Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

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.

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.
 
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
 
Just heard...

I141022_192554_717127oTextTRMRMMGLPICT000041247207o_zps4b641439.jpg
 
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.
 
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.
 
So, the Tories pick 2 chairs from the establishment to chair an enquiry into claims of an establishment cover up of child abuse

#seemslegit
 
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?

upload_2014-10-31_20-27-47.png
 
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. :confused:
 
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."
 
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.
 
Back
Top Bottom