The Westminster paedophile conspricy

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I fear that this nation may be on the brink of the biggest scandal to hit its ruling political class in century or more. For those who have not been following this story closely it is alleged that a Tory MP murdered a 12 year old boy to satisfy his perverted sexual desires. It is also claimed that the establishment has been effectively covering up this and other serious sexual offences against children that took place at the Elm Guest House in Barnes and at Dolphin Square in Pimlico SW London during the 1970's and 80's.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845969/Former-Scotland-Yard-detectives-say-young-boys-murdered-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html

 

If this were not bad enough even the Home Secretary has conceded (on the Andrew Marr Show) that what is already in the public domain may be just 'the tip of the iceberg'. Apparently Ministers (both Labour and Conservative) have been aware of these grave allegations for some time now but have done little or nothing about it. It is also alleged that journalists attempting to report the story in the past were issued with official 'D Notices' forbidding them from doing so because of 'national security' concerns. I don't like the sound of any of this and (if true of course) the potential to do grave damage here to British politics is perhaps incalculable. However I can only hope that before too long the truth will out because we must find out what happened here - come what may.

 

A police investigation is ongoing, but in the meantime you are invited to express your opinion here - you are also (for your own sake) reminded of this forum's libel guidelines.

[View From The Top]

You're a few years behind the curve here.

 

It's been discussed, documented, evidence submitted, names named etc for quite a while now.

 

Get yourself comfy and start reading. http://www.exaronews.com/

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Being 'a few years behind the curve' is the story of my life I'm afraid.

 

But thanks for the link.

[pap]

Thanks for starting the thread, Charlie. This may be one of our rare moments of agreement. When first referencing this topic, you mentioned both conspiracies, and the fact that this may be our "Watergate".

 

Watergate sells the situation less than it needs to. This is no mere Watergate, which primarily focused on the hubris of a single man. This is bigger. I don't give a f××k who you are, where you come from, or how much money you earn. There is nigh universal condemnation for nonces, and rightly so.

 

This is not the new Watergate. It is a new potential Russian Revolution, in the sense that the entire establishment could be wiped out. Nixon never really had to deal with that.

[Bearsy]

it is alleged that a Tory MP murdered a 12 year old boy to satisfy his perverted sexual desires

 

jesus, i didn't know bout this, and i kind of wish you hadn't told me

 

This kind of thing is why i can't watch the news

[badgerx16]

It is also alleged that journalists attempting to report the story in the past were issued with official 'D Notices' forbidding them from doing so because of 'national security' concerns.

 

And 114 files relevant to the allegation later disappeared;

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/05/lost-child-abuse-files-home-office

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Thanks for starting the thread, Charlie. This may be one of our rare moments of agreement. When first referencing this topic, you mentioned both conspiracies, and the fact that this may be our "Watergate".

 

Watergate sells the situation less than it needs to. This is no mere Watergate, which primarily focused on the hubris of a single man. This is bigger. I don't give a f××k who you are, where you come from, or how much money you earn. There is nigh universal condemnation for nonces, and rightly so.

 

This is not the new Watergate. It is a new potential Russian Revolution, in the sense that the entire establishment could be wiped out. Nixon never really had to deal with that.

 

Yes you are correct, there might be a analogy to be drawn re any 'cover up' but at its core this may well become before too long a even more grave matter than the Watergate business. I find it hard to imagine how it could be any more serious actually.

 

Although the story has been widely reported in the press and on TV I don't really get the impression that this country has yet fully taken on board the implications of the situation - if proven. I'm at a loss to explain this ... perhaps the British people just don't want to believe it.

 

http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/

[View From The Top]

Yes you are correct, there might be a analogy to be drawn re any 'cover up' but at its core this may well become before too long a even more grave matter than the Watergate business. I find it hard to imagine how it could be any more serious actually.

 

Although the story has been widely reported in the press and on TV I don't really get the impression that this country has yet fully taken on board the implications of the situation - if proven. I'm at a loss to explain this ... perhaps the British people just don't want to believe it.

 

http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/

 

Who controls the media?

 

The story has existed for years but ask yourself why nothing has ever been reported, not that D notices were slapped on, but why no Fleet St paper ran the story(s).

 

The truth will get out, the genie is out of the bottle and I would suggest that the reputation of a former Home Secretary and a PM from the 70s is going to be well and truly trashed.

