Newsnight Fri 2 Nov please watch v Important you know who is running the country

(1000 Posts)
MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 11:53:32

Tom Watkins tweeted a seniour politician will be outed tonight and Max Clifford said on Daybreak shocking news will be released by the BBC today.

AuntieStella Fri 02-Nov-12 12:02:20

Not lizard men controlling Prince Phillip? Pity.

More sensibly, hype is hype. If there is a story, it'll also be on the ordinary news by tomorrow.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 12:04:44

Iain Overton and Tom Watkins are tweeting.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 12:15:41

marks place

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 12:32:48

Someone said on one of the JS threads, it has gone to lawyers, it may be blocked.

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 12:32:58

I had assumed it was going to be the deceased sailor but according to his tweets it is someone who is alive

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 12:36:18

The sailor was quickly flashed up on the BBC earlier just before Freddy Starr was shown. TH's house has been closed down and put up for sale.

poachedeggs Fri 02-Nov-12 12:38:13

I need to review my Twitter usage. I miss all the good stuff.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 13:03:19
AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 13:14:27

Just seen this on twitter

"Senior political figure" due to be accused tonight by BBC of being paedophile denies allegations + tells me he'll issue libel writ agst BBC

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 13:17:12

marks place.

FiercePanda Fri 02-Nov-12 13:19:15

Can someone PM me as to who the deceased sailor is? <brainmelt>

AuntieStella Fri 02-Nov-12 13:20:45

The only (former) Cabint Member I can think of who campaigned openly for the abolition of the age of consent was Patricia Hewitt. I wonder if there is anything behind this current flurry of tweets, and if it could be referring to any individuals in her cohort?

NeverKnowinglyUnderstood Fri 02-Nov-12 13:21:22

can someone PM me too I am in the dark..

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 13:22:58

The sailor's (high profile) family and he were friend's of JS.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 13:23:50

I understand Murdoch bought up the survivors story a while back.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 13:24:16

I'm guessing that the dead sailor is Ted Heath, but since he is dead it won't be about him.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 13:25:40

Another dead sailor too. No pm's. It has been all losted on the savile threads.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 13:26:34

posted already, all there if you look at the threads the last month.

Pinot Fri 02-Nov-12 14:46:01

I thought the dead sailor was Lord MB, uncle of Charlieboy.

And TH and his boat. Sicko.

ommmward Fri 02-Nov-12 14:46:29

there are very interesting things to find if you dig down into the Islington care home scandal - Margaret Hodge/ Patricia hewitt etc etc. Home Educators dug up a lot of this stuff when the last government was trying to put through legislation aimed at giving the state a lot more power over our children (and quite yucky power too - we were all very glad when the general election got called days before the bill went through)

It does feel to me as if more of the pieces of the jigsaw are being put together by more people. There is a huge amount of corruption in our society. I'm not a lizard-ruler conspiracy theory type, but I do think that a huge amount of evil can be done by individual acts of blackmail, and by a relatively small number of people with unwholesome tastes but a lot of leverage (for whatever reason)

margerybruce Fri 02-Nov-12 14:50:35

Michael Crick &#8207;@MichaelLCrick
The senior political figure due to be accused paedophile activity by BBC tonight tells me that he still hasn't heard from them for response
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite
1h Michael Crick &#8207;@MichaelLCrick
"Senior political figure" due to be accused tonight by BBC of being paedophile denies allegations + tells me he'll issue libel writ agst BBC

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 15:01:49

I would imagine foreign press will be interested in this story, so they will name this SPF?

Alibabaandthe40nappies Fri 02-Nov-12 15:07:54

Mrsj - you seem to have a bit of an obsession with this.

All the hype is unhelpful IMO, and the Beeb are clearly desperate to start smearing elsewhere rather than focusing on putting their own house in order. It is all massively distasteful, when we should be concentrating on making sure that those people who have been abused feel safe in coming forward that they are not going to be swept up into some kind of media frenzy.

Very clever by Newsnight though, as the name is leaked all over twitter, well a couple of names, so cant see how this politician can hide really, sure newsnight will have researched throughly.

If it isnt aired tonight due to a court injunction, will that person have to resign anyway? If a tory then DC will be informed, surely the man will have to go, DC cannot be seen to publicily back someone in this position, not after everything thats coming out, and surely all evidence will have been handed to police?

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 15:21:39

What has it got to do with anyone else what anyone else is interested in? Do comment on the interest levels of dog people, feminists and so on? If you don't like the subject don't fuel it by posting.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 15:24:27

I don't think it's a matter of having an obsession, or of hype. It's a matter of making more people aware of the unbelievable amount of corruption in the way this country is run sad

MrsJR does not have an obsession, but what is happening at the moment is incrediably important and people have to right to discuss this. If Newsnight does `out` this politician tonight the repercussions will be enourmous.

LineRunner Fri 02-Nov-12 15:34:31

It would appear that there are lots of Houses to put in order, including but not confined to the BBC.

Pinot Fri 02-Nov-12 15:37:23

Actually, I think it's the media focusing on the BBC and it's a massively positive step that that is stopping.

It goes much further/deeper/darker than the Beeb.

This news is a good thing, IMO.

MrsChristmasVamos Fri 02-Nov-12 15:38:52

I agree, Nigella. The more we hear, the worse it gets.

People think Hillsborough was bad ? Now this ? I don't think we have even scratched the surface yet. sad

QuickLookBusy Fri 02-Nov-12 15:53:24

Agree with Pinot. All this concentration on the BBC by the media is detracting from the fact there are other institutions which are also guilty.

Really glad Newsnight are going to name other people. Hope they don't stop with just this one.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 15:54:13

'Mrsj - you seem to have a bit of an obsession with this.'

That's probably what was said to victims and people trying to expose the truth in the Savile case and all the care home scandals.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 15:59:03

I wonder if all the posters on here who always have a go at MP John Hemming will now think twice.

QuickLookBusy Fri 02-Nov-12 15:59:57

Exactly Claig. This whole scandle has been pushed under the carpet so many times, just like Hillsborough/Stephen Lawrence etc etc.

It's a blooming good job some people are obsessed with these things or the truth would never get out.

Alibabaandthe40nappies Fri 02-Nov-12 16:47:26

claig don't you fucking dare.

I haven't said at all that this shouldn't be investigated, or exposed - not at all.

What I find distasteful is the grandstanding, the 'ooh who will it be next, how exciting' attitude which some people are adopting.

donnie Fri 02-Nov-12 16:48:42

Dh has just reminded me that back in the 80s there were loads of rumours about a Certain member of Thatcher's cabinet. Someone who ended up getting big fat jobs in the eUropean Parliament iirr. he shares the same name as a footballer,apparently. I think it may be him.

It appears that Newsnight are going to run the story without actually naming the politician.

I have looked back over all the posts and cannot see anyone `excited` about this, however, people are very interested and it is a very large news story which will have implications all round. People naturally want to discuss it, and it seems to me that you are trying to read something into this thread which is just not there.

PropositionJoe Fri 02-Nov-12 16:55:22

John hemming is an arse. IMHO.

troubador Fri 02-Nov-12 16:56:43

I don't think anyone is grandstanding or 'excited'.

I, for one, am horrified by the whole thing. I'm thankful for the people who keep talking about it and pushing for it to be exposed because I just don't have the stomach to follow it very closely.

However, it's that kind of apathy that's enabled it to happen for so long. So I'm glad people are talking about it, I'm pleased I keep seeing threads about it in active convos. We NEED to make sure this doesn't get brushed under the carpet.

And I can see how it could be become an obsession. It's so bloody unjust - we should all be obsessed with how this has been allowed to happen, imo.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 17:03:52

'What I find distasteful is the grandstanding, the 'ooh who will it be next, how exciting' attitude which some people are adopting.'

What I find distasteful is the fact that this was covered up for decades and Savile was enabled to get away with it. Of course people want to follow who will be exposed in the biggest scandal for the BBC and other institutions in 50 years.

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 17:04:58

I think it's unfair.

The BBC to refuse to comment on its own staff/procedures etc etc because they don't want to interfere with the police investigation.

But seem quite happy to deny others the similar basics of waiting until a police investigation has been properly carried out.

If BBC want trial by media, they could start with themselves. And at least wait until someone has been arrested (ideally wait until someone is charged) before they let a name be known to this who are bound to publicise it.

Either they trust the police investigations; in which case they need not pre-empt then on Newsnight.

Or they don't: in which case their internal investigations need a huge kick start.

MissMemoo Fri 02-Nov-12 17:10:59

Is it K--f--C???

Part of that I agree with Edith, name them thats fine, but I presume with concrete evidence that the police will act on. What I find very uneasy though is saying that they are going to name a very senior politician, then pull out because of a gagging order, unless they have passed on the information to the police who will act on it.

CarnivorousPanda Fri 02-Nov-12 17:17:17

DonnieI heard those rumours too. Yes he was very senior and probably very litigious.

Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 17:18:15

the name is going to come out whether they run with the programme or not it always does

The name is out Nancy, but what will happen? I presume Newsnight must of had some evidence?

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 17:26:32

"the name is going to come out whether they run with the programme or not it always does"

Which is also a disgrace, as trial by media invariably is. Unless they are simultaneously accusing the police of failing to investigate right now - an immensely serious thing.

(I'm discounting the possibility that they have not passed evidence to the police as just too far-catches).

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 17:27:18

"far catches"?? Sorry 'far-fetched'

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 17:34:30

"What I find distasteful is the grandstanding, the 'ooh who will it be next, how exciting' attitude which some people are adopting."

I cannot see one post that displays this attitude.

reading this sent me off on a bit of googling and reading articles. it's remarkable how many institutions and people were complicit in JS's abuse - except it's not remarkable is it because this is the trouble with boys clubs - nudge, nudge, wink, wink culture rather than actually reactng and giving a damn about the children involved.

JakeBullet Fri 02-Nov-12 17:51:50

I think tonight will be very touch and go with regards to the decision to broadcast......suspecting it will be pulled at the last minute.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 17:53:42

I was off focusing on obsessions irl.

I do agree with the person who was questioning why newsnight was not handing over evidence to the police.

It is a shame there will be somewhere to hide now for this SP and to think someone who has harmed children and had power over the way this country is run, a trusted MP voted in by people in good faith.

How are people who voted him in to work in their best interests going to feel?

How have the survivors of his abuse lived with what this person did to them and to watch them in public life.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 17:55:38

see on link below the last sentence of the article, in italics

Tim Fenton &#8207;@zelo_street
Newsnight And A Paedophile Accusation: may not be who many think - here's the clues to another possible name #savile
Retweeted by Nicky Campbell

Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 17:55:51

there have been police enquiries in which this person's name came up though - i imagine the suggestion is going to be that he was protected from on high.

ThePathanKhansWitch Fri 02-Nov-12 17:57:52

I didn,t think they will air it.It would be a bombshell.If the web rumours are correct.

FiercePanda Fri 02-Nov-12 18:12:17

From the link posted above...

...^Because this could be a most Educating revelation.^

Jesus take the wheel. shock

gazzalw Fri 02-Nov-12 18:21:17

I must be thick because I don't get the hint?????

GeorginaWorsley Fri 02-Nov-12 18:24:21

Bloody hell,would never have thought it of him.
iF it is true of course..wink

Pinot Fri 02-Nov-12 18:30:45

Oh my goodness.

The current Education Minister? Am I reading that correctly?


Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 18:34:27

i think you're all barking up the wrong tree.

gazzalw Fri 02-Nov-12 18:35:21

No someone who was an education Minister in the 1990s if I'm not being too obtuse...... Current Education Minister would have been a babe in arms then....

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 18:36:25

I haven't got a clue either, but it does look like Newsnight won't be naming names.

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 18:36:48

If you're reading that, it's not based on the zelo link, which is referring to one of two PPS to John Major, tending towards the unmarried one. Gove wasn't an MP until 2005, so not him.

Actually, given that the person concerned in the cryptic statements was not impeded from pursuing a political career, I don't find the assumption that it must be a Tory convincing. The oft quoted bit seems to say that the person was connected (nfd) with a paedophile convicted in the 1990s, and also that he was a senior political figure connected to a former PM. It is not explicit about which of those events occurred first.

Pinot Fri 02-Nov-12 18:39:10


MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 18:40:40

Go on twitter and put in #newsnight, then have a read.

and then have a look at related underneath.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 18:47:02

If it is him, would explain his strange ideas on rape hmm

gazzalw Fri 02-Nov-12 18:49:36

Aargh couldn't access it as I don't have an account.....

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 18:52:59

I read somewhere that whoever it was, was a popular figure and had popularity outside of his party, that would fit.

member Fri 02-Nov-12 18:53:01

Hmmm, why on earth did Iain Overton tweet the content before air? How did Micheal Crick know who to speak to regarding the potential broadcast??

