Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

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.
 
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
 
and it's next door to St Georges Sq where the peoples princess worked in a playgroup in about 1980! :D

This is still in their front window...sniff, snuffle...flowers....land-mines....

DSCF3844_zps6ef404cc.jpg
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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).”
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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. :hmm:
 
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. :hmm:

I should have lost the capacity to be surprised by this stuff but that is still gobsmacking. Good spot brogdale
 
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....
 
...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?
 
isn't there precedent for having someone from abroad?, we've had peace envoys from abroad for the Northern Ireland thing
 
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.
 
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.
 
Back
Top Bottom