 

I would imagine "Kitty" though is feeling relaxed in their Caribbean retreat that has no extradition agreement with the UK.

[pap]

Yes you are correct, there might be a analogy to be drawn re any 'cover up' but at its core this may well become before too long a even more grave matter than the Watergate business. I find it hard to imagine how it could be any more serious actually.

 

Although the story has been widely reported in the press and on TV I don't really get the impression that this country has yet fully taken on board the implications of the situation - if proven. I'm at a loss to explain this ... perhaps the British people just don't want to believe it.

 

http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/

You know that I have some off-beam opinions about the way the world is run. Ultimately, I'm a simplifier, both in work and at home. This situation is simple. If the political will to investigate and prosecute existed, we'd not be having this discussion. It would have occurred in the mid 1980s, lessons would have been learned and we would now be entirely dismissive of the defunct dodoes caught up in the controversy.

 

The broader picture is simple too. We have laws that we are all supposed to subscribe to. One of those laws is that we don't mess with people if they are not an adult. An unspoken principle is that kids should be entitled to the freedom of childhood. If any of these allegations are proven, both of the previous principles are lost.

 

Simplifying even further, it seems like we abandon the principles of justice if the alleged perpetrators are important enough.

[sadoldgit]

This is sickening and no stone should be left unturned to get to the truth. Whether it will on not determines the type of leaders we have currently in our society but the public should demand a full and proper investigation.

[pap]

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2014/news/local-press-gagged-over-child-sex-abuse-scandal/

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2014/news/local-press-gagged-over-child-sex-abuse-scandal/

 

'However it has also emerged that the D-Notice archives for the period in question are incomplete,

meaning the claims by both Don and Hilton are now impossible either to prove or disprove ...'

 

Thanks Pap.

 

Frankly it beggars belief that any measure as significant as a official 'D Notice' can simply disappear from the record as if it were a old unpaid parking ticket. But I suppose we should not be all that surprised because the Home Office has already admitted it has 'lost' other important records related to this affair. The stench of corruption here is overpowering.

 

This story is going to run for years to come and right now I suspect we are still be closer to the start of it rather than the finish.

[pap]

I'm not sure that there is much appetite to get to the bottom of the truth from any government we are likely to have. One of the inquiries has already ditched two of its proposed heads because those proposed were too connected with some of the accused. To me, that says whitewash from the start, and that the inquiries are setting out to achieve the opposite of their stated purpose.

 

In addition to all the pain, suffering and murdering, it is also worth remembering that paedophiles in high places constitute a massive national security risk, due to the ease at which they can be blackmailed or brought to heel. I have mentioned Ted Heath before. He visited Haut de la Garenne and with the help of a referendum, signed us up for the European Economic Community, effectively the end of independent sovereignty in this country. Possibly putting 2+2 together and getting 5, but I do wonder how many of his decisions were his own.

[Bearsy]

dunno bout the legitimacy of that theory, pap, but it sounds like a vote-winner for UKIP!

[Unbelievable Jeff]

FFS, what is wrong with the establishment. Disgraceful.

[View From The Top]

FFS, what is wrong with the establishment. Disgraceful.

 

The fucckers that helped cover it up should be hung out to dry. Those who did it should just be hung.

[Viking Warrior]

That TPUc article is very disrespectful to the victims of the Dunblaine school shooting and their relatives. So excuse me if I dismiss 80% of what is being spouted off .

 

I was living in millbank in the mid 70's . I remember there was a murder a gay male. I'm can't remember if they if they found the killer All us male military medics at QAMH were interviewed as part of the police investigation .

I don't recollect any kids going missing in pimlico during the years it was there.

Mind you the likes of Hughie Green used to frequent the ponsonby arms next door to our bks .

 

As for Dolphin Square . Been in there a couple of times to provide medical treatment a very old senior officer and his wife in their apartment or return them home after being in the hospital at millbank

It's a massive place, Dolphin Square , posh I agree So if something was going on I can't recall seeing anything sinister . My memories are well faded . But I'm sure the three of us who went to treat the husband and wife would have noticed something at the time . I certainly don't recall seeing any kids there . But as I said its a big place and we only went to one apartment

Edited 25 November, 2014 by Viking Warrior

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Interesting snippet on the C4 peadophile next door about the PIE movement and how they were actually taken seriously.

 

Now this was before I was born, but seriously, dafuq were you older guys thinking letting that shït fly?