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 18:53:30

I don't have twitter but can access it

GeorginaWorsley Fri 02-Nov-12 18:57:02

no,my post refered to cigar and jazz liking figure,not education secretary

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 19:00:41

He was an education secretary though.

I just can't believe it could be the popular Tory being referred to, but that seems to be the most prolific opinion on Twitter. This gets more and more bizarre.

LineRunner Fri 02-Nov-12 19:02:18

The one with the funny rape views was Education Secretary under Thatcher.

LineRunner Fri 02-Nov-12 19:03:00

('Funny' as in odd, bizarre, not right.)

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 19:04:21

I am not sure that is what he is particularly well known for though.

There is a Lord being named a lot on twitter which makes sense of Newsnight saying it is a senior political figure rather than senior politician.

earwig1 Fri 02-Nov-12 19:05:46

OMG! I was not expecting to be shocked by knowing the name of the presumed culprit, but I am, massively. It goes to show paedos are everywhere...

LineRunner Fri 02-Nov-12 19:06:11

Not Hong Kong Fooey?

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 19:07:16

COBRA met today to discuss the Ash tree problem, interesting that happened on the same day as this newsnight article.

Hmm I did think this morning COBRA and the ash tree problem was a bit strange.

Coconutty Fri 02-Nov-12 19:15:00

I'm a bit thick and still have no clue who you are all on about.

earwig1 Fri 02-Nov-12 19:15:15

Yes, ash tree problem is serious but...really...

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 19:15:16

Hmm I did think this morning COBRA and the ash tree problem was a bit strange.

So did I, I thought COBRA was national security type thing?

But it is all very odd, Newsnight say they are going to run this story, alledgevery d person says I`ll sue, newsnight drop his name, all seems very amaturish.

earwig1 Fri 02-Nov-12 19:16:14

maybe the cabinet met urgently about the imminent revelations, but said to press it was about ash trees...

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 19:16:17

probably gets teh name out on twitter without being sued

withjamin Fri 02-Nov-12 19:18:59

But sometimes, let's not forget a cigar is just a cigar. And the potential loss of between 30% and 75% of UK trees (afaik the Chilean thingummy fungus can cross species - hey, maybe it's a pinochet-led conspiracy and wasn't he mates with Maggie?) is a big, big deal.

withjamin Fri 02-Nov-12 19:22:23

And cobra is combined response to any largescale emergency such as the recent flooding. Is not security per se. Is only way to.quickly organise multi-agency response.

BloominMarvellous Fri 02-Nov-12 19:33:04

I can't see newsnight on the TV guide. Did they axe it?

ImperialBlether Fri 02-Nov-12 19:37:20

I thought it would be LB. There's a very nasty story about him.

ommmward Fri 02-Nov-12 19:45:13

Linky, Imperial?

(and Christ almighty, I know his family sad )

bringupthebabies Fri 02-Nov-12 19:58:00

Was all outed here last month

donnie Fri 02-Nov-12 20:01:54

Yes, imperial. LB is the one IMO

Coconutty Fri 02-Nov-12 20:05:44

LB? Who's that?

Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 20:06:47

i don't think it is

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 20:08:31

Nancy, your press, have you got info?

donnie Fri 02-Nov-12 20:09:50

That blog mentions MP and PL about whom there were rumours galore back in the eighties. some of the stuff on there is really shocking.
Nancy what is your view?

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 20:12:14

LB has been known about for a while, however I do not think he is a household name and this person is supposed to be well known.

Imperial, LB?

ImperialBlether Fri 02-Nov-12 20:16:12

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Aaah I see, off to Google

Bilbobagginstummy Fri 02-Nov-12 20:17:34

This is weird. Why not just watch Newsnight if you're interested?

Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 20:17:50

i think it's a certain lord

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 20:17:57

I feel sorry for that swansea footballer.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 20:20:27

chances are Newsnight will have pulled it, Bilbo.
Agree that it's weird though!

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 20:20:52

I know viva, I am sure Jimmy Somerville could empathise.

ImperialBlether Fri 02-Nov-12 20:21:18

Can you give an initial, Nancy?

bringupthebabies Fri 02-Nov-12 20:21:53

I don't know why you are all being so coy about names?

They are talking about Lord McAlpine, Peter Lilley, Michael Portillo, Michael Gove, Derek Laud and others.

Is it the same minister that gave JS control of Broadmoor?

Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 20:23:33

he's got a 100 names!

But A M seem to be most widely used initials

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 20:25:56

bringupthebabies coy about names because previous threads have been deleted for naming names of living people !

LineRunner Fri 02-Nov-12 20:28:27

AM - not a household name but an AM was Thatcher's 'right hand man' and sorted out her premiership financially, it is alleged.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 20:28:31

Laurence Lee &#8207;@gregorsamsa1967
out already: #BBC newsnight set to allege that lord mcalpine is a paedophile on the prog tonight. Currently being legalled. He will sue
Retweeted by Will Black

bringupthebabies Fri 02-Nov-12 20:31:49

Well JS would approve of that.

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 20:32:38

Cant link as on phone but google michael portillo paedophile. First link is to a blog, v interedting.

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 20:33:02


Piffpaffpoff Fri 02-Nov-12 20:34:42

Aris do you mean Jimmy Saville? Not Jimmy Sommerville!

Piffpaffpoff Fri 02-Nov-12 20:36:34

Ah, I may have got the wrong end of the stick. "Taxi for Piff...." blush

As you were...

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 20:37:11


Done it. is that nlog really from 1997? how come its tskrn so long to come out.

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 20:39:05

Someone sort my link pls. its explosive stugf

Says thete is a video of mcalpine raping boys which the bbc has had a copy of for years.

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 20:40:36
withjamin Fri 02-Nov-12 20:42:04

Because it's a load of unsubstantiated, homophobic claptrap? trotting out the old homosexual=paedophile stuff? C'mon, seriously?

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 20:44:35

Maybe. Will watch with interest tonight.

ImperialBlether Fri 02-Nov-12 20:45:23

I think the person who suggested Michael Gove is on the wrong tracks - wrong by about 30 years.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 20:49:50

I don't want the thread pulled, full names will get deleted.

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 20:54:15

Because it's a load of unsubstantiated, homophobic claptrap? trotting out the old homosexual=paedophile stuff? C'mon, seriously?

Reminds me of the fairly recent threads that said..."What, just 'cos he looked like a weirdo & lived alone, Savile was a paedo? It's nothing but a load of unsubstantiated claptrap - about a dear old man who raised millions for charity".


You may be right - it might all be bollox. But absolutely nowhere have I seen anyone pulling the homosexual=paedophile stuff. Guess what - some paedophiles are gay, some are straight, some are lesbians and some are bi-sexual.

Let's wait and see.

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 20:57:15

I said Jimmy Somerville because people keep confusing him with Jimmy Saville, just like the swansea footballer and the former home secretary.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 20:58:16

David Icke named some people many years ago in his book 'The Biggest Secret' and some allegations he made were even more serious, and he always said if it isn't true why didn't anyone sue him.

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 21:00:05

I'm only putting names in the way of 'this blog says x has done y',. Which I believe is ok as the blog does say that do what I've said is true. I offer no opinion on whether the blog is correct.

Arisbottle Fri 02-Nov-12 21:00:25

I don't think anyone has trotted out , homosexual = paedophile at all.

I think that in the past when homosexuality was illegal, gay men could have been forced to become secretive and to mix in circles which may have overlapped with more sinster groups including paedophilia. But that obviously does not mean that one necessarily links to the other.

exexpat Fri 02-Nov-12 21:00:49

I don't think anyone would sue David Icke because that might suggest he was actually worth taking seriously.

If you're just one of many people named in one of his conspiracy theories (along with extraterrestrial lizards or whatever) it would surely be better just to treat it as a big joke?

gazzalw Fri 02-Nov-12 21:01:37

DW saw Michael Portillo being shown round Marrakesh back in the 1990s - he was on his own though with a guide doing the tour in Spanish ;-)

It's outrageous and unbelievable - it actually reads like one of those 'fantastical' American thrillers.....

It just gets worse and worse......;-(

exexpat Fri 02-Nov-12 21:02:19

And all I can say on the subject of Newsnight is that my twitter feed this afternoon has been curiously full of references to suede shoes...

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 21:03:28

Well he just had a sellout show at Wembley Stadium a week ago, and he says it on video and live and in radio interviews etc. There are blogs all over the net saying similar things.

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 21:05:31

I've just been on Guido's blog: there are dozens of names there - all parties, all plausible. No clear front runner.

And that's the damning bit. So many of whom one was prepared to believe it.

FiercePanda Fri 02-Nov-12 21:07:26

Blue suede shoes, expat? Mine was full of comments about a young one who likes summer holidays and devil women.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 21:08:01

There is a youtube video of David Icke at the Oxford Union. They invited him to speak. I personally think he says a lot of things that are true but lots of new age stuff that is rubbish and is possible deliberate deception of the audience to further a new age agenda. But not everything he says is rubbish. He said Savile was a paedophile and necrophiliac while the main stream media was lauding him for his charity work.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 21:08:10

Beaver this is your link

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 21:10:30

And all I can say on the subject of Newsnight is that my twitter feed this afternoon has been curiously full of references to suede shoes...

If that's who I think it is, & turns out to be true, I'd be really, really shock about that. And slightly gutted 'cos I've always thought of him as one of the good guys sad

exexpat Fri 02-Nov-12 21:12:13

I think the politician in question is known for wearing rather scruffy brown suede shoes. But Twitter has been getting rather over-excited this afetrnoon, so who knows.

exexpat Fri 02-Nov-12 21:13:33

Same here, Crikey - not a Tory fan, but he always seemed more human than the new guard. But may well be wrong.

topknob Fri 02-Nov-12 21:16:57

KC then !

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 21:18:08

expat same here, although his recent comments about rape made me change my mind about him, I must say.
However, I'm thinking it's not him now, anyway.
I'm thinking it's the Lord...

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 21:24:50

I think it's A Mc too. And I think the fall out could be enormous in terms of who knew what and who covered up for him.

Fucking hell angry

chipstick10 Fri 02-Nov-12 21:28:36

it could be anyone, its prob someone we havent heard of or someone whose dead. And why are newsnight suddenly coming out now and naming some random tory mp? Why didnt they name savile when they had the chance?

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 21:28:45

That young one is travelling in countries with no extradition treaty, alledgely.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 21:29:41

The Daily Telegraph has learned that the claims centre on historic allegations about a paedophile ring at a children's home.
The politician, who does not want to be named, told The Daily Telegraph the allegations were "totally untrue".

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 21:31:27

It seems that the media covered for Savile and others, but now the lid has been lifted. Some media will not look in, but it is possible that other media might look further. It might spread and it is not impossible that it might even lead to a general election.

Viperidae Fri 02-Nov-12 21:37:47

I'm just totally bewildered confused

After I've read this thread and all the cryptic clues I barely remember my own name, let alone anyone elses

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 21:38:11

"politician" is different from "political figure" isn't it?

MissHilly Fri 02-Nov-12 21:38:14

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 21:39:04

I didn't even spot that

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 21:41:41

claig I do hope you're right, but I fear it's all going to be covered up again and generally forgotten about by Joe Public, just like HLG was covered up and forgotten about..

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 21:42:48

misshilly i've just checked his wiki page shock

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 21:44:46

Who on earth in bb6 wS close to Thatcher. Are we talking celebrity bb..?

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 21:45:55

NigellasGuest, I think it depends if the media is really in competition or if it is all just a charade, and if some media want to gain advantage.

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 21:47:18

Viva just check the lust of contestants that year and it's pretty obvious.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 21:47:51

We don't really understand how it all works and why the media seemed to protect Savile, but I think some media is in competition with others and will have lots of information.

ShutTheFrontDoor Fri 02-Nov-12 21:47:55

Yes I remember the contestant, a v posh (ex) mp I think, black.

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 21:47:55

It is apparently linked to Peter Righton and Tom Watson's comment in the HoC the other week. Link to children's home in Jersey - Haut de la Garenne.

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 21:48:34

list not lust blush Fuck me, that was an unfortunate typo.

MissHilly Fri 02-Nov-12 21:49:58

shutthefrontdoor yes it's him, he wasn't an MP but a political advisor and connected to The Lord who is being named tonight.

Mrcrumpswife Fri 02-Nov-12 21:50:51

Didnt you watch channel 4!

Might as well have said the name.

edam Fri 02-Nov-12 21:51:34

The Spanish-sounding MP, the floral one and the one named after a country were all the subject of an awful lot of gossip in the 90s, when they were ministers (last one was minister under Thatch, the others under Major I think although may have been juniors under Thatch).

