothing like that can cap the well. The phenomenon is driven both by victims, whistleblowers and by widespread historical rumour. Only once those to are exhausted do matters end, having a 'top level' abuser exposed doesn't make irrelevant all those lower down the chain.

It's completely understandable why there is a focus on threads like these on the highest level abusers. But whats been unleashed post-Savile goes far beyond that, its about people who were abused via uneven power relationships, regardless of quite how much power the abusers had in the grand scheme of things. So many of the prosecutions we see post-Savile don't involve names we care about, but are just as important.


----------



## gosub (Aug 3, 2015)

elbows said:


> As far as I'm concerned nothing like that can cap the well. The phenomenon is driven both by victims, whistleblowers and by widespread historical rumour. Only once those to are exhausted do matters end, having a 'top level' abuser exposed doesn't make irrelevant all those lower down the chain.
> 
> It's completely understandable why there is a focus on threads like these on the highest level abusers. But whats been unleashed post-Savile goes far beyond that, its about people who were abused via uneven power relationships, regardless of quite how much power the abusers had in the grand scheme of things. So many of the prosecutions we see post-Savile don't involve names we care about, but are just as important.



Agree with you, but if they follow up Heath (Establishment rotten to the core! shock! horror!), with a couple of high profile patsies, that are provably innocent, it'll be Witch hunt! let sleeping dogs lie! blah, blah,in no time


----------



## elbows (Aug 3, 2015)

gosub said:


> Agree with you, but if they follow up Heath (Establishment rotten to the core! shock! horror!), with a couple of high profile patsies, that are provably innocent, it'll be Witch hunt! let sleeping dogs lie! blah, blah,in no time



I don't think that can happen. Not at these stages. Too much has already been set in motion. The Messham stuff didn't kill matters even though that happened at a much earlier and more delicate stage, so I don't think that trick has any legs right now.

Here is some news I missed from July:



> In a key protection for those working in the police, security services or public sector the inquiry has received written assurances from the attorney general that whistleblowers who come forward with evidence or documents will not be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act.



From this article, the detail of which does suggest the Inquiry will have some teeth:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...th-project-lowell-goddard-independent-inquiry

Cynicism is well-founded but they can't actually draw a line under any of this unless they take some genuine steps to erode this cynicism. I think they realise this and are doing so, because they don't want all this stuff to come back again more years down the line.


----------



## tim (Aug 3, 2015)

Barking_Mad said:


> Fellows found not guilty. It's all very 1984 doublethink.
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...ed-of-attempting-to-pervert-course-of-justice




Doesn't the verdict just reflect the reality that the allegations could never have been  proved or disproved so many years after the event happened. Whether or not he was a victim in the past Fellows seems to me to be a victim of the present, a very vulnerable person encouraged by the police when they thought they could get a high-profile scalp and then prosecuted, when they realised that they couldn't.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 3, 2015)

elbows said:


> As far as I'm concerned nothing like that can cap the well. The phenomenon is driven both by victims, whistleblowers and by widespread historical rumour. Only once those to are exhausted do matters end, having a 'top level' abuser exposed doesn't make irrelevant all those lower down the chain.
> 
> It's completely understandable why there is a focus on threads like these on the highest level abusers. But whats been unleashed post-Savile goes far beyond that, its about people who were abused via uneven power relationships, regardless of quite how much power the abusers had in the grand scheme of things. So many of the prosecutions we see post-Savile don't involve names we care about, but are just as important.


And there will be many prosecutions that nobody "sees" - every local paper will carry stories about a child sex abuser that never make the mainstream media, or end up being discussed on boards like this.

The Saviles and Rolf Harrises are the tip of an iceberg - they are the high-profile representatives of a pattern of human behaviours that goes all the way down to the most anonymous and insignificant perpetrator in some far-flung corner of the country. What is less stratified is the nature of those who have been abused: as we have seen, you only had to be "fortunate" enough to be invited backstage at TOTP or a Rolf Harris event to become an abuse victim, or maybe you just had the wrong athletics coach. Or uncle, or dad. Or mum, for that matter.

And they're the tip of a different kind of iceberg, too. As we have seen time and again in the high-profile (and less high-profile) cases, very few of these abusers could have continued for so long had it not been for the enabling of those around them. Sometimes that was active and collusive, sometimes it was just turning a blind eye, and most often of all it was just people not being able to believe that something like that was happening. Or not wanting to.

Which is why I find the apparent approach of those in government so incomprehensible. The cat is out of the bag now. Anyone with an ounce of common sense is going to be saying "Hang on a minute...if all these celebrities, politicians, etc., were able to get away with so much in plain view, how much more of it is going on?" Even the cognitive dissonance which gets in the way of our believing that nice Mr Maths Teacher or helpful neighbour might be abusing our kids will struggle against the growing realisation that famous people whom we similarly thought to be beyond reproach were at it.

There is a risk, but I don't think it's from politicians trying to "cap the well"; rather, it's from good old apathy. People will get tired of the endless stream of stories, and become jaded about the whole thing. The atmosphere of shock at the sheer extremity of what's gone on which I think still pervades us will fade over time, but I don't think we will ever return to quite the depths of almost-wilful ignorance of the activities of abusers, famous or otherwise.


----------



## Buckaroo (Aug 3, 2015)

existentialist said:


> And there will be many prosecutions that nobody "sees" - every local paper will carry stories about a child sex abuser that never make the mainstream media, or end up being discussed on boards like this.
> 
> The Saviles and Rolf Harrises are the tip of an iceberg - they are the high-profile representatives of a pattern of human behaviours that goes all the way down to the most anonymous and insignificant perpetrator in some far-flung corner of the country. What is less stratified is the nature of those who have been abused: as we have seen, you only had to be "fortunate" enough to be invited backstage at TOTP or a Rolf Harris event to become an abuse victim, or maybe you just had the wrong athletics coach. Or uncle, or dad. Or mum, for that matter.
> 
> ...



Well said.


----------



## elbows (Aug 3, 2015)

existentialist said:


> And there will be many prosecutions that nobody "sees" - every local paper will carry stories about a child sex abuser that never make the mainstream media, or end up being discussed on boards like this.



Indeed. Just in recent days my local paper brought news that a children's home's manager from decades ago is facing numerous charges.



> Sometimes that was active and collusive, sometimes it was just turning a blind eye, and most often of all it was just people not being able to believe that something like that was happening. Or not wanting to.





> Even the cognitive dissonance which gets in the way of our believing that nice Mr Maths Teacher or helpful neighbour might be abusing our kids will struggle against the growing realisation that famous people whom we similarly thought to be beyond reproach were at it.



That sort of thing is the toughest nut to crack in my opinion. It seems well possible to crack it, but only temporarily. Perhaps its some kind of issues to do with how brains tend to build trust and impressions of associates, friends etc. Even when aspects of attitudes towards celebrities, people in positions of power has changed over the decades, even when there is far greater awareness and less misplaced trust, issues of how easily our positive feelings towards someone may lead to giving them the benefit of the doubt don't seem to have gone away. Likewise there are multiple reasons why people in organisations close ranks or get dragged along on some sinister journey full of wrong.



> There is a risk, but I don't think it's from politicians trying to "cap the well"; rather, it's from good old apathy. People will get tired of the endless stream of stories, and become jaded about the whole thing. The atmosphere of shock at the sheer extremity of what's gone on which I think still pervades us will fade over time, but I don't think we will ever return to quite the depths of almost-wilful ignorance of the activities of abusers, famous or otherwise.



I am somewhat relaxed about that risk because I don't think the general public as a whole need to be energised about these issues all of the time in order for the process to keep rumbling on. I only have to look back at how this and other threads have evolved to see that we've probably already passed though a number of distinct phases of public interest. But there are enough people who are and will remain interested parties to the process to keep things going. And enough institutions that have ended up having to set things in motion, e.g. the inquiry is going to last at least 5 years and even if there are periods where there is not a lot of interest, future revelations will still get a lot of eyeballs.

I reckon theres a whole bunch of things we will never return to, including the one you mention at the end. Some of them were pretty much dead long before the post-Savile stuff. Others may have lingered on despite losing the cultural conditions that enabled them in the first place, and I would hope we can eradicate some of these as part of the processes that will unfold for at least the rest of this decade.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 3, 2015)

I can't help wondering if the Ted Heath revelations today might be a storm in a teacup.  There are some fairly wild rumours about Heath floating around but nothing that looks very credible.  Moreover, there are a lot more rumours about Heath's gay dalliances, and it seems reasonably well established now that he was a regular cottager until the police warned him off it when his political career started to take off.  Like as not some of those encounters were with young guys - over the modern age of consent, probably, but young enough to be referred to as boys - and in the climate of the 1950s-70s it's not hard to see how those could quickly turn into rumours of a penchant for young boys.  Depends on the nature of the allegations put before Wiltshire police, I suppose.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 3, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I can't help wondering if the Ted Heath revelations today might be a storm in a teacup.



I'm wondering if it fits into a broader news management/distraction angle. Fortunately no journalist seems to have bothered persuing the more recent and increasingly substantiated Brittan stuff and the glaring obvious issue of wether any serving cabinet ministers would have been aware of the stench at the time.


----------



## elbows (Aug 3, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I can't help wondering if the Ted Heath revelations today might be a storm in a teacup.  There are some fairly wild rumours about Heath floating around but nothing that looks very credible.  Moreover, there are a lot more rumours about Heath's gay dalliances, and it seems reasonably well established now that he was a regular cottager until the police warned him off it when his political career started to take off.  Like as not some of those encounters were with young guys - over the modern age of consent, probably, but young enough to be referred to as boys - and in the climate of the 1950s-70s it's not hard to see how those could quickly turn into rumours of a penchant for young boys.  Depends on the nature of the allegations put before Wiltshire police, I suppose.



Well the Heath stuff is certainly not the only case where those sorts of factors may apply. Such things certainly had to be considered when discussing some of the other historical rumours, e.g. some (but by no means all) of the Scallywag stuff. So yeah, there are a spectrum of possibilities and only further investigation and eventual public disclosure may eliminate some. As we've seen before, the police have encouraged any victims to come forwards and the results of that request will be the big factor.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 3, 2015)

Am I the only person who, everytime I come to this folder to see:


*How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?*

just wants to type a post saying "fucking loads"


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 3, 2015)

elbows said:


> Well the Heath stuff is certainly not the only case where those sorts of factors may apply. Such things certainly had to be considered when discussing some of the other historical rumours, e.g. some (but by no means all) of the Scallywag stuff. So yeah, there are a spectrum of possibilities and only further investigation and eventual public disclosure may eliminate some. As we've seen before, the police have encouraged any victims to come forwards and the results of that request will be the big factor.



Indeed.  Heath isn't the only instance where at least some of the allegations relate to homosexual encounters that, although they might have been exploitative, were with people over the modern age of consent.  The OB have been pretty clear that they're not going to go prosecuting people for things that would be legal now, but it's probably fair to say that such allegations are causing a certain amount of confusion, at least.


----------



## elbows (Aug 3, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I'm wondering if it fits into a broader news management/distraction angle. Fortunately no journalist seems to have bothered persuing the more recent and increasingly substantiated Brittan stuff and the glaring obvious issue of wether any serving cabinet ministers would have been aware of the stench at the time.



You'll have to spell out what substantiated Brittan stuff has been happening recently. And if no journalist has touched it, where are you getting it from?

I may well have missed some stuff this year. What I'd seen happening regarding Brittan of late was that certain victim(s) who had given details of abuse previously, were now able to have him named in that context. 

And there was the revelation the other week about the cabinet papers which involve names such as Brittan. The problem is we don't actually know what those files said, so it's hard to infer much more than was written in the press at the time, which wasn't much.

But perhaps I've missed something, I certainly missed the news that Operation Fernbridge ended and was replaced with Operation Athabasca - either I'm slacking even worse than I though or some of the journalists that I was relying on previously to bring these details to my attention have gone off the boil.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 3, 2015)

"You'll have to spell out what substantiated Brittan stuff has been happening recently. "

Chiefly the naming of him in a mainstream Australian TV doc, much more firm stuff than anything hitertoo.


----------



## laptop (Aug 3, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Chiefly the naming of him in a mainstream Australian TV doc, much more firm stuff than anything hitertoo.



I have reason to believe that many of the people who were central to the making of that have "journalist" in their job description.




What you mean, as so often, is that you're annoyed no-one has published the article you want to read when and where you want to read it.


----------



## BigMoaner (Aug 3, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Am I the only person who, everytime I come to this folder to see:
> 
> 
> *How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?*
> ...


i haven't read the thread but one thing that was far bigger than the lord in the bra was what the lord actually said when one of the women asked him if this sort of thing went on a lot "boys is the common thing" was his answer.

i mean jesus, that should have been the main story - they should be questioning him about what HE knows


----------



## J Ed (Aug 3, 2015)

existentialist said:


> There is a risk, but I don't think it's from politicians trying to "cap the well"; rather, it's from good old apathy. People will get tired of the endless stream of stories, and become jaded about the whole thing. The atmosphere of shock at the sheer extremity of what's gone on which I think still pervades us will fade over time, but I don't think we will ever return to quite the depths of almost-wilful ignorance of the activities of abusers, famous or otherwise.



I don't think that it's a risk so much as a reality. There are a lot of people in this country are capable of simultaneously thinking 1) we are ruled over by people who cover up paedophilia 2) things like raping children is just a consequences of human nature, it's normal for the powerful to do whatever they want to the powerless, it is the natural order of things and cannot be helped

There is already more than enough evidence that people should be out on the streets over it, like in Belgium, but the response in Britain has been to cover it up and ignore it. When I think about political topics I have discussed with colleagues at work people just don't get exercised about it like they do about subjects like immigration, people on welfare and other people that they have been told to hate.

This mentality scares me almost as much as the fact that a high profile paedophile ring can operate. What else will this country allow?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 3, 2015)

laptop said:


> I have reason to believe that many of the people who were central to the making of that have "journalist" in their job description.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry, yes. UK journalist. This has the heavy vibe of being sat on. And it is annoying, not because I want to read it.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

From today's Independent, some more detail on what's being alleged against Ted Heath.  I might have spoken too quickly last night...

Also see the Mirror.


----------



## elbows (Aug 4, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> From today's Independent, some more detail on what's being alleged against Ted Heath.  I might have spoken too quickly last night...
> 
> Also see the Mirror.



In the Independent yesterday we were treated to a Heath biographer who promoted the 'asexual' view of Heath sticking to his guns. Some of the points made are fine, but also some terrible ones which expose an excessive degree of faith in the biographers own ability to get a good reading on someones life.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ty--im-sure-thats-all-they-were-10436328.html


----------



## brogdale (Aug 4, 2015)

elbows said:


> In the Independent yesterday we were treated to a Heath biographer who promoted the 'asexual' view of Heath sticking to his guns. Some of the points made are fine, but also some terrible ones which expose an excessive degree of faith in the biographers own ability to get a good reading on someones life.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ty--im-sure-thats-all-they-were-10436328.html


Gotta laugh at all these sychophant/lickspittles (with a VI) who come out of the wood with their 'incredulity' and character references...like Heath would have told a biographer or PS "hey, guess what...back in the early sixties I regularly enjoyed raping kids."


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

and there we have it. A tory prime minister who was a peadophile. A man in charge of the entire country- another peed friend of thatch to- was a nonce. I think that tells us all we need to know about the establishment and its views on human beings.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> and there we have it. A tory prime minister who was a peadophile. A man in charge of the entire country- another peed friend of thatch to- was a nonce. I think that tells us all we need to know about the establishment and its views on human beings.



Not yet we don't - it's all rumour and allegation about Heath so far.  Let's not jump to conclusions just yet.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 4, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> Not yet we don't - it's all rumour and allegation about Heath so far.  Let's not jump to conclusions just yet.


Technically correct, of course. 
But he is dead, was a senior vermin politician and (apparently) credible accusations of abuse have been made. I don't bet, but if I did......


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

the way I see it its been made clear nobody above the rung of luvvie light entertainer will ever be held up in court with hard evidence because the british state just don't do that, dear boy. So I'm calling heath a peed forevermore


----------



## quiquaquo (Aug 4, 2015)

http://www.lbc.co.uk/the-journalist-kicked-out-of-uk-for-investigating-ted-heath-113992

The audio file is in more detail.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 4, 2015)

elbows said:


> In the Independent yesterday we were treated to a Heath biographer who promoted the 'asexual' view of Heath sticking to his guns. Some of the points made are fine, but also some terrible ones which expose an excessive degree of faith in the biographers own ability to get a good reading on someones life.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ty--im-sure-thats-all-they-were-10436328.html



BBC 5 Live had the Heath biographer rambling on this morning saying the same sort of thing.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 4, 2015)




----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


>



Pity it's a S*n source. 

Anyone know what became of the case?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the way I see it its been made clear nobody above the rung of luvvie light entertainer will ever be held up in court with hard evidence because the british state just don't do that, dear boy. So I'm calling heath a peed forevermore


I see your point, but I tend to prefer the idea that we don't call people paedophiles unless there is a reasonably substantial basis for assuming that they are.

Mainly because it troubles me to see the term diluted. People who sexually abuse children are, in my view, about as far beyond the pale as it gets, and we risk trivialising that when we start throwing the word around for anyone who's done far less. 

In the case of Heath, all of the allegations so far seem to centre on activities with boys/young men who were below the homosexual age of consent, but who would today be above the prevailing age of consent. That is not, no matter how hard you stretch the definition, "paedophilia", and a very different thing from someone interfering with young children. Unpleasant, unsavoury, quite possibly abusive, but not paedophilia.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Ted Heath flashback. Allegations of obscene photographs in court case



...can't see the link - is it this one .....amazed to see this involved Boy George's uncle....

https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/edward-heath-the-paedophile-prime-minister/

Many thanks to T for contacting me with this very interesting snippet of information concerning Edward Heath. I’ve had to strip down what he has told me so as not to identify him but this unredacted extract gives the gist of the allegations.

_“the producer told me that years before when he was an assistant editor in a cutting room in Wardour Street he used to get his holiday photos developed at a shop in Wardour Street and one day the shop was raided by the police because the owner was dealing in pornography or at least that was the presumed reason. During the raid, a distribution list was discovered which had Ted Heath’s name on it also Patrick Moore’s and it was for “kiddie porn” as it was termed in those days. I do not know how he got this information about the list but apparently “everyone in Wardour Street” knew about it.”_

It reminded me of a very strange court case involving Boy George’s uncle (you really couldn’t make some of this stuff up) Kenneth O’Dowd in 1984 who alleged that he had compromising photographs of Edward Heath . The news reports do not describe what the photographs that included Ted Heath depicted however he says that his former mistress “appeared in pornographic photographs together with his two children”
 .
According to The Glasgow Herald, O’Dowd produced a photocopied photograph of Edward Heath but it was “dismissed in court as a forgery”.




DotCommunist said:


> ....another peed friend of thatch to- was a nonce.........



...not that it particularly matters to the issue at hand but Heath & Thatch were _*very*_ far from being friends in the political or personal sphere....the dynamics of that enmity largely driven by Heath's loathing for "that woman" on account of being toppled by her cabal of supporters ( Airie Neave et al )


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 4, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I see your point, but I tend to prefer the idea that we don't call people paedophiles unless there is a reasonably substantial basis for assuming that they are.
> 
> Mainly because it troubles me to see the term diluted. People who sexually abuse children are, in my view, about as far beyond the pale as it gets, and we risk trivialising that when we start throwing the word around for anyone who's done far less.
> 
> In the case of Heath, all of the allegations so far seem to centre on activities with boys/young men who were below the homosexual age of consent, but who would today be above the prevailing age of consent. That is not, no matter how hard you stretch the definition, "paedophilia", and a very different thing from someone interfering with young children. Unpleasant, unsavoury, quite possibly abusive, but not paedophilia.


The allegation reported today is with regards to a twelve-year-old. Technically hebephilia. 

But I take your general point.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

existentialist said:


> all of the allegations so far seem to centre on activities with boys/young men who were below the homosexual age of consent, but who would today be above the prevailing age of consent



the latest allegation is that he raped a 12 year old boy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> Airie Neave


its fun to stay with the INLA


----------



## existentialist (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the latest allegation is that he raped a 12 year old boy.


OK, well, that does put a different complexion on things. Is it a remotely credible allegation?


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the latest allegation is that he raped a 12 year old boy.



If that turns out to be groundless, though - and it still might - then all that's left is the rumours that have swirled around Heath since the 70s, rumours which have always had a nastily homophobic edge to them (FWIW I do think he was probably gay, but so far back in the closet he was practically in Narnia).  It seems wrong to perpetuate those sorts of attitudes, and I agree with existentialist about not calling people paedophiles without very good reason to do so.  Best to wait and see, IMO.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

existentialist said:


> OK, well, that does put a different complexion on things. Is it a remotely credible allegation?


yep. Its quite clear now that for some time senior figures in british establishment and 'senior' society were perfectly happy to either cover up or engage in child abuse. I see no reason to doubt this persons allegation. Balance of probabilities is all we are getting you know that? It'll never be beyond reasonable doubt standards of proof because they won't allow it to get that far and besides, dossiers lost etc


----------



## existentialist (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> yep. Its quite clear now that for some time senior figures in british establishment and 'senior' society were perfectly happy to either cover up or engage in child abuse. I see no reason to doubt this persons allegation. Balance of probabilities is all we are getting you know that? It'll never be beyond reasonable doubt standards of proof because they won't allow it to get that far and besides, dossiers lost etc


I realise that we're going to be lucky if we get criminal prosecution standard proof, especially after all this time and with the apparently strenous efforts of The Establishment to muddy the waters at every turn.

But there's a difference between a credible allegation and something someone has just pulled out of their arse. Unfortunately, there will always be opportunists or attention-getters who will see the various revelations and want to go one better, and - again - it doesn't help make the case against these people when genuine (or genuine-seeming) claims are mixed up with wild and fabricated allegations.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

existentialist said:


> wild


after saville, after kncora, after righton-dolphin fucking square- I'm not sure there is a wild anymore. Its quite obvious that there was serious and organised child abuse going on by the rich and powerful on the most vulnerable. When the proven and known goes beyond what you ever considered possible from our sainted masters perhaps its time to start considering what went on and what a massive clean up operation went on.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> after saville, after kncora, after righton-dolphin fucking square- I'm not sure there is a wild anymore. Its quite obvious that there was serious and organised child abuse going on by the rich and powerful on the most vulnerable. When the proven and known goes beyond what you ever considered possible from our sainted masters perhaps its time to start considering what went on and what a massive clean up operation went on.


Absolutely, I agree that _in general terms_ we cannot any longer rule anything out - "What, a senior MP, in a classy apartment complex, abusing kids???" - and I absolutely think that nothing should be off-limits in terms of investigating that stuff.

But it's a long reach from there to making very specific unfounded allegations about individuals: not that I am saying you're doing that, particularly in the light of this new stuff about 12 year olds, but I think the point is worth making as a general one anyway.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I see no reason to doubt this persons allegation.



There's certainly no reason it shouldn't be taken seriously - and thankfully it sounds as if it finally is - but all allegations need to be treated with scepticism for exactly the reasons existentialist has just given.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 4, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> There's certainly no reason it shouldn't be taken seriously - and thankfully it sounds as if it finally is - but all allegations need to be treated with scepticism for exactly the reasons existentialist has just given.



I think I see what you and existentialist are saying, I'm just recalling that Lord who wanted to sue all of twitter for a false claim against him. obviously that helped not at all.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 4, 2015)

Exaro reporting that their source 'Nick' (Dolphin Square etc.) told them that Heath had raped him.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  25m25 minutes ago
‘Nick’, regarded by police as a credible witness, alleges that Sir Edward Heath sexually abused him multiple times. More on Exaro soon.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  26m26 minutes ago
The Met started to investigate Sir Edward Heath last October after Exaro arranged a meeting between ‘Nick’ and detectives…

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  31m31 minutes ago
Exaro can confirm that the Met has been investigating claims of child sex abuse by Sir Edward Heath under 'Operation Midland'. More soon.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 4, 2015)

...funny that according to McGuire and Pierce on yesterday's Sky News press review they _*never*_ heard even the _*slightest*_ rumour to do with Ted Heath's private life...doesn't instil alot of confidence in their nose for a story....


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 4, 2015)

Article here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ild-sex-abuse.html?via=desktop&source=twitter


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 4, 2015)

I remember that bizarre ted heath court case - and the way the judge completely closed it down and the media moved on as if it hadn't happened.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

Heath story all over the BBC.  Really does seem to have legs now...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 4, 2015)

'Nick' speaks out about relief that Heath's name is now in the open.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...t-also-investigates-claims-of-child-sex-abuse


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 4, 2015)

All this makes wonder what Brasseye would be like now.

See as we do seem to be nation ruled by nonces.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 4, 2015)

Is it reasonable to suspect that Heath may be thrown to the wolves for strategic purposes?


----------



## laptop (Aug 4, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Is it reasonable to suspect that Heath may be thrown to the wolves for strategic purposes?



Wolves are, I believe, quite picky about carrion. He dead.

The only question is why Wiltshire police made an announcement now, rather than a couple of weeks ago. 

The official start of the silly season guaranteed that they'd get maximum publicity for Doing Something.

If you want an ulterior motive, check out whether the force has been accused of pension irregularities, or letting people off for speeding, or something.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> Wolves are, I believe, quite picky about carrion. He dead.
> 
> The only question is why Wiltshire police made an announcement now, rather than a couple of weeks ago.
> 
> ...



I knew the analogy was cronky. Vultures really. It's not just Wiltshire though is it? It looks like a ton of stuff now. I was wondering if, even as a former PM, he was considered safer territory than the heat on a more recent Foreign Sec, because there are serving cabinet ministers who could reasonably be assumed to have been informed about the latter. Heath is massive news that brings down no one. Brittan is big news that could bring down someone.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 4, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Is it reasonable to suspect that Heath may be thrown to the wolves for strategic purposes?


Given that he's dead, it seems unlikely. We've seen enough of deceased celebs/politicians effectively "getting away with it" for me to think that anyone is going to be placated by a succession of conveniently late abusers. We've already seen how the post-mortem revelations about Savile have triggered a wave of allegations, which themselves have triggered more. The enquiries those have led to have resulted in a significant number of not-yet-dead perpetrators facing justice.

 Anyone who thinks the bandwagon is going to be stopped by flinging a few elderly corpses in its path must surely be very badly mistaken.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 4, 2015)

Quite possibly so existentialist.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Is it reasonable to suspect that Heath may be thrown to the wolves for strategic purposes?



By whom do you mean?


----------



## laptop (Aug 4, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> By whom do you mean?



Them.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> Them.



You don't say!


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 4, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> By whom do you mean?



Those aspects of this system that have had this covered up for decades. For example, MI5 didn't just waltz off with the Smith stuff on a whim. Nor did Dickensons paedo files just get lost down the back of a wardrobe. The repeat theme of higher up plod shelving investigations lower down, who thinks that is all coincidence?

"them" is whatever apparatus of the state has been doing this, with the reputation of the state as paramount far over justice for or interests of the child victims of rape.


----------



## quiquaquo (Aug 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> Them.


----------



## andysays (Aug 4, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Is it reasonable to suspect that Heath may be thrown to the wolves for strategic purposes?



It's not just about whether or not Heath committed various sexual offences, it's quite explicitly also about whether allegations were properly followed up or swept under the carpet.

Edward Heath abuse claims: Four forces investigating ex-PM


> The BBC understands Wiltshire Police halted an inquiry into a brothel keeper in the 1990s after she said Sir Edward was involved in child sexual abuse. The BBC's home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani says claims made by the female brothel keeper, that the former PM was a client, meant that she had left herself open to prosecution. However, the case against her was allegedly discontinued between 1990 and 1995.





> The woman, whose identity is known to the BBC, was later convicted of controlling prostitutes after a successful prosecution by Wiltshire Police. She was jailed for six years after a trial which included allegations that she had supplied children as young as 13 to her clients. It is unclear whether or not the force then went back to re-investigate the woman's original allegations against Sir Edward after she was convicted - and this is now part of a corruption inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.





> The IPCC said on Monday that it would look at whether Wiltshire officers failed to pursue allegations of child abuse made against Sir Edward, who was prime minister from 1970 to 1974 and died in 2005 aged 89 at his home in Salisbury. A retired detective has alleged that claims were made in the 1990s but were not followed up. Wiltshire Police has declined to comment on the case, but has appealed for information regarding allegations against Sir Edward.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 4, 2015)

Five forces now. Who knows how many by the morning.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 4, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


>




This video needs plastering over social media again and again and a fucking gain.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 5, 2015)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-337949...ng&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

Hmmm...smelly


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-337949...ng&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central
> 
> Hmmm...smelly



Not necessarily smelly at all. She could, for example, be telling the truth and she never tried to use Heath as a shield. We'll see, not that I have any great faith that the IPCC will get to the bottom of it. But seeing as she was prosecuted eventually anyway, its never been the Heath story I'm most interested in.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 5, 2015)

elbows said:


> Not necessarily smelly at all. She could, for example, be telling the truth and she never tried to use Heath as a shield. We'll see, not that I have any great faith that the IPCC will get to the bottom of it. But seeing as she was prosecuted eventually anyway, its never been the Heath story I'm most interested in.


Of course she could be telling the truth; that would make the actions of Wiltshire etc even smellier.


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

I'm not catching your drift.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 5, 2015)

elbows said:


> I'm not catching your drift.


Why would Wiltshire make that up?


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 5, 2015)

It's a bit weird if they are answering something Ms Forde never alleged. It turns the spotlight on the retired senior officer turned 'whistleblower'. It makes one wonder why other police forces are suddenly leaping to it. It's almost as if it were common practice to cover things up, even if that wasn't the case here.


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Why would Wiltshire make that up?



Nope, still not following you. Are you mixing up what Wiltshire police have said recently with what the former officer alleged?


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Why would Wiltshire make that up?


Not obvious to me that it's necessarily about making stuff up as opposed to covering arse. Conceivably because they have no records showing what happened one way or the other. I'm more interested in why the IPCC have taken it on.

I have to say the initial story set off my 'possible bullshit' meter when it described the story as originating from a retired police officer. This wasn't alleviated by the revelation that he was a constable at the time. Every possibility that he's retailing canteen gossip rather than fact in the hope of selling a story.

As this has developed it's become a little more interesting although my response to learning that five separate forces are investigating allegations about Heath is to wonder how much of police budgets is being devoted to this, particularly given stories like this yesterday
Manchester police: Missing teen searches 'unsustainable' - BBC


----------



## brogdale (Aug 5, 2015)

elbows said:


> Nope, still not following you. Are you mixing up what Wiltshire police have said recently with what the former officer alleged?


Well they said this..


> “Sir Edward Heath has been named in relation to offences concerning children. He lived in Salisbury for many years and we would like to hear from anyone who has any relevant information that may assist us in our enquiries or anyone who believes they may have been a victim.


Are you suggesting that the naming went beyond Myra Forde's allegations?


----------



## kebabking (Aug 5, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> ...It makes one wonder why other police forces are suddenly leaping to it...



possibly because getting the 'scalp' of a long dead PM provides a convienient glossing over of current failures? 

Wiltshire - or whoever - know that Heath will fill the papers for weeks with stories of brave rozzers challenging the establishment to uncover past misdeeds by the powerful, and will easily displace the story of the local sports coach finally being convicted after 15 years of un-acted-upon allegations.

the original allegation that a prosecution/investigation had been shelved came from a retired, senior officer. perhaps its the retired, senior officer who'se looking to muddy the waters over some impending, pension-losing, investigation..?


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Well they said this..
> ​Are you suggesting that the naming went beyond Myra Forde's allegations?



I'm suggesting that the former plod named him, and they are his allegations, not necessarily Myra Fordes.


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

Besides I don't even know as its that important who got this ball rolling. The point is that now Heaths name is out there, every investigation into him get to call for victims to come forwards. And what happens to any particular branch of investigation into him shouldn't affect the others. If Heath was a prolific abuser then we've got some chance of learning some truth eventually, if not then maybe we'll never gain certainty on this one.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 5, 2015)

elbows said:


> And what happens to any particular branch of investigation into him shouldn't affect the others.


Really ? If we have to have multiple investigations they might at least communicate with one another.


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Really ? If we have to have multiple investigations they might at least communicate with one another.



I should have been more specific. This thread sometimes features suspicions that stinky branches may be introduced in order to scupper things. I don't think it works like that, and I'm really quite bored of all the cloak and dagger bollocks.


----------



## elbows (Aug 5, 2015)

When I say bored, I probably mean frustrated. Because there is a lot of dodgy shit that actually happened, but quite a part of discovering what actually happened involves eliminating the bogus stories. So when people come up with a bunch of fresh intrigue every single step of the way, increasingly muddy waters frustrate me.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 5, 2015)

elbows said:


> I should have been more specific. This thread sometimes features suspicions that stinky branches may be introduced in order to scupper things. I don't think it works like that, and I'm really quite bored of all the cloak and dagger bollocks.


Ah, I see what you mean. I entirely agree.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 5, 2015)

There's a high degree of incredulity expressed out there in the media, fwiw, and it's probably not helpful to the credibility of victims. There have been persistent rumours about Heath for years. Every case that turns out to be unsubstantiated or not proven increases the volume of the cries of 'witch hunt'. What is most concerning of all is the possibility that rich and powerful people haven't magically stopped abusing children and are even now getting away without being investigated and prosecuted.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 5, 2015)

elbows said:


> When I say bored, I probably mean frustrated. Because there is a lot of dodgy shit that actually happened, but quite a part of discovering what actually happened involves eliminating the bogus stories. So when people come up with a bunch of fresh intrigue every single step of the way, increasingly muddy waters frustrate me.


Well, I'm sorry if my comment about how 'smelly' this story is has added to your frustration; that was not my intent.

But the way this story about Heath has emerged has all the hallmarks of an attempt at a highly choreographed example of news management. To my untrained eye it looks as though the authorities have thought long and hard about how to break this to the public. 

It appears tonight that they've already moved to a national investigation, and this story seems to have grown very quickly. I suspect that the brothel-owner/retired plod story was seem as a convenient way to break the news relatively gently, but perhaps they didn't reckon on Forde blowing their story.

Former PM as paedo really is pretty big, isn't it? This is the sort of stuff that Icke & co. were on about years ago.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Former PM as paedo really is pretty big, isn't it?


 
You're right, if correct it is truly astronomical in scale.


----------



## kenny g (Aug 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Well, I'm sorry if my comment about how 'smelly' this story is has added to your frustration; that was not my intent.
> 
> But the way this story about Heath has emerged has all the hallmarks of an attempt at a highly choreographed example of news management. To my untrained eye it looks as though the authorities have thought long and hard about how to break this to the public.
> 
> ...



Agree that this seems very orchestrated. I was having the same thoughts that it is probably true but being selectively released.


----------



## elbows (Aug 6, 2015)

So now the prosecutor at the time for the abandoned Forde case provides a third version of events:



> “On the day of her trial there was a large number of reporters at the court,” he said. “I was informed by the police that this was because the defendant, who had been on bail, had let it be known that if the case progressed as far as her having to give evidence she intended to allege that she had provided rent boys to Edward Heath.”
> 
> Seed said there was no suggestion the men were under age or “anything more than male prostitutes” and furthermore these were “unsubstantiated assertions”.
> 
> “The decision for the case to proceed no further was mine and was based on the lack of evidence and had nothing whatsoever to do with any potential allegations against Edward Heath.”





> In a letter to the Times, Seed said three witnesses, all prostitutes who allegedly worked for Forde at her brothel in Salisbury, Wiltshire, failed or refused to give evidence at court, leaving him with no choice but to offer no evidence.



http://www.theguardian.com/politics...e-was-dropped-over-lack-of-evidence-barrister


----------



## laptop (Aug 6, 2015)

elbows said:


> So now the prosecutor at the time for the abandoned Forde case provides a third version of events:
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...e-was-dropped-over-lack-of-evidence-barrister



My suspicion is that these conflicting accounts have little to do with noncery, and everything to do with competing interests trying to ward off action for professional misconduct. I would read her lawyer's denial in that context. Were he not a lawyer, I would be more terse and precise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2015)

laptop said:


> My suspicion is that these conflicting events have little to do with noncery, and everything to do with competing interests trying to ward off action for professional misconduct. I would read her lawyer's denial in that context. Were he not a lawyer, I would be more terse and precise.


contrasting events? contrasting accounts?


----------



## laptop (Aug 6, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> contrasting events? contrasting accounts?



Corrected while you were typing


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2015)

laptop said:


> Corrected while you were typing


you have to be quick to get one by me


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 6, 2015)

The various Heath investigations to be merged into one, or as the Guardian put it

Investigation into Edward Heath child abuse claims to go national - Guardian

Featured several paragraphs down the story :



> The Metropolitan police do not have an ongoing investigation into allegations of abuse by Heath. The force said it had interviewed a complainant in April who alleged in the Mirror newspaper this week that he was raped by Heath as a 12-year-old boy.





> But the force said that, after making a full assessment, there were no lines of inquiry that could “proportionately” be pursued. The force has refused to confirm whether Heath features in Operation Midland – its ongoing investigation into claims that three murders were carried out to cover up abuse by a paedophile ring made up of politicians and other high-profile individuals at locations across southern England.



This contradicts elements of the Mirror story which stated that there was an ongoing investigation of the allegation it described. However this is quite separate from any allegations about Heath being dealt with by Operation Midland which this weeks Exaro story refers to.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 6, 2015)

The LBC interview with Leah McGrath Goodman.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 7, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Former PM as paedo really is pretty big, isn't it? This is the sort of stuff that Icke & co. were on about years ago.



That weirdo has been right so many times now it's unsettling


----------



## two sheds (Aug 7, 2015)

about liz and people being lizards? can't argue with that.


----------



## elbows (Aug 7, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> That weirdo has been right so many times now it's unsettling



No reason to be unsettled. Part of his work involves reheating old rumours and adding his spin. I won't give him much credit for that, and there were certainly plenty of historical rumours to choose from on the sex abuse front.

Aside from whatever happens in regards bringing people to justice, inquiries etc, one of the things thats steadily been happening post-Savile is better mainstream acknowledgement of the rumours. Perhaps we'll even get to find out whether some of them were true. Icke can never have been truly right about them in my book because he delivered them as if they were proven facts. Such sloppiness doesn't get a special award from me in the event that further detailed investigation later proves some of them.


----------



## gosub (Aug 7, 2015)

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffee...ay-trust-me-i-tried-and-failed-to-seduce-him/


----------



## tufty79 (Aug 7, 2015)

Ugh.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 7, 2015)

Why has the convicted paedo got a column in that rag?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 7, 2015)

(Really) not wishing to muddy any waters here...but this reported FT interview of Camila Batmanghelidjh caught my eye...


> Its colourful founder, Iranian-born Camila Batmanghelidjh, told the Financial Times that government demands in return for crucial annual funding had become too onerous.
> 
> “*There were three drivers that brought this to a head*,” she said in an interview. “Number one: I kept telling the Cabinet Office enough was enough and we had to get our funding sorted out. Number two: I kept challenging the government about child protection issues; *and number three: I was told about historic child sex abuse . . . involving senior very recent ministers.”*


----------



## laptop (Aug 7, 2015)

brogdale said:


> (Really) not wishing to muddy any waters here...but this reported FT interview of Camila Batmanghelidjh caught my eye...
> ​



So she was shut down because she Knew Too Much, not because she was too incompetent an administrator to receive government funds?

Look out for bankers claiming that they were fingered for fiddling foreign exchange rates only because they Knew Too Much.


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 7, 2015)

And the Spectator sinks to a new low by featuring a piece written by an expert on paedophiles, a certain Jonathon King:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/07/jonathan-king-specator-controversy_n_7955434.html

With any luck there'll be a job vacancy behind the editor's desk some time soon.


----------



## The Octagon (Aug 7, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> And the Spectator sinks to a new low by featuring a piece written by an expert on paedophiles, a certain Jonathon King:
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/07/jonathan-king-specator-controversy_n_7955434.html
> 
> With any luck there'll be a job vacancy behind the editor's desk some time soon.



Jesus


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> And the Spectator sinks to a new low by featuring a piece written by an expert on paedophiles, a certain Jonathon King:
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/07/jonathan-king-specator-controversy_n_7955434.html
> 
> With any luck there'll be a job vacancy behind the editor's desk some time soon.


tbh i don't suppose there's that many gay men who would respond positively to an approach by jonathon king.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2015)

laptop said:


> So she was shut down because she Knew Too Much, not because she was too incompetent an administrator to receive government funds?
> 
> Look out for bankers claiming that they were fingered for fiddling foreign exchange rates only because they Knew Too Much.


i was under the impression that if you knew this sort of thing then you wouldn't be closed down. and if she does know this and she didn't use it to prevent the closure of kc then what was the fucking point of knowing it in the first place?


----------



## elbows (Aug 7, 2015)

Exactly. Unless she comes out with something of substance, I consider her words on that front to be a shameless disgrace. Pathetic, especially as in the same breath she denies any issues with how sex abuse was handled by her own organisation.


----------



## elbows (Aug 7, 2015)

Janner legally required to attend hearing, even if only for a minute:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33814819


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 7, 2015)

Kincora in my Troubles reading again today- more claims that it was used as leverage. Interestingly the author refers to a 'homosexual vice ring' operating out of kincora, rather than noncery. Claimed as part of a wider dirty tricks campaign, including it being used to end the power sharing executive through dark means, i.e get the ulster strike endorsed rather than spiked. Not sure what to make of it all. The claims that this was done deliberatly to discredit wilson and his gov are certaiinly going to need more than the word of one ex spook


----------



## Shirl (Aug 8, 2015)

elbows said:


> Janner legally required to attend hearing, even if only for a minute:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33814819


I was recently a juror, on a 'trial of the facts'. It was interesting in the way it was different from other trials but I don't reckon it caused much if any distress to the accused who sat not in the dock but in the well of the court, completely at ease if a little bemused.


----------



## elbows (Aug 8, 2015)

Well this is just a magistrates court appearance, and there is talk that they could even hold that hearing in his home. I'm not sure what will happen in regards the trial/trial of the facts.


----------



## laptop (Aug 8, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> one ex spook



Peter Wright?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> Peter Wright?


just checked- one colin wallace. no idea as to his overall credibility but it was interesting to see a book published over 20 years ago referencing things about kincora and the role intel had used its 'activities' for


----------



## laptop (Aug 8, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> just checked- one colin wallace.



Insert palm-down tilting-hand "_comme ci, comme ça_" smiley.

Ah, you were thinking the same.



DotCommunist said:


> no idea as to his overall credibility but it was interesting to see a book bublished over 20 years ago referencing things about kincora and the role intel had used its 'activities' for



I think it's safe to confirm that his credibility is disputed


----------



## free spirit (Aug 8, 2015)

tbf, anyone claiming to be from the security services with inside knowledge of what went on at Kinncora who hadn't been subject of a campaign to discredit them would be a bit suspicious.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 8, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Kincora in my Troubles reading again today- more claims that it was used as leverage. Interestingly the author refers to a 'homosexual vice ring' operating out of kincora, rather than noncery. Claimed as part of a wider dirty tricks campaign, including it being used to end the power sharing executive through dark means, i.e get the ulster strike endorsed rather than spiked. Not sure what to make of it all. The claims that this was done deliberatly to discredit wilson and his gov are certaiinly going to need more than the word of one ex spook



TBF, what Wallace mentioned was an overall operation (Clockwork Orange) whose intention was to introduce anti-Labour disinfo/black propaganda into general discourse. The use of Kincora was MI5, the Green Slime and Ulster Special Branch taking advantage of an already-existing "honeytrap" operation that was itself constructed on abuse taking place at the home. Wallace (and Fred Holroyd) are both reasonably credible on this subject for ex-military spooks.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> Insert palm-down tilting-hand "_comme ci, comme ça_" smiley.
> 
> Ah, you were thinking the same.
> 
> I think it's safe to confirm that his credibility is disputed



His credibility has *always* been disputed.
Interestingly though, few of his core claims have ever been adequately rebutted, despite masses of journalistic talent being tasked to do so (I'm looking at the _Telegraph_ papers here).


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 8, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Holroyd


Yeah thats the other name mentioned in this chapter of Dillons 'dirty war'. Insane stuff really, anyone who ever repeats the lie that 'we didn't go in gloves off' is getting a lecture. Short of stationing an artillery outfit a mile south of belfast and doing a grozny on the place, the gloves were off.


----------



## laptop (Aug 8, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Clockwork Orange






			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Journalists from foreign news organisations would be given briefings and shown forged documents, which purported to show that politicians were speaking at Irish republican rallies or were receiving secret deposits in Swiss bank accounts.
> 
> People named by Wallace as having been targeted in this manner include Harold Wilson, Edward Heath, Merlyn Rees, Cyril Smith, Tony Benn and Ian Paisley.



In the context of this thread:


----------



## laptop (Aug 8, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> masses of journalistic talent... (I'm looking at the _Telegraph_ papers here).



Reconsidering, the major journalistic talent involved here was probably the ability to file a story retailing what they'd been told by a spook who'd just got them _ver, ver, drunk_.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> Reconsidering, the major journalistic talent involved here was probably the ability to file a story retailing what they'd been told by a spook who'd just got them _ver, ver, drunk_.



Back in the day (and as recently as Moore's and Lawson's editorships) there was no need to get 'em drunk - they just fed the ed the info, and some mutton-head would get tasked with building it up into a credible story.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 8, 2015)

elbows said:


> Well this is just a magistrates court appearance, and there is talk that they could even hold that hearing in his home. I'm not sure what will happen in regards the trial/trial of the facts.


This is undoubtedly going on to the Crown Court, whether they have to make a special appointment to hold the Magistrate's hearing in a more convenient place so as not to 'unduly distress' Janner, or else employ the little used legal mechanism which has been discussed in the press to allow them to commit him to the Crown Court without his attendance.

As you say what happens at Crown Court is another matter entirely. It seems most unlikely that the Judge will not find him unfit to plead given both Prosecution and Defence agree about it. Clearly there will then be a robust case made by the Defence counsel retained by the Janner family that a 'trial of fact' would be unfair, not least because of any prejudicial press coverage in the period between the DPP deciding not to go ahead and that decision being overturned. (Things like a Daily Mail article which made a very serious and almost certainly untrue allegation about him). An article in the Guardian this week suggested that in the circumstances the Court would not want to accept such arguments against a 'Trial of Fact'. We shall see.

If it does go ahead then the Court will appoint counsel on Janner's behalf, almost certainly the defence counsel the family have retained. The state will pick up the tab for their subsequent services however. They will no longer be acting for Janner but for the Court (despite having been acting for him up to that point) and cannot offer a defence on his behalf. It will be their job to test the credibility of the evidence offered by the Prosecution on behalf of the court. It's not clear to me what limits there are to cross examination of witnesses at a Trial of Fact but it seems inconceivable that if, for example, the witness who testified about Janner at Frank Beck's trial gives evidence he will not have the same questions put to him about his motives for giving evidence in Beck's defence. The prosecution will still have to make their case. I suspect a good deal would rest on the strength of the evidence in the most recent Leicestershire investigation. If it gets that far.


----------



## laptop (Aug 8, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Back in the day (and as recently as Moore's and Lawson's editorships) there was no need to get 'em drunk - they just fed the ed the info, and some mutton-head would get tasked with building it up into a credible story.



The spook didn't even need deniability?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> The spook didn't even need deniability?



Deniability comes from the ed attributing the base of the story to "anonymous sources". I knew someone who left the _Sunday Telegraph_ after being asked to place a spook-tale once too often. Ended up working for the Daily Fail, as I recall, where she got equally pissed off being tasked with wingnut features about the latest health fad/cancer cure/anti-ageing diet.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Yeah thats the other name mentioned in this chapter of Dillons 'dirty war'...


 I hope your "Troubles reading" goes a bit deeper than Martin Dillon. I've had early morning shits that take longer to work through than one of his books. My turds tend to be better referenced too.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 8, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> I hope your "Troubles reading" goes a bit deeper than Martin Dillon. I've had early morning shits that take longer to work through than one of his books. My turds tend to be better referenced too.


it will do- I find it hard going. Not cos its hard as thinking hard its just. Any amount of fictional war and violence I can do before breakfast. The real stuff, well small doses in order to preserve ones MH. Next bit of study on this front is going to be that Devlin lady and also the history/roots of the INLA.


----------



## tim (Aug 8, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> And the Spectator sinks to a new low by featuring a piece written by an expert on paedophiles, a certain Jonathon King:
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/07/jonathan-king-specator-controversy_n_7955434.html
> 
> With any luck there'll be a job vacancy behind the editor's desk some time soon.



One that Laurie Penny will be very pleased to fill.

(Clearly posted at a point were I managed to confuse the Spectator and the New Statesman)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2015)

Fred Holroyd's book can be had here:

http://issuu.com/bristlekrs/docs/abk023_holroyd_burbridge_-_1989_-_w


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 9, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> My turds tend to be better referenced too.


Indeed, I heard the Bristol Stool Scale was based on your morning extrusions.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 9, 2015)

Christ.

I went to look at the "independent" panel page, hastily set up within a mere year of it being announced.

https://www.csa-inquiry.independent.gov.uk/about-the-inquiry

From which:

The Inquiry will investigate a wide range of institutions including:

local authorities,the police,the Crown Prosecution Service,the Immigration Service,the BBCthe armed forcesschoolshospitalschildren's homeschurches, mosques and other religious organisationscharities and voluntary organisationsregulators, andother public and private institutions.



---------------------------------

See where has managed to avoid being explicitly named?

elsewise, it does seem they are doing much at the moment, but after a year getting round to existing at all, perhaps it was time to go a bit easy. It's only kids being fucked after all.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Aug 9, 2015)

Radio Four seem to be re-running the Ted Heath episode of Desert Island Discs ...


----------



## teqniq (Aug 9, 2015)

Is this some sort of attempt to get us to remember what an absolutely lovely guy he was? Surely not!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 9, 2015)

tim said:


> One that Laurie Penny will be very pleased to fill.
> 
> (Clearly posted at a point were I managed to confuse the Spectator and the New Statesman)



What makes you think _La Pennionara_ wouldn't sell out in a moment for a Boris-sized salary?


----------



## tim (Aug 9, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> What makes you think _La Pennionara_ wouldn't sell out in a moment for a Boris-sized salary?



She'd, pesumably, see it more as a stepping stone to City Hall, and eventually Downing Street.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 9, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Radio Four seem to be re-running the Ted Heath episode of Desert Island Discs ...


His choices included Topol's "If I were a rich man" from "*Fiddler on the roof*" and Elgar's _*Cockaigne *(In London Town)_, Op. 40, also known as the *Cockaigne Overture. *Along with the luxury item of suntan lotion.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 9, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> just checked- one colin wallace. no idea as to his overall credibility but it was interesting to see a book published over 20 years ago referencing things about kincora and the role intel had used its 'activities' for



Wallace is pretty credible in my view .


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 9, 2015)

Dunno if this has been posted


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 9, 2015)

This name has regularly cropped up around kincora . His death, seemingly at the hands of 2 state agents,  when the scandal first began to leak out was pretty convenient .

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McKeague


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 9, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Kincora in my Troubles reading again today- more claims that it was used as leverage. Interestingly the author refers to a 'homosexual vice ring' operating out of kincora, rather than noncery. Claimed as part of a wider dirty tricks campaign, including it being used to end the power sharing executive through dark means, i.e get the ulster strike endorsed rather than spiked. Not sure what to make of it all. The claims that this was done deliberatly to discredit wilson and his gov are certaiinly going to need more than the word of one ex spook



There's 2 ex spooks now . Brian gemmell is speaking out too .

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...st-homosexual-says-whistleblower-9644610.html


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 9, 2015)

Just on MCkeague, his is one of 2 deaths connecteed to kincora were there's strong suspicion the British intelligence services had a hand in it . In the early 80 s an INLA grass, Rab MCCallister decimated the organisation in Belfast . While grassing up his comrades he personally admitted to 5 killings . One of those was McKeague , who shortly before his killing was threatening to name names after being questioned by the cops about kincora .
MCAllister admitted to having been turned as an agent a year prior to that killing . Despite his admission he was never prosecuted for shooting McKeague .

Months prior to that Robert Bradford MP was executed by the IRA . He too had been digging into kincora . It's since transpired that the special branch and military intelligence knew in advance of the killing but did nothing . There's persistent rumours that Fru agents..namely stake knife / scap ...was up to his neck in it too . Bradfords special branch bodyguards were left unharmed ..and they never harmed the hit team either . Although a civilian witness was ruthlessly cut down .

Pretty much stinks of loose ends being conveniently snipped off .


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 9, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Months prior to that Robert Bradford MP was executed by the IRA . He too had been digging into kincora . It's since transpired that the special branch and military intelligence knew in advance of the killing but did nothing . There's persistent rumours that Fru agents..namely stake knife / scap ...was up to his neck in it too . Bradfords special branch bodyguards were left unharmed ..and they never harmed the hit team either . Although a civilian witness was ruthlessly cut down .



Lyra McKee has been digging into this the past few years

http://www.beaconreader.com/projects/the-last-story-of-robert-bradford


----------



## The Pale King (Aug 9, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Radio Four seem to be re-running the Ted Heath episode of Desert Island Discs ...


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 9, 2015)

Apols if this has been posted before .

Heartbreaking stuff


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 11, 2015)

brogdale said:


> (Really) not wishing to muddy any waters here...but this reported FT interview of Camila Batmanghelidjh caught my eye...
> ​





laptop said:


> So she was shut down because she Knew Too Much, not because she was too incompetent an administrator to receive government funds?
> 
> Look out for bankers claiming that they were fingered for fiddling foreign exchange rates only because they Knew Too Much.



.....was my initial reaction....although I see that going back a few weeks we do have a record of it being slightly more substantial - yet another "dossier" in-fact ...

....was this Camilla's insurance policy as she lived high on the hog......we all know what these insurance companies are like when we want to claim on a policy..... 

*Ministers hid abuse, says charity chief*

_Katie Gibbons
Last updated at 12:01AM, July 4 2015_

_A children’s charity head claims that she is being pressured to resign after approaching the government with *a list of establishment figures involved in an historical child sex abuse case*.

Camila Batmanghelidjh, founder of the charity Kids Company, has said that she “will not be bullied” into resignation despite alleged threats to withdraw vital state funding.
_
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4487820.ece


Also don't think this has been posted : from Don Hale via the Sunday People : Puts Heath as an attendee at PIE meetings from his mysterious Barbara Castle dossier :

Edward Heath fixed it for Jimmy Savile to receive OBE and attended Paedophile Information Exchange meetings

_We can also reveal that Heath, under investigation by seven police forces over child abuse claims, was present at more than half a dozen Westminster meetings of the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange.

A dossier of files compiled by former Labour minister Baroness Castle showed Heath was present at Westminster meetings with paedophile rights campaigners from the PIE group.

Heath is said to have attended at least a quarter of the 30 or so monthly or bi-weekly meetings.

His name is said to have appeared on minutes of the private gatherings, also apparently attended by other MPs, along with scoutmasters and headteachers.

But the Castle files have been missing since the mid 1980s._


----------



## Celyn (Aug 11, 2015)

brogdale said:


> (Really) not wishing to muddy any waters here...but this reported FT interview of Camila Batmanghelidjh caught my eye...
> ​



If she "was told" of child sexual abuse allegations involving very recent ministers, has she remembered to share this information with the police?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 11, 2015)

Meanwhile...now 12 police forces investigating Heath...
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5638/sir-edward-heath-more-than-a-dozen-police-probes-become-one


----------



## weltweit (Aug 11, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Apols if this has been posted before .
> 
> Heartbreaking stuff



Very difficult to listen to.
It beggars belief how this seems to have been covered up, and the perpetrators protected.


----------



## Celyn (Aug 11, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile...now 12 police forces investigating Heath...
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5638/sir-edward-heath-more-than-a-dozen-police-probes-become-one



12 now?  That must be some sort of record. Bloody hell.  I'll still be happier when Mr. Plod is going after the live ones, but this is progress.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 11, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Very difficult to listen to.
> It beggars belief how this seems to have been covered up, and the perpetrators protected.


Sadly, it does not beggar belief at all.
UK society was operating in a state of total denial regarding sexual abuse of any kind...from sexual abuse of women to child sexual abuse, it was ignored, laughed off, and utterly denied. Sure, we'd joke about the pervy games teacher or the inadequate with a penchant for friendships (which were probably harmless) with young kids, but in doing so, we studiously ignored the army of careful, skilful abusers who had made their stock in trade the violation of - particularly - innocents. Society sent these people the message that the risk of getting caught was minimal, and the likely penalties no more than token, given our unwillingness to acknowledge what was going on in plain view under our noses. I know of several schoolteachers who were given their marching orders "or we're calling the police" - an empty threat, since no school wanted to be bothered with the aggravation of a (likely futile) prosecution, so sex abuser teachers could safely move on to pastures new and totally innocent of their history...because, for sure, no reference given was ever going to risk disclosing their predilection.

To make things worse, the stigma of child sexual abuse was _just_ bad enough to ensure that abusers would close ranks and collude in ways that inevitably put their victims at even greater risk, through networks of abusers, and "intelligence sharing" of a kind that meant their naive victims stood no chance of overcoming.

Surprise? Nah. It's not even surprising that it's taken this long to come out.

The true surprise will come when we learn just how endemic this has been - and continues to be - in our society.

ETA: and of course, in all of this, the one group no thought whatsoever was given to was the people who suffered at the hands of both their abusers, and a society which refused to listen to or take seriously their experiences.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 13, 2015)

Janner faces arrest if he fails to appear at court hearing on child abuse charges



> Lawyers acting for Greville Janner have lost their attempt to prevent him being forced to attend court on Friday to face child abuse charges.
> 
> They had argued that it would be “barbaric, inhumane and uncivilised” to arrest the former Labour peer if he did not attend the hearing. Paul Ozin said there was medical evidence that requiring Lord Janner to attend court would cause a “catastrophic reaction” due to the severity of his dementia....


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 13, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Janner faces arrest if he fails to appear at court hearing on child abuse charges


Good to see his briefs have a firm grasp of the concept of perspective


----------



## teqniq (Aug 13, 2015)

Indeed


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

Really pleased to hear this news this morning.  In response to the 'it'll be catastrophic' lie peddled by his defence, judge says even if it unsettles him, he'll quickly forget it anyway!!


----------



## two sheds (Aug 14, 2015)

Hehe yes the defence argument does sort of suggest that they're fully aware that he *doesn't* have alzheimer's.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 14, 2015)

Lord Janner fails to appear in court over child sex abuse charges



> Lawyers for Greville Janner argued on Friday for the former Labour peer to be allowed appear before court via video link after he failed to attend a hearing in central London.
> 
> Janner, 87, had been expected to attend Westminster magistrates court for his first appearance over allegations that he sexually abused nine boys over three decades after his legal team lost a high court bid to keep him out of court.
> 
> His barrister, Paul Ozin, was in court but Janner did not appear. Ozin said his preferred option was for Janner to appear via videolink from his home, but prosecutor Louise Oakley said that would not be lawful....


----------



## weltweit (Aug 14, 2015)

I hear Janner has again failed to appear in court despite being ordered to by a judge.

His lawyers have been asking for a video link from his home but the court is not willing.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 14, 2015)

....lets have some sympathy for this poor afflicted soul....try and remember who the real victim is here....


----------



## laptop (Aug 14, 2015)

His refusal to recognise the court is clearly a symptom of his sad condition. He has Anarchia Nervosa.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I hear Janner has again failed to appear in court despite being ordered to by a judge.
> 
> His lawyers have been asking for a video link from his home but the court is not willing.



Video links are only accounted for in victim legislation. It's not that the court is unwilling, it's that there's no legislation allowing defendants to "appear" via video link.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

laptop said:


> His refusal to recognise the court is clearly a symptom of his sad condition. He has Anarchia Nervosa.



_Saundersia Nervosa_, if you don't mind!


----------



## teqniq (Aug 14, 2015)

Well yes, more like.


----------



## laptop (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> there's no legislation allowing defendants to "appear" via video link.



Happens increasingly often - is reported when a terrsm suspect appears from Belmarsh. I recall it happening in proceedings to continue remanding someone in custody.

I suspect that there's no legislation allowing it _in this rather unusual legal process. _


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

laptop said:


> Happens increasingly often - is reported when a terrsm suspect appears from Belmarsh. I recall it happening in proceedings to continue remanding someone in custody.
> 
> I suspect that there's no legislation allowing it _in this rather unusual legal process. _



The terror-related cases are covered under emergency powers, for terrorism-related crime only.
Frankly, if the old fuck could be allowed to testify by link, I still wouldn't want him to. he needs to be in the courtroom.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

laptop said:


> Happens increasingly often - is reported when a terrsm suspect appears from Belmarsh. I recall it happening in proceedings to continue remanding someone in custody.
> 
> I suspect that there's no legislation allowing it _in this rather unusual legal process. _



I'd be pretty surprised if a magistrate's court went down the video link process - mainly because it doesn't seem at all practical and would set a bizarre precedent...


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> The terror-related cases are covered under emergency powers, for terrorism-related crime only.
> Frankly, if the old fuck could be allowed to testify by link, I still wouldn't want him to. he needs to be in the courtroom.



I'm not saying that he is not guilty but you seem awfully certain the he is guilty before he has even be tried.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 14, 2015)

So it's more of a _techicality_ well I hope the prosecution stick to their guns and insist that he show up


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not saying that he is not guilty but you seem awfully certain the he is guilty before he has even be tried.



Whether he's a paedophile or not, he's still an old cunt who's done no favours for British Jewry, with his Zionism in high places. He's guilty alright - guilty of being a despicable human being whose support for the state of Israel has influenced UK foreign policy in the Middle East.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

teqniq said:


> So it's more of a _techicality_ well I hope the prosecution stick to their guns and insist that he show up



So do I.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Whether he's a paedophile or not, he's still an old cunt who's done no favours for British Jewry, with his Zionism in high places. He's guilty alright - guilty of being a despicable human being whose support for the state of Israel has influenced UK foreign policy in the Middle East.



Hmm...

So are you saying that because this man is a Zionist, he should be automatically convicted of child sex abuse offences?

Not sure how that leaves the majority of the population of Israel to be frank...


----------



## teqniq (Aug 14, 2015)

Heh, looks like the judge is having none of it

Judge threatens to arrest Lord Janner after non-appearance in court


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

It seems like a simple contempt of court thing, though I could be wrong.

I still don't really understand what this tactic is supposed to yield...


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Hmm...
> 
> So are you saying that because this man is a Zionist, he should be automatically convicted of child sex abuse offences?
> 
> Not sure how that leaves the majority of the population of Israel to be frank...


Don't be an idiot. While Janner's support for Israel is something of a red herring in this case, the exceptionalism he and his advisors are trying to make use of here is not so different from the arguments he has tried to make in the past in order to excuse Zionism from being held to the same standards of humanity as the rest of us.

It is only you who is saying that "because this man is a Zionist, he should be automatically convicted of child sex abuse".


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> It seems like a simple contempt of court thing, though I could be wrong.
> 
> I still don't really understand what this tactic is supposed to yield...


I suppose the fact that the contempt in question is entirely in line with the argument his lawyers have been making all along makes it look somewhat more...premeditated.