Edited 25 November, 2014 by KelvinsRightGlove

[View From The Top]

That TPUc article is very disrespectful to the victims of the Dunblaine school shooting and their relatives. So excuse me if I dismiss 80% of what is being spouted off .

 

I was living in millbank in the mid 70's . I remember there was a murder a gay male. I'm can't remember if they if they found the killer All us male military medics at QAMH were interviewed as part of the police investigation .

I don't recollect any kids going missing in pimlico during the years it was there.

Mind you the likes of Hughie Green used to frequent the ponsonby arms next door to our bks .

 

As for Dolphin Square . Been in there a couple of times to provide medical treatment a very old senior officer and his wife in their apartment or return them home after being in the hospital at millbank

It's a massive place, Dolphin Square , posh I agree So if something was going on I can't recall seeing anything sinister . My memories are well faded . But I'm sure the three of us who went to treat the husband and wife would have noticed something at the time . I certainly don't recall seeing any kids there . But as I said its a big place and we only went to one apartment

 

What a very odd post.

[Viking Warrior]

Removed as I don't want to upset VFTT

Edited 25 November, 2014 by Viking Warrior

[Viking Warrior]

vFTT

 

Why is it an odd article ?

 

Did you not read the TPUC article re Hamilton and the insinuation about Dunblane ? So did Robertson actual allow him to gave a Gun licence or is the author being economical with the truth . I don't know

 

As for my reference to Dolphin Square . I'm just giving my impression of the place, as it comes across in some articles as a very seedy place . That's not what I recollect about it the few times I went to treat a very old man and his wife

Edited 25 November, 2014 by Viking Warrior

[Halo Stickman]

Interesting snippet on the C4 peadophile next door about the PIE movement and how they were actually taken seriously.

 

Now this was before I was born, but seriously, dafuq were you older guys thinking letting that shït fly?

 

I’m 56, so, I guess, this puts me into your category of ‘older guys’. Anyone who is half decent at maths will be able to work out that I went from the age of 12 to 22 during the seventies. I can assure you that, far from ‘letting that sh!t fly’, I never even knew that the PIE existed; and I’m almost certain this was the case for the vast majority of my contemporaries. It goes without saying that – like any right-minded person – I abhor the objectives of organisations such as the PIE.

 

I do, however, think it is important to acknowledge the fact that attitudes towards a whole range of things were different back in the seventies. For example, a relative of mine was a girl-guide leader who on overhearing a conversation between some brownies discovered that the headmaster of the local primary school was palpably a paedophile. She reported the matter to the authorities; discreet investigations were carried out; the headmaster was allowed to quietly resign his position; no charges were brought.

 

In the same village, at the same time, the local scoutmaster ran a ‘club’ for his favourite boys; the initiation ceremony involved lots of naked bodies and shaving foam; no-one appeared to bat an eyelid.

 

Let's not forget this was also the era when the relationship between Bill Wyman (47) and Mandy Smith (13) made headlines not because people thought he was a paedophile, but simply due to the age difference.

 

All of the above seems outrageous to us today. Times change; attitudes change. These days, each of those cases would almost certainly lead to criminal convictions – rightly so, most of us will say.

 

Today, it seems incredible that the age of consent in the UK was just 12 up until 1875. Perhaps even more incredible is the fact that UK common and canon law allowed girls of 12 and boys of 14 to be legally married as recently as 1929. Maybe it’s worth conjecturing whether people a hundred years from now will think that the present age of consent is too low?

 

I realise I’ve gone off on a bit of a tangent with this post, but I do think the subject of changing attitudes is relevant to this discussion – hopefully, changing attitudes will play a huge role in finally bringing the resolve to properly investigate these historic cases and bring these paedophiles to long overdue justice.

 

Anyway, back to the subject of the PIE in the seventies, here is one man’s take on the subject:

 

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/what-pie-and-the-nspcc-have-in-common/14763#.VHWLHmcYvPg

[sadoldgit]

We were talking about the age of consent last night and someone mentioned it is currently 14 in Germany and 11 in a middle east country. I am 60 and don't recall the PIE stuff either Halo.

[Miltonaggro]

It is incredible what goes under the radar of the general public, and I agree that the current impasse is just the beginning - many dots will be joined up and 'mysteries' solved once things are out in the open. Incredible, that contempt for the citizenry has been so widespread and public reaction so passive so often - http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medical science

[Miltonaggro]

Apologies chaps, here's the link again: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

 

Interesting case / reading for those of us who grew up in Southampton in the 60s and 70s...