ShutTheFrontDoor Fri 02-Nov-12 21:51:53

And openly gay.

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 21:53:05

He was a speech writer. The politician is ex Tory party treasurer and deputy chairman but before John Major was PM.

BB6 guy worked at a PR agency in Pimlico mentioned or linked to earlier in the thread

Feenie Fri 02-Nov-12 21:54:07

And openly gay

So? confused

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 21:58:34
ShutTheFrontDoor Fri 02-Nov-12 22:00:01

So he prefers boys to girls

Well connected if you believe the article.

LineRunner Fri 02-Nov-12 22:03:26

The only possible connection whatsoever that I can imagine between being gay, and paedophilia, is that back in the shameful bad old days of it being illegal to be gay (certainly to act on it) there was scope for blackmail.

The very illegality of homosexuality could have created some dreadful conditions of coercion and manipulation.

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:04:36

Softkitty shock at that link - just shock So many connections...

Feenie Fri 02-Nov-12 22:05:17

Would you say Jimmy Savile was openly heterosexual? confused It's not relevant, surely.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 22:07:01

Fucking hell at Softkitty link

I bet Cameron is preying its not him...

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 22:09:05

Cameron is the person who calls COBRA meetings, still think it was just about Ash trees?

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:10:07

shock shock shock

I have NO idea (to be clear) whether any of this is true - but a website that named JS & A Mc two years ago also alleges the following:

A very, very, very high up recent politician arrested lurking in a London toilet "importuning" another (adult) man for sex. Fined £500, but charged under his middle names

A jug eared actor, beloved of Sunday drama type shows, seen paying a 12 year old rent boy & taking him off in a taxi

An as famous as it gets musician who has spent many a hard days night downloading and paying for (with his own credit cards) child pornography. Not charged in spite of the evidence because of his "influence" hmm

A shaggy haired footballer/manager found to be having an affair with a 13 year old girl. Police were called by HIM when the girl's family threatened him with violence - but she refused to give evidence against him. Newspapers refused to run the story because of his "most beloved of the nation" reputation at the time.

There's a few others. Could really just be tattle - but appears alongside other stuff that now seems to be true. So....shock.

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 22:10:11

It seems extremely odd to me to call a COBRA meeting for Ash trees.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 22:10:18


nancy75 Fri 02-Nov-12 22:12:16

Did you read the comments on soft kitty's link? People are secret Jews?Homosexual perverts? The truth about people that have been involved in child abuse needs to come out, but not like this.

MissHilly Fri 02-Nov-12 22:12:42

Cobra minutes are minuted, i think if there were to be a meeting about tonight's revelations it would be very discreet and involve very few people.

HotheadPaisan Fri 02-Nov-12 22:12:50

No wonder they lock files away for 100 years, people would be up in arms if they realised the true extent of the corruption, abuse and covering up that goes on. Maybe some of the conspiracy theorists have been right all along.

MissHilly Fri 02-Nov-12 22:13:15

Sorry meant to say meetings are minuted!

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:14:29

The high up politician shares initials with a lung disease, btw.

HolyAutumnGoldBatman Fri 02-Nov-12 22:16:36

I really hope the actor one isn't true!

HotheadPaisan Fri 02-Nov-12 22:16:45

Agree some of it is bonkers and obscures the truly horrifying stuff that has gone on, I wonder if there be any justice done.

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:17:07

I've lurked on all the JS threads and read around on it a lot - many MNers have put a lot of time and effort into researching and linking relevant info. Many of the same names keep coming up, along with some new ones.

All of this is so, so shocking but sadly, not surprising.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 22:17:32

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:17:53

crikey what website is it?

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:18:55

Lung disease? A Mc?

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:19:29

maybe the COBRA meeting was called about Yew Trees not ash trees

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 22:21:01

Cobra meetings are top secret so it would be years before any minutes could be disclosed.

Nigella you may well be right about yew trees.

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:21:16

Lung disease?? This is just becoming more confusing confused

As for the actor, I assume that is the one that was linked to Wayne Rooney via a '3rd party' (I am just being particularly obtuse to confuse everyone else as much as I am confused grin)

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:22:24

Lung disease relating to the politician lurking in the London loo, Kitty - not A Mc.

Hold on, Nigella will get the link.

HolyAutumnGoldBatman Fri 02-Nov-12 22:22:42

ceebee think of a very, very, very high up politician (i.e. as high as you can get) and see who as the initials that are also a lung disease.

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 22:23:17

Crikey the football one is why he resigned his very senior job in a hurry and hasn't worked in that capacity since, iirc.

Lung Disease = TB

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:23:42

I remember the Sunday night actor being mentioned on a thread a year or two ago, iirc something to do with him allegedly having affairs and being an all-around sleaze bag. No mention of paedophilia though. Where's that come from, Crikey?

CarnivorousPanda Fri 02-Nov-12 22:24:13

I hear a lot of people used to suffer from TB in the past.

HolyAutumnGoldBatman Fri 02-Nov-12 22:24:49

I'm really hoping the actor isn't who I think it is!

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:25:47

Shit, just worked out the politician. Really? sad.

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:26:32

Scroll down to about half way where comments by "anonymous" are posted.

Would have taken no notice at all if there were no mention of JS & A Mc (and TH too).

Make of it what you will.

Cee No - different actor. More shocking, I think. Lung disease = TB. Sorry, trying to be subtle so this thread doesn't disappear!

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:27:02

Of course - sorry, am being really slow tonight blush

The musician and footballer ones are fairly obvious - in fact they all are. And, yes, the more you think about it and what has come out, there probably is some truth in them shock

I cant work out the actor with big ears.

lubeybooby Fri 02-Nov-12 22:27:42

Jesus. wtaf is going on? Are newsnight going ahead with it?

lubeybooby Fri 02-Nov-12 22:28:42

is the actor MC?

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:32:58

crikey ohmygod

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 22:33:37


CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:33:44

Yes, Lubey

HolyAutumnGoldBatman Fri 02-Nov-12 22:33:46

Some of those on that site must be lies they can't ALL be paedophiles. I can't believe it, particularly ones where there has never been so much as a muttering about it before.

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:34:01

OMG at the actor - not what I thought at all and definitely didn't see that one shock

I see that the person currently on his (late) summer holiday has form for disappearing out of the country hmm

Tbh, if half of what is on that website is true, it is despicable sad

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:34:37

are you all watching NN? On now!

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 22:35:07

Watching NN. They haven't named him yet.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 22:35:26

Yep, I don't think they will name tho

lubeybooby Fri 02-Nov-12 22:35:33

fucking hell.

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:35:50

No, DH is watching Moonraker for the 50th time hmm

Have they named him or are they not even mentioning the story??

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:35:55

I was wrong about who the actor is. Shit Crikey! I just can't get my head around such a massive cover up.

What is the point in this if they're not going to name the person responsible?

Tipsandshoots Fri 02-Nov-12 22:36:06

yes they are going to go through the lot. please go for it newsnight

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 22:36:31

They will only name him if they can be certain his victims will give evidence in court that can be corroborated.

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:36:58

ceebeegeebies they have opened with the story

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:37:05

Ah - so they are not naming anyone on Newsnight hmm

nancy75 Fri 02-Nov-12 22:37:08

The myspace link is just a copy & paste of one of the earlier links. Please remember that anyone can write anything on the Internet, this is not the way to get justice or the truth

GobblersKnob Fri 02-Nov-12 22:37:09

I don't think they are going to name, unless they are stringing us out in the style of Davina.

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:38:40

Yes - I thought that if even one of those stories is even slightly true, then it's disgusting.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 22:38:51

I believe him x

CarnivorousPanda Fri 02-Nov-12 22:39:33

Wrexham not leon = lord?

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:39:48

Yes I believe him too.
He is very brave.

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:39:51

That poor man, reported it to the police and wasn't believed. sad

Who fucking who?!

I don't know who they're talking about.

LouMacca Fri 02-Nov-12 22:40:40

Google Ben Fellows.

HolyAutumnGoldBatman Fri 02-Nov-12 22:41:32

I think nancy is right, some anonymous blog, no evidence whatsoever, it's a bit early to be condemning the people on that link.

MordionAgenos Fri 02-Nov-12 22:41:48

holy I was on a train with him this morning. He didn't look worried.

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 22:42:18

It says on the MySpace blog that hollie greigs father and brother moved to pria De luz in portugal

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:42:35

God, this is disgraceful. [Angry]



Have I got that right?

angry I am so so angry, words just fail me at this time, how fucking dare they do this to these children. No more cover ups these people must now face prosecution.

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:44:01

Ok, as I am not watching it, can someone tell me who it is??

difficultpickle Fri 02-Nov-12 22:44:51

NN bottled it.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 22:45:17

They haven't named him angry

NigellasGuest Fri 02-Nov-12 22:45:35

They did not say who it actually was

VivaLeBeaver Fri 02-Nov-12 22:46:12

No names on nn

Tipsandshoots Fri 02-Nov-12 22:46:15

ahh bollocks

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 22:46:31

Yeah - even though it was me that brought it up, I do think we need to be careful. We don't know who made these allegations or what evidence they have.

Must admit I find the GB one in Aberdeen hard to believe, for some reason.

And I also believe the guy on Newsnight. Hope the cunt gets properly outed.

ceebeegeebies Fri 02-Nov-12 22:46:45

OMG, you are kidding me! Can't believe they bottled it...was it all a publicity stunt by BBC?

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 22:48:10

Ivor, no.

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 22:48:35

That poor man. Going through a nightmare like that and NW police adding to that nightmare by not believing him.
There must be no more cover ups now and the perpatrators of this abuse MUST be prosecuted.
Steven...i believe you.

What is the point if they're not going to name and shame?

Presumably they have passed their investigation onto the police?

I realise it takes enormous courage for the victims of such abuse to come forwards and tell their story, and such bravery should never be dismissed simply because the abuser himself isn't identified.

But the BBC, by broadcasting such a story, are showing that they believe them. So why not go the full extent and actually say who the Hell they're accusing? It's unfair not to since possibly innocent people are going to find themselves the subject of rumour and gossip.

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 22:49:49

And questions must be asked about some of the serving police officers in NW of that time.

Xenia Fri 02-Nov-12 22:50:25

There's a court injunction by the man who would have been exposed. Perhaps the tweet was the only way to keep the story public in a sense.

Sexual interest in children (if indeed there is anything in the allegations) is not new. In Victorian London there were child brothels. It has always been important children are protected and of course that libelous material is not published I have a feeling this time the injunction is not going to work very well but let's see.

Nancy66 Fri 02-Nov-12 22:51:00

yeah - if it's the north Wales thing it's def the lord

People on Twitter seem to all be naming the same person confused but not sure how much of that is just reflective of a sort of sheep mentality...

MissHilly Fri 02-Nov-12 22:52:26

Newsnight didn't need to name him (and probably couldnt anyway due to legal reasons)as it's out there now for everyone to see anyway. Channel 4 news tonight sailed very close to the wind in naming him, so it was easy to figure out.

CarnivorousPanda Fri 02-Nov-12 22:54:03

There's plenty to read about Wrexham and that person.
I think he's the senior one.

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 22:54:19

Can someone please PM me when you have a min. Cos i dont think its the person that i originally thought.

SoftKittyWarmKitty Fri 02-Nov-12 22:54:33

Well Freddie Starr's injunction didn't work, did it? It was overturned. Lets hope this one is too.

chipstick10 Fri 02-Nov-12 22:56:26

BBc wanted to look like they arent the bottle jobs they proved they were with Savile and so thought they would throw this into the loop but just left everyone dangling. They are pretty pathetic.

AuntieMaggie Fri 02-Nov-12 22:58:42

There really was a COBRA meeting about Ash Trees today... my employer is linked to what is happening there... not saying there weren't any other meetings there too but the people meeting about the trees wouldn't necessarily be the same people who might be in the room about this other stuff iyswim...

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 23:00:53

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 23:04:27

No, let's hope it's not overturned, and that the police - unless you believe the British police are incapable of running such an investigation in the current climate - can get on with their work. The public does not need to know every detail of an ongoing major investigation, except when there is a serious allegation that the current investigation is incompetent.

The Internethas gone mad today, and so has this thread, with innuendo about just about any unpopular public figure getting swept up in in.

Now, maybe amongst the plethora of names there are indeed one or more criminals. But that is for the police to establish and the CPS to prosecute. And perhaps once any criminalmcases are delay with, there will be a need for an enquiry into earlier investigations. But again, those wil be better handled by properly appointees with powers to interview under caution or under oath.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 23:05:37

I fear this will be another stick to beat the BBC with

Growlithe Fri 02-Nov-12 23:06:30

Do you know what? I thought this would be a serious criminal investigation into a shockingly prolific child sex offender, and into any accomplices he may have had that are still alive and so can be brought to justice.