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

The arrogance of it....hope they arrest him.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

shygirl said:


> The arrogance of it....hope they arrest him.


It does seem to me that his lawyers are making things worse for him...unless they have reason to believe that producing him has the potential to somehow be even more catastrophic.


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

Just read that he will appear in court this afternoon.  Doesn't it feel good when the judiciary does the right thing (for once).


----------



## two sheds (Aug 14, 2015)

I do always wonder when judges condemn people for waiting (for example) to change their plea until the last moment because they're mainly just acting on solicitor's advice. 

Not sure about this one though, whether it's indeed him wailing "I don't want to go".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Hmm...
> 
> So are you saying that because this man is a Zionist, he should be automatically convicted of child sex abuse offences?
> 
> Not sure how that leaves the majority of the population of Israel to be frank...



I'm not saying anything of the sort, and attempts to imply that I am, are your usual clumsy clodhopping.


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Hmm...
> 
> So are you saying that because this man is a Zionist, he should be automatically convicted of child sex abuse offences?
> 
> Not sure how that leaves the majority of the population of Israel to be frank...


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

shygirl said:


> Just read that he will appear in court this afternoon.  Doesn't it feel good when the judiciary does the right thing (for once).


Heard on the radio he'll be allowed in through a side door and only has to stay for 40 seconds. Should feel at home, it'll be like visiting the Lords each day to get his £200.


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

Is he still turning up to HOL?


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Don't be an idiot. While Janner's support for Israel is something of a red herring in this case, the exceptionalism he and his advisors are trying to make use of here is not so different from the arguments he has tried to make in the past in order to excuse Zionism from being held to the same standards of humanity as the rest of us.
> 
> It is only you who is saying that "because this man is a Zionist, he should be automatically convicted of child sex abuse".



Wait a second...

You are exactly saying that his advocacy of Zionism corresponds to the denial of child sex offending.

That is exactly your argument and it is egregiously specious on many different levels.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

shygirl said:


> Is he still turning up to HOL?


No, he suspended himself a few months ago (but then contacted them to extend his suspension rather than cease to be a member, iirc - can't remember the detail 100%).


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not saying anything of the sort, and attempts to imply that I am, are your usual clumsy clodhopping.



How does his Zionism correspond to child abuse?

Or is he just an appalling person who needs to be punished by virtue of his Zionism, regardless of the child abuse claims that have lit him up as an appalling person by virtue of his Zionism?

Please do enlighten us as to your considered views.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

shygirl said:


> Is he still turning up to HOL?


I posted this earlier in the thread in terms on how his mental capacity seems to have a Guinness like tendency to come and go:

"So, if I've got the timeline right on Milord Jannerrapecunt:

 Rapes kids - forever
 Writes book - 2008
 Diagnosed with alzheimers - 2009
 Dec 2012 - delivers speech in Lords
 Dec 2013 - house raided
 Oct 2014 - 'on leave'
 March 2014 - has mental capacity to pass his mansion to the kids, one of whom is linked to the DPP
 April 2015 - Milord will not be charged, due to mental capacity
 April 2015 + a few days - It's okay, I'm fine! Can I come back to work?"

And given that we are now in a (kind of) trial, I'll add the word 'allegedly' to all that.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Can't Diamond just be given his own forum? It would at least stop so many threads ending up about him.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Wait a second...
> 
> You are exactly saying that his advocacy of Zionism corresponds to the denial of child sex offending.
> 
> That is exactly your argument and it is egregiously specious on many different levels.


I think my argument was abundantly clear, and the only reason you have chosen to pretend to yourself that it isn't is because you were dying to use "egregiously specious" on the thread. 

Which, incidentally, I am nicking as my tagline forthwith.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

And to be clear - I am no fan of Janner, nor do I seek to defend him directly, but there is some surprisingly weak thinking on this thread amongst posters who are far, far more perspicacious then currently evidenced...


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

He's in court now.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> And to be clear - I am no fan of Janner, nor do I seek to defend him directly, but there is some surprisingly weak thinking on this thread amongst posters who are far, far more *perspicacious then currently evidenced*...



Can you stop this? It doesn't make you look clever, it makes you look like a pretentious sixth former.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I think my argument was abundantly clear, and the only reason you have chosen to pretend to yourself that it isn't is because you were dying to use "egregiously specious" on the thread.
> 
> Which, incidentally, I am nicking as my tagline forthwith.



No. Your argument was not clear and it's notable that you did not try to refine it.

Perhaps because you cannot.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> How does his Zionism correspond to child abuse?
> 
> Or is he just an appalling person who needs to be punished by virtue of his Zionism, regardless of the child abuse claims that have lit him up as an appalling person by virtue of his Zionism?
> 
> Please do enlighten us as to your considered views.



The answers to your hectoring lie in the replies I've already, as anyone who isn't disingenuous and/or plain stupid will have already determined.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> The answers to your hectoring lie in the replies I've already, as anyone who isn't disingenuous and/or plain stupid will have already determined.



I would have expected your answers to my "hectoring", given that they are so abundantly manifest, would be demonstrated by a simple sentence but maybe a simple man might need assistance in providing that simple sentence so simply.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> No. Your argument was not clear and it's notable that you did not try to refine it.
> 
> Perhaps because you cannot.



diamond in his dreams


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

I wish I was such a stunner as that chap!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I would have expected your answers to my "hectoring", given that they are so abundantly manifest, would be demonstrated by a simple sentence but maybe a simple man might need assistance in providing that simple sentence so simply.


have you ever tried writing a simple sentence? this ^^^ suggests you're unable to write one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I wish I was such a stunner as that chap!


i rest my case m'lud.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I think my argument was abundantly clear, and the only reason you have chosen to pretend to yourself that it isn't is because you were dying to use "egregiously specious" on the thread.
> 
> Which, incidentally, I am nicking as my tagline forthwith.



Are you indeed outstandingly misleading?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Are you indeed outstandingly misleading?


he's more misleadingly outstanding


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 75350
> diamond in his dreams



Even the mighty Rumpole would struggle to get Diamond acquitted for his murdering of the English language.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Can you stop this? It doesn't make you look clever, it makes you look like a pretentious sixth former.



Really? I was thinking more along the lines of "desperate-to-impress sadsack".


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Can you stop this? It doesn't make you look clever, it makes you look like a pretentious sixth former.


i have met pretentious sixth formers. they do not deserve to be insulted by association with diamond.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> And to be clear - I am no fan of Janner, nor do I seek to defend him directly, but there is some surprisingly weak thinking on this thread amongst posters who are far, far more perspicacious then currently evidenced...


How fortunate, then, that you have found it within yourself to honour us with your presence, insight and wisdom in order to show us the error of our ways, not to mention take time out on a thread dealing with one of the most fundamentally corrupting offences to be committed against defenceless victims so you can educate us on the finer points of debate. 

How lucky we are to have you (and your interminable self-regarding non-sequiturs) amongst us to maintain that perspective and prevent us from being distracted from the important matters - you and your ego - by the irrelevancies of people abusing power and privilege to sexually abuse children!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> How fortunate, then, that you have found it within yourself to honour us with your presence, insight and wisdom in order to show us the error of our ways, not to mention take time out on a thread dealing with one of the most fundamentally corrupting offences to be committed against defenceless victims so you can educate us on the finer points of debate.
> 
> How lucky we are to have you (and your interminable self-regarding rambling non-sequiturs) amongst us to maintain that perspective and prevent us from being distracted from the important matters - you and your ego - by the irrelevancies of people abusing power and privilege to sexually abuse children!


c4u


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I would have expected your answers to my "hectoring", given that they are so abundantly manifest, would be demonstrated by a simple sentence but maybe a simple man might need assistance in providing that simple sentence so simply.



Alternately, anyone with the intellectual assets of a 10-yr old could read the posts I'd already written and find the answer to your question there.
Do stop trying to construct an argument through manoeuvring your interlocutors. You're nowhere near sharp enough to do it subtly enough.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 75350
> diamond in his dreams



Horace is a barrister, Diamond isn't.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> How fortunate, then, that you have found it within yourself to honour us with your presence, insight and wisdom in order to show us the error of our ways, not to mention take time out on a thread dealing with one of the most fundamentally corrupting offences to be committed against defenceless victims so you can educate us on the finer points of debate.
> 
> How lucky we are to have you (and your interminable self-regarding non-sequiturs) amongst us to maintain that perspective and prevent us from being distracted from the important matters - you and your ego - by the irrelevancies of people abusing power and privilege to sexually abuse children!



What has been proven?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 75350
> diamond in his dreams


*chortle*

Or, maybe...


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Alternately, anyone with the intellectual assets of a 10-yr old could read the posts I'd already written and find the answer to your question there.
> Do stop trying to construct an argument through manoeuvring your interlocutors. You're nowhere near sharp enough to do it subtly enough.



So you are too lazy to make your case.


----------



## twentythreedom (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> And to be clear - I am no fan of Janner, nor do I seek to defend him directly, but there is some surprisingly weak thinking on this thread amongst posters who are far, far more perspicacious then currently evidenced...


Evidenced


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Even the mighty Rumpole would struggle to get Diamond acquitted for his murdering of the English language.



It has just occurred to me that Diamond's English usage is akin to that attributed to travelling "snake oil" salesmen in the "Wild West" - use of unnecessary words in an attempt to impress those seen as "hicks", and gull the unwary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Horace is a barrister, Diamond isn't.


yes. i said 'in his dreams'.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> So you are too lazy to make your case.



I've already made my case, as is quite obvious to everyone, including you.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What has been proven?


That your obsession with looking clever trumps all?


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yes. i said 'in his dreams'.



I'm not a barrister because I'm not a blowhard, unlike you.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yes. i said 'in his dreams'.



You should have said "*wildest* dreams", frankly.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> That your obsession with looking clever trumps all?



No, no.

It is simple that you have not made your case and, consequently, you are on uncertain ground.

Perhaps you are too lazy to do so while you preen...


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not a barrister because I'm not a blowhard, unlike you.


That's quite clever: cock-crowing and denial all at the same time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not a barrister because I'm not a blowhard, unlike you.


for the hard of thinking I NEVER SAID YOU WERE A FUCKING BARRISTER


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not a barrister because I'm not a blowhard, unlike you.



You're not a blowhard? 
Self-awareness and self-analysis are obviously not your fortes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not a barrister because I'm not a blowhard, unlike you.


no no you've never ever ever boasted about all the pro bono work you claim to do. you've never told us _ad nauseam_ that you know something of the law. tho' what it is you know has always remained something of a mystery.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Anyway, fun as it is to provide Diamond Geezer with the iota of encouragement he needs to go off on one, let's return to our regularly scheduled pervs...


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

The herd of hard of thinking gather, mewling.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The herd of hard of thinking gather, mewling.



More like "several onlookers gathered, watching the pathetic sight of the deluded solicitor flinging his own faeces into the air, then attempting to catch them in his mouth - something he achieved more often than not".


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

I am still struggling to see the Zionism/child abuse angle?

Perhaps ViolentPanda is in the best position to explain this?

How does Zionism relate to child abuse Violent Panda?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond, if you want to hide behind the 'hasn't been tested in court/found guilty', by all means do so.  But there's sufficient 'evidence' out there from previous investigations, the police astonishment that he wasn't initially charged and all the rest for the reasonable person to think there is a very good chance he did the things he's accused of. In this case, where there won't be a conventional trial, that's probably as good as it will get in terms of establishing what happened. IN those circumstances, with real victims who have been terribly abused when at their most vulnerable, your trolling proceduralism is out of order.

edit... as said much better by existentialist in 5803


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I am still struggling to see the Zionism/child abuse angle?
> 
> Perhaps ViolentPanda is in the best position to explain this?
> 
> How does Zionism relate to child abuse Violent Panda?


tbh you struggle with the simplest things.


----------



## maomao (Aug 14, 2015)

Oh good, I thought, 3 unread pages of one of Urban's best threads to catch up on over potato scones and a cup of juice. Then I saw Diamond had posted and understood why. Can we either ignore the little prick or petition a mod to get him kicked off this so-far rarely sidetracked thread please because it would really be a shame to have nearly 200 pages of sensible thread ruined.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Anyway, fun as it is to provide Diamond Geezer with the iota of encouragement he needs to go off on one, let's return to our regularly scheduled pervs...



It will be interesting to see/hear the evidence against Janner (rather than the charges), given the possibility of tie-ins with other alleged crimes by other politicians and senior Civil Servants. Will it be rehashing of similar tales, or is there something there that's made it worthwhile for the head of the CPS to row back on her original decision (which she's unlikely to have done only through the weight ofpublic opinion)?


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The herd of hard of thinking gather, mewling.


Well lets get this over quickly then,
Diamond: spurious accusation based on misquoting another poster.
Urban 75: No ones saying that
Diamond: what, no one wants to take me on so I can demonstrate my brilliance
Urban 75: Fuck Off Diamond
Diamond: Pro Bono
Urban 75: Fuck Off Diamond
Diamond: Exotic girls
Urban 75: Fuck Off Diamond
Diamond: how dare you call me a sex pest
Urban 75: Fuck Off Diamond
Diamond: this is a fucking outrage, I'm of
Urban: Right where were we before all of that.

That should save a good 10 pages or so.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

maomao said:


> Oh good, I thought, 3 unread pages of one of Urban's best threads to catch up on over potato scones and a cup of juice. Then I saw Diamond had posted and understood why. Can we either ignore the little prick or petition a mod to get him kicked off this so-far rarely sidetracked thread please because it would really be a shame to have nearly 200 pages of sensible thread ruined.



So you muse on 200 pages everyday, do you?

Or are you a pompous so-and-so perhaps....?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> So you muse on 200 pages everyday, do you?
> 
> Or are you a pompous so-and-so perhaps....?


go on, say something outrageous


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> So you muse on 200 pages everyday, do you?
> 
> Or are you a pompous so-and-so perhaps....?


You really can not read can you.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Diamond, if you want to hide behind the 'hasn't been tested in court/found guilty', by all means do so.  But there's sufficient 'evidence' out there from previous investigations, the police astonishment that he wasn't initially charged and all the rest for the reasonable person to think there is a very good chance he did the things he's accused of. In this case, where there won't be a conventional trial, that's probably as good as it will get in terms of establishing what happened. IN those circumstances, with real victims who have been terribly abused when at their most vulnerable, your trolling proceduralism is out of order.
> 
> edit... as said much better by existentialist in 5803



I think he should definitely be tried.

His lawyers' maneuvers are quite frankly ridiculous.

But what I find a tad distasteful is that this man appears to have been deemed guilty long before trial.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> You really can not read can you.


nor can he think


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I think he should definitely be tried.
> 
> His lawyers' maneuvers are quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> But what I find a tad distasteful is that this man appears to have been deemed guilty long before trial.


are you a septick?


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> Well lets get this over quickly then,
> Diamond: spurious accusation based on misquoting another poster.
> Urban 75: No ones saying that
> Diamond: what, no one wants to take me on so I can demonstrate my brilliance
> ...



"Exotic girls"

What the fuck is this?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I think he should definitely be tried.
> 
> His lawyers' maneuvers are quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> But what I find a tad distasteful is that this man appears to have been deemed guilty long before trial.


That's because he is fucking guilty.

(allegedly)


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Seriously - what the fuck is that about?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> It will be interesting to see/hear the evidence against Janner (rather than the charges), given the possibility of tie-ins with other alleged crimes by other politicians and senior Civil Servants. Will it be rehashing of similar tales, or is there something there that's made it worthwhile for the head of the CPS to row back on her original decision (which she's unlikely to have done only through the weight ofpublic opinion)?


I do wonder if that's the reason they're so anxious not to have him appear - it is possible that, in his delusional burbling, he might incriminate himself further, or perhaps even others. I imagine it could be in some people's interests to characterise him as a lone abuser, but there could be people trembling in the corridors of power at what he knows and could let slip.

ETA: talking about Janner here, not Diamond Geezer. Sorry about that, Diamond.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> That's because he is fucking guilty.


yeh but diamond knows only one bit of law - about the presumption of innocence - which he deploys at every opportunity. please don't deny him his moment of glory as he shows his small piece of law.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Again - what the fuck is this "exotic girls" thing about?

Seriously?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Seriously - what the fuck is that about?





Diamond said:


> Again - what the fuck is this "exotic girls" thing about?
> 
> Seriously?


oh dear


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but diamond knows only one bit of law - about the presumption of innocence - which he deploys at every opportunity. please don't deny him his moment of glory as he shows his small piece of law.


“The little bit (two inches wide) of ivory on which I work with so fine a brush, as produces little effect after much labour.”

- the one and only time Diamond and Jane Austen will feature in the same post.  Even the monkeys tapping on the typewriters of infinity will never achieve this again.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again - what the fuck is this "exotic girls" thing about?
> 
> Seriously?


It's all about you - isn't that enough. 

Seriously, though, stop shitting all over this thread. I plan on it still being here in a few months' time.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again - what the fuck is this "exotic girls" thing about?
> 
> Seriously?


Don't know why you sent a private message demanding a public explanation & apology.

Explanation: post #5830, stated because I for one am bored of you hi jacking threads, 
Apology: No chance, now fuck off Diamond.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Fuck you.

I will not have my girlfriend described as an "exotic girl" because she comes from a different country in order for others to make cheap currency of their xenophobia.

Fuck you.

That is not going to happen.

If I happen to shit all over your precious thread, have no doubt that I will sink it because I will not have that, not for one moment and I will persist in sinking it relentlessly.

Ridiculously nasty behaviour by a bunch of total cowards.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> It's all about you - isn't that enough.
> 
> Seriously, though, stop shitting all over this thread. I plan on it still being here in a few months' time.


they say diamonds are forever but i hope this one isn't


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> Don't know why you sent a private message demanding a public explanation & apology.
> 
> Explanation: post #5830, stated because I for one am bored of you hi jacking threads,
> Apology: No chance, now fuck off Diamond.



What are you getting at by "exotic girls", you revolting individual?


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

you do realise no one believes your claims of exotic girlfriends Diamond? Or much else you say for that matter.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 14, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> you do realise no one believes your claims of exotic girlfriends Diamond? Or much else you say for that matter.


and not just exotick gfs. i am agnostick on her existence.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

I don't care what you lot believe -if you are so inclined you can put in the hard work that Athos did to identify me - but I am seriously offended and surprised that urban seems to tolerate the idea of foreign girlfriends being "exotic girls".

Whether you are in a relationship or not with an "exotic girl" is really neither here nor there - it is about the idea that there are "exotic girls" out there...

It's a bit beyond the pale to be honest...


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)




----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> ....I will not have my girlfriend described as an "exotic girl" because she comes from a different country .



If you can find the exact quote where I said this, quote it and feel free to continue with your little hissy fit. If however you cannot, how about you do us all a favour and just fuck off. Deal?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

> Oh, and before I have had a relationship with a Bahraini and a Dijboutian girl (not at the same time, mind!).
> 
> Is that an issue?
> 
> Was I "hunting" there?



http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/tinder-anyone-tried-it.336164/page-4#post-13978516


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

> It seems awfully like you are saying that being involved with foreign girls, either here or abroad, is suspect...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> The reason urban it tolerating the idea is because it is only you who has chosen to take the interpretation that it is offensive, presumably, given your long track record of doing this, because it suits your self-obsessed agenda to make that assumption.
> 
> Now STFU and leave the thread alone.


why stop at the thread?


----------



## teqniq (Aug 14, 2015)

*sigh* Diamond please stop shiting up the thread you vain fool.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> why stop at the thread?


I'm practising tolerance, in case it comes in useful later


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

To be honest, diamond's sexual history - real or imagined, domestic or international - is a derail this thread doesn't need.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I do wonder if that's the reason they're so anxious not to have him appear - it is possible that, in his delusional burbling, he might incriminate himself further, or perhaps even others. I imagine it could be in some people's interests to characterise him as a lone abuser, but there could be people trembling in the corridors of power at what he knows and could let slip.



Of course, "delusional burbling" depends on whether his Alzheimers is Saundersian variety or not.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, diamond's sexual history - real or imagined, domestic or international - is a derail this thread doesn't need.


Most of us might have thought twice about making a molehill about our sexual history into a mountain on this particular thread...


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of course, "delusional burbling" depends on whether his Alzheimers is Saundersian variety or not.


True. I suspect the poor old bastard probably isn't firing on all cylinders, rather than it being a more creative diagnosis, which probably makes him more of a threat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Most of us might have thought twice about making a molehill about our sexual history into a mountain on this particular thread...


or indeed any sort of erection on this thread.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

No - I will not leave this alone because you are a bunch of total hypocrites, writ large.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

It is amazing to see your cozy, back slapping certainty that describing another person's partner as an "exotic girlfriend" is fine, just ticketty-boo.

I imagine that there are others, intimidated by your massed ranks, who see this for what it is - lazy prejudice - certainly not dangerous but equally certainly deeply uncomfortable.

Do you call your friends' foreign wives "exotic".

Are they "exotic wives"?

What does "exotic" mean to you?


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> No - I will not leave this alone because you are a bunch of total hypocrites, writ large.


So you cant find any post of mine where I suggested your girlfriend was an exotic lady.
Care to admit that yet, or would you rather carry on acting like a knob for a bit longer.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> Well lets get this over quickly then,
> Diamond: spurious accusation based on misquoting another poster.
> Urban 75: No ones saying that
> Diamond: what, no one wants to take me on so I can demonstrate my brilliance
> ...



I think it is about the eighth line down.

Or maybe you were just being lyrical....


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> No - I will not leave this alone because you are a bunch of total hypocrites, writ large.


not because you're a windbag with nothing but farting piffle to offer then.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Time to fuck off now. Since you seem to be incapable of knowing when enough is enough, allow me to point out to you that you crossed the line (again) about a country mile back.



That does not even mean anything beyond "fuck off" in a pompous fashion.

You know what - I am definitely not going to do that because one person has had a go at my girlfriend in an unacceptable, in my view, fashion and lots of others have backed them up, including you, equally unacceptably.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I think it is about the eight line down.
> 
> Or maybe you were just being lyrical....


I said Exotic girls.
There is no reference to your girlfriend is there.
You did that all on your own.
Which says more about you and how you percieve your girlfriend.
I agree with your concerns, perhaps you should go and have a quiet word with your self.
Or at least a little lie down now.
Arse


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> I said Exotic girls.
> There is no reference to your girlfriend is there.
> You did that all on your own.
> Which says more about you and how you percieve your girlfriend.
> ...



My god, if I had a few minutes in a room with you, you pathetic disingenous, cowardly, mealy-mouthed, prejudiced, arrogant so-and-so...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> My god, if I had a few minutes in a room with you, you pathetic disingenous, cowardly, mealy-mouthed, prejudiced, arrogant so-and-so...


yeh you'd bore poor Lucy Fur to tears with your endless wittering


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> My god, if I had a few minutes in a room with you, you pathetic disingenous, cowardly, mealy-mouthed, prejudiced, arrogant so-and-so...


Apology accepted, do try and read properly next time, maybe get a grown up to help with the longer words.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

I am genuinely astonished that urban has got to a point in time when criticising  people for having "exotic girlfriends" is anything of any weight at all!

This is crazy!

It's not a question of banning the speech - but when was it ever remarkable or wrong or, more to the point, when was the idea of an acceptable sense of "exotic girlfriends" conjured up and decided to be defended?

I think a lot of people need to take a long, hard look at what they are choosing to write.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> So do I. You could lead by example, since you seem so exercised by the standard of Urbanite discourse. You could start with the irritating tendency some posters seem to have of wrecking threads by endlessly rehearsing their own inadequacies.



That doesn't actually mean anything.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

For fuck's sake though - when did urban get racist?

This is crazy!


----------



## dogDBC (Aug 14, 2015)

Er, 'semi-lurker' breaking cover here. 

 This is a good thread with some excellent commentary from most posters.

This Diamond character however...  well, not on here, fella? Eh?  Please?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 14, 2015)

do we have a time on the deffo not faking it rapist appearing before the beak?


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I am genuinely astonished that urban has got to a point in time when criticising  people for having "exotic girlfriends" is anything of any weight at all!


Only you have made the link between girlfriends and exotic girls, and seen it as a negative one. *Just You*



Diamond said:


> This is crazy!


 no, *Just You*



Diamond said:


> It's not a question of banning the speech - but when was it ever remarkable or wrong or, more to the point, when was the idea of an acceptable sense of "exotic girlfriends" conjured up and decided to be defended?


 it hasn't been by anyone, *Just You*



Diamond said:


> I think a lot of people need to take a long, hard look at what they are choosing to write.


 No, *Just You*


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> For fuck's sake though - when did urban get racist?
> 
> This is crazy!


the moment you decided to post this particular strawman.


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> I said Exotic girls.
> There is no reference to your girlfriend is there.
> You did that all on your own.
> Which says more about you and how you percieve your girlfriend.
> ...



I think this is a tad disingenous.   Whatever our views of posters on here, is it really on to make cheap jibes in this way.   Why did you write 'exotic girls', out of interest?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> do we have a time on the deffo not faking it rapist appearing before the beak?


He's been in and gone home for an ice cream (really).
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-court-appearance-over-child-sex-abuse-claims


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> do we have a time on the deffo not faking it rapist appearing before the beak?


Been and gone. Got an ice cream from his daughter for his pains.

ETA: beaten to it by that bastard Wilf. I'm going to be taking this extremely personally. It was probably an_ exotic i_ce cream, and all


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

I realise this is pretty distasteful, but given the accusations against him, getting 'rewarded with an ice cream' is a bit, well, twisted. Fucking hell.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

I cannot begin to describe how I feel when someone accuses me of going out with "exotic girls" and another person reflects that I might consider my girlfriend an "exotic girl" when I dispute that.

I swear, if I heard that in person I would do all in my power to hurt them as much as possible for their extreme prejudice.

You need to look at yourselves long and hard.  You truly do.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> He's been in and gone home for an ice cream (really).
> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-court-appearance-over-child-sex-abuse-claims



probably went to a van so he could oggle kids. There is no justice really, Janner is likely to die before the wider enquiry ever gets finished.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I realise this is pretty distasteful, but given the accusations against him, getting 'rewarded with an ice cream' is a bit, well, twisted. Fucking hell.


A cynic might suggest that it was a little show put on with the intention of garnering sympathy.

Incidentally, given that these are now active court proceedings, should we now be being careful to observe the traditional niceties? (general question, not aimed specifically at you, Wilf)


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Get over it or GTFO. Seriously.



Get tae fuck


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> A cynic might suggest that it was a little show put on with the intention of garnering sympathy.
> 
> Incidentally, given that these are now active court proceedings, should we now be being careful to observe the traditional niceties? (general question, not aimed specifically at you, Wilf)


True, on both counts. In fact, I'll go back and edit something I said earlier - purely out of respect for Ed/the mods.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Can I just ask - "exotic girlfriends" - if you are OK with this term, please like this post.


----------



## StoneRoad (Aug 14, 2015)

ffs, there is one definition of "exotic" as "non-native" , at least when describing fauna and flora.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Can I just ask - "exotic girlfriends" - if you are OK with this term, please like this post.



You're the only one whose used that term on this thread.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I cannot begin to describe how I feel when someone accuses me of going out with "exotic girls" and another person reflects that I might consider my girlfriend an "exotic girl" when I dispute that.
> 
> I swear, if I heard that in person I would do all in my power to hurt them as much as possible for their extreme prejudice.
> 
> You need to look at yourselves long and hard.  You truly do.


For what it's worth, I read the thread on dating which this all relates to. I thought you were being a tad provocative on there, but I have absolutely no evidence that any of your international relationships were anything other than just that - dating.  As such any insinuation there was anything else in play was out of order. But when you start apparently threatening posters with violence, you've lost it.  If you still have any complaints, report the relevant posts.  But for fucks sake stop shitting on this thread.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Can I just ask - "exotic girlfriends" - if you are OK with this term, please like this post.


No. Take it to another thread.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> You're the only one whose used that term on this thread.



You are correct - "exotic girls" - was the term, which, in a way because it makes it sound more like cruising, is even more offensive.

I am not going to let this rest.

It is a slur that will not stand, which would not be tolerated for any moment in day to day life.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 14, 2015)

shygirl said:


> I think this is a tad disingenous.   Whatever our views of posters on here, is it really on to make cheap jibes in this way.   Why did you write 'exotic girls', out of interest?


It was (e2a my original post) a surprisingly accurate parody of how Diamond so often derails threads. So not disingenius at all. Suggesting that I had called or indeed even inferred that it was a reference to his girlfriend was a straight up lie on his part.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> No. Take it to another thread.



No, no.

This is this thread. This is the forum for discussion.

There are no other fora better suited.

You are a spineless apologist for an idiot who thought they were making a great point through the medium of racist prejudice,


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> It was a surprisingly accurate parody of how Diamond so often derails threads. So not disingenius at all. Suggesting that I had called or indeed even inferred that it was a reference to his girlfriend was a straight up lie on his part.



Fair enough, but why the 'exotic girls' comment?  I haven't been on the boards as much lately, so am not aware of all dynamics on here.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> It was (e2a my original post) a surprisingly accurate parody of how Diamond so often derails threads. So not disingenius at all. Suggesting that I had called or indeed even inferred that it was a reference to his girlfriend was a straight up lie on his part.



You are truly pathetic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> No, no.
> 
> This is this thread. This is the forum for discussion.
> 
> ...


shurely 'through the medium of urban'


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> The reason urban it tolerating the idea is because it is only you who has chosen to take the interpretation that it is offensive, presumably, given your long track record of doing this, because it suits your self-obsessed agenda to make that assumption.
> 
> Now STFU and leave the thread alone.



Unfortunately for Diamond there are at least a handful of counsellors and psychologists on this thread that can see through his "me me me" agenda.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> You are correct - "exotic girls" - was the term, which, in a way because it makes it sound more like cruising, is even more offensive.
> 
> I am not going to let this rest.
> 
> It is a slur that will not stand, which would not be tolerated for any moment in day to day life.



What do you find offensive about it? You have on a number of occasions claimed to have had relationships with 'girls' (your description) from faraway places.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Unfortunately for Diamond there are at least a handful of counsellors and psychologists on this thread that can see through his "me me me" agenda.


REALLY??


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I am not going to let this rest.


----------



## shygirl (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> You are correct - "exotic girls" - was the term, which, in a way because it makes it sound more like cruising, is even more offensive.
> 
> I am not going to let this rest.
> 
> It is a slur that will not stand, which would not be tolerated for any moment in day to day life.



I can understand you feeling sore about the 'exotic girls' remark, but can I suggest you take it to the mods, and not drag it out on this thread.  The subject matter on here is painful for many of us, what we don't need is protracted arguments about unrelated matters.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> No, no.
> 
> This is this thread. This is the forum for discussion.
> 
> ...


Go to the mods, start a thread in feedback, do what you want - I'm sure that can also incorporate an analysis of the harm you would do to another poster if you were ever in a room together.  But leave this fucking thread alone.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Unfortunately for Diamond there are at least a handful of counsellors and psychologists on this thread that can see through his "me me me" agenda.


it's 'meme', vp.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Time to fuck off now. Since you seem to be incapable of knowing when enough is enough, allow me to point out to you that you crossed the line (again) about a country mile back.



He's trying a dwyer, but doesn't have the lobes (as the Ferengi would say) to pull the ploy off.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> What do you find offensive about it? You have on a number of occasions claimed to have had relationships with 'girls' (your description) from faraway places.



What is important about those people being "exotic girls"?

What does it illuminate or even mean?

Why mention it?

The insinuation is not difficult to decipher...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Go to the mods, start a thread in feedback, do what you want - I'm sure that can also incorporate an analysis of the harm you would do to another poster if you were ever in a room together.  But leave this fucking thread alone.


i'm not sure the mods would look kindly on a complaint by a poster who had threatened or intimated the use of violence against another poster.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What is important about those people being "exotic girls"?
> 
> What does it illuminate or even mean?
> 
> ...


only if you've a guilty conscience


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What is important about those people being "exotic girls"?
> 
> What does it illuminate or even mean?
> 
> ...



Well why do you mention the places they come from?


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> only if you've a guilty conscience



What the fuck is this?


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Well why do you mention the places they come from?



What the fuck is this?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What the fuck is this?


it's a shit reply to my post.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

For fuck's sake - when did urban become such a conservative, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, forum of eejits?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Can I suggest we all stop replying to Diamond?


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

When did this happen:

Poster has foreign girlfriend. He mentions that she is foreign.  That is suspect.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> For fuck's sake - when did urban become such a conservative, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, forum of eejits?





Diamond said:


> For fuck's sake though - when did urban get racist?
> 
> This is crazy!


it's always meme with you isn't it


----------



## Belushi (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> For fuck's sake - when did urban become such a conservative, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, forum of eejits?



It's not working you know, try another tack.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

What a complete cop-out.

A liberal place demonstrating basic prejudice.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Completely fucking pathetic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> When did this happen:
> 
> Poster has foreign girlfriend. He mentions that she is foreign.  That is suspect.




how important is it to you that your gfs have no family nearby?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What a complete cop-out.
> 
> A liberal place demonstrating basic prejudice.


you're holding us back from our advanced prejudice classes


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Completely fucking pathetic.


there's your tagline sorted.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

shygirl said:


> I think this is a tad disingenous.   Whatever our views of posters on here, is it really on to make cheap jibes in this way.   Why did you write 'exotic girls', out of interest?



I'd say "you need to read the background to all this", but frankly I'm not going to, as subjecting anyone to the hell of half a dozen threads Diamond has shat on would be too horrible.


----------



## gimesumtruf (Aug 14, 2015)

How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?


----------



## dogDBC (Aug 14, 2015)

gimesumtruf said:


> How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?


Thank you!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Been and gone. Got an ice cream from his daughter for his pains.
> 
> ETA: beaten to it by that bastard Wilf. I'm going to be taking this extremely personally. It was probably an_ exotic i_ce cream, and all



Neat bit of theatre though, Daddy being infantilised before the cameras.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'd say "you need to read the background to all this", but frankly I'm not going to, as subjecting anyone to the hell of half a dozen threads Diamond has shat on would be too horrible.



You do take threads very seriously, don't you?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> REALLY??



I find the possibilities for underlying pathology interesting. I don't go for all that "bed-wetter" nonsense, though. Most cases of enuresis are due to physical rather than emotional issues.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I find the possibilities for underlying pathology interesting. I don't go for all that "bed-wetter" nonsense, though. Most cases of enuresis are due to physical rather than emotional issues.


i would posit that in diamond's case it's a bit from column a and a bit from column b


----------



## Athos (Aug 14, 2015)

Does anyone know when his dementia set in, and how that overlaps with the timeline of investigation/prosecution?


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

Oh great. Another Friday, another flurry of reports about Diamond disrupting a thread.  This is a particularly important one


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

mango5 said:


> Oh great. Another Friday, another flurry of reports about Diamond disrupting a thread.  This is a particularly important one


as it's friday why not give him the weekend off? it might be the kindest thing to do


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Athos said:


> Does anyone know when his dementia set in, and how that overlaps with the timeline of investigation/prosecution?


No, but he was certainly acting as a legislator post diagnosis.  I'm not sure how many of the instructions he made post diagnosis (as in the rough time line I did below) were under Power of Attorney?


Writes book - 2008
 Diagnosed with alzheimers - 2009
 Dec 2012 - delivers speech in Lords
 Dec 2013 - house raided
 Oct 2014 - 'on leave'
 March 2014 - has mental capacity to pass his mansion to the kids, one of whom is linked to the DPP
 April 2015 - Milord will not be charged, due to mental capacity
 April 2015 + a few days - It's okay, I'm fine! Can I come back to work?"


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

People actually report slurs about my "exotic girls" - interesting...


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond said:


> No, no.
> 
> This is this thread. This is the forum for discussion.
> 
> ...


This is not the thread for this beef. Take it elsewhere.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

gimesumtruf said:


> How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?



Of individual cases, there's plenty. Of established rings there's also plenty. Of "high level" rings there's very little, which is in itself (given frequency of tendency to paedophile criminality across the population, from supposedly-minor "non-contact" sex offences like internet grooming or flashing at children, all the way to major offences involving penetration) intriguing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond please stay on topic or get off the thread. I suggest some of the rest of you put him on ignore, y'all are becoming prime candidates for the new forced ignore feature.


----------



## Athos (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> No, but he was certainly acting as a legislator post diagnosis.  I'm not sure how many of the instructions he made post diagnosis (as in the rough time line I did below) were under Power of Attorney?
> 
> 
> Writes book - 2008
> ...



Ta.


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Wilf said:


> April 2015 + a few days - It's okay, I'm fine! Can I come back to work?"



Please post a link regarding what you are referring to with that last entry on your timeline as my memory tells me you are mischaracterising that one but I could be wrong.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

Athos said:


> Does anyone know when his dementia set in, and how that overlaps with the timeline of investigation/prosecution?



Supposedly around 2009 (first diagnosis).
As was said when one of my great-uncles was first diagnosed though, in a significant minority of cases the problem isn't "Alzheimers", but some other set of effects of age and systems failure.


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Personally I'll be keeping any cynicism directed at how solicitors etc attempt to use things like dementia, and not much towards the question of whether he has dementia at all.

I have no problem believing he has dementia, especially as I think I saw footage of him from some years back where it already seemed like he was starting to unravel around the edges. I doubt I'll go looking for it though because I'm not going to play the armchair diagnostics game on this one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

elbows said:


> Personally I'll be keeping any cynicism directed at how solicitors etc attempt to use things like dementia, and not much towards the question of whether he has dementia at all.
> 
> I have no problem believing he has dementia, especially as I think I saw footage of him from some years back where it already seemed like he was starting to unravel around the edges. I doubt I'll go looking for it though because I'm not going to play the armchair diagnostics game on this one.


but it is the urban way


----------



## maomao (Aug 14, 2015)

mango5 said:


> Diamond please stay on topic or get off the thread. I suggest some of the rest of you put him on ignore, y'all are becoming prime candidates for the new forced ignore feature.


Any chance of a mass delete? we'd only lose half a dozen meaningful posts if you just scrubbed the last 5 pages.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> to be fair it's not like senility or dementia sets in the moment the diagnosis is made, is it. there is some time before mental incapacity is complete.


Yeah, absolutely (my Dad's just gone through a similar process. 2 years ago he could sign things for himself, now he can't, but it would be hard to say when he crossed the line).  It's just there's an obvious suspicion his mental capability has fluctuated depending on whether he wanted to remain a Lord versus wanting to avoid facing the beak.


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but it is the urban way



My failure to join in on that one shouldn't hamper the urban way too much.


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

maomao said:


> Any chance of a mass delete? we'd only lose half a dozen meaningful posts if you just scrubbed the last 5 pages.


That's a reasonable idea. Not pages but posts. Of course, posters still have the ability to go back and clean up their own self-important shit. My patience is very thin with regard to this thread and I'm more in a hammer mood than a shovel mood tbh.


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Just so long as nothing happens to cause this thread to be locked please - it wasn't good that so many other sex-offender threads got closed ages ago.


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

Don't worry, that's why I'm here.


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Thanks very much, I had hoped so, but am still sad about the way things were handled ages ago (not by you I don't think).


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

elbows said:


> Please post a link regarding what you are referring to with that last entry on your timeline as my memory tells me you are mischaracterising that one but I could be wrong.


Yes, I am (mischaracterising it) - deliberately, to be honest. I was so pissed off that around the time they announced he wouldn't be prosecuted due to mental incapacity it turned out he had personally written to the Lords asking for a leave of absence.  It's a minor point - and what I wrote was factually incorrect. However, the implication was he was making a conscious and capable choice to remain in the Lords (even if on leave of absence), at the very point his incapability was being given as the reason to keep him out of court.

edit, oh, yes and that was the link:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/janner-asked-for-absence-from-lords-31158561.html


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Cheers for the confirmation and the honesty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2015)

elbows said:


> Cheers for the confirmation and the honesty.


it shows a good spirit


----------



## gimesumtruf (Aug 14, 2015)

I think it to be most important that the high level "live suspect" cases be prosecuted with preference, speed and harshness.
What irks is they get to long to think about their escape route and I'd like to see some of the coppers being charged too (wasting police time, anything CRAP to pin on their CV).


----------



## Diamond (Aug 14, 2015)

Bloody hell - it's stunning that you lot can't see how cosy you are...

Yep, delete all my posts.

Delete my profile if you like, it will just be further evidence of you intolerance.


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

Diamond did you read what I posted, in mod mode, in direct response to reports and reading recent crap on the thread? There is no profile deletion on Urban.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

I'm not going to gripe about it if my edited posts disappear...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 14, 2015)

gimesumtruf said:


> I think it to be most important that the high level "live suspect" cases be prosecuted with preference, speed and harshness.



Justice needs to be blind, to be justice, which means no preference.
Harshness will lie with the court's decision, and any need to punish, but a judge can't sentence outside of established guidelines for the crimes committed, unless they want the case to be chucked out on appeal.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Justice needs to be blind, to be justice, which means no preference.
> Harshness will lie with the court's decision, and any need to punish, but a judge can't sentence outside of established guidelines for the crimes committed, unless they want the case to be chucked out on appeal.


And in the Janner case, perhaps more than most, any information that might lead to further prosecutions, and the way in which it is uncovered, needs to be unimpeachable. I have a feeling that what we're picking at here might be a long and well-connected thread.


----------



## mango5 (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I'm not going to gripe about it if my edited posts disappear...


I wish others would follow your lead.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 14, 2015)

No bans, thread remains on track. Good modding.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Sadly, it does not beggar belief at all.
> UK society was operating in a state of total denial regarding sexual abuse of any kind...from sexual abuse of women to child sexual abuse, it was ignored, laughed off, and utterly denied. Sure, we'd joke about the pervy games teacher or the inadequate with a penchant for friendships (which were probably harmless) with young kids, but in doing so, we studiously ignored the army of careful, skilful abusers who had made their stock in trade the violation of - particularly - innocents. Society sent these people the message that the risk of getting caught was minimal, and the likely penalties no more than token, given our unwillingness to acknowledge what was going on in plain view under our noses. I know of several schoolteachers who were given their marching orders "or we're calling the police" - an empty threat, since no school wanted to be bothered with the aggravation of a (likely futile) prosecution, so sex abuser teachers could safely move on to pastures new and totally innocent of their history...because, for sure, no reference given was ever going to risk disclosing their predilection.
> 
> To make things worse, the stigma of child sexual abuse was _just_ bad enough to ensure that abusers would close ranks and collude in ways that inevitably put their victims at even greater risk, through networks of abusers, and "intelligence sharing" of a kind that meant their naive victims stood no chance of overcoming.
> ...




The difference was though kincora was a massive scandal from  the get go . From day one of the story breaking back in the early 80s fingers were being pointed at the intelligence services , police and prominent unnamed individuals ...politicians and civil servants . Even back then there were demands for transparency in the investigations .people appointed to committees meant to oversee it were resigning in disgust because the investigation was a farce and a cover up . And a cover up that went to downing street and Whitehall . The RUC chief at the time asked for an outside force to come in and investigate to...ostensibly...avoid bias . But in reality he knew they'd cover it up, and he just didn't want to be tainted as part of that cover up .

Even today they're still at it . May has done her best to ensure that the kincora case will be treated separately from the others . That it'll be investigated....and buried...over here in the same tired and usual shitty fashion . Far away from any proper scrutiny . I believe that's the case that can do them serious harm myself .


----------



## gimesumtruf (Aug 14, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Justice needs to be blind, to be justice, which means no preference.
> Harshness will lie with the court's decision, and any need to punish, but a judge can't sentence outside of established guidelines for the crimes committed, unless they want the case to be chucked out on appeal.


 
You are right of course but it is hard to swallow having watched as the 2011 rioters got hammered, did'nt D Cameron call for justice for them along the lines as I do for the paedophiles.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 14, 2015)

mango5 said:


> I wish others would follow your lead.


I am sure they will, now that I have shown the way


----------



## elbows (Aug 14, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> That it'll be investigated....and buried...over here in the same tired and usual shitty fashion . Far away from any proper scrutiny . I believe that's the case that can do them serious harm myself .



The case can damage them on some additional fronts that aren't applicable to some other abuse cases, but I wouldn't start compiling a leaderboard of which are more likely to do harm to 'them'.

I might claim that it will lack a shock factor because it's such a well known scandal, but I shouldn't because if stuff happens to splash it all over the frontpages in a media frenzy then it will cause a load of people to hear of and think about this shit in ways they probably haven't in the past.

One reason it won't necessarily stand out in terms of damage is that there is a mental trick some people will play in order to contain the horror of any revelations about what games the state was playing at the expense of children. They can file it under the 'oh the troubles were dirty, lots of dark shit happened on all sides' phenomenon. And I don't just mean the scum that would justify such acts on that basis, but a broader group who will hang their heads and feel very gloomy or angry about this shit, but still manage to keep it away from contaminating their broader impression of the state 'at times of peace'.

Certainly when it comes down to the abuse as a whole, I think if it were not for the involvement of the security services etc then it would be slightly easier for the state to deal with the shitstorm and bubbling desire for justice. Its now beyond obvious that they couldn't put a lid on it all, and that the best defence in terms of the reputation of the state and all that goes with it, is the passage of time. The reputation of a number of decades in this country is expendable, and thats what we are getting at a minimum, some honesty about the actual stench of those times. But when it comes to cynical security service strategies, tactics etc, they have so many reasons to be afraid to go there, not least because we haven't been able to see very much of how those services have evolved over the decades. Given the pathetic crumbs we've received over the decades such as officially being allowed to say the services actually exists, perceptions of that dark zone might not safely buffer their acts of decades ago from the popular imagination as to what games they get up to now.


----------



## Buckaroo (Aug 14, 2015)

elbows said:


> Its now beyond obvious that they couldn't put a lid on it all, and that the best defence in terms of the reputation of the state and all that goes with it, is the passage of time. The reputation of a number of decades in this country is expendable, and thats what we are getting at a minimum, some honesty about the actual stench of those times.



Well said.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Neat bit of theatre though, Daddy being infantilised before the cameras.


Can't help but think the choice of clothing for court was also part of this (scroll down to the 'returning home' picture):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33931860
Not really that important in the scheme of things, but it looks like this was all part of the twatty entitled game his lawyers were playing today.


----------



## J Ed (Aug 15, 2015)

Thanks mango5


----------



## elbows (Aug 16, 2015)

Myra Forde is providing plenty of crap with which to write awful tabloid pieces that have little to do with the original subject:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/edward-heath-brothel-madam-eastenders-6260631


----------



## laptop (Aug 16, 2015)

elbows said:


> Myra Forde is providing plenty of crap with which to write awful tabloid pieces that have little to do with the original subject:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/edward-heath-brothel-madam-eastenders-6260631



"We'll give you £3k to tell us everything you know."

"10"

"7"

"Done."

_A while later..._

"Is that _it_?"


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 16, 2015)

....it worked though....I went & bought a Sunday people this morning for "the file"....meanwhile...
*

SECRET files linking Leon Brittan to the Westminster paedophile scandal were suppressed until after his death, it was claimed.*

Don Hale and Marcus Chippindale / Published 15th August 2015

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/459488/Abuse-claims-cover-up-paedophile-scandal

A retired MI5 officer says the dossier was deliberately buried until after the former Home Secretary’s death in January and May’s General Election.

He told the Daily Star Sunday its existence was hushed up for months after it was uncovered in 2014.

Our intelligence source said the alleged cover-up stopped Brittan being quizzed.

But a Cabinet Office spokesman insisted the files were only found on January 22 – _*the day after Brittan died*_.

....subtle...


----------



## laptop (Aug 16, 2015)

A former MI5 officer chose to talk to the _Daily Star_?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 16, 2015)

laptop said:


> A former MI5 officer chose to talk to the _Daily Star_?


 No, a retired MI5 officer was one of at least two intelligence sources spoken to by Don Hale and/or Marcus Chippindale.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 21, 2015)

Looks like well known oddzeals and recruiters amongst the most vulnerable the Jesus Army may have some issues to answer:
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/n...egations-to-northamptonshire-police-1-6913248


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Sadly, it does not beggar belief at all.
> UK society was operating in a state of total denial regarding sexual abuse of any kind...from sexual abuse of women to child sexual abuse, it was ignored, laughed off, and utterly denied. Sure, we'd joke about the pervy games teacher or the inadequate with a penchant for friendships (which were probably harmless) with young kids, but in doing so, we studiously ignored the army of careful, skilful abusers who had made their stock in trade the violation of - particularly - innocents. Society sent these people the message that the risk of getting caught was minimal, and the likely penalties no more than token, given our unwillingness to acknowledge what was going on in plain view under our noses. I know of several schoolteachers who were given their marching orders "or we're calling the police" - an empty threat, since no school wanted to be bothered with the aggravation of a (likely futile) prosecution, so sex abuser teachers could safely move on to pastures new and totally innocent of their history...because, for sure, no reference given was ever going to risk disclosing their predilection.
> 
> To make things worse, the stigma of child sexual abuse was _just_ bad enough to ensure that abusers would close ranks and collude in ways that inevitably put their victims at even greater risk, through networks of abusers, and "intelligence sharing" of a kind that meant their naive victims stood no chance of overcoming.
> ...



Really?

I know of the brother of a friend of mine who was sexually abused at school - don't know the details mind - and the teacher was definitely shown his marching orders straight to prison.

Also the case with friends of friends of mine at a different school.

The language you use is typical of this hysteria - a marauding army of paedos lurking in the shadows...

There's something typically British about all this stuff.  We had a round of paedo-fear in the early 00s - remember that Brass Eye episode? - and this looks an awful lot like the same pitchfork like crusades.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

Also, and I think I have made this point before on this thread.  There was not one Geoffrey Dickens dossier.  As far as I recall, there were around 8.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Also, and I think I have made this point before on this thread.  There was not one Geoffrey Dickens dossier.  As far as I recall, there were around 8.


Your point being?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Really?
> 
> I know of the brother of a friend of mine who was sexually abused at school - don't know the details mind - and the teacher was definitely shown his marching orders straight to prison.
> 
> ...


Your experiences may differ from mine. 

I don't think that makes it necessary to assume - or mindread - that mine are somehow fabricated as some kind of "paedofear". 

Indeed, had you the vaguest idea of my posts on the subject, you'd know what a stupid assumption that was to draw. 

But then, stupid assumptions seem rather to be your thing.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> Your point being?


I don't think he has one. This looks like the usual scattershot hurling around of vague half-thought nonsense that we're all supposed to take on trust.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 21, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I don't think he has one. This looks like the usual scattershot hurling around of vague half-thought nonsense that we're all supposed to take on trust.


Yep, probably just best ignored.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 21, 2015)

Yes it all clearly never happened. Because he claims that one teacher was sacked, all teachers who did it were sacked and the claims are hysteria is the clear inference.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> Yep, probably just best ignored.


I think you're right. I suspect his response to my much earlier post - which, judging by the number of likes it received must have struck a few chords - was probably just another attempt to reap the whirlwind and feed up his victim fantasy a bit. I'll not collude in that.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> Your point being?



The point being is that they were increasingly incredible - he was instrumental in the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic and was never taken seriously at the time.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Really?
> 
> I know of the brother of a friend of mine who was sexually abused at school - don't know the details mind - and the teacher was definitely shown his marching orders straight to prison.
> 
> ...



In fact I think this crosses the line and I've reported it. Telling people who have been subjected to physical and sexual abuse that it never happened and they're being hysterical is either trolling or just evil.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

two sheds said:


> Yes it all clearly never happened. Because he claims that one teacher was sacked, all teachers who did it were sacked and the claims are hysteria is the clear inference.


At the moment, I'm rather hamstrung by the whole sub judice thing, in any case, otherwise I could be naming names and providing examples...


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

http://saff.nfshost.com/dickens.htm


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Also, and I think I have made this point before on this thread.  There was not one Geoffrey Dickens dossier.  As far as I recall, there were around 8.


nearly as many as the referals made to the DPP who dismissed them out of hand regarding one Lord Janner. Its almost like their was a sustained and serious abuse sexually on the children of the least powerful by the most powerful and it has been deliberatly kept on the QT for 40 odd years. Perhaps an inquiry of some sort could be proposed?

You can fuck off with your 'hysteria' shit. It was funny to do that joke before glitter and saville and righton and brittan and kincora revealed a depravity that goes beyond anything my mind could concieve possible.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

two sheds said:


> In fact I think this crosses the line and I've reported it. Telling people who have been subjected to physical and sexual abuse that it never happened and they're being hysterical is either trolling or just evil.


TBF, he may not have read that particular thread. Not that I disagree with you about him being out of order...


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The language you use is typical of this hysteria - a marauding army of paedos lurking in the shadows...
> 
> There's something typically British about all this stuff.  We had a round of paedo-fear in the early 00s - remember that Brass Eye episode? - and this looks an awful lot like the same pitchfork like crusades.





Diamond said:


> The point being is that they were increasingly incredible - he was instrumental in the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic and was never taken seriously at the time.





Diamond said:


> http://saff.nfshost.com/dickens.htm



So where do you stand on this as your posts seem somewhat contradictory.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> So where do you stand on this as your posts seem somewhat contradictory.



Where is the contradiction?

Spell it out and perhaps I can assist you on clarity...


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Where is the contradiction?
> 
> Spell it out and perhaps I can assist you on clarity...


No need to spell it out, my first impression was wrong, I see now you are just warming to your theme that the current situation is one of unjustified hysteria. A view I find pretty abhorrent, and we will just have to agree to disagree on that.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The language you use is typical of this hysteria - a marauding army of paedos lurking in the shadows...QUOTE]
> 
> This is truly revolting. Do you view any topic as an opprtunity for this sort of point scoring?
> 
> Astonishing. Please stop this.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The point being is that they were increasingly incredible - he was instrumental in the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic and was never taken seriously at the time.



"Instrumental"?
He rode on the coat-tails of an already-existing transatlantic conspiracy theory-cum-mini industry that was already rooted into social work and psychology academia over here, and had filtered into general social work and some therapeutic psychology. Dickens was "targeted" as a parliamentary figurehead by the SRA-purveyors like Valerie Sinasson because of his previous campaigning on paedophilia. The moral panic was already in full flight in the UK when he became involved.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 21, 2015)

SAFF (Sorcerer's Apprentice Fighting Fund, as it was originally known) isn't a credible information source. Much as I admire and like the author (who I've known since 1989 - he's well-known in occult and Masonic circles), he's not exactly unbiased with regard to Dickens and with "Satanic Panic" hysteria in general, given how much that hysteria cost him.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 21, 2015)

I know I just lurk on this thread, but can we all please not allow one of the most informative, best threads here to be hijacked by stupidity, however tempting.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 21, 2015)

Lucy Fur said:


> No need to spell it out, my first impression was wrong, I see now you are just warming to your theme that the current situation is one of unjustified hysteria. A view I find pretty abhorrent, and we will just have to agree to disagree on that.



I truly wish it was "unjustified hysteria". However, having been in foster care myself (although thankfully not for long), and grown up with several kids who lived in local "childrens' homes" in the boroughs of Lambeth and Wandsworth, I know it isn't - I knew too many kids whose main problem when they went into care was being mixed race (yep, really  ), and whose problems when they left care were the result of sexual, physical and emotional abuse. 
Likewise, I know that a teacher at my school (I was there in the '70s) was a predatory paedophile, that he was exposed as such while I was there, but that he was allowed to keep on teaching. He was eventually done for grooming then buggering some of his charges while teaching at a private school in Surrey in 1997, so for at least 20 years he had a "clear run" at damaging young lives.
I also recall the multiple sexual abuse scandals across London boroughs between the '70s and the '90s with regard to care homes and "special schools", and how poorly-reported they were, in national coverage terms. One reason for this was because municipal re-insurers (who sensed massive liability) started demanding that local authorities suppressed such scandals as quickly as possible - in order to minimise claims.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 21, 2015)

Plumdaff said:


> I know I just lurk on this thread, but can we all please not allow one of the most informative, best threads here to be hijacked by stupidity, however tempting.



Well said.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Aug 21, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I truly wish it was "unjustified hysteria". However, having been in foster care myself (although thankfully not for long), and grown up with several kids who lived in local "childrens' homes" in the boroughs of Lambeth and Wandsworth, I know it isn't - I knew too many kids whose main problem when they went into care was being mixed race (yep, really  ), and whose problems when they left care were the result of sexual, physical and emotional abuse.
> Likewise, I know that a teacher at my school (I was there in the '70s) was a predatory paedophile, that he was exposed as such while I was there, but that he was allowed to keep on teaching. He was eventually done for grooming then buggering some of his charges while teaching at a private school in Surrey in 1997, so for at least 20 years he had a "clear run" at damaging young lives.
> I also recall the multiple sexual abuse scandals across London boroughs between the '70s and the '90s with regard to care homes and "special schools", and how poorly-reported they were, in national coverage terms. One reason for this was because municipal re-insurers (who sensed massive liability) started demanding that local authorities suppressed such scandals as quickly as possible - in order to minimise claims.


In deed, im in my mid 40's and as a kid I grew up in a village and went to school in Guildford. There was a bus driver who happily let you go for free, if you sat at the front on the dash, and we would for the extra sweety money not paying bus fare brought us, and we became quite deft at never letting his casual hand wander too far north when it landed on your knee. I had a teacher, who's reputation proceeded him, and whom once kept me back for extra tuition. During which he placed his hand under my shirt and up my back. I stood up and told him to fuck off. he gave me a wide burth thereafter, and his final report he said "it will be a releif to us both when he finally gives up this subject" which in hind sight possibly said more about him than me. None of my experiences come close to some of the stuff thats coming out at all, and I certainly dont put it up to compare, but it leaves me in no doubt that mine and more importantly others much worse experiences were a good deal more wide spread than recorded at the time.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

Again, this thread being hijacked code...

It simply means that if someone is disturbing our inquiry by, shock horror!, disagreeing with the direction in which it travels, then they are ruining our grand project.

There are two points to bring out here:

First, this is a thread on a public internet bulletin board.  There is no grand project.  There is nothing to be ruined.  You are not building anything.  You have not launched an investigation.  You are simply whiling away the hours.  To pretend otherwise is, quite frankly, absurd in the extreme. There is no architecture, there will be no hulking remains.  This is ephemeral entertainment that means nothing.

Second, if you argue that dissenting opinions are "hijacking" your conversations, perhaps you can play that through in to free speech implications.  Or perhaps you cannot because you have not thought about them.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Aug 21, 2015)

Several of my contemporaries at boarding school are still battling their own demons, alcohol dependence and broken relationships that relate directly to being sexually and emotionally abused by people who were trusted to care for them in loco parentis.

Diamond , fuck off with your 'ephemeral entertainment that means nothing'. That it means nothing to you is clear. Don't assume that others don't value the contributions and find them useful in their own way.


----------



## Libertad (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again, this thread being hijacked code...
> 
> It simply means that if someone is disturbing our inquiry by, shock horror!, disagreeing with the direction in which it travels, then they are ruining our grand project.
> 
> ...



Have you read the thread? If you have then it should be evident that your contributions have added nothing of any value to it.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 21, 2015)

Deep breaths everyone please.


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again, this thread being hijacked code...
> 
> It simply means that if someone is disturbing our inquiry by, shock horror!, disagreeing with the direction in which it travels, then they are ruining our grand project.
> 
> ...


Hello, Reg Folder.


----------



## editor (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again, this thread being hijacked code...
> 
> It simply means that if someone is disturbing our inquiry by, shock horror!, disagreeing with the direction in which it travels, then they are ruining our grand project.
> 
> ...


I'm not taking sides here but I've had enough reported posts from enough different posters over enough threads over a long enough period of time to know that you are indeed fucking up threads and intentionally disrupting discussions. I can't believe that you're not fully aware of what you're doing, so take this as you first warning. Please desist. 

I will also tell you that I will NOT discuss this matter on this thread further and if you attempt to drag me into it, you will be warned again.


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

editor said:


> I'm not taking sides here but I've had enough reported posts from enough different posters over enough threads over a long enough period of time to know that you are indeed fucking up threads and intentionally disrupting discussions. I can't believe that you're not fully aware of what you're doing, so take this as you first warning. Please desist.
> 
> I will also tell you that I will NOT discuss this matter on this thread further and if you attempt to drag me into it, you will be warned again.



You do whatever you see fit.  It's your set of boards, your property, your rules but I think it would set a pretty poor example to silence someone because they simply disagree with other posters.

I have not harassed anyone; I simply hold opinions that differ from others.

If that merits a ban, then go ahead but I would suggest that it would reflect badly on the mode of discussion in general here.

I also have no idea which posters are reporting myself for whatever reasons - a bit more perspective might help...


----------



## Diamond (Aug 21, 2015)

Right - official warning received, notably without any particulars, time to withdraw.  Enjoy your inquiry folks...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2015)

Diamond said:


> You do whatever you see fit.  It's your set of boards, your property, your rules but I think it would set a pretty poor example to silence someone because they simply disagree with other posters.
> 
> I have not harassed anyone; I simply hold opinions that differ from others.
> 
> ...


some self-awareness and -reflection may clear away your confusion.


----------



## laptop (Aug 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> some self-awareness and -reflection may clear away your confusion.



Now I have to wipe coffee of my screen 

/derail


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> some self-awareness and -reflection may clear away your confusion.


If I thought for a moment that sharing some of my own first-hand experience (rather than some friend-of-a-friend hearsay) might actually help, I'd put Diamond in the picture. But I can't imagine that anyone here would expect him to respond in any way other than the usual, and I really don't particularly want all that thrown back in my face .


----------



## two sheds (Aug 21, 2015)

And for me it wasn't the "simply hold opinions that differ from others", it was the way those opinions were expressed. 

/back to thread


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2015)

According to this Exaro story from some days ago, the 'abused in Staffordshire woods by Lib Dem MP and others' has gone from a scoping exercise to a full-blown criminal investigation:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5641/video-esther-baker-on-how-police-have-stepped-up-abuse-case


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2015)

It seems that 6 of Janners alleged victims have had to press on with suing him now, rather than waiting till any criminal trial/trial of facts is done, because his lawyers denied a request which would have made the timing better:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lord-janner-sued-six-alleged-6288407#ICID=sharebar_twitter


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 21, 2015)

The fuck happened to this thread?


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2015)

It will be ok, just move on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The fuck happened to this thread?


diamond


----------



## existentialist (Aug 21, 2015)

elbows said:


> It seems that 6 of Janners alleged victims have had to press on with suing him now, rather than waiting till any criminal trial/trial of facts is done, because his lawyers denied a request which would have made the timing better:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lord-janner-sued-six-alleged-6288407#ICID=sharebar_twitter


And the sickening thing is that there will no doubt be those who will regard those who sue their abusers as no more than opportunists out for a bit of easy money. No matter that their lives might have been blighted by the aftermath of abuse, or that the lost opportunities and efforts to overcome that aftermath have cost them dearly, their actions will be seen - probably by the same narrow-minded fools who regard this topic as mere self-indulgence and manufactured fear - as capitalising on the publicity that has belatedly begun to arise over these long-suppressed injustices.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 22, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again, this thread being hijacked code...
> 
> It simply means that if someone is disturbing our inquiry by, shock horror!, disagreeing with the direction in which it travels, then they are ruining our grand project.
> 
> ...