[buctootim]

Apologies chaps, here's the link again: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

 

Interesting case / reading for those of us who grew up in Southampton in the 60s and 70s...

 

A friend who was working at the BBC in 1987 when the great storm hit was convinced his station had been hit by a pulse bomb - a bomb designed to wipe out electronic communications without damaging physical infrastructure because the nature of the damage was unlike anything you'd expect from severe weather (like current surges or short circuits).

[pap]

A friend who was working at the BBC in 1987 when the great storm hit was convinced his station had been hit by a pulse bomb - a bomb designed to wipe out electronic communications without damaging physical infrastructure because the nature of the damage was unlike anything you'd expect from severe weather (like current surges or short circuits).

Changed your stance on D Notices?

[buctootim]

Changed your stance on D Notices?

 

Not at all. D notices were very different to DA notices. Important not to mix the two up.

[pap]

Not at all. D notices were very different to DA notices. Important not to mix the two up.

Remind us then.

 

Which one didn't happen?

[buctootim]

Remind us then.

 

Which one didn't happen?

 

Surely you remember? you were trying to convince us there lots of modern conspiracies like Rigby and 7/7 where the press had been silenced by D notices. When I pointed out they had been abolished in 1993 you got abusive.

[pap]

Surely you remember? you were trying to convince us there lots of modern conspiracies like Rigby and 7/7 where the press had been silenced by D notices. When I pointed out they had been abolished in 1993 you got abusive.

Wrong, I'm afraid.

 

The specifics are this. I claimed that D Notices were used to cover up instances of abuse, with specific reference to the findings of Operation Ore, itself a result of an FBI investigation.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DA-Notice

 

As for the differences, people can check the above. Wiki claims it is a mere renaming.

 

Can you tell us what the differences are apart from that?

[Halo Stickman]

Tried to discuss the matter on the Savile thread. Was assured by aintforever that it was no more prevalent in the establishment than it is in mainstream society. He missed, which is that the establishment will protect itself. It has long been my view that leverage was more important for those in the know than justice.

 

If you're sincere about this, Chapel End Charlie, start a thread. I'll happily contribute, but know that on this at least, May is right. It is the tip if the iceberg.

 

I cannot talk about anyone living, but other names you may wish to consider are Ted Heath and Lord Mountbatten. Heath, like Savile, visited Haut de la Garenne. A conspiracy of silence exists to this day on the island. I am in NI now, and have heard persistent rumours for years that the IRA got to Mountbatten through his weakness.

 

Pap, I have copied your post above onto this thread because it’s more relevant here.

 

Mountbatten is a person in whom I’ve had a passing interest for a long while, mainly because he figures in various historical events that have fascinated me over the years, i.e. the St Nazaire Raid, Dieppe, the Battle of the Atlantic, Partition of India, Northern Ireland terrorism etc. He was also the Governor of the Isle of Wight whilst I was growing up on the Island.

 

It’s well documented in the mainstream media, historical books, biographies etc that he and his wife had an ‘open’ marriage, i.e. both of them had many partners. It’s also been stated in one or two biographies that Mountbatten had a preference for men. None of this is particularly unusual, especially for marriages within that social sphere during that era. The mainstream media have also documented his links to Saville.

 

But, you will know better than I do, pap, that many of the, let’s say for want of a better expression, less mainstream online sites, refer to Mountbatten as a paedophile and link him to, amongst other things, child abuse at the Kincora children’s home.

 

What I would like to know is this: what is the original source of this information? Has Mountbatten been directly accused by a victim? Is there hard evidence that he was a paedophile or is this just hearsay? I realise that these may be difficult questions to answer; and I’m not trying to trip anyone up here or make some kind of point; I’m genuinely interested to learn the answers.

Edited 26 November, 2014 by Halo Stickman

[buctootim]

Wrong, I'm afraid.

 

The specifics are this. I claimed that D Notices were used to cover up instances of abuse, with specific reference to the findings of Operation Ore, itself a result of an FBI investigation.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DA-Notice

 

As for the differences, people can check the above. Wiki claims it is a mere renaming.

 

Can you tell us what the differences are apart from that?