But no, it actually must have been a form of Friday Night entertainment. Name the evil famous person. Major disappointment.

Sorry I got it wrong there hmm

ThePathanKhansWitch Fri 02-Nov-12 23:07:28

What were the lawyers at the Welsh tribunal doing? Did not one of them have the balls to represent those children properly?

"First we kill the lawyers" now I understand that quote.

MissHilly Fri 02-Nov-12 23:09:56

Well said Growlithe, I think the BBC were doing their best to get the name out there by tweeting earlier and I really, really hope David Cameron will meet with the victim on Newsnight and grant a new investigation.

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 23:10:37

Growlithe in the interview on NN he made it clear that he reported it (or tried to) at the time and the POLICE DIDNT believe him.

CarnivorousPanda Fri 02-Nov-12 23:11:25

I hope that the victim who bravely related details of appalling abuse will not be let down.

Hopefully, as in the Savile case, others will now come forward.

CaptainNancy Fri 02-Nov-12 23:12:35

The Hollie Greig thing is a hoax! Was discredited ages ago.
All these blogs are just conspiracy-theorist fantasists, and the people commenting on them are vile.

Yes, there will be well-known figures that are paedophiles. Yes, there will be people who use their fame or economic status to abuse children and young people and get away with it.

Threads like this don't help anything, certainly not the victims.

It's just prurient.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 23:13:26

Growlithe, how would this become a serious criminal investigation if the police didn't believe him?

Look, I know for some people it looks as though it is just entertainment, but it is not it is incrediably serious. These people have been protected for too long, its easy to say `just leave it to the police` but that is what happened and it was covered up.

These days, like it or not, social media has and is changing the world, and people are having a voice that was quietened before. Many of these people did speak up at the time and were not believed. It is going to be a messy come out because it was so messed up before.

If exposure (media) had not run the JS story then everyone would still be in the dark.

MrsjREwing Fri 02-Nov-12 23:18:15

Those poor boys. I hope they get heard now and apologies by those that harmed them and let them down.

What a mess that the abuser got an injunction, I hope there is a proper investigation and public arrest.

Growlithe Fri 02-Nov-12 23:19:20

I am not saying that there hasn't been a massive massive cover up. I'm not saying I didn't believe every word the guy said. I'm saying that it is not at all appropriate for the BBC to create the will we or won't we name this major figure, and then for threads like this to express disgust that they didn't, to the point of posters asking for names by PM.

Ask yourself. At this point in the investigation does it actually matter a jot if YOU know the names of the accused?

No, I agree with that to an extent Grow, my feeling is, and it is only my feeling, that this cover up has gone on for too long. Why should someone so rich and protected be able to slap an injuntion on and stop a proper prosecution happening.

If it were jo bloggs down the street then no, there is no reason to name, but these people are running our country, our lives so yes I want to know, I want them to be in court, I dont want them having a say in my life. If the police could be trusted to bring them to court then it would be different, but they have proved not to be trust worthy in all of this. So what do we do?

As for this thread, its absolute human nature to talk about this, people are trying to get their heads around all these allegations.

AnyaKnowIt Fri 02-Nov-12 23:29:04

It doesn't matter to me what his name is, what does matter is that the scale of abuse that has been allowed to happen and people who could stop it haven't. They have covered it up!

EdithWeston Fri 02-Nov-12 23:29:15

I said "just leave it to the police" because I cannot see a better way to conduct the current enquiry. Is there however a better open now? I cannot think of any alternatives with the capability to conduct a criminal investigation in a wat that could lead to sound convictions.

And once the current criminal investigations are concluded, then there needs to be a proper enquiry into why things that are alleged now to have been so widely known were not dealt with at the time. And to do whatever can be done to precent similar happening in future. But again, there may be better ways of doing this, within the law at present, and I'd be interested to know what they are.

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 23:30:05

Growlithe it is possible that other survivors who have suffered at the alleged perpatrators hands might read something not unlike this thread via social media and then feel a bit braver about coming forward if their alleged attackers name is already out there.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 23:31:40

'The Overton window is a political theory that describes as a narrow "window" the range of ideas that the public will find acceptable, and that states that the political viability of an idea is defined primarily by this rather than by politicians' individual preferences'

Iain Overton tweeted that Newsnight was going to discuss it this morning.

The solicitor on Newsnight said something like at that time the idea that politicians and celebrities could be involved in child abuse seemed a bit far-fetched but based on recent revelations this is no longer far-fetched.

It looks like the Overton window has been shifted for everyone except the conspiracy theory bloggers.

Why now?

Darkesteyes Fri 02-Nov-12 23:32:21

Growlithe please read this thread particularly the post at 20.19.

earwig1 Fri 02-Nov-12 23:33:43

absolutely agree Dreams... we are governed by these people, and it makes me feel like grabbing my kids and running for the hills!

I haven't seen the other threads that MN pulled and wouldn't be surprised if this goes too for naming names.

The newsnight piece was just so sad that no-one believed him and no doubt the countless other children like him that have been completely and utterly let down by a system that allowed them to be abused in the most awful ways.

Whoever these nameless faces are - whether named on here or not - I hope that the police prosecute these vile cowardly bastards and bring them to face the justice they fucking deserve for what they have done, moneyed influence or not.

The real problem is is that the allegations relate to power people, I guess that throws everything in the air. Of course we need to know who they are, they effect our everyday life.

I dont know, Im tired, I hate witch hunts but I really don think this is one, people just want to know the truth and because it appears that most high institutions are involved people dont trust them. I mean, look the two people arrested and questioned so far are GG and FS, z list celebrities, no one with any power, and yet we know that it goes much deeper than z lists.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 23:37:23

Lots of things must have been known by newspapers for many, many years. The phone hacking scandal has shown us that all sorts of secrets were known. But nothing ever came out. But now we are getting the "tsunami of filth".


I'm with Dreams on this. I think the establishment have happily protected their own and the only thing that will stop them continuing to do so is that there is so much public pressure and public knowledge that a cover up becomes impossible or so damaging to the establishment that they have to do something.

JS was head of a Broadmoor taskforce by Edwina Currie.

Dennis MacShane quit as an MP today for fiddling his expenses - think how the MP's welcomed that investigation when it happened - they had all been abusing the system for years and it took a whistleblower and media and public pressure to force any action.

Sometimes the establishment has to be shamed into acting.

Growlithe Fri 02-Nov-12 23:38:26

Hillsborough. Don't forget it. It has blown wide open a huge can of worms.

There were huge cover ups during that period.

What that man said tonight was important. When you were all sitting there waiting for them to name names. He said His statement was changed and he was only allowed to give evidence on the edited statement.

FFS Does noone see a pattern here? Does noone see a fucking great big picture emerging???

edam Fri 02-Nov-12 23:38:30

Grow, problem is we now know people in authority have been keeping dirty secrets for a very long time indeed. Including the police - every time there was a complaint about Savile, mysteriously the police would find 'no evidence' without actually bothering to try and find any (i.e. not even speaking to the former head of Duncroft). And including the supposed official inquiry into wholesale appalling child abuse in North Wales children's homes, where we now discover the victims weren't allowed to say who had abuse them and the press weren't allowed to report any of the evidence anyway.

You are right that there is something extremely dangerous in a Twitter fever where people are frantically bandying about names without any evidence... but the authorities have not merely failed, they have been deliberately obstructive. People have to speculate because no bastard has ever even been properly investigated, let alone held to account. If the police, the courts, social services, Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all had actually done their jobs at any point in the last 40 years, there would be no need for speculation. (And if the BBC had not been so keen to let star status blind everyone to wrongdoing, and if the newspapers had not been so reluctant to take Savile on, and if the libel laws weren't so appalling in this country that they protect rich powerful wrong-doers but leave ordinary innocent people with no redress...)

edam Fri 02-Nov-12 23:40:17

V good point re statement-fixing though, Grow. But that wasn't the only thing wrong with that inquiry, very far from it.

chipstick10 Fri 02-Nov-12 23:43:46

Why werent the BBC so quick to hand over Savile? Tonights newsnight is a little bit too little too late. I agree with whats been said on here, that throwing names into the ring isnt helpful.

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 23:45:53

All these blogs are just conspiracy-theorist fantasists, and the people commenting on them are vile

ALL? Do you realise how many blogs & threads all over the internet have been naming Savile as a pervert for years? And there were an equal number of people (sorry, just like you) dismissing it all as vile conspiracy theories. "Why aren't the police involved then?" was a common question. Because they didn't want to be, unfortunately.

I don't doubt for a moment that there are, and always have been, people with some power abusing their position and having the resources to cover up for themselves. A common theme seems to be that they WERE reported to the police & nothing came of it.

What are victims supposed to do then? Slink off to the corner feeling unimportant and overlooked? Fuck that. If it was me, I would be getting the information out there in any way I could - and it seems that some of them have. How nice that without any actual justification you've dismissed them as "vile fantasists". How do you know that?

I agree - there should be no trial by media, and it's horrendous that there could be completely innocent names being bandied about. But what this must, must, must do is finally bring it home to the powers that be that NOBODY is too big, too influential, too important to evade prosecution.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 23:45:55

'Why werent the BBC so quick to hand over Savile?'

For the same reason as no one else was either, probably.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 23:48:36

The solicitor on Newsnight said that the allegations were being made for decades.

CrikeyOHare Fri 02-Nov-12 23:50:05

The abuse of in children's homes is a national scandal - and very, very real. A close family member of mine was in a boy's children's home in Surrey - and was repeatedly raped by staff and older boys all the time he was there. (Not, as far as I'm aware by anyone mentioned on these threads). On this basis, I am not struggling to believe some of the tales from the "vile fantasists".

A flood gate has been opened.

I questioned a few days ago whether the general public really want this all to come out as it would be so shocking, maybe people dont, easier for people to believe that `alls right in the world`.

claig Fri 02-Nov-12 23:56:06

What I don't understand is why did it take 1 year for the Savile story to come out after Newsnight started investigating it and why do we wait all day from Iain Overton's tweet before Newsnight releases the report. Why do other media organisations not jump the gun over the entire year or day as they surely know what the story is likely to be and surely have info as well. Why do they let Newsnight break the story? Do they form an orderly queue?

Exactly claig, this is a massive massive story, what are they all scared off? I thought we led the way for investigative journalism? obviously not!

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 00:01:44

For most news stories we have assumed that they all want the scoop, but this seems different.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 00:03:23

It is starting to look like we lead the way for cover-ups and whitewashes

Growlithe Sat 03-Nov-12 00:05:43

The most important thing was said tonight. Those boys were not allowed to name that name in court, because their statements had been changed. They were rendered powerless.

Similarly, the Hillsborough families were given a cut off point of 3.15 for time of death, so they were rendered powerless for challenging the critical errors occurring after this time which were so obviously crucial.

The crimes are hideous vile crimes. There were perpetrators and there are victims. And all of these are very very important.

But what is important to you, sitting there tonight in your home, is not the names of the victims, or the perpetrators. Even if they are in public office, because they won't be after arrest.

What should be crucially, crucially important to you, sitting there in your homes, with your families, is a fundamental belief in a transparent justice system.

We had evidence tonight, in that Newsnight, that there is not a transparent justice system. And that was not the first evidence of that we have had this year.

That should worry all of you more than names, because as the families of Hillsborough will tell you, it is of the utmost importance to have a transparent justice system.

clam Sat 03-Nov-12 00:06:33

So this 'not-yet-named' politial figure has allegedly threatened to sue if NN broadcast his identity.
And? If it's common knowledge that he's done these things, on what grounds would he sue? Wouldn't it be similar to when the Mail published the names of Stephen Lawrence's killers, inviting them to go ahead and sue, knowing full well they wouldn't have a leg to stand on?

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 00:11:19

Agree clam, and I thought exactly the same about Savile's supposed threats to sue and stop his marathon runs. Pull the other one, it's got a shellsuit on it.

Of course it is Grow, but I dont just have to believe in just one thing, I want a transparent justice system but I also dont want peadophiles running my life. I could ask you the same, why cant a powerful public peadophile not be named?

noblegiraffe Sat 03-Nov-12 00:11:32

I don't understand with all these cover-ups and 'culture of the times' comments, how Jonathan King ever ended up in prison for molesting boys. He was rich, powerful, massive in the pop world; how did his conviction not open the floodgates?

ThePathanKhansWitch Sat 03-Nov-12 00:12:54

Claig I fear you're right. A veneer is being torn away.