Incidentally, this is wrong: these threads can, and do, have real world outcomes. As a small example: it was on a precursor to this very thread that a discussion ensued that led to my decision to go to the police and disclose abuse from 40 years ago. They took it seriously enough to start an investigation that resulted in ten new victims hitherto unknown to them being found and about 30 charges of offences against children being brought, and a second offender facing further charges. 

That simply would not have happened if it hadn't been for that discussion, and the rather sneering suggestion of one poster that it was a waste of money for the police to be investigating these historic cases.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 22, 2015)

existentialist said:


> And the sickening thing is that there will no doubt be those who will regard those who sue their abusers as no more than opportunists out for a bit of easy money. No matter that their lives might have been blighted by the aftermath of abuse, or that the lost opportunities and efforts to overcome that aftermath have cost them dearly, their actions will be seen - probably by the same narrow-minded fools who regard this topic as mere self-indulgence and manufactured fear - as capitalising on the publicity that has belatedly begun to arise over these long-suppressed injustices.




That vile predatory nonce johnathon king is still publicly giving out about " the victim industry " . Publicly sneering at victims coming forward . Beggars belief that not only is he given a platform to do that ,but before all the saville stuff there were numerous liberal types claiming he was persecuted for his sexuality . They'd think twice now most of them .


----------



## elbows (Aug 22, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> but before all the saville stuff there were numerous liberal types claiming he was persecuted for his sexuality . They'd think twice now most of them .



It wasn't the Savile stuff that really changed that, though it may have been the first opportunity for people to notice the changes on that front. It was a range of things including very important ones such as age of consent equality. Because at stages of the long struggle for equal rights, steps along the path lead to messy periods where non-abusive relationships were still criminalised. Some abusers exploited those situations, latching on to a wider struggle. They can't hide around those margins anymore, and we also have laws that reduce the opportunity for older people in positions of trust to abuse power in relation to their younger charges.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 22, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Incidentally, this is wrong: these threads can, and do, have real world outcomes. As a small example: it was on a precursor to this very thread that a discussion ensued that led to my decision to go to the police and disclose abuse from 40 years ago. They took it seriously enough to start an investigation that resulted in ten new victims hitherto unknown to them being found and about 30 charges of offences against children being brought, and a second offender facing further charges.
> 
> That simply would not have happened if it hadn't been for that discussion, and the rather sneering suggestion of one poster that it was a waste of money for the police to be investigating these historic cases.



That's "...the rather sneering suggestion of one poster who is either a troll, or has all the social awareness and self-awareness of a pus-filled arse boil", if you don't mind!


----------



## existentialist (Aug 22, 2015)

elbows said:


> It wasn't the Savile stuff that really changed that, though it may have been the first opportunity for people to notice the changes on that front. It was a range of things including very important ones such as age of consent equality. Because at stages of the long struggle for equal rights, steps along the path lead to messy periods where non-abusive relationships were still criminalised. Some abusers exploited those situations, latching on to a wider struggle. They can't hide around those margins anymore, and we also have laws that reduce the opportunity for older people in positions of trust to abuse power in relation to their younger charges.


I think that the Savile business was the coming to a head of an increasingly obtrusive boil. If it hadn't been Savile, it was inevitable that it would have been something else, but I completely agree with you that the question of historical sexual abuse was becoming increasingly difficult for anyone to continue covering up. 

What I think that the Savile revelations did was to put in front of the police (in particular) an issue that was both unignorable, and at the same time comparatively low-risk: they could investigate past crimes without the hitherto awkward business of having to work towards a prosecution of those crimes. That snowballed as the full scope of what Savile had done came to light, but - critically - sent the message to victims of other abusers that the police were able and prepared to investigate historical allegations without the victims being dismissed or disbelieved. And, as prosecutions started to feed through, that they could finally stand a chance of seeing their abusers account for their activities in court.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 22, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's "...the rather sneering suggestion of one poster who is either a troll, or has all the social awareness and self-awareness of a pus-filled arse boil", if you don't mind!


Ah. We're talking about a different arse boil here. I think it was a poster called Giles who suggested that these offences shouldn't be prosecuted.


----------



## elbows (Aug 22, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I think that the Savile business was the coming to a head of an increasingly obtrusive boil. If it hadn't been Savile, it was inevitable that it would have been something else, but I completely agree with you that the question of historical sexual abuse was becoming increasingly difficult for anyone to continue covering up.



I was only talking about one or two phenomenon caused by historical inequalities in the age of consent, and how this created a somewhat grey area for a time which some could exploit at the expense of the naive and well-intentioned. And how Savile had nothing to do with evolution and revelation on this front.

In terms of the historical abuse coming out for a public airing, I believe Saviles death was a big trigger for that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 22, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Ah. We're talking about a different arse boil here. I think it was a poster called Giles who suggested that these offences shouldn't be prosecuted.



Oh, you mean the chap who favours the practice of eugenics on anyone/any group he doesn't like?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 22, 2015)

elbows said:


> I was only talking about one or two phenomenon caused by historical inequalities in the age of consent, and how this created a somewhat grey area for a time which some could exploit at the expense of the naive and well-intentioned. And how Savile had nothing to do with evolution and revelation on this front.
> 
> In terms of the historical abuse coming out for a public airing, I believe Saviles death was a big trigger for that.


I absolutely agree that the moralistic proscription of perfectly healthy and natural sexual behaviours facilitated a lot of harmful and abusive ones, yes.


----------



## 1%er (Aug 22, 2015)

Thank fuck Baroness Butler-Sloss is not chairing the CSA. These two stories appear to show a remarkable lack of judgement by someone so eminent in the legal field.

Butler-Sloss Is Character Witness For Alleged Paedophile.

Paedophile Philip Chard Found Guilty (Despite Butler-Sloss Supporting Him.)


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2015)

1%er said:


> Thank fuck Baroness Butler-Sloss is not chairing the CSA. These two stories appear to show a remarkable lack of judgement by someone so eminent in the legal field.
> 
> Butler-Sloss Is Character Witness For Alleged Paedophile.
> 
> Paedophile Philip Chard Found Guilty (Despite Butler-Sloss Supporting Him.)


Yeah, I saw that - and thought that.  At the very least it was an unfair intervention, seeking to bring the kudos of a senior judge into play in the case (even if it didn't work).


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 22, 2015)

1%er said:


> Paedophile Philip Chard Found Guilty (Despite Butler-Sloss Supporting Him.)



Not trying to derail but she looks the absolute spit of Saville in that pic they chose .

Basically her character reference amounts to " he didn't look like a nonce. I've seen loads of them in my time but he didn't strike me as one " . He was in her bloody house with his mum for christs sake . What was he supposed to be doing ?

Can't believe they wre putting her in charge .


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Not trying to derail but she looks the absolute spit of Saville in that pic they chose .
> 
> Basically her character reference amounts to " he didn't look like a nonce. I've seen loads of them in my time but he didn't strike me as one " . He was in her bloody house with his mum for christs sake . What was he supposed to be doing ?
> 
> Can't believe they wre putting her in charge .


How dare you cast aspersions on the good Lady! She numbers a former Home Secretary in her circle of friends.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2015)

the new person in charge is still establishment, kiwi establishent, but still.


----------



## elbows (Aug 22, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the new person in charge is still establishment, kiwi establishent, but still.



Indeed, but there is still room for quite a lot of variation in quality and agenda of chairperson even within the confines of the establishment.

Although I share much of the cynicism about inquiries etc, I don't really know how, by their very nature, we could have a public inquiry that wasn't establishment. Sp it then comes down to the usual questions as to whether the time has come that the establishment will open up significantly, or whether fresh injustice will occur in a pronounced way.

In some senses the multiple botches on the inquiry chair front were a bad sign, but I think the fiasco's created an opportunity for more good to come out of things. It's given the establishment several slaps already, plenty for them to think about and this can affect the delicate balance of things in a positive way. Same for The Janner crown prosecution fiasco.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 23, 2015)

Apologies for the link, but interesting revelation 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/600117/Boy-rape-filmed-notorious-Dolphin-Square


----------



## brogdale (Aug 24, 2015)




----------



## Dan U (Aug 25, 2015)

Proctor now giving a press conference detailing allegations against him

https://twitter.com/ExaroNews

https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes

And others I am sure


----------



## Dan U (Aug 25, 2015)

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  17m17 minutes ago
Harvey Proctor says that 'Operation Midland' is investigating claim that he sexually abused and murdered a boy. HP denies claim.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  11m11 minutes ago
Harvey Proctor catalogues allegs again him, including role in murder of two other boys, torture and sexual abuse of boys. He denies it all.

*ExaroNews* ‏@ExaroNews  3m3 minutes ago
Harvey Proctor says that police are investigating claim that he sexually abused boy at Sir Edward Heath's home. He denies it.


----------



## Dan U (Aug 25, 2015)

won't post anymore of these, check the links above but erm. wow

*Fiona Hamilton* ‏@Fhamiltontimes  4m4 minutes ago
One of claims against Harvey Proctor is that he was persuaded by former PM Edward Heath not to castrate the complainant, then young boy


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Proctor now giving a press conference detailing allegations against him
> 
> https://twitter.com/ExaroNews
> 
> ...


Telegraph are leading with this atm.
This is some high-stakes defence strategy from Proctor. Looks like they may have got a live one.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Telegraph are leading with this atm.
> This is some high-stakes defence strategy from Proctor. Looks like they may have got a live one.


...well, live enough to blab..


----------



## tim (Aug 25, 2015)

I don't like Proctor, but I don't trust Exxaro or the competence of the Met; and I don't find this huge conspiracy thing terribly convincing - it's all becoming a bit too David Icke.

 Child abuse was everywhere in British society at this time, at all levels and plenty of blind eyes were turned, but I think that by buiding things like this house of cards we put investigations into more credible but more mundane claims of abuse at risk.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2015)

tim said:


> I don't like Proctor, but I don't trust Exxaro or the competence of the Met; and I don't find this huge conspiracy thing terribly convincing - it's all becoming a bit too David Icke.
> 
> Child abuse was everywhere in British society at this time, at all levels and plenty of blind eyes were turned, but I think that by buiding things like this house of cards we put investigations into more credible but more mundane claims of abuse at risk.


I know what you mean, but I have to say Proctor appeared to do himself no favours today with that extra-ordinary pressa and then doing a very good impression of a psychopath in the C4 News interview. And all the stuff about revealing the precise nature of the allegations against him...odd.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 25, 2015)

brogdale said:


> ...And all the stuff about revealing the precise nature of the allegations against him...odd.



oh i don't know, its a good way of forcing the police/CPS to either piss or get off the pot by making them look either incompetant or like conspiraloons.

'ex-tory MP interviewed over sex abuse allegations' could be anything, and carries plausibility. 'ex-tory MP interviewed over allegations he strangled a boy in the company of an ex-PM he loathed - and who loathed him - the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Home Secretary' is like something you'd read on a David Icke website.

that does not preclude it being true, but you'd need some spectacular evidence to prove something that sounds so outlandish - and given that they've not charged him, that evidence doesn't appear to in their pocket just yet. he's looking to get the police/CPS to drop it, and making them look like idiots is a good way of doing that.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2015)

Here's the interview..



4.00 to 6.30 is pretty damning; if he can't admit to the nature of crimes for which he was convicted it doesn't lend huge weight to his strident defence against the new allegations.


----------



## twentythreedom (Aug 25, 2015)

Does he comes from a long and distinguished line of proctologists

Oh and from urban dictionary:

"Harvey
To have a visible and quite noticeable semi-erection when in public."

As if he wasn't guilty enough already

Tbf that press conference was bizarre. Still, lucky him to have such a platform available to make his views and opinions public


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Aug 25, 2015)

It's hard not to speculate whilst watching him as to whether his somewhat shifty demeanour and the occasional slightly odd turn of phrase is simply someone under immense, unfair pressure being asked "when did you stop beating your wife" style questions, with KGM's ever present subtle, sensitive and understated style doing it's best to put the interviewee in a relaxed and un-defensive mood, or something much, much darker.

Talking about yourself in the 3rd person, however, which Proctor has a couple of times in today's media appearances, comes across as immensely weird and intense, though, whatever the circumstances.  Let alone these circumstances.


----------



## benedict (Aug 25, 2015)

Creepy archival material.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Aug 25, 2015)

Odd mannerisms and eccentric behaviour are not an indication that a person is or might be a murdering rapist.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 25, 2015)

unless you're an mp......?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 26, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> It's hard not to speculate whilst watching him as to whether his somewhat shifty demeanour and the occasional slightly odd turn of phrase is simply someone under immense, unfair pressure being asked "when did you stop beating your wife" style questions, w*ith KGM's ever present subtle, sensitive and understated style *doing it's best to put the interviewee in a relaxed and un-defensive mood, or something much, much darker.
> 
> Talking about yourself in the 3rd person, however, which Proctor has a couple of times in today's media appearances, comes across as immensely weird and intense, though, whatever the circumstances.  Let alone these circumstances.


 Must admit I usually think he's an antagonistic arse, too much interrupting, never gets anything out of his interviewees. That interview was well conducted though, just the right balance of interrogation whilst there's a possible legal process to think about - along with a proper note of contempt for a rich powerful man who used rentboys a generation younger than himself.


----------



## benedict (Aug 26, 2015)

MAD-T-REX said:


> Odd mannerisms and eccentric behaviour are not an indication that a person is or might be a murdering rapist.



Pleaded guilty to paying for sex with underage boy. More than mannerisms. Stick to your high ground.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 26, 2015)

benedict said:


> Pleaded guilty to paying for sex with underage boy. More than mannerisms. Stick to your high ground.


Let's just say KCG was making a reasonable point when he guessed, assumed, suggested that Proctor 'hovered' around the age of consent when selecting youths for sex.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 26, 2015)

Iain Dale interviewed Proctor for LBC. Video of the whole interview is available here at Dale's site but unfortunately can't be embedded on Urban. (LBC have put a short extract on youtube).

The Needle blog have published the written version of Proctor's statement which was issued in advance of his Press Conference.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2015)

MAD-T-REX said:


> Odd mannerisms and eccentric behaviour are not an indication that a person is or might be a murdering rapist.


Correct, but that C4 News interview revealed a number of Proctor's characteristics and beliefs that undermine the credibility of his denials. Amongst other things, his perception that using (then) under-age sex-workers constituted "consensual sex" was perhaps most troubling. Added to which he appeared willing to deny and lie about conduct for which he had pleaded guilty and was convicted. This all has to be set in the context of the times and Proctor's role/position within the political class. His electoral victory for thatcher's tories in Basildon was emblematic of the vermin's socially conservative stranglehold on political culture that produced Section 28 of the Local Government Act in the year following his conviction. In the interview with KGM Proctor once again demonstrated the hypocrisy and self-interest of the cohort of gay tory MPs who were, for the sake of their own career self-interest, anxious to conceal their own sexual orientation whilst supporting homophobic legislation.

All of which tends to suggest that Proctor is a very unpleasant example of a narcissistic psychopath willing to put his own sexual gratification above the law concerning consensual sex. Not a great basis for his very strident and high-profile denials of the most recent allegations, and nothing to do with having odd mannerisms or 'eccentric' behaviour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2015)

i would be surprised if hp turned out to be a murderer. would not be too taken aback if the rest true tho.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2015)

Also...when asked what he was doing when he went to Dolphin Sq. Proctor appeared to be smirking at the lack of credibility of his own account when he said he'd "been visiting a General" and that the meeting had be witnessed by a "girl" acting as "secretary" to the "General".


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 26, 2015)

One thing I do know about Proctor is that he's still a member of the far-right Monday Club.

The racist cunt deserves nothing but my utmost contempt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> One thing I do know about Proctor is that he's still a member of the far-right Monday Club.
> 
> The racist cunt deserves nothing but my utmost contempt.


shurely deserves a fair trial. before being sent down


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i would be surprised if hp turned out to be a murderer. would not be too taken aback if the rest true tho.


Your 'gut instinct' may well be correct...but it wasn't so long ago that many would have said the same of the 'great & the good' being paedophiles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Your 'gut instinct' may well be correct...but it wasn't so long ago that many would have said the same of the 'great & the good' being paedophiles.


'many' would say the same thing now. as for my guts, they tell me when no carrot cake available for breakfast don't trade up to chocolate cake.


----------



## benedict (Aug 26, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Iain Dale interviewed Proctor for LBC. Video of the whole interview is available here at Dale's site but unfortunately can't be embedded on Urban. (LBC have put a short extract on youtube).
> 
> The Needle blog have published the written version of Proctor's statement which was issued in advance of his Press Conference.



LBC uploaded the full version of the interview to YouTube.


Spoiler: LBC Full Interview


----------



## tim (Aug 26, 2015)

benedict said:


> LBC uploaded the full version of the interview to YouTube.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: LBC Full Interview





I'm sure this must have been posted before, but here is "Nick's" interview with Exaro. No claims that anyone was murdered, though.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...of-how-mps-liked-to-inflict-pain-during-abuse


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2015)

Link to full text of Proctor's statement to yesterday's press confernece...

**trigger warning** (conatins graphic descriptions of alleged CSE and physical abuse)
https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/25/full-statement-of-harvey-proctor/

Those allegations; Jesus.


----------



## benedict (Aug 26, 2015)

Proctor interview on Newsnight if anyone missed this


Spoiler


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2015)




----------



## frogwoman (Aug 26, 2015)

Hes scum.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 26, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Also...when asked what he was doing when he went to Dolphin Sq. Proctor appeared to be smirking at the lack of credibility of his own account when he said he'd "been visiting a General" and that the meeting had be witnessed by a "girl" acting as "secretary" to the "General".


It would be interesting to know if proctor's lawyer's put any restrictions on those interviews. For example he wasn't asked if he'd ever visited Elm House.


----------



## benedict (Aug 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> It would be interesting to know if proctor's lawyer's put any restrictions on those interviews. For example he wasn't asked if he'd ever visited Elm House.



Maybe. He does say in the press conference statement, though, that he never visited the place and was unaware of its existence.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2015)

benedict said:


> Maybe. He does say in the press conference statement, though, that he never visited the place and was unaware of its existence.


Ah right, cheers. I only watched the ch4 interview.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2015)

Proctor runs away.

Good riddance cunt.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 29, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Proctor runs away.
> 
> Good riddance cunt.


So long as wherever he ends up has an extradition treaty with the UK.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2015)

belgium obvs


----------



## J Ed (Aug 29, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Proctor runs away.
> 
> Good riddance cunt.



Charge him + take away his passport imo


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2015)

'all I've got is my MP's pension' of 30 k a year plus your partners wealthy and you tory wanks all have old money stashed. Cheek of it playing the impovrished and wronged man.


----------



## tim (Aug 30, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Charge him + take away his passport imo



Have you read the allegations that have been made against him? If so, do you honestly think they would stand up in court? 

What would be achieved by him being charged, tried and then inevitably acquitted?


----------



## elbows (Aug 31, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> 'all I've got is my MP's pension' of 30 k a year plus your partners wealthy and you tory wanks all have old money stashed. Cheek of it playing the impovrished and wronged man.



I'm not suggesting he is eating out of bins but he certainly didn't used to be a well off tory - hence the reason why a number of tories gave money to help him setup that shirt business after his conviction saw the end of his career in Westminster.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2015)

elbows said:


> I'm not suggesting he is eating out of bins but he certainly didn't used to be a well off tory - hence the reason why a number of tories gave money to help him setup that shirt business after his conviction saw the end of his career in Westminster.


might not be eating out of bins but has his snout in the trough


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2015)

tim said:


> Have you read the allegations that have been made against him? If so, do you honestly think they would stand up in court?
> 
> What would be achieved by him being charged, tried and then inevitably acquitted?


the winners would be lawyers like (but not) diamond


----------



## existentialist (Aug 31, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the winners would be lawyers like (but not) diamond


I think the winners would need to be moderately competent lawyers, all the same...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I think the winners would need to be moderately competent lawyers, all the same...


quite so.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 31, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> quite so.


And not much given to flights of self-regarding histrionics.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Sep 5, 2015)

> Scotland Yard is under pressure to shelve its VIP paedophile murder inquiry after it emerged detectives had ‘grave doubts’ about the testimony of the key witness.
> 
> Officers have not found a ‘shred of credible evidence’ to back up claims that a string of senior Establishment figures were responsible for murdering three boys in the 1970s and 1980s.
> ...
> There is also mounting concern among officers about the role of an ‘investigative’ news website called Exaro, which has close links to campaigning Labour MP Tom Watson.


'Grave doubts' over key witnesses's claims in VIP sex abuse inquiry


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 10, 2015)

I see Jonathan Kings been nicked.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I see Jonathan Kings been nicked.


if he's charged i look forward to his defence statement, or the king's speech as it's known in legal circles


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2015)

1%er said:


> Thank fuck Baroness Butler-Sloss is not chairing the CSA. These two stories appear to show a remarkable lack of judgement by someone so eminent in the legal field.
> 
> Butler-Sloss Is Character Witness For Alleged Paedophile.
> 
> Paedophile Philip Chard Found Guilty (Despite Butler-Sloss Supporting Him.)



Now sentenced:



> On Monday the judge Erik Salomonsen jailed Chard for seven years for the rape and one year concurrently for the sexual activity charge.
> 
> He told Chard that “he could not resist a very attractive 13-year-old girl” and “became increasingly attracted to her”. The judge did not refer to Butler-Sloss during the sentencing but said Chard was a man “who has merits”.



Child rapist jailed despite support of Lady Butler-Sloss


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2015)

Catching up with Exaro articles. I continue to have mixed feelings about Exaro at times.

One Dolphin Square witness/victim has stopped cooperating with police after they referred his baby son to social services. 

Police ‘betray’ CSA survivor by referring his son to social services | ExaroNews

A strong defence of Exaros practices in relation to 'Nick' and the idea that police on the case still view him as credible:

Analysis: why police continue to investigate claims by ‘Nick’ | ExaroNews

Hard to properly judge for ourselves since the details that apparently give credibility to his account cannot be revealed at this point.

A story about one of Proctors ex-lovers giving a statement to police:

Harvey Proctor’s ex-lover talks to Met’s ‘Operation Midland’ | ExaroNews


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 17, 2015)

IPCC announce a further 12 investigations concerning


> allegations of corruption in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and one allegation detailing corruption in Essex Police. All relate to child sex offences dating from the 1970s to the 2000s.





> The investigations are to be conducted by the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) and Essex's Professional Standards Directorate (PSD) but will be overseen, and have the terms of the investigation set, by the IPCC. The majority of the investigations stem from allegations made by retired MPS officers.





> This is in addition to the 17 investigations announced earlier this year. All relate to allegations about:
> 
> Suppressing evidence;
> Hindering or halting investigations;
> Covering up the offences because of the involvement of members of parliament and police officers



The details of these allegations are :


> 1) Allegation that a prosecution against a government official who was in possession of indecent images of children was not pursued following instruction from senior officers and lawyers.
> 
> 2) Allegation that an investigation into a paedophile ring in south-west London in the 1970s was shut down prematurely on instruction of senior or high-ranking officers.
> 
> ...


Once upon a time resistance to investigating allegations of wrongdoing was so strong that if an investigation was announced one could be reasonably certain that there were strong grounds for it. Today that's no longer as true.

Even so despite my gloomy conviction that some of this is more about covering arse than any reflection of the quality of the evidence (and also despite my scepticism about testimony from former police officers) this is an interesting development.


----------



## elbows (Sep 17, 2015)

Do we know which MP number 4 relates to, given they were charged with something at the time?


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 17, 2015)

elbows said:


> Do we know which MP number 4 relates to, given they were charged with something at the time?


No idea. Speculation at the Needleblog that it might be Peter Morrison.


----------



## elbows (Sep 17, 2015)

I don't think that much of their speculation, especially as they seem a bit confused about the prospects for investigations being buried after someone has been charged.

I guess I'm not going to get an answer on this one from mainstream sources now since, even if it would be safe to name the MP purely in relation to historical charges faced, the fresh accusations make it unsafe to do so.

Meanwhile I note this info in a Guardian article thats initial focus was on the latest IPCC stuff.



> It has now emerged that Scotland Yard launched a review of Midland in April. The review concluded at the end of last month and the findings are now being considered.
> 
> A Met spokesman said: “An internal review of Operation Midland was commissioned on 8 April 2015. It is routine for investigations of this nature to be reviewed in this way. The review was carried out, with the full report submitted on 25 August. The product of this review is under consideration.
> 
> “We are not prepared to comment on the review in any detail at this time as Midland is an ongoing investigation.”



Police watchdog expands inquiry into alleged cover-up of paedophile network


----------



## Diamond (Sep 18, 2015)

Private Eye has a pretty damning article on Exaro in its current issue.


----------



## elbows (Sep 18, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Private Eye has a pretty damning article on Exaro in its current issue.


----------



## Diamond (Sep 18, 2015)

elbows said:


>




That's the one.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 18, 2015)

Exaro certainly seem to have forgotten the "winning friends" bit of the task of "influencing people". The kind of bullish Fleet Street arrogance Mark Watts displays is one thing when you're the editor of The Sun and it's still 2005. Quite another when it's 2015 and you're the editor of a financially troubled press agency which isn't producing much new copy. As far as I can see the only new aspect of the Eye story is the information from their annual accounts. The rest repeats criticisms (for example in Matthew Scott's blog post, a shortened version of which appeared in the Telegraph) and facts (amongst other examples the Mail's background piece on Exaro in one of their Harvey Proctor stories) already published elsewhere. It's part of the increasingly hostile scrutiny Exaro have received since Proctor's press conference, and in particular the publication of the text of the Operation Midland disclosure document setting out the matters he was to be questioned about.



elbows said:


> Meanwhile I note this info in a Guardian article thats initial focus was on the latest IPCC stuff.
> 
> 
> > It has now emerged that Scotland Yard launched a review of Midland in April. The review concluded at the end of last month and the findings are now being considered.


Interesting timing if that's correct. The Mail story claiming that Operation Midland was in trouble  appeared on the 5th September. And was followed by last Sunday's Sunday Times story (paywalled) about "Darren", which stated


> In addition, a source has told The Sunday Times that Operation Midland — a separate investigation by the Metropolitan police into the alleged Westminster ring — is “going nowhere” because detectives can find no evidence to corroborate the stories of witnesses.


which was picked up by the Mail and the Telegraph. 



Spoiler: Text of Sunday Times story



A POLICE investigation into claims of murder by a VIP paedophile ring has been halted after detectives could find no evidence to support the allegations.

Officers from the Suffolk force became so worried by the behaviour of the “witness” who made the claims — known only as Darren — that they have referred his son to social services.

Darren has now said that he will no longer co-operate with the police. He had previously given lurid accounts of two incidents in which he claimed people died at the hands of a paedophile gang that included a senior Conservative politician.

His claims have been given widespread coverage in newspapers and on the internet. In July he was interviewed for an Australian television documentary, the 60 Minutes programme on Channel 9, during which he named a Conservative MP as being part of the gang.

The declaration that there is no evidence to support Darren’s claims is another setback to the campaign by the new deputy Labour leader Tom Watson and others to show that a paedophile ring once operated at the highest level of the government.

Last week it was reported in the Daily Mail that police had “grave doubts” over allegations by a second witness, known as “Nick”, who claimed to know of three murders by the gang, but officers could not find a “shred of credible evidence” to substantiate them.

In addition, a source has told The Sunday Times that Operation Midland — a separate investigation by the Metropolitan police into the alleged Westminster ring — is “going nowhere” because detectives can find no evidence to corroborate the stories of witnesses.

Last month Mark Williams-Thomas, the former police officer who exposed Jimmy Savile as a serial sex offender, warned that many of the current allegations against political figures were unsubstantiated and could undermine efforts to tackle child abuse.

Darren made his claims in an interview with the investigative news website Exaro, in which he claimed to have fallen into the hands of the VIP paedophile ring at the age of 15 when he undertook work experience at Thornham Magna estate in Suffolk.

At the time, he said, the known paedophile Peter Righton was renting a house on the estate after his conviction for possessing child pornography in 1992.

He claimed Righton was involved in the killing of a man in his thirties on the estate and that he knew of a girl who had died during a VIP paedophile party at the Dolphin Square apartment block in Westminster where Righton took him on a number of occasions in 1993.

But Suffolk police have investigated all the claims and found no evidence to support his account. In fact, police sources say Darren had never come into contact with Righton or worked at the estate when Righton lived there.

Watson had claimed in October 2012 that Righton, a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange group who died in 2007, was a key figure in the alleged Westminster paedophile ring.

Darren said he was abused by Righton and Charles Napier — who was jailed for 13 years in December for sex attacks at a boys’ school — while working at Thornham Magna.

He said Righton once forced him to strap a man called Andrew, who had Down’s syndrome, to the front of a car and tie his legs to another vehicle. The two vehicles were then reversed apart.

“I do not know for sure whether Andrew was killed. But he had been a regular fixture on the estate, and that was the last I saw of him,” Darren has been quoted as saying. He further claimed Andrew had helped him dig six graves on the estate “four in a field, and another two in some woods”.

“Two days later, I walked past the place where we had dug four of the graves, and they were filled in,” he said. “I believe he was murdered and put in one of those graves.”

Darren alleged that Righton trafficked him and other children to Dolphin Square for the parties where he saw a 15- year-old girl taken into what was described as the “medical room” and never saw her again. When asked what he believed had happened to her, he replied: “She’s dead.”

Suffolk police said: “We fully investigated the claims and these have been found to be unsubstantiated.”

On the referral of Darren’s child to social services, the force added: “We have a duty of care to protect young people where a concern has been raised for their wellbeing.”

Speaking yesterday, Darren said: “My allegations are true, I have no reason to lie to anyone, I’ve never made any money from speaking out and neither would I want to. I told the truth in the belief that there would be justice. Why would I lie? What would I have gained by lying?”

On the suggestion that he had not been at Thornham Magna during Righton’s time he said: “I have records that state differently.”

Darren had previously accused the police of a “betrayal of trust” by referring his son to social services and claimed it had been done “to silence me”.

Mark Watts, editor-in-chief of Exaro, said it fully stood by the accounts of both Darren and Nick.



In a statement today about setting up a dedicated team to deal with the workload from the IPCC investigations into Police corruption, the requirements of the Goddard enquiry, and criminal investigations relating to Operations Fairbank and Yewtree, the Met also confirmed that Operation Midland is still ongoing.

Met creating team to deal with historical child abuse cases - BBC


> The BBC understands the controversial Operation Midland - which is investigating claims of child abuse by establishment figures - will continue as a "standalone operation" because it is also examining allegations of child killings.
> 
> Scotland Yard has finished a routine review of the Midland investigation which began in April, partly to consider further lines of inquiry. The results have not yet been made public.





> The Met has made no detailed comment about Operation Midland for months. There have been reports it will be scaled back because it has not uncovered substantial evidence, despite a 10-month investigation.
> 
> In a statement on Friday the Met said the investigation involved 27 officers from the Homicide and Major Crime Command, who would remain there.





> "As part of their duties they undertake on-call responsibilities where they deal with calls for initial management of new cases. The team are taking no new investigations and their main focus is on Midland," the statement said.


The Guardians version. 

The fact that unlike criminal investigations relating to Yewtree and Fairbank, Midland is specifically not being absorbed into this new unit might indicate that the Met are confident about it. Or then again it might not.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Sep 19, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> It's part of the increasingly hostile scrutiny Exaro have received since Proctor's press conference, and in particular the publication of the text of the Operation Midland disclosure document setting out the matters he was to be questioned about.


Exaro deserves a good kicking. It withheld the details of Nick's account because it knew the allegations sounded absurd. It hides behind the Met's foolish statement that Nick's account was "credible and true" when questioned about its coverage (how responsible). It attempts to make a story out of every 'development' such as 'Proctor's former lover speaks to Midland' - the implication being that he was revealing all but he could have told the police that nothing happened.

And its arrogance and crowing leaves something to be desired. @ExaroNews never fails to retweet someone saying 'Exaro is the best!!!' and it inexplicably claimed the credit for the CPS reversing its decision on Janner.

I'm starting to see parallels between Exaro and Wikileaks - a good cause is ultimately going to be undermined by people who see it primarily as a path to success and adoration from their followers.



> The fact that unlike criminal investigations relating to Yewtree and Fairbank, Midland is specifically not being absorbed into this new unit might indicate that the Met are confident about it. Or then again it might not.


I'd say that it doesn't. If Midland is going nowhere, it makes sense to quarantine it for reputational and confidence reasons, sparing the new unit from taking a hit before it has even established itself.


----------



## elbows (Sep 19, 2015)

I can't reach a judgement about Midland because it remains possible that specific details in 'Nicks' testimony actually add credibility to the allegations, rather than detract from them. It seems reasonable to assume that some of the details he gave the police made them take it seriously, even if it turns out to be fatally flawed in some other ways.

So I'll just have to wait and see, but in the meantime I share some of the critical feelings towards Exaro, mostly since they stopped getting much new info and blew their own trumpet too much. I am certainly very hesitant to complain that they took potential victims very seriously, given that was one of the main failures with child abuse historically.


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 19, 2015)

Midland was also pretty much a murder investigation as opposed to an abuse enquiry....

...without digging up some bodies or accumulating a serious number of independent witnesses you're never going to get to a satisfactory conclusion....which is rather what it is looking like now...

...from this morning





A MOUNTAIN of files on historic VIP child sex abuse cases is missing, The Sun can reveal.

Documents known as “Red Dockets” from highly sensitive cases have mysteriously vanished from police archives, well-informed sources say.

The revelations, said to feature the names of politicians, showbiz stars and a senior cop, come as a Metropolitan Police inquiry into claims that establishment figures murdered three boys teeters on the verge of collapse.

Files which have disappeared include ones from the infamous 1980s Operation Circus inquiry.
It was shut down after undercover cops allegedly photographed rent boys from London’s Piccadilly Circus with VIPs.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 19, 2015)

Full text of the Sun story fwiw



Spoiler: Sun article



*A MOUNTAIN of files on historic VIP child sex abuse cases is missing, The Sun can reveal.*

Documents known as “Red Dockets” from highly sensitive cases have mysteriously vanished from police archives, well-informed sources say.

The revelations, said to feature the names of politicians, showbiz stars and a senior cop, come as a Metropolitan Police inquiry into claims that establishment figures murdered three boys teeters on the verge of collapse.

Files which have disappeared include ones from the infamous 1980s Operation Circus inquiry.

It was shut down after undercover cops allegedly photographed rent boys from London’s Piccadilly Circus with VIPs.

Sources told The Sun it was axed on the orders of then Director of Public Prosecutions, the late Sir Thomas Hetherington.

A DPP official is said to have visited West End Central police station in early 1985 and ordered the inquiry terminated.

An ex-cop said: “A report went to the DPP which identified under-age male prostitutes, their pimps and clients.

_“All that information has now gone. The only conclusion is that the DPP authorised the plug to be pulled on it.”_

Names of MPs, showbiz stars, industrialists and a Scotland Yard commander cropped up in the Circus inquiry.

Sources told The Sun that “red docket” files — named after their covers’ colour — were placed in a Special Branch registry but have now vanished.

Analysis of audit trails is being carried out on child abuse case files booked out by officers.

Special Branch is under investigation over allegations of nobbling inquiries which would have exposed figures including MP Cyril Smith.

_And so-called X4 files containing unsubstantiated information on paedos, said to be “a goldmine”, were shredded._

The Met’s Operation Midland investigation, into allegations MPs were involved in the murders of three boys, was launched after claims by a young man.

The witness, known as Nick, claims to have seen murders at London’s Dolphin Square and to have been abused abroad by foreign VIPs.



Deciphering this it appears to be saying that a search of archives to find evidence supporting the claims of former policemen that Operations Circus and Orchid were shut down to cover up VIP abuse and that files from the time would contain lots of VIP names has found nothing. And in other shock news...



> An ex-cop said :



I wonder if this is the same ex-policeman referred to in this Huffington Post piece last year about these claims, written by former Daily Mail journalist Geoffrey Seed, who was able to use it to plug his recently published conspiracy thriller with a VIP paedophile cover-up sub-plot.



> My source was in what I named the Blackened Name Club, officers who'd fallen foul of the Metropolitan Police anti-corruption squad in contentious circumstances which didn't guarantee convictions in court.
> 
> He contrasted their treatment - phoned-tapped like terrorists, family lives scrutinised, liberty in jeopardy - with how official blind eyes were turned when paedophile politicians, churchmen and lawyers were allegedly violating children.



The way in which ordinary hardworking cops just trying to earn an honest bung were forced out of the Met through political correctness and the need to cover up VIP corruption and abuse, and are now reduced to selling stories to semi-retired journalists is truly a scandal.


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 19, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Full text of the Sun story fwiw
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 19, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> The way in which ordinary hardworking cops just trying to earn an honest bung were forced out of the Met through political correctness and the need to cover up VIP corruption and abuse, and are now reduced to selling stories to semi-retired journalists is truly a scandal.



Ain't that the truth


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 20, 2015)

Sunday Times reporting (paywalled) that Police have dropped one of the three investigations into allegations against Cliff Richard


Spoiler: Text of article



ONE of the three investigations into alleged sex abuse by Sir Cliff Richard has been dropped by police, according to a close friend of the pop star.

The inquiry is said to have foundered because detectives have been unable to find evidence to substantiate the claims. Richard is also understood to have provided police with evidence that he was never alone with two men who allege that he attacked them in separate incidents in the 1980s.

“Cliff has given the police evidence that he was never on his own on the days when the alleged attacks took place,” said the friend, who asked not to be named.

South Yorkshire police and a spokesman for Richard declined to comment but the prospect of an end to the 13-month inquiry will be a boost to Richard as he prepares for a UK concert tour to mark his 75th birthday. Richard, who is estimated to have sold 250m records during a career spanning almost 60 years, begins the tour in Birmingham on September 29. It will culminate with five nights at the Royal Albert Hall in London from October 12. The friend suggested the tour was a sign Richard believed he would soon be cleared.

Richard, who has not been arrested or charged, was on holiday in Portugal in August last year when police raided his £2.5m (£3.4m) home in Sunningdale, Berkshire. Footage of the raid was broadcast live on the BBC.

The pop star is one of a number of celebrities named as being under investigation by Operation Yewtree, the inquiry into allegations of historical sex abuse involving showbusiness personalities. He vehemently denies the claims, describing them as “absurd and untrue”.

One of the alleged victims claims he was 15 when he was assaulted by Richard at a Billy Graham rally in Sheffield in 1985. More than 47,000 people attended the event and Richard was accompanied by minders and other staff. The friend suggested some of those have signed affidavits supporting the singer’s assertion he was never alone.

It was also suggested by the friend that detectives found inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s description of the surroundings at the Bramall Lane stadium. A second allegation was made by a man who said he took part in the making of a music video with Richard in 1981. Again, Richard is understood to have presented evidence that he was never on his own during filming.

South Yorkshire police said: “We won’t be providing a running commentary on the investigation. The inquiry continues.”

Seven celebrities — the comedians Freddie Starr, Jim Davidson and Jimmy Tarbuck; producers Ted Beston and Wilfred De’ath; DJ Mike Osman and broadcaster Paul Gambaccini — were accused of offences under Operation Yewtree but later exonerated. The police have faced criticism over their decision to name the celebrities as well as for the time it has taken to clear their names.

Last week, The Sunday Times revealed Suffolk police has halted a probe into claims of two murders by a VIP paedophile ring after finding no evidence to back allegations by a witness known as “Darren”.


Not as yet confirmed by the Police.

Article in the Telegraph about "Darren" with some detail about his past. 


> A senior source at Scotland Yard, which has been involved in the investigation into Darren’s claims, said: “We are between a rock and a hard place. We don’t want people to ever lose faith in coming to the police. We believe our victims and we support vulnerable victims who need our support.
> 
> “But this has been months of difficulties. We cannot prove categorically that he is lying but there is no evidence for his claims.”





> The source added: “Darren needs proper help. That is absolutely fundamental.”
> 
> Police are furious that Darren’s claims were given publicity by the Exaro website before they could be investigated fully by officers. They believe that the glare of publicity has put Darren under more pressure.





> “This is not Darren’s fault. This is a problem for the people at Exaro,” said the source.



There was also a disgraceful attack piece in another paper yesterday about "Nick" which comes close to identifying him. Don't think it should be linked to.


----------



## elbows (Sep 20, 2015)

Well I guess we always knew those sorts of complications would feature. Its a tricky line to walk, but I think it can be made a lot easier by allowing enough time for things to be explored, and relying on more witnesses/victims  coming forwards and lots of small fact checking in order to determine the likely reality, rather than indulging in attacks on possible victims.

For now it remains much easier to study related phenomenon in the media rather than reach conclusions about the crimes, victims and suspects. For example, regardless of the validity of 'Darrens' claims, the following sections of the Telegraph article trouble me:



> Reputations of senior Conservative politicians and even war heroes have been shredded in the process.





> Mr Watson, elected Labour’s deputy leader two weeks ago, has won huge plaudits for standing up in the House of Commons in October 2012 and alleging that a high level paedophile network had existed with protection from senior politicians in Parliament and even in Downing St.
> 
> Mr Watson said that Righton was a key figure in the network of paedophiles and was subsequently contacted by Darren and copied into emails that Darren sent to police officers.



Signs of both party politics and the very same 'deference shield' and 'contrast social standing of alleged victims with alleged abusers' that contributed to historical cover-ups and victims not being believed back in the day. There must be a way to reflect seriously on the realities of the cases without going down either of these dark tunnels.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Sep 20, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> There was also a disgraceful attack piece in another paper yesterday about "Nick" which comes close to identifying him. Don't think it should be linked to.


It's almost like the newspaper in question is trying to bait the police into investigating it for jigsaw identification of a complainant.


----------



## laptop (Sep 20, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> There was also a disgraceful attack piece in another paper yesterday about "Nick" which comes close to identifying him. Don't think it should be linked to.



Ah, they _*are*_ worried about Labour, not just routinely sniping...



> Like his campaign against phone hacking in the Murdoch press, [Tom Watson's] war on paedophiles not only propelled him back into the limelight, it also helped his party.



Its actual purpose is a smear on Watson.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 20, 2015)

laptop said:


> Ah, they _*are*_ worried about Labour, not just routinely sniping...
> 
> Its actual purpose is a smear on Watson.


As a google search on the phrase "nonce finder general" will demonstrate Watson has been under attack over this issue for several years, and has been attacked far more than either Danczuk or Mann. I'd imagine one reason is that he has been a little more cautious in what he has said and arguably somewhat more effective in raising the issue. (I don't say that because I'm any kind of fan of the man). His elevation to deputy leader undoubtedly provides additional motivation but it is not the only reason for singling him out.


----------



## Casually Red (Sep 20, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I see Jonathan Kings been nicked.



Along with 2 others . Bailed the same day .


----------



## laptop (Sep 20, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> Watson has been under attack over this issue for several years



But none of those attacks involved the _Daily Fail_ investing cash did they?


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 21, 2015)

Long public statement from the Met about Operation Midland.

Main takeaway is that they distance themselves from any "misapprehension"  about what Det Supt Kenny McDonald meant by describing "Nick"'s allegations as "credible and true"


> More significantly, only a jury can decide on the truth of allegations after hearing all the evidence. We should always reflect that in our language and we acknowledge that describing the allegations as ‘credible and true’ suggested we were pre-empting the outcome of the investigation. We were not. We always retain an open mind as we have demonstrated by conducting a thorough investigation.


There is criticism of some media behaviour


> In recent weeks, one journalist reporting on Operation Midland has shown the purported real identity of someone making an allegation of sexual assault to a person who has disclosed that they have been questioned by police concerning those allegations.


which is clearly intended as a more general warning.


> First, for those who have made allegations of sexual abuse, it is extremely distressing to discover that their identity might have been given to anyone else, particularly if that is to someone who may be involved in the case. Secondly, possible victims or witnesses reading the article may believe their identities could be revealed as well, which could deter them from coming forward. Ultimately, that could make it harder for allegations to be proved or disproved. This might not just deter those who could provide information for this investigation but also concern anyone thinking of coming forward with sexual abuse allegations. Finally, the potential disclosure by a journalist of a name may possibly hamper an investigation. Names will be disclosed by police to those involved in the case, but that will be at the appropriate time for the investigation depending on how those lines of enquiry progress.


There is a pointed suggestion that the media should take account of the vulnerability of people making allegations.


> What can be overlooked, at times, is that those making allegations are very often vulnerable individuals. A useful definition of ‘vulnerable people’ is set out in the Ofcom code for broadcasters (8.22). It is important to note that the police must take account of this vulnerability at all stages, irrespective of whether the allegations can be substantiated or not. We ask the media and those asked to comment to do likewise. We also think the press should consider following Ofcom’s approach by amending its code to recognise that vulnerability in reporting of crime is not just a matter of the age of witnesses or victims.


There is a denial that any authorised disclosure of the names of the subject of allegations has taken place.


> Moreover, the Commissioner told the Home Affairs Select Committee in March that he supports the proposal for granting accused people anonymity until charge.


As to Operation Midland


> There are also allegations of sexual abuse but the MPS has made clear from the outset that this is, and remains, a murder investigation.


(...)


> The integrity of our investigation is paramount, and the public can have confidence that allegations of homicide are being investigated thoroughly. Our officers have the resources to test all the evidence, and we have not yet completed this task. It is then for the Crown Prosecution Service to make a decision on whether to prosecute.


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 21, 2015)

re Operation Circus...wondering why - unless the risk involved was part of the sick jollies - you would get the use of street-level and under-age rent boys somewhere as public as Piccadilly Circus by "VIP's" if there was also the more discrete type of Dolphin Square / Elm House behind-closed-doors operation available for "high-level paedos"....

....was there an inner and outer circle of HLP's with some not invited to the club or was it so powerful that they were entirely confident they could just wave a get-out-police-custody card a-la Cyril Smith...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 21, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Yeah.
> The telegraph report uses a slightly different quote...
> 
> 
> ...


So was this the game-plan all along?
Use a 'fall-guy' to undermine the credibility of their own 'investigation'?


----------



## elbows (Sep 21, 2015)

No.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 22, 2015)

So according to the Times headline I read they're not going to start from a position of believing allegations any more? Whats going on with this? Will recent events mean they re evaluate this stance?


----------



## elbows (Sep 22, 2015)

What recent events and what headlines?

Without this I may be barking up the wrong tree, but the main issue over their position was the language used, primarily the use of the word true when that bit is supposed to be left to the court system.

I doubt the police or any other organisation or humans could actually operate their brains properly without being able to form an opinion as to the truth of something. But to come out and say it when you occupy a certain role is a different matter. They aren't likely to be any more or less sympathetic towards or believing of victims as a result of operation midland etc, that stuff changed for the better and won't come undone easily at that level.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 22, 2015)

Met Police admit error over alleged Establishment paedophile ring murders


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 22, 2015)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ing-murdered-three-boys-as-true-10511713.html


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 22, 2015)

elbows said:


> What recent events and what headlines?
> 
> Without this I may be barking up the wrong tree, but the main issue over their position was the language used, primarily the use of the word true when that bit is supposed to be left to the court system.
> 
> I doubt the police or any other organisation or humans could actually operate their brains properly without being able to form an opinion as to the truth of something. But to come out and say it when you occupy a certain role is a different matter. They aren't likely to be any more or less sympathetic towards or believing of victims as a result of operation midland etc, that stuff changed for the better and won't come undone easily at that level.



I hope so.


----------



## elbows (Sep 22, 2015)

Ta for there links. In that case I was barking up the right tree. Still not sure which recent events you were referring to.

Various parts of the establishment and state institutions won't get away with returning to an older era where victims were disbelieved in a manner and on a scale that made a variety of abuses easier to get away with than today. That stuff had already been changing since the 70's/80's, many breakthroughs in the 90's and whilst the post-Savile era offered the opportunity to take things further, it also cemented some of these gains for at least a generation or two.

On that front it doesn't matter if some of the most high-profile investigations go nowhere, there is still no road back to the bad old days for that lot. Thats why they have to be so careful with their language, and they will mess up sometimes and overcompensate, as in the 'credible and true'. But there is a limit as to how far they will adjust back in the other direction when called out by angry parties when they make a mistake.

Where things are much less clear is in other areas, such as media and public attitudes, and political will. There is more room for that stuff to wander in bad directions, but I'll save that for another time.

If I'm feeling optimistic (which isn't too often) then I can even look at all the mistakes that public bodies, deciders etc have made since things got 'real serious' are actually part of the process of making things at least a little better. I'm glad they messed up by choosing crap heads for the inquiry for example, and that their mistakes and missteps were highlighted and, often belatedly, responded to.

Perhaps the biggest threat to the police etc's enlightened attitude towards abuse cases is the large amount of resources they take up. The system is going to be virtually overwhelmed in various areas for some years to come, but we do need to remember that even if the highest profile cases fizzle out for lack of evidence, there are a lot of cases that don't involve famous names that are being dealt with and are securing convictions. We know that power and the misuse of it exists in all manner of human relations and since the elite are a minority I don't expect, even if various factors happened to give them a higher than average offending ratio, that we are dealing with a huge quantity of 'famous names'. But the pool of people who had power and opportunity of abusing others at less spotlighted levels of society so much more numerous. We are probably going to hear about a lot of 'locally prominent' abuses via various inquiries, and thats not simply because they may have had less effective powers covering up for them and less involvement of the security services, its because there are/were more of them.

Oh sorry I started waffling while waiting for my food to finish cooking, got too hungry.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 22, 2015)

By recent events I meant with Cameron which will no doubt leave people wondering what else people in the establishment are hiding and don't want found out about.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 22, 2015)

elbows said:


> No.


When I said 'fall-guy' I did mean Det Supt Kenny McDonald, not 'Nick'.


----------



## elbows (Sep 22, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> By recent events I meant with Cameron which will no doubt leave people wondering what else people in the establishment are hiding and don't want found out about.



I don't know, people already wonder a great deal about that. And the public imagination already had some ideas about the posh and their educational establishments, e.g. soggy biscuit.

Sometimes I get the idea that this isn't only about justice, exposing people, changing things so its harder for it to keep happening. That we'd like to use 'the energy of the scandal' to get people interesting in an analysis of power. And this happens on occasion, but I doubt all the detail of it reaches the same size audience as the scurrilous bits


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 22, 2015)

.


----------



## elbows (Sep 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> When I said 'fall-guy' I did mean Det Supt Kenny McDonald, not 'Nick'.



Thanks for the clarification. I still say no, because what makes or breaks these investigations is the evidence and number of victims that come forwards. If the numbers are insufficient then no further coverups are required. There are many reasons why the numbers and evidence may be insufficient - the passage of time, cover-ups or crimes of the past, lack of surviving victims, lack of criminal act in the first place.

McDonald may end up being the fall guy for language mistakes made, but not as part of some plan from the get go to build the investigation up and then knock it down. Thats a game the media play in many situations, but its not one I think the establishment were indulging in here.

And the reason I say that refers to my first point - the language mistake made was done so because the police were trying to overcompensate for past failings, and wanted to put out a statement designed with the best chance of getting any victims to come forwards. If it had worked then the investigation could build credibility by building a case. We don't actually know for sure that it has failed to do so yet. But if it has, and the fallout we've seen in the media gains weight, then so be it. Because I'll still see it as the opposite of what a plot would have been seeking to achieve - would a plot have risked having a stage where victims were genuinely encouraged to come forwards?


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 24, 2015)

Operation Midland may not have ended but the attacks on it seem to be increasing. Following the Met Statement, Alison Saunders' criticisms and Hogan-Howe's interview on LBC (podcast here)*, The Times ran four pieces yesterday and today (paywalled).

[ETA: just realised that is LBC's subscription only service - the Hogan-Howe interview is on YouTube here]

Met chief defends child sex probe “shambles”


Spoiler: Text of article



*Jenny Booth*
Last updated at 3:43PM, September 23 2015
Sir Bernard Hogan Howe today defended his force’s inquiry into alleged child murders by a VIP paedophile ring, insisting Operation Midland was “not a shambles”.

The Metropolitan Police commissioner rejected claims by the former Conservative MP Harvey Proctor that officers had been conducting a homosexual witchhunt, and were now preparing an exit strategy to back away from the troubled investigation.

Operation Midland is a probe into claims by abuse survivors that three children were murdered by MPs and other prominent public figures who held child sex parties, some at the Dolphin Square mansion flats in central London where many government figures live.

Scotland Yard yesterday acknowledged that a detective had overstepped the line at the outset by describing the main accuser’s claims as “credible and true”, which a force spokesman conceded had “suggested we were pre-empting the outcome of the investigation”.

Today however Sir Bernard Sir Bernard said detectives would have been rightly criticised if they had not taken allegations of three murders seriously, and said people should not focus on “the use of one word, in one interview”.

“I think they have carried out a very thorough and professional inquiry which they are in the middle of and you are saying ‘why are you still carrying it on?’. But for that one word then I think it has been a very good inquiry”, said Sir Bernard.

Claims that Midland would close were “not accurate”, he went on, adding: “We will do whatever we need to do to get to the bottom of this.

“It has taken a while to get this far, but the trouble with these inquiries is often the victims and the witnesses don’t have total recall of the information or the detail of the offence, and clearly we have struggled at times to corroborate, with such a passage of time, some of the things that have been said.”

When the inquiry was launched, Detective Superintendent Kenny McDonald said officers who had spoken to an alleged victim, known by the pseudonym “Nick”, thought his account was “credible and true”.

On Monday Scotland Yard defended its work, saying: “Whilst we start from a position of believing the witness, our stance then is to investigate without fear or favour, in a thorough, professional and impartial fashion, and to go where the evidence takes us without prejudging the truth of the allegations. That is exactly what has happened in this case.”

Operation Midland includes allegations of sexual abuse but it is “and remains” a murder investigation, the statement said.

Last month Mr Proctor, who has been questioned twice by investigators, told a packed press conference that former prime minister Sir Edward Heath and ex-home secretary Leon Brittan had been named among his “alleged co-conspirators”.

Today the former MP, who represented Basildon in Essex from 1979 to 1983 and Billericay from 1983 to 1987, criticised Sir Bernard’s comments.

“I’m not sure that the police commissioner should be in the media treating it like a quiz show, allocating marks of quality and ranking to his inquiries,” said Mr Proctor.

He added that Mr McDonald’s words had not been “off the cuff”.

Mr Proctor said: “It was a very slow and deliberate statement and it was made after Scotland Yard threw their own press conference.”



followed by a shorter slightly toned-down article today saying much the same (presumably to keep it on the front page)

Police chief defends VIP abuse inquiry


Spoiler: Text of article



*Fiona Hamilton* Crime Editor
Published at 12:01AM, September 24 2015
The Metropolitan police commissioner defended his force’s inquiry into historical abuse yesterday and denied that it was a “shambles”.

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe described Operation Midland, an investigation into allegations of child murder and abuse carried out by establishment figures, as a “very thorough and professional inquiry”.

He was speaking after the Met, in a statement earlier this week, admitted that it was wrong last year to state that claims by a man known only as “Nick” that he saw three murders in the 1970s and 1980s were “credible and true”.

Sir Bernard, speaking yesterday to LBC radio, said that it had been a good inquiry rxcept for the use of the word ‘true’ and denied claims that it was about to be wound down.

He said: “I think they have carried out a very thorough and professional inquiry which they are in the middle of and you are saying, ‘Why are you still carrying it on?’.”

He admitted that detectives had “struggled at times” to corroborate claims by Nick.



They cover the same ground as the Guardian's piece but from a more hostile perspective.

Westminster paedophile ring inquiry 'not a shambles', says police chief - Guardian

The Times also found an ex-policeman to say
Police ‘scared’ to end VIP abuse inquiry


Spoiler: Text of article



*Sean O'Neill* Chief Reporter
Published at 12:01AM, September 23 2015
Police chiefs are frightened to scale back their investigation into allegations of child murder by a VIP paedophile ring because they do not want to be accused of a cover-up, a retired senior murder detective said yesterday.

Colin Sutton, a former detective chief inspector who was drafted in to solve the Night Stalker rapist case in 2009, said that senior Metropolitan police officers needed to take a detached look at the allegations of child murder by top politicians at Dolphin Square and reach professional conclusions.

Scotland Yard admitted this week that it had been wrong to state last year that claims made by a man known only as Nick that he witnessed three murders in the 1970s and 1980s were “credible and true”. It is continuing with Operation Midland, although no bodies have been found and it is not known who was allegedly killed.

Mr Sutton said: “They’re frightened. A culture has emerged of automatically believing victims and nobody’s got the balls to stand up and say the emperor’s got no clothes on.”

The Met has faced criticism over the conduct of historical sex abuse cases since the allegations against the former Tory prime minister Edward Heath.

Alison Saunders, director of public prosecutions, said yesterday that police may have “overstepped the mark” in initially saying the allegations were true.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 24, 2015)

The pièce de résistance however is a column by David Aaronovitch - clearly the column which his increasingly vocal "scepticism" over recent months has been leading to:

We've been conned by the new McCarthyites


Spoiler: Text of article



Published at 12:01AM, September 24 2015
Only now are police admitting they were wrong to describe lurid allegations of VIP sex abuse as “credible and true”

Finally, somebody else said it. That man on the horse riding down the street preceded by flags and followed by drums? The one whose wonderful attire they’re all loudly acclaiming? Stark naked. Not a stitch on. That’s what former Detective Chief Inspector Colin Sutton told _The Times _yesterday.

Nearly three years have passed since the Savile scandal broke and — in its wake — the MP Tom Watson (now Labour’s deputy leader) stood up in the House of Commons and asked David Cameron to ensure that the police “investigate clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to parliament and No 10”. In that time, the idea of a Westminster paedophile ring has entered the popular folklore of British politics. It has been deployed by social media partisans in the Scottish referendum campaign, in support of Ukip, and by just about anyone short of a stick to beat politicians with.

A few of us (at the beginning, very few of us) watched this process with alarm. From Watson’s acorn — or alleged acorn because, of course, no names were named and no cases detailed — grew a forest of lusty oaks. A phenomenon arose akin to a latterday McCarthyism, a general assertion that has relied on its own vigour to grow, rather than on anything as footling as evidence.

This minor witch-hunt has had no figurehead. There has been no single interrogator and many of those involved seem to have been motivated by conscience and a sense of the public good. But then, aren’t they always? Newspapers, BBC journalists, online press agencies that sell stories by the yard, politicians such as Zac Goldsmith, John Mann and Simon Danczuk, authors, victims’ groups and others have together created an impression of certainty that there was once, and maybe still is, a conspiracy to commit and then to cover up the most appalling crimes against children by some of the most powerful in the land.

Whatever it was Watson had in mind when he stood up and made the claim (and he has never publicly detailed it) what has bubbled out in the years since has been almost impossible to keep up with and evaluate. In the same way that Savile begat Operation Yewtree and thousands of claims of historical child abuse by celebrities — some of them upheld in courts, some not and some never proceeded with — so the Watson statement was followed by claims of politician abuse.

For the first time, wider credence was given to claims previously confined to the margins of the internet. A list, purporting to be of visitors to a guest house where paedophile parties allegedly took place, gave rise to Operation Fernbridge. In pursuit of which, claimed the press agency Exaro more than a year ago, a former cabinet minister would shortly be arrested.

People began to come forward and a rubric developed. If anyone made an allegation of anything involving a claim of child abuse, then the police would have to say they were taking it seriously and investigating it. At this point the very fact that it was being investigated would be used as an argument for the existence of crime itself. After all, why would the police waste their time investigating something that hadn’t happened?

One claim led to another. The logical extension of this was “Nick”. “Nick” was the man who appeared in silhouette a year ago on an item that led the BBC _Six O’Clock News_. He claimed he had been abused as a boy by leading politicians in the 1980s. In a week Nick had gone from claiming to have witnessed not one murder by the Westminster gang, but three. Those politicians were not named by the police (who infamously agreed that his account was “credible and true”) but their supposed identities were nevertheless the common stuff of internet legend. And then one or two other people came forward and claimed that they had been abused in the same way by the same perpetrators.

Since Savile it has been obvious that the police and the DPP, scarred by the (often justified) claims that they failed to take abused children seriously, and apprehensive about future inquiries, have been falling over themselves to avoid offending the Abuse Lobby. We’ve all felt it. Those of us who looked at what was being alleged, trawled the online sites, listened hard and stuck to the Golden Question — where is the evidence? — nevertheless felt real pressure not to question what was going on. Who wants to be called, as I have been, the paedophile’s friend, the shill of the establishment?

So it grew. The accusations became widespread enough for some papers to feel that they could just print any claims on the front page under a banner headline, without doing even the most basic research on the credibility of their informants. It became open season on dead Tory politicians. Keith Joseph? Rhodes Boyson? Michael Havers? Leon Brittan? Who, apart from their families, would care enough to defend their reputations? Open season too on live but anonymous politicians, whose good names could not be defended without their defenders themselves repeating a libel.

And then it came out that “Nick” had accused Ted Heath. And the former MP Harvey Proctor — so far as I know the only living accusee in this particular case — came forward and made public the accusations. Nick had not only witnessed three killings but, at a sex-and-murder party in Dolphin Square, Proctor had supposedly threatened to cut his genitals with a knife, and had been saved by the squeamish Heath. Proctor had given the knife to the boy who kept it, had given it to the police, who now showed it to Proctor.

Like Senator McCarthy in 1954, when he went after supposed Communists in the US Army, the accusations had over-reached. How could such totally implausible and uncorroborated stuff be regarded as “true”? And if it couldn’t, what about the rest? If there had been murders, where were the bodies? Why, after more than a year had Operation Midland come up with nothing?

How did we allow this madness to take hold? How much damage has it done to the reputations of the innocent — and to the cause of genuine victims? For the moment let’s just note our lamentable tendency as a society to swing the pendulum an unnecessary full arc from negligence to hysteria without ever stopping at common sense.





> This minor witch-hunt has had no figurehead. There has been no single interrogator and many of those involved seem to have been motivated by conscience and a sense of the public good. But then, aren’t they always? Newspapers, BBC journalists, online press agencies that sell stories by the yard, politicians such as Zac Goldsmith, John Mann and Simon Danczuk, authors, victims’ groups and others have together created an impression of certainty that there was once, and maybe still is, a conspiracy to commit and then to cover up the most appalling crimes against children by some of the most powerful in the land.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 24, 2015)

The Needleblog takes apart what Aaronovitch says about Tom Watson.

Tom Symonds has a long article on the BBC site
Should the Met 'believe' victims from the outset?

and Panorama producer Ceri Thomas


----------



## elbows (Sep 24, 2015)

The Aaronovitch piece is no surprise because I don't view it as a destination he's just reached. He's had that stance for a long time and been vocal at times when to be so was further out of step with 'the public mood' and the tone of much of the press than may be the case today. He's used much of the same insensitive, loaded language before too I think, though I haven't time to fact-check right now.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 25, 2015)

elbows said:


> The Aaronovitch piece is no surprise because I don't view it as a destination he's just reached. He's had that stance for a long time and been vocal at times when to be so was further out of step with 'the public mood' and the tone of much of the press than may be the case today. He's used much of the same insensitive, loaded language before too I think, though I haven't time to fact-check right now.


Entirely agree that he's had these views for a long time. He claims now it's from the very start, but then "he would, wouldn't he". My impression from looking back at his column, listening to the R4 thing about SRA,  his twitter comments etc., was that before this it's been expressed at a more "nudge nudge wink wink" level. 

At any rate I haven't seen him express them this baldly, and my assumption is that he's only been emboldened to do so by the sea change in attitudes since the Proctor press conference. Which for me is the main point of interest.