 

http://www.dnotice.org.uk/faqs.htm#5

[pap]

http://www.dnotice.org.uk/faqs.htm#5

So that's a no, then. Odd. I thought it was important to not mix up the two.

[Bearsy]

dunno, but interesting that "da notice" (ali g voice pls) is unenforceable. Newspaper bros will not be let of hook here if they accept them to cover up pedo child killings!

 

Edit: Sorry if this post is miss point & non relevant, i'm out of my element

[ART]

Wasn't Jeremy Thorpe, the Liberal leader involved in some sordid scandal in the 70's.

[pap]

Regarding Mountbatten, the biggest claims are to be found in The War of the Windsors. I haven't read it myself, but the summarised versions I have seen don't present any hard evidence. They link him to the Kincora abuse scandal, but their claims do not go beyond circumstantial from the summaries I have read. It is mainly references to his other proclivities and relationships. Mountbatten was the Royal that introduced Jimmy Savile to the rest of the Royal family.

 

I'd love to offer something more concrete, but the situation doesn't really lend itself to it, and unlike some other commentators, I'm not prepared to lie to make some semblance of a point.

[Viking Warrior]

Wasn't Jeremy Thorpe, the Liberal leader involved in some sordid scandal in the 70's.

 

Art . Yes there was a scandal . He had an affair with a guy called Norman Scott . If I recall he allegedly hired a hit man to kill Scott . Scott was quite graphic about the affair . Is Thorpe still alive last I heard was he had Parkinson's diseases . Thorpe was also married if my me memory serves me right

[Lets B Avenue]

Art . Yes there was a scandal . He had an affair with a guy called Norman Scott . If I recall he allegedly hired a hit man to kill Scott . Scott was quite graphic about the affair . Is Thorpe still alive last I heard was he had Parkinson's diseases . Thorpe was also married if my me memory serves me right

 

[Halo Stickman]

Regarding Mountbatten, the biggest claims are to be found in The War of the Windsors. I haven't read it myself, but the summarised versions I have seen don't present any hard evidence. They link him to the Kincora abuse scandal, but their claims do not go beyond circumstantial from the summaries I have read. It is mainly references to his other proclivities and relationships. Mountbatten was the Royal that introduced Jimmy Savile to the rest of the Royal family.

 

I'd love to offer something more concrete, but the situation doesn't really lend itself to it, and unlike some other commentators, I'm not prepared to lie to make some semblance of a point.

 

Ok, fair enough, I haven’t read that book so can’t comment on it.

 

Let me clarify my position on this. I have no doubt that there are paedophiles within the Establishment, and that they have used their position and status to 1) pursue their perverted activities and 2) avoid detection. I also have little doubt that they have formed networks, and I wouldn’t be surprised if these networks were extensive. Somehow these paedophiles must be exposed and brought to justice.

 

On the subject of Mountbatten: I’m not here to defend the bloke In fact, imo, his roles in the St Nazaire and Dieppe raids and his role in the Partition of India leave a lot to be desired. I also have a friend who alleges he witnessed Mountbatten demand the instant dismissal of some poor chap who had inadvertently hung the union flag upside down. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Mountbatten was a complete sh!t. But none of this makes him a paedophile, and, thus far, I haven’t seen credible evidence to suggest that he was.

 

This leads me on to a more general point. There are too many online sites glibly stating that so-and-so is a paedophile without giving references to source material or even stating why they think so-and-so is a paedophile. Most of these sites seem to adopt a scatter-gun approach - he is a member of the Establishment, therefore he is a paedo; he is a Royal, therefore he is a paedo; he is bisexual, therefore he is a paedo; he met Saville, therefore he is a paedo; his nickname was ‘Dickie’; therefore he is a paedo – which, imo, just muddies the water and obscures the real paedophiles lurking in the cesspool.

 

This approach also leaves them open to the charge that they are acting like this bloke:

 

[Goatboy]

The fucckers that helped cover it up should be hung out to dry. Those who did it should just be hung.

 

An important distinction in this case VFTT: hanged not hung.

[View From The Top]

An important distinction in this case VFTT: hanged not hung.

 

I was stuck as to whether it was hanged or hung.

[Goatboy]

I was stuck as to whether it was hanged or hung.

 

Two very different requests on plenty of fish.

[View From The Top]

Two very different requests on plenty of fish.

 

I will investigate that at a later date.

[buctootim]

I will investigate that at a later date.

 

You'll be needing something like this.

