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

[baffled]

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]

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]

Lord McAlpine has been named several times, predating internet rumours.

Yes, by the person who has just cleared him.

 

[smokedout]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Fine.

Cool, any ideas what we should keep out? And on what basis?

 

[Woollyredhat]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

free spirit - fwiw, i was reading your posts as asking about the transport specifics

 

[butchersapron]

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]

don't involve someone who isn't already involved, you mean?

 

[butchersapron]

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]

not disagreeing in the slightest - just checking i hadn't got you wrong

 

[elbows]

A different kind of stranger danger.

 

[Treacle Toes]

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]

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).