----------



## elbows (Sep 25, 2015)

He was slightly more careful in 2012 but the message was much the same, including warnings about witch-hunts.

peezedtee: Aaronovitch: Beware a modern Salem over child abuse


----------



## teqniq (Sep 26, 2015)

Ex-MP to be interviewed by police over paedophile ring claims


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 28, 2015)

The Telegraph write a piece about Chris Fay's fraud conviction, presumably to follow up their story just over a week ago about "Darren"s past convictions.

'VIP child abuse ring’ accuser served time in prison for fraud - Telegraph

At the end they quote Fay expressing his unhappiness about his former associate putting his notes about Elm House on line :


> He added: “It was so wrong to put that list online. It starts with hunts. That list could have encouraged people to make up claims.”



The Telegraph's sub-editor fails to pick up the obvious typo in the second sentence. And when the Mail, as usual, crib the article wholesale, neither does theirs.

Social worker who accused Leon Brittan and other VIPs as being members of an alleged paedophile ring was convicted of fraud in 2011 - Mail

(For the benefit of anyone unaware of what Fay has said in the past about the 'Elm House Notes' it's worth reading the posts by him at the needleblog here and here, as well as some of the follow-up blog posts there, for example this one which he comments on).


----------



## elbows (Sep 28, 2015)

Yeah I had to link to his very clear and sensible explanation of what the list was and was not, back when this thread had more participants and people would stumble on stuff like that list without knowing the back-story and context.

I'm not happy with the tone of Telegraph articles. The facts they have used to write the Fay story are far from new, we discussed them in this thread quite some time ago, including the fraud conviction. A conviction which doesn't really affect my opinion of the list at all - an opinion which is similar to Fay's, its a starting point for proper investigation, not a list of the guilty.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 28, 2015)

elbows said:


> Yeah I had to link to his very clear and sensible explanation of what the list was and was not, back when this thread had more participants and people would stumble on stuff like that list without knowing the back-story and context.
> 
> I'm not happy with the tone of Telegraph articles. The facts they have used to write the Fay story are far from new, we discussed them in this thread quite some time ago, including the fraud conviction. A conviction which doesn't really affect my opinion of the list at all - an opinion which is similar to Fay's, its a starting point for proper investigation, not a list of the guilty.


Entirely agree. IMO these articles are not interesting because of any new information they provide, but because they reflect the different varieties of scepticism, about Operation Midland specifically and VIP abuse more generally, which are being expressed more forcefully and to a degree are coalescing.

Not surprising if there isn't more of this in the run up to next weeks edition of Panorama.

And here is Frank Furedi at Spiked :
Operation Midland: Treating Fiction As Fact - Spiked


----------



## laptop (Sep 28, 2015)

Lurdan said:


> And here is Frank Furedi at Spiked :
> Operation Midland: Treating Fiction As Fact - Spiked



The expected slack-brained bilge. I wonder why Furedi doesn't refer to his RCP's support for paedophilia _per se_...


----------



## existentialist (Sep 28, 2015)

laptop said:


> The expected slack-brained bilge. I wonder why Furedi doesn't refer to his RCP's support for paedophilia _per se_...


Furedi gave a lecture when I was at university. I thought there was a distinct air of "emperor's new clothes" about the whole thing.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 2, 2015)

The Mail continues the 'complainants discredited' and 'Watson is to blame' line with

Woman who falsely accused Lord Brittan of raping her is a Labour activist who admitted hating the Tories - Mail

This is 'Jane' whose allegations were prominently reported by Exaro. The Mail have actually run this story more than once before but this time they state baldly that the allegation was 'false'.

Commentary on it at the Needleblog which continues it's ongoing criticisms of Exaro :


> I can only tell you what my interpretation of it all was at the time and that was that it was nothing more than an unscrupulous play to prolong and exploit the lucrative commercial value of Jane, their source, and that at no point was any consideration given to the duty of care that they owed her.



and at the 'Bartholomew's Notes on Religion' blog which also makes some observations about the current newspaper 'backlash' against claims of VIP abuse.

Daily Mail Returns to Leon Brittan and “Jane” as VIP Abuse Claims Come Under Scrutiny

The critique of Exaro continues with a blog post by Matthew Scott, Where now for Exaro?,  which discusses it's background and the evolution of its business plan and journalistic focus at length but then goes on to make very serious criticisms of the way it has treated its sources. The whole thing is worth reading IMO but these extracts seem particularly to the point :



> As a result of [Darren's] exposure by Exaro, he says, he has been “_ridiculed nationwide_.” One of his allegations is that Exaro suggested that he join Twitter. They “_said it would be good for me and get more exposure for my case.” _He took up the suggestion (if that is what it was) last May, tweeting under a pseudonym.


(...)


> The Telegraph reported one important point that was not included in the Exaro report:
> 
> “_Police sources have suggested the referral to social services was made over growing concerns that Darren’s postings on the social networking site Twitter were increasingly alarming.”_
> 
> In other words, according to the Telegraph, the referral to social services was linked to Darren’s twitter account, an account he had set up because Exaro asked him to do so.


(...)


> Exaro might suggest that publicising his case through social media will help expose and catch the criminals responsible for his abuse and the murder he witnessed.
> 
> In fact the contrary is true. Quite apart from the damage that may have been done to Darren himself, the more he discusses his case with others on social media, the less compelling his testimony is likely to be should it ever come before a jury.





> And the result of giving Darren’s case “more exposure” has been that Darren has been ridiculed, his account has been ridiculed, he has had to deal with the threat of Social Services removing his child, and he has withdrawn co-operation with the police.
> 
> Whether his account is true or false, from Darren’s point of view this seems a pretty disastrous outcome. It also seems disastrous from the point of view of anyone hoping to see his allegations properly and fully investigated.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 4, 2015)

The Times/Daily Mail tag team continue. Yesterday the Times published a story, based on blog postings, about "Darren"s criticisms of Exaro amongst other things. The Daily Mail then run with it.

Man who said he was abused by VIP paedophile ring now claims he was 'manipulated' by news website that led the crusade against politicians

Today the Sunday Times publish a piece by Max Hastings criticizing Lord Bramall's treatment by Operation Midland. The Mail run their own version.

Former Army chief fighting 'entirely unfounded' child sex abuse claims should be 'exonerated at the earliest opportunity'  

On the end of it they add another attack on "Nick" this time spun into another anti-BBC piece about the 'internal war in the BBC' over this Tuesday night's edition of Panorama The VIP Paedophile Ring: What's the Truth? 

Two weeks ago the Solicitor General issued a public warning to the media over identifying complainants in sexual abuse cases. That followed a Daily Mail story which offered strong clues to "Nick"s identity including a partially pixelated photograph and details of his job. Their purpose was presumably much the same as the highly criticized police press conference outside Edward Heath's house - to encourage people who know and can identify "Nick" to come forward with usable information about him. In this latest story the Mail shows what it feels about the Solicitor General's warning by republishing another version of the pixelated photograph.


----------



## eskdave (Oct 5, 2015)

where the fuck is Greebo? Davey needs to talk


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 5, 2015)

eskdave said:


> where the fuck is Greebo? Davey needs to talk


Greebo is on holiday.


----------



## Zabo (Oct 6, 2015)

"Panorama investigates sensational allegations of historical child abuse and murder by some of the most prominent people in Britain: a paedophile ring at the heart of the Establishment. Why were the allegations described by police as "credible and true" with no hard evidence or corroboration? What role have senior politicians and the media played in promoting this story around the world? And what price will genuine victims of child abuse pay if it turns out not to be true?"

BBC One - Panorama, The VIP Paedophile Ring: What's the Truth?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 6, 2015)

every bit of these reactions will fuel the 'hysteria' narrative for years to come and be cited as hard fact by journos during the ever-delayed inquiry


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 6, 2015)

BBC 6.00pm news report that the Met have issued an apology to Brittan's widow and said that the rape allegations against him would not have led to further action.

The BBC also report one element of tonight's Panorama :

VIP paedophile inquiry: Lord Brittan claims unreliable - 'victim' - BBC


> A vulnerable man who made sex abuse allegations against VIPs has told the BBC he may have been led into making the claims by campaigners.
> 
> The man told Panorama he had provided VIP names including that of ex-Home Secretary Leon Brittan, "as a joke suggestion to start with", which had later been repeated in earnest.
> 
> His account was the basis of news reports about the late Lord Brittan.


(...)


> Panorama understands that David told the Metropolitan Police he was worried that two well-known campaigners may have led him into making false claims.



The Mail runs a story about David Mellor calling for an investigation by an outside Police force into 'false' allegations and underneath it ask DID BBC 'BURY' PANORAMA'S PAEDOPHILE EXPOSE? - bury in this context meaning 'put it on at 10.35 at night'.

Police must probe false claims of abuse by senior Conservatives and Establishment figures, says David Mellor - Mail

The Sun runs a long attack piece about "Darren" in which they claim he told them he had been offered asylum in North Korea.

Kim off it - Sun

Exaro report that a Senior MPS Detective is being investigated following a complaint that he


> is suspected of improperly disclosing to journalists the name, address and other details of a complainant


Met investigates Panorama source over leak of CSA survivor’s ID - Exaro

The artfully worded Exaro story links this to tonights Panorama, which they have been attacking for some time, because he is also allegedly a 'confidential source' for the programme. (It is perhaps unnecessary to point out that Exaro have themselves been criticized for putting the security and well-being of "Darren", "Nick" and others second to their commercial interest in exploiting this story).

Following the Times story about "Darren" falling out with them, Exaro posted a series of tweets quoting directly from communications they had received from him while themselves undermining him to which he replied

As an interesting example of their commitment to journalistic standards, on the same page Exaro report that Daniel Foggo the journalist presenting this edition of Panorama


> (...) lived – throughout his childhood – over the road from Sir Peter Morrison, one of the best-known politicians who is alleged to have been a paedophile (...)



Drawing attention to the fact that Fiona Woolf was a neighbour of Leon Brittan they then ask Foggo if he will be declaring the fact he was a 'neighbour' of Morrison's as a child on Panorama. It is hard to see this as anything other than a singularly unpleasant smear operating at more than one level.

(There is some hostile commentary on Exaro's Panorama stories at the 'Bartholomew's Notes on Religion' blog).


----------



## elbows (Oct 6, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> every bit of these reactions will fuel the 'hysteria' narrative for years to come and be cited as hard fact by journos during the ever-delayed inquiry



No, the inquiry is so broad that the shit 'hysteria' narrative is unlikely to dominate it. For example since its about institutions failing in their duty to protect children, it's remit includes territory occupied by Savile's offences, and there is no appetite to write his crimes off as hysterical fantasy.

If there are moments where certain particular high-profile cases are being looked at by the inquiry then perhaps we'll get the sort of thing I think you are alluding to, but its only going to be a part of a much longer story. There is going to be so much stuff that falls well below the 'VIP sizzle' level that leads to these sorts of media games.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Oct 6, 2015)

From Exaro's Twitter:


Implying that a struggling news outlet is turning to half-baked and salacious reporting to make a splash? Who does that remind me of?


----------



## elbows (Oct 6, 2015)

Thats very depressing.

I finally got round to reading the July 9th opening statement of the inquiry. It's not too bad, I quite like the modular approach and the plan to report regularly. 

Given that as I read it the increasingly shit Exaro-Darren-Nick-OtherMedia stuff loomed large in my mind, I was struck by this sentiment which was expressed at some point in the inquiry opening statement: 



> While it would obviously be of assistance to the Inquiry to hear as much direct oral evidence from victims and survivors as possible, they must never be made to carry the weight of proving anything.



https://www.iicsa.org.uk/sites/default/files/inquiry-opening-statement.pdf


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2015)

Brittan's mate Gummer went on R4 "Today" programme this am to lay into investigations into his old pals. His claims that allegations against Brittan & others (including Heath) were "false", "nonsense" and that the "investigations had been dropped" went completely unchallenged in the interview.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> Agree with you, but if they follow up Heath (Establishment rotten to the core! shock! horror!), with a couple of high profile patsies, that are provably innocent, it'll be Witch hunt! let sleeping dogs lie! blah, blah,in no time


Why a deserved downfall beckons for Tom Watson | Nick Cohen 
I can't remember who on here informed me they had relaxed the official secrets act in order to gain evidence on this matter, but have there been many cases come out of this from inside the basic 30 year d-notice period?	Taking the statistical rate of paedophilia to be say 0.5%


----------



## elbows (Oct 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> Why a deserved downfall beckons for Tom Watson | Nick Cohen
> I can't remember who on here informed me they had relaxed the official secrets act in order to gain evidence on this matter, but have there been many cases come out of this from inside the basic 30 year d-notice period?	Taking the statistical rate of paedophilia to be say 0.5%



I'm not 100% sure what you are asking for but unless I've got completely the wrong end of the stick it is way too early to answer that question. 

For example the attorney generals confirmation that people won't face Official Secrets act problems applies to the inquiry into child sex abuse, an inquiry that is only just getting started and will run for years.

Here is the letter that confirms people giving evidence won't get into trouble:

https://www.iicsa.org.uk/sites/default/files/attorney-general-letter.pdf


----------



## laptop (Oct 11, 2015)

No idea what your question is, gosub

But that Cohen piece is an appalling sour-grapes attack on Watson because of his supporting Cohen's adversaries in an internal argument in the London commentariat. No more.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2015)

laptop said:


> No idea what your question is, gosub
> 
> But that Cohen piece is an appalling sour-grapes attack on Watson because of his supporting Cohen's adversaries in an internal argument in the London commentariat. No more.


A few others attacking Watson as well, granted may well be his new job, but the its a witch hunt thing is starting....whilst the cases that have come out all seem to be 30 year+ old


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 12, 2015)

Watson has indeed taken a proper pasting, within a few weeks of being eletected deputy Labour leader.

Deputy to a guy who opposes Trident and NATO.

It is a function of intelligence agencies to destabilise politicians like Corbyn.

Such agencies have actively assisted the kid-fuckers, as MI5 did in waltzing off with the Cyril Smith files.

2 birds, 1 stone?


----------



## gimesumtruf (Oct 12, 2015)

Perhaps the mods from here should be deputy leader because they warned, be careful who you accuse. Perhaps Watson is not as savvy as our mods, which would not surprise me in the least.
Victims, as ever in for the long wait?


----------



## J Ed (Oct 12, 2015)

Amazing that we've got into the territory where it is now seen to be morally wrong to report child abuse, or at least that is the line that the entire media establishment seem to be desperate to push. I don't think it will be successful though, the connection between paedophilia and high ranking politicians is now too firmly entrenched.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 12, 2015)

Trial due to start next week. Wonder what other distractions can be created by state and institutions that are known to protect kid-fuckers.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/04/ca
meron-patrick-rock-tip-off


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Amazing that we've got into the territory where it is now seen to be morally wrong to report child abuse, or at least that is the line that the entire media establishment seem to be desperate to push. I don't think it will be successful though, the connection between paedophilia and high ranking politicians is now too firmly entrenched.



Indeed. Principles not personalities. There is no need to accuse a single individual of anything now. We have known for long enough that the establishment protects child-rapists and thus facilitates it.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 12, 2015)




----------



## eoin_k (Oct 12, 2015)

Many years ago Paul Foot claimed that the rumour about Leon Britain abusing  children  had probably been manufactured by antisemitic spooks. It would be ironic if some people  knew Watson to be barking up the wrong tree because they also knew the real source of these allegations.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 12, 2015)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Watson has indeed taken a proper pasting, within a few weeks of being eletected deputy Labour leader.
> 
> Deputy to a guy who opposes Trident and NATO.
> 
> ...




Don't be naive. Intelligence agencies seek to destabilise, or gather material aimed at destabilising ALL politicians and people in public life, not just the likes of Corbyn.


----------



## elbows (Oct 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Amazing that we've got into the territory where it is now seen to be morally wrong to report child abuse, or at least that is the line that the entire media establishment seem to be desperate to push. I don't think it will be successful though, the connection between paedophilia and high ranking politicians is now too firmly entrenched.



I think the line is more complicated than that. But yes, some of the media have been so shit about this that such detail might be lost. But I don't think they are quite pedalling the line that its morally wrong to report abuse. 

Multiple victims coming forwards really helps make a case that won't get this sort of shit from the press. When that doesn't happen, but people have talked to the press, this sort of backlash is far more likely. 

Party politics certainly seems to have set in motion one agenda. The fact Brittan was subject to a number of historical rumours back in the 80's probably winds some old Tories up, which is kind of understandable if it turns out that a case can't be made against him again now. This can be contrasted against the likes of Janner, who was also subject to rumours back in the day, with the key difference being that those ones showed signs of having more evidence pointing in that direction at the time, and sufficient evidence to proceed with a prosecution now.

And those who seek a law to stop the accused in sexual abuse cases being named are likely to use the 'dying man harassed in his last days' narrative to further that cause.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 12, 2015)

eoin_k said:


> Many years ago Paul Foot claimed that the rumour about Leon Britain abusing  children  had probably been manufactured by antisemitic spooks. It would be ironic if some people  knew Watson to be barking up the wrong tree because they also knew the real source of these allegations.


From what I recall, Paul Foot reached that conclusion because he could find no corroboration. Given the nature of the claims, that was hardly surprising. Given Foot's politics, seeing the state behind the claims is also hardly surprising.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 12, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Don't be naive. Intelligence agencies seek to destabilise, or gather material aimed at destabilising ALL politicians and people in public life, not just the likes of Corbyn.




Some more than others, clearly.


----------



## elbows (Oct 12, 2015)

Tim Tate, the telegraph journalist who mostly came to the attention of this thread because he was on Exaros case earlier than most, in relation to stories about a historic press interview with a customers officer and what was actually recorded on tape, had a very interesting blog post recently. It cover a lot of Exaro mistakes, but also Panorama ones.



> But Panorama’s worst offence concerned Brittan himself. It wheeled out testimony from former colleagues of the late politician to portray him as a man terribly and wrongly traduced as a paedophile.
> 
> Yet as Panorama knows (or should know) there is strong evidence to indicate that Brittan had a sexual interest in children. As I have reported elsewhere, tucked in the files of Operation Fairbank/Fernbridge is a formal 2014 statement from the ex-customs officer. This, of course, denounces Exaro’s bogus story about the 1982 videos and films; but it also contains the startling – and detailed – account of how at a later date the ex-customs officer stopped Brittan as he arrived at Dover.  A search of Brittan’s car yielded a child pornography videotape which, even 30 years later, the contents of which the ex-customs officer was able to describe.



Unfortunately I'm having trouble finding any permalink to specific blog posts on his site, so you'll have to go to the following URL and then scroll down till you get to the story entitled 'THE LOUSE & THE FLEA: PANORAMA, EXARO & THE VIP PAEDOPHILE SAGA'.

Blog Archives - Tim Tate


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 12, 2015)

From October 7th :

David Hencke's take on that Panorama programme.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 13, 2015)

eoin_k said:


> Many years ago Paul Foot claimed that the rumour about Leon Britain abusing  children  had probably been manufactured by antisemitic spooks. It would be ironic if some people  knew Watson to be barking up the wrong tree because they also knew the real source of these allegations.



Even the idea that the abuse rumour could have been put about by spooks could be something put about by spooks. This stuff is a hall of mirrors, to the benefit of child-rapists of course.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 13, 2015)

Rebekah Brooks is out to get Tom Watson


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 13, 2015)

I thought watson stuck to his guns very well in his response. Not sure Cameron is wise to pursue this as - whatever the facts of the case - it looks _exactly_ like the establishment closing ranks to defend one of their own. And Brittain is not exactly "national treasure" material who people would prefer to believe the best of. It also runs a very real risk that if more solid evidence emerges about Brittain, Cameron and the rest of  the tory huffers and puffers are exposed (again) as nonce protectors.
Maybe they are very sure of their ground - or maybe the arrogant pompous shitbags just cant help themselves.


----------



## elbows (Oct 13, 2015)

Ha ha:



> A letter by MP Tom Watson demanding Lord Brittan be interviewed about a rape allegation was only passed to police after the former home secretary was questioned, prosecutors say.





> The letter was received by the CPS in late April and passed to the police in June. However the interview with Lord Brittan had already taken place in May.
> 
> The CPS has released a statement saying it did not ask the police to reopen the investigation as a result of Mr Watson's letter.
> 
> It said it had forwarded Mr Watson's letter to the Metropolitan Police, saying this was normal practice, and that Lord Brittan had already been interviewed by the Met by the time it received the letter.



Tom Watson's Leon Brittan letter received after police interview - BBC News


----------



## elbows (Oct 15, 2015)

And now they've found another angle:

Police dismissed Tom Watson's 2012 abuse claims within two months - BBC News



> Claims by Labour Deputy Leader Tom Watson of a link between a paedophile group and a current government minister were dismissed by police within two months, the BBC has learnt.
> 
> Panorama has obtained police emails sent shortly after Mr Watson's statement to the Commons in 2012.
> 
> They concluded that there was no evidence the minister was guilty of any criminal complicity.


----------



## quiquaquo (Oct 15, 2015)

Submissions to Theresa May's child sex abuse inquiry accidentally deleted
_http://www.theguardian.com/profile/rajeev-syal
"Information provided by alleged child abuse victims to the overarching inquiry set up by Theresa May has been deleted due to a blunder, it has emerged."_


----------



## existentialist (Oct 15, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> Submissions to Theresa May's child sex abuse inquiry accidentally deleted
> _"Information provided by alleged child abuse victims to the overarching inquiry set up by Theresa May has been deleted due to a blunder, it has emerged."_


Government departments don't usually like admitting to blunders. So whatever they've done is presumably serious enough that admitting to a blunder is the preferable alternative.

It's funny how good the state is at deleting things...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 15, 2015)

Im pretty convinced that a whole bunch of people  - the spooks, theresa may, presumably cameron, fuck knows who else - are working together to actively protect people in positions in power. From the farcical merry-go-round of choosing a chair for the enquiry, to the co-ordinated assault on Tom Watson to deleting the files - its stinks to fuck. 

I think the result of all the various inquiries and police investigations will be sweet fuck all. Decrepit entertainers and long dead  mps are one thing - former home secretaries, even dead ones - seem to be beyond the pale.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 15, 2015)

It does rather look that way.


----------



## elbows (Oct 16, 2015)

The other stuff does smell in various places, but I'm pretty sure this is just typical website incompetence. For example something to do with not changing code when moving the website to a new domain. If it were deliberate shenanigans then I'd have expected it to last longer before being revealed - i.e. lose far more victims statements.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2015)

elbows said:


> The other stuff does smell in various places, but I'm pretty sure this is just typical website incompetence. For example something to do with not changing code when moving the website to a new domain. If it were deliberate shenanigans then I'd have expected it to last longer before being revealed - i.e. lose far more victims statements.


I agree that it's probably not deliberate incompetence...but I can't help wondering whether, say, something as trivial as collecting statements relating to historical abuse might have ended up being administered by, shall we say, well, not the IT First Division...?

It's pretty clear that a lot of those in government regard this exercise as a massive ballache that they'd be very pleased to see disappear without trace.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2015)

*Police withdraw claim that Cyril Smith visited south London guest house




			Statements released by the force in 2013 and 2014 claimed that officers had “established” that the late Liberal MP, who was known to be a child abuser, had visited Elm Guest House in Barnes, south-west London.

That claim has been repeated by campaigners – such as the Conservative candidate for mayor of London, Zac Goldsmith – who believe there is evidence of a cover-up of abuse at the home dating back 30 years.

But a new statement released by the Met to the Guardian has removed the claim, casting doubt on whether the late MP for Rochdale was ever there.
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## J Ed (Oct 16, 2015)

Covered up


----------



## elbows (Oct 16, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I agree that it's probably not deliberate incompetence...but I can't help wondering whether, say, something as trivial as collecting statements relating to historical abuse might have ended up being administered by, shall we say, well, not the IT First Division...?
> 
> It's pretty clear that a lot of those in government regard this exercise as a massive ballache that they'd be very pleased to see disappear without trace.



Honestly its no surprise to find mistakes, including silly ones, made at most levels of IT. There is nearly always something that can be overlooked, especially during a migration of some sort.

Government knows that they can't make the inquiry disappear without trace. Not even if a load of the higher profile, most 'scandalous' potential MP/Minister etc cases go nowhere and continue to be roasted in the press, because the inquiry goes beyond that that stuff and into the other levels of power, institutions etc where abuse happened.

Many things have happened to both encourage and discourage victims of abuse from coming forwards. The volume of additional police & justice work thats been created by people coming forwards post-savile tells us that something has happened that no manner of silly games at the highest levels will put down. 

But certainly I can believe they will attempt damage limitation wherever possible, especially when it comes to higher echelons. But I've always been aware that a number of the cases we've heard about will be tough, either because they are not based on what really happened, or the coverups indulged in at the time were too effective, or other reasons why victims might not be available to seek justice in todays climate. I place more hope in hearing more details of 'VIP' abuse by politicians who are dead and relatively easily exposed, or of cases that didn't reach the media rumour mill at the time or since but may emerge at some point, than in the highest profile cases that have so occupied the medias focus and are now again being destroyed or turned into a sideshow much like the Meecham-McAlpine stuff and Schofields list were.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 19, 2015)

This is kind of related. Patrick Rock, who was caught in possession of indecent images of children, was due in court last week. There's nothing in the press about it and the entire story itself is being kept quiet. Rock, as some of you may recall, was a Downing Street SpAd and a 5 times failed parliamentary candidate.

This Whatdotheyknow thread makes interesting reading.

ETA: As I said, there's nothing in the press but I found this. Rock was bailed last week until he goes to trial in May 2016.
Patrick Rock court case adjourned


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Oct 19, 2015)

My feeling on Rock is that the media is giving the story a very wide berth so they can continue to fully report on the unrelated VIP paedophile allegations. It would be flirting with contempt to run a story about any defendant in Rock's position alongside (or anywhere near) that coverage and it would bolster the inevitable claim by the defence that a fair trial is impossible in the current atmosphere. 



nino_savatte said:


> This Whatdotheyknow thread makes interesting reading.


To be fair, he asked the wrong department. HMCTS or the CPS could have told him immediately.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 20, 2015)

The Met solve the problem of what to do about Operation Midland by taking it out the back and shooting it merging it and Operation Fairbank into the dedicated team dealing with historic child abuse that was announced last month. When this team was announced Midland was not included and a couple of days later they issued a statement making it clear that it was still ongoing. Following the barrage of criticism that Midland has received over the last couple of weeks they have now changed their minds.


> Whilst we are not prepared to give a running commentary on any ongoing live investigation, as Operations Midland and Fairbank have progressed officers identified a number of people and locations that were common to both enquiries. It is therefore operationally important to have the same officer in charge of these enquiries.


Coincidentally this also avoids some of the 'reputational damage' that might follow from formally closing Midland down.


> This team will also be responsible for the preparatory work required to support the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.
> 
> This team will continue to investigate the various operations that are ongoing, including those historical allegations of impropriety by police officers dealing with sexual abuse in the period 1970-2005.


Interesting to wonder how much time the unit will be spending on further investigation of the Midland allegations as opposed to preparing the presentation about them to the inquiry.

Met statement

ETA: explaining this decision by stating that Midland and Fairbank "identified a number of people and locations that were common to both enquiries" is a little odd given that Midland was set up as a separate operation on the basis of allegations made to Fairbank.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 20, 2015)

MAD-T-REX said:


> My feeling on Rock is that the media is giving the story a very wide berth so they can continue to fully report on the unrelated VIP paedophile allegations. It would be flirting with contempt to run a story about any defendant in Rock's position alongside (or anywhere near) that coverage and it would bolster the inevitable claim by the defence that a fair trial is impossible in the current atmosphere.



The issue for me (and no doubt many others), however, is that Cameron's judgement _vis a vis_ those in his employ is non-existent. There was Coulson et al, now there's Rock.


----------



## eskdave (Oct 21, 2015)

fishfinger said:


> Greebo is on holiday.


Sorry thrice -I will leave it out-Greece is it?


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 21, 2015)

eskdave said:


> Sorry thrice -I will leave it out-Greece is it?


Back now


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 22, 2015)

The Home Affairs select committee hearings on #watsongate and the Met's delays in dealing with  "Jane's" rape allegation against Brittan produced little of interest beyond the inadvertent confirmation from one of the Met witnesses that there was still a current live investigation into a different allegation about Brittan.

Exaro actually has some news in the form of the latest figures from Operation Hydrant, which acts as the national co-ordinator for investigations into allegations of child sexual abuse by prominent people or within institutions.

Police probe 13 more politicians over claims of child sex abuse - Exaro


> Of 287 prominent people under investigation, 89 are national or local politicians, 145 from radio, TV and film, 38 from the music industry and 15 from the world of sport, according to Operation Hydrant. The total number of suspects has jumped from 1,433 to 2,016, a rise of more than 40 per cent. Among these are 372 suspects from religious institutions, 289 teachers and 157 care workers, the latest figures show.





> In total, 676 institutions are under police scrutiny, almost double the figure as of May. These include 271 schools, 181 children’s homes, 76 religious institutions and 31 health establishments, with all types of institution seeing higher numbers within the past five months.





> Operation Hydrant is co-ordinating 262 “significant police investigations” across the UK.




And one of the Dickens dossiers has been handed to self-effacing campaignerJohn Mann who has issued statements to the press that he will be passing it to the Police. In the meantime it has been shown to BBC journalists.

Police to investigate Geoffrey Dickens sex abuse dossier - BBC


> One document, among several seen by the BBC, suggests that "large numbers" of those named in it were paedophiles.
> 
> It contains the names of three MPs from the 1980s and other individuals connected to the Conservative party.


(...)


> The document seen by the BBC contains 21 names. A handwritten note in pencil suggests it was "given to Geoff Dickens, in Lobby, Jan 84".
> 
> The author, a Conservative party member in the 1980s, says the information was gathered from two former Tory MPs - Sir Victor Raikes and Anthony Courtney.
> 
> Both are now dead and as a result the authenticity of the document can't be directly verified; however, handwritten notes said to have been compiled during discussions with the MPs in the 1980s are also also in the file.


----------



## elbows (Oct 23, 2015)

Since Boothby & Kray came up here before, it seems appropriate to post this here.



> An association between Conservative peer Robert Boothby and London gangster Ronnie Kray was the subject of an MI5 investigation, documents have revealed.
> 
> The men went to "homosexual parties" together and were "hunters" of young men, declassified MI5 files claim.
> 
> Allegations in 1964 about the pair's relationship caused such concern within Downing Street that the then head of MI5 was summoned to the Home Office.



Ronnie Kray and Tory peer Lord Boothby 'attended homosexual parties' - BBC News


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 23, 2015)

...article by BBC Panorama journalist Alistair Jackson...

*Why won’t the Met speak out on Tom Watson’s biggest claim?*

The police have found no evidence for ‘a paedophile network linked to No. 10’. They should now admit it.

Alistair Jackson
_
McKelvie claimed that evidence recovered by police from Righton’s house contained the supposedly explosive link to No. 10. McKelvie believed he had a lead to the former senior aide being prepared to look after child -pornography.

But who was this ‘senior’ politician? Watson was quick to point out who it wasn’t, ruling out Peter Morrison, a former aide to Margaret Thatcher. I soon established whom McKelvie believed it to be: a man who is now today a government minister. I won’t name him because, as we have seen over the past few months, baseless accusations against innocent men can cause permanent reputational damage. Mr Watson did not, evidently, believe these claims to be baseless — indeed, when I made my inquiries, I was also told that two witnesses would be able to confirm Minister X’s involvement. But when I tracked down the supposed witnesses, both told me that he never been part of the abuse they had suffered._


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 26, 2015)

David Hencke lays into Aaronovitch.


> So what is the evidence? There are two separate sources. First my original source – not Chris Fay – who a colleague met – was a former local government officer on Richmond Council. It was he who led me to investigate why Elm Guest House was raided in the first place in 1982.
> 
> It wasn’t complaints from survivors but the residents who lived on this smart Barnes street. They were fed up with people coming at all hours, seeing children going into the guest house, and having posh chauffeur driven cars drawing up there. Most ordinary people do not have large posh cars or chauffeurs at their beck and call. It was one of the then residents who identified Leon Brittan not a survivor. Separately in answer to a direct question from a Dispatches investigation, the police confirmed that Sir Cyril Smith visited Elm Guest House and contary to reorts,haver not withdrawn it.
> Why  let your good smear campaign  be spoiled with the facts, David Aaronovitch


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 5, 2015)

*Ex-deputy director of MI6 is named by MP as 'key' figure who 'manipulated' Westminster VIP paedophile ring*

John Mann said George Kennedy Young was 'key' to paedophile claims
Labour MP said ex-deputy director of MI6 took part in 'dubious' activities
Mann added Mr Young was a 'manipulator' who controlled groups of people within which there were paedophile rings in the 1970s or 1980s

Ex MI6 chief 'key' to Westminster VIP paedophile ring claims, says MP

Mr Mann, MP for Bassetlaw, claimed he had been handed a copy of the dossier of evidence that was given by Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens to then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in 1984.

In a Westminster Hall debate, Mr Mann said Mr Young, who died in 1990, had been named in the first line of the document.

He said: 'This is an original, I have spoken and met and got a copy from the person who personally handed it to Geoffrey Dickens who then personally gave it to Leon Brittan.
'And what it says is, first line - GK Young heads up a Powellite faction known as Tory Action. GK Young, George Kennedy Young, was deputy director of MI6 in the past, long dead.

'The allegations are that he manipulated a group of people and that within that there were paedophile rings. And it goes into detail - who it's alleged were involved and where.
'I won't give all the locations because some would be I think sensitive and would potentially identify people - but London is one, Greater Manchester is another, North Yorkshire is a third one.'
Mr Mann said GK Young may be key in finding out what happened to the dossier.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 5, 2015)

GKY 70s far-right protege was Harvey Proctor.


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 5, 2015)

Misread post, so deleting my original commment.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 5, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> GKY 70s far-right protege was Harvey Proctor.


Indeed. Young is a very interesting figure who turns up a lot in early issues of Lobster magazine. (In the issues that Stephen Dorril has free on his website there are references to him in 11, 23 and particularly 19 - which contains a long account of Young's Intelligence career written either by Young himself or a close associate). Like Proctor and the Powellite wing of the Tories he had a visceral hatred for Heath. In 1974 he stood for the post of Chairman of the Monday Club, supported by many of it's more radically right wing elements including NF entrists. He lost and a purge of the NF elements followed.

If Mann is being quoted accurately in the Mail :


> And what it says is, first line - GK Young heads up a Powellite faction known as Tory Action.


then it rather suggests that the 'dossier' - based on information from two former Tory MPs and prominent members of the Monday Club - began life as a factional document in this internal warfare after the Tory defeat in 74. If that's the case then its purpose wasn't the noble cause of exposing paedophiles (or the less noble one, given when it was written, of exposing homosexuals) but of smearing political opponents. In other words something not unlike John Mann's open letter to Corbyn during the Labour leadership election, in which, amongst other things, he accused Corbyn of 'rubbishing' Dickens. (Read again now that letter looks even more self-serving and contemptible than it did at the time).

Of course none of that means that this 'dossier' doesn't contain information which might be useful or interesting although frankly I'm disinclined to hold my breath about it. (And given that the BBC seem to have had sight of it independently of Mann I'm guessing it probably doesn't contain anything that is unknown to the Police). But I think it does highlight a couple of things : 

Firstly, the need to be careful in dealing with claims that originated as ammunition in political infighting, because the difference between truth, lies and spin often isn't of the slightest importance to the people who produce and circulate them. **

And secondly, looking at the way in which this 'dossier' is being deployed by Mann (a true son of Dickens in this respect, although without the justification of being as obviously stupid) what massive cunt's some of the self-proclaimed 'champions' of abuse victims really are.

**(Obviously it's equally necessary to be careful in dealing with claims like the Whitelaw/Powell/Abse ones which first surfaced in the SRA obsessed Charismatic wing of the CofE and the 'house church movement' on it's fringes, although there the problem isn't caused by political expediency but from a faith in 'revealed' truth).


----------



## brogdale (Nov 13, 2015)

State broadcaster grudgingly concedes that it mis-led over claims that OB had dropped CSE investigations against Brittan. Only took them a month.


----------



## elbows (Nov 30, 2015)

I quite liked the sound of Fridays inquiry announcement. I won't say more until I've read the information given in its entirety rather than just press reports, but for now here are the initial 12 strands of investigation (which will be followed by more some time later).

Children in the care of Lambeth council
Children in the care of Nottinghamshire councils
Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale council
Child sexual abuse in the Anglican church
Child sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic church
The sexual abuse of children in custodial institutions
Child sexual abuse in residential schools
The internet and child sexual abuse
Child exploitation by organised networks
The protection of children outside the United Kingdom
Accountability and reparations for victims and survivors
Allegations of child sexual abuse linked to Westminster


----------



## elbows (Dec 1, 2015)

Latest Operation Hydrant stats:

Operation Hydrant: UK police identify 2,228 child abuse suspects - BBC News



> More than 2,200 suspects are being investigated by UK police probing historical child sex abuse allegations.
> 
> Figures from Operation Hydrant - which was set up by the National Police Chiefs' Council - show the total has risen by almost 800 since May.
> 
> ...





> Of the 2,228 suspects currently under investigation:
> 
> Some 286 are now dead, while 554 are classified as unknown or unidentified
> Among those of public prominence, 39 come from the music industry and 17 from the world of sport
> ...


----------



## teqniq (Dec 7, 2015)

Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences


----------



## existentialist (Dec 7, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences


Not a surprise. I imagine that the legal authorities are going to considerable lengths to make sure there can be no suggestion that he is being let off lightly.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 10, 2015)




----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 10, 2015)




----------



## existentialist (Dec 10, 2015)

It's all got quite a "leaned-on" feel about it, hasn't it?


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 10, 2015)

existentialist said:


> It's all got quite a "leaned-on" feel about it, hasn't it?


Indeed, it does and I suspect more of this kind of thing.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 17, 2015)

Stuart Hall released from prison halfway through sentence - BBC News


----------



## existentialist (Dec 17, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Stuart Hall released from prison halfway through sentence - BBC News


I'm quite surprised at this if he's still protesting his innocence, but it's not at all unusual to parole someone at 50%, from what I gather.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 17, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences



Only just seen that.

But it's reported in that article that Lord Janner will be the subject of a 'trial of the facts' rather than a full trial.

But surely that's not new information? 

The above articles's from 7 December this year, but as I recall, it was suggested a fair while longer ago that only a trial of the facts would be what happened. The article looks (to me) like it's no more than a confirmation of what was predicted ages ago.  Or was that prediction just spin at the time from sources close to ... ?

Correct me if I'm wrong though please.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Only just seen that.
> 
> But it's reported in that article that Lord Janner will be the subject of a 'trial of the facts' rather than a full trial.
> 
> ...


I think the idea was that there would be a formal process to confirm whether or not this was to be a trial or a trial of the facts. Nobody will have been surprised by the outcome, but it's just one of those hoops that needs to be jumped through.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 17, 2015)

Thanks for that clarification existentialist -- appreciated.


----------



## elbows (Dec 17, 2015)

existentialist said:


> It's all got quite a "leaned-on" feel about it, hasn't it?



Several different sorts of leaned on I suppose, but also other possibilities. I don't think I could discuss all of them properly because it wouldn't be fair to the bloke and I dont have enough information.

Instead I'll just say this is one of a number of reasons why I always go on in this thread about how important it is to a number of potential high profile cases that more victims come forwards. Because sadly a few isolated victims coming forwards and having awkward dealings with a few members of the press and or police, is not all that different to what happened in the 1980's or 1990's. Even though the climate has changed since then, the results are sadly similar if nothing more than this can be built, victims are left exposed, and I'm left with nothing more concrete than rumour. Especially as its almost inevitable that in some of these cases that go all wrong in the press, victims were actually damaged by far less high profile abusers, and somewhere along the way this damage has translated into a state where accusations that may lack a firm basis in reality come out.


----------



## elbows (Dec 31, 2015)

The historic letters that have been released under FOI which expressed support from well placed members of society for the sex offences bishop Peter Ball are quite telling.

Archbishop and MPs wrote in support of bishop later convicted of sexual offences



> In his letter to the chief constable of Gloucester, dated 5 February 1993, Carey wrote: “I have been keeping an anxious eye on developments concerning my colleague Peter Ball, whilst being keenly conscious of the need to avoid any suggestion that I might be attempting to influence the police enquiries.”
> 
> Saying that he wished to offer a “few personal reflections”, the then archbishop of Canterbury wrote of Ball’s “wholehearted commitment to his Lord and the Christian Church”. The sexual abuse investigation came as “a terrible shock to me” and “seemed to me at first most improbable”. He added: “If he is guilty of unprofessional behaviour it is quite unrepresentative of his style.”
> 
> He acknowledged that “‘special pleading’ would be entirely inappropriate; at the same time ... I believe I am justified in drawing to your attention the excruciating pain and spiritual torment which these allegations have inevitably brought upon a man in his exposed position and with his sensibilities”.





> A handwritten letter from Donald Coggan, the archbishop of Canterbury who consecrated Ball as a bishop in 1977, referred to his regard and respect for a “godly man, totally devoted to his church and to the people whom he has loved and served since his ordination”.





> Renton, who was arts minister in John Major’s government until 10 months before writing to the DPP in support of Ball, said the bishop had “suffered terribly over the past six weeks” of police investigation.
> 
> Renton said he had never heard a “breath of any suggestion of impropriety” regarding Ball’s behaviour while bishop of Lewes in the MP’s constituency. He continued: “However, I know him well enough to be certain that no punishment will be greater for him than any knowledge that he has broken his own vows of chastity. This alone will make him suffer for the rest of his life. To add the further shame of criminal action seems far too great a punishment.”





> Former high court judge Anthony Lloyd wrote that the bishop was “the most saintly man I have ever met” and that “if there is a latter day St Francis, then Peter Ball is him”.
> 
> He added: “And now he finds himself in this appalling situation ... He has obviously suffered far more already than any of us can imagine, and far more than a more ordinary human being would have suffered.”
> 
> None of the correspondents made any reference to the suffering of those who had made allegations against Ball.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 1, 2016)

Lots of closing ranks shit.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 1, 2016)

teqniq said:


> Lots of closing ranks shit.


Another tranche of Goddard's "_lessons to be learnt".
_


----------



## elbows (Jan 1, 2016)

A couple more in the BBC version of the story:



> The Conservative MP for Lewes, Tim Rathbone, wrote: "I find it literally inconceivable that he would ever become involved with anyone in the way the newspapers have described or insinuated."
> 
> James Woodhouse, the former headmaster of Lancing College in Sussex wrote that Ball was "acutely distressed" by some aspects of 20th-century culture, including "sexual permissiveness".
> 
> In his letter the warden of Radley College, Richard Morgan, said he had dismissed the allegations against Ball as "impossible" since the bishop had lived a life of "discipline".



Letters of support for sex offender ex-bishop Peter Ball released - BBC News


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2016)

Not sure whether they found the allegations incredible or whether they were urging other people to do so, or both.

Incredulity certainly played a large part in failure to act. 
ETA: in general, I mean.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 1, 2016)

elbows said:


> A couple more in the BBC version of the story:
> 
> 
> 
> Letters of support for sex offender ex-bishop Peter Ball released - BBC News


I find myself completely uncomprehending at these expressions of support. Most of them seem to treat as irrelevant the question of whether he abused these people, and major on the idea that he's basically a Jolly Good Chap, as if that is really any kind of mitigation for the life-ruining stuff he was accused (and eventually convicted) of doing.

I'm probably repeating myself, but these attitudes that seek to excuse abusers in this way are as much a part of the problem as the abuse itself. I don't think a witch hunt is the answer, but the tolerance that is still extended to abusers, particularly those in public office, sets a very nasty tone for overall social attitudes.

I think we are still at risk of seeing the perpetrators of abuse stereotypically, and of somehow excusing those who don't fit the stereotypical picture, as if what they are doing is not as harmful or repulsive to the rest of us.

I hope that those who expressed support for Peter Ball, and whose identities are now known, are suitably shamed and embarrassed by their efforts to excuse a now-convicted abuser for his crimes, and for their unwillingness to even countenance the effect both his abuse, and their support for him, will have had on those people who, unlike Ball or his cheerleaders, never had any choice as to their role in the matter.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 1, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Not sure whether they found the allegations incredible or whether they were urging other people to do so, or both.
> 
> Incredulity certainly played a large part in failure to act.
> ETA: in general, I mean.


I think it often does. And, in answer to your first question, I suspect that they could not see past what they knew of this man (and remember, abusers don't just groom victims - they groom everyone around them), and if they couldn't believe he was an abuser, then it was impossible that he could be one.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2016)

J Ed said:


> Oh this story is interesting
> 
> Greville Janner: Keith Vaz was among MPs who defended Labour peer against child sex abuse allegations


Apparently Vaz has deleted his Twitter and Facebook accounts tonight and a Sun front page tomorrow will feature a senior Labour politician.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 7, 2016)

vom


----------



## J Ed (Jan 7, 2016)

Orang Utan said:


> Apparently Vaz has deleted his Twitter and Facebook accounts tonight and a Sun front page tomorrow will feature a senior Labour politician.



I cannot think of that vile man without this coming to mind


----------



## J Ed (Jan 7, 2016)




----------



## bluescreen (Jan 7, 2016)

Bring me up to speed J Ed, who's speaking here?


----------



## J Ed (Jan 7, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Bring me up to speed J Ed, who's speaking here?



In the pic above? That's Salman Rushdie, Vaz assured him he would support before leading a hate mob against him.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 7, 2016)

Oh lordy lord, it's not the esteemed Bliar? Please put me out of my misery - I long to know who spoke those words.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Oh lordy lord, it's not the esteemed Bliar? Please put me out of my misery - I long to know who spoke those words.


Rushdie innit.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 7, 2016)

Thanks, J Ed. I have recalibrated my moral compass.


----------



## laptop (Jan 7, 2016)

Orang Utan said:


> Apparently Vaz has deleted his Twitter and Facebook accounts tonight and a Sun front page tomorrow will feature a senior Labour politician.


At 22:26 his Twitter status changed to "FUCK YOU ALL! YOU WON'T PROVE ANYTHING"


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 7, 2016)

laptop said:


> At 22:26 his Twitter status changed to "FUCK YOU ALL! YOU WON'T PROVE ANYTHING"


 
there is a suggestion that someone else has appropriated the name on tweeter...


----------



## J Ed (Jan 7, 2016)

Now that we're hearing allegations about one sitting MP, will more follow?


----------



## J Ed (Jan 7, 2016)

J Ed said:


>



edit: this is from July, I am an idiot


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 7, 2016)

Nah. That's tantamount to accusing someone of hypocrisy, and that could never be.


----------



## laptop (Jan 7, 2016)

Nothing today





J Ed said:


> edit: this is from July


Nothing today?


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 7, 2016)

Not understanding this at all unless the point is that Vaz himself soehow now under suspicion??


----------



## laptop (Jan 7, 2016)

Duncan2 said:


> Not understanding this at all unless the point is that Vaz himself soehow now under suspicion??



That was what the _Fail_ was insinuating, yes. Though they might have incorrectly completed the field "Insert Labour MP here" in the story-generator.


----------



## elbows (Jan 7, 2016)

Keith Vaz puts to rest mystery of the deleted social media accounts



> Keith Vaz’s mysterious deletion of his social media accounts has sparked a frenzy of speculation, but the Labour MP has insisted he was merely refurbishing his profile page.
> 
> A spokesman for Vaz, who is a prominent media commentator, said there was no conspiracy behind the deletion of his Twitter account. The MP was away in India while followers hypothesised about his whereabouts and wellbeing.
> 
> “The account is being refurbished with new pictures and a profile for example, but we’ve created a new account in the meantime, and we’re trying to get Twitter to verify that,” the spokesman said. The new account has tweeted several times this morning.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2016)

damn


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 7, 2016)

He's such a vain, pompous twat


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 8, 2016)

twentythreedom said:


> He's such a vain, pompous twat


And a fuckwit to boot


----------



## 1%er (Jan 13, 2016)

Duncan2 said:


> Not understanding this at all unless the point is that Vaz himself soehow now under suspicion??


Could it just be that he is going for the position of Speaker of the House, would that be a reason to delete those accounts?


----------



## 1%er (Jan 13, 2016)

Is this inquiry going to be streamed over the internet? (the public bits?)


----------



## elbows (Jan 13, 2016)

1%er said:


> Is this inquiry going to be streamed over the internet? (the public bits?)



Too early to answer that question. We are talking about at least 12 investigations as part of the inquiry, most of which they anticipate will cumulate in public hearings. They are very much still in the stage of setting everything up, and getting the detail of procedures laid out.

There is already quite a lot of info scattered around their website so I might have missed something, but as far as I know this is the biggest clue we have so far as to when your question may be answerable:



> 3. When will the public hearings actually start?
> 
> Preliminary hearings will begin in February 2016. These hearings will consider applications from those who wish to be designated as core participants and will deal with other
> procedural matters the Inquiry needs to consider. They will also provide direction on the scope, format and timescales for the main public hearings.



(from https://www.iicsa.org.uk/sites/default/files/november-2015-update-statement-faqs.pdf )

So perhaps during or shortly after these initial preliminary hearings we might learn enough about the format of the main public hearings to find out about streaming etc.

Meanwhile the latest official news from the inquiry website involves which investigations core participants are being asked to apply first:



> Individuals and organisations that wish to be designated as a core participant in relation to the following investigations are being asked to submit their applications before 5 February 2016:
> 
> The Anglican Church
> Lambeth Council
> Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale


( from Applications for core participant status | IICSA Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse )

I'm sure its not totally safe to assume that these will be the first three to make it to public hearing stage, but I'll tentatively consider they might offer some guide for now.


----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2016)

Or as it turns out we got another indication much sooner:



> The Goddard inquiry - the independent inquiry examining historical child sex abuse in England and Wales, chaired by New Zealand judge Justice Lowell Goddard - said it would resume its investigation into the allegations against Lord Janner now that the criminal case had ended.





> The BBC's home affairs correspondent, Tom Symonds, says he understood the inquiry was considering televising some of the evidence sessions relating to Lord Janner.



Lord Janner: Criminal proceedings over abuse claims end - BBC News


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 18, 2016)

Hatton Garden Heist leader 'found sick pics of Tory child abuser' in 1971 raid

18 JAN 2016 UPDATED 07:51, 18 JAN 2016
BY TOM PETTIFOR , NICK SOMMERLAD

_Hatton Gardens heist boss Brian Reader was horrified when his gang broke into a bank vault and found sickening photos of a leading politician abusing children.

But the notorious crook was shocked further when the thieves left the pictures for police to find – only for the Tory Cabinet minister’s crimes to be hushed up._


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 18, 2016)

There is apparently "insufficient evidence" to charge Lord Bramall with child sexual abuse.
Lord Bramall calls for investigation into man who accused him of sex abuse

They said the same about Janner iirc.

Max Hastings (spits) defends his "friend". It's the Daily Heil, so apologies.
MAX HASTINGS: My friend Lord Bramall's ormentors MUST be punished



> Since the exposure of Jimmy Savile, sex abuse allegations have been made against a range of high-profile people. Some charges are supported by credible and circumstantial evidence from a range of witnesses – for instance, those concerning former Liberal MP Cyril Smith and ex-Labour MP Lord Janner, both now dead. It is entirely right that several elderly showbusiness figures have been convicted and imprisoned for their criminal misconduct.
> 
> Amid the rightful charges, however, some malicious people or fantasists have made claims against public figures – most prominently Edward Heath, Leon Brittan and Lord Bramall – which seemed grossly implausible. Yet never did the police officers conducting the Operation Midland inquiries seem to acknowledge a duty of care towards those falsely accused, matching their responsibility to the victims of real abuse.



The second paragraph says it all "Our lot are innocent. Don't you dare touch them".


----------



## laptop (Jan 18, 2016)

hot air baboon said:


> Hatton Garden Heist leader 'found sick pics of Tory child abuser' in 1971 raid
> 
> 18 JAN 2016 UPDATED 07:51, 18 JAN 2016
> BY TOM PETTIFOR , NICK SOMMERLAD
> ...


Reader is awaiting sentencing, yes? How does he think mentioning this  now will help?


----------



## existentialist (Jan 18, 2016)

nino_savatte said:


> There is apparently "insufficient evidence" to charge Lord Bramall with child sexual abuse.
> Lord Bramall calls for investigation into man who accused him of sex abuse
> 
> They said the same about Janner iirc.
> ...


 I can't really comment on whether the police have failed in their "duty of care" to people accused of sex abuse crimes, but that Mail article smacks a little too heavily of the "What about National White Day" attitudes we see from reactionaries about race: as if there is a simple pendulum that swings between (in this case) accusers and the accused.

For far too long, any duty of care towards victims of abuse has been grossly neglected, and it is only in the last few years that it seems to me that the police have started listening properly to people claiming to have been abused in the past. I think we have made great progress in improving that, and it is not for the likes of Max Hastings to try to undermine it, no matter how obliquely, by shifting the focus to the accused, rather than the victims.

I'm not suggesting that it should be open season on anyone who someone sees fit to accuse, for whatever reason, and there will be false (either malicious or for some other reason) allegations which at the same time as being taken seriously need to be investigated carefully so as not to put those being accused too firmly in the frame. But perhaps we also need to remember that our justice system is supposed to operate by making it possible for allegations to be made, and properly tested, ultimately in open court. For that to happen, it is inevitable that allegations which are ultimately unsustainable (as many of these historic ones may turn out to be) are still able to be aired.

Lord Bramhall has been, by default, exonerated: since there is insufficient proof to try him, he must be deemed to be innocent in the eyes of the law. I imagine it has been an awful experience for him to endure these allegations and the long wait to find out what action is to be taken, but there isn't really a better way, unless we want to go back to simply ignoring victims of abuse.

Given Hastings' rather antediluvian mindset, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he falls into the set that tends to argue that there's no point raking over historical allegations, and that victims should just accept that they were silenced for too long, and have no recourse to the law. Personally, I don't much like that idea.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2016)

existentialist said:


> Lord Bramhall has been, by default, exonerated: since there is insufficient proof to try him, he must be deemed to be innocent in the eyes of the law


insufficient to charge


----------



## existentialist (Jan 18, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> insufficient to charge


Point taken.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 18, 2016)

laptop said:


> Reader is awaiting sentencing, yes? How does he think mentioning this  now will help?


are you implying he might agree to keep quiet for a reduced sentence?


----------



## laptop (Jan 18, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> are you implying he might agree to keep quiet for a reduced sentence?



I wasn't at all sure why this was announced by his "close confidant" now. Perhaps...


----------



## existentialist (Jan 18, 2016)

laptop said:


> I wasn't at all sure why this was announced by his "close confidant" now. Perhaps...


What his actual motives for doing it are is probably open to debate, but I suspect the core intention is to be able to say "Look, I might be a bit of a rough diamond, but I'm a good guy really - look, I even struck a blow against pervs".


----------



## teqniq (Jan 18, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> are you implying he might agree to keep quiet for a reduced sentence?


Seems a bit of a forlorn hope. If indeed he did see such pics and left them at the vault, it's his word against the police's no prizes for guessing how that would turn out I reckon.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 18, 2016)

teqniq said:


> Seems a bit of a forlorn hope. If indeed he did see such pics and left them at the vault, it's his word against the police's no prizes for guessing how that would turn out I reckon.


yeah my head started imagining a tragic jailhouse 'suicide' before realising its all a bit tin foil. Existentialists sounds the more reasonable explanation


----------



## likesfish (Jan 18, 2016)

Insufficent to charge is a bit vauge covers everything from this is a load of codswallop to we cant prove it but he did it


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jan 18, 2016)

likesfish said:


> Insufficent to charge is a bit vauge covers everything from this is a load of codswallop to we cant prove it but he did it


This is intentional. If you say there is nothing in one allegation and there is insufficient evidence relating to another allegation, it is implicit that there was something to the second allegation, which would be very unfair to the suspect since the evidence would never be tested in court.


----------



## Flanflinger (Jan 18, 2016)

laptop said:


> I wasn't at all sure why this was announced by his "close confidant" now. Perhaps...




Probably seen the film The Bank Job too many times.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 18, 2016)

Why has this story about Brian Reader surfaced now ? In order to make money from a tabloid. Why has it come from a 'close confidant' ? Because that is a simple way of avoiding any action under Part 7 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 that might prevent Reader from profiting from the sale of the story. Why would a tabloid buy it ? Because it combines a story about a "celebrity criminal" and one about Westminster paedophiles and thus appeals to two small but devoted fanbases who will lap up any old guff provided its appropriately branded. And it also gives the Mirror the opportunity to publish the following with an entirely straight face :


> The Government of the time allegedly forced the press to stop reporting on the burglary as a matter of national security amid allegations raunchy photos of the late Princess Margaret were found in another safety deposit box in the vault.
> 
> But the latest claims, revealed to the Daily Mirror, are more disturbing and further evidence of the Establishment cover-up of powerful paedophiles.
> 
> We are not naming the politician, who has since died and was never publicly linked to allegations of child sexual abuse.





> But we have passed details to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, which is set to examine claims against Labour peer Lord Janner, who died before facing trial for child sexual abuse, and Lib Dem MP Cyril Smith, whose paedophilia was exposed after his death.
> 
> Inquiry chairman Judge Goddard said in November: “We will conduct an objective fact-finding inquiry into allegations of abuse by people of public prominence (...)"


Goodness how public spirited they are. *slow hand clap*.

The unanswered question as far as I am concerned is why anyone sensible would give this drivel any more credence than the equally nonsensical 'recollections' sold to the tabloids by ex-detectives. Does paedo slash-fiction produced by cunts to make money out of the abuse of others really become something other than a repellent form of pornography just because its shelved in the "tru-crime" section ?


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 19, 2016)

_VIP paedophile inquiry being killed off, claims Harvey Proctor

Rajeev Syal
Monday 18 January 2016 22.36 GMT

A former Conservative MP who is under investigation for child murder has accused the Metropolitan police of attempting to kill off the Westminster paedophile inquiry to protect the careers of senior officers. 

Harvey Proctor made the claim after the Met’s Operation Midland – which is investigating claims that establishment figures murdered and raped boys – dropped claims of child abuse against the war hero Lord Bramall.

Steve Rodhouse, deputy chief constable of the Met, who is in charge of Operation Midland, has written to Proctor’s solicitors to say that detectives are assessing new information which could be relevant to their inquiry.

The former MP for Billericay, who denies the claims against him, said Rodhouse’s latest claim was part of a plan to kill off Operation Midland by degrees. 

“This is all part of the media management of the Met as they plan how to wave the white flag over this inquiry in a way that does senior officers the least amount of damage,” he said._


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 19, 2016)

> We are not naming the politician, who has since died and was never publicly linked to allegations of child sexual abuse.



....if its concocted wouldn't they have come up with a "name" like Heath or Brittan though...


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2016)

hot air baboon said:


> _VIP paedophile inquiry being killed off, claims Harvey Proctor
> 
> Rajeev Syal
> Monday 18 January 2016 22.36 GMT
> ...


Surely that's a brag that it's being killed off rather an accusation and a demand to keep it going?

Also seems at times like every single safe and deposit box in the 60s and 70s that was successfully broken into and the culprits later nicked at some point for something or other was stuffed full of pics of VIPs involved in child abuse.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 19, 2016)

......there's a liklihood there could have been child porn in one of those boxes...longer odds on the perp being a politician of the sort that your average London villian could identify back before you had media-saturation of politics / Parliament etc.....


----------



## existentialist (Jan 19, 2016)

hot air baboon said:


> ......there's a liklihood there could have been child porn in one of those boxes...longer odds on the perp being a politician of the sort that your average London villian could identify back before you had media-saturation of politics / Parliament etc.....


I might be missing something important here, given that I don't know much about the proclivities of child porn consumers, but what use is smut locked in a safety deposit box?


----------



## teqniq (Jan 19, 2016)

Insurance?


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 19, 2016)

...possibility rather than liklihood...the possibility is obvisoulsy greater that they could have uncovered some actual child pornography as opposed to the gilt-edged VIP stuff...then retrospectively aggrandising it even sub-consciously and now believing it to be true at this remove..

....it strikes me as something you might not leave lying around your Belgravia mansion for the servants to find but I'm happy to admit I'm no expert on such topics...


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2016)

The suggestion is that they were being held in safety deposit boxes by others blackmailing the alleged abusers, not that the abusers had stashed them isn't it?


----------



## teqniq (Jan 19, 2016)

^ yes, this is pretty much what I meant by 'insurance', blackmail or as a means of blackmail should the need arise.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 19, 2016)

....I'm not sure we can rule out other motives.....according to some testimony the photograhping of the abuse was done by the perps...presumably as memento's

Dave said: “There would be flash bulbs going off when someone was going round taking pictures. All this took place during the day, whatever day of the week they fancied.

“I can remember all the adults had posh accents. They used to say things like ‘He’s cute, he’s nice’.

....paedo's are notorious for hoarding vast amounts of the stuff ..e.g. if you saw Julian Levene in the BBC's Hunt for Britain's Paedophiles where he had removable skirting boards all around the house with hidey-holes etc.....


----------



## teqniq (Jan 19, 2016)

How convenient.

Prosecutors 'missed' three chances to prosecute Lord Janner


----------



## elbows (Jan 19, 2016)

teqniq said:


> How convenient.
> 
> Prosecutors 'missed' three chances to prosecute Lord Janner



Certainly the full inquiry will have to go far, far beyond the comfort zone of 'missed opportunities' narratives if it is to even begin to cut through the well deserved cynicism.

The full report is rather interesting. I won't quote from it much, in part because the activities of Janner are discussed in detail, but this bit I just reached is too quotable to miss. 



> Complainant 1 was receiving clothes and sweets from Janner and indicated that on almost every occasion that he met Janner, sexual activity took place.
> 
> Beck indicated that he believed these disclosures and reported them to the Director of Social Services who replied “oh no, not again”.


----------



## elbows (Jan 19, 2016)

That report makes it quite clear that unlike the shit police investigation in 1991, the 2014 police Operation Enamel turned up loads more evidence (including a lot of corroboration of small facts e.g. hotel room arrangements) in relation to complainant 1 (the one that relates to the Beck trial). Given that the recent prosecution of Janner involved 9 victims in total, we might assume that there is lots of evidence from Operation Enamel to come besides these few snippets. I expect that this will happen via the public inquiry.


----------



## elbows (Jan 19, 2016)

Unless I missed it this thread mostly skipped the flurry of Janner victims stories/media investigations which the likes of the BBC published as soon as the legal trial process was formally ended. Here are some:

Lord Janner 'abused 12 at children's homes' - BBC News
Lord Janner 'made me feel dirty and unloved' - BBC News
Lord Janner: 'He took my innocence' - BBC News


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 19, 2016)

Hmmm, perhaps if I press my fingers into my eyeballs I can stop them rolling.



butchersapron said:


> The suggestion is that they were being held in safety deposit boxes by others blackmailing the alleged abusers, not that the abusers had stashed them isn't it?