 

 

Can probably get a used one from here

[Goatboy]

That's my father.

[buctootim]

That's my father.

 

Mine too. Small world. Hows it going Leia?

Edited 27 November, 2014 by buctootim

[carljack]

What about the well documented cases against the Lord Montague of Beaulieu,a penchant for little boys, especially if he could get them alone with his lordshipfullness with the pervy toff wearing nothing but a smile and fur coat.He allegedely molested underage boys for years both at the motor museum (on the roof) and in his beach hut on the solent.There were many more rumours and accusations with only one or two prosecutions,one was made to stick in Lymington magistrates court,today our noble lord would need a whole peado registry just for himself and he would not be going to magistrates court.

[pap]

Think Montagu's son has spoken of the shame he brought on his family.

[pap]

Ok, fair enough, I haven’t read that book so can’t comment on it.

 

Let me clarify my position on this. I have no doubt that there are paedophiles within the Establishment, and that they have used their position and status to 1) pursue their perverted activities and 2) avoid detection. I also have little doubt that they have formed networks, and I wouldn’t be surprised if these networks were extensive. Somehow these paedophiles must be exposed and brought to justice.

 

On the subject of Mountbatten: I’m not here to defend the bloke In fact, imo, his roles in the St Nazaire and Dieppe raids and his role in the Partition of India leave a lot to be desired. I also have a friend who alleges he witnessed Mountbatten demand the instant dismissal of some poor chap who had inadvertently hung the union flag upside down. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Mountbatten was a complete sh!t. But none of this makes him a paedophile, and, thus far, I haven’t seen credible evidence to suggest that he was.

 

This leads me on to a more general point. There are too many online sites glibly stating that so-and-so is a paedophile without giving references to source material or even stating why they think so-and-so is a paedophile. Most of these sites seem to adopt a scatter-gun approach - he is a member of the Establishment, therefore he is a paedo; he is a Royal, therefore he is a paedo; he is bisexual, therefore he is a paedo; he met Saville, therefore he is a paedo; his nickname was ‘Dickie’; therefore he is a paedo – which, imo, just muddies the water and obscures the real paedophiles lurking in the cesspool.

 

This approach also leaves them open to the charge that they are acting like this bloke:

 

 

Probably worth dealing with Savile first. It is of course, unfair to label anyone that had dealings with him as a potential paedophile, but it's also naive to think that those in authority didn't know what he was. There are few parts of the establishment that he didn't touch. He dined with Prime Ministers at Chequers, was close to the Royals, even going as far as boasting that he helped Charles and Diana settle differences in the early years of their marriage. I find it inconceivable that in those times, and with that level of access, that his proclivities were unknown to those charged with protecting the integrity of the realm and its representatives. Thatcher was dissuaded from suggesting him for honours five times before he finally became a Knight. He was also given a Papal knighthood from the Catholic church, which has spent the last two decades paying victims of its own child abuse off.

 

As I said before, there is no hard evidence on Mountbatten that I've seen - a large part of why I wasn't prepared to characterise the allegation as anything more than persistent rumours. Realistically though, it's unlikely that we'll ever get confirmation on that. The establishment is very good at protecting itself.

 

A picture is emerging of industrial scale abuse of children. Look at what we do know. Today, a care home magnate was convicted on 33 separate counts of child abuse. Savile got himself into positions of trust, as did every depraved pervert that sought the cover of the Catholic church to abuse kids. The patterns are all too familiar; vulnerable kids in care homes or hospitals, facilitated by a secret courts system for family matters. Institutions and tools designed to protect children were used against them.

 

So yep, there are some glib and unsubstantiated comments out there. I think we have a duty to substantiate those claims, punish or denigrate the guilty, depending on whether they are alive or dead and clear those that have been named in error. People, including myself, laugh at David Icke's lizard claims but as a metaphor, it works just fine. I feel like this people don't belong to the same fúcking species as most people I know. There have been some very interesting points made about the context of our times, and the age of consent at various points in our history. Interesting arguments, but they don't hold water now. At some point, our ancestors recognised that 12 year olds did not have the emotional maturity to fend off grooming predators, or the means to deal with the consequences of sexual congress even in a consensual relationship.

Entirely the right call.

 

I have no confidence in this enquiry, by the way. It looks like a whitewash, and if this is the level of interest we're going to see in Parliament, those damaged by these vile cúnts will never see justice nor closure.