Darkesteyes Sat 03-Nov-12 00:12:56

i agree about the justice system Growlithe. The whole thing needs ripping apart and starting again.

It's the fear isn't it - the political influence (perhaps overly so if some names are to be believed), the threat of libel/slander and damages that are stopping these names from coming out.

We should respect this IF the police are putting together strong cases to bring all of these fuckers to justice. My fear is that power and influence and the position some of these people held or even hold will dilute the case/s and a number of them will taper out over coming months or even years.

Innocent until proven guilty of course but surely some of these names are more than just wicked rumours and the number of times that their names would have cropped up with these rumours - as it no doubt did for Savile - makes me angry that Newsnight didn't just go ahead this evening and name one of the people that they have evidence on - with the tag 'allegedly' if necessary.

It is in the public interest to know who has abused their positions to harm children - as it would be for any other criminal offence they have committed.

It is also right that these people are brought to justice for the sake of those children they have abused and harmed.

Why should their positions or ex positions allow them to get away with it for longer? Or are we going to learn in the future of more dead celebs/politicians that should have faced justice for their hideous crimes when they were alive but authorities/police/press were too afraid to deal with the repercussions?

Growlithe Sat 03-Nov-12 00:23:38

Dreams of course I'd want him named.

What I wouldn't want is trial by TV, or trial by Internet forum. That would not be justice.

There was obviously some point of law which prevented Newsnight naming names tonight.

My point is, the programme was as important anyway, because there was actually nothing legally to stop them saying the statements had been changed and this led to a different outcome to the case.

They didn't have to name him. Logic says he's finished. Like Norman Bettison. Its all just a matter of time now.

What's important is statement changing.

bringupthebabies Sat 03-Nov-12 00:24:35

bringupthebabies Sat 03-Nov-12 00:25:02
claig Sat 03-Nov-12 00:26:45

We are told on TV that Savile threatened newspapers that if they ran stories that his charity donations to hospitals would have stopped, and that is why they didn't run stories on him. So are we expected to believe that they turned a blind eye to child abuse so that hospitals could get charity money from him and even after he died, they still didn't tell run any stories.

Agree Grow - it's not only anger about these individuals and their crimes but the fucking cover ups and the fact that there has been no justice as of yet for the victims in this - and will there ever be?

Sorry for the swearing but as a mother and protector-until-my-last-breath of my beautiful children, this story just makes me so bloody angry that we have a system that seems to condone child abuse and has covered up scandals such as this for years with no justice or, as you rightly say, transparency for those victims that have finally been allowed to voice what they had many years ago and were ignored and failed by a fucking screwed up system where only money and influence mattered.

Darkesteyes Sat 03-Nov-12 00:32:45

Ive just been on Twitter and seen that they have named Leonard Rossiter on tommorows front page

<growlithe i dont follow their account and dont buy the Sun. Someone else i follow retweeted it and it appeared in my timeline.

Growlithe Sat 03-Nov-12 00:39:07

I'm going to sleep now.

When all these names start slipping out, remember one thing They changed statements. Recall it happened over Hillsborough. Look out for it in future. It can't be allowed to go unchecked. Its too important.

Darkesteyes Sat 03-Nov-12 00:40:19

Agree Growlithe G"night x

Darkesteyes Sat 03-Nov-12 00:59:20
Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 07:19:41

I don't think the old lady is necessarily wrong - she is probably right that some teenage girls were no angels and did swap sex for cigarettes. Things are never black and white but what we need to ensure is that now no one preys on under age girls or boys and stop it and give children the mechanism to complain.

This is another older link - I see the 2000 BBC one above which similar

SoftKittyWarmKitty Sat 03-Nov-12 07:21:26

That article Darkesteyes shock .

So how come The Sun can name Rossiter but Newsnight can't name that senior political figure?

Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 07:25:12

Rossiter is dead. You cannot libel the dead. The Sun link says Rossiter was in the room but not involved in the attack anyway so it's a bit of a spurious link although I would imagine most of us would shout out and make people stop if we saw that going on in a room even if we were preparing to go on screen.

I heard third hand but may be wrong that Newsnight was subject to a court injunction obtained yesterday from the living public figure who could have been named as accused (but of course not guilty unless and until there is a trial).

poachedeggs Sat 03-Nov-12 07:29:36

Because he's dead.

ghoulygumdrops Sat 03-Nov-12 07:57:52

Does anyone know why so many people are tweeting JKW at newsnight?

FiercePanda Sat 03-Nov-12 08:08:59

They're bots/spammers, set up to tweet random letters at trending topics every so often so they look like real active accounts.

ghoulygumdrops Sat 03-Nov-12 08:22:03

Ahhh very annoying! Thanks FP.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Sat 03-Nov-12 09:01:58

Before everyone charges out with pitchforks, they might want to read this article from the blogger Anna Raccoon who was actually a pupil at Duncroft, and who has spoken with Margaret Jones, the 91 year old former head, this week. She has a very different take on the story.

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sat 03-Nov-12 09:24:10

i thought Ms Jones seemed very of her time, probably the 'harsh but fair' head that children like that might have needed.

i used to go out with a psych nurse, he said that sex for cigarettes was absolutely institutional currency when he was training back in the late 80s (he was part of a 'new broom' designed to sweep that out, of course).

Pinot Sat 03-Nov-12 09:25:50

NN definitely said politician, not political figure. So KC not Mc A.

WynkenBlynkenandNod Sat 03-Nov-12 09:50:49

The last year or two have been a depressing eye opener for me and I feel like I had been living in a bubble. We've had revelations of Murdoch's dynasty controlling politicians, Hillsborough cover up, Savile's abuse being a very open secret and now it's apparent that justice was absolutely not done for those victims of the North Wales Child Abuse and high ranking political figures are paedophiles.

Last night's Newsnight was important as it exposed how cover ups occur in high levels of government and how the Watergate inquiry evidence was tainted ie. how the boys were told they could only put certain bits into their statement and then only bits of their statements were read out. So in effect they were prevented from giving relevant evidence.

The point made previously about transparency is really important. It's clear at the moment it's far from being so. There's a lot of stuff on the Internet about Jack Straw reversing a ruling in a family law case, Clayton v Clayton, which was case that entitled people involved in cases heard by the Family Courts to speak out to the press after the proceedings. By reversing this, a side effect was that a child in care who had been through the family courts is prevented from speaking to the press regarding any wrong doing they consider to be done to them. It was reported in the Independent.

It's hard to find out if this is definitely the case but if true we've the situation where children in care were abused and prevented from giving evidence by the police as we heard last night on NN and they are currently legally prevented from speaking out about any abuse that may occur.

I find what's been happening incredibly hard to get my head round. The encouraging thing is that finally victims of abuse are coming forward as finally they know they will be believed and society owes it to them to ensure things change so that no one is above the law and will need to answer to it and these things can't happen again.

I'm going on a bit here but on a personal note (I've mentioned it on another thread), this week my 74 year old mother finally spoke out about how she was targeted by her local Catholic priest (not in this country) which resulted in her leaving home at 16 . She tried to tell her sister about him but she wouldn't believe her so she felt she had no option but to leave home. She was two years older than my DD is now and I can't describe how I feel about it.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sat 03-Nov-12 10:14:32

Actually even if he was dead they might legally have a problem naming him anyway.

If you read the article that has been posted by a number of sites and is supposed to be from the guardian in 1997 it says the following:

When the tribunal was established last year, it had been assumed that the press could report its proceedings, using the laws of privilege which allow them to name names from court cases and public hearings without fear of libel actions.

However, Sir Ronald then ruled that the media could not report the name of any living person who was accused or likely to be accused of abusing children in the North Wales homes unless they had previously been convicted of such an offence.

Since then he has extended his ruling twice: he has granted anonymity to one man who died 16 years ago and to another who has twice been convicted of sexually assaulting boys from a North Wales home.

Sir Ronald has argued that his ruling will encourage alleged paedophiles to come froward and give honest evidence without fear of retribution. Critics say this is unnecessary, since he has the power to compel witnesses to attend, and that those who have come forward have done so to deny the allegations and not to make a clean breast of their alleged offences.

One lawyer who has been involved with the tribunal said he feared that the anonymity ruling was actively discouraging witnesses. "Newspaper readers may well have information of potential value to this tribunal. They may themselves have been the victims of abuse, or they may have worked with the alleged abusers. But if the press is not allowed to inform them of the names of those against whom allegations are made, they will not learn that their information is important. So they will not come forward."

This is a crucial thing to look at and understand.
a) it was believed that a media blackout would "encourage alleged paedophiles to give honest evidence and be treated without fear retribution." - thus recognising the dangers of trial by media ruining innocent reputations and possible vigilanti attacks - which I do understand in terms of what is happening with so many names being thrown around - and potentially how this could affect justice (right to a fair trial is a good way to get someones conviction over turned); however how does that justify extending anonymity to the dead and convicted?

b) there is no thought of how a media blackout would also act to silence victims and how they are put as a lesser priority to the dead and convicted criminals.

I'd also like to point out two things that seem to be being conveniently forgotten as this becomes more and more of an internet witch hunt rather than a proper organised investigation which the government and indeed press are rapidly loosing control of due to their incompetence damaging public confidence just so much.

1) whilst I applaud the work of conspiracy theorists who pursued this for years, when the people who should have whistleblown haven't, I'm also wary about the situation it creates when they are proved true on this. It doesn't mean they are right about everything else but people having lost faith in the establishment means people are looking for others to fill a vacuum and be sucked into believing a hell of a lot of crap in the process. Its not lost on me that David Icke makes a living from this and that is something to be cautious of. Last night his site went down around the time of newsnight and hes put a big thing up saying the site was attacked. Nothing to do with the sheer volume of traffic - (high traffic being to blame for frequently killing ticket selling websites for popular artists) - it has to be yet another conspiracy. Whether its genuine understandable paranoia after years of being ridiculed or deliberately trying to misled 'followers' is perhaps beside the point; reason and logic first followed by raising questioning after.

My point is vigilance and questioning are great; we've not done nearly enough. But out and out paranoia is really unhelpful and we must not fall into this trap either.

2) there has been a focus on Tory politicians in this - because a Tory is involved and because its been reported that Hague was Welsh Security at the time of the first report that led to this tribunal. A tribunal that was held between 1997 and 2000 AFTER the election of Tony Blair. So any findings of the tribunal and potential subsequent cover up fall under the watch of a Labour government. This is important. It shouldn't be a political point scoring exercise as its about a general problem rather than a Labour / Tory one but its going to be used in that way unfortunately. The D notice on Islington care home, especially in the context of this scandal, raises huge questions that need to be answered.

In the best interests of getting to the bottom of this, party allegiances have to be put to one side when debating this otherwise it detracts from the most important things; the victims and preventing this from ever happening again - both in terms of the abusers and the cover ups that have very clearly happened (and are still happening) at the ever going list of institutions being exposed.

FiercePanda Sat 03-Nov-12 10:17:42

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Growlithe Sat 03-Nov-12 10:18:32

Wynken Yes it is depressing. But I like to also think it's a very important time in British History. It's proving that cover ups cannot last for ever, the truth will always out.

I think we will see more of the same in the coming year, now Pandora's box has been opened. I think in the end the country will be better for it, and so your daughter will grow up in a better world than your mum.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 10:24:43

Good points, isupposeimabitofafraud.

You have to use judgement. Lots of conspiracy theories are deliberate disinfo and some are true, some contradict others. I think that some of what Icke says is disinfo and some is true.

Also if you believe what is on the net, then this is wider than a party.

Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 10:57:28

Let us see who sues for libel. some who are innocent may choose not to as it just brings more attention to the libel itself of course. I think there may be an injunction granted yesterday which perhaps is one of those we are not even allowed to know exist so in that case if the jailhouse link poster above does not know about the injunction presumably they are not at risk in posting the link.

What is clear is that vulnerable children are exploited. My father in a sense involved with this field used to suggest rather controversially that even if a birth family are not up to much that given the poor outcomes for most children in care you are probably better off supporting the child within its own family. That is what most social workers try to do and I am not happy about the increase in adoptions and removal of children. I think on the whole they are safer being left where they are although not of course all the time.

The other issue is that men (it is usually men) who simply go abroad to get what they are after. Even in the UK in the 1930s men with to Morocco if they wanted boys. It would be interesting if the rise of fundamentalist Islam and its prohibitions on same sex relationships ended up protecting children.

We also have to ensure that those men who are gay are never automatically assumed to be interested in children. They are no more so than heterosexual women or men and it is very unfair if that assumption is made. It is a totally different thing.

ha3782 Sat 03-Nov-12 11:16:44

Hi Xenia,

I suspect that once everything has come out we will see that there are actually very few people with these particular tastes, whether they are straight or not. I believe that power is the main factor here, whether it's through entrapment or blackmail or whatever. Being gay or having an affair is not shocking or career-ruining anymore but child abuse is the ultimate taboo, this may be more about putting people in compromising positions to get power over them.