Well no, the Mirror has no need to suggest anything at all. The idea of the compromising material held in a safe deposit box and what happens if it is found by criminals is a staple of crime fiction, along with the 'Mission Impossible' variant in which a 'caper' is launched to get hold of it, and the closely related plot in which 'honest geezer' bank robbers discover that they've accidentally stolen money belonging to the mob. Anyone who has consumed enough crime fiction - undoubtedly a majority of the population of this country - is perfectly capable of filling in the dots for themselves.

(Your version seems a little dull. Couldn't the deposit box have belonged to Mossad and the Tory politician in the photos' have been Margaret Thatcher ?)



hot air baboon said:


> ....if its concocted wouldn't they have come up with a "name" like Heath or Brittan though...


Well off the top of my head : given that the only proof that this isn't a load of garbage - the photographs themselves - were conveniently 'left on the floor of the vault' perhaps the Mirror don't want to be bothered with a lot of tiresome complaints from friends and family of the 'Tory politician'. Or perhaps they recognise that if they named the politician it might tarnish their stance of 'public spiritedness' in wasting the time of the Goddard enquiry with this crap. Or, just perhaps, as tabloid journalists they understand the concept of the "blind item" - a staple of scandal sheets for over a century - and know that many of their readers love guessing who is being referred to even more than being told.

This ridiculous Brian Reader story is certainly part of the story of "high level" paedophile abuse but only in the same way that the Jack the Ripper Museum is "part of" the Jack the Ripper story. Aside from the question of any resources diverted to investigate it, It's only relation to the actual abuse that has taken place is as a demonstration (as if we really needed one) that we live in a society where there is literally nothing that cannot be turned into a commodity, and that there is no commodity too silly or too unpleasant that customers can't be found to consume it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2016)

Lurdan said:


> Hmmm, perhaps if I press my fingers into my eyeballs I can stop them rolling.
> 
> 
> Well no, the Mirror has no need to suggest anything at all. The idea of the compromising material held in a safe deposit box and what happens if it is found by criminals is a staple of crime fiction, along with the 'Mission Impossible' variant in which a 'caper' is launched to get hold of it, and the closely related plot in which 'honest geezer' bank robbers discover that they've accidentally stolen money belonging to the mob. Anyone who has consumed enough crime fiction - undoubtedly a majority of the population of this country - is perfectly capable of filling in the dots for themselves.
> ...



You did get that this:




			
				me said:
			
		

> Also seems at times like every single safe and deposit box in the 60s and 70s that was successfully broken into and the culprits later nicked at some point for something or other was stuffed full of pics of VIPs involved in child abuse.



was sarcasm right?


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 19, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> You did get that this:
> 
> 
> 
> was sarcasm right?


No - really ?


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 19, 2016)

....I do see that the supposed D_Notice slapped on the robbery at the time wasn't turned up after being investigated by Duncan Campbell...

Baker Street robbery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 20, 2016)

elbows said:


> Unless I missed it this thread mostly skipped the flurry of Janner victims stories/media investigations which the likes of the BBC published as soon as the legal trial process was formally ended. Here are some:
> 
> Lord Janner 'abused 12 at children's homes' - BBC News
> Lord Janner 'made me feel dirty and unloved' - BBC News
> Lord Janner: 'He took my innocence' - BBC News


Cheers - there was a long item about Janner on the East Midlands version of Inside Out on Monday. Here on the BBC iplayer for the next four weeks.

The Goddard Inquiry has published a document setting out the scope of the inquiry into Janner.

Investigation into allegations of child sexual abuse involving Lord Greville Janner | IICSA Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse



Spoiler: text of scope document



Allegations of child sexual abuse linked to Lord Greville Janner

An inquiry into allegations of child sexual abuse involving Lord Janner and the institutional response to the allegations

Scope of investigation

1. The Inquiry will investigate allegations of child sexual abuse involving Lord Janner.

2. To the extent that the Inquiry finds some or all of the allegations to be wellfounded, it will consider:

2.1. the adequacy and propriety of law enforcement investigations and prosecutorial decisions relating to allegations falling within paragraph 1 above, including whether any public authority hindered or prevented the  effective investigation and/or prosecution of allegations of child sexual abuse by Lord Janner;

2.2. the extent to which Leicestershire County Council was aware of the  allegations of abuse and the adequacy of its response;

2.3. the extent to which the Labour Party, government departments, and/or  the security and intelligence agencies were aware of the allegations of abuse and, if so, the adequacy of their response;

2.4. the extent to which any other public or private institution may have failed in its duty to protect children from sexual abuse;

2.5. whether the Kirkwood inquiry was conducted adequately and whether the omission of any mention of Lord Janner in the Kirkwood report was  appropriate. 

3. In light of the investigations set out above, the Inquiry will publish a report setting out its findings and recommendations to improve child protection and  safeguarding in England and Wales.



They have also announced that there will be a preliminary hearing in relation to this investigation on 9th March. The Times have described this as a 'public evidence session' but it's not clear from the Inquiry page that this is the case.


----------



## gosub (Jan 21, 2016)

Jimmy Savile: Janet Smith’s damning review leaked to Exaro | ExaroNews


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 21, 2016)

Another day another Met statement about Lord Bramall. This one is from Assistant Commissioner Specialist Crime and Operations Patricia Gallan responding to the calls for an apology. She declines to do so but in saying :


> In conclusion, I have offered to meet Lord Bramall at the conclusion of Operation Midland to explain the nature of our investigation and why we have acted in the way we have. I do want to hear his views and understand whether we might have conducted ourselves differently in any of our engagements with him and his legal representatives.


she makes things as clear as the Met intend to. It hasn't impressed Bramall's establishment chums who are reading one sentence as implying that he put his own name into the public domain.

Amusingly Assistant Commissioner Gallan writes :


> The Inquiry has already made clear that it will be investigating cases where there are allegations of child sexual abuse and exploitation involving people of public prominence associated with Westminster. This may include Operation Midland.


Any notion that Operation Midland will not have a starring role in the Westminster strand of the Goddard inquiry would be wishful thinking verging on the delusional. Hence of course the slow pace. The Met clearly take the view that since they are going to get a kicking anyway it would be better that it was for being over-diligent than risk handing their critics any further ammunition by leaving any stones unturned.


----------



## nino_savatte (Feb 1, 2016)

'Dirty' Doug Richard has been acquitted. Excuse me, but fucking a 13 year old girl qualifies as statutory rape. No?


> Doug Richard, the former Dragon’s Den star and one-time business adviser to David Cameron, paid a 13-year-old girl for sex after meeting her on a “sugar daddy” website, a court has heard.
> 
> The 57-year-old American-born entrepreneur and millionaire allegedly arranged for two teenage schoolgirls to travel from their homes in Norwich to London, where he spanked and had sex with the younger one.
> 
> ...




I reckon Patrick Rock will probably be acquitted too, and will insist that he was "under a great amount of stress" or he was "depressed" or some such bullshit.


----------



## laptop (Feb 12, 2016)

Just for the record: more charges for him:
Rolf Harris faces seven indecent assault charges - BBC News


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 13, 2016)

from Friday's Sun


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 14, 2016)

Operation Midland has not found enough evidence to charge any suspects

Vikram Dodd Police and crime correspondent
Sunday 14 February 2016 17.14 GMT

Operation Midland detectives investigating claims of sexual abuse by prominent establishment figures believe their main witness is still credible, but have not uncovered evidence to support criminal charges against any suspects.

The Guardian understands that the Scotland Yard investigation has found evidence pointing to the credibility of aspects of the account given by “Nick”, who has been the subject of attacks on his reputation.

The current standing of the £2m investigation is as follows, the Guardian can reveal:


No specific dates of alleged attacks have been established, nor has any direct evidence of murder been uncovered, or specific links to homicide victims.
In one instance Nick correctly described the interior of a military premises in southern England, where he claimed abuse had taken place. The details he provided were not publicly available, and the premises itself is not open to the public, making it likely he had been there at some stage, police concluded.
Detectives have not been able to disprove Nick’s credibility, nor establish that his central claims could not have happened.
An informal review, conducted six months into the investigation by a senior officer with no previous connection to the team, concluded there was sufficient substance to continue the homicide and sexual abuse inquiries.
Most of the detectives drawn from the Met’s sexual abuse and homicide divisions believe Nick is credible.
The investigation has so far not uncovered enough evidence against a living person to reach the standard of reasonable suspicion necessary to make an arrest.

The extent of the progress in the controversial investigation will fail to satisfy critics who believe detectives have fallen for a fantasist. But for others, the indirect support found for some of Nick’s account may explain why detectives have continued with the investigation for almost 15 months.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 15, 2016)

IMO the most significant passage in that Guardian piece is


> One of the tasks for the team of detectives is to ensure their inquiry can withstand scrutiny from the Goddard inquiry, set up by the government to look into the scale of sexual abuse in Britain and claims of cover-ups.


Given that criticisms of Operation Midland are supplying the fuel which has turned #hogan-howegate up to eleven it's scarcely likely that any of the more junior Met officers involved with the investigation are going to risk career blight by using any other word than "credible" about Nick.


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 19, 2016)

Police recruit more investigators for Edward Heath inquiry

Jamie Grierson

Friday 19 February 2016 12.41 GMT

Detectives investigating allegations of sexual abuse against the late former prime minister Sir Edward Heath are recruiting additional investigators in a sign that the criticised inquiry remains active.

Wiltshire police, which is supervising all investigations launched across the country into sexual abuse allegations against Heath, last month advertised for a number of staff investigators to assist the inquiry for at least 12 months, possibly up to two years.

The recruitment drive was reportedly launched to support plans to examine the Heath archive at the Bodleian Libraries, which is made up of about 4,500 boxes of material.

Detectives are understood to believe they might be able to corroborate witness accounts and Heath’s movements by examining his private papers in the Bodleian’s warehouse near Swindon, the Times reported.


----------



## elbows (Mar 1, 2016)

Detective who wanted to speak to minister was taken off case - BBC News



> A detective was removed from his post after telling colleagues he wanted to approach Paul Boateng - then government minister in charge of police.
> 
> Multiple sources have told the BBC they believe Det Insp Clive Driscoll intended to ask Mr Boateng what - if anything - he knew of a known paedophile, John Carroll.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 2, 2016)

elbows said:


> Detective who wanted to speak to minister was taken off case - BBC News



Another long and very interesting background piece about abuse in Lambeth on the BBC site :
The council that employed an abuser to look after children - BBC

The Boateng aspect of this was the lead item on last night's Newsnight currently on the BBC iplayer at this link.
01/03/2016, Newsnight - BBC Two

Mentioned on Newsnight but not in either of the website pieces is that Boateng is alleged to have rung Southwark Council during the row between Southwark and Lambeth over whether Michael John Carroll, the convicted paedophile who was at the time managing one of Lambeth's children's homes, should be allowed to foster children. (Southwark had learned Carroll had a conviction for child abuse back in the 60s and that Lambeth were aware of this). Boateng, or someone claiming to be him, had contacted Southwark to ask if he could be of assistance in resolving the row, an offer which was not taken up.

Not mentioned in any of these BBC stories is Boateng's wife Janet who was of course a Lambeth Councillor and Chair of it's Social Services Committee.

Newsnight state there is no reason to believe Boateng had done anything wrong but ask why the detective looking at Carroll's activities was removed from the case after having announced an intention to question Boateng, who was by then a Minister of State at the Home Office in charge of the Police. And why Operation Middleton, the more wide ranging operation looking at all Lambeth Children's Homes which was then set up, also did not follow up this line of inquiry.

Many of the elements of this have been mentioned before on this thread - for example back in 2014 when the Mirror ran stories about an unnamed Labour politician and Lambeth has it's own thread of course.

It goes without saying that there is no suggestion that Boateng is currently the subject of any criminal investigation and that Urban's very sensible rules about not stating or implying that living individuals have committed serious criminal offenses very obviously apply in the case of living individuals who are also rich lawyers.

Lambeth is of course one of the strands of the Goddard Inquiry (the scope of the investigation into it is set out in this pdf file). 



> The Preliminary Hearing on allegations of child sexual abuse involving children in the care of Lambeth Council will take place on the morning of Thursday 24 March, in Court 73 of the Royal Courts of Justice.
> (...)
> Preliminary Hearings are open to the press and public, but none of them will be broadcast.



From the note published on the Inquiry website it looks as if much of this initial hearing will be taken up with procedural matters.


----------



## laptop (Mar 2, 2016)

Lurdan : Insert "not" before "currently"


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 2, 2016)

laptop said:


> Lurdan : Insert "not" before "currently"


The resulting double negative could be read as implying that he is. Which in the absence of any evidence to that effect could be seen as defamatory. Why should I wish to say that ?


----------



## laptop (Mar 2, 2016)

Ah, yes, now I come out of my meeting with lawyers and with coffee I understand your qualification


----------



## shygirl (Mar 3, 2016)

Something I don't understand about all the people/police, etc who tried to report allegations of abuse is why they didn't then go on to make anonymous allegations via organisations such as NSPCC, (although these too have been found wanting).   The IRA used to issue warnings to organisations like the Samaritans at a time when the police didn't always act on warnings (dirty tricks), as  way of ensuring the warnings did go through.   I do appreciate that reporting things can be really scary, and people might worry that they will, somehow, be identified or traced.  But I can't believe the sheer scale of people who seemed to have given up once they'd been told to shut up.  It's tragic, when you think of what might have been prevented from happening.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 3, 2016)

http://www.nervemeter.co.uk/images/N8.pdf just found this online,  got a paper copy kicking around somewhere (from a street magazine) intersting if you havent sens this


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 10, 2016)

The Goddard Inquiry held a preliminary hearing yesterday in relation to it's investigation into Janner. A full transcript available here on its website in pdf form.

Mostly concerned with procedural issues but Ben Emmerson the Senior Counsel to the Inquiry gave an opening presentation which touched on general issues relevant to the Inquiry as a whole, and a brief outline of why Janner had been selected as one of the 13 specific investigations announced so far.

To date more than 30 people have alleged that they were sexually assaulted by Janner as children.


> The allegations in summary are that Greville Janner exploited children and perpetrated a full range of sexual offences against them, including what would now be termed in English law as "rape".
> 
> The offending was alleged to have taken place at children's homes, hotels and at the Janner family home. The earliest offence allegedly occurred in 1955 and the latest in time is alleged to have occurred in 1984. In relation to a number of the complainants it is alleged that Janner abused his position as an MP by arranging for children in whom he had a sexual interest to be brought to the Houses of Parliament.



Public hearings for the Janner investigation are expected to begin in September and to take up eight weeks over a six month period.

The preliminary hearings into the investigations into Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale and into the Anglican Church are set for next Wednesday 16th. The preliminary hearing into the investigation into Children in the Care of Lambeth Council is the following Thursday 24th.


----------



## elbows (Mar 10, 2016)

That transcript is really quite quotable, I shall have to restrain myself from quoting too much of it. I've read quite a lot of Janner stuff before and I've lost track of which facts and details are well known, so apologies if the following already raised eyebrows in the past, I don't remember it:



> At the conclusion of the Beck trial, the then Secretary of State for Health, William Waldegrave, announced the Kirkwood Inquiry into the abuse of children in Leicestershire children's homes. Greville Janner gave evidence to the Kirkwood Inquiry, but for reasons which are so far unexplained, he was  permitted to do so in private. The report which was published in 1992 recorded that Janner had been a witness and published his written evidence. It did  not, however, contain any reference to the testimony that he gave in private.


(from page 14)


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 10, 2016)

Oh there is definitely lots of interesting stuff to come. In one way I don't see any enormous mystery about the nature of Janner's participation in the Kirkwood inquiry. A week after the end of Frank Beck's trial Leicester Police had publicly announced that "on the advice of the Crown Prosecution Service" no further action was to be taken against Janner. (My guess is that the CPS had made their decision before Beck's trial and that the Police only made an announcement at all because of the coverage of Janner's speeches in Parliament). The Kirkwood Inquiry into Beck was scarcely likely to act in such a way as to re-open the issue.

But in another way it precisely draws attention to the issues the Goddard Inquiry will itself face over allegations involving living people who haven't been charged, and who may not currently be the subject of any criminal investigation. How they deal with the Kirkwood Inquiry's handling of Janner will be an interesting opportunity to see how they think Inquiry's should act over such issues.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 16, 2016)

The Goddard Inquiry held two preliminary hearings today, the first regarding it's investigation into CSA in the Anglican Church, (transcript here in PDF format) and the second regarding its investigation into Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale (transcript here).

Both hearings were largely concerned with procedural matters and in both cases further preliminary hearings are anticipated to resolve these. Unlike the Janner preliminary hearing last week the anticipated future timetable was not clearly set out.

The Anglican Church Inquiry will look at CSA and child protection policies within the Church of England and the Church in Wales, and the adequacy of the reviews both churches conducted into historic abuse. As specific case studies it will consider the Diocese of Chichester and the case of Peter Ball, a former bishop of the diocese.

From the opening statement by Ben Emmerson, Senior Counsel to the Inquiry


> The evidence which is so far available suggests many instances of sexual abuse by priests and others in positions of authority within the Anglican Church over a long period of time and that there have been serious failures on the part of those within the Church to acknowledge, prevent and remedy such abuse.  There is evidence that abuse has occurred and continues to occur in religious schools and within parishes.  There is also reason to believe that the Church of England's own scrutiny of the issue in the past, the past cases review, which was carried out in 2007 to 2009, provided a picture that was less than comprehensive.





> The Diocese of Chichester is one of 42 dioceses within the Church of England and covers most of East and West Sussex and part of Kent.  The Bishop of Lewes, the position that Peter Ball occupied from 1984 until 1992, is one of the bishops in the diocesan area.  The diocese is notable for a high reported rate of child sexual abuse complaints against a clergy and for numerous examples of apparent failures of reporting and safeguarding.





> The problem of child sexual abuse within the diocese reached deep into Chichester Cathedral and its associated institutions.  A large number of clerics in the diocese and others, including Terrance Banks, the head steward of Chichester Cathedral, have been convicted of child sexual abuse.  The Anglican Church recently settled a claim in respect of an allegation by George Bell, as you have heard, who was Bishop of Chichester from 1929 until 1958.


(...)


> The history of Chichester raises concerns over the accuracy of the Church of England's Past Cases Review. That review reported in 2010 that diocesan scrutiny of 40,747 files disclosed just 13 cases which required formal action.  It did not pick up on Peter Ball's offending or on the history of allegations against other clerics within the diocese, including Roy Cotton, Robert Coles and Gordon Rideout.  These cases cast considerable doubt over the assertion made by the Church in the wake of its review that it had "thoroughly re-examined" allegations and taken "appropriate action".


(...)


> The case of Peter Ball illustrates broader failings in the Anglican Church and in the criminal justice system.  In 2015 the CPS accepted that there had been "sufficient admissible, substantial and reliable evidence" that Ball had committed the offences and that a prosecution would have been in the public interest in 1993.  The question, which of course remains opaque, is whether, had that prosecution been pursued, the subsequent offences might have been prevented.



The Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale Inquiry will look at CSA of children placed in residential children's homes by Rochdale Council, including the involvement of Cyril Smith in that abuse. It 


> will not look solely at the council's treatment of children, but will also consider, amongst other matters, the role of the police, the prosecuting authorities and the Department of Education.


From Ben Emmerson's opening statement


> Smith was a governor of a number of Rochdale schools and played a role in the establishment of the Cambridge House Hostel and Knowl View School.  The investigation will examine whether Smith used his position either as a governor or as a local politician to secure inappropriate access to children.


(...)


> The two institutions at the heart of this investigation -- Knowl View School and Cambridge House Hostel -- were residential establishments for boys and young men.  Cambridge House was opened to residents in 1962 until its closure in 1965.  Knowl View opened in 1969 and finally closed, after a period of temporary closure, in 1996. Knowl View was, during the period of time covered by this investigation, under the supervision of Rochdale Borough Council and the Department of Education.





> Cambridge House Hostel, however, was different.  It was set up by the Rochdale Hostel for Boys Association, a voluntary organisation.  Its chair was a probation officer; its secretary was Cyril Smith.  It is known, however, that Rochdale Borough Council placed some children in Cambridge House.


(...)


> The Inquiry has had the opportunity to consider a significant quantity of material disclosed to it by Rochdale Borough Council about Knowl View School.  The bulk of this material focuses on the period from around 1989 until the closure of the school in 1994.





> Three main issues have emerged.  The first is that the material supplied by the council proved the exploitation of boys who attended Knowl View School and possibly children who resided in children's homes in Rochdale in public toilets and other places outside the school.  Some of these children may have been very young indeed.  It is important to understand whether the exploitation of these children was tolerated over time and, if it was, to understand how children most in need of protection were allowed to be the subject of this sort of abuse.


(...)


> The second issue is that a known paedophile gained entry to Knowl View School in 1990.  While this incident was to precipitate changes in the school, the materials that we have seen suggest that it was not a one-off and that this individual may have been targeting the school and its children for many years.  Again, whether the risks this individual posed to children were simply accepted as part and parcel of school life and what that tells us about the treatment of children at Knowl View School is a matter which this investigation will need to consider.





> The third issue is the extent to which the school failed to protect children from other children who posed a risk of sexual harm to them.  Again, the documentation provided suggests that there may have been failures to assess the risks some children posed to others and that this was compounded by failures to adequately supervise children at night.


----------



## shygirl (Mar 17, 2016)

Just heard that the woman doing the enquiry has found no evidence of high profile/establishment CSE.   Oh, what a fucking surprise.  Not.


----------



## laptop (Mar 17, 2016)

shygirl said:


> Just heard that the woman doing the enquiry has found no evidence of high profile/establishment CSE.   Oh, what a fucking surprise.  Not.


Heard from whom?

The inquiry cannot have formally found anything when it hasn't even started hearing evidence...


----------



## shygirl (Mar 17, 2016)

laptop said:


> Heard from whom?
> 
> The inquiry cannot have formally found anything when it hasn't even started hearing evidence...



bbc news. its the enquiry, looking at the Waterhous enquiry.  sorry if I've got the wrong one


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 17, 2016)

Macur review: 'No reason' to undermine abuse inquiry findings - BBC News

North Wales child abuse scandal: The road to Macur - BBC News

Report of the Macur Review (redacted) - gov.uk


----------



## shygirl (Mar 17, 2016)

Thanks Lurdan


----------



## laptop (Mar 18, 2016)

Not very high-level, but: Met Police detective charged with child sex offences - BBC News



> A Met Police detective working in a child abuse investigation unit has been charged with child sex offences.


----------



## elbows (Mar 18, 2016)

Lurdan said:


> Macur review: 'No reason' to undermine abuse inquiry findings - BBC News
> 
> North Wales child abuse scandal: The road to Macur - BBC News
> 
> Report of the Macur Review (redacted) - gov.uk



Thanks for the links. Didn't expect much exposure of anything from that one really. Just as well, as its stuffy, narrow, redacted and thoroughly establishment style respectable. Very different to how the main inquiry will need to be careful to be, at least in some areas, in order to stand even a vague chance of reducing public cynicism and mistrust.

I don't think there is much point in me spending too much time picking on that reviews conclusions too much at this stage, its very narrow remit means it was never going to cut the mustard. The main 'disappointment' for how it turned out compared to what we might of expected if we believed everything we read in the newspapers post-Savile, relates to the Welsh Office, e.g. the notion that William Hague put a lid on some things for party reasons. e.g. Peter Morrison. But it turns out that all this review manages to do in this regard is successfully blunt some of the important stuff that is claimed in the likes of the following Daily Mail article. An article which I'm confident caught this threads attention at the time, as I remember going on about it.

Former Minister says Thatcher aide was paedophile who preyed on boys' home - and Hague should have known

The review talked to Rod Richards and he said plenty of things that undermine that Mail article. There are other opportunities where we might discover more of the actual truth about Peter Morrison, but this didn't turn out to be one of them.

Sadly I haven't got time to read the whole review, and from the fair chunk of it I did manage it doesn't seem worth it. But certainly aside from the area I've just drawn attention to, there is stuff there about the whole McAlpine mess and the antics of a journalist with photographs trying to get a victim to put a name to an powerful abusers face. The nature of the redactions in the report make reading it really weird though, you pretty much have to remember the whole story including historical & internet rumours and the full alleged cast list in order to make sense of some sections, and if you already know that stuff this review doesn't have much of value to add.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 20, 2016)

ooops wrong thread..


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 20, 2016)

Operation Midland "has now closed". Harvey Proctor has been informed that he faces no further action. Met statement here. 



> Whilst investigations could not be completed into individuals who are no longer alive, sufficient evidence has not been found that would have led the MPS to refer the matter to the CPS if they were alive.





> In the course of the investigation, officers have not found evidence to prove that they were knowingly misled by a complainant. The MPS does not investigate complainants simply on the basis that their allegations have not been corroborated.



The Met have attempted to pick a 'good day' to announce this but the hostile criticism of the Operation is unlikely to be deflected.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 21, 2016)

guess this lapses to the realm of "conspiracy theory" now - (which im sure the good soldiers amongst the electronic corps will back - with a lol) - bloody disgusting JAnner is a fact - Smith is a fact - , why the greens dont call them all nonces (and 9/11 a lie while there at it ) is unknown to me - bloody hell, how can we talk about the little stuff when the pary machines have been run by these MONSTERS - #spyspys not #spycops did this . also #copcops but we know the #copcops jump when the #spyspys say jump , OH for a free press, nah , wil just be told on the david icke forums and photocopied pamphlets of lunatics. PROTEST AT MI5 on the 14th april from midnight!!!!


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 21, 2016)

janner and smith confirmed - but has there actually been a tory confirmed (britain and heath potentially innocent werent htey_) - ah its a fucked up situation, must discuss sensibily but who is at the centre of all of this? who told polciei n leicester and winchester and lambeth and elsewhere to desist - ITS BLOODY THE SECURITY SERVICES isnt it ? but we dont do demos there do we, not for ten years -= ha ha ha -and you lot - you lot bending the narrative for them? your part of it - hang.,your,heads


----------



## Diamond (Mar 21, 2016)

kingfisher said:


> guess this lapses to the realm of "conspiracy theory" now - (which im sure the good soldiers amongst the electronic corps will back - with a lol) - bloody disgusting JAnner is a fact - Smith is a fact - , why the greens dont call them all nonces (and 9/11 a lie while there at it ) is unknown to me - bloody hell, how can we talk about the little stuff when the pary machines have been run by these MONSTERS - #spyspys not #spycops did this . also #copcops but we know the #copcops jump when the #spyspys say jump , OH for a free press, nah , wil just be told on the david icke forums and photocopied pamphlets of lunatics. PROTEST AT MI5 on the 14th april from midnight!!!!



9/11 is a lie?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 21, 2016)

kingfisher said:


> janner and smith confirmed - but has there actually been a tory confirmed (britain and heath potentially innocent werent htey_) - ah its a fucked up situation, must discuss sensibily but who is at the centre of all of this? who told polciei n leicester and winchester and lambeth and elsewhere to desist - ITS BLOODY THE SECURITY SERVICES isnt it ? but we dont do demos there do we, not for ten years -= ha ha ha -and you lot - you lot bending the narrative for them? your part of it - hang.,your,heads


You know, it might merely be because, having recently gone through the process of taking a (non-celebrity) paedophile to court, I'm a bit touchy about these things, but it REALLY FUCKS ME OFF when conspiratastic nutjobs start hijacking every single fucking social issue in support of their cause.

It's not spies. It's not gubmint. It's not the fucking Freemasonic Illuminati Lizard Alpha Centauri Combo conspiracy.

It's adults sexually abusing kids. Pure and simple.

Try not to forget that, eh?


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 21, 2016)

existentialist said:


> You know, it might merely be because, having recently gone through the process of taking a (non-celebrity) paedophile to court, I'm a bit touchy about these things, but it REALLY FUCKS ME OFF when conspiratastic nutjobs start hijacking every single fucking social issue in support of their cause.
> 
> It's not spies. It's not gubmint. It's not the fucking Freemasonic Illuminati Lizard Alpha Centauri Combo conspiracy.
> 
> ...



i hope you got justice - and i dont have a cause - specifically rather than the angle of spy analysis - but in this case VIP paedophiles IT IS spies and fovernemnt (not sure about aliens n all that )


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 21, 2016)

im not some ho hum mother fucker getting no vicarious thrills of it - my mate died in winchester prison for getting a ring all the way up to [ed: no names, please] - in the cover up - sorry , in this VIP paedophile thread "conspiracy nutjob" is the only angle you can go on it - a conspiracy , a systemic system of recruiting kids for blackmail/diploacy - that havent been believed - for you to reduce it as Freemasonic Illuminati Lizard Alpha Centauri Combo conspiracy. - thats fucking mocking the kids that have been abused and the survivors. my mate - that was done by leon britain for example. who stood with fitted up IRA men. YES it is to do with SPIES and is to do with GOVERNMENT and it is to do with SOCIAL WORKERS and FREEMASONS - (ALPHA CENTUERI- what you on about - )


----------



## existentialist (Mar 21, 2016)

kingfisher said:


> <-->


Poke it, sunshine. As far as I'm concerned, that's a line crossed. And I'm not talking about the Freemasons bollocks, either.

People want Urban to cut you some slack. I can appreciate that - you're clearly not having quite the same relationship with reality that most of us enjoy. However, that doesn't give you carte blanche to hijack every issue, as it suits you, in pursuit of your own delusions, without being at least slightly held to account for doing so. Or just having the implications of what you're saying pointed out to you.

And that's what I'm doing: I'm pointing out the implications of what you're saying. At the very least, take your conspiranoid ramblings elsewhere than a halfway-decent and informative thread about a topic that is serious and important to enough of us for it not to be appropriate to be hijacked for that kind of nonsense.

Wind it in.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 22, 2016)

no you are right, the mi5 dont have anything to do with the closing of operation  midland and the covering up, leaning on the judiciary, media police etc to "fix it" (geddit) for these (yes i will say it ) "illuminati paedophiles" - what is "urban" - "same relationship  with reality" - no i dont have a deal at present to protest./opine within the narrative -for reward -  no - but THIS THREAD - yeah , umm MI5 are at the centre of it, obviously, and the failure to discuss that implys the forum as run by "them" - DELUSIONS - what delusions - what nonsense - MI5 are at the centre of the VIP paeo ring issue - http://www.nervemeter.co.uk/images/N8.pdf you read this - 
so im not sure hwat you are saying , are you of the opinion that ) there is no organized UK VIP paedo ring (all the gotvt nonces were doing it independently) OR there are VIP Paedos but MI5 "missed them" in vetting etc OR .. ? - you keep saying conspiraoid - IT IS A FUCKING CONSPIRACY. but you know - you know this - but gotta get paid isnt it - gott a build the compromised-alternative narrative!!! 

the secret services are at the centre of this - kincora (is that a conspiracy)_ 

are you not allowed to discuss once i comment on a thread? because personally i have barracked activists ( you know the squatty type people and that, your occupy type peopole n that_ for refusing to tackle this LEAVING this issue to the bedraggled, leaving them on the fringes - because its TOCLOSE TOHOME - yes 
im campaignign on this - im taking direct action , 
fuck you , doesnt it make you feel bad ? lying , sayin it s "conspiraoied" - nice word by the way , nice bit of degradation and dissembling- 
enjoy your cognitive dissonance - is your paedophile case you talk to real (i dont know your just a person on the internet like me ) or is that just gaslighting to shame me to shutting up - 
in short - anyone thats involved in the secret services that tells themselves the lie that they are "woerking for the people" "practising entryism" - has this on the colective memory of their organization, but shamefully enough , there is no one to whistle blow too - no one to tell - you need me - sorry for ruining you thread by the way. sorry for any offence - i may just go set myself on fire in the mi5 lobby, (probs just snuiff 3 bags of smack there though OD - be less painful if failed) -


----------



## editor (Mar 22, 2016)

kingfisher said:


> no you are right, the mi5 dont have anything to do with the closing of operation  midland and the covering up, leaning on the judiciary, media police etc to "fix it" (geddit) for these (yes i will say it ) "illuminati paedophiles" - what is "urban" - "same relationship  with reality" - no i dont have a deal at present to protest./opine within the narrative -for reward -  no - but THIS THREAD - yeah , umm MI5 are at the centre of it, obviously, and the failure to discuss that implys the forum as run by "them" - DELUSIONS - what delusions - what nonsense - MI5 are at the centre of the VIP paeo ring issue - http://www.nervemeter.co.uk/images/N8.pdf you read this -
> so im not sure hwat you are saying , are you of the opinion that ) there is no organized UK VIP paedo ring (all the gotvt nonces were doing it independently) OR there are VIP Paedos but MI5 "missed them" in vetting etc OR .. ? - you keep saying conspiraoid - IT IS A FUCKING CONSPIRACY. but you know - you know this - but gotta get paid isnt it - gott a build the compromised-alternative narrative!!!


Please do NOT post up any allegations naming specific persons who have not been charged. This is not because I'm doubting what you're saying, but by doing do you can put the site at serious risk and I haven't got the £££££s to take on defamation proceedings.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 22, 2016)

kingfisher There are ways of saying this stuff that puts it across in a way that doesn't make people roll their eyes and dismiss you as a conspiracy loon. That's what this thread's been about from the start, researching, documenting, recording and attempting to separate the wheat from the chafe.

There have been discussions about MI5 involvement throughout this thread, and IMO at least some elements of MI5 are implicated at the heart of much of this, but flinging around allegations that anyone who crosses you / doesn't fully support your posts must be on the payrole is a seriously counter productive way of going about things, as is disbelieving a long term poster who's documented their case on these forums over several years.

Please take a step back, read over your recent posts and have a think about your approach, as it's disrupting this and other threads and pissing off people who're on the same side of the situation.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 22, 2016)

editor said:


> Please do NOT post up any allegations naming specific persons who have not been charged. This is not because I'm doubting what you're saying, but by doing do you can put the site at serious risk and I haven't got the £££££s to take on defamation proceedings.


also what the editor says. This thread has been allowed to stay open and running for 211 pages since 2012 because posters have been careful to keep the right side of these lines. Several others have ended up being closed because of posts like yours.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 22, 2016)

my approach is that - the normative narrative - of this site - like all forum is geared toward the longstanding posters - who work for the secret services , they were nt allway in the majority but they are now - the cussingsorry down of conspiracy themes, and quite frankly for people who just lurk - who use this as a resource., the fucked up think about these IP (investigatory powers;Illuminati paedos) is that people all know who they are , the journos etc etc - the lawyers, yes they are all uin on it - compare to the "super injunctions" - they all got named on twitter - downfal - for frivolous things, no definitive list exitsts, sorry guys, i think i am fulfilling a function - there are spies here, narrative controllers who - are covering up - but no ones doing dmeos except me - its monstrous. 
but the editor in his wisdom has allowed me to remain so, thats cool - you people should really be forced to lie , occasionaly rather than rely on aloof snarky innuendo. . 
power to the peoplke
kill the monsters


----------



## free spirit (Mar 22, 2016)

Thing is, you do the security services jobs for them if you cast unfounded aspersions on long standing posters and activists, it just creates an atmosphere of mistrust, backstabbing and cliques that paralyses activist groups. Especially when you apparently don't know any of the people involved.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 22, 2016)

no i think there should be definitely more mistrust - and if its about "knowing them" - iv been lurking herfe long enough, i dont have to have my ideologys battered into conforming with the "THERE ARE NO SPOOKS THAT IS MISGUIDED WE MUYST HAVE UNITY OR CONFLICT WITHIN PARAMETERS" - i do know them , i know lots of people , all of activism, all of forums are run by spooks - thats why they cant talk about spooks - BUT THIS IS OFF TOPIC - have your discussion about VIP PAEDOS sans spooks - BIG UP TO THE FORUM MODERATORS who havent kicked me yet - , sad thing about the IP BILL - make the disgusted disavaowed disparaged former agents, make it harder for them to link up, to whistleblow in a faction , ,, , everyone spying on everyone, but this is about the VIP PAEDO ring , THAT DID EXIST - 
KINGCORA WAS THE MODEL
longstanding ! HAH! if they are longstanding they wouldv figured iut out (or maybe how to know or not know) - this is for the lURKERS - the RESEARCHERS , the muggles - the future historians.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 22, 2016)

sorry im not trying to derail this at all


----------



## free spirit (Mar 22, 2016)

ok, well just a word to the wise then... it's GCHQ who'll be doing the social media / online stuff not really MI5.


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 22, 2016)

Meet Prism's little brother: Socmint (Wired UK) and the police, various forces, all have their own agenda? - does GCHQ have linguists - or de they decrypt then send over to mi5 - to gchq do offline sutff- the transfere of anonynmous online to offline - they all do everything - what the #spycops thing is quit a lot about is ACPO basically trying to set up a whole new bloody international spy game - WELL THIS IS STUFF WE WIL NEVER NOW free spirit -


----------



## kingfisher (Mar 22, 2016)

thats something ill never know - how the spooks justified letting these nonce politcians get away with it - apparantly the kgb gru know - maybe we will see it on RT- yeah bit more espionage please, the terrorism myth has gone quite stale- sorry - sorry derailign


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 22, 2016)

Self-effacing "victims champion" John Mann MP swiftly issued a press statement after the Met announced that Operation Midland had ended.


> I am not at all surprised that Operation Midland has been closed down.
> 
> I have never discussed matters with the witness ‘Nick’ who was making the allegations and I did not send evidence to the Midland investigation.
> 
> I had one meeting, last autumn, at Midland’s request where I provided them with a new source of related allegations that impacts on several enquiries, including North Wales.


(...)


> Mr Harvey Proctor, as well as misquoting me today, has claimed that there was no Westminster or VIP ring. As he has had no involvement with it, by definition, how can he possibly know this? His uninformed speculation is unhelpful.



Misquoted eh ? And "did not send evidence to the Midland investigation". I don't seem to be able to find the press statement Mann issued when he was "misquoted" by the Daily Mail last March.

VIP abuse police raid home of shamed Tory: Veteran Harvey Proctor will be first of many to be investigated, says campaigning Labour MP - Daily Mail 5th March 2015
(...)


> Harvey Proctor, 68, had been named on a list of politicians passed to police by campaigning Labour MP John Mann.


(...)


> It is understood that investigators now have up to nine current and former senior politicians on Mr Mann’s list in their sights as the sensitive inquiry gathers pace.
> 
> Speaking last night, Mr Mann said he was pleased at the progress of the investigation and insisted that ‘no stone must be left unturned’.
> 
> ‘It is encouraging to see that the Met are continuing to fully investigate allegations of child abuse and prominent people,’ he added.


(...)


> Campaigning MP John Mann passed his dossier naming suspected Westminster paedophiles to police in December last year.
> 
> The explosive list identifies 22 potential suspects across the political spectrum who are allegedly linked to historic child abuse between 1970 and the late-1990s.
> 
> Of these, nine are still alive, and are said to include four serving MPs, three former MPs, a member of the House of Lords and one high-ranking town hall figure. The document also includes the names of 13 ex-ministers, including at least two who allegedly went to ‘abuse parties’.





> The report names 14 Tory politicians, five Labour and three others.
> 
> As a young councillor in South London, Mr Mann uncovered evidence a Tory Cabinet minister was allegedly involved. He alerted police but was told three months later that the inquiry was being shelved on the orders of ‘those at the top’.


----------



## newbie (Mar 29, 2016)

So, Proctor 


> Breaking down in tears, he said he felt the police had regarded him as "disposable", and he had lost his home and his job as a result of the allegations.
> 
> "I do believe it is profoundly un-British and unfair."
> 
> ...



leaving aside the crap about 'un-British' he seems to have every reason to feel aggrieved.  The allegations against him were based on a single source, granted anonymity by both police and press.  They've not been tested in court and there's no plan to prosecute 'Nick', leaving a taste of no smoke without fire. 

Exaro has not covered itself in glory- it's brief report of Proctor being cleared and the closure of Midland makes no mention of his call for them to be prosecuted for "seeking to pervert the course of justice".  That's not journalism, it's cowardice.

He's a nasty, rightwing racist, but on one thing he's correct, the allegations against him are amongst the worst imaginable.

So what should happen?  Should May, Hogan Howe and the leadership of Midland resign, should 'Nick' and Exaro be investigated with a view to prosecution, and if so, by whom?  Should Proctor receive compensation?

Or, nothing?


----------



## likesfish (Mar 31, 2016)

nick sounds like a nutter.
  now if you were a conspiracy loon you might suggest putting somebody like that up would muddy the waters so much that nobody would bother investigating the real abusers.
 much like the british army kenyan rape case British soldiers cleared of rapes in Kenya
throw enough shit up and its impossible to get to the truth.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 31, 2016)

likesfish said:


> nick sounds like a nutter.



No.


----------



## bluescreen (Apr 1, 2016)

likesfish said:


> throw enough shit up and its impossible to get to the truth.


Edit: No, I was wrong.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 4, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> The Sunday Express is carrying a story that associates of Willie McRae believe he was murdered by security forces because he had information on a Westminster paedophile ring.
> 
> SNP activist 'killed over child sex files'
> 
> For those who don't know of him, MacRae was a solicitor and well-known SNP activist who died in mysterious circumstances in 1985.



More revelations: 

Revealed: key evidence missing on mysterious death of SNP activist Willie McRae

"evidence on the mysterious death of SNP activist and campaigner Willie McRae – including the gun that killed him – is inexplicably missing from police files, the Sunday Herald can reveal.

Police have also formally admitted for the first time that the weapon was not swept for fingerprints, while other key forensic evidence was not gathered from the scene."

(Quoted from the Herald).


----------



## elbows (Apr 4, 2016)

> The 1992 documents released to the BBC also reveal that, following his questioning by the inquiry, Lord Janner asked chairman Andrew Kirkwood if he could tell the media waiting outside that he had not been asked about allegations of child abuse against him.
> 
> Andrew Kirkwood replied: "Of course, Mr Janner."
> 
> ...



Lord Janner 'misled inquiry' over link with abuser Frank Beck - BBC News


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 4, 2016)

Am hoping someone is going to ask Andrew Kirkwood to explain his quoted reply assuming he is himself still alive and kicking.


----------



## elbows (Apr 4, 2016)

He snuffed it in 2014.

*



			Sir Andrew Kirkwood
		
Click to expand...

*


> *5 June 1944 – 8 May 2014*
> 
> Sir Andrew Tristram Hammett Kirkwood QC, barrister and judge, died on 8 May 2014, aged 69. The son of a major in the Royal Engineers who was killed in Holland when Kirkwood was six months old, he was educated at Radley College and Christ Church, Oxford, where he read Jurisprudence, graduating in 1965. He was called to the bar by the Inner Temple in 1966 and soon established a thriving practice, specialising in family law. He became a recorder in 1987 and a judge of the High Court of Justice, Family Division, with the customary knighthood, from 1993 until his retirement in 2008. He was an adviser to the Cleveland child abuse inquiry set up in 1987, chaired the inquiry into child abuse in homes run by Leicestershire County Council in 1992, and in 2001 heard the ‘internet twins’ adoption case (when he ruled that two babies adopted over the internet by a British couple should be returned to the US). He was survived by his wife Penelope and their three children.



Oxonian lives | Oxford Today


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 7, 2016)

elbows said:


> He snuffed it in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> Oxonian lives | Oxford Today


That 'll be why no-one has asked him.


----------



## hot air baboon (May 9, 2016)

This Is What Happens When You Report Historical Sexual Abuse To The Police

_*Exclusive: In his first interview, a survivor called David reveals being groomed aged 15, being taken to dinners with MPs and then abused in the notorious Dolphin Square apartment block – and the long search for justice that followed.*_

posted on May 7, 2016, at 8:04 a.m.

Patrick Strudwick, BuzzFeed LGBT Editor, UK

This is a story about a secret. At its heart is a man who has spent his life searching for justice but kept being denied it, blocked by forces he found hard to understand. Dominating everything, however, was a prolific child abuser with establishment connections whose name has been kept from prominence – until now.

When BuzzFeed News began investigating this story, the details, which pointed to a clutch of paedophiles operating across some of our most powerful institutions, seemed at first too grim and too outrageous to hold up. That was until we started examining the evidence, until the files began to surface, forced into the open through the Data Protection Act and the coroner’s court. These files not only corroborated David’s story, but expanded on it. There were details he wished he had not discovered.

What emerged casts a different light on what we have heard. It reveals how a child from a loving family comes to fall into the hands of powerful predators, how boys like him were brought from the countryside into the capital for sexual exploitation – and what is stacked against them when they come forward. Most surprising is what this case reveals about the police: how despite the prominence now afforded to sexual abuse, they continue to behave in strange and unaccountable ways. Ways that lead to troubling questions.

David, now 49, sits upright in an armchair, hands gripped together, revisiting as much as he can. He has decided to forego his right to anonymity – for his real first name and photograph to be used – in the hope that he will, at last, be heard.

We talk in a hotel room for two days. It is the start of the investigation, and as David begins it seems his story is centred on sexual abuse – until something perhaps more startling appears.

There are things he has never said aloud to another person.


----------



## teqniq (May 9, 2016)

Thanks for posting this, more coverup eh?


----------



## existentialist (May 9, 2016)

hot air baboon said:


> This Is What Happens When You Report Historical Sexual Abuse To The Police
> 
> _*Exclusive: In his first interview, a survivor called David reveals being groomed aged 15, being taken to dinners with MPs and then abused in the notorious Dolphin Square apartment block – and the long search for justice that followed.*_
> 
> ...


That was pretty uncomfortable reading, and that's without all the power & influence stuff factored in


----------



## hot air baboon (May 10, 2016)

...follow up article...

Child Abuse Survivor Calls For Inquiry Into Police Handling Of......s


----------



## existentialist (May 10, 2016)

Police hand Cliff Richard sexual abuse claims to prosecutors, sources say


----------



## Shirl (May 10, 2016)

existentialist said:


> Police hand Cliff Richard sexual abuse claims to prosecutors, sources say


Unfortunately it's the South Yorkshire Police  I hope the CPS take it seriously and don't just assume it's more of their made up bollocks


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2016)

Shirl said:


> Unfortunately it's the South Yorkshire Police  I hope the CPS take it seriously and don't just assume it's more of their made up bollocks


Well, that's the trouble, isn't it? They do have previous for made up bollocks.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2016)

existentialist said:


> Police hand Cliff Richard sexual abuse claims to prosecutors, sources say


I wonder if he'll sing like a canary


----------



## kingfisher (May 10, 2016)

And young ones shouldn't be afraid


----------



## nino_savatte (May 11, 2016)

Maybe he'll sing this.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 31, 2016)

> An inquiry into child abuse across a range of institutions in Northern Ireland will focus on Tuesday on the Kincora boys home scandal including allegations that MI5 blackmailed a paedophile ring which operated there in the 1970s.



Child abuse inquiry to focus on Kincora home and claims of MI5 blackmail


----------



## nino_savatte (May 31, 2016)

Patrick Rock was due to appear at Inner London Crown Court today and according the Daily Heil, his defence counsel claimed that the photos in his possession were no worse than "Britney Spears videos". Really?


> A former aide to Prime Minister David Cameron downloaded images of scantily clad girls as young as 10 but denies the pictures were indecent, a court has heard.
> 
> Patrick Rock, 64, a former Tory general election candidate, admits downloading 20 images of nine girls in August 2013 but denies child sex offences.
> 
> ...



Citing Britney Spears' videos as a defence for viewing images of underage girls shows us just how out of touch these people are. Spears is yesterday's news.

BBC London News mentioned Rock's court appearance in their One O'Clock bulletin, but the story is unlikely to appear anywhere else - especially the national newscasts.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 1, 2016)

> Hundreds of files marked “top secret” have been declassified as part of the inquiry into the Kincora boys’ home in which it is alleged that the security services blackmailed a paedophile ring that operated there during the Troubles.
> 
> The inquiry into the historical scandal heard on Wednesday that the sensitive police files are now in the possession of the tribunal sitting at Banbridge courthouse.
> Barrister and counsel to the tribunal, Joseph Aiken, said: “When the inquiry began this was all marked secret. At the request of the inquiry it has all been declassified by the PSNI and made available to the inquiry.”


 
Kincora abuse inquiry: top secret files declassified by PSNI


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 1, 2016)

Patrick Rock update. The jury is considering its verdict.
David Cameron's former adviser on porn admits downloading images of girls as young as 10



> Sasha Wass QC also cited Lewis Carroll’s obsession with 10-year-old Alice Liddell, who inspired Alice in Wonderland and of whom Carroll took photographs that can still be found on sale.
> 
> The case risked “criminalising” a man of good character with no previous criminal convictions, she told the jury.



"Good character"? Yeah, that supposedly comes with being a member of the aristocracy/haute bourgeoisie.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 1, 2016)

That Sasha Wass is certainly having a crack, isn't she?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 1, 2016)

DaveCinzano said:


> That Sasha Wass is certainly having a crack, isn't she?


Is he not fragrant?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 1, 2016)

Rock's been cleared of two charges. There are a further 18 to go. 
Patrick Rock, ex-David Cameron aide, cleared on two counts of downloading indecent pictures as jury continues deliberations


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 1, 2016)

Rock found guilty on five charges of possessing indecent images. More news as it happens.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 1, 2016)

nino_savatte said:


> Rock found guilty on five charges of possessing indecent images. More news as it happens.




Truly this is breaking a butterfly on a wheel. A really noncey butterfly.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 1, 2016)

Ex-Cameron aide Patrick Rock guilty of child image offences - BBC News


----------



## kingfisher (Jun 1, 2016)

hopefully the "protesters" can suffix the teehee he fucked a pig bit with he was mates with/employed  (at least 1 that we are allowed to say we know about) nonce.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 2, 2016)

"Dear Dave, is Andy Coulson still you're most embarrassing ex-employee?"


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 2, 2016)

I've just heard that Patrick Rock has been allowed to walk free. He's been given a 2 year conditional discharge and will be on the sex offenders register for the same period of time. Anyone else would've been sent down. I've also heard that he was tipped off by 'Downing Street' two days before the bizzies swooped on him.


> Patrick Rock, a former aide to David Cameron, has avoided jail after being found guilty of five counts of downloading indecent images of young children.
> 
> The 65-year-old has been given a two-year conditional discharge, meaning he will not be sentenced unless a further offence is committed within that period.
> Former aide to David Cameron avoids jail over indecent child photos



The judge said:


> "I have not lost sight of the obvious reality that right-thinking people will quite properly consider that those who did what you did should be punished for it.
> "You should be. And you have been. The punishment for you is the loss of your reputation and your very public humiliation.



*shrugs* He won't be signing on and claiming Universal Credit any time soon. His supposed "loss of reputation" will be overlooked by the Tories, who will no doubt offer him another backroom job.


----------



## kingfisher (Jun 2, 2016)

nino_savatte said:


> I've just heard that Patrick Rock has been allowed to walk free. He has a 2 year conditional discharge and will be on the sex offenders register for the same period of time. Anyone else would've been sent down. I've also heard that he was tipped off by 'Downing Street' two days before the bizzies swooped on him.
> Patrick Rock, a former aide to David Cameron, has avoided jail after being found guilty of five counts of downloading indecent images of young children.
> 
> The 65-year-old has been given a two-year conditional discharge, meaning he will not be sentenced unless a further offence is committed within that period.
> Former aide to David Cameron avoids jail over indecent child photos


think the eton boy had worse (higher category stuff) and there was lots of legal eagles at the time saying how it was within guidelines. is there a petition we can sign anywhere? not seen one yet


----------



## two sheds (Jun 2, 2016)

You'd have thought that, with all the publicity and very public humiliation, Fred West would have been let off with a lighter sentence too.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jun 2, 2016)

nino_savatte said:


> I've just heard that Patrick Rock has been allowed to walk free. He's been given a 2 year conditional discharge and will be on the sex offenders register for the same period of time. Anyone else would've been sent down.


Nah.

The relevant sentencing guideline is here: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.u...exual-Offences-Definitive-Guideline-web-1.pdf

Page 75 onwards addresses indecent images.

The images possessed by Rock fell into Category C as they did not show sexual activity and it was not suggested that he had distributed or produced the images.

The starting point in these circumstances is a high level community order, which usually means a lot of unpaid work. A conditional discharge is on the lenient side but he had no previous convictions and has been very publicly disgraced, which does not happen to the vast majority of offenders (mainly because local papers can't afford to send journalists to court) and is a worse punishment than any community order.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 2, 2016)

nino_savatte said:


> t he was tipped off by 'Downing Street' two days before the bizzies swooped on him.


probably some burned twisted  and melted terrabyte drives buried in his garden then


----------



## Wilf (Jun 2, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> probably some burned twisted  and melted terrabyte drives buried in his garden then


Winston Wolfe is on a retainer for these guys.


----------



## laptop (Jun 14, 2016)

Not, probably, a "ring" but here seems the best place to note this:
ITV investigation: Politician Sir Clement Freud accused of child sexual abuse

Clement Freud died on 2009.

All sorts of spooky connections... shared an office with Cyril Smith...

Sir Clement Freud exposed as a paedophile as police urged to probe Madeleine McCann links


----------



## nino_savatte (Jun 16, 2016)

No further action to be taken against Kitty Cliff.
CPS ends Sir Cliff Richard sex abuse inquiry, with no further action to be taken - BBC News


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2016)

hopefully that will put to bed any more scurrilous rumours about the barbadan citizen and friend of jimmy saville, sir cliff richard


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2016)

not-bono-ever said:


> hopefully that will put to bed any more scurrilous rumours about the barbadan citizen and friend of jimmy saville, sir cliff richard


very droll


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2016)

If it had gone to court he could have been found innocent.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2016)

not-bono-ever said:


> hopefully that will put to bed any more scurrilous rumours about the barbadan citizen and friend of jimmy saville, sir cliff richard


yeh. i for one look forward to reading sir cliff richard's obituary


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2016)

brogdale said:


> If it had gone to court he could have been found innocent.


he could have been found guilty


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2016)

laptop said:


> Not, probably, a "ring" but here seems the best place to note this:
> ITV investigation: Politician Sir Clement Freud accused of child sexual abuse
> 
> Clement Freud died on 2009.
> ...


i see you've posted a ring piece


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> he could have been found guilty


You know what I was getting at.


----------



## laptop (Jun 16, 2016)

Probably a straight piece, it seemed at the time.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 16, 2016)

Cliff's facebook statement, alas shared by a friend:



> After almost two years under police investigation I learnt today that they have finally closed their enquiries. I have always maintained my innocence, co-operated fully with the investigation, and cannot understand why it has taken so long to get to this point! Nevertheless, I am obviously thrilled that the vile accusations and the resulting investigation have finally been brought to a close.
> 
> Ever since the highly-publicised and BBC filmed raid on my home I have chosen not to speak publicly. Even though I was under pressure to ‘speak out’, other than to state my innocence, which was easy for me to do as I have never molested anyone in my life, I chose to remain silent. This was despite the widely shared sense of injustice resulting from the high profile fumbling of my case from day one. Other than in exceptional cases, people who are facing allegations should never be named publicly until charged. I was named before I was even interviewed and for me that was like being hung out like ‘live bait’. It is obvious that such strategies simply increase the risk of attracting spurious claims which not only tie up police resources and waste public funds, but they forever tarnish the reputations of innocent people. There have been numerous occasions in recent years where this has occurred, and I feel very strongly that no innocent person should be treated in this way.
> 
> ...


----------



## kingfisher (Jun 17, 2016)

who was it told me this - -his vinyards watered with the blood of dead children...didnt believe ti at thetime


----------



## elbows (Jun 17, 2016)

kingfisher said:


> who was it told me this - -his vinyards watered with the blood of dead children...didnt believe ti at thetime



Its usually not a good idea to believe variations of pathetic blood libel shit.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 17, 2016)

elbows said:


> Its usually not a good idea to believe variations of pathetic blood libel shit.


It also makes the person posting it look like a fool.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 22, 2016)

Staff ‘devastated’ as owners close investigative journalism website Exaro – Press Gazette

Exaro News has closed just days after being declared “open for business” by its freshly appointed joint-head of news.

Owners News Sparta took a snap decision to close the investigative news agency yesterday, Press Gazette understands.

A board meeting at midday resulted in the doors closing for the final time at 5pm in what head of Exaro News David Hencke has described as “like something from Goldman Sachs”.


----------



## elbows (Jul 22, 2016)

Meanwhile when searching for 'Gove when he was younger' clips on youtube, I discovered one show compilation which had an excruciating interview between him and Rhodes Boyson. Rhodes is one of the dead tory MPs that has been accused of abuse and so came up briefly in this thread before.

The interview which Rhodes starts at the 1 hour 39 min 30 sec mark. 

The 'uncomfortable' bit of the interview starts just before the 1 hours 45 minute mark. Its no smoking gun, its crap banter from Gove along the lines of smutty innuendo about tough discipline. But I still find it telling when studying attitudes, especially historical ones, around this front. And it wouldn't shock me if Gove made some of his comments from a position of insider knowledge, or at least insider rumours.


----------



## phillm (Jul 22, 2016)

elbows said:


> Meanwhile when searching for 'Gove when he was younger' clips on youtube, I discovered one show compilation which had an excruciating interview between him and Rhodes Boyson. Rhodes is one of the dead tory MPs that has been accused of abuse and so came up briefly in this thread before.
> 
> The interview which Rhodes starts at the 1 hour 39 min 30 sec mark.
> 
> The 'uncomfortable' bit of the interview starts just before the 1 hours 45 minute mark. Its no smoking gun, its crap banter from Gove along the lines of smutty innuendo about tough discipline. But I still find it telling when studying attitudes, especially historical ones, around this front. And it wouldn't shock me if Gove made some of his comments from a position of insider knowledge, or at least insider rumours.




and includes the now notorius Max Clifford just before that


----------



## OneStrike (Aug 4, 2016)

Justice Goddard has resigned as head of the csa inquiry. Child sex abuse inquiry: Judge Lowell Goddard quits - BBC News It's almost like this thing is being stalled, what with all of these set backs.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 4, 2016)

Joshua Rozenberg has been critical. She may have felt out of her depth.
Janner: a misguided inquiry

E2A: There's more on his FB page 31 July where he's critical of her not knowing how to deal with evidence given in confidence.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 4, 2016)

OneStrike said:


> Justice Goddard has resigned as head of the csa inquiry. Child sex abuse inquiry: Judge Lowell Goddard quits - BBC News It's almost like this thing is being stalled, what with all of these set backs.


Particularly when some media are saying that key reason for her resignation = her inability to get her head around UK law. Good choice, then.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Aug 4, 2016)

This is from a few days ago - a scathing criticism of her inability to make a routine decision. The inquiry would have taken, well, forever, with Goddard in charge. 

Some people aren't surprised. New Zealand lawyers informally ranked their High Court judges a few years ago and Goddard came in position 64 of 64. Presumably the other Commonwealth judges had the sense to say no before she was asked.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 4, 2016)




----------



## elbows (Aug 4, 2016)

MAD-T-REX said:


> This is from a few days ago - a scathing criticism of her inability to make a routine decision. The inquiry would have taken, well, forever, with Goddard in charge.




I just read that article and I find it impossible to characterise its criticism as being of her inability to make a routine decision at all.

Rather, it was being critical of things relating to her overstepping specific legal limits of inquiries. Mostly in relation to the idea that the inquiry would be a sort of trial of a deceased person, Janner.

I'm sure the article has a point or two but I didn't like the way it went at all. It seemed to go well beyond the call of duty to those particular legal points, on to familiar territory which we have seen from others in the media in the past. A cynicism towards and lack of care for victims tends to feature.

Leaving the articles excesses on that front to one side, I think a purely legal and dry analysis of what an inquiry is supposed to be for and the boundaries in which it operates does miss a point about inquiries and their function, one that is exceedingly relevant to this particular inquiry. Inquiries are a way for establishments to allow historical pressure/stench that has built up and been suppressed in the past, to be released to some extent in a controlled fashion. Attempts can then be made to 'draw a line under the thing', say lessons have been learnt, express some remorse and then move on. The extent to which this is pulled off varies widely and we se plenty of examples where the first few attempts at an inquiry end up with credibility well below the level necessary for people to actually think the truth has come out, wrongs have been exposed and a modicum of justice served. Child abuse inquiries are clearly prone to this phenomenon to its fullest extent, even fairly comprehensive ones from the past did not not release enough pressure historically, requiring this giant one to deal with all that was stirred up in the post-Savile environment.

Even if her interpretation of the law and the inquiries limits was faulty when it came to the Janner case, I think its pretty obvious why an establishment inquiry thought it needed to go there. A case where CPS decisions ran contrary to what the public would accept when Janner was still alive, forcing a u-turn that then lead nowhere due to Janners death. Its hardly surprising that in order to draw a line under any suspicions about politicians & child abuse at all, you need to pick specific examples and give it as public an airing as possible.

Beyond the Janner stuff, I don't know how crap she was at various other aspects of her role. One thing she did seem to manage better than her predecessors in the role was having some idea about emphasising what the process could do for victims, and many aspects that can be placed under the banner of 'truth and reconciliation'.

Returning to that article, I should probably read it again when I'm not so tired but I'll make the following criticism now anyway and retract it if it turns out I misinterpreted something. They are moaning on about Janner receiving a posthumous trial of sorts, but when they talk about what the inquiry should be focussing on they mention institutions and people like Savile who abused within them. But Savile was very dead before we were treated to the full gamut of revelations about him - so why is that so very different to exploring all possible facts around Janner?

Even as someone who does not have particularly wild ideas about the scale of historical child abuse by politicians, and spent at least as much time debunking stuff and trying to prevent dark ideas about the states worst shit from leaking too extensively into my view of all things as I did hunting for genuine signs of abuse and guilt or historical rumours that had real legs, I'm frequently disturbed by attitudes expressed across a range of media. A decent child abuse inquiry for this country would surely need a module on the media. But we already had Leveson and look how the media thwarted that one shamelessly. Honestly though anyone who pondered during the post-Savile frenzy the question 'how did this stuff get ignored and buried historically?' need only review the output of the press in the last year or two to find a few reasons that are alive and well today


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 4, 2016)

Have a look at Rozenberg's subsquent FB post 31 July. It's a public post so you should be able to access it. Emerson QC, counsel to the inquiry, 





> <snip>told Goddard that he would not be calling his first witnesses in the Janner investigation until March 2017, six months later than had been announced. That was because some of the complainants who had made allegations against Janner at children’s homes in Leicestershire have also accused other people of child abuse at the same time and in the same homes. Those allegations were under active investigation by Leicestershire police. As Emmerson explained, it would make sense to co-ordinate evidence-gathering.
> 
> Goddard agreed to the delay. But then Samantha Leek QC, for Leicestershire police, asked Goddard to restrict publication of what Emmerson had disclosed an hour or so earlier. “There are a number of suspects who do not yet know that they are under investigation,” Leek said. “I’m told that to alert them to that fact at this stage may prejudice the ongoing criminal investigation.” The information disclosed by Emmerson had been given by Leicestershire police to the Goddard inquiry in confidence, she insisted.
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Aug 4, 2016)

Thanks. The way this forum showed that stuff caused me to only read his original piece and not the follow-up, hence me not understanding the idea that the criticism was about her inability to make a decision.

I guess that certainly gives me an indication of where she was out of her depth. 

It doesn't change my other thoughts though, god how I hate the emphasis and priorities of writers like that. They usually make a number of points I can completely agree with but they can't help going too far into territory that is shit, shit, shit.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 4, 2016)

Her departure may also have something to do with media criticism of her prolonged absence from the UK. The Times reported today that she has spent more than 70 days abroad either working or on holiday since her appointment. Child sex abuse inquiry: Judge Lowell Goddard quits - BBC News


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Aug 4, 2016)

elbows said:


> Thanks. The way this forum showed that stuff caused me to only read his original piece and not the follow-up, hence me not understanding the idea that the criticism was about her inability to make a decision.


