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

[Kaka Tim]

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]

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]

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]

Whitewash extravaganza.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Has this been posted yet? http://www.johnmannmp.com/corridors...b4-9564-0c9b4e61bdae&Order=LatestConversation

 

[AnIdiot]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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]

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]

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]

Apart from the immediate protestations in the chamber from Hancock etc., the tory response to this has been very muted. Hmmmm

 

[Quartz]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?