But yeah, one's sexuality is irrelevant. Also one's political party is irrelevant too, I'm sure there will be offenders on both sides.

hackmum Sat 03-Nov-12 11:29:30

fiercepanda - wow, I wasn't expecting that last name! Surely the blogger now runs a real risk of being sued?

Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 11:37:44

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Feenie Sat 03-Nov-12 11:58:54

Seriously, Xenia?

Sympathy for Jimmy Savile, Jonathan King, Gary Glitter?

No. Any sympathy is strictly reserved for their victims. You have a point perhaps if you consider that many paedophiles may have been victims of abuse themselves, but there is a line to be crossed there, and any sympathy I have diminishes entirely when it's crossed.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sat 03-Nov-12 11:59:41

Xenia what you just said is actually very offensive and an apologist point of view.

Just because you are sexually attracted to a particular type of person from birth which is beyond your control does not mean you also commit violent acts upon that group as that is definitely within the realms of making a conscious decision and that you lack the ability to understand the concept of consent and abuses of power.

In this case we are talking about men who were in positions of considerable positions of trust and therefore needed to be highly intelligent and have good knowledge of acceptable behaviour within society and understanding of the law and abuses of their position. Saying that they had this underlying sexual preference that they couldn't control just doesn't cut it I'm afraid. As for having sympathy for them? Nope, not really.

To be blunt about it, even if they had sexual preferences that are outside of the boundaries of the law - not just social acceptance - they were intelligent enough to understand that and understand the consequences of acting upon them and have a good understand of why they shouldn't have acted on them.

Stop making shit excuses.

Pinot Sat 03-Nov-12 12:22:19

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

JakeBullet Sat 03-Nov-12 12:32:45

I think Xenia has a point in the idea of prevention. It is NOT okay to sexually abuse children or involve them I sexual acts just as it is NOT okay to rape a woman or beat her.

At the moment programmes exist to help offenders address abusive behaviour with domestic violence (with varying regress of success).
Rape is never acceptable and nor is abuse of children. We need to look at treatment options if they exist, as children might be safer with them. Doing this though means we have to be open and accept that some adults have a predilection for children sexually....horrible though that is. A the moment we can't accept it and we drive these people underground as a result....

And I am an ex abuse victim.....I would far rather my abuser had been abe to say openly that he had an issue and got treatment than go through the ordeal I did.

Is there a way of allowing such perpetrators to get help and therefore protect children? That's the bit I am hazy on.

FiercePanda Sat 03-Nov-12 12:42:46

Just report my post if the blog link could be dodgy.

NapOfTheDamned Sat 03-Nov-12 12:43:29

Bloody good postsisuppose

MrsjREwing Sat 03-Nov-12 12:43:59

umm, second thread this week people said this about xenia Pinot. Do people report?

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 12:47:37

Fierce, I think it would be best to remove that link as there is no evidence quoted at all. It looks like teh blogger is possibly in the US or somewhere.

isuppose says all that is needed to be said.

HellATwork Sat 03-Nov-12 13:05:49

hear hear Isuppose - very well said on all points. There really are no political points to be scored in this horrific mess which is why it has remained hidden for so long - political stalemate where no party can gain an advantage by unmasking the abusers becausse at the same time they risk unmasking their own party's abusers. The abusers and their protectors are cross-party in all strata of parliament. You only have to look at 1960s high profile abusers - all now dead but long associated - Lord Boothby (conservative) and his boy orgies with Ronnie Kray; Tom Driberg MP (Labour); Jeremy thorpe (liberal democrat) are all examples.

MI5 and MI6 have been revealed to be up to this to their necks ever since Thatcher had to ask Sir Maurice Oldfield (head of MI6 at the time) to step down over the Kincora Boys' Home abuse scandal - if you have a national intelligence service who, having lost their power to blackmail key politicians, foreign diplomats etc through threatening to reveal homosexuality (Wolfenden made homosexuality legal in 1967), it appears they will find another, worse tool for gaining leverage over people. There are many, many, varied motives amongst this proliferation of powerful and in power abusers and those who are desperate to keep this covered up.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sat 03-Nov-12 13:11:38

I am now somewhat amused by the fact that David Icke has now removed his comment on his headlines page about how the site was under attack last night as it kept going down!

Definitely wasn't a figment of my imagination, and I'm glad it has been removed tbh. Just... well... questioning motives is always a worthwhile exercise in assessing stuff.

HellATwork Sat 03-Nov-12 13:18:13

He guarded 3 PMs.

HellATwork Sat 03-Nov-12 13:18:22
Hummingbirds Sat 03-Nov-12 13:20:49

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 13:25:39

There was a terrible spate of abductions and murders of children, young girls and young boys, in the mid 1980s. There was the sense of a cover up. Although the Police through Operation Orchid did eventually get a few convictions (e.g. Leslie Bailey), most of the murderers are still loose and many victims' bodies are yet to be found.

Mark Tildesley, Barry Lewis, Jason Swift. Up to 20 men were involved in raping and murdering them.

I hope this comes under scrutiny again.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 13:32:09

Hummingbirds, I didn't see any evidence quoted on that site, just pictures. I don't think it is right to accuse people without any evidence quoted. Lots of people have been named elsewhere together with details about care homes or newspaper articles etc.

clam Sat 03-Nov-12 13:46:17

I'd be interested to now what topics Andrew Neil and his guest presenters have been discussing this week in his "This Week" programmes.

Hummingbirds Sat 03-Nov-12 13:50:49

Claig, when the courts are silencing the victims, I think the last refuge the victims have is to let the information come out through word of mouth. I agree that these are only allegations, and it is the job of the courts to deal with evidence. But that can only happen if and when the judges' bizarre protection of certain persons is investigated.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 13:55:23

Hummingbirds, you are right. The cover up has been a disgrace and I believe that lots and lots of people heard rumours and gossip and did nothing.

We have seen before thing that turned out to be an open secret in Westminster circles among journalists, lobbyists, politicians and the great and the good, but which were never told to the plebs.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 13:59:24

The MP expenses scandal seems to have been an open secret in some circles, but was not revealed to the plebs.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sat 03-Nov-12 14:14:27

Hummingbirds Sat 03-Nov-12 13:20:49
Claig, why should the link be removed? It is the site of a man whose entire life was ruined by being sexually abused in a 'care' home. After a life of crime, he now champions the rights of prisoners. Perhaps he has knowledge from the victims themselves. Why silence him?

Its not about silencing him. If he wants to put that on the internet that for him to do and accept the consequences. But Mumsnet haven't made that decision, that they think its acceptable to do, and that does create a problem for them in terms of the law as they are 'mainstream'. What we are talking about in terms of difference is how it affects the general public and justice in general.

The trouble with publishing all these names widely without evidence, is that any conviction is potentially 'unsafe' because its pretty reasonable to be able to argue that the offender didn't get a fair trial.

If you think about who we are talking about trying to pin; officials with money, influence and intelligence then they are likely to use every trick in the book including that one.

Would it be justice for the victims if, after all this, someone was found guilty only to walk free on technicalities?

Just because we have lost our faith in the institutions which are supposed to just fair justice, doesn't mean we should abandon the principles upon which they were founded and resort to mob justice. It means we have to rebuild these institutions and the faith we have them instead and to do that, it is essential that those principles are applied to everyone unlike in the past.

The problem started in this particular case when the men involved were protected from media coverage during the tribunal which was against what would normally happen. Unfortunately since that decision was made, their names coming up now do so without proper evidence about why their names were mentioned in the first place. So now we have a situation where putting their names out there in this way jeopardises justice, and means because we have no official account that the wrong names could be being thrown around.

I do think the internet has the power to apply pressure and force this to go to through legal challenges. It doesn't necessarily mean we need to witchhunt at every opportunity though, and any media outlet with power and influence of the same nature as Mumsnet has a duty not to encourage that too much. There are plenty of news articles and blogs out there which are can be used to argue the case about this and push the agenda and force the changes we need thanks to the exposure of Jimmy Savile and the house of cards starting to fall.

What we need now at this stage is, an official reopening of the enquiry and an official release of the names of the people concerned so that the press can pick apart things properly and that such injunctions are not allowed to be used again in this way as they are not in the public interest, not in the interest of the victims and not actually in the interests of the accused either if 15 years down the line things are going to come out in drips without proper evidence behind them.

The rot has to stop at this point, and that doesn't happen by having a few lynchings. Public executions after the process of law has to prevail for justice to be served.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 14:23:08

Well said again, isuppose.

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:23:48

I think sadists are made not born, and in these cases there is a fair amount of sadism going on. Prevention is fine but so is protection. A few prolific abusers generate a huge number of victims, it's too late to do anything for this type of abuser, it's more important to bring them to justice and protect others.

If an offender of this kind says they will re-offend they will, no amount of treatment or programs will help, many will not even go on them. Prison is fine. We just need to believe those reporting and act.

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:23:54

Hi hell,
John McAleese was the sad guy in the Iranian seige. He died at 61 leaving his 23 yr old wife and their two children in Greece. His had 2 children from an earlier marriage 26 and 29 . I am trying to see which were the mps he looked after.

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:24:30

Sad not sad although a bit Freudian though

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:24:48

Sas ffs

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:26:20

Wouldn't having another enquiry result in the names being published? if not, what would be the point? Either way, won't we see people arrested anyway and charged or not now?

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:31:41

Hi second wife was 42 when he died and his eldest son was 29 when he died 2 years before he himself died.
His second wife said he wasn't computer literate so whoses photos were they then. Still cant find the pm though.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 14:31:43

I think we will see some celebs arrested, but I wonder if it will go any higher.

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:31:59
HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:32:12

'some teenage girls were no angels and did swap sex for cigarettes.'

Or you could look at it as adults sexually exploiting children.

NapOfTheDamned Sat 03-Nov-12 14:36:19

Please read this blog about being a girl at the approved school where Meirion Jones aunt was the Head...and ow the ex Head has been stitched up.

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:37:09

Many children in care homes had already been abused and were vulnerable, it appals me that we can equate that with a grown adult choosing to exchange sex for anything, not that that is without societal structures enabling it. No wonder these abusers get away with it, we allow and enable them.

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:40:48

How can you even say it Xenia, especially in the context of 'we believe you', do you really think young girls have as equal power and financial standing as these abusers? Do you think it's a fair and reasonable trade? Would you do it? It sickens me.

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:41:17
AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sat 03-Nov-12 14:44:13

i don't think that's in dispute, nowadays. but back then, according to a v good friend of mine, it was just currency in an economy.

this is not to justify any of this IN ANY FORM, but in that andrew o hagan piece in the LRofB, Joan Bakewell likened this culture shock that we're now experiencing (but HOW could no-one have done anything, said anything etc) as similar to them looking at the victorians. putting children up chimneys is so obviously wrong, and yet a hundred or so years ago it was happening here. cultures do shift.

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:54:57

Sure aitch, but we still believe all this shit now, that there is no power differential, or, worse, the power is all with young girls, it's such bullshit.

Tipsandshoots Sat 03-Nov-12 14:56:19

John McCaleese received the military medal for gallantry whilst stationed in Northern Ireland in 1988.
After that he was a bodyguard to prime ministers and members of the Royal Family.
After leaving the services he worked as a security consultant in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He served as presenter in the BBC 2003 series ' SAS are you tough enough '
So that would be thatcher, major, and blair

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 14:59:55

And we don't put children up chimneys any more but they are still sexually abused and exploited.

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sat 03-Nov-12 15:11:28

and they are still being put up chimneys or used for gruelling work in other countries as well.
i'm not disagreeing with you at all, paisan, i just thought it was an interesting observation by bakewell. when i think of some of the sexism i've personally shrugged off i want to slap my own head. it's bred into us, i think, and how to not do same for dds?

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 15:17:19

From PebBr-

"*It seems that there are so many 'sworded' paedophiles that perhaps we should consider replacing their titles with a separate dis-honour just for them, Shites of the kinder-Garter-n. At least then people would see these viperous chameleons' true colours."*

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 15:24:30

We're almost saying the same thing except I'm saying the prevailing culture here continues to facilitate the abuse of the children and women, it's still happening. I know you know this but earlier comments just make me despair, it plays right into the hands of those who want to abuse.