Yes, apologies. Inadequate linking on my part.

I agree that an inquiry cannot be purely legalistic - the fact that an inquiry is necessary at all is an acknowledgement that the legal system has failed to deliver justice - but any matter as complex as this needs a strong and experienced decision maker driving it forward. Goddard was not right the job, and it is for the best that she has packed it in at an early stage in the actual hearings.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 5, 2016)

Seems to be taking on aspects of the poisoned chalice.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 5, 2016)

NZ establishment anyway. Might be NZ but part of a certain strata regardless.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 5, 2016)

Oops apologies I didn't realise this news had already been posted, should've looked. DotCommunist yeah i remember reading that link you posted concerning her connections.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 5, 2016)

teqniq said:


> Oops apologies I didn't realise this news had already been posted, should've looked. DotCommunist yeah i remember reading that link you posted concerning her connections.


you get the impression that someone who isn't 'one of us' is never going to chair this inquiry. The argument about 'capability' just goes to show the naked class make up of senior judiciary. You can't find any non establishment bod cos all the high court trained are establishment. Longrass continues


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 11, 2016)

So what do we know of Alexis Jay and why has google got a 'some results removed' bit on it. Always makes me do this face


----------



## brogdale (Aug 11, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> So what do we know of Alexis Jay and why has google got a 'some results removed' bit on it. Always makes me do this face


Rotherham.


----------



## elbows (Aug 11, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> So what do we know of Alexis Jay and why has google got a 'some results removed' bit on it. Always makes me do this face



Cant rely on that as a sign of anything anymore. To quote from googles own page:



> When you search for a name, you may see a notice that says that results may have been modified in accordance with data protection law in Europe. We’re showing this notice in Europe when a user searches for most names, not just pages that have been affected by a removal.


----------



## phillm (Sep 7, 2016)

Darren the main informant / abuse survivor at the heart of Operation Midland and Exaro investigations has decided to go public with his identity. From reading his tweets he appears to be concerned that the police will be going after him and other 'informants' and sees being in the public eye as part of his 'protection'. 

Darren Thornham (@DarrenCSAS) on Twitter


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2016)

phillm said:


> Darren the main informant / abuse survivor at the heart of Operation Midland and Exaro investigations has decided to go public with his identity. From reading his tweets he appears to be concerned that the police will be going after him and other 'informants' and sees being in the public eye as part of his 'protection'.
> 
> Darren Thornham (@DarrenCSAS) on Twitter




> _*...groomed and manipulated by Exaro news...*_


Interesting.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 9, 2016)

Some victims may boycott the troubled sex abuse inquiry. What has gone wrong? | Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2016)

teqniq said:


> Some victims may boycott the troubled sex abuse inquiry. What has gone wrong? | Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone


The more this farrago grinds on, the more I feel as if nothing at all has gone wrong; on the contrary, it has gone exactly right. We will reach a point where someone will sigh heavily, express regret to all the victims, and explain that, after so much chaos and confusion, it would be impossible to have an inquiry which reached any useful conclusions, thanks for your courage in coming forward, etc., blah, lessons learned, change is a-blowin' in the wind, nothing to see here, move along.

And then only the total silence of the dust settling from the whole thing having been dropped down a conveniently deep hole.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 9, 2016)

Yeah that was the sense I got from that article, much more kicking into the long grass or certainly preparing us for the expectation that this will be the case.


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 12, 2016)

Wisdom of running this article by this particular person? It's certainly not going down well in the comments: The scale of historical sexual abuse in the UK is a catastrophe. We need catharsis | Beatrix Campbell


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Sep 12, 2016)

The Guardian pays for those pieces and it's disgusting that Beatrix Campbell has received even a penny for her opinion on child abuse issues. She helped spread the completely false allegations of abuse in Newcastle that destroyed the lives of innocent people. This article on that clusterfuck is long but worth reading: Cleared: nursery nurses' fight for justice


----------



## 1%er (Sep 13, 2016)

This inquiry was highly likely to show that all the agencies with responsibility for children's welfare are unfit for purpose. It would have had to criticize, both local and national government, the justice system, churches of all denominations, the education system both public and private, the NHS, the care system, the police, social services and charities to list but a few. It would have clearly undermined the ability of the state to keep children safe in the minds of millions of peoples.

The scale of child abuse is massively under reported, the Children’s Commissioner for England (who are likely to be conservative with their figures) estimates that only 1 in 8 are identified by professionals because the system is geared towards children "self-referring or reporting abuse" and of course many children do not even recognize that they have been abused until they are much older. With the majority of abuse being carried out with-in families or by trusted people it isn't surprising that the overwhelming majority of kids don't tell anyone.

I'm surprised that a country such as England doesn't have mandatory reporting for all professionals who have contact with children. 

I read a report sometime ago (I'm sure the figures were for the USA not England iirc) that 1 in 3 girls and 1 in 5 boys will experience some form of sexual abuse by the time they are 18 years old, why would the figures be different for England?

I agree with existentialist comments above, this will end with someone making an apology and the whole sorry episode being dropped in a deep hole.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 13, 2016)

1%er said:


> I'm surprised that a country such as England doesn't have mandatory reporting for all professionals who have contact with children.


This is the only bit I take issue with.

When this mandatory reporting thing first raised its head, I was still working in schools. I gave it considerable thought, and came to the decision that, if it came into force, I would have to resign that job.

I'm a dedicated professional, and that work with young people meant a lot to me, but I was not prepared to have to risk prison in the name of my job.

Which might sound like a funny thing for a "dedicated professional" to say, so I'll try and explain.

One of the reasons reporting of child abuse still isn't up to par is because of the way those reports are handled. While there are undoubtedly vast numbers of examples of best practice in action, there are also very many cases where interventions, carried out by overstretched staff being managed by statistics rather than motivation to do the best for young people, are heavy handed, and often seriously counterproductive. Having experienced that kind of intervention as a result of making the kind of disclosure that would be covered under mandatory reporting (concerning a suicidal client, in that case), I resolved that I would never do so again, unless in my judgement the child was at imminent serious risk of harm.

As it was, my policy put me outwith the formal policy of my employer, but I was prepared to stand my ground there, if it ever arose (it didn't). To put myself in a position where I was having to be accountable in a court for a professional decision made on ethical grounds was not, in my view, tolerable.

And the likelihood is that it would be "dedicated professionals" like me, with the experience and opinionatedness to stand up for our clients' best interests, who would be most likely to be caught out by this: staff who were more compliant, less experienced, or who perhaps lacked the same desire to be practically effective, not just going through the motions, who would be hit hardest by this, and most likely not to wish to put themselves in that position.

Given suitably professional, well-resourced individuals working within a facilitative system that isn't just about box ticking and arse-covering, it would not be necessary to legislate for mandatory reporting. If people aren't reporting now, it's either because they are unwilling or unable to do so (which is an issue of professionalism), or because they lack faith in the system to respond appropriately, proportionately, sensitively, or effectively.

Get that right - and we are a LONG way from doing that - and there will be no reason for people like me to have to consider whether the clients best interest is served by making a disclosure. Otherwise, we're just punishing people at the coal face for the systemic failings of a service which has always tended to be something of a Cinderella.


----------



## 1%er (Sep 13, 2016)

existentialist 
A friend of mine who works as a teacher in England said something similar to me about mandatory reporting, she said the problem is the lack of systems and resources are not in-place. She reported a case of what she believed were clear signs of sexual abuse to her line manager, who intern reported it up the chain. It ended up with someone called the "designated safeguarding lead" in the education department, who apparently didn't know what to do about it (according to what her headteacher told her). When I asked her what the outcome was, she said the headteacher (said he) spoke to the parents and she didn't hear anything else. 

Surely it can't be beyond the ability of the state or educations departments to put something workable in place or maybe they don't want to highlight what they know is a massive problem that would need massive resources to deal with, that wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 13, 2016)

1%er said:


> existentialist
> A friend of mine who works as a teacher in England said something similar to me about mandatory reporting, she said the problem is the lack of systems and resources are not in-place. She reported a case of what she believed were clear signs of sexual abuse to her line manager, who intern reported it up the chain. It ended up with someone called the "designated safeguarding lead" in the education department, who apparently didn't know what to do about it (according to what her headteacher told her). When I asked her what the outcome was, she said the headteacher (said he) spoke to the parents and she didn't hear anything else.


That sounds very typical.



1%er said:


> Surely it can't be beyond the ability of the state or educations departments to put something workable in place or maybe they don't want to highlight what they know is a massive problem that would need massive resources to deal with, that wouldn't surprise me.


Public sector workers often find they are inhabiting a strange netherworld, in which policy can state quite clearly that certain things should happen, while in practice the opposite happens, and yet it is impossible to pin anyone down to try and find where the disconnection is.

Go to any local authority, and they will happily (ish) furnish you with their child protection policies, and the various designated individuals responsible for implementing them.

Actually watch the policies being implemented, and what you find is that, somewhere between the conception of the policy and its execution, all of the original intentions have been transmuted via a kind of reverse-alchemical process into a bunch of tick boxes, which bear no relation to the goals such policies are intended to achieve.

So, suddenly, rather than keeping a child safe, the most important priority becomes to tick the box that says An Intervention Has Been Made, Per Statutory Requirements. With the result that some unbriefed social worker has been sent to drop the news on a child's parents that they said X. In many cases, the parents are quite the wrong people to be telling (sometimes they're part of the problem), in others it is done against the express wishes of the child, who just learns to distrust a whole other bunch of adults.

And, almost invariably, the result of all this upheaval is...nothing. A cash-strapped and overwhelmed social services department, or child and adolescent mental health service, has had to ration its offerings, which invariably means hoisting up its skirts a little higher, so that all of a sudden, a child who, under statutory guidance, is at sufficient risk to trigger the disclosure process isn't actually at sufficient risk to warrant an intervention. And so it's quickly brushed under the carpet, any remaining boxes neatly ticked, and the problem goes away.

Except that a child has either found out what happens if they DO share with an adult what's going on (chaos happens, that's what), or a child who genuinely needs help and support has it dangled before them (at a price paid in chaos, which they're willing to pay if it gets them what they need) and then snatched away at the last minute because they're "not suicidal enough", or whatever.

And frequently end up feeling betrayed and hopeless, and having the feelings of despair and hurt reinforced by the sense they get that telling someone doesn't really make any difference anyway.

No wonder, perhaps, that some of those children end up attempting suicide, or escalating their self-harm, etc.

And I am not prepared to collude in such a system, nor to go to prison for refusing to collude.


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2016)

existentialist said:


> The more this farrago grinds on, the more I feel as if nothing at all has gone wrong; on the contrary, it has gone exactly right. We will reach a point where someone will sigh heavily, express regret to all the victims, and explain that, after so much chaos and confusion, it would be impossible to have an inquiry which reached any useful conclusions, thanks for your courage in coming forward, etc., blah, lessons learned, change is a-blowin' in the wind, nothing to see here, move along.
> 
> And then only the total silence of the dust settling from the whole thing having been dropped down a conveniently deep hole.



The mood music may have changed, but the inquiry is far from dead. I don't expect it to go down a hole, even if certain aspects fall away.

As far as 'highest level abuse' goes there is certainly no sign of any great revelations but this is because the thing I was always going on about doesn't seem to have happened - no critical mass of victims coming forwards in relation to specific perpetrators. All the other bollocks and agendas that have fucked with the mood music would not have been so successful if there had been more on that front, but it was always going to be tough for so many reasons.


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2016)

Gordon Anglesea in court.

Ex-police chief Gordon Anglesea 'threatened abused boy' - BBC News


----------



## existentialist (Sep 14, 2016)

elbows said:


> The mood music may have changed, but the inquiry is far from dead. I don't expect it to go down a hole, even if certain aspects fall away.
> 
> As far as 'highest level abuse' goes there is certainly no sign of any great revelations but this is because the thing I was always going on about doesn't seem to have happened - no critical mass of victims coming forwards in relation to specific perpetrators. All the other bollocks and agendas that have fucked with the mood music would not have been so successful if there had been more on that front, but it was always going to be tough for so many reasons.


I hope you're right.


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2016)

existentialist said:


> I hope you're right.



Even if I am I don't think its quite what people were hoping for anyway. A very broad and long inquiry can still go ahead yet fail to deliver on the most sensational fronts. 

My stance all along has been based on the idea that not too much modern coverup is required because the passage of time and the historical coverups did their job long ago. Combine that with having no clear sense of the scale of the abuse in terms of number of high level perpetrators, and I was left not expecting that much. At least not on the most sensational fronts if you know what I mean. 

I did and still do expect some progress on some other levels, including stuff that may help victims find a degree of closure. And some examination of a few dead perpetrators, their methods and protectors. But I have certainly been too optimistic in the past at times, I thought the wider need to 'restore credibility' and 'draw a line under things' would leave one or two living perpetrators exposed to justice. Well this sort of nearly happened once or twice but it was a mess with strong pressures in both directions and ill health and death waiting to put a stop to it.


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2016)

Hard to know exactly what to think or say about the suspension and resignations at the top of the inquiries legal team without having the inside story. Seems reasonable to suggest that Emmerson has been one of the friction points on more than one occasion but I've got no sense of detail on this and maybe run the risk of creating a sideshow if I try exploring that now anyway.

Despite my various posts where I've declared hope that something will still come out of the inquiry and that it isn't completely doomed, I can fully understand why this unending saga of personnel issues is completely eroding the faith and hope of some.

Abuse victims 'saddened' as Ben Emmerson QC quits inquiry - BBC News



> The Shirley Oaks Survivors Association described the decision to quit by Ben Emmerson QC as "devastating".
> 
> It said some survivors were losing faith, believing the investigation's large remit was designed to fail.


----------



## xes (Sep 30, 2016)

Of course it's designed to fail, when something this sick and twisted goes as deep as this does, do you really think that ANYONE will EVER get held to account? A few sacrificial lambs will be all they offer us. The rest, like that Janner cunt, will be protected until death, when all of a sudden all involved will say "oh yes, we knew about him". But they will do FUCK ALL, because this is exactly how this has been designed to go down. Frustrating as fuck, but this is how it will play out. I'll put every penny I ever fucking earn on it.


----------



## elbows (Sep 30, 2016)

I know what you mean. But at the same time if you are going to dismiss anyone that is ever actually held to account as simply being a sacrificial lamb, and speak in mysterious tones of the unknown depths, then of course you are never going to feel like any real justice has been served.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 10, 2016)

elbows said:


> Gordon Anglesea in court.
> 
> Ex-police chief Gordon Anglesea 'threatened abused boy' - BBC News


More on this today:



> Mold Crown Court heard Gordon Anglesea was trying to "wriggle out" of the fact he "said two vastly different things" during a High Court libel action in 1994, and the current trial.
> 
> ...The court has previously heard one complainant claim sexual abuse by Mr Anglesea in a shower block.
> 
> ...



As they say, the trial continues, sub judice caveats etc.

Abuse charge ex-policeman Gordon Anglesea 'lied under oath' - BBC News


----------



## elbows (Oct 21, 2016)

Anglesea found guilty!

Gordon Anglesea: Former police chief guilty of child sex abuse - BBC News


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 21, 2016)

elbows said:


> Anglesea found guilty!
> 
> Gordon Anglesea: Former police chief guilty of child sex abuse - BBC News



In relation to 



> In 1994, Anglesea was awarded £375,000 in libel damages after media organisations ran stories about his links to abuse at children's homes in north Wales.



Depending on the specifics of the claimed libel, would it be possible for those against whom the action was brought to bring a counter-action against Anglesea to recover that award?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2016)

DaveCinzano said:


> In relation to
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on the specifics of the claimed libel, would it be possible for those against whom the action was brought to bring a counter-action against Anglesea to recover that award?


...and what else they got?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 21, 2016)

So he's been granted bail until 4th November.

I have a sneaking suspicion he might do a John Owen (the teacher whose sexual abuse over decades resulted in his death by suicide just before he was due to attend court to - finally - answer charges).

Unless he's the kind who can maintain a sense of his own innocence in his mind, he has lost everything, and been critically implicated in an activity arguably worse than the sexual abuse of children itself - namely, being part of a group which procured children for abuse widely - this has to be an absolutely catastrophic outcome for him.

I am gratified to see that people who have successfully held the accountability for their horrible deeds at bay for so long are finally being called to account. And it is only proper that the sentence is not diminished in any way by the amount of time that has passed since their commission of these offences.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 22, 2016)

existentialist said:


> And it is only proper that the sentence is not diminished in any way by the amount of time that has passed since their commission of these offences.



Indeed, and those who have actively avoided justice since their having commissioned their crimes, e.g. by (possibly fraudulently) instituting civil actions against those accusing them of the very crimes they have later been convicted of, would - presumably - face a tariff reflecting such evasive behaviour.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 22, 2016)

DaveCinzano said:


> Indeed, and those who have actively avoided justice since their having commissioned their crimes, e.g. by (possibly fraudulently) instituting civil actions against those accusing them of the very crimes they have later been convicted of, would - presumably - face a tariff reflecting such evasive behaviour.


I hadn't thought of that latter thing - yes, in a way, the fact that Anglesea was prepared to go to court and sue for libel should be an exacerbating factor, so I wonder if that gets factored in. The only way to know would be to get hold of the judge's sentencing statement. On the other hand, I suppose he might argue that he could hardly not sue for libel if he was claiming his innocence...

In any case, I'm not even sure that the length of the tariff is the most significant issue. As I understand it, life inside is nastier if you happen to be a copper or a child molester. I'd imagine that a child-molesting copper is going to be Uncle Target in prison, so he'll presumably be on Rule 45, with all that entails. And he's getting on, and doesn't look to be in brilliant health. Nor does he seem to be the type who's going to accept what he's done, take the consequences, and make the best of it - I would guess that he is going to be nursing a serious sense of injustice, which is going to make the tribulations of prison even harder to bear.

I can't say that my heart is bleeding for him. I do hope that this verdict, regardless of the sentence, is some comfort to those he abused.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2016)

In this week's 'Spectator's Notes' Charles Moore mentions a recent 'Times' piece (no links for either) in which an "unnamed participant" in the enquiry accused Lowell, not only of racism, but also of "nursing a deep reverence for the royal family".
Interesting?

e2a: Moore, of course, thinks this is an absurd thing to be cited as in any way a valid criticism of her fitness to lead the enquiry.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 23, 2016)

brogdale said:


> Interesting?


I doubt it. The Times has run an enormous number of articles about the problems of the enquiry, and about Goddard, and why she may have left etc etc. Frankly I can barely summon the interest to even look at most of them. There is no central editorial focus to the Times approach. It ranges from concerns about the size of the enquiry based on understandable skepticism about the tendency of highly paid and ambitious lawyers and civil servants to engage in 'mission creep' or the competence of any chair to control things; through less acceptable concerns about whether some or all of the allegations of abuse are genuine or 'serious'; through to attempts to position the 'enquiry' as a potential political lever or weapon to be applied to May; and on to some barely concealed special pleading by friends and relatives of the notables and celebrities whose names have been dragged into it. Amongst a lot of other things.

Today Goddard is simply one more piece to be deployed. Whether she was impossible to work with, or held 'views', or had underestimated the entrenched vested interests she would encounter (not just in the 'establishment' but in the 'counter-establishment' of victims 'champions' and 'representatives'), or wasn't up to the job, or concluded the potential outcome didn't justify the personal cost : we will never know. All we get to see is a particularly venomous and hypocritical level of political gossip. In due course there may be some 'official' version but I doubt I'll believe it or indeed care much.

As far as I am concerned the 'politics' surrounding the enquiry is really only of any interest in terms of it's current and future activities, and whether it produces any information of interest. Goddard is yesterday's woman.

That all being said if you can narrow down which Times article this might be I'll have a look for it if you want. But otherwise meh, indeed meh squared.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2016)

Lurdan said:


> That all being said if you can narrow down which Times article this might be I'll have a look for it if you want. But otherwise meh, indeed meh squared.


Sorry, no...it'll be behind Murdoch's £wall, I'm afraid...and I'll have to bow to your greater knowledge of its output/editorial angle(s).
I merely thought it interesting that a "deep reverence for the RF" had become an (alleged) issue at all, and under what circumstances such a view might have had any bearing on her work.
That's all.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 23, 2016)

brogdale said:


> Sorry, no...it'll be behind Murdoch's £wall, I'm afraid...and I'll have to bow to your greater knowledge of its output/editorial angle(s).


Apologies, I was a being bit grumpy earlier. I have a 'magic key' which gets me behind the paywall. I had a quick search and found this :

*‘Tantrums and shocking racism’ of inquiry’s dysfunctional dame*

Staff say Dame Lowell Goddard should have been removed earlier


Spoiler: Text of article



*Andrew Norfolk | Sean O’Neill*
October 14 2016,
On a summer afternoon this year Dame Lowell Goddard stood at the doorway of her Westminster office and shouted in anger. Unless she got her own way, she is said to have declared, “I’m going to pack my bags, go back to New Zealand and take this inquiry down with me.”

A visitor to the headquarters of the national child sex abuse inquiry might have been shocked, not least because the threat was made by the judge paid £500,000 a year to lead an investigation forecast to run for a decade at a cost of £100 million.

Dame Lowell’s staff, however, barely flinched. They were used to her tantrums, and worse. Multiple senior sources have told _The Times_ the judge peppered her 16 months at the helm of Britain’s biggest public inquiry with racist remarks and expletive-ridden outbursts. Insiders say Dame Lowell, 67, also appeared to have memory lapses and failed to grasp legal concepts.

She allegedly said Britain had so many paedophiles “because it has so many Asian men” — a comment that left colleagues stunned. “I was so shocked to see the number of ethnic people,” she is said to have told a colleague, while she allegedly commented she had to travel 50 miles from London to see a white face. Her home in the capital was a smart, taxpayer-funded flat in Knightsbridge.

Several sources described Dame Lowell’s reluctance to question the propriety of the royal family. Discussing the Prince of Wales’s friendship with a bishop jailed last year for sex offences against young men, the judge is said to have insisted: “Prince Charles couldn’t possibly have had anything to do with that, not with his breeding.” The source added: “For someone who claimed not to understand what the establishment was, she had a reverence for it that was quite astonishing.”

On the 23rd floor of Millbank Tower, where the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) has its offices, staff soon realised they had a problem. They were supposed to be putting in place the foundations of an investigation into suspected abuse at dozens of institutions, including schools, care homes, the church, the armed forces and parliament.

Since being launched by Theresa May in 2014, IICSA has hired more than 150 staff, opened three regional offices, started the Truth Project to allow abuse victims to give testimony anonymously, commissioned an academic study and begun a legal disclosure exercise demanding that institutions under investigation hand over millions of pages of documents.

Yet it was so dysfunctional under Dame Lowell’s leadership that work often ground to a halt because senior staff felt “totally paralysed”, one said.

Former colleagues, who have asked not to be named, were puzzled then increasingly troubled. One said that staff who were committed to the inquiry’s success felt trapped in “an impossible situation”. They felt they were led by someone who at times behaved “like a very angry child”.

“The pressure was immense. She was rude and abusive to junior staff, she didn’t understand the issues and worse than that she used appalling terms all the time. It was almost intolerable,” the insider claimed.

Senior staff held furtive meetings to discuss their options. It was agreed the best hope lay in sharing their concerns with the Home Office. Mrs May, then home secretary, hired Dame Lowell. Only she could fire her.

Whitehall’s instinct in the face of calamity is often to hide it, however. Until now, the true picture remained secret. Observers have pointed to the irony of a body established to dissect a culture of institutional secrecy, denial and cover-up becoming an exemplar of the problems it was designed to expose. The inquiry’s senior team were all complicit, said one insider. “Goddard should never have been appointed and she should have been removed so much earlier than she was. She was catastrophic.”

Dame Lowell arrived in the UK from New Zealand after two false starts in the search for someone to lead the inquiry. Its first two chairwomen were forced to step down in quick succession over their alleged closeness to the British establishment, and the home secretary could not afford a third mistake. When the appointment was announced in February last year, it was claimed that Dame Lowell was selected after 150 nominees were put through an exhaustive vetting process. The lead counsel, Ben Emmerson, QC, hailed a due diligence exercise of “unprecedented depth and detail”.

Insiders tell a different story, of the Home Office’s “blind panic” after the resignation in October 2014 of the inquiry’s second chairwoman, Dame Fiona Woolf. She survived a month; her predecessor, Baroness Butler-Sloss, had lasted six days. “They were desperate. It couldn’t be a judge from England and Wales so they decided to look at the Commonwealth, but they also wanted a woman. There wasn’t much choice. Then Goddard’s name popped up. It was all signed and sealed very quickly,” a source said.

Doubts over Dame Lowell soon emerged. She spent six weeks negotiating a pay deal that eventually included a £360,000 salary plus a £110,00 annual housing allowance, a chauffeur-driven car and four return flights a year to New Zealand with her husband, Christopher Hodson, QC. One senior source viewed such perks as “completely inappropriate for a public servant”. Dame Lowell, however, is said to have been outraged the deal only entitled her to business-class not first-class seats.

“We all had to tiptoe around her. It set the tone for an organisation that became secretive,” said a source who accused the judge of behaving like an “autocratic and dictatorial” monarch.

Sources described her regular use of racist language as like “going back to the 1950s”. One described a sense of shame that no complaints were made. “You’ve got someone making racist comments who clearly has a racist attitude, and nobody says anything because we’re all bloody pussy-footing around.”

Dame Lowell was heavily reliant on Mr Emmerson, 53, a leading human rights QC who is not renowned for his emollience or team-working skills. In early 2015, before he began working with her, he described Dame Lowell as a woman of “courage, independence and vision”. Within weeks of her arrival, he is understood to have thought differently. In tandem, said one observer, their impact was “utterly toxic”, adding: “So many people were devoted to trying to make the damn thing work, to getting to the bottom of some really egregious societal problems. They all deserved so much better.”

In public, every senior figure stayed silent, including Professor Alexis Jay, then a panel member, who won praise for her leadership of the Rotherham child abuse inquiry. She became IICSA’s fourth chairwoman after Dame Lowell abruptly stood down.

Mr Emmerson resigned last month, 24 hours after being suspended for undisclosed reasons. His departure came two weeks after the unexplained resignation of his junior counsel, Elizabeth Prochaska, 35.

Professor Jay, 67, and others may yet be asked to explain why they did not challenge Dame Lowell. Insiders insist they took the only course of action open to them and prayed for an intervention from Mrs May.

Sources described many months of behind-closed-doors discussions during which panicked staff were assured their concerns were being shared with the Home Office, yet officials “sat there and did nothing”. _The Times_ has been told that those “kept in the loop” included Mark Sedwill, the Home Office permanent secretary, and Liz Sanderson, Mrs May’s special adviser.

Eventually the concerns entered the public domain. At a hearing in late July, the judge’s stumbling performance did not go unnoticed. When she admitted her unfamiliarity with “local law”, the inquiry was exposed to ridicule. Finally, insiders made their move. On August 4, _The Times _revealed she had been overseas for three months of her first year in office. Within hours, she resigned.

The events of that final day have remained secret until now. That morning, she was approached by senior colleagues and informed her position was no longer tenable. Her response was a two-sentence resignation letter that she sent to the Home Office before leaving for lunch. Amber Rudd, the newly installed successor as home secretary, swiftly accepted it. After lunch, the judge tried to withdraw her resignation. Her reversal was not accepted, and the inquiry lost its third head. That loss should have come many months earlier, her colleagues believe.

Dame Lowell’s lawyers denied all the allegations last night.


 
FWIW I can't say I'm particularly convinced by it. This looks like precisely the sort of thing that I would expect inquiry staff to say as they try to shovel as much of the shit as possible onto Goddard's doorstep and a little onto Emmerson's. Just stir in some snobbery about 'colonials' and their uncouth ways.


----------



## squirrelp (Nov 4, 2016)

Some strange coded messages going on in the Podesta emails.

References to walnuts, cheese, pasta, handkerchiefs seem like a code but what of?

Internet Is On Fire With Speculation That Podesta Emails Contain Code for Child Sex | We Are Change


----------



## existentialist (Nov 4, 2016)

Anglesea: 12 years.

Ex-police chief Gordon Anglesea jailed for child sexual abuse

Given the extent and severity of his offending, that seems quite light. On the other hand, he's nearly 80, he's ex-filth, and I shouldn't imagine that even half that time is going to be anything other than deeply unpleasant, especially since he's almost certainly going to be on rule 45.

ETA: OK, that was on 2 counts of indecent assault (he had to be charged in accordance with the law prevailing at the time - now, he'd probably have been done for something rapey).

According to the Sentencing Council's guidance, the maximum penalty for indecent assault between 1986 and the new Act in 2003 was 10 years. So I'm not quite sure how he ended up with a 12 year sentence. I'll go and look.

ETA2: Ian Hislop (who lost a libel case for accusing Anglesea of being a child sex abuser) describes the sentence as "almost as if he had committed the offences now". And alludes to the possibility of an appeal by Anglesea.

One of the witnesses in the libel case killed himself after Anglesea won it - he, of course, can't know that he has been vindicated, but it adds a depressing and "grim" note to a business that is miserable even so.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 8, 2016)

The heavily redacted versions of parts of Richard Henriques review of Operation Midland have been released by the Met and can be downloaded here (scroll down to the bottom of the page).

Commissioner's statement following Sir Richard Henriques Review

Hogan Howe's accompanying statement states :


> Forty-three failings are identified in Operation Midland. The principal errors were:
> To believe the complainant Nick was a credible person for too long;
> To say publicly that the allegations were credible and true;
> To obtain search warrants with flawed and incomplete information; and
> Not to have closed the investigation sooner.



In a separate statement the Met have confirmed that


> As a result of the review of Operation Midland, the MPS have referred to Northumbria Police an allegation against a complainant of attempting to pervert the course of justice. Northumbria Police have begun the investigation and will therefore deal with further inquiries regarding its progress.


The Guardian are stating that the Met have since confirmed this refers to 'Nick'.



> The MPS has spoken to the IPCC and we are making a voluntary referral in relation to five officers involved in Operation Midland. The referral to the IPCC relates to potential breaches in the code of professional standards of behaviour relating to ‘Duties and Responsibilities’. The ranks of the officers to be referred to the IPCC are a Detective Sergeant; Detective Inspector; Detective Chief Inspector; Detective Superintendent and a Deputy Assistant Commissioner.


Statement by the Metropolitan Police Service

A Deputy Assistant Commissioner has also been referred to the IPCC over 'potential breaches in the code of professional standards of behaviour' in respect of Operation Vincente which investigated the claim that Brittan had raped a woman. This presumably refers to DAC Rodhouse who was in charge of it.


----------



## free spirit (Nov 10, 2016)

existentialist said:


> Anglesea: 12 years.
> 
> Ex-police chief Gordon Anglesea jailed for child sexual abuse
> 
> ...


did he get anything added on for perjury in the libel trial?


----------



## existentialist (Nov 10, 2016)

free spirit said:


> did he get anything added on for perjury in the libel trial?


I don't think that was on the charge sheet. But I imagine that, in principle, a prosecution on that could take place now that his crimes have been proven to a criminal standard of guilt. It wouldn't even need the original libel defendent to sue - presumably the police could charge him quite independently.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 10, 2016)

existentialist said:


> I don't think that was on the charge sheet. But I imagine that, in principle, a prosecution on that could take place now that his crimes have been proven to a criminal standard of guilt. It wouldn't even need the original libel defendent to sue - presumably the police could charge him quite independently.



Would be only proper thing to do, so prolly wont happen.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 10, 2016)

Private Eye says according to NCA "financial matters relating to Gordon Anglesea are currently being examined under the Proceeds of Crime Act".


----------



## existentialist (Nov 10, 2016)

two sheds said:


> Private Eye says according to NCA "financial matters relating to Gordon Anglesea are currently being examined under the Proceeds of Crime Act".


Oof. That's going to hurt his precious, tight-arsed ego.


----------



## Celt (Nov 11, 2016)

If i believed in god I would hope that there is a special place in hell for corrupt  bastards like Anglesea, people who's job was to protect kids in care.   I hope he never has another  day of peace in his life


----------



## Sirena (Nov 11, 2016)

Celt said:


> If i believed in god I would hope that there is a special place in hell for corrupt  bastards like Anglesea, people who's job was to protect kids in care.   I hope he never has another  day of peace in his life


I should imagine that breach of trust is a factor in sentencing but I have always thought it should be counted as an explicit and separate factor in cases involving those (like politicans and the police) whose position is one of public authority and gives them power over others.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 12, 2016)

Celt said:


> If i believed in god I would hope that there is a special place in hell for corrupt  bastards like Anglesea, people who's job was to protect kids in care.   I hope he never has another  day of peace in his life


For someone like Anglesea, who clearly put quite some store by his social standing (senior police officer, senior Freemason, bit of a pillar of society all round), the worst hell is going to be in the reputational damage he will feel he has suffered. I was quite astonished, in the case I have most experience of, that the effect on the perpetrator's public reputation was actually cited by his barrister in mitigation.

Ah, so that wasn't especially unusual (from the Grauniad):


> Griffiths said Anglesea and his family could lose his police pension and asked the judge to be as “humane” as possible because jail would be so difficult for him.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 12, 2016)

Lurdan said:


> I doubt it. The Times has run an enormous number of articles about the problems of the enquiry, and about Goddard, and why she may have left etc etc. Frankly I can barely summon the interest to even look at most of them. There is no central editorial focus to the Times approach. It ranges from concerns about the size of the enquiry based on understandable skepticism about the tendency of highly paid and ambitious lawyers and civil servants to engage in 'mission creep' or the competence of any chair to control things; through less acceptable concerns about whether some or all of the allegations of abuse are genuine or 'serious'; through to attempts to position the 'enquiry' as a potential political lever or weapon to be applied to May; and on to some barely concealed special pleading by friends and relatives of the notables and celebrities whose names have been dragged into it. Amongst a lot of other things.
> 
> Today Goddard is simply one more piece to be deployed. Whether she was impossible to work with, or held 'views', or had underestimated the entrenched vested interests she would encounter (not just in the 'establishment' but in the 'counter-establishment' of victims 'champions' and 'representatives'), or wasn't up to the job, or concluded the potential outcome didn't justify the personal cost : we will never know. All we get to see is a particularly venomous and hypocritical level of political gossip. In due course there may be some 'official' version but I doubt I'll believe it or indeed care much.
> 
> ...



To be honest, I don't think anyone is capable of heading this enquiry. It is just too vast.

It would perhaps have been better to split the enquiry geographically, with 'county' teams investigating, and reporting to a central point.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 12, 2016)

existentialist said:


> For someone like Anglesea, who clearly put quite some store by his social standing (senior police officer, senior Freemason, bit of a pillar of society all round), the worst hell is going to be in the reputational damage he will feel he has suffered. I was quite astonished, in the case I have most experience of, that the effect on the perpetrator's public reputation was actually cited by his barrister in mitigation.
> 
> Ah, so that wasn't especially unusual (from the Grauniad):



Perhaps he should have thought about the effect on his family, before he did such despicable things.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 12, 2016)

Lurdan said:


> The heavily redacted versions of parts of Richard Henriques review of Operation Midland have been released by the Met and can be downloaded here (scroll down to the bottom of the page).
> 
> Commissioner's statement following Sir Richard Henriques Review
> 
> ...



This business of police forces investigating police forces needs to stop.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 12, 2016)

Sasaferrato said:


> Perhaps he should have thought about the effect on his family, before he did such despicable things.


I don't know how the mind of a paedophile works, but I suspect that quite a lot of them do think about such things, but are still unable to stop themselves from offending. That's not in any way meant to excuse them: after all, as we know from the Anglesea case, his behaviour has cost at least one victim his life, and I can only speculate at the number of lives he has blighted with his actions. But we'd be barking up the wrong tree if we really thought that stopping these offences was merely about them having a good think...

And a big part of stopping these offences is the knowledge that, if they're reported, crimes like these *will* be investigated and taken seriously. Which is what is somewhat worrying about Hogan-Howe's recent comments about reviewing the policy of "believing allegations".


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2016)

perhaps there should be a thread "how much evidence is there of police intelligence"


----------



## discokermit (Nov 23, 2016)

lots of stuff coming out about abuse at crewe alexandra, dunno if this is being discussed elsewhere,

Paul Stewart: I was sexually abused by my football coach for four years


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 2, 2016)

interesting development. wasn't aware they were still digging into heath's (alleged) noncery - but sounds like its very much still happening.

Edward Heath child abuse investigation 'not a witch-hunt'


----------



## elbows (Dec 15, 2016)

Anglesea is dead.

Gordon Anglesea: Jailed child abuse ex-police boss dies - BBC News


----------



## Wilf (Dec 15, 2016)

elbows said:


> Anglesea is dead.
> 
> Gordon Anglesea: Jailed child abuse ex-police boss dies - BBC News


At 79 his cause of death could be anything, including the shock of being in prison. But looking back to the trial there was no mention of any dramatic medical condition from his defence team (or at least not in my cursory search).  More interestingly, I hadn't realised Anglesea had won massive damages against private eye and others over 20 years ago (probably covered already, but, y'know, 215 pages):
Gordon Anglesea: Paedophile ex-police boss gets 12 years - BBC News

The private eye clip suggests the police federation were considering funding his appeal.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 15, 2016)

Wilf said:


> At 79 his cause of death could be anything, including the shock of being in prison. But looking back to the trial there was no mention of any dramatic medical condition from his defence team (or at least not in my cursory search).  More interestingly, I hadn't realised Anglesea had won massive damages against private eye and others over 20 years ago (probably covered already, but, y'know, 215 pages):
> Gordon Anglesea: Paedophile ex-police boss gets 12 years - BBC News
> 
> The private eye clip suggests the police federation were considering funding his appeal.


He didn't look well at the trial...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 16, 2016)

That 101 year old Ralph Clarke got convicted today, 21 counts, sentencing on Monday:

101-year-old Ralph Clarke guilty of child sex offences - BBC News


----------



## existentialist (Dec 19, 2016)

DaveCinzano said:


> That 101 year old Ralph Clarke got convicted today, 21 counts, sentencing on Monday:
> 
> 101-year-old Ralph Clarke guilty of child sex offences - BBC News


101-year-old paedophile jailed for 13 years

13 years. That can't be anything but a whole life sentence.

Much as I think it's a tragedy that someone should spend their twilight years in prison, I can't see any alternative: it cannot be that the passage of time should mitigate the penalty. Even so, I imagine there's a difference between confronting a prison sentence you know will come to an end before you do, and knowing that you will be spending the rest of your days inside.

Not that it sounds as if this one is planning to spend too much of his sentence reflecting on the harm he has done.


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 8, 2017)

JAILED: Third former teacher from St Paul's School guilty of sexual assault sentenced to 18 years in prison


A former teacher at an independent boys school in Richmond has been jailed for 18 years for sexually abusing 10 boys.

Patrick Vernon Marshall, 68, was found guilty of 24 counts of indecent assault and one count of sexual activity with a child on Monday, February 6, after a four-week trial at Southwark Crown Court.  He was sentenced the same day.

Marshall, who worked at the prestigious St Paul’s School in Lonsdale Road, Barnes, from 1971 until 1981, and targeted a number of boys at the school rowing club where he was a coach.

Marshall is the third former teacher at the school to be convicted of indecently assaulted boys aged under 16.

David Sansom-Mallett, 70, of St James Road, Purley, was jailed for 14 years and nine months after being found guilty of 23 sexual offences against four boys between 1974 and 1983 at a trial at Southwark Crown Court in November 2016.

Samsom-Mallet was a master at St Paul’s preparatory school Colet Court between 1973 and 1975. Three of his victims did not attend St Paul’s School.

Michael Ellis, 71, of Bolton Road, Chiswick, was found guilty of two indecent assaults of boys under 16 between 1973 and 1992 at Southwark Crown Court in July 2016. He also pleaded guilty to four counts of making indecent images of children on his home computer.


----------



## tim (Feb 8, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> JAILED: Third former teacher from St Paul's School guilty of sexual assault sentenced to 18 years in prison
> 
> 
> A former teacher at an independent boys school in Richmond has been jailed for 18 years for sexually abusing 10 boys.
> ...




I failed the entrance exam for Colet Court in the early 1970's, a lucky escape perhaps.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2017)

tim said:


> I failed the entrance exam for Colet Court in the early 1970's, a lucky escape perhaps.


It continues to appal me just how hidden in plain sight so much of this abuse was. I hope more than anything that we are able to learn from this drumbeat of historical abuse cases (you know, the ones certain people keep telling us should be left to lie, as it's so long ago ) that this is the price paid for complacency, undue regard for authority, and regarding children as commodities.

Each one of those cases - and, I don't doubt, the rest of the iceberg of cases where victims still do not feel they can speak out - is an offence against us all, and we all bear the responsibility of remaining vigilant - but not paranoid - and being ready to speak out. We cannot assume that the victims of these people can, or will, and if we don't, then they can operate, as they so evidently did for so long, with total impunity.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 8, 2017)

Woman's Hour (I know I know) had a good interview today with Prof Alexis Jay. She was defending the scope of the Inquiry on the grounds that we could learn a lot from the patterns of abuse and cover up across all institutions of power. She said the Inquiry would welcome back those survivor groups who'd rejected it. At the root of all, the question that needed addressing was why some men (it's usually men) wanted to abuse children. BBC Radio 4 - Woman's Hour, Actress Cherry Jones; Professor Alexis Jay, the chair of the inquiry into child sexual abuse


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 8, 2017)

I say glibly "it's usually men" forgetting for a moment those people who have suffered the brutality of nuns.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2017)

Matthew Parris looking more like an aardvark. (Warning!!! Daily Mail link)



> The police chief investigating claims that Sir Edward Heath was a paedophile is convinced the allegations are ‘120 per cent’ genuine, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.


----------



## agricola (Feb 19, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Matthew Parris looking more like an aardvark. (Warning!!! Daily Mail link)
> 
> ​



If any car can prove that someone commits crimes against his fellow men, its the Rover 2000.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 19, 2017)

agricola said:


> If any car can prove that someone commits crimes against his fellow men, its the Rover 2000.


Stank of petrol, or was that just the Pi ?


----------



## agricola (Feb 19, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Stank of petrol, or was that just the Pi ?



Its more that they are hideous.  Take this example below for instance, which is the one that Paul Nuttall won the 1977 Paris-Dakar in:


----------



## brogdale (Feb 19, 2017)

agricola said:


> Its more that they are hideous.  Take this example below for instance, which is the one that Paul Nuttall won the 1977 Paris-Dakar in:


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Feb 19, 2017)

Condemn the vile paedo scum but not the car. Back the days of rattling rust bucket Cortinas & Marinas I had a ride in my mate's dad's Rover 2000TC. It went like shit off a shovel while we rode smoothly cocooned in soft leather & walnut.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 21, 2017)

In response to the Daily Mail story claiming he "is convinced" that the allegations against Heath are "120% genuine" Wiltshire Chief Constable Mike Veale has issued a statement objecting very strongly to unhelpful and inappropriate speculation about the investigation.



> In relation to the recent unhelpful speculation regarding the veracity of the allegations made, let me once again be clear, it is not the role of the police to judge the guilt or innocence of people in our Criminal Justice System. Our role is to objectively and proportionately go where the evidence takes us. Further, those who choose to continue to make comment on this case whilst not in possession of the facts ultimately may serve to unfairly damage both the reputation of Sir Edward Heath and / or those who have disclosed abuse.



It's not very hard to see what the Mail were up to with their story about Veale "being convinced" about the allegations. Sections of the press including the Mail attacked Bernard Hogan-Howe over Det Supt Kenny McDonald's statement that 'Nick's allegations were 'credible and true'. This is an attempt to recreate that line of attack.

Meanwhile the Daily Mail have published another story. This one takes a rather different line :

Group of women who say they were abused by Sir Edward Heath also claim their parents ran a satanic sex cult that was involved in SIXTEEN child murders



> The seemingly far-fetched allegations have been made by a family who allege that the politician was part of a satanic sex cult run by their own parents.They say that the cult regularly slaughtered children as ritual sacrifices in churches and forests around southern England and also participated in similar ceremonies in Africa. They claim their mother and father – who is said to have known the former Conservative leader – were responsible for slaughtering children ranging from babies to teenagers – yet they evaded justice. The paedophile ring – which they say Sir Edward was part of – stabbed, tortured and maimed youngsters in churches and burnt babies in satanic orgies before men, women and children gorged themselves on blood and body parts, police have been told.



If this story seems familiar that may be because a version of it was first run by the Mail last November :

Sir Edward Heath accuser is a 'satanic sex fantasist': Police warned by OWN expert that ritual abuse claims are false - including how the former PM 'went to candlelit forest for paedophile parties'

Rachel Hoskins who had previously acted as a consultant to the police in cases where crimes appeared to involve religious rituals had been asked by Wiltshire Police to review some the allegations made against Heath. She went public with her concerns that some of this was a revival of allegations first made during the SRA panic and which originally hadn't involved Heath (her own account of those concerns can be found at the bottom of that last link).

Frankly I can't say I would be astonished if some of the claims being investigated did turn out to be nonsense. (I wonder if they include the allegations made in 1984 by a guy on trial for rape that he was being fitted up to cover up the fact that his victim had posed in pornographic photographs with both Ted Heath and the police officer who had arrested him ?) However that doesn't mean they all are and I'll wait and see what the investigation turns up. It's not as if Heath is going anywhere, or  that he will be any less of a cunt even if Wiltshire Police don't establish a case against him. It's a shame that the same level of resources can't be devoted to historical abuse in Lambeth Children's Homes, to take one example, where some of the alleged abusers are still alive, but I guess we can't have everything.


----------



## hot air baboon (Apr 10, 2017)

Stiff Upper Lip: Secrets, Crimes and the Schooling of a Ruling Class – review


_Stiff Upper Lip, Alex Renton’s powerful study of abuse – physical, psychological, sexual – that has been a feature of boarding schools pretty much since they were created. The book stems from a piece Renton wrote three years ago for this newspaper’s magazine about his own experiences at Ashdown House, a boarding prep school that also educated Boris Johnson and Viscount Linley, among other well-known people._


----------



## tim (Apr 11, 2017)

> . It's a shame that the same level of resources can't be devoted to historical abuse in Lambeth Children's Homes, to take one example, where some of the alleged abusers are still alive, but I guess we can't have everything.



If true it's more than a shame, because it means that chasing the big names, however incredible the allegations, is taking precedence over investigating abuse that clearly did happen. I don't dou t the ubiquity of child abuse in this period but I find little credibility in these grotesque conspiracy  theories. They do a disservice to the suffering of the countless victims of the casual toleration of abuse in this period.


----------



## BigMoaner (Apr 12, 2017)

existentialist said:


> 101-year-old paedophile jailed for 13 years
> 
> 13 years. That can't be anything but a whole life sentence.
> 
> ...


Its be a tragedy if he wasn't a child rapist. Its a result for justice that he will die behind bars. Good. Very good. 


existentialist said:


> 101-year-old paedophile jailed for 13 years
> 
> 13 years. That can't be anything but a whole life sentence.
> 
> ...


----------



## existentialist (Apr 12, 2017)

BigMoaner said:


> Its be a tragedy if he wasn't a child rapist. Its a result for justice that he will die behind bars. Good. Very good.


I think it is possible to have compassion for even these people. I'll admit that it's taken me a lifetime to get there, but I believe that it's part of what makes us different from them .


----------



## phillm (Apr 16, 2017)

Press playing guess the celebrity again - it took just a minute of googling to get the name.

Cops probe superstar over rape of 'naive 14-year-old virgin' in 1970s


----------



## elbows (Jun 22, 2017)

In regards to the Church of England stuff and those who supported the abuser Ball, I see Carey got criticised in the report and is being asked to step down from his honorary assistant bishop role role. Not surprising really given what had already emerged on this in recent years, it would have been hard for the review to draw any other conclusion.

Church 'colluded' with sex abuse bishop Peter Ball - BBC News



> The review found Lord Carey received seven letters from families and individuals following the arrest and cautioning of Ball in 1992 for gross indecency - when he stood down as bishop of Gloucester - but failed to pass six of them to the police.
> 
> He also chose not to put Ball on the Church of England's "Lambeth List", which names clergymen about whom questions of suitability for ministry have been raised.
> 
> ...




A brief discussion on this stuff earlier in this thread, here: #6218


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 4, 2017)

Sex abuse was covered up at cadet forces, Panorama finds - BBC News

This country is fucked isn't it ? The stiff upper lip and must grumble ethos bred into us for generations looks to have provided an ideal cover for the rapist cunts who flourish within our systems and structures


----------



## existentialist (Jul 4, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Sex abuse was covered up at cadet forces, Panorama finds - BBC News
> 
> This country is fucked isn't it ? The stiff upper lip and must grumble ethos bred into us for generations looks to have provided an ideal cover for the rapist cunts who flourish within our systems and structures


It's not just "mustn't grumble"; it's "don't *you* grumble either", aka "don't rock the boat".

It stinks.


----------



## mather (Jul 4, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I think it is possible to have compassion for even these people.



I don't, fuck him. I would happily see the cunt swing from the gallows.



existentialist said:


> I'll admit that it's taken me a lifetime to get there, but I believe that it's part of what makes us different from them .



Liberal bollocks. What is it about the liberal mindset that always has a soft spot for these types and wastes needless compassion and emotion on people who deserve none? If you read the article, the cunt is not even sorry for what we did, no remorse at all.

As for the false equivalency in your post, there is nothing the justice system can or could do that would lower them to his level. Even if was sent to the gallows it would in now way make the hangman as bad as he is, this pedo abused innocent and defenceless children and can't even bring himself to admits his wrongs. You could hang him a thousands times over and you would still be better than this vermin.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 4, 2017)

mather said:


> I don't, fuck him. I would happily see the cunt swing from the gallows.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wish I had so much anger to spare.


----------



## mather (Jul 4, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I wish I had so much anger to spare.



Those are just my views. In my opinion the only people who have any right to forgive the perpetrators of such crimes are the victims themselves but that is no reason for the rest of society and the legal system to be so forgiving.

It is also not just a question of anger, but one of practicality. People like that are never going to be reformed, you can imprison them but if they get out, chances are they will commit further crimes and further suffering. For everyones sake it is better to simply get rid of them, permanently.


----------



## Sue (Jul 19, 2017)

This is interesting.

Oxford Mail wins five-year legal battle to identify millionaire businessman named in child-sex trial

Khuja runs a letting agency in Cowley Rd in Oxford which is in the middle of the area where most of the Operation Bullfinch sexual abuse/assaults happened.

When I lived in Oxford, he was notorious for his property developments -- basically illegally converting houses into flats with scant if any regard for safety then installing tenants on housing benefits in them and (allegedly) pressuring them not to rock the boat. Likewise with neighbours concerned about dodgy wiring/building work etc.

So a man with access to loads of flats connected, if never charged, to a child abuse ring.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2017)

Free Melanie Shaw - Child Abuse whistleblower | Campaigns by You

this is doing the rounds on the internet but i can find any credible sources for the story. Anybody know the truth behind this story? because its looks exactly like the sort of feverish, conspiracy nut dot joining that needs to be stopped in its tracks.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Free Melanie Shaw - Child Abuse whistleblower | Campaigns by You
> 
> this is doing the rounds on the internet but i can find any credible sources for the story. Anybody know the truth behind this story? because its looks exactly like the sort of feverish, conspiracy nut dot joining that needs to be stopped in its tracks.


Some useful information in the answer to my query about this...
*prisoner solidarity


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Some useful information in the answer to my query about this...
> *prisoner solidarity



cheers for that. pretty much chimes with my suspicions.


----------



## elbows (Sep 17, 2017)

> A child abuse survivor who says she was raped and tortured by a well-known figure in London Fields is pleading with other victims to come forward.
> 
> The woman, who is now a successful academic, told the _Gazette_ she was finally able to face up to the torment she suffered between 1973 and the early 1980s, and bring her attackers to justice.



‘Paedophile ring led by well-known figure abused London Fields kids in 1970s and 1980s’


----------



## elbows (Oct 5, 2017)

> BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said most of the complainants were male and were children at the time of the alleged abuse.
> 
> It is understood investigators have discounted some allegations and identified inconsistencies in the accounts of other complainants, our correspondent said.
> 
> However, detectives believe they have found grounds to suspect the former prime minster of an offence in about six cases for which he would probably have been interviewed under police caution if he was alive, he added.



Edward Heath abuse report expected


----------



## 19force8 (Oct 5, 2017)

elbows said:


> Edward Heath abuse report expected


This would be the same police force that sent detectives to interview Ian Hislop in the hope that as editor of Private Eye he might have some dirt on the grocer.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 5, 2017)

so thats as far as we'll ever get with Heath then. When they say 'this will now be part of the wider inquiry into parliamentary HCSA' it sort of sounds like it may be revisited but I don't know.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 5, 2017)

Its a difficult one the heath case- there was always rumour with him when I was a kid/ youth, but it had that blurring of yore, where paedophilia and homosexuality were kinda interchangeable tropes for pretty much most people I knew ( yes, fucking hell, not that long ago either).


----------



## elbows (Oct 5, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Its a difficult one the heath case- there was always rumour with him when I was a kid/ youth, but it had that blurring of yore, where paedophilia and homosexuality were kinda interchangeable tropes for pretty much most people I knew ( yes, fucking hell, not that long ago either).



Yes, and that phenomenon has been discussed here before, eg the time Phillip Schofield waved a little list at Cameron on tv and Cameron mentioned something about historical attitudes towards homosexuality. Cameron had a point, given that for a number of decades the Tories were described by some as having 'the largest closet in Europe', and that the old conflation of homosexuality and paedophilia was partially enabled by dodgy inequalities in things like the age of consent.

Great swathes of this thread were also involved with looking at the historical rumours about a number of tories, the nature of the rumours, the few people who were prepared to commit them to print and their agendas and levels of fact checking. In a few cases the possible involvement of security services in spreading rumours to serve agendas came up.

The baggage that came with some of the cases that had already been rumoured in the past left me wanting some 'brand new' revelations to come out rather than only rehashing what rumours were already in the public domain, but there havent been many examples of that happening when it comes to any possible high level political perpetrators. Thats not to say that I view cases that were rumoured in the past as less credible, since after all Savile triggered this stuff and there were no shortage of rumours for decades about him.


----------



## elbows (Oct 5, 2017)

Not found a lot of stuff that is useful to quote here from the report, but here are a few bits and bobs.



> 8.15 Enquiries about vehicles and with Government Drivers (Chauffeurs)
> 
> 
> 8.15.1  Sir Edward Heath was afforded a Government driver from immediately before his election as Prime Minister in 1970 almost continuously to the time of his death in 2005. The civil service operating procedures meant that Sir Edward Heath was normally driven by a regular driver, but pool drivers would assist when the regular driver was unavailable. His initial regular driver died some time ago but investigators from Operation Conifer were able to interview several other regular and pool drivers.
> ...



Since the 'completely asexual' thing has come up in his defence in the media again, I shall quote a bit that relates to that:



> 8.28.1  The Operation Conifer investigation recognises that a person’s sexuality and the issue of whether or not they are sexually active is normally a private matter and is not an indicator of their propensity to commit sexual offences. During the investigation the issue became relevant as it was publicly8 implied that it was implausible for Sir Edward Heath to be an alleged suspect in child abuse related offences as he was considered to be ‘completely asexual’.
> 
> 
> 8.28.2  Witnesses who were interviewed by investigators from Operation Conifer offered different opinions about Sir Edward Heath’s sexuality. However two witnesses, who have not disclosed abuse, provided evidence that he was sexually active with consenting adults during parts of his life.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 9, 2017)

More Cyril Smith revelations: MI5 knew prosecutors lied to press about Cyril Smith case, inquiry told


----------



## elbows (Oct 10, 2017)

I'm watching the livestream of the inquiry. Evidence currently being given suggests Smith had considerable control over the selection & timing of children admitted to live at Cambridge House, via both his roles in council committees and the independent entity that ran the house. And the company he owned also employed some of the boys (it was a house for working boys).


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2017)

Bloody inept!



> The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse has admitted breaching its own procedures by publishing a victim's name despite his right to anonymity.
> 
> The man's name appeared on its website in the title of a document. The inquiry said it removed the name as soon as it was brought to its attention.





> Since the inquiry began in March 2015, it has been alerted to seven breaches of anonymity and on four occasions, including this one, it reported itself to the Information Commissioner.



Child sex abuse inquiry breaches anonymity


----------



## existentialist (Nov 9, 2017)

elbows said:


> Bloody inept!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Now this is where my nearest-to-conspiraloony tendencies start to emerge...

A proper, well-conducted, wholehearted and revealing inquiry would be a complete disaster to Those In Authority. Even though the sins they will be tried for will be decades-old sins, they will be found wanting, even if - and it's pretty evident we do still have a long way to go - they'd completely cleaned up their acts.

There are a lot of skeletons in a lot of cupboards, and I suspect that a lot of people know they were complicit, or turned a blind eye, or maybe just didn't know what to do, which has enabled abuse to flourish in particular areas. 

So the best thing to do would be to scupper the inquiry from the start. You have to be seen to be holding one, but you set out to ensure that, at every turn, it succeeds in discrediting itself. You might do that indirectly, by ensuring (I can almost imagine Sir Humphrey explaining it) that your most inept, security-blunder-prone or just plain corruptible people are staffing it, and nudging them (deniably) in the right direction now and again. Or you do it directly, leaking stuff, making sure they hire the wrong person, along with regular briefings about the latest disaster.

After a while, the inquiry staggers into life, as it must, but 90% of survivors are staying away for fear of the next security blunder, they're on their seventeenth chair, and nobody has any faith in the outcome being taken remotely seriously, if one ever comes. Job done. Arses covered, can kicked down the road.

And no black helicopters, obvs.


----------



## justin credible (Nov 11, 2017)

This thread needs more skeptical links IMO
I am extremely concerned about how batshit crazy conspiraloon nonsense has been treated as credible by various police services, mental health professionals and some journalists
excellent blog here, with a great post on some of the bonkers people making accusations about Ted Heath
Satanic Ritual Abuse and a Conspiracy Podcast: Some Notes on Some Connections

I am no fan of the tories but it seems to me that most of not all of the accusations against Heath were made by people who cherish delusions of Satanic Ritual Abuse, including former DCI Clive Driscoll, who nowadays spends his time working with the notorious Clinic for Dissociative Studies (founded by satan hunter in chief Valerie Sinason) and also defending convicted paedophiles such as the the unfortunately named Brian Pead
Money for sex’ therapist  escapes jail (Bexley news site)

Brian Pead, Michael Bird meet retired DCI Clive Driscoll | Lambeth childabuse and cover up
Brian Pead writes to the Probation Service | Lambeth ... (links to conspiraloon site)

I think that the problem is that some abuse of children was ignored and covered up and that as a result a whole load of false allegations, many of them linked to conspiracy theories of Satanic Ritual Abuse, have been flying around. 

People seem prone to hysteria in relation to sexual abuse allegations.  We need to be extremely careful to be sceptical and evidence based in our research.
While it is important that allegations of child abuse are not covered up it is also important that people are considered innocent until proven guilty and that people are not subjected to trial by internet, especially in these days of fake news.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2017)

This thread did deal with such topics quite a number of times, back when it was more active generally.

Some other claims that were not directly connected to the satanic ritual abuse angle have also been debunked here over time. Admittedly sometimes in rather gentle ways due to not wanting to make an error in the opposite direction and on account of how damaged victims of abuse can be, including some who were abused but also made other claims of abuse that lacked basis in fact.


----------



## EYEisBloke (Nov 11, 2017)

This may not be the right thread to ask and apologies if so but has the #pizzagate kerfuffle been discussed and if so was it completely debunked? If yes or on another thread signposting would be much appreciated.


----------



## elbows (Nov 11, 2017)

EYEisBloke said:


> This may not be the right thread to ask and apologies if so but has the #pizzagate kerfuffle been discussed and if so was it completely debunked? If yes or on another thread signposting would be much appreciated.



This is a thread about the UK in the UK subform, so no, its not the right place for Pizzagate.

Use the search feature on this forum and you'll see it mentioned in more than one thread in the world forum, eg threads dealing with Trump, the alt-right and Alex jones. I'm not sure whether it got a full debunking or just a lot of piss-taking because it was so obviously crap.


----------



## EYEisBloke (Nov 11, 2017)

elbows said:


> This is a thread about the UK in the UK subform, so no, its not the right place for Pizzagate.
> 
> Use the search feature on this forum and you'll see it mentioned in more than one thread in the world forum, eg threads dealing with Trump, the alt-right and Alex jones. I'm not sure whether it got a full debunking or just a lot of piss-taking because it was so obviously crap.



Thanks.


----------



## justin credible (Nov 14, 2017)

elbows said:


> This thread did deal with such topics quite a number of times, back when it was more active generally.
> 
> Some other claims that were not directly connected to the satanic ritual abuse angle have also been debunked here over time. Admittedly sometimes in rather gentle ways due to not wanting to make an error in the opposite direction and on account of how damaged victims of abuse can be, including some who were abused but also made other claims of abuse that lacked basis in fact.



sorry if my post came across as critical, I didn't intend it to be
I think that this is an interesting thread that has been fairly sceptical in focus but I do feel that it would benefit from a more thorough examination and debunking of some of the wilder conspiracies, especially those relating to SRA, especially given issues re fake news and interference in elections etc.

The whole SRA hoax in Hampstead hasn't really been examined or debunked here in any detail and given that many of the promoters of that hoax (mostly if not exclusively an interesting mix of faux evangelical Christians and new age hippy Hitler apologists) also promote PizzaGate and the Hollie Grieg hoax and that all of these hoaxes claim that the "powers that be" including corrupt politicians, royalty, police, social services etc. are blood drinking baby munching Satanists who belong to a secret elite cabal that is trying to take over the world, I believe that such claims should quite correctly be included in this thread. and debunked, obviously.

You even get people posting on here asking seriously if PizzaGate has been debunked. 

PizzaGate is relevant to this thread inasmuch as it is one of a massive number of hoaxes claiming to prove the existence of elite paedophile rings involving blood drinking, baby munching, child sacrificing paedophile  Satanists.  Many of those allegations have targeted innocent people in the UK and are part of a wider cultural milieu in which fake allegations of child abuse have been made that make our entire culture appear to be built on a foundation of appalling child abuse.

One person who immediately comes to mind is the extremely dodgy Camila Batmanghelidjh, a long time associate of Valerie Sinason and someone who, for many years moved in similar social circles. I have taken the time to read Batmanghelidjh's book, Shattered Lives and so much of it is very obviously completely made up and exaggerated bullshit that it's amazing that she wasn't pulled up on it years before she was.  Who wrote the blurb on the reverse of the book?  No other than Valerie Sinason

‘This wonderful bombshell of a book is a sustained, honourable and timely paean of fury on behalf of the children whose murdered childhood haunts and damages us all. In these circumstances “neutrality is offensive” from all professionals and indeed adults who disguise the real level of pain they witness in children for the sake of easier research, policy, relationship with peers and superiors.’
– _Valerie Sinason, PhD, MACP, MInst Psychoanal, FRSA, child psychotherapist and adultpsychoanalyst_

Batmaghelidgjh talking shit to Voice of Russia radio

She says trained as a psychotherapist (she didn't complete her training to the point where she was accredited though). She claims that "the average age which prostitution starts in Britain for girls in 12" - where the hell does she get that figure from? Just total bollocks.  She also waffles on about "brain research" Kids Co carried out on children, this research was extremely controversial, much of it conducted without proper consent of the children and / or their families.  

