Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

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.
 
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?
 
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....
 
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.
 
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.

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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 :mad: internet can be fucking slack sometimes
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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/
 
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>
On this limited basis, they launched a new inquiry, Operation Parallel. They drew up a list of priority targets, weeding out those whose victims were reluctant to give evidence or whose offences were historic and/or minor. In this way, they discarded some 40 of the suspects. They had done their best to satisfy themselves that they were not dangerous. It was, as one officer put it, “a harsh decision”. Now, in the final stage of the ‘exit strategy, Jones’ reduced team were given a dozen extra detectives for a single week in March this year, to arrest and process the dozen or so suspects who remained on their list.
This time, it was a very different operation. Jones’ officers knew that they were not expected to press victims for information about other offenders and other abusers. It was over.
<snip>
The political reality is that the Home Office continue to steer police resources into dealing with reported crime, like vehicle theft and burglary: the most unreported crime in the country carries little political weight. In its major 1996 inquiry, Childhood Matters, the NSPCC concluded that: “The legal system, designed to provide justice and redress for victims of abuse, is failing to do so consistently.”
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 

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
 
Back
Top Bottom