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 15:25:55
noddyholder Sat 03-Nov-12 15:30:22

These people need to be exposed and charged if appropriate. There was a whole culture in those days of inappropriate behaviour wrt to children and sexuality. I remember when I was very young local men in Ireland where I lived who were known for this sort of thing were referred to in bit of "what is he like" kind of way. We had babysitters when my sister and I were quite young who behaved inappropriately with us but I don't remember us ever telling anyone or being particularly distraught as it was common. I don't think anyone from those days was ever prosecuted although if it was now they would be in serious trouble.

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 16:02:53

Margaret Jones -

The school was always open with visitors – magistrates, councillors, MPs – and I encouraged the girls to talk to whoever they wanted to talk to. I never stopped them. So they've no excuse, these girls.
'If they didn't tell me about Jimmy Savile, they deserve all they get. They should've reported him

Vile, just vile.....

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sat 03-Nov-12 16:49:59

The school was always open with visitors – magistrates, councillors, MPs – and I encouraged the girls to talk to whoever they wanted to talk to. I never stopped them. So they've no excuse, these girls.

is this vile? isn't she saying that she ran an open unit? i'd have thought that might have seemed like progress. she says that she really didn't know about it, and the blog from the woman who lived there seems to back her wholly. i wouldn't be so quick to judge her, if that blogger won't.

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 17:04:19

They deserve all they get?


Pinot Sat 03-Nov-12 17:15:26

I am so massively FUCKED OFF that HQ deleted my comment about Xenia.

Feenie Sat 03-Nov-12 17:17:48

I raised my eyebrows too - it wasn't a personal attack, Xenia is often deliberately controversial.

Pinot Sat 03-Nov-12 17:21:44

Thanks Feenie.

I wouldn't want ANYONE to think I'd said something on this subject that deserved a deletion sad

Mrcrumpswife Sat 03-Nov-12 17:23:58
MrsjREwing Sat 03-Nov-12 17:32:06

I have seen similar behaviour too on other threads.

LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 17:41:45

Pinot didn't deserve deletion. She pointed out a 'winding up' tendency and advised Do Not Engage.

I thought Xenia much too thick-skinned to report such things. So who on earth did?

LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 17:43:59

Oh and mignonette I agree that the quote attributed to M Jones, that the girl victims in her care somehow 'deserved' their abuse, to be vile - though very telling.

Pinot Sat 03-Nov-12 17:46:00

Cheers Line smile You are wise as well as beautiful

Pagwatch Sat 03-Nov-12 17:46:23

I think that the assumption that child abuse is simply a manifestation of a sexual attraction to children is naive - it is like suggesting that rape is only ever about sexual attraction.

It is about power, control, the desire to hurt, to dominate, to humiliate.

To suggest that dealing with attraction to children would end child abuse is ridiculous.

claig Sat 03-Nov-12 17:46:59

Agree with you mignonette, and I doubt that Xenia would have reported because she often takes much more criticism than that

noddyholder Sat 03-Nov-12 17:47:43

I agree pag there is a culture in this country of the 'untouchables' which is very very scary

Mrcrumpswife Sat 03-Nov-12 17:49:32

If Tom Watson is already getting threats then some people must be very worried.

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 17:51:25

Time for another 'We Believe You' thread for all those courageous people coming forward.

LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 17:52:14

I have a natural attraction to adult men, but no-one needs to run prevention courses and help-lines for me and women like me to stop us going round attacking and abusing them. Many of us manage in our whole lives to not do anything non-consensual or harmful to a single other person.

The 'natural attraction' issue is a red herring.

The real issue like Pag suggests is some really nasty. selfish choices made by criminals.

Agree with pagwatch.

And Linerunner, yes, yes and yes.

yes but 'really nasty selfish choices' supported by society realistically. supported by the collective fantasy machine that is pornography nowadays and was benny hill then.

REALLY want to find stuff on who was released and when.

LoopyLoopsOlympicHoops Sat 03-Nov-12 18:02:38

I'm a bit out of the loop here. Am abroad, no Newsnight.

LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 18:04:28

I think when Jason Swift was murdered, and he was characterised not as a brutally murdered child of 15 but as a 'rent boy' (ffs), that that was the work of the collective cover-up.

Make the victims the questionable ones. Put their parents on the back foot.

It has been mooted that Operation Orchid got the procurers; but that they never got the wealthy clients.

HellATwork Sat 03-Nov-12 18:05:16

Nap - I think that blog concerns only the events of Duncrofts during 1964/65 and therefore can only speak to allegations from that time. IIRC Karin Ward and another woman from Duncrofts were speaking about events in the 70s? I don't doubt her view and experience of Duncrofts, but it doesn't have to be at odds with what others have experienced. There's no question that Miss Jones allowed JS to stay there and she does appear to hold a strange view of sexual exploitation of vulnerable children and teens. AnnaRacoon sounds level-headed and all but I think she was one of Miss Jones' favourites and experienced a very different relationship with Miss Jones than other girls did, who Miss Jones deemed unsaveable or unworthy of saving or too difficult to engage with or were hell-bent on self-destruction due to abuse they had already suffered. However, if anyone lives near to Liverpool University she was telling journalists to go and check the National Archives up there.

LoopyLoopsOlympicHoops Sat 03-Nov-12 18:09:43

I've read a couple of times a rumour about Jill Dando having been interested in the care homes scandals. Does anyone know if this is true?

realistically the headmistress just talks in the way it was acceptable to talk about young girls who are sexual in those days and in the way that many people still think about girls who are sexual now but are young or savvy enough to know they can't publicly express.

i worked on a secure 'behavioural unit' back in the 90's which was actually a ward full of victims or horrendous childhood sexual abuse suffering intense post traumatic stress. they were treated as deviants not victims. a sexualised girl is a 'bad girl' regardless of whether she had any choice in that sexualisation. it is tragic but true.

clam Sat 03-Nov-12 18:18:21

Don't know, but wasn't she very matey with Cliff Richard?

isupposeimabitofafraud Sat 03-Nov-12 18:19:30

If you haven't read Tom Watson's blog today YOU MUST

I’m not going to let this drop despite warnings from people who should know that my personal safety is imperilled if I dig any deeper. It’s spooked me so much that I’ve kept a detailed log of all the allegations should anything happen.

there are so many 'obvious' people aren't there?

LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 18:26:14

Wiki on Dando's murder reads like a planned execution, and it seems that the police always want to see as that, but it didn't go that way.

"The original police investigation had explored the possibility of a professional killing. But since Dando was living with her fiancé and was only rarely visiting her Gowan Avenue house, it was considered unlikely that a professional assassin would have been sufficiently well informed about Dando's movements to have known when she was going there. CCTV evidence of Dando's last journey (mainly security video recordings from the Kings Mall Shopping Centre in Hammersmith, which she visited on her way to Fulham) did not show any sign of her being followed.[17] Her BBC colleague Nick Ross stated on Newsnight on the night of her death that retaliatory attacks by criminals against police, lawyers and judges were almost unknown in Britain. Finally, forensic examination of the cartridge case and bullet recovered from the scene of the attack suggested that the weapon used had been the result of a workshop conversion of a replica or decommissioned gun. It was argued that a professional assassin would not use such a poor quality weapon. The police therefore soon began to favour the idea that the killing had been carried out by a crazed individual acting on an opportunist basis. This assumed profile of the perpetrator led to the focus on Barry George."

Yes, Dando was apparently a devout Christian.

bringupthebabies Sat 03-Nov-12 18:32:09
LineRunner Sat 03-Nov-12 18:34:46

There's people on MN still prepared to laud the Thatcher Years, believe it or not.

QuickLookBusy Sat 03-Nov-12 18:35:58

It's no wonder children were abused, if people with attitudes such as Ms Jones were in charge. angry

MrsjREwing Sat 03-Nov-12 18:40:53

Tom Watson's blog is very concerning.

NigellasGuest Sat 03-Nov-12 18:42:27

I agree, QuickLookBusy - and it doesn't help the matter when people excuse such attitudes as just the culture of that time sad

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sat 03-Nov-12 20:46:56

hang on, people slagging off ms jones, have you bothered to read the blog post by her former pupil?

we are all products of our times, it's just absolutely dense to pretend that's not the case.

Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 20:52:44

The main thing is that we get the police to look at all the allegations again with a fresh light and on the basis that if there is enough evidence and people are prepared to go on oath about what happened that proceedings should follow and for the future and now ensure that every child knows what is unacceptable in how it may be treated and whom to call if there is a problem and be assured that call will be taken seriously.

HotheadPaisan Sat 03-Nov-12 20:59:51

But we still see a lot of blaming of those who are abused and a lot of excuses made for abusers. It's still culturally acceptable to do this.

HellATwork Sat 03-Nov-12 21:01:55

The blog isn't at odds with the view of Miss Jones presented by the media. She liked some of the girls and considered them her special chosen ones to be advised on progressing in life (annaracoon), and some of them she thought were beyond redemption. Karin Ward's testimony backs Miss Jones up in her view of the girls in one sense, she says things like well we knew when it happened that it was the price of having a day out to London, to escape for a day, she even said something like "that was what we were worth".

NigellasGuest Sat 03-Nov-12 21:03:37

no one is "pretending" anything confused

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sat 03-Nov-12 21:25:14

i agree, hellatwork, that's what i was talking about when i spoke of an accepted currency. also these were 'disturbed and intelligent' girls, what on earth had brought them there in the first place, who had failed them up to that point?

if this ms jones was in on the savile thing, string her up. but if she wasn't, then vilifying soemone who probably had a very, very hard job to do at the time and was one of the few adults in their lives with decent motives just isn't making progress. and all teachers have favourites, i hardly think that the instinct for preference can be drilled out of human beings just cos it's not exactly 'fair'.

CFSKate Sat 03-Nov-12 21:36:39
MrsjREwing Sat 03-Nov-12 21:55:07

Bless him, brave man.

Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 22:12:19

It is a really difficult issue if we want Parliament to seek to set itself above the courts in naming people. John Hemming has done it.

If one of us were on the list and were innocent and had done nothing wrong and were named in Parliament and we lost our jobs and lives without due process and a trial we might find it rather unfair.

They are very difficult issues. Much better of course if the police can obtain enough evidence to prosecute and if there is no evidence then innocent people wrongly accused do not have lives destroyed.

Mrcrumpswife Sat 03-Nov-12 22:12:40

What a strange time we live in when i am actually worried about Tom Watsons and now Steven Messhams safety because everything seems so corrupt and dangerous right now.

Where on earth is all of this headingsad

Xenia Sat 03-Nov-12 22:16:21

I am not sure it is any worse than it has ever been and the freedom of the press and ability for ordinary people to use the internet and social media in a sense is protective for them and a huge step forward from the days when in say the 1920s we never learned anything much which the powers that be wanted to hide.

It has always been terribly hard to prosecute where evidence is from damaged vulnerable young people who keep changing their stories and may not choose to give evidence as in some of the recent cases but not impossible. The prosecution of the men who abused the girls in Rochdale did go through - although the men were Asian so probably had few strings to pull and not much influence.

HellATwork Sat 03-Nov-12 22:17:30

Good move for him getting on twitter. When is David Cameron going to meet with him? Have just retweeted his request to meet with DC.

Why aren't more MPs using Parliamentary privilege as Tom Watson is? It now becomes clear most of the MPs new Peter Morrison MP was a child abuser. How comes they're not on the receiving end of the same vitriol aimed at the BBC?

NigellasGuest Sat 03-Nov-12 22:17:47

I really hope, MrCrumpsWife, that where it's heading towards is justice for the victims and survivors of abuse, both from years ago and current. I really hope.
Also that the adults who let them down so badly by not doing their jobs properly are brought to justice.

Mrcrumpswife Sat 03-Nov-12 22:21:21

I hope you are right Nigellasmile

Growlithe Sat 03-Nov-12 22:32:05

There are two separate parts to all these scandals. The actual crime, and the cover up.

I think the best we can do, if we are not direct victims, on forums like this and also in RL, is to protest against the cover ups. Please protest against the cover ups.

It makes me sick that there were so many people pissing against the wind during this period, for different reasons, in different circumstances, but all after one thing - justice.

We need the road to justice be be a lot smoother for the ordinary person.

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 22:37:58

We need an organised march in Central London, drawing as much attention as we can to this issue so as to render a whitewash impossible. Or an organised march in any major centre of population....

MrsjREwing Sat 03-Nov-12 22:42:45

I read on the DI forum that they are trying to co-ordinate sending kids birthday cards in protest over childabuse.

AnyaKnowIt Sat 03-Nov-12 22:43:48

<heads over to DI>

Growlithe Sat 03-Nov-12 22:55:57

How fantastic would it be, a march though all the major areas affected by the cover ups. Gathering people affected. Unrealistic though, by geography and the sheer number of people.

Maybe a website for people to post their story, and their struggle - without accusations when these are proving legally contentious?