Anyone listening to this interview could easily end up believing that the UK is a nation of paedophiles who care more about their dogs than their children. Batmanghelidjh says "There is something about the British psyche that struggles with vulnerability and that's why I think they struggle with loving and cherishing children." 

Don't missunderstand me. I am not suggesting that conspiracies to sexually abuse children never happen, or that coverups do not happen.  I have bitter personal experience of organised child sexual exploitation and of it being covered up.  My concern is that resources that should be spent on investigating real child abuse are spent on investigating allegations that Ted Heath was a Satanist.  The situation is insane. 

some links that deserve serious examination that are relevant to this thread

FALSE: Comet Ping Pong Pizzeria Home to Child Abuse Ring Led by Hillary Clinton

Russians 'set up shop' in Scotland to force new independence vote link includes screenshots linking Russian FB trolls to equating Hilary Clinton to Satan

More links to follow soon but am in a library and have to go now


----------



## existentialist (Nov 17, 2017)

Not necessarily a "high level paedophile ring", but this story implies some fairly high-level collusion within the Roman Catholic establishment....

Revealed: monk who abused children on Caldey Island for decades


----------



## justin credible (Nov 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Not necessarily a "high level paedophile ring", but this story implies some fairly high-level collusion within the Roman Catholic establishment....
> 
> Revealed: monk who abused children on Caldey Island for decades



Horrible, but unfortunately not uncommon. 

Any organisation or institution in which some individuals are given a highly idealised and elevated status provide  opportunities for predators to abuse the vulnerable.  Whether it is religious / quasi-religious organisations, personal development cults, the entertainment industry, politics or businesses people in positions of power who possess psychopathic tendencies will use their privileged position to indulge their proclivities.

The dynamics of power usually mean that abusers are surrounded by people whose career and or personal welfare is dependent on pleasing the person in charge.  These dynamics can be both very powerful and very unconscious so that people feel that they cannot say no / cannot make a fuss / cannot even speak about what is happening.  Witnesses of all kinds of evil abuses who speak out and take action are IME in the minority rather than the majority. 

This is not just because people are cowards or selfish; powerful unconscious dynamics come into play that effectively make people feel complicit and unable to speak. 

Families are a microcosmic version of large institutions and when the sexual abuse of children happens within families it is not uncommon for everyone in the family to know what is going on but for there to be an unspoken  rule of silence, a kind of Omertà. This was how it was in my family where all the children were sexually abused.  As I grew older my father's attentions shifted to my brother and my father would spend hours in my brother's bedroom of an evening.  Nobody in the family ever spoke about it.  None of us would have dreamed of entering my brother's bedroom.  The powerful unconscious dynamics persist to the present day and one of my sisters still clings on to the ridiculous idea that my father was simply performing unusual medical examinations upon us. I believe that somewhere deep inside herself she knows the truth; that it is not usual for fathers to spend hours of an evening intimately examining his children's most private body parts. For all kinds of reasons she prefers to believe a ridiculous lie and nothing anyone says will shift her point of view.

I have experienced the same thing in an organisation where a (subsequently convicted) paedophile was very obviously sexually abusing vulnerable children in his care.  The lead person in the organisation would have faced immense financial difficulties and possibly a fraud investigation had he gone to the police regarding the multiple indications of child sexual abuse that were obvious for anyone to see.  So he decided that the abuse allegations were a conspiracy to destroy his business and once he had decided upon this strategy nothing would persuade him otherwise.

Human beings are complex highly evolved apes with a tendency towards blaming others, shifting responsibility and abusing power. I don't believe it is surprising that lots of abuses of children are covered up, I think it is more surprising when some individuals report child abuse to the police, even if it risks their livelihood to do so. I'm thinking of the owner of an IT business who, upon finding appalling images of the sexual abuse of infants and toddlers on his employees work computer, took them straight to the police.  The poor man was eventually bankrupted (IMMIC) through just doing the right thing.  His actions resulted in the conviction of Vanessa George and the monstrous child abusers who were part of the same paedophile ring.  The business owner's actions undoubtedly saved many young children from being abused and put some scary people in jail where they belonged but because the police seized his computers for an extended period and he received no compensation he went out of business.  He should have received a medal IMO. The scary thing is to wonder who many people discover evidence of CSA and don't report it, or don't even allow themselves to think about it, because to do so would be to put themselves in a precarious situation.

Just thinking aloud really


----------



## justin credible (Nov 18, 2017)

I promised you some links relevant to this thread and here is an important one 

this is a link to the excellent Hoaxed Research blog that was started by victims of a cruel and disgusting hoax that saw countless innocent families in Hampstead targeted by vigilantes and trolls who believed in a non-existent baby eating Satanic cult consisting of police, social workers VIPs etc.

this link explores some of the main players involved in both the Hampstead hoax and the Hollie Grieg hoax and also into the farcical investigations that were Operation Conifer  
‘Sexing up’ the Hollie Hoax: The precursor to Hoaxtead

have to go for now but more soon


----------



## bogbrush (Nov 19, 2017)

The guest book/ reception book  for the 'Elm Guest House' should have settled that question finally.  Nothing much that wasn't known already, from the time of Ronnie Kray and Lord Boothby onwards.  If you remember, we have not so long ago had an ex-home secretary buried in an unmarked grave because of it.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 21, 2017)

Theresa May and Amber Rudd suppress Westminster child abuse documents for national security reasons


----------



## existentialist (Nov 21, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Theresa May and Amber Rudd suppress Westminster child abuse documents for national security reasons


It's very hard not to think that this is a whitewash. I struggle to think of a genuine "national security" reason why the facts behind Cyril Smith's epredations should not be held up for all to see. We all recognise that a lot of very flimsy excuses have been trotted out over the decades for maintaining the omerta around child sexual abuse, but it seems the Government want to have their cake and eat it, insisting to us that things have changed, while still falling back on the same shabby arguments for not actually *doing* anything any differently.

Which, of course, continues to send the message to offending MPs and other "establishment" types that there will always be a veil behind which they can hide.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 21, 2017)

I stopped thinking of it as anything but a whitewash quite some time ago.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2017)

I looked it up in Hansard because the response was missing from the text part of that article. I know it was included in the video but I don't know if everyone will look at that.



> Lisa Nandy (Wigan) (Lab)
> Last month in this House, the Home Secretary told me that some papers would be withheld from the Cyril Smith inquiry for reasons of national security. This week, the Prime Minister has written to me to say:
> 
> “We are clear that the work of the security services will not prevent information being shared with other such inquiries.”
> ...





> Amber Rudd
> 
> I am happy to confirm that the Prime Minister is always right. I will certainly look carefully at the letter the hon. Lady has received to ensure that we comply with it.



Topical Questions - Hansard Online


----------



## justin credible (Dec 5, 2017)

Very interesting article in Rolling Stone, it is specifically about the Pizzagate hoax but is highly relevant, IMO / IME to fake news conspiracies here in the UK especially Operation Conifer and some of the allegations re Ted Heath, pushed for time right now but more later.  

Pizzagate: Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal


----------



## elbows (Dec 5, 2017)

Numerous harrowing tales of abuse and coverup within religion-related institutions have been covered by the independent inquiry and Scottish inquiry of late.

Girl 'abused by priest had arm broken'



> An eight-year-old girl had her arm broken by a nun after she discovered the child was being sexually abused by a priest, an inquiry has heard.
> 
> Theresa Tolmie-McGrane told the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry she hoped the nun would protect her after walking in on the assault at Smyllum Park orphanage in 1970.
> 
> ...



Boy 'abused' by head of Catholic school



> A head teacher of a Catholic boarding school invited a young pupil into his study and then sexually abused him, the inquiry into child abuse has heard.
> 
> The hearing heard the boy was told to pretend to go to bed in his dorm at Ampleforth College, in North Yorkshire, and then to get up and go to his study.
> 
> ...





> The third day of hearings into allegations involving the Church examined abuse at Ampleforth College, a private school run by Benedictine monks.



Priest 'tried to control' abuse inquiry



> Police raised concerns that the head of a Roman Catholic boarding school tried to "control" a child sex abuse investigation, an inquiry has heard.
> 
> A former North Yorkshire detective said officers were "excluded" from inquiries at Ampleforth College in 1995 and 2002.
> 
> ...





> An earlier hearing was told the former head teacher was warned about employing Fr Piers Grant-Ferris - who was later jailed for abusing boys.
> 
> Grant-Ferris, who the pupils had nicknamed "Pervy Piers", was convicted of 20 counts of indecent assault in 2006.
> 
> ...


----------



## existentialist (Dec 5, 2017)

> An earlier hearing was told the former head teacher was warned about employing Fr Piers Grant-Ferris - who was later jailed for abusing boys.
> 
> Grant-Ferris, who the pupils had nicknamed "Pervy Piers", was convicted of 20 counts of indecent assault in 2006.
> 
> ...


My first job after qualifying as a counsellor was in schools counselling, and the service was set up specifically to avoid this kind of conflict. Counsellors were employed independently of schools, per the Clwych inquiry's recommendations, by the local authority. While I am not aware of any specific instances where that independence was directly responsible for abuses being disclosed, there was no doubt that it gave us a freedom, should it have been necessary, to report suspicious goings-on without having to worry about the school shutting us down.

Sadly, following a series of funding cuts, a lot of the responsibility for supporting the service ended up devolving onto individual schools, with designated days of provision being funded directly by the school. At which point I got the local authority to make me an offer I couldn't refuse, and accepted the (moderately generous) redundancy settlement they made.

But I fear for the well-being of any children who might be at risk within the schools environment, because - regardless of the professionalism of the rest of the team who remained - I know that they will always have to factor in the impact that any boat-rocking they might engage in will have on their financial situation.

In my view, it should be a legislative imperative that *any* organisation with power or control over young people should be obliged to have an independently-funded person available to all of those young people. Which was definitely in the spirit of the Clwych Inquiry's recommendations, if not the letter.

The Clywch Inquiry was set up following the death by suicide of John Owen, a schoolteacher who killed himself after police inquiries were resumed to investigate his prolific sexual abuse of adolescents in a secondary school in South Wales throughout the 1980s and '90s. https://www.childcomwales.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Clywch.pdf


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 6, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Jan 6, 2018)

Sent me a pm about it too. Why, I wonder?


----------



## Corax (Jan 6, 2018)

Rsbridgr Ghost said:


> *Please sign the petition: Westminster must investigate the evidence of MPs raping children
> 
> Hello there,
> 
> ...


Yeah, starting a new account then spamming everyone via pm, that'll endear you.

Byeeee...


----------



## gosub (Feb 6, 2018)

‘VIP paedophile ring’ accuser charged


----------



## elbows (Feb 15, 2018)

I've been trying to catch up with various inquiry-related matters, I am months out of date.

One document alone, the only thing I've read so far, tells me that the terms of the Janner-related bit were changed at some point, to be looking at institutional failings in regard to complaints about Janner. And Janners son and daughters  tried to convince the inquiry to deprive 30 of the 33 individuals who have made allegations that they were sexually abused by Janner of core participant status. Jay did not go along with this and all 33 remain core participants.

https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-docume...tion - Review of core participant status .pdf


----------



## hash tag (Mar 2, 2018)

I know people who were personally effected by this Man abused in 'paedo's paradise' fought back and got justice for 100s of kids


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 3, 2018)

gosub said:


> ‘VIP paedophile ring’ accuser charged


"Nick" has now also been charged with twelve counts of perverting the course of justice relating to his VIP abuse claims and some of the evidence he produced to support them, and one count of fraud relating to a Criminal Injuries Compensation claim. Details here :

Man who said he was victim of VIP child sexual abuse ring charged - The Guardian 

and in the CPS' statement about it

Man charged with perverting the course of justice - The Crown Prosecution Service

which points out


> Criminal proceedings in relation to this matter are now active and it is extremely important there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.





> The CPS is unable to publish the name of the man who has been charged due to a risk of prejudicing unrelated, ongoing proceedings involving the defendant


----------



## likesfish (Jul 3, 2018)

nick accused the head of the army of being at an orgy on remembrance Sunday a Day he's likely to be a tad busy .

VIP padeos have got away with it not sure theres a vast conspiracy 
pizzagate had some nutter fire rounds into a ceiling in an attempt to save children from the cellar said pizza shop didnt have a cellar


----------



## teqniq (Aug 12, 2018)

You might perhaps wonder what tales he might have told.



> A British QC who was accused of sadistically beating boys attending Christian holiday camps in the 1970s and 80s has died at his home in Cape Town.
> 
> John Smyth, 77, died soon after it emerged Hampshire police had reportedly requested he return to the UK for questioning.
> 
> His family told the BBC the cause of death appeared to be a sudden heart attack following a cardiac procedure last week and asked to be allowed to grieve in private....



Lawyer accused of beating boys at Christian camps dies


----------



## 4eyes (Aug 22, 2018)

teqniq said:


> You might perhaps wonder what tales he might have told.
> 
> 
> 
> Lawyer accused of beating boys at Christian camps dies



Done it again!  Look after your own, paedophile, freemason c**nts!

Police chief's Hillsborough charges dropped

And this, f**cking hard men in uniform.

Video shows police officer hit girl, 14


----------



## existentialist (Aug 22, 2018)

4eyes said:


> Done it again!  Look after your own, paedophile, freemason c**nts!
> 
> Police chief's Hillsborough charges dropped
> 
> ...


What's this got to do with child sexual abuse?


----------



## 4eyes (Aug 22, 2018)

existentialist said:


> What's this got to do with child sexual abuse?


All part of the same system, but I suspect you really knew that.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 22, 2018)

4eyes said:


> All part of the same system, but I suspect you really knew that.


Dunno why we don't just have one huge thread, then, for general interconnectedness. 

Anyway, talking of "same systems", who were you?


----------



## Ralph Llama (Aug 22, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Dunno why we don't just have one huge thread, then, for general interconnectedness.
> 
> Anyway, talking of "same systems", who were you?


Propaganda Due - Wikipedia

Not good eh?


----------



## yield (Nov 2, 2018)

Secret service to testify on 'political paedophiles' at child abuse inquiry 
31/10/18


> Britain's spy agencies will reveal its knowledge of alleged Westminster-related child abuse at a public inquiry amid concerns it aided in an establishment cover-up.
> 
> MI5, MI6 and GCHQ have given their "full cooperation" with the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, lead counsel Andrew O'Connor QC told a preliminary hearing on Tuesday.





> However, it emerged yesterday that some of the evidence the agencies will give may be heard in private due to national security reasons.
> 
> Mr O'Connor said: "We have been asked expressly on behalf of several of the core participants [of the inquiry] whether all of the evidence from the security and intelligence agencies will be given in public hearings, or...


paywalled. Does anyone know how to get around it?


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 2, 2018)

yield said:


> paywalled. Does anyone know how to get around it?


I think if you register with them you get access to a limited number of articles. Can't be arsed myself but it looks like it's based on a story in the Times earlier in the day

*Secret service to testify on ‘political paedophiles’*


Spoiler: Text of Times story



Sean O’Neill, Chief Reporter

October 31 2018, 12:00pm

Britain’s spy agencies will be called to give evidence about their knowledge of suspected paedophiles in the Westminster establishment, a public inquiry heard yesterday.

MI5, MI6 and GCHQ are co-operating with the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) and have already provided files and documents relevant to its investigation into the failure to pursue and prosecute child abusers in Whitehall and parliament.

It will be a highly unusual move for the intelligence services to present evidence at a public inquiry and a preliminary hearing was told that some material might have to be heard in secret for national security reasons.

Andrew O’Connor, QC, the inquiry counsel, said that he hoped the intelligence evidence “will be given in public hearings” but added: “It is, of course, inherent in the work that the agencies do that some information — about, for example, records that they do or do not hold — cannot be given publicly without damaging national security interests.”

The whips’ offices of all the major political parties have also been asked for documents and archives are being trawled for evidence that abuse scandals were covered up.

Full evidence hearings on the Westminster issues are scheduled for March next year but the inquiry heard that the allegations that led to it being set up by Theresa May, when she was home secretary in 2014, were no longer part of the investigation.

Mrs May created the inquiry at the height of claims that a powerful paedophile ring had been protected for decades and its members had murdered children during “sex parties” at the Dolphin Square apartment complex.

The allegations led to Scotland Yard’s disastrous Operation Midland investigation, based on the statements of a man known as “Nick”, which saw public figures including Field Marshal Lord Bramall and the former home secretary Leon Brittan being wrongly accused of offences.

Mr O’Connor said the decision not to investigate Operation Midland during the public inquiry was now “particularly compelling” because of related criminal proceedings.

He added: “‘Nick’ has now been charged with perverting the course of justice and fraud in relation to the allegations and is currently on remand awaiting trial. It is plainly imperative that nothing that we do as part of this investigation prejudices in any way the fairness of those criminal proceedings”.

Mr O’Connor said a number of other notorious cases linked to Westminster — including those of the late former MPs, Cyril Smith, a Liberal, and Victor Montagu and Peter Morrison, both Conservatives —- will be investigated.

The cases were being examined because of claims from former police officers that they had been “warned off investigating possible cases of child sexual abuse committed by senior politicians and other establishment figures in the 1960s, 70s and 80s”.

Mr O’Connor said the inquiry intended to call the secretary of the D-Notice committee, which liaises with the media over the protection of national security information, to give evidence.

The IICSA will also examine why the high ranking diplomat Peter Hayman, who died in 1992, escaped prosecution for sending obscene material through the post. The allegations against Hayman, who is believed to have been an MI6 official, were made public under parliamentary privilege in 1981.

The diplomat was a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which during the Seventies was seeking government funding. Mr O’Connor said links between PIE and Whitehall would be investigated and the inquiry was also seeking evidence from Liberty (formerly the National Council for Civil Liberties) about its dealings with the paedophile group in the Seventies and Eighties.



It's based on what was said at the preliminary hearing in the Westminster strand of the Inquiry that was held on Tuesday. The transcript of the proceedings are on this page as a PDF file.


----------



## elbows (Nov 2, 2018)

Although the 'Nick' side of things is understandably not being looked at, that TImes article missed out the other category of investigation that features the name Leon Brittan. I'm just going through the transcript you linked to now, and here is the part of relevance.



> Another category of these investigations concerns allegations relating to Elm Guest House. Those allegations include possible misconduct on the part of the Metropolitan Police in the way in which investigations into goings on at Elm Guest House were conducted, and also allegations that the fruits of those investigations were covered up. The latter allegations include the well-known allegation that evidence relating to Leon Brittan's presence at and/or involvement with Elm Guest House was suppressed. We propose to call some more detailed evidence relating to these cases at the hearings next year.


----------



## elbows (Nov 2, 2018)

I may as well quote some of the other ones too, since the people and incidents have mostly all featured in this thread in the past. It takes ages to format these quotes so I wont do everything of possible interest.



> The first of these issues relates to the way in which the leadership of the Liberal Party, subsequently the Liberal Democrat Party, responded to allegations of child sexual abuse made against Cyril Smith. In this regard, we have made detailed rule 9 requests to and have received witness statements from Baroness Brinton, on behalf of the Liberal Democrat Party, and also Des Wilson, Michael Meadowcroft, Lord Alton and Lord Steel. We intend to call at least some of these witnesses to give organisational evidence. We are very conscious of the lines of enquiry that some complainant core participants wish us to pursue in this regard.





> The second issue relates to the way in which allegations of child sexual abuse made against Peter Morrison MP were dealt with, both by the Conservative Party, of which he was a member, but also by the wider political community. We have obtained a number of witness statements and also a number of relevant documents in this regard. Related matters  regarding the police are the subject of another one of the IOPC's investigations, and we anticipate that we will call oral evidence from several witnesses on these issues.





> The fourth topic concerns the activities of the Whips' Offices of the various parties in parliament. At the hearing in January, I read out the now notorious words of the former Conservative Whip Tim Fortescue, in which he appeared to assert that one of the ways in which Whips gained the loyalty of MPs was by helping to cover up scandals, including what Mr Fortescue described as "scandals involving small boys". There is a clear issue for the inquiry to investigate here: is it true that the Whips' Offices of any party failed to report, or, worse, assisted in suppressing, allegations or evidence of child sexual abuse? As I mentioned earlier, we have searched for relevant documents in a number of archives. We have also requested and obtained a number of witness statements from former Whips of all major parties. We propose to call at least some of these witnesses to give oral evidence at the hearings in March.


----------



## elbows (Nov 2, 2018)

> The first case relates to Victor Montagu, who was a landowner and Conservative MP. Records held by the National Archive, which the inquiry has obtained and will disclose in due course, show that in the early 19670s Montagu was reported to the police for, and admitted, indecently assaulting a young boy. Montagu was never prosecuted, however -- the papers indicate that the then DPP himself, Sir Norman Skelhorn, advised that Montagu should receive no more than a caution, apparently on the basis that the offence could be treated as a one-off. In fact, Victor Montagu's son has stated that he himself was abused by his father and, moreover, that he is aware of at least ten other boys who were also abused. We are likely to call evidence from Robert Montagu and also to hear evidence from the CPS about the decision making in this case.


----------



## David Clapson (Dec 5, 2018)

Shouldn't Carl Beech be in this thread by now? Man who said he was victim of VIP child abuse ring is named


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 23, 2019)

Carl Beech, aka "Nick", pleaded guilty yesterday to five counts relating to making and possessing more than 300 indecent images of children, some of them Category A, the worst kind. And to one charge of voyeurism which involved secretly filming a boy while he was using a toilet.

Man admits voyeurism and indecent image charges - BBC News

Sentencing deferred to a later date, possibly after his other trial in May on charges of perverting the course of justice over his VIP abuse claims.

Mike Veale, the former Chief Constable of Wiltshire, the force which spent £1.5 million on the investigation of claims of child abuse by Ted Heath, some of which had originated from Carl Beech, resigned from his post as Chief Constable of Cleveland  last Friday over unspecified "serious allegations" which have been referred to the IOPC. The Telegraph is now reporting that this relates to complaints from two women police officers of inappropriate behaviour by him.


----------



## elbows (Mar 4, 2019)

I've been waiting for this part of the inquiry to begin and will try to find some time to pay attention to it now that this news story has alerted me.

Police 'not told' of 1980s MP abuse claim



> Claims of an MP's "penchant for small boys" were passed to security services but they did not investigate or report them to police, an inquiry has heard.
> 
> A 1986 letter implicated the late Tory MP for Chester, Peter Morrison, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse heard.





> It will investigate whether any whips became aware of allegations and "tried to turn such allegations to their advantage" to keep party colleagues in line.
> 
> Mr Altman said they will look at "whether it is true that the Whips' offices of any party failed to report or, worse, assisted in suppressing allegations or evidence of child sexual abuse".
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Mar 4, 2019)

Pages 14-39 of todays transcript certainly gives an overview of the bulk of the various historical matters which we managed to trawl through on this thread in the past. ie all the historical stuff that had been mentioned in the press or elsewhere in some way decades ago. Historical allegations of historical abuse. Everything from Piccadilly Circus to the Elm Guest House to PIE, Peter Hayman, Scallywag claims, etc. I've not got any further yet and as usual the document is laid out in an annoying format.

https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/9640/view/public-hearing-transcript-4-march-2019.pdf

There is a bit on page 12 which gives some info about a witness statement from Lord Tebbit, an explanation of comments he made on telly in 2014.



> Lord Tebbit has provided the inquiry with a witness statement, and we would invite you to adduce that in evidence in due course. In that statement, Lord Tebbit explains what was in his mind when he referred to "a big political coverup" by the establishment in relation to child sexual abuse. At paragraphs 14 to 21 of the statement, he refers to his awareness of Jimmy Savile's excessive interest in child patients at Stoke Mandeville; the lack of action taken against Cyril Smith for allegedly abusing teenage boys; rumours of sexual deviance of senior members of the churches of England and Rome; and that Peter Morrison had an interest in young men, which Lord Tebbit said he took to mean "young men of about sixth form age".


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 5, 2019)

The transcript of yesterdays opening day of the Westminster strand of the inquiry is in the usual very annoying two column broken into sections format. I've reformatted it as a straightforward text file - here's the PDF of it. I've stripped out the line numbers and the references at the end. I've also silently corrected a couple of obvious typos and added notes in blue next to what look like some others. Hopefully I haven't added any myself.

It's very interesting IMO. Brian Altman the Counsel to the Inquiry gives an opening presentation setting out what will and what will not be dealt with. That's followed by opening statements from Counsel for some of the core participants.

The documents specifically referred to in the course of Altman's presentation are online at this page

Reading Altman's remarks I note that quite a few people seem to be lined up for some pointed questioning about past statements and actions or inactions. Alongside more obvious names I note Peter McKelvie, Don Hale of "Special Branch Ate My Dossier" fame and some of the ex-policemen who sold stories to the press. 

Of the other opening statements Geoffrey Robertson's is very entertaining. He's acting for Harvey Proctor and aside from going over his allotted time, manages to say something which promptly gets redacted, urges the inquiry to rewrite its terms of reference and makes some flamboyant remarks about the good character of his client and the bad character of some of his accusers. I'm tempted to watch the video of his contribution just for the pleasure of seeing what an old ham he's become.


----------



## elbows (Mar 5, 2019)

Yes, I think its already clear that we will see some debunking, some wriggling and some backtracking. In a bunch of cases it looks like this will be highly appropriate, and it is less clear whether anything new of note will emerge. We are bound to see a bunch of examples of shit and twisted establishment priorities, but these will mostly be built off of cases where there is a more substantial foundation and common acceptance that there was an actual abuser and abuse (Cyril Smith, and a few other cases where people were let off the hook such as Victor Montagu). The bit where they will look at the Whips could be interesting, but I will hardly be surprised if it turns out to be far less interesting than some hope.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 6, 2019)

A reformatted and hopefully more readable PDF version of the transcript of yesterdays inquiry hearing. Original version and supporting documents are here on the inquiry website. On that page for each day there is a PDF file listing the contents of the various documents put online. (A witness statement from Anthony Daly the author of 'Playland' about his experiences at the time of the original Playland case in the 1970s was supposedly put up yesterday but the link doesn't work).

Yesterday Chris Mahaffey lead senior investigator for the IOPC and Commander Catherine Roper head of Professional Standards for the Met gave evidence about multiple investigations carried out into allegations of police failings and misconduct regarding the investigation of child abuse cases where prominent persons were alleged to be involved. 

In both cases the main purpose of their evidence was to lay the foundation for the subsequent evidence to be heard from some of those whose allegations have been investigated.

Lord Taverne then gave evidence about his time as a junior Home Office Minister from 1966-68, and specifically a conversation he was present at during which it was stated by the then Met Commissioner that the Met avoided investigating homosexual activities in toilets near Westminster.


----------



## likesfish (Mar 6, 2019)

noncery until recently was covered up by everyone doubly so if anyone had any influence or money.
 Spooks would use any evidence as blackmail material and explaining to spooks why this was a bad thing runs into a problem of explaining concepts such a legality and morals to spooks


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 7, 2019)

Here is a reformatted PDF of the transcript of yesterdays IICSA hearing (6th). The original version of the transcript and supporting documents are on the inquiry website here. (Additional documents have also been put up relating to Tuesdays hearing. The broken link for one document I mentioned yesterday has now been removed entirely although the document is still listed in the revised PDF index of evidence).

Yesterday evidence was given by four former police officers: ex-DCI Howard Groves, ex-DI Andrew Surplice, ex-Superintendent Robert Glen and ex-DC Paul Foulton. The first two gave evidence about concerns they had regarding aspects of Operation Circus which they were involved with as very junior officers. 

Glen gave evidence about two investigations by the Clubs Office at West End Central when he was attached to it as an inspector for nine months in 1977-78. One concerned Cyril Smith, and the other organised prostitution at the Hilton Hotel. Glen claims both were ended on instructions from Chief Superintendent Neil Diver who was in overall charge of the unit. Glen also gave an account of what he had heard of Diver's subsequent career which allegedly involved him being caught trying to book a hotel room in Piccadilly, in the company of a young man, using a forged cheque. 

Foulton gave evidence regarding an occasion when he claims Special Branch officers attempted to stop him and a colleague interviewing a young man in Feltham Borstal in the course of a murder investigation. According to Foulton the interview still went ahead but after it had been established that the interviewee had an alibi for the murder, and the formal part of the interview was over, he had apparently referred to having had a sexual relationship with Cyril Smith. 

All of the above claims were the subject of investigations by the IOPC and/or the Mets Professional Standards who found little or no supporting evidence from other officers or from what few records survived. The man interviewed at Feltham has denied he knew Cyril Smith. (The relevant reports are all online on the IICSA website at the link above). This was put to these four witnesses all of whom stood by the substance of their accounts.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 8, 2019)

Reformatted PDF of yesterdays IICSA hearing (Thursday 7th) is here. Original version and supporting documents are here. (It seems to take longer for reports and documents to go up, presumably because they are checked over by the lawyers).

Yesterday the inquiry heard evidence from more serving and former policemen.

Det-Supt. Kirby of Wiltshire police testified about how two former Met officers were put in touch with Mike Veale the former Wiltshire Chief Constable by a journalist. After looking at what they had to say it was referred to the Met's Operation Winter Key. The two former officers then gave evidence themselves.

Ex-Inspector Malcolm Sinclair and Ex-Inspector Paul Holmes both gave evidence about their time in the Clubs Office at West End Central. Sinclair was attached to it from 1977-79. Holmes had spent much of his career as a policeman working with the Clubs Office and it's successor units.

Both spoke about an operation which had been shut down about 1978. This was evidently a different operation to the one referred to by Ex-Supt. Glen in his evidence on the 6th, and had happened after it. Their recollections of it differed. Sinclair (at the time a sergeant) said he recalled seeing Cyril Smith pick up a young boy in Piccadilly Circus and drive him to an address in Cricklewood. This house was watched and he said that he had seen Edward Heath, Jeremy Thorpe and Leon Brittan also enter the flat during the course of this surveillance.

Paul Holmes' recollection of the operation was different. He recalled the flat belonged to Rodham Twiss, the son of a former Black Rod, who was suspected of acting as a procurer of children and young men. He thought the surveillance had been initiated because of information received about Twiss. Although he had taken part in the surveillance he had never seen any of the four people named by Sinclair. He recalled Cyril Smith's name being discussed, because Smith's activities had previously come to the attention of the Clubs Office. He did not recall any of the other three names being discussed at the time.

Both men referred to the operation being shut down. Holmes suggested a number of possible reasons why enquiries might have been stopped and why there might have been a reluctance to pursue investigations involving prominent people. He also discussed his work in the West End more generally. (Other matters were touched on by both former officers - I think it is worth reading both evidence sessions together with that of ex-Supt. Glen).

Lastly Commander Neil Jerome, current head of the Met’s Police Central Specialist Crime Command gave evidence about a report which the Met had been asked to compile about the various investigations into allegations relating to Elm Guest House. (Brief extracts were also read from a statement by former DCI Paul Settle which had been provided to the inquiry independently). People interested in Elm Guest House will wish to read the transcript of this session for themselves (and also the report and statements as they go up online). In brief no evidence of any kind was found to support the well known claims about Elm Guest House, and doubts about the credibility of Chris Fay in particular were expressed fairly bluntly.


----------



## elbows (Mar 11, 2019)

Not got much time but just wanted to say thanks for the better formatted documents. I read the original format of last Mondays, and yours from Wednesday and Thursday so far, so I have some gaps I would like to fill before commenting on what I've read so far.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 11, 2019)

elbows said:


> Not got much time but just wanted to say thanks for the better formatted documents. I read the original format of last Mondays, and yours from Wednesday and Thursday so far, so I have some gaps I would like to fill before commenting on what I've read so far.


Glad they're of use. Got sick of trying to read their annoying format for the Rochdale hearings last year so this was primarily for my own benefit. Friday will be up later this evening, hopefully followed very shortly afterwards by todays sessions.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 12, 2019)

Reformatted versions of the transcripts of the IICSA hearings last Friday 8th - PDF here - and yesterday Monday 11th - PDF here. Originals and supporting documents on their website here.

Friday was taken up with a long evidence session with Don Hale a journalist who has been praised in the past for his work in miscarriage of justice cases. Hale has claimed that Barbara Castle supplied him with documents about Westminster supporters of PIE in 1984 when he was the acting editor of the Bury Messenger, all of which were seized by Special Branch officers in a raid in which he said they served a D-Notice on him.

Hale was questioned at length about the multiple inconsistencies between the various statements he has given police, and between those statements and the press stories, for which he either been the source or the credited co-author. I think it would be fair to say that his explanations fell somewhat short.

In what might seem like overkill Hale was followed by Geoffrey Dodds, current Secretary of the DSMA Committee to explain what D Notices are, something this "multiple award winning" journalist still didn't seem to grasp.

I must admit that I already regarded Hale's claims with a good deal of scepticism but his performance at the inquiry left me somewhat gobsmacked. Personal highlights were his repeated inability to get Rhodes Boyson's name right, even at one point misspelling it out loud, and his attempt to describe the photocopier technology available in a newspaper office in 1984. I think if I was a victim of a miscarriage of justice and I saw Don Hale OBE looming on the horizon to assist me I'd be looking around for a club to fight him off with.

(The Bury Messenger incidentally was one of the free sheets owned by Eddie Shah. It was at his Bury typesetting plant, Caps Ltd, that he first attempted to circumvent the closed shop agreement he had with the NGA by hiring non-union labour. This led to the disastrously unsuccessful strike at the Stockport Messenger in 1983-84, that humbled the NGA and set the stage for the News International strike in 1986 which broke the Fleet Street print unions. The Bury Messenger was thus an odd choice of newspaper for lifelong NUJ member Barbara Castle to have approached at any time — on the most charitable interpretation only about a quarter of the content of Shah's free titles was "news" — but particularly just after the Stockport Messenger strike had ended).

Yesterdays hearing (Monday 11th) first heard from four people about the claims that sometime in the late 1980s the Labour and Conservative parties in Chester had agreed to 'bury' the issue of Peter Morrison's paedophilia in exchange for an undertaking that he would stand down at the next election.

Doreen Frances Mowatt the Conservative Agent in Chester denied that there had ever been any rumours about Morrison at all or any meetings with the Labour Party. 

Grahame Nicholls and Jane Lee both Labour Party members at the time said that they recalled a meeting at which it was said a deal had been struck between the parties about Morrison standing down. 

Christine Russell, the Labour Party Agent in the relevant part of the 1980s and subsequently the M.P. for the area described a meeting that Labour Candidate David Robinson had had with Doreen Mowatt at Mowatt's request, at which Mowatt supposedly said that Morrison was unwell and would not be standing at future elections. However she said that there had been no agreement of any kind arising out of this. (Doreen Mowatt herself had denied earlier the meeting ever took place). Russell denied she had ever stated, at that time or since, that there had been a pact between the parties.

The last witness was an anonymous MI5 employee. The live feed was turned off for his testimony. He stated he was a lawyer and perhaps inevitably the first part of his evidence consisted of a tedious series of very minor amendments to the written statement he had given the inquiry. He testified that documents found in MI5 archives confirmed that MI5 had been aware of allegations about various politicians and civil servants. That very little had been done in response and what had been done gave no thought whatever to the fact that the allegations concerned possible criminal activity. Lastly he described the MI5's recently adopted and absolutely excellent safeguarding policy that would ensure the stable doors were properly lubricated in future. 

Records relating to Morrison and Hayman were discussed at more length, as was an MI5 interview with the latter which doesn't seem to have led to anything. The names of Maurice Oldfield, Tom Driberg, Leon Brittan (a rumour apparently about another M.P. rather than Brittan himself), Christopher Chattaway, Charles Irving, Lord Lambton, Colin Peters and William van Straubenzee were mentioned. Can't say I heard anything new and since the concerns expressed to MI5 generally led to no action being taken, it is hard to judge whether some of those concerns were actually about paedophile activity or about homosexuality. The only thing that is clear is that there was no concern about possible victims of sexual abuse.


----------



## elbows (Mar 12, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> The Bury Messenger was thus an odd choice of newspaper for lifelong NUJ member Barbara Castle to have approached at any time — on the most charitable interpretation only about a quarter of the content of Shah's free titles was "news" — but particularly just after the Stockport Messenger strike had ended).



I didnt find that bit all that odd, if other parts of Hales testimony regarding Barbara Castle were anything like accurate. ie They already knew each other quite well, and I dont think its too odd that personal and professional connections might be more of a factor than certain aspects of the publication.

Not a biggie really but just something that has popped into my head as I'm reading it, mostly because I read your post before I started. I still have lots of it to read so may comment again later, cheers. The main thing thats made me groan so far was at the start where he was reeling off his awards and accomplishments.


----------



## elbows (Mar 12, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> In what might seem like overkill Hale was followed by Geoffrey Dodds, current Secretary of the DSMA Committee to explain what D Notices are, something this "multiple award winning" journalist still didn't seem to grasp.



Not really overkill, because part of the inquiries purpose is surely to deal with all the stuff that was being churned up in public. They were always bound to try to educate people about what the D/DA-notice realities are.

I got through the Hale evidence, somehow. I suppose the quality of his evidence was approximately in line with the quality I often imaged documents from 'dossiers' of Castle & Dickens possessed. Which is not to say there was zero of value in any of it, but it does tend to smell the same as the usual conflations, mishmashes mixed agendas that were sort of partially evident when these 'dossiers' were discussed in the press at the time, let alone decades later when it all came up again. Including the sort of stuff Cameron did a poor job of trying to explain to Philip Schofield in the infamous 'list waved about on telly' incident. I was sort of hoping that at some point we might at least get a few more clues about why names like Rhodes Boyson have tended to pop up, but I'm not sure how much hope I really still have of that, its quite possible very little is going to be elevated above the typical levels of historical scurrilous gossip and conflation.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 13, 2019)

Reformatted version of the transcript of yesterdays IICSA hearing (Tuesday 12th). PDF here. Originals and supporting documents (witness statements and documents discussed) are here.

This hearing was primarily devoted to issues raised by the official response to allegations about Peter Morrison.

Susan Hogg, Morrison's civil service diary secretary from 1983 to 1985, gave evidence, referring to his heavy drinking and to the impression she had formed that he had a relationship of some nature with someone called Eliza, who she discovered later was Eliza Manningham-Buller.

Baroness Elizabeth Manningham-Buller gave evidence of her friendship with Morrison in the 1980s when she was a junior officer with MI5. She said she had been a friend but not a girlfriend although she wondered if that might be an impression he sought to give. She was taken through the various pieces of official correspondence discussing Morrison which the inquiry has received, which include two memos from her to her MI5 managers in 1986. These reported allegations about Morrison which she had heard from a friend, and then an account of conversations she had with Morrison and his father which referred to those allegations. She agreed that it appeared that prior to this she had passed up information about Morrison, although documentation regarding that hasn't been found. She said this was the one and only time she could recall reporting on a friend. She said she took no view about the allegations at the time although uneasiness about them later formed part of the reasons for not attending his funeral in 1995. She agreed that the way that the allegations had been examined at the time was inadequate and felt it reflected MI5's narrow focus on any security implications, excluding any consideration of whether crimes had been committed.

Lord Armstrong, formerly Sir Robert Armstrong, who was Cabinet Secretary from 1979 to 1987 also gave evidence about the correspondence made available to the inquiry. He confirmed that he had first discussed rumours about Morrison with Thatcher in 1983. She had already heard them and it was agreed that it was a matter for the police to investigate. Armstrong was taken through the items of correspondence about Morrison in 1986. His understanding was that Thatcher did not feel there was a need for any more rigorous examination of the allegations. His view was that Morrison's ministerial roles were not in departments where security implications were significant, and that his role as Tory Deputy Chair was a matter for the party. He then gave evidence about the response to allegations about Peter Hayman, including a briefing note to Thatcher. He could not recall what response she made to it.

Lastly Giles Brandreth who replaced Morrison as Tory M.P. for Chester gave evidence about his dealings with Morrison, that he had first heard rumours about him during canvassing, and about his time as a Tory whip.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 13, 2019)

elbows said:


> I didnt find that bit all that odd, if other parts of Hales testimony regarding Barbara Castle were anything like accurate. ie They already knew each other quite well, and I dont think its too odd that personal and professional connections might be more of a factor than certain aspects of the publication.



I can see how that might be the case. However as far as I'm aware the only evidence they were friends is Hale's own claims long after her death. I could go on at even more tedious length than usual about why his claims strike multiple false notes for me but actually it's much simpler than that. I watched the live stream of Hale's evidence and to me he resembled someone who'd got lost on his way to collect the wooden spoon award at the Britain's Got Bullshitters finale.

Still I hadn't actually intended to editorialize much while the hearings are taking place and I'll leave it there.



elbows said:


> I was sort of hoping that at some point we might at least get a few more clues about why names like Rhodes Boyson have tended to pop up, but I'm not sure how much hope I really still have of that,



Sadly I'm old enough to remember Rhodes Boyson. He was a prominent supporter of corporal punishment in schools which led as I well recall to a lot of jokes about him probably being into spanking. He was also one of the more prominent opponents of any liberalization of the laws against homosexuality, and thus subject to jokes about how he was probably in the closet. Given his vocal public stance on these sorts of issues I can't see how any perception that his private life didn't reflect the bollocks he came out with wouldn't have been the subject of amused gossip. Which I don't recall. The current allegations may simply reflect a distorted half-memory of those jokes about him. 

I suppose now they'll find a 'missing dossier' and I'll have to eat my words, but until then...


----------



## eatmorecheese (Mar 13, 2019)

Boris Johnson under fire over remarks about child abuse inquiries

Just as an aside, another crappy intervention from a buffoon.


----------



## elbows (Mar 13, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> Sadly I'm old enough to remember Rhodes Boyson. He was a prominent supporter of corporal punishment in schools which led as I well recall to a lot of jokes about him probably being into spanking. He was also one of the more prominent opponents of any liberalization of the laws against homosexuality, and thus subject to jokes about how he was probably in the closet. Given his vocal public stance on these sorts of issues I can't see how any perception that his private life didn't reflect the bollocks he came out with wouldn't have been the subject of amused gossip. Which I don't recall. The current allegations may simply reflect a distorted half-memory of those jokes about him.
> 
> I suppose now they'll find a 'missing dossier' and I'll have to eat my words, but until then...



Much earlier in the thread I found an interview Gove did with Boyson on the telly, during Goves brief TV career. Gove threw several pieces of innuendo his way. I suppose I asked about Royson here because I am already well used to this module of the inquiry often having little more than gossip to deal with. But with Boyson we mostly have his name popping up in a couple of different contexts, but without much that starts to build an impression of the 'background gossip' relating to him historically. And most of the other names that popped up a few years ago also popped up at least somewhere in the media several times in the more distant past, ie the allegations were not new, and I dont recall the same being true for Boyson.

Oh God it was the Liberals today. Steel was awful, and I probably only made it through the entire days testimony because Des Wilsons testimony was a bit fruity in places.


----------



## zahir (Mar 14, 2019)

The Guardian has a report on Steel’s statement.

Lord Steel says he believed Cyril Smith child abuse allegations


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 14, 2019)

Reformatted PDF here of yesterday's IICSA transcript (Wednesday 13th).

Baroness Brinton gave evidence about the shift from the significantly decentralised Liberal Party of the 1960s to the rather more modern Liberal Democrat structure and outlined it's safeguarding procedures.

Des Wilson gave an entertainingly blunt account of the parliamentary party in the 1970s and 1980s and how it's failings may have contributed to the failure to investigate or deal with the allegations against Cyril Smith when they became public in 1979.

Lord Steel explained that he hadn't seen the need to do anything about ten year old allegations once Cyril Smith had told him they had been investigated but no charges followed.

I see the Guardian and other papers are reporting that Smith had confessed to child abuse and that Steel believed him  which wasn't exactly what I heard. 

What I understood him to be saying was that Smith had said that the allegations in the Private Eye article were true but that they had been investigated by the police and that they had taken no further action. This was a lie since they had sent a report to the DPP with the expectation of being able to charge him with indecent assault and Smith knew that. Steel didn't question this and accepted the implication that the police had found insufficient evidence to proceed. He wasn't asked about it but from previous statements he has made and his written statement to the inquiry he also appears to be saying that at the time he saw the issue as being about corporal punishment as distinct from sexual assault. Obviously that in no way excuses his abject failure to act.

To a question from one of the core participants as to whether she was aware of any other allegations of child sexual abuse against any Liberal Democrat MPs since Cyril Smith, Baroness Brinton replied no. 

I suppose that Clement Freud, being dead, was no longer an MP when allegations against him became public. However I am guessing the question may have been motivated by the allegations made against former Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming by Esther Baker who has core participant status at the Inquiry. The police investigated and interviewed Hemming under caution but found insufficient evidence to charge him. Hemming himself went public at this point. The police subsequently decided there was "insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction for perverting the course of justice" against Baker. 

Hemming recently agreed an out of court settlement in a libel action he began against Graham Wilmer and former Exaro journalist David Hencke over statements they had made about him. More details here :
Two Supporters of “VIP Abuse” Accuser Esther Baker Settle Libel Claim Brought by Former MP John Hemming - Bartholomew's Notes


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 14, 2019)

Reformatted PDF here of today's IICSA hearing. Original and other documents here.

Liz Reason testified on behalf of the Greens. Outlined their brand new safeguarding policies. Discussed the Challenors and a couple of other recent cases. At the end was asked to look at an email the Greens received in 2014, thus predating their current systems, alleging that a candidate was unfit due to alleged past sexual misconduct. Liz Reason said she had only just seen it herself and wasn't sure of it's source. She said they hadn't been able to find it on their email systems. Hilariously it turned the Greens themselves had supplied it to the Inquiry some time ago.

Helen McNamara a senior official in the Cabinet Office testified about the working of the Cabinet Office Secretariat which manages one part of the honours system. The processes of nomination and scrutiny, and the mechanisms for annulling honours awarded to people found unworthy and still alive were gone through. Various examples were discussed: Savile, Rolf Harris, Hayman, Cyril Smith.


----------



## elbows (Mar 14, 2019)

The Lib Dems arent happy with Steel either:



> Liberal Democrat deputy leader Jo Swinson tweeted: "The party has rightly begun a disciplinary investigation into Lord Steel following his revelations.
> 
> "Clearly this is incredibly serious and he should be suspended while this takes place."





> Lord Steel said he had "assumed" that Smith had committed the offences, but said he took no further action because: "It was before he was an MP, before he was even a member of my party. It had nothing to do with me."
> 
> Lord Steel also described recommending Smith for a knighthood in 1988 and said he did not pass on any allegations about the sexual abuse of children because "I was not aware of any such allegations other than the matter referred to…which appeared to have been fully investigated."
> 
> And he said it had not occurred to him that children could still have been at risk from Smith.



Liberal Democrats investigate former leader

The Savile stuff also generated some stories such as:

Honours panel 'told of Savile abuse in 1998'



> The committee that recommends people for knighthoods received allegations of child sexual abuse against Jimmy Savile in 1998, an inquiry has heard.
> 
> The head of the Honours Committee also resisted pressure from Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s to knight Savile, according to letters seen by the probe.


----------



## Beermoth (Mar 15, 2019)

Steel was saying all this 5 years ago



> Asked if he had looked into rumours about Smith’s behaviour while a Liberal MP, he said: “We are a political party – not a detective agency.”



David Steel responds to Cyril Smith allegations: “Idle gossip is not a basis for any inquiry at all”

Don't know why he wasn't suspended then.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 15, 2019)

Beermoth said:


> Steel was saying all this 5 years ago
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't want to be seen to be defending Steel, but there is an important consideration to bear in mind here: we have come a long way since the early 1990s, and I fear that Steel's attitude closely reflected the prevailing view at the time, which was that nobody was interested in looking too hard for evidence of child sexual abuse in the absence of overwhelming pressure to do so - it was almost as if it were regarded as a victimless crime, presumably because the victims were nearly always silent.

Steel could have been part of the solution to that problem, and had the courage to speak out. He could have refused to recommend Smith for a knighthood, and said why, without doing any more than putting himself in a slightly awkward position. He didn't, and he's poorer as a person for that...but I think it would be a mistake if he became the sole focus, and thus the scapegoat, for a pervasive societal attitude towards child sexual abuse that pretty much guaranteed that victims wouldn't be heard, and perpetrators would never be held to account.

It may even be that, had he spoken out, he'd have been ignored or shouted down. But the fact he didn't take that risk reflects as badly on him as it does on a society which was prepared to allow abusers to operate with impunity, almost in plain view.

And we've come a long way, but we'd be fools to believe we're out of those woods even now.


----------



## elbows (Mar 15, 2019)

He isnt going to be the sole focus, its just the Lib Dems trying to look like they give a shit now.

Quite similar stuff was being said just a day or two earlier about Thatcher and the tories in regards Peter Morrison, eg MP child abuse claims 'not questioned'


----------



## existentialist (Mar 15, 2019)

elbows said:


> He isnt going to be the sole focus, its just the Lib Dems trying to look like they give a shit now.
> 
> Quite similar stuff was being said just a day or two earlier about Thatcher and the tories in regards Peter Morrison, eg MP child abuse claims 'not questioned'


Well, yes, and the same could be said of her, though my - uncharitable - view is that she seemed to have much more of a vested interest in keeping a lid on things.


----------



## elbows (Mar 20, 2019)

I've just been catching up with last Fridays hearing, which was all about the whips. I dont have that much to say, except that some of the more excessive attempts to overly sanitise the details of the work of the whips were somewhat undermined by all the whips papers that lord Jopling kept and submitted as evidence. There were also some ambiguous comments about Geoffrey Dickens and his campaigns, from which it was hard to draw firm conclusions due to the impossibility of separating their feelings about his campaigns and the press they generated, from the wider disobedient nightmare he posed for the whips.

A small part of the questioning of Sir Murdo Maclean seemed to relate to leaning on a member of the press in relation to a potential story about Peter Morrison.

The day before there was some stuff related to the honours system, which included going easy on Sir Peter Hayman, and Thatcher pushing for Jimmy Savile to get another award, which I believe we have already heard about before.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 25, 2019)

IICSA hearings began again today after a weeks break. Reformatted version of today's transcript - PDF here. Original and supporting documents are here.

Today was devoted to evidence from Tim Hulbert who has claimed he saw evidence of Home Office funding for PIE. This was previously looked at as part of the review conducted by Peter Wanless and Richard Whittam - their report and annexes here.

First Michael Cox who headed the secretariat for the Wanless/Whittam review gave evidence regarding the scope of the searches of departmental records and efforts to contact former civil servants.

The rest of the day was taken up with evidence from Tim Hulbert, questioned first by Counsel for the Inquiry and then by his own Counsel.


----------



## yield (Mar 25, 2019)

Thanks Lurdan & elbows


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 26, 2019)

Reformatted version of today's transcript - PDF here. Original and supporting documents here.

Jeremy Clark of the Albany Trust gave evidence about the Trust's dealings with PIE.

Professor June Thoburn gave evidence about the review she was asked to conduct into the safeguarding policies held by various political parties, Government departments and at Westminster.

An anonymous SIS compliance officer gave evidence about searches for documents relevant to the Inquiry which had turned up very little, about the Service's current child protection policy, and discussed some cases from before and after it's introduction.

Lastly Chris Mahaffey lead senior investigator for the IOPC and Commander Catherine Roper head of Professional Standards for the Met returned to jointly give evidence about matters arising from the evidence from other Police witnesses during week one of these hearings. A series of bland assurances were given that while there were issues things weren't that bad in the past and are ever so much better today.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 27, 2019)

Reformatted version of today's transcript - PDF here. Original and supporting documents here.

Robert Montagu gave evidence about being sexually abused by his father Victor Montagu. 

Former Detective Sergeant Bryan Collins gave evidence about his time in the Met's Obscene Publications Squad in the mid-1970s and specifically his recollection of interviewing Andre Thorne at Feltham Borstal when he made allegations about Cyril Smith, his role in the investigation of PIE and in the separate investigation of Peter Hayman and others which developed out of that.

Jeremy Naunton gave evidence about his role as a junior Solicitor in the DPP at the time that the decision was made to caution rather than prosecute Peter Hayman.

Lastly Gregor McGill current Director of legal services at the CPS gave evidence about the reports which the CPS had given the inquiry about the decisions to caution Montagu and Hayman.

This was the last day of evidence sessions. The Inquiry isn't sitting tomorrow. On Friday there will be closing statements.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 29, 2019)

Reformatted version of today's transcript - PDF here. Original and supporting documents here.

The last day of public hearings for the IICSA Westminster investigation heard closing statements from Richard Scorer, on behalf of seven men who have claimed they were abused by Cyril Smith, and from Counsel for Esther Baker, Harvey Proctor, Tim Hulbert, the Met, the IOPC, the CPS, the Home Office and the Labour Party.

Brian Altman the Counsel to the Inquiry then spoke about leaks of some of the material that had been disclosed to core participants to a journalist (who wasn't named). It had not been discovered who had done this but he suggested it seemed likely it was a core participant. Alexis Jay indicated her unhappiness about it. Proctor's counsel then drew attention to another apparent leak of the contents of an email from Proctor's legal team to Inquiry staff which hadn't been circulated to core participants, reopening the issue of who might have been at fault.

The most interesting of the closing statements IMO was that by Richard Scorer, which challenged some of the claims made on behalf of the Liberal Party by Baroness Brinton, robustly criticised David Steel, questioned the responses made to the Inquiry by some of the witnesses on behalf of institutions and also criticised the role played by conspiracy theorists, in that context mentioning Don Hale. He concluded :



> In 2014, when this inquiry was established, rumours of VIP paedophile rings were at their height. Some of the headlines from that period were lurid, sensationalist and highly questionable. Through this inquiry, some of those conspiracy theories have been exposed as the fictions that they always were, but that does not mean there is nothing to see here.





> Indeed, what has replaced the more fantastical conspiracy theories during the course of this inquiry is perhaps less salacious for the media, but we say far more concerning. From Cyril Smith to Peter Hayman to Viscount Montagu, these hearings have uncovered real and compelling evidence of men evading justice because of their power and social status. There has been evidence of coverup, of more favourable treatment and of deals being done.





> The evidence has demonstrated a real culture of deference to people of public prominence and a failure by political parties to grasp even the basic elements of safeguarding.





> As we said at the beginning, political parties and state bodies have failed to treat the welfare and safeguarding of children as even a factor to be considered. Welfare of children has been a distant concern.



Of the other closing statements, that on behalf of Tim Hulbert repeated, at considerable length, his claims about the Home Office funding PIE and attempted to address the lack of any supporting evidence beyond Hulbert's own recollections. Counsel for the Home Office suggested that Hulbert was genuine but mistaken in his claims, drawing attention to the fact that these have now been looked at several times, and that the new information the Inquiry has heard does nothing to support them.

The statement on behalf of Harvey Proctor was in the same confrontational vein as the opening statement made by Geoff Robertson. Sadly Robertson himself wasn't available today, but his junior counsel Mr Wagner did his best to make up for this. At one point he stated that Elm Guest House was "equally fantastical", and that there was no VIP Paedophile network at Westminster. This appeared to provoke what the transcript refers to as an "outburst" from the public gallery. (I was listening to it live but couldn't make out what was being said). Later during the day Wagner asked to clarify that he had meant to say the 'Elm House List' was fantastical.

Of the various statements by the institutional core participants, that for the Met briefly took up the notion of a few "rotten apples" rather than a culture of deference, and then moved swiftly on to address Don Hale's claims that his statements contradicted one another because they hadn't been taken down accurately by the Police.

Counsel for the CPS stressed how very difficult it all was, and illustrated this by demonstrating that it is indeed very difficult to put a favourable gloss on the DPP's decisions not to prosecute Hayman and Montagu.

The Inquiry expects to produce its report on this investigation early next year.


----------



## elbows (Mar 31, 2019)

Thanks for your efforts as always. A lot of the Montagu detail was rather graphic, wish I hadnt read some of it even though it was an important case to look at. The police report about a victims mother was not exactly subtle in terms of attitudes towards class.

This probably belongs in this thread too:

Honours system under scrutiny after sex abuser kept title for years



> Hubert Chesshyre, 78, an expert on heraldry and genealogy, held a number of senior positions within the royal household, rising to become secretary of the most noble order of the garter, the highest order in British chivalry. Among the many honours bestowed upon him over more than 40 years were the Queen’s Silver and Golden Jubilee Medals, and the commander of the Royal Victorian Order (CVO) – the latter for distinguished personal service to the monarch. A fellow or member of several illustrious organisations and charities, he was a heraldic consultant to the likes of Sir Paul McCartney, Lord Sugar and Sir Terry Pratchett.
> 
> But it recently emerged during the Independent Inquiry Into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) that in 2015 Chesshyre was found to have sexually abused a teenage chorister during the 1990s, a fact that has remained buried from public record. This is because Chesshyre’s case did not result in a criminal conviction. Rather, the inquiry heard “he was found to have committed the acts in question” in a trial of the facts.





> The fact that Chesshyre’s name was misspelled throughout the trial, despite repeated police efforts to have it corrected, has made it difficult to identify him in legal databases.





> In October 2015, Chesshyre’s victim wrote to Sir Alan Reid, secretary of the Royal Victorian Order, calling for forfeiture of Chesshyre’s honour. Reid replied that this would be wrong because Chesshyre had been given an absolute discharge, and no conviction registered. Reid’s position was mirrored by that of several organisations. The Heraldry Society said that it had no plans to remove his fellowship, in an email seen by the _Observer_.
> 
> In another email to the victim, the Society of Antiquaries of London said it would not put the question of his removal to the fellows of the society. The Bach Choir said it was “not incumbent” on it to take any further action as Chesshyre, an associate member, had no involvement with it any more. The Corporation of London emailed the victim to tell him it did not have the power to remove Chesshyre’s status as a Freeman of the City of London. The Institute of Heraldic and Genealogical Studies continues to list Hubert Chesshyre CVO as a vice-president.





> It was only after the victim contacted his MP, who took it up with the prime minister, that the honour was eventually forefeited. But the victim only learned of this action in October 2018, five months after it happened and three years after Chesshyre’s trial. He was dismayed to learn via a Cabinet Office email that the forefeiture would not be published in the _London Gazette_, a standard procedure.





> As of Saturday night, Chesshyre’s Wikipedia page made no mention of his trial. When approached by the _Observer_, the various societies of which he is a member confirmed that they would not be dissociating themselves from him. The victim said: “As far as most people are concerned, he’s still Hubert Chesshyre CVO.”


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 16, 2019)

I heard Frankie Boyle say the other night ‘He doesn’t believe there was a paedophile ring in Westminster, it was more of an orderly queue’!


----------



## elbows (Apr 16, 2019)

> Senior police officers may have influenced decisions about inquiries going ahead into child abuse allegations against a politician, a watchdog has said.
> 
> Leicestershire Police inquiries into Lord Janner are being reviewed by the Independent Office for Police Conduct.
> 
> ...





> While emphasising its investigation was ongoing, the IOPC outlined "matters of concern" including:
> 
> 
> In the early 1990s, before a formal investigation into Lord Janner commenced, police records indicate "a number of references to a relationship, including a sexual relationship, between Lord Janner and a child", but there is no evidence the claims were looked into
> ...



Senior police 'influenced' abuse inquiry


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2019)

elbows said:


> Senior police 'influenced' abuse inquiry


The whole barrel is rotten


----------



## Lurdan (May 14, 2019)

Carl ("Nick") Beech's trial, on 12 charges of perverting the course of justice over his VIP abuse claims and one of fraud, began last week at Newcastle Crown Court. The first three days were taken up with various procedural matters. Today it heard the start of the prosecution's opening statement.

Carl Beech told 'extraordinary tale' of VIP paedophile ring - BBC News
Westminster VIP abuse accuser 'fled to Sweden when story collapsed - Guardian

The judge gave permission last week for the trial to be live tweeted. The most detailed twitter stream I've found so far is from Jordan Milne of Sky News. For those who hate twitter here is is as a VERY LARGE image. (As with twitter itself you need to read it from bottom to top).



Spoiler: IT'S QUITE BIG!!












ETA: or better still read it at the link in The Hooded Claw's post below.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (May 14, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> The most detailed twitter stream I've found so far is from Jordan Milne of Sky News. For those who hate twitter here is is as a VERY LARGE image. (As with twitter itself you need to read it from bottom to top).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: IT'S QUITE BIG!!



An easier way to display a long thread is to reply to any of the tweets in the thread with "@threadreaderapp unroll" and the Thread  Reader App bot will send you a link to the threaded tweets in a more readable format eg 

Thread by @JEMilneSky: "Today I’m at Newcastle Crown Court for the opening of the trial of Carl Beech - who is accused of making false allegations of the “most seri […]"


----------



## Lurdan (May 14, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> An easier way to display a long thread is to reply to any of the tweets in the thread with "@threadreaderapp unroll" and the Thread  Reader App bot will send you a link to the threaded tweets in a more readable format eg
> 
> Thread by @JEMilneSky: "Today I’m at Newcastle Crown Court for the opening of the trial of Carl Beech - who is accused of making false allegations of the “most seri […]"


Just discovered that - cheers.


----------



## Lurdan (May 18, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

News Story links (Tuesday 14th links are in post 6565 above).


Spoiler: News Story Links



Wednesday 15th

Child abuse accuser Carl Beech a paedophile, court told - BBC News
Westminster VIP abuse accuser 'posed as fake witness to back up his claims' - The Guardian
Man who sparked VIP abuse ring inquiry is paedophile, court told - The Guardian

Thursday 16th

Carl Beech 'did not know' alleged abusers' names - BBC News
'VIP abuse ring' accuser initially named only Jimmy Savile and stepfather - The Guardian

Friday 17th

Carl Beech trial: No evidence in Westminster paedophile ring accuser's first claims, jury told - Independent
Police could not stand up VIP accuser's first abuse claims, jury told - The Guardian



Jordan Milne of Sky News has live tweeted the proceedings so far. A link to the text of her tweets on Tuesday is in TheHoodedClaws post above. Unfortunately her tweets on Wednesday and Thursday morning weren't threaded - here are links to PDFs of the text for those :

Wednesday
Thursday Morning

And links to
Thursday Afternoon
Friday.

Finally there are useful daily posts at the realtrollexposure blog. (Saying that these posts are useful isn't an endorsement of the blogger, who on past form seems to me like a bit of an arse).

Tuesday,	Wednesday,	Thursday,   Friday

The trial resumes next Wednesday morning.


----------



## Lurdan (May 25, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

Much of the week was taken up with evidence from DS Townley of the Met. about the interviews Beech gave them in October and November 2014, which led to Operation Midland being set up.

News Story links :


Spoiler: News Story Links



Wednesday 22nd May

VIP abuse accuser gave police list of suspects 'after he saw reporter's photos' - Guardian
'Nick' who sparked VIP paedophile ring probe 'said MP Tom Watson knew of his "extraordinary" claims - Daily Mail

Thursday 23rd May

Edward Heath 'saved VIP abuse accuser from attack by Tory MP' - Guardian 
Abuse accuser Carl Beech told police 'MI5 boss stole my dog' - BBC News
'Fantasist known as Nick' claimed ex-MP Harvey Proctor was violent - Daily Mail

Friday 24th May

'Nick' lied to police about VIP abuse ring murders, court told - The Guardian
Abuse accuser Carl Beech says he 'saw three boys being murdered' - BBC News
Ex-colonel dismisses 'asinine' claims by 'fantasist known as Nick' who said he was 'smuggled into barracks and abused by former head of the British Army Lord Bramall' - Daily Mail



Unlike last week there was no live tweeting from Sky News. There were some short threads by the BBC's Daniel De Simone including this one about Friday afternoon.
*




*
There are also useful daily posts, which construct an account of the days proceedings from various sources, at the realtrollexposure blog. (To repeat what I said above this isn't an endorsement of the blogger).

Wednesday  -  Thursday  -  Friday

The trial resumes next Wednesday morning, 29th May.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 1, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*.

More prosecution evidence from the Police and from Beech's therapist.

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Wednesday 29th May

Abuse accuser Carl Beech 'shown images of potential victims by BBC reporter' - BBC News
'Fantasist known as Nick' behind VIP Westminster sex ring claims 'wept as he helped police artist draw e-fits of boys who never existed whom he said had been killed by MP Harvey Proctor' - Daily Mail

Thursday 30th May

VIP abuse accuser Carl Beech 'confided in counsellor' before police report - BBC News 
'Nick' drew map of injuries inflicted by alleged VIP paedophile ring - The Guardian 
Therapist tells court 'Fantasist known as Nick' handed her note 'naming Saudi Prince and foreign royals as his childhood abusers a year after he told police about Westminster sex ring' - Daily Mail Online 

Friday 31st May

VIP abuse ring accuser wrote email attacking Leon Brittan, jury hears - The Guardian
Fantasist called 'Nick', 51, described Lord Brittan as being 'as close to evil as a human can get' - Daily Mail



Useful daily summary posts drawn from various sources at the realtrollexposure blog. Not an endorsement of their author.

Wednesday  --  Thursday  --  Friday


Trial resumes next Tuesday 4th June.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 7, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*.

Lot less press coverage this week.

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Tuesday 4th June

Carl Beech schoolmate says he cannot recall any hit-and-run attack 

Wednesday 5th June

Carl Beech: Army chiefs accused of being in Westminster paedophile ring were men of ‘great integrity’, court told - Independant

Thursday 6th June

Scotland Yard detective visited Australia as part of VIP paedophile ring investigation, court hears - Telegraph



And the daily round up posts at the realtrollexposure blog. (Posts useful, their author less so etc. etc.)

Tuesday  --  Wednesday  --  Thursday

Trial resumes next Tuesday 11th June.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 15, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

Presentation of the Prosecution case continued - it's likely to go on for a couple more weeks. Only the Mail ran stories every day apart from Wednesday when Beech's ex-wife gave evidence. 

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Tuesday 11th June

VIP paedophile ring fantasist Carl Beech had £70,000 debt Newcastle Crown Court - Daily Mail

Wednesday 12th June

Carl Beech trial: ex-wife 'confronted him after Panorama appearance' - The Guardian

Ex-wife of abuse accuser Carl Beech 'first heard claims on TV' - BBC News

Ex-wife of 'fantasist known as Nick' gives evidence for first time - Daily Mail

Thursday 13th June

'Fantasist' known as Nick emailed police to describe MP Harvey Proctor as 'pure evil' - Daily Mail

Friday 14th June

VIP paedophile ring 'fantasist' known as Nick, 51, fled an interview room in tears - Daily Mail



The BBC's Daniel De Simone posted short twitter threads about some of the evidence on Wednesday and Thursday.

The daily summary posts at the realtrollexposure blog. (Not an endorsement of the author etc.).

Tuesday  --  Wednesday  --  Thursday  --  Friday

The trial resumes next Monday June 17th.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 22, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

The Prosecution presented what is likely to be the last full week of it's case, expected to conclude next week. Aside from the Daily Mail, press coverage focussed on the video of Lord Bramall's interview under caution which was played in Court on Monday, Harvey Proctor's evidence on Thursday and his cross examination on Friday.

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Monday 17th June

Abuse claims 'ridiculous', ex-Army chief told police - BBC News
Carl Beech trial shown video of ex-army chief banging desk in denial - The Guardian
Lord Bramall was interviewed by police over paedophile claims just days after his wife died - Telegraph
D-Day hero Lord Bramall slammed 'uncorroborated, monstrous' sex abuse claims made by 'Nick' - Daily Mail

Tuesday 18th June

Fantastist 'Nick' wrote 'memoir of abuse' in which he claimed VIP sex ring tortured him - Daily Mail

Wednesday 19th June

Dolphin Square sketch provided by 'fantasist' matched location featured in Culture Club video - Daily Mail

Thursday 20th June

VIP abuse ring claims made life a nightmare, former MP tells court - The Guardian
Harvey Proctor: VIP child abuse ring claims ‘ravings of a fantasist’, ex-Tory MP tells court - The Independent
Harvey Proctor: Murder and abuse claims 'horrendous', says former MP - BBC News
Harvey Proctor says allegations he was part of Westminster sex ring are 'polluted ravings of a fantasist' - Telegraph

Friday 21st June

Carl Beech trial: former Tory MP calls police inquiry a charade - The Guardian
Harvey Proctor: Carl Beech abuse inquiry police 'acted in bad faith' - BBC News
Ex-Tory MP denies existence of Westminster VIP paedophile ring - Sky News
Harvey Proctor accuses Met of leaking his name to media, Westminster child sex abuse trial hears - Telegraph
Harvey Proctor blasts Met Police for handling of case after false accusations he was a child killer - Daily Mail



On Thursday and Friday BBC and Sky News journalists tweeted from Court.

Martin Brunt (@skymartinbrunt) on Twitter
Daniel De Simone (@DdesimoneDaniel) on Twitter

And the daily summary posts at the realtrollexposure blog. (Not an endorsement of their author).

Monday  --  Tuesday  --  Wednesday  --  Thursday  --  Friday

The trial resumes on Tuesday 25th.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 26, 2019)

Fucking incredible 

How Ian Brady got access to teenagers in jail


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 29, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

Presentation of the Prosecution case continued. Although it was expected to conclude this week that didn't happen. 

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Tuesday 25th June

Retired general accused of abuse by 'Nick', dismisses claims as 'grotesque' - Telegraph
Former Army General brands VIP sex ring claims 'beyond grotesque' - Daily Mail

Wednesday 26th June

'Fantasist' known as Nick 'had no trace of any injuries' despite claiming VIPs broke his bones - Daily Mail

Thursday 27th June

'VIP sex ring fantasist blamed son and mother over child rape images' - Daily Mail



Useful daily summary posts at the realtrollexposure blog. No endorsement of their author intended.

Tuesday  --  Wednesday  --  Thursday

The trial is scheduled to continue in front of the jury on Tuesday 2nd July.


----------



## kenny g (Jun 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Fucking incredible
> 
> How Ian Brady got access to teenagers in jail



But not at all suprising. I wonder how many youngsters he raped whilst in detention with full access due to his status as cleaner.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 6, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

Coverage of the trial picked up this week as Carl Beech began giving evidence. On Tuesday the Prosecution finished their case. Beech took the stand on Wednesday.

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Tuesday 2nd July - None

Wednesday 3rd July

VIP abuse accuser Carl Beech 'tortured by generals' - BBC News
VIP paedophile ring accuser tells his trial he stands by his claims - The Guardian
'Nick' tells court of alleged abuse at hands of Lord Bramall as he claims he was raped by him at Army barracks - Telegraph
Sex abuse `lies´ accused repeats claims he was raped by Jimmy Saville - Press Association Report at Daily Mail
'Fantasist known as Nick' says he was raped by his Army stepfather on day out - Daily Mail

Thursday 4th July

'Fantasist Nick' contacted police in 2012 after Jimmy Savile scandal - Daily Mail
VIP abuse accuser Carl Beech claims friend was killed - BBC News
VIP abuse ring accuser gives graphic account of alleged killings - The Guardian

Friday 5th July

VIP abuse accuser Carl Beech 'lied about having child abuse images' - BBC News
VIP abuse ring accuser 'totally ashamed' of paedophile conviction - The Guardian
'VIP sex ring fantasist says he made 'stupid error' in missing his child porn court date - Daily Mail



For the days on which Beech gave evidence the best reporting is the live tweet threads from Jordan Milne of Sky News. Gathered together as text at these links :

Wednesday  --  Thursday  --  Friday

The daily round-up posts at the realtrollexposure blog (posts useful, author not so much). For Tuesday 2nd this is pretty much the only account fwiw.

Tuesday  --  Wednesday  --  Thursday  --  Friday

The trial continues at 10.00am on Monday. Cross examination of Beech should begin that day.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

Three days were taken up with the Prosecution cross examination of Carl Beech.

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Monday 8th July

VIP abuse accuser Carl Beech admits lying to police over 'witness' - BBC News
VIP accuser Nick admits he lied to police, court told - Telegraph
'Fantasist known as Nick', 51, 'admits he lied in first police interview ' - Daily Mail

Tuesday 9th July

VIP abuse accuser Carl Beech claims he was flown to Paris as a child - The Guardian
VIP sex abuse 'fantasist' put down&nbsp; deposit for a Ford Mustang day after receiving £22,000 compensation, court hears - Telegraph
'Fantasist known as Nick', 51, 'insists he was flown to Paris on a private 747 to be abused - Daily Mail

Wednesday 10th July

'Fantasist' known as Nick 'claimed he was abused by a Labour MP at a Conservative-only club' - Daily Mail
Selfie of 'Nick' posing in his pants is seen by jury as lawyer questions 'why he has NO scars' - Daily Mail



Best coverage of Monday and Tuesday's cross examination is the live tweet threads by Jordan Milne of Sky News. Here reformatted as text :

  Monday  --  Tuesday

Very short thread by the BBC's Daniel De Simone on Wednesday

Useful daily summary posts at the realtrollexposure blog. Ball not man (and balls he comes out with) etc etc.

Monday  --  Tuesday  --  Wednesday

Thursday was taken up with legal submissions. Trial resumes in front of the jury on Monday 15th July.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 14, 2019)

Prince Andrew's humiliation as 'sex slave' files of paedo pal to be released


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 20, 2019)

*Carl Beech trial round up*

Jury began deliberating Friday afternoon and will continue on Monday. So likely to be the last of these posts (cue loud cheering).

Defence case concluded Monday. Closing arguments by the Prosecution on Tuesday and by the Defence on Wednesday. Judge's summing up Thursday and Friday. Not many news stories.

News Story links


Spoiler: News Story Links



Monday 15th July

Exaro journalist told 'fantasist' known as Nick how to hide his internet activity - Daily Mail

Tuesday 16th July

Carl Beech: VIP abuse accuser 'habitual liar', court hears - BBC News
'Lies by fantasist Nick contained similarities to memoirs of an abuse survivor' court is told - Daily Mail

Wednesday 17th July

Carl Beech: VIP abuse accuser thought claims were true, a court hears - BBC News



Simon Warr live tweeted from court from Tuesday to Friday. Reformatted as text at these links.

Tuesday  —  Morning  --  Afternoon

Wednesday  —  Morning  --  Afternoon

Thursday  —  Morning  --  Afternoon

Friday  —  Morning  --  Afternoon

(Although Warr's twitter handle is @bbcsimonwarr he was there in a private capacity).

Daily summary posts at the realtrollexposure blog (despite their author).

Monday  --  Tuesday  --  Wednesday  --  Thursday --  Friday


----------



## elbows (Jul 22, 2019)

Beech has been found guilty, which is not surprising.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 22, 2019)

Sentencing hearing 10.00am Friday for the 13 guilty verdicts in this trial (twelve of perverting the course of justice and one of fraud), and the five counts of possession of child abuse images he pled guilty to earlier this year.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 22, 2019)

Tom Watson issues the statement he's been working on :


----------



## brogdale (Jul 28, 2019)

Gotta say...even in the heat of the (2014) media frenzy...the fact that the OB publicly stated that they thought what 'Nick' was saying to be true was, to say the least, rather strange.

How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 28, 2019)

Maybe. Context was police attempts to institutionalise believing the (alleged) victim and treating all allegations as credible, alongside wider context of institutional failure to address historic abuse. And police should treat all allegations as credible - although stating in press conferences that allegations are true when no convictions have yet been secured (and if memory serves, not even charges yet) is obviously reckless and cavalier.

I do worry about the consequences of the Beech case though. I know the abuse in wrexham around bryn estyn and bryn alyn was known about for years, decades - it was common knowledge - and I know it's murkier and darker than has come out, with scores of abusers never held to account. Tbh I regret the momentum of a few years ago has been lost


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 28, 2019)

18 years! Which is considerably more than what most child abusers get. To me that sounds like a strong message being sent out to anyone who goes to the police with accusations of abuse against powerful people.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Maybe. Context was police attempts to institutionalise believing the (alleged) victim and treating all allegations as credible, alongside wider context of institutional failure to address historic abuse. And police should treat all allegations as credible - although stating in press conferences that allegations are true when no convictions have yet been secured (and if memory serves, not even charges yet) is obviously reckless and cavalier.
> 
> I do worry about the consequences of the Beech case though. I know the abuse in wrexham around bryn estyn and bryn alyn was known about for years, decades - it was common knowledge - and I know it's murkier and darker than has come out, with scores of abusers never held to account. Tbh I regret the momentum of a few years ago has been lost


Agree with your concerns.
Clearly, the police failings with Beech will suit some within the political establishment in undermining the credibility of extant and yet to be revealed examples of high profile CSA.
Calling Beech's (then unproven) allegations "true" was a pretty startling example of how not to conduct an enquiry.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 28, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> 18 years! Which is considerably more than what most child abusers get. To me that sounds like a strong message being sent out to anyone who goes to the police with accusations of abuse against powerful people.


I posted about this other day, it does appear to be a chunky sentence, but I wasn't sure if the child porn charges also made up sentence - Mirror reported the 18 years was just for 12 x perverting course of justice and one count of fraud (getting 20k criminal compensation) while BBC reported that it also included half a dozen child porn charges


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I posted about this other day, it does appear to be a chunky sentence, but I wasn't sure if the child porn charges also made up sentence - Mirror reported the 18 years was just for 12 x perverting course of justice and one count of fraud (getting 20k criminal compensation) while BBC reported that it also included half a dozen child porn charges



Possession of child porn images wouldn't get you close to 18 years - so im assuming most of it was for perverting the course of justice. 
Did beech plead guilty?
Did he essentially rehash stories, accusations and rumour their were already out there and put it together in a narrative that placed himself at the centre of it - so various aspects looked corroborated and credible - thus gulling the mugs at the met?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 28, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Possession of child porn images wouldn't get you close to 18 years - so im assuming most of it was for perverting the course of justice.
> Did beech plead guilty?
> Did he essentially rehash stories, accusations and rumour their were already out there and put it together in a narrative that placed himself at the centre of it - so various aspects looked corroborated and credible - thus gulling the mugs at the met?


Guilty to child porn, not guilty to PCoJ and fraud. Yeah he weaved narrative from mixture of existing allegations, the (rampant) online conspiracy theory type stuff around CSA, and a book by a US abuse victim (from which he took lots of events that he claimed happened to him). He was able to draw pictures of people and properties linked to the claimed abuse because, unknown to police, an Exaro journalist had shown him photos (of people and places linked to existing rumours eg Elm House)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 28, 2019)

Regardless of Beech being convicted, come of post conviction media stuff has been dubious - BBC did a long piece which included substantial comment on Beech spending some of criminal compensation on a nice car. As if people receiving criminal compensation for CSA should only spend the money on therapy or something


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 28, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Possession of child porn images wouldn't get you close to 18 years - so im assuming most of it was for perverting the course of justice.


Sentencing comments are here

15 years for each of the twelve counts of PCOJ. 18 months for the fraud. 18 months each for the two most serious child porn offences and varying terms from 1 to 6 months for the other counts at his first trial. 2 months for failing to attend (absconding to Sweden). The 15 years and the two lots of 18 months are to run consecutively totalling 18 years. The judge said, without being specific, that the lots of 18 months had all been reduced from what they would otherwise have been to take account of the overall total being imposed. Minimum term to be served 9 years.

The sentence which stood out for me (if I'm reading it right) is the six months for voyeurism - setting up a camera in his toilet to film a neighbours child but I've no idea what the sentencing guidelines are for that.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Regardless of Beech being convicted, come of post conviction media stuff has been dubious - BBC did a long piece which included substantial comment on Beech spending some of criminal compensation on a nice car. As if people receiving criminal compensation for CSA should only spend the money on therapy or something


I wasn't expecting anything other than a shitstorm of cuntishness and I haven't been disappointed. From Michael Jackson (and even Jimmy Saville) truthers claiming this supports their views through to cunts dragging out the same list of "academic studies" "proving" that the majority of rape allegations are false which mens rights types have been touting for years. And justified criticisms of the people and institutions which enabled and promoted Beech that have been wrapped up in so much sanctimonious cunt in a dog-collar sermonizing as to be positively nauseating. I was looking for any useful links yesterday but eventually came to the conclusion that it would be sensible to let my levels of bile drop before proceeding further.

I'm a little surprised at the example you give. As far as I can see the BBC (and other) reports were pointing to the fact that this fucking cunt was spending the proceeds of crime on a car, as opposed to paying the therapist he claimed he needed it for. If he had actually been a victim of CSA it would be a different matter. I haven't seen anything to support the idea that any of his claims are genuine, although some of his apologists are still putting forward the possibility that his lies are a product of the trauma caused by 'having been abused'.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 28, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> I wasn't expecting anything other than a shitstorm of cuntishness and I haven't been disappointed. From Michael Jackson (and even Jimmy Saville) truthers claiming this supports their views through to cunts dragging out the same list of "academic studies" "proving" that the majority of rape allegations are false which mens rights types have been touting for years. And justified criticisms of the people and institutions which enabled and promoted Beech that have been wrapped up in so much sanctimonious cunt in a dog-collar sermonizing as to be positively nauseating. I was looking for any useful links yesterday but eventually came to the conclusion that it would be sensible to let my levels of bile drop before proceeding further.
> 
> I'm a little surprised at the example you give. As far as I can see the BBC (and other) reports were pointing to the fact that this fucking cunt was spending the proceeds of crime on a car, as opposed to paying the therapist he claimed he needed it for. If he had actually been a victim of CSA it would be a different matter. I haven't seen anything to support the idea that any of his claims are genuine, although some of his apologists are still putting forward the possibility that his lies are a product of the trauma caused by 'having been abused'.



allegations against ted heath, leon brittian, jenna amongst other did not originate with beech. But this has profundly undermined the chances of any investigation. Rich and powerful child abusers can sleep a lot easier in their beds.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 28, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> I'm a little surprised at the example you give. As far as I can see the BBC (and other) reports were pointing to the fact that this fucking cunt was spending the proceeds of crime on a car, as opposed to paying the therapist he claimed he needed it for. If he had actually been a victim of CSA it would be a different matter. I haven't seen anything to support the idea that any of his claims are genuine, although some of his apologists are still putting forward the possibility that his lies are a product of the trauma caused by 'having been abused'.



Yeah, that's fair. I've limited sympathy for Beech and take your point, it was more the general implication that people who receive criminal compensation can be judged on what they spend it on, that it's an indication of whether they were worthy of it. 

A bit like when people bang on about big tellys or satellite dishes on council houses or how rates of smoking and scatchcards are more prevelant among people at the sharp end (there's a suprise, economically insecure people buying diversion and hope)


----------



## elbows (Jul 28, 2019)

I'm not happy about the 'mood music' but I could have said that a year or two ago as well.

It was never going to be easy. I always said that I'd have been more optimistic if more of the stories had been 'new' rather than continuations of stuff that emerged/was rumoured decades ago. Because there were issues with historical shit media, shit spook games, political games, conflation of gay with paedophile, size of Tory closet. Plus all the stuff about choosing victims who would not be believed, and the difficulties of us being able to tell the difference between a damaged victim of high-level abuse, and damaged victims of other abuse whose reality is distorted and may have gone on to become abusers themselves.

There is ample evidence in regards elite priorities, closing ranks, and the upper echelons of society being treated differently. There is a lack of evidence in terms of victims of the highest profile alleged suspects. Not much has emerged that would better enable us to judge which accusations had truth to them, as little as there ever was to help us tell the difference between cover-up and untrue, scurrilous rumour.

The obvious exceptions are Cyril Smith and Janner, and further exploration of older cases that were known at the time (eg Peter Hayman). Heath and Brittan were always going to be impossible unless something concrete emerged, either because of effective historical coverup, or a lack of actual crimes and victims. I had hoped for more on the likes of Morrison, but the inquiry on that didnt really get any further than what scraps we'd already heard in the press, and many of the witnesses were deeply unimpressive. I had also hoped that we might get a bit more on Dolphin Square, but I dont think that went anywhere either.

I dont think the inquiry will have much trouble in damning institutions for their priorities and failings. Beyond that, we needed compelling evidence of things to emerge and mostly this hasnt happened. And no fresh coverup was required for this to happen, any original coverup decades ago, and the subsequent passage of time, was sufficient. Or a lack of actual abuse from the highest levels.

Beyond the highest levels, good things still happened post-Savile. Up and down the country, many people have had their day in court and seen the perpetrators of historical abuse against them face some justice. But most of these perpetrators were not high enough level for those who were only interested in the big names getting nabbed. And of course many people didnt get full justice because a lot of the perpetrators are old and had health issues that prevented trials, but at least the victims were believed this time.

Having said that, the push-back from certain quarters has been predictable and hideous and demonstrates that plenty of priorities are still twisted. The message seems quite deliberate. And the whole process has fallen well short of meaningful truth and reconciliation. In some ways the establishment could actually have done with a few high-profile names to be brought to justice, in order to 'draw a line under things' and start to create a new foundation of trust. Similar reasons probably explained why the police came out with statements about trusting the supposed victim, but they picked the wrong case.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 28, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> allegations against ted heath, leon brittian, jenna amongst other did not originate with beech. But this has proundly undermined the chances of any possible investigation. Rich and powerful cunts child abusers can sleep a lot easier in their beds.


Bearing in mind what I said about my current levels of bile I don't really want to get into it much today. However I'm not in love with that as a takeaway. Yes Beech didn't originate the allegations about the VIPs he named. Some of the people he named were either IMO guilty (Saville) or IMO had a case to answer (Janner). But they weren't guilty of abusing him. Others IMO he clearly just plucked out of his arse  (Bramall, Beach). But Ted Heath ? How many more millions do you want to spend ? I haven't seen anything to convince me there's anything there to investigate. He's still a (dead) cunt of course. 

Some of the allegations Beech adopted originated in conspiraloon circles, and introducing them into investigations has, IMO, done nothing except compromise them and undermine the possibility of dealing with real CSA. Proper Tidy referred to North Wales. Amongst the multiple failings of the original investigations the introduction of VIP abuse allegations by a local Councillor only helped derail things as far as I can see. Interestingly he supposedly was told about them by a woman called Tara aka Andrea Davison, who amongst other things claimed to be involved with Scallywag. What is indisputable is that she fled the country and was convicted in her absence of involvement in a boiler room fraud targeting pensioners. She has since reinvented herself as an "ex-MI5 whistleblower", although it's pretty obvious that this is a supplementary income stream to whatever dodgy dealing she's actually making a living from. From the amazon page for her nonsensical book - yours for only 1.99.


> Andrea Davison is a British born intelligence agent who fled persecution in Britain and now lives in Argentina with her five rescue dogs. Andrea was involved in scandals spanning the Atlantic, Arms to Iraq, Iran Contra, Lockerbie, terrorism, regime change and the trafficking of children. She was the intelligence advisor to the Labour members of the parliamentary select committee investigating Super-gun. She also worked with Tony Blair MP and other well-known Politicians and journalists. From an ancient Celtic line, she inherited the 'sight'.


I bring her up because during Beech's trial she popped up to do some 'brand building' by tweeting in support of him. Part of the networks of petty fraudsters and abuse entrepreneurs who make a dirty shilling by exploiting CSA.

IMO the people who are going to be sleeping soundly in their beds thanks to the post-Beech backlash against false allegations and 'compo seeking fake victims' will be the perpetrators of the majority of CSA which isn't carried out by VIPs or grooming gangs but within and around families.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 28, 2019)

Wrexham has been whitewashed three times over, can only hope one day it will fully come to surface


----------



## elbows (Jul 28, 2019)

Regarding Janner, the next inquiry hearing about that is scheduled for late September. Its been pushed back to that date because they are trying to wait till the IOPC has finished looking at things. For all I know it could yet be pushed back further. The inquiry focus will be on institutional failings and related dodgyness, and I'm pretty sure they will find some in that case.


----------



## elbows (Jul 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wrexham has been whitewashed three times over, can only hope one day it will fully come to surface



One of the long terms results of the inquiry that I am still hoping for, is that the issue of insurance companies leaning on councils to prevent report publications is examined in such a way that there is great pressure for some meaningful steps to be taken to change this picture.


----------



## elbows (Jul 28, 2019)

elbows said:


> Regarding Janner, the next inquiry hearing about that is scheduled for late September. Its been pushed back to that date because they are trying to wait till the IOPC has finished looking at things. For all I know it could yet be pushed back further. The inquiry focus will be on institutional failings and related dodgyness, and I'm pretty sure they will find some in that case.



I should have said that this September thing is just a preliminary hearing. The full Janner thing is currently scheduled for February 2020.

October is abuse in residential schools.
November is abuse in the catholic church (the anglican church one already happened in July).
March is child protection in religious organisations and settings.

The Inquiry also took the step of releasing a short statement saying that Beech is not a core participant in any of the inquiry modules, and nor did he apply to be.

Inquiry statement on Carl Beech


----------



## StalkedToDeath (Aug 14, 2019)

Glad to see you say the author of realtrollexposure blog. author is "less so".

He runs the protected twitter abuse account ANY Protonmail Autodeleted  (@majorleak2017) on Twitter  and he is a proven liar, a liar who made knowingly false criminal allegations to Dorset police that resulted in the sudden & unexpected death of my partner Robert.  His name is Simon R. Just and he has many victims, amongst them myself since 2015.

I invite you to read my expose and forensic dissection of his recent blog  EXCLUSIVE: Messenger Delivery_messenger_-_delivery_/

You can read my publication exposing him and another notorious SuperTroll stalker of Mark Williams-Thomas and myself and my late partner here @Scambusters999 & Simon the Goose who laid the Golden eggs  This proves that you cannot believe all you read on his realtrollexposure website.



Lurdan said:


> *Carl Beech trial round up*.
> 
> And the daily round up posts at the realtrollexposure blog. (Posts useful, their author less so etc. etc.)
> 
> ...


----------



## StalkedToDeath (Aug 14, 2019)

His accomplice who I expose also on my publication had the following chat with Carl Beech

@Scambusters999 J.E.Millard & Carl Beech


----------



## LiamO (Aug 20, 2019)

I'll just leave this here


A KINCORA BOY ABUSED BY MOUNTBATTEN COMMITTED SUICIDE A FEW MONTHS LATER


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

Probably not a great thread for this but didn't want to start a new one. What title would I give it for a start.

This article is about the course ran by MoJ in prisons that a researcher claimed was allowed to continue for years after she identified that it made sex offenders more likely to re-offend.

BBC News - Sex offender: 'I've never had so many deviant thoughts'
Sex offenders say rehab course 'made them worse'

It does seem incredible that MoJ ever thought to stick loads of sex offenders, rapists, and paedophiles convicted of crimes of varying severity together to talk about sexual offending in fine detail and didn't ponder the (to me quite obvious but maybe that's hindsight) possible negatives of this approach. Like making it a finishing school for apprentice sex offenders or normalising abhorrent behaviour amongst the selected cohort. What the fuck.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 9, 2019)

NHS offer it too Sex offender treatment programme | RDaSH NHS Foundation Trust

"*To gain entry into the programme, a service user undertakes a series of in-house tutor assessments. The service user must*

Have an IQ between 55 and 75"
Hmm.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 9, 2019)

Poi E said:


> NHS offer it too Sex offender treatment programme | RDaSH NHS Foundation Trust
> 
> "*To gain entry into the programme, a service user undertakes a series of in-house tutor assessments. The service user must*
> 
> ...


Assume a different programme (still group though) but crikey wtf is that IQ about


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

The whole Operation Midland investigation was farcical and disgusting.

Tom Watson should resign or be sacked.

However those who claim that this entire farce was a left wing snear campaign against the right are incorrect.

I speak as someone who endured "therapy" with an asociate of the psychologist Elly Hanson aka Elly Farmer (daughter of prominent Tory brexiteer Lord Farmer).

Elly Hanson / Farmer was the psychologist who convined the keystone cops at Op Midland that Beech's deranged narratives were credible.

She has a long history of invovlement with networks of quacks who promote David Icke style conspiracy theories about satanic ritual abuse and mind control, the Queen being a lizard and other insanity.

Hanson works as a psychologist with CEOP and the National Crime agency.

This contamination of our criminal justice system by insane conspiracy theorists is shocking.

The really concerning issue is the far right promotion of conspiracy theories around VIP paedophile rings in order to pervert democracy.  this very clearly happened with Pizzagate and Qanon and I think it very likely that it happened with Brexit.

eta

she is still at it, even after all the bad press re Op Midland

Dissociative Identity Disorder  Created Through Organised Extreme Abuse


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

One of the many demented pages from the website of the organisation hosting the event linked to in my above post 

RITUAL ABUSE CALENDAR - THE INSIGHT FOUNDATION

How is it that psychologists who work with the police at a very high level and who are allied with a Tory thinktank the Centre for Social Justice (remember them, they were one of the organisations promoting Camila Batmanghelidjh) see fit to attend such insane event?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> However those who claim that this entire farce was a left wing snear campaign against the right are incorrect.


we all sneer at the right


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> One of the many demented pages from the website of the organisation hosting the event linked to in my above post
> 
> RITUAL ABUSE CALENDAR - THE INSIGHT FOUNDATION
> 
> How is it that psychologists who work with the police at a very high level and who are allied with a Tory thinktank the Centre for Social Justice (remember them, they were one of the organisations promoting Camila Batmanghelidjh) see fit to attend such insane event?


ah right, you think that people who work with the cops and the tories should in some be way worthy of respect

i don't see any grounds for your suggestion that they should be reputable and above board


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> ah right, you think that people who work with the cops and the tories should in some be way worthy of respect
> 
> i don't see any grounds for your suggestion that they should be reputable and above board



WTF are you on about?

Of course a psychologist who works with the cops at a senior level should be reputable.  She specialises in the sexual abuse of children.  

The Centre for Social Justice promotes itself as a reputable, caring organisation. 

Elly Hanson is not reputable 

The CfSJ is not reputable 

That is my point


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> WTF are you on about?
> 
> Of course a psychologist who works with the cops at a senior level should be reputable.  She specialises in the sexual abuse of children.
> 
> ...


i still don't see any grounds for your suggestion that they should be reputable and above board. why should they be reputable and above board when so much of our public life is riddled with corruption and hypocrisy? how can they be reputable at such a time?


----------



## maomao (Oct 10, 2019)




----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i still don't see any grounds for your suggestion that they should be reputable and above board. why should they be reputable and above board when so much of our public life is riddled with corruption and hypocrisy? how can they be reputable at such a time?



So if someone attempts to demonstrate corruption the response should be to ridicule them for claiming that we should expect our stautory bodies and qualified mental health professionals to not be corrupt?


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

Some other fascinating mental health professionals associated with the Centre for Social Justice

Benjamin Fry

Commissioning Effective Talking Therapies | The Centre for Social Justice

Founder of Khiron House an interesting treatment centre for people experiencing emotional trauma

"Each client’s individualised treatment plan of trauma modalities may include Sensorimotor Psychotherapy, Somatic Experiencing, EMDR, Internal Family Systems, Lifespan Integration and BSP (Brainspotting), all of which are body referencing therapies that are redefining therapeutic and health outcomes."

Trauma Treatment | Khiron House - Treatment for Trauma

Internal Family Systems is a discredited form of quackery that lead to multiple lawsuits in the US at the Castlewood Treatment Centre, where vulnerable patients with eating disorders "recovered memories" of satanic ritual abuse. 

Satanic Ritual Abuse therapist loses job amidst claims of malpractice - International Skeptics Forum

All the other therapies listed are dubious to say the least and have been associated with false memories of sexual abuse and satanic ritual abuse

I could go on but am pushed for time

eta 

Peter Fonagy is another quack associated with the CSJ


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

I just could not resist another quick post about the truly awful Benjamin Fry 

PTSD treatment in private UK clinic for free

I am extremely relieved that posters on the arrse forum have greater powers of discernment than the ****s at the CSJ



enjoy!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> So if someone attempts to demonstrate corruption the response should be to ridicule them for claiming that we should expect our stautory bodies and qualified mental health professionals to not be corrupt?


over the last ten years we've seen some of how corrupt our elected representatives are, with the expenses scandal. we've seen how little the police will do to protect vulnerable people from paedophiles - indeed, the great lengths they will go to to protect paedophiles. there is great scope for corruption and incompetence in mental health, some of which you've alluded to. so while there should be an anticipation that statutory bodies and mental health professionals are honest, upright and disinterested, that they act with the best interests of society in mind, i don't think that can be an actual expectation as those augean stables haven't yet been cleansed.

oh: as for the ridicule, don't know where you're getting that from


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> I just could not resist another quick post about the truly awful Benjamin Fry
> 
> PTSD treatment in private UK clinic for free
> 
> ...


Why don't you report him to his governing body?


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> Why don't you report him to his governing body?



Some years ago I attempted to report some therapists who were sexually assaulting* clients to their accrediting body.

The accrediting body (the UKCP) gave me the run around for weeks before finally phoning me to tell me that they had consulted a lawyer and that they had been told that because sex work is not illegal there was nothing that they could do.   They seemed to consider the sexual massages as prostitution and a seperate issue to abuse. 

I contacted the same person I spent hours on the phone to, Sunita, fairly recently and she claimed to have no memory of my communication.  Either she has severe amnesia or she is lying.   The then chair of the UKCP David Pink promised, via Sunita, to contact me.  He never did despite repeated phone calls and emails. 

I subsequently learned that all of the UK psychotherapy accrediting organisations have been infiltrated by quacks, charatans and even criminals

It raises the issue of who do you report people to when the accrediting organisations are rotten?

These days I spend a lot of time reporting various quacks and charlatans to the PCCs and CCGs who have commissioned their services

I continue to get the run around and, as a result, have extreme concerns about some police officers, some people working in the NHS at senior levels and other people of influence in various statutory organisations.

People with direct personal experience of the cults involved have warned me that by whistleblowing I am putting my safety at risk.  I believe that they are correct.  I have little to lose as people I have whistleblown to have passed on my details to the people I am concerned about. 

*they were in fact claiming to cure rape and child sexual abuse survivors by massaging their genitals and anuses (yoni and "sacred spot" massage) in order to heal sexual abuse because "the body remembers what the mind cannot" or some such bullshit


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

This is one of the charlatans I attempted to report

About Me

His real name is Martin Jelfs

He is a UKCP accredited psychotherapist and supervisor

I reported him to the UKCP 8 years ago

[editor: without proof, this is libellous, so content removed]

eta

I once found various ratings for Jelf's wife Hannah Katz Jelfs on the punternet or punterlink website. [editor: without proof, this is libellous, so content removed]

further eta

a video



further eta

Jelfs has trained in Brainspotting one of the quack therapies that Benjamin Fry has trained in.

even further eta

[editor: without proof, this is libellous, so content removed]

We have an absolutely bizarre and scary situation happening right now in the UK in which allegations of sexual abuse and historic sexual abuse have been weaponised for political purposes. 

Given that psychotherapy organisations are promoting and endorsing quack therapies that generate false memories of sexual abuse this is an incredibly dangerous situation


----------



## editor (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> This is one of the charlatans I attempted to report
> 
> About Me
> 
> His real name is Martin Jelfs


Please do not repeat any of the claims that I removed from your post.


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

I got locked out of my old email address and I cannot show you the emails (they may be accessible via an old external hard drive), however I swear that everything in my (now deleted) post is true

I understand why you removed it and would not wish to get you into any problems

Could I post a photo of Jelf's flyer that I sent to the UKCP in 2011?

If it's a problem don't worry, I have shedloads of evidence re things I can prove re the UKCP 

Jelfs is still accredited with them and anyone who wants to can report him if they are concerned about him


----------



## editor (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> I got locked out of my old email address and I cannot show you the emails (they may be accessible via an old external hard drive), however I swear that everything in my (now deleted) post is true


That's not the point though. I don't want this site being put in the firing line like this by your accusations, even if they are true.


----------



## justin credible (Oct 10, 2019)

I understand

I have no wish to cause you problems

FWIW I visited the Professional Standards Authority to complain about my experience of attempting to report Jelfs to the UKCP, if it came to me being in a court of law I could hold my own very well on this, but I appreciate that you have to keep yourself out of the firing line

eta

I may have the punter reviews on an old hard drive, will look for them 

here is a link to Mrs Jelfs' (she spells Hanna sometimes with an h and sometimes without aka Shakti Aqua) massage services 

Shakti Hanna | Tantralink.com

The website and contact details are the same as for Mr Jelfs


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 10, 2019)

justin credible said:


> Dissociative Identity Disorder  Created Through Organised Extreme Abuse





0/10 for grandma and puncutation,

I like the refunds policy.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 10, 2019)

Oh what now
Mr Dow


----------



## maomao (Oct 10, 2019)

editor said:


> That's not the point though. I don't want this site being put in the firing line like this by your accusations, even if they are true.


Would it make any difference if some of the stuff were posted in the community forums? I didn't see any of the posts before they were edited I'm afraid so not sure what kind of content it was and just trying to help.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 10, 2019)

The Elly Hanson stuff is actually very interesting IMO. An article in Private Eye after Carl Beech had been found guilty goes into some of it. It doesn't seem to be online so here it is :



Spoiler: Private Eye 1503 - 23rd August 2019












Richard Bartholomew has also written about her and about the role of psychotherapists at his blog, for example 

A Note on Carl Beech and the Psychotherapists 

Private Eye Looks at Clinical Psychologist Involved with Two “VIP Sex Abuse” Investigations 

and back in 2017
Police Consulted “Dissociative Identity Disorder” Therapist In Ted Heath Abuse Probe 

The second blog post refers to her involvement with Ian Duncan Smith's Centre for Social Justice. (Which IMO while interesting doesn't amount to very much).

The Private Eye article points out that an outside police review of Operation Conifer (Wiltshire Police into Ted Heath) had questioned the fact that Elly Hanson had given advice to Conifer itself, but had then been employed by Wiltshire as part of a supposedly independent external scrutiny panel into Conifer. The circle is joined even further now that we know she had not only already acted as a consultant to the Met regarding Carl Beech's allegations about Heath, which had been passed on to Conifer, but had also been consulted by Beech's own therapist !! 

That's even before we get into any questions about Hanson's therapeutic methods, the ideas underpinning them or her professional judgement.

After Beech was found guilty the Guardian published the following letter (28th July) :



> Trauma and abuse evoke powerful feelings. As therapists, psychologists and counsellors we are concerned that the extra anger being aimed at Tom Watson MP, the police and Carl Beech is missing adequate reflection. Tom Watson suggested, in parliament in 2012, that evidence from the paedophile Peter Righton’s conviction pointed to a “powerful paedophile network linked to parliament and No 10”. This was prior to speaking to Beech, and he was right. National figures such as Jimmy Savile and Cyril Smith MP were unmasked as prolific child abusers.





> The outcry culminated in the then home secretary, Theresa May, announcing an independent inquiry, and the 2014 pressuring on police to be believing – now rescinded. The scenarios Carl Beech describes, and his complex mixture of untreated victim and perpetrator, are familiar. People need to understand “fantasists” and “liars”. To ignore that subject risks not hearing vulnerable children. Children with dissociative identity disorder from trauma, for example, are often accused of being liars when one state of mind is amnesic to what another has said or done. To be wrongly accused is abuse.





> We must provide justice for all, while acknowledging the number of innocent people named is very small compared with the one in 65 survivors who gain justice.





> Valerie Sinason, Sue Richardson, Kathryn Livingston, Melanie Goodwin, Rémy Aquarone, Nancy Borrett, Jaclyn Everitt,Andrew Baxter, Penny Johnson, Paula Fenn, Dena Sanger, Ruth Alborough, Kay Luck, Maire Fitzmaurice, Michelle Jowett, Winja Lutz, Sandra Buck, Judy Williams, Lindsay Schofield, Kate Forbes Pitt, Dehra Mitchell, Eimir McGrath, Andrea Aldridge, Liz Hall, Mandy Coghill, Ronete Cohen, Giles Lascelle, Abbie O’Connor, Jane Blackhurst, Cathie Wright, Ruth Leaper, Patricia Bahs, Katia Kohler, Loraine Newbold, Paula Biles, Rainer Kurtz, Judith Marlow, Heather Bacon



This has to be the most astonishing apologetic for Beech I have seen outside conspiraloon circles. Ignoring the utter nonsense in the first paragraph about how Tom Watson "was right", the second paragraph actually suggests that we should be open to the possibility that Beech's lies (or as the letter writers seem to prefer "lies") might be a result of his being a "complex mixture of untreated victim and perpetrator". 

He wasn't "untreated", at least not as a "victim", he had been in therapy. He was indeed an untreated perpetrator. Three different police forces looked at his claims, found no trace of evidence that he had ever been abused by anybody, but a fair bit of evidence that he'd made all his claims up. And a jury had just found him guilty of perverting the course of justice by lying. Is there any point at which inconvenient facts might be allowed to outweigh expensive professional opinions about the credibility of "scenarios" being presented?

In being concerned about people "getting away with it", and their misdeeds being covered up, we should be including some of these arrogant shitheads.


----------



## justin credible (Oct 13, 2019)

Thank you Lurdan

I agree with your post

It is really hard to get people to appreciate what is happening partly because the situation is so insane and so disturbing

One thing that all of the people who signed that letter have in common is that they are almost all (possibly all) involved with the ISSTD as a quick google search will demonstrate


Some more information re the CSJ

Firstly re Benjamin Fry

He started a therapeutic residential centre in the UK called Khiron House

Like many strange and concerning organisations promoting conspiracy theories about satanic ritual abuse and VIP paedophile rings, Khiron House has connection to an organisations called the ISSTD (the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation)

On the Khiron House website it states:

"We comply with the International Society for the Study of Trauma (ISSTD) guidelines (2011) for the treatment of trauma ISSTD - International Society for the Study of Trauma & Dissociation (I wouldn't click on that link IIWY) and work with its three phase model of:

1. Symptom reduction and regulation

2. Processing traumatic memories

3. Consolidation and integration"

source via the archive
Wayback Machine

The ISSTD is an extremely controversial organisation that for decades has promoted David Icke style conspiracy theories about satanic ritual abuse, although, strangely, a significant number of the UK psychologists, psychiatrists and psychotherapists involved with the ISSTD trained at the Tavistock Clinic and its related organisations.  This is extremely weird as the La Rouche organisation has for many years been publishing bizarre conspiracy theories regarding the Tavistock as being at the centre of a satanic cult, as has Icke.

I believe that the situation is one where there are real conspiracies but that they have layers of clearly incredible conspiracies heaped on top of them.  The end result is that anyone trying to whistleblow about the real abuses is assumed to be a conspiraloon.

Back to the ISSTD.....

wiki on the ISSTD past presidents here

International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation - Wikipedia

From the above wiki you will see that the 2nd president of the ISSTD was the late “Dr” Bennett Braun, a notorious charlatan who destroyed the lives of many vulnerable people by brainwashing them into believing that they had been abused by satanic cults.  Many people ended up believing that they were satanist cannibals and baby murderers themselves and had repressed the memories.

There are some excellent old documentaries about Braun and his abuses of vulnerable people available on youtube

These are highly recommended





Much more can be found via google about Bennett Braun and the ISSTD but this is all I have time for right now

eta

One of the most notorious people who signed the letter defending Carl Beech is someone who anyone familiar with the satanic panic and mental health malpractice will recognise instantly Valerie Sinason. Private Eye magazine publishes articles about her regularly under the Satanic Panic section of the Eye.

She is an extremely disturbed and abusive person who was one of the clinicians, based at the Tavistock, who abused Carol Felstead.


----------



## justin credible (Oct 14, 2019)

Have been working hard with a friend on an interesting story.

Will post a link tomorrow


----------



## justin credible (Oct 15, 2019)

oops a little late
hopefully you will all like this
a friend wrote it, I did some research, more fascinating information to follow soon
BoJo, Arcuri, and…Wesley Hall?


It is on the subject less of a VIP paedophile ring and more of a long term promoter of conspiracy theories about satanic ritual abuse and VIP paedophile rings and his connections to ...
well you have to read the piece 

eta

Wesley Hall is not so affectionately known as the Weasel. 

Here is just one of his many social media accounts

#OpDeathEaters

Also the video in the blog post of Jennifer Arcuri in Bristol in 2016 is very interesting


----------



## LiamO (Apr 26, 2020)

The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring









						The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring
					

MI5, MI6, Buckingham Palace, The Royal Ulster Constabulary and the exploitation of children in care by a VIP Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. By Joseph de Burca. Introduction: This online book draws together…




					villagemagazine.ie


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 28, 2020)

Can't seem to get that link to work-could have sworn it was working yesterday.


----------



## tim (Apr 28, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> Can't seem to get that link to work-could have sworn it was working yesterday.



It was! 

Suspect what you will, Although, as far as I got, I didn't read anything that I haven't come across before, quite probably on here.

Search results for query: Kincora


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 28, 2020)

Yeah thanks Tim-looks like the link that Liam has been directing us to has packed up atmo.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Apr 28, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> Yeah thanks Tim-looks like the link that Liam has been directing us to has packed up atmo.



I think they just changed the URL, if you go to main page then scroll it's still there









						The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring (Online Book)
					

MI5, MI6, Buckingham Palace, The Royal Ulster Constabulary and the exploitation of children in care by a VIP Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. By Joseph de Burca. Introduction: This online book draws together…




					villagemagazine.ie


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 28, 2020)

Brill got something to read after all cheers Proper Tidy.


----------



## elbows (Oct 12, 2020)

I dont have time to follow this properly at the moment due to the pandemic but it seems the Janner bit of the inquiry is in progress:









						'Culture of deference' may have protected Lord Janner, abuse inquiry hears
					

Alleged victims have had ‘justice denied’, barrister tells inquiry into child sexual abuse




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## elbows (May 20, 2021)

I see Welby has isued a full personal apology in regards abuse of public schoolboys at the evangelical 'bash camps'. Welby was a dormitory officer at the camps.









						Archbishop of Canterbury apologises to abused participants in Christian camps
					

In the 1970s and 80s QC John Smyth abused boys who attended camps where Justin Welby worked




					www.theguardian.com
				




I note from a much earlier article about the sadistic abuser in this case, John Smyth, that he was the QC who worked with Mary Whitehouse. According to his wikipedia entry, this included representing her in her blasphemy case against the Gay Times.









						Public school defends role in alleged cover up of abuse at Christian camps
					

Winchester College knew in 1982 about allegations of abuse at the camps but says it didn’t go to the police to save the victims further trauma




					www.theguardian.com
				







__





						John Smyth (barrister) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




I also note that the originator of those camps, E J H Nash had the nickname Bash, and 'was well known for his sense of humour, and his ability to create a happy atmosphere.[17]:31Chapman notes: "He was an unassuming yet eccentric figure who avoided tomato pips, took a bewildering array of medications, and enjoyed juvenile humour."









						E. J. H. Nash - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




As for the sort of regime Nash created at those camps, it sounded ripe for abuse to me. These are all quotes from that wikipedia page:



> Nash made it his business to preach the Christian Gospel at the top thirty British public schools, and began a camp ministry which by 1940 was based at Clayesmore School in the village of Iwerne Minster. Attendance was by invitation only. He used military terminology: Nash was known as _commandant_, his deputy, _adjutant_ and the leaders were _officers._His prayer was "Lord, we claim the leading public schools for your kingdom."





> Some have noted that Nash created an "oddly male, oddly elitist, and oddly simplistic world."[25] In 1969, it could be said that much of the leadership of the British Evangelical church had been "Bash campers"





> Controversy is eschewed by "Bash campers"; it is held to be noisy and undignified - and potentially damaging. As a result many issues which ought to be faced are quietly avoided. Any practical decisions that must be made are taken discreetly by the leadership and passed down the line. The loyalty of the rank and file is such that decisions are respected; any who question are liable to find themselves outside the pale... It does not give a place to the process of argument, consultation and independent thought which are essential to any genuine co-operation, inside the church or outside it.





> Bishop David Sheppard remarked that Nash could be "single-minded to the point of ruthlessness" and "courageous in challenging people about their actions or priorities," but that this could become "over-direction"; some even needed to make a complete break in order to be free of his influence.[14]:23
> 
> Even if some cast doubt in his "rigid focus" and his hope for a national "trickle-down effect"[10] in 2005 John Stott, his most famous protégé, was ranked among the 100 most influential people in the world by _Time_ magazine.[26]Alister McGrath describes Nash and his ministry as one of the factors leading to the post-war Evangelical renaissance, saying his work "laid the nucleus for a new generation of Evangelical thinkers and leaders."


----------



## tim (May 20, 2021)

elbows said:


> I see Welby has isued a full personal apology in regards abuse of public schoolboys at the evangelical 'bash camps'. Welby was a dormitory officer at the camps.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think the links and podcast below give a very honest insight from an evangelical perspective of what happened both at these camps, which included ten-hour caning sessions: "this was not Christianity but a sadomasochistic cult". They also cover the abuse of adult men at Emanuel Church in Wimbledon by the former vicar Johnathan Fletcher. 




Richard Coekin and Jonathan Fletcher’s circle - Anglican Ink © 2021

Former vicar 'left to administer naked beatings' amid 'no action'



The first few minutes of the podcast may be a bit irritatingly evangelical, but bear with it.


----------



## two sheds (May 20, 2021)

You'd think they'd show a bit of fucking humility by saying "We're really sorry, and we're not going to preach at people any more or try to make them feel guilty for going against stupid statements in this ancient book written by misogynistic homophobic racist old twats"


----------



## two sheds (May 20, 2021)

I can never spell misogyny so I checked and the first search term


----------



## 19force8 (Sep 3, 2021)

From a piece in this week's Private Eye, it seems there's more evidence of of conspiracy theories about high level paedophile rings fucking up the people who believe them than there is of such rings existing:

Three people (Edward & Janet Stevenson, 69 & 67, and Wilfred Wong, 56, a "non-practising barrister") have been convicted of conspiracy to kidnap a child from Anglesey. Three others had pleaded guilty, all women, but not named in the article.

This is the Satanic Ritual Abuse conspiracy from the 90s re-emerging among evangelical christians via Q-anon. Though I suspect it never really went away.

Slight digression - clearing out the garage the other week I came across a "fight the Alton Bill" badge from the late 80s when David (now Lord) Alton sponsored an anti abortion bill. In 2002 the same Lord Alton hosted a meeting in Westminster featuring Wong declaiming on the crimes of British satanists. Small world, eh?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 3, 2021)

All sounds bonkers and sad and I really hope the kid comes through all this okay.









						Man turned down 'crazy' request to abduct a child from North Wales
					

The therapist, who was convicted of conspiracy to kidnap along with five others, tried to recruit the man as a getaway driver




					www.dailypost.co.uk


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2021)

i tuned out of this thread a long time ago... in briefest terms, whats the answer to the question "How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?"


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 3, 2021)

19force8 said:


> Though I suspect it never really went away.
> 
> Slight digression - clearing out the garage the other week I came across a "fight the Alton Bill" badge from the late 80s when David (now Lord) Alton sponsored an anti abortion bill. In 2002 the same Lord Alton hosted a meeting in Westminster featuring Wong declaiming on the crimes of British satanists. Small world, eh?


Yeah. Never went away, although for a long time it only became visible occasionally. For example the Hampstead SRA affair which kicked off in 2008, some elements of which prefigured the Pizzagate bollocks in the US.

Today we are in a 'golden age' of conspiraloonery in which a loud, very unpleasant minority are forming an activist 'counterculture' within which different strands of nonsense are merging together. A key element bonding stuff together has been 'Save the Children' rhetoric. There have been small demonstrations by SRA activists/grifters over the summer. I referred to the presence at one of them of the UK's godfather of anti-5G activism shouting anti-SRA and anti-VIP Paedo  rhetoric here.

Another demonstration the other week concluded their walk by blocking traffic on Tower Bridge, the whole thing being live streamed by the partner of the organiser Jeanette Archer. It would be tempting to treat it as a joke but on the live stream, after they've abused security guards outside Freemason's Hall and County Hall, the cunt with the camera can be heard abusing a woman for child abuse because their child is wearing a mask.

And then there is this kidnap attempt - or 'attempted rescue' as it's supporters describe it. One 'Christian' infused strand going back a long time is of cunts and shitheads attempting to involve themselves in contentious custody and child protection proceedings. This included efforts to help parents at risk of having their children taken into care get out of the country. This North Wales attempted kidnap is an extreme development of this kind of thing.

Wong is an interesting character. Here's a report of a conference he addressed in October 2019 when anti-abortion activists were targeting Stella Creasy. It was organised by CBR-UK (Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform UK) 



> It recently hit the headlines after posting billboards featuring graphic imagery near Creasy’s constituency office. Its #StopStella campaign has specifically targeted the pregnant MP over her role in liberalising the law in Northern Ireland, where abortion was banned in 1861. (...)





> While a lobbyist, Wong had an office in the House of Commons for 16 years. He is currently a director of CBR-UK, and a former director of another anti-abortion group, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC). What he suggested – that sexual and reproductive rights progress is actually the result of Satanic machinations – was extreme. But it wasn’t original. This is a well-worn conspiracy theory, which claims that Satanists, including those in powerful political positions, ritually abuse adults and children to increase the devil’s power and impose an anti-Christian agenda on society. Wong said UK abortion rates are linked to high-profile Satanists who aim to “undermine and transform society”.





> He accused former prime minister Edward Heath of being involved in ritual Satanic abuse, and prompted heckling and boos from his apparently pro-Brexit audience after referencing Heath’s role in bringing the UK into the EU in the first place. Jimmy Savile was also a Satanist, he added, but this was covered up by high-profile, Satanist media editors. Even some churches and the British government have been infiltrated by Satanists, Wong claimed, hence their reluctance to “deal with abortion”. He urged the room to challenge this. One audience member called out “Hallelujah.” At another point, attendees muttered “Amen”.





DaveCinzano said:


> All sounds bonkers and sad and I really hope the kid comes through all this okay.



Sadly the child is very likely to be the focus of attention of cunts and grifters for a long time to come. This North Wales court case had severe reporting restrictions while it was taking place. Many have been lifted but there are still court orders banning the publication of the names of the child, their actual parents, the foster parents and anything that would identify them. As that Private Eye report says a couple of cunts have been done so far for breaching this. Others have had formal police warnings. 

This isn't stopping cunts overseas from naming the child and commending Wong as a 'Christian hero'.

I mentioned the Hampstead affair. The children in that case - also involved in a parental access battle - were induced to make lurid claims of a satanic murder cult at their school by their mothers new partner. They were interviewed three times by the Police - in the third they admitted how they had been pressured to make the claims. The tapes of the first two interviews and a contact list for families and staff at the school were put into the public domain by Sabine McNeill, a fucking cunt who is now serving a nine year sentence for stalking and multiple breaches of court orders. All hell broke loose. The school, a local church and a local McDonalds all of which supposedly contained areas used for child sacrifice, were targeted for demonstrations. Parents were subjected to abusive contact from cunts worldwide. Two Americans who came over to 'save the children' were deported, one after serving a short prison sentence.

The mother of one of the children at the school gave an impact statement at Sabine McNeill's trial.



> To this day my daughter is fearful and worries that our family will be attacked in our home - my husband keeps a crowbar under our bed. She struggles to understand why adults post material of a sexual nature about her online for the world to see. My daughter has had to assume an alternative name in certain aspects of her life, which is something that no child should have to do. We may have to consider fully changing our daughter’s name by deed poll. She may have to live with the stigma of being branded a satanic sexual abuse victim for the rest of her life.



The two children at the heart of the Hampstead affair are of course of particular ongoing interest from these cunts. Only this week a piece of shit put up a YouTube video describing how she'd managed to get in contact with their father. The tapes of the Police interviews still circulate. They are not just used by both grifters and shitheads as 'evidence of SRA'. They are also of course used as pornography by paedophiles. Since the internet never forgets they will be living with the consequences of this for the rest of their lives.

But of course none of this sort of thing is child abuse. It's God's Work.


----------



## elbows (Sep 3, 2021)

ska invita said:


> i tuned out of this thread a long time ago... in briefest terms, whats the answer to the question "How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?"


If we take 'high level' to mean the very highest levels, and 'ring' to mean a certain level of organised stuff, then the answer is none, at least as far as strong, public evidence goes.

There is plenty of evidence about grotesque institutional failures, and enough evidence for me to conclude that certain well placed individuals in society were guilty of abuse. There is evidence of cover-up and turning a blind eye, and plenty of indicators about the shameful attitudes that enabled such things, and how some of those failings still linger. Plenty of stuff points to the usual 'closing rank' and 'protecting our own' and 'reputation management' motives, as opposed to clear signs of organised highest level rings.

It isnt possible to be sure because multiple things hampered the ability to obtain the full picture. The passage of time, the age of alleged perpetrators, poor mental health of some accusers, victims who killed themselves or didnt want to come forward in recent years, lost records, successful coverups decades ago or otherwise botched investigations, attitudes then and now, all get in the way.

In terms of the highest levels, almost everything and everyone who came up this time around were unsurprising, given that the high profile suspects this time tended to be the same people whose names emerged via gossip and rumours in the 1980s. Some of that might have been based on truth that is now lost, but some of it was probably due to dirty tricks and other stuff like attitudes towards the age of consent and closeted tory hypocrites when it came to sexuality in the 1980s.

Having said all that, it would be hard for someone to convince me that Janner was innocent, and there are a bunch of other names that remain of interest to me but about whom an entirely insufficient amount of decent evidence emerged. And without that evidence it can be hard to tell the difference between reasonable and unreasonable suspicions.

Some clearly misuse status and power, and a combination of shoddy institutions, attitudes towards listening to children, contradictions between public personas and private sex lives, made certain decades especially horrific for abuse and the potential to abuse and ge away with it.


----------



## elbows (Sep 3, 2021)

Plus Cyril Smith was clearly guilty of certain things, and although the full extent of it remains unclear, he was a good example of corrupt local authorities and turning a blind eye, and further coverups at the level of national power and political parties.

The best things that came out of this stuff and the public inquiry include:

The opportunity to talk about some of the issues more.
A better look at widespread institutional failures.
A large number of prosecutions and investigations of abuse that involved people that were not at the very highest levels of power, but who still misused the power and local abuse opportunities they had at the time. And even where prosecutions were not possible, far more victims than ever before at least got to see the crimes committed against them taken seriously after all these years.
Hopefully better protection and more deterrents going forwards, although its hard to make claims about how many potential victims of the future wont end up being victims as a result of this.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2021)

elbows said:


> If we take 'high level' to mean the very highest levels, and 'ring' to mean a certain level of organised stuff, then the answer is none, at least as far as strong, public evidence goes.
> 
> There is plenty of evidence about grotesque institutional failures, and enough evidence for me to conclude that certain well placed individuals in society were guilty of abuse. There is evidence of cover-up and turning a blind eye, and plenty of indicators about the shameful attitudes that enabled such things, and how some of those failings still linger. Plenty of stuff points to the usual 'closing rank' and 'protecting our own' and 'reputation management' motives, as opposed to clear signs of organised highest level rings.
> 
> ...


+ i presume there are 'fixers' like Epstein lurking in the shadows


----------



## elbows (Oct 20, 2021)

I havent had a chance to explore the inqurys Janner conclusions properly myself yet. And their chosen angle in this case was really quite narrow. So for now here is a media summary of their findings.









						Lord Janner: Police shut down MP child abuse investigations - report
					

An inquiry finds police seemed "reluctant to investigate" claims against former MP Lord Janner.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Since that particular article doesnt go into much detail about certain things, here is another one from 2016 at an early stage of the inquiry about this.









						Janner sexually abused children for 33 years, public inquiry hears
					

Late peer Lord Janner allegedly began sexually abusing children as far back as 1955, a public inquiry hears.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Oh and the full report that I havent read yet:



			https://www.iicsa.org.uk/reports-recommendations/publications/investigation/lord-janner


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 19, 2022)

I was abused by Lord Mountbatten claims former boys’ home resident
					

A former resident of the East Belfast home has waived his anonymity to make the allegations




					www.google.com
				




"Legal proceedings have been initiated against a number of institutions in Northern Ireland alleging that Lord Mountbatten abused a boy at a notorious Belfast children’s home in the 1970s.

Arthur Smyth, a former resident of the Kincora home, has waived his anonymity to make the allegations against the earl, a great uncle of the King."


Its not news that Mountbatten was a pedophile...and visited Kincora..








						Book links Mountbatten to sex abuse at Kincora boys' home
					

A new biography of Lord Mountbatten, who was murdered by the IRA in Sligo in 1979, includes evidence linking him to abuse of children from the Kincora Boys’ Home in Belfast.The Mountbattens, by Andrew Lownie, includes two interviews with unnamed men who describe being brought from Kincora in the sum




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




But I think its a first case against the state accusung Mountbatten and the state where the Kincora home victim has waived his anonymity.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2022)

Thanks for this. I initially saw a link on twitter a couple of days ago to an article in the Belfast Telegraph but didn't post it as it is paywall protected and the archived versions are no good either. Interesting that this has surfaced now, after the queen has croaked I wonder if they were (the legal team and the individual concerned) waiting until she died before disclosure?


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 19, 2022)

teqniq said:


> Thanks for this. I initially saw a link on twitter a couple of days ago to an article in the Belfast Telegraph but didn't post it as it is paywall protected and the archived versions are no good either. Interesting that this has surfaced now, after the queen has croaked I wonder if they were (the legal team and the individual concerned) waiting until she died before disclosure?



Quite possibly..although the article detailing the book about Mountbatten was printed in 2019.

I went down a rabbit hole reading articles & watching videos about Kincora.  It was well known who abused those poor boys. They were taken off to different locations across the UK.

The royals...the judiciary...lords...MPs...Orange order leaders...Religious leaders...MI5...its known that royal palaces were used for these parties.

I mean.....The queen must have known already. And Charles must have known. Andrew was feckin involved...

Its pretty obvious that these people all saw little wrong with abusing these boys.





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com
				






One victim's account of what happened to  him when he was in Kincora


... Ian Paisley knew about what was going on...as did RUC and unionist politicians and the Orange order.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 20, 2022)

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) have published their final report today.

Their website.

The Full Report (PDF) can be viewed or downloaded from here

An executive summary (PDF) can be viewed or downloaded from here

A rapid read with the report's conclusions (PDF) can be viewed or downloaded from here

The Inquiry conducted 19 separate investigations some more relevant to this particular thread than others.
The full reports from those individual investigations are all linked to from this page

However they have also produced rapid reads about them which can be found on this page


----------