Just some mechanism to mark each and every member of the public who as been shockingly let down by the system we believed in. sad

mignonette Sat 03-Nov-12 23:04:43

We must keep the pressure up. I am a psychiatric nurse and have many many patients who have been abused. I am determined never to be part of the problem, but to hopefully be part of the solution by not keeping quiet..

ha3782 Sat 03-Nov-12 23:16:26


Re. Jill Dando, Tom Watson posted this last Sunday:

It's a very good breakdown of the case and how it relates to the phone-hacking scandal. The conclusion is rather worrying.

ha3782 Sat 03-Nov-12 23:17:09
AnyaKnowIt Sat 03-Nov-12 23:30:49

Well it hasn't been a good week for Cameron has it, first significant defeat in the Commons since he came to power, Newsnight, and now texts between Rebekah Brookes have been leaked.

Chris Bryant has just tweeted that the Pm isn't doing PMQ'S this week

MrsjREwing Sat 03-Nov-12 23:34:59

He is probably scared if he is asked what he was riding!

AnyaKnowIt Sat 03-Nov-12 23:36:34


Xenia Sun 04-Nov-12 07:16:44

It is not a party political issue.

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sun 04-Nov-12 08:13:41

do we know that it isn't? if i was doing something illegal i'm not sure i'd fraternise with the opposition while doing it.

FiercePanda Sun 04-Nov-12 08:17:03

DC's probably not doing PMQs because by that time more of his grubby texts to Rebekah Brooks will have been released, and we'll all know how compromised his position is.

...£10 on a 2013 general election, anyone? wink

Pagwatch Sun 04-Nov-12 08:22:17

It may be that the story has political connotations but that is different from the attempts to make it party politics.

Tbh I am feeling pretty contemptuous of anyone who tries to use this dreadful issue to score a cheap party point. It diminishes what happened. It's incredibly disrespectful to the seriousness of what happened to victims.

I am a bit hmm about what looked like an awful attempt at a joke upthread.

LoopyLoopsOlympicHoops Sun 04-Nov-12 08:25:12

Not sure if this has been linked already? Petition to allow Leah McGrath her visa back (Jersey home scandal journalist, visa revoked after uncovered abuse)

FiercePanda Sun 04-Nov-12 08:30:40

I'm fairly disgusted that he's not doing PMQs, this week of all weeks. Has any reason been given, or does he just not feel like it?

I'm no fan of Dave's or the Tories, but this goes way beyond party politics. DC. Is the PM and he has to show authority and be demanding inquiries, transparency, protection for those in fear for their lives. He should be promising that every single allegation will be taken seriously and investigated, and those responsible no matter who they are be brought to justice. If I can see that, why can't he? confused

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 09:44:16

Sorry for causing offence, it wasn't a joke.

edam Sun 04-Nov-12 10:32:08

Xenia - parliamentarians do have the power to set themselves 'above the courts' by speaking freely in parliament (if that's how you want to see it). There's no question of whether we want them to or not - it's not a new phenomenon, parliamentary privilege has been part of our constitution for hundreds of years.

It's a crucial right for us mere voters - the fact that our MPs can give us some measure of justice even when the rich and powerful and the courts seek to obstruct it. For instance, by naming those wrongly given doubly secret injunctions that are so secret you aren't allowed to say someone has an injunction. Ridiculous obfuscation dreamed up by the courts to allow wrong-doers such as Trafigura to hide their wickedness that was rightly exposed by MPs using parliamentary privilege.

All those useless inquiries into Hillsborough, child abuse in North Wales and so on were all led by judges, all of whom were tasked with finding the truth but actually succeeded in covering it up. It took an independent panel headed by a Bishop to get the truth about Hillsborough. God knows what it will take to find out what the hell went on in North Wales.

BethFairbright Sun 04-Nov-12 10:51:17

When they appoint the teams of the various inquiries and judicial reviews, It's essential that none of them are freemasons.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 11:10:37

Hmm odd that those texts leak now.

Who leaked them is the big question I'm asking. In theory there are only two people who had those texts. (Unless someone hacked).

With the Leveson report due this month its convenient. Most convenient.

(And stuff to do with phone hacking and Leveson is ALSO not party political.)

I was going to post last night that I had a feeling they would announce an overall all inquiry into failures of child protection as a national scandal to take control of the situation and take a lead role over all these individual investigations in the next couple of days.

Reading this this morning, I'm not so sure now. My feeling about the lack of an inquiry up to this point was that it was symptomatic of a lack of leadership and an inability to see the need given the staggering scope of institutional failures that were already laid bare before Newsnight. But Newsnight was a tipping point that would force the governments hand.

Not doing PMQ this week is the least of my concerns. I don't know that it is the end of the world as I would imagine someone else (Clegg) will be taking questions in his absence as he has done. Thus giving politicians the chance to ask questions under parliamentary privilege anyway. (Who is answering them is perhaps of less interest and importance than the questions themselves)

What I am concerned about is Cameron, being knocked sideways by this leak and puts him in a position where he is going to be more focused merely on maintaining his position rather than other pressing political issues. I'm not sure I actually blame him for that.

If this all runs as deep as some fear (and I'm certainly not a conspiracy theorist) then there is a big motive for trying to cause an leadership crisis a) because it distracts from Cameron from the issue in general b) it distracts the press from doing what is necessary c) it is going to take a strong leader to tackle many of the issues concerned and this will weaken and potentially destabilise the current government.

The way that Leveson and phone hacking, the choices of what the media choose to investigate and all these numerous failures of child protection are hugely connected. They didn't do Jimmy Savile in his lifetime and they also didn't challenge the ruling of the Waterhouse Tribunal despite the fact that senior politicians were involved. Why? Surely these are far more in the public interest than all the other celeb stories they have covered. Its very important not to loose site of this. I was always taught to look not just at what is reported in the press - but more importantly to look for what is not reported - as that is the bigger story and reveals a lot, lot more about the 'truth'.

What has happened with Savile is the best defence against the idea of more media regulation being introduced by Leveson but it also shows enormous cracks in the use of this argument by the media when they are shown up to have failed in their 'duty' and 'purpose'. This is important to both the media and to politics.

One of the things that people always say is 'follow the money'. Stories about celebrities generate £££££s. Huge under cover investigative journalism is both costly and risky and doesn't interest as many people. The biggest celeb money generators has always been the Royal Family. Diana used to sell more newspapers than any other subject. And whats happened to Kate Middleton is also very telling.

The Savile story is an interesting one though, as I rather suspect that Savile is selling a awful lot of newspapers right now as people are horrified, but I'm not sure how deeply the general public are actually interested beyond the celebrity aspect. The names being thrown about, whilst hugely shocking, won't sell newspapers in the same way as Savile... So public obsessions pay a huge part in this in a way. The stories we look at are monitored for traffic and influence editorial decisions. Clicks count.

Whilst we are all sitting here feeling damn powerless right now, I do think its helpful to really think about all of this and if people want to put pressure on to make sure this is all seen through, understanding what really motivates the press and politicians is going to be crucial.

FWIW I don't think we are powerless. I do think as a huge unorganised group we lack leadership and direction which makes it a lot, lot harder to challenge and put pressure on to get answers and change things. Again worth thinking about the criticisms/successes of other similar protest groups in the last couple of years. Hillsborough - never giving up in the face of adversity and never accepting the official line. Occupy - suffered for a complete lack of focus and set of clear objectives due to the numerous and diverse groups involved.

Patience, persistance, clear ideas of what the main objectives and issues are and staying focused on that without being distracted by all the side shows (stuff like leaking of texts to undermine the PM) and avoiding getting into too much infighting.

That was waaaaayyyy to long, but nevermind. Soundbites don't really cover it.

NapOfTheDamned Sun 04-Nov-12 11:20:08

If it looked like the security service could be implicated in paedophile blackmail links discoverable by a media or parliamentary investigation, I would expect the security services to leak those texts as a threat and a distraction.

TiggyD Sun 04-Nov-12 11:28:23

Good story here about it.

I think Lord McAlpine and Derek Laud might need to explain a few things.

NigellasGuest Sun 04-Nov-12 11:31:27

I am reposting loopyloop's link to the petition to un-ban Leah Mcgrath Goodman from Jersey:

It is very very important we all know about this issue.
I will try and find a link to the video again, where she explains what has happened.
Basically, the powers that be of Jersey banned her from investigating what they're up to, and from uncovering Haut de la Garenne child abuse.

This whole thing goes right to the top of many walks of life and professions and anyone who thinks it is party political is quite frankly naive.

NigellasGuest Sun 04-Nov-12 11:35:57

here it is, please watch. You need to forward to 12:33

this is how people who try to get to the truth are treated.
Why haven't any other journalists tried to investigate, it Leah the only one?
Perhaps they have, but I'm not aware of them?

AnyaKnowIt Sun 04-Nov-12 11:53:14

John Hemming?

Hummingbirds Sun 04-Nov-12 12:06:56

Claig, re evidence:

Scallywag magazine did claim to have evidence when they published rape allegations against Lord McA. and Mr D.L.. Neither sued Scallywag for publishing the accusations.

"In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published."

Hummingbirds Sun 04-Nov-12 12:11:00

For the full article that quote came from, google

"Scallywag's Simon Regan"

Arisbottle Sun 04-Nov-12 12:15:55

I noted with interest Michael Portillo highlighted this story when on TV this morning with Andrew Neill and acknowledged that be had no choice but to do so. He did not look uncomfortable in doing so but his fellow guest looked visibly uncomfortable .

clam Sun 04-Nov-12 12:26:27

Noted that also arisbottle. Although he didn't acknowledge on air that there were other political figures implicated too. Wonder why not? hmm

Who were the guests on the show this morning?

clam Sun 04-Nov-12 12:49:02

The other guests aren't relevant!

Er, they are if I'm searching for the show and need reference terms. hmm

Arisbottle Sun 04-Nov-12 13:00:47

It isn't on I player yet, it was the Sunday Politics.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:01:27

Hummingbirds, yes I know about that.

I believe in many conspiracy theories unlike naive idiots who think that it is all about "lizards" and believed that Savile was a naional icon and quasi-saint.

But that other site only showed pictures without linking to any information on what are called "conspiracy" sites.

Thanks, Arisbottle. I could only find the show from 2nd December.

FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 13:06:45

Sonia Poulton has just shared the above on twitter. ( scroll down, her article is the second one)

Wonder how long it will be before she is gunned down on her doorstep?

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 13:06:45

I don't think anyone still denies the Savile conspiracy theory, which is not a theory, it was a conspiracy and we still don't know all the people who conspired together.

FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 13:08:22

From her article: As a journalist, and in light of the Savile revelations, people have contacted me desperate to share their abuse stories.

Some accuse powerful members of the establishment. Several household-name MPs are said to have committed acts of degradation against children as young as six.

Just sad

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:08:35

wildstrawberries, I think the other guest you are referring to was Helena Kennedy, but I didn't thinkt she looked uncomfortable

FiercePanda Sun 04-Nov-12 13:11:44

Isupposeimabitofafraud, your post hits the nail on the head and has made me rethink my annoyance at DC not doing PMQs/leaked text messages etc. It is all too convenient, coming out at a time when there are so many allegations, unanswered questions and horror stories.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:12:14

'I don't think anyone still denies the Savile conspiracy theory'

Of course not, not now that the mainstream media has told them about it, but Davicd Icke and many others were saying it all years and years ago and the naive didn't believe them, and of course they still don't believe any of teh other conspiracy theories on other political and financial issues. Instead they still believe the mainstream media who lauded Savile as a quasi-saint.

Mrcrumpswife Sun 04-Nov-12 13:13:17

I dont suppose someone could do me a favour and try and get on the David Icke site.

I am ploughing through and now its coming up with loads of red messages and you cant get on.

Have they taken the site down or is it my laptop???

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:14:36

But of course after the Savile affair, millions of people are waking up and being shocked by other conspiracies too. Even if this is all covered up like before, Pandora's box has been opened and millions of people have wised up.

tiredemma Sun 04-Nov-12 13:15:02

I also cannot get the David Icke site.

The whole thing bloody stinks to high heaven.

NapOfTheDamned Sun 04-Nov-12 13:16:05

Helena Kennedy QC has a great record for speaking out for victims of violence and abuse and human rights abuses.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:16:52

The David Icke forum is working, it must be your laptop.

Arisbottle Sun 04-Nov-12 13:18:18

It doesn't work for me either, on twitter Icke is saying that they are aware of problems but it should be working now.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 13:18:48

I had a look at the thread in todays news about Tom Watkins and DI headlinea, they say the site is under attack.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:19:28

Sonia Poulton is a great Daily Mail reporter.

FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 13:20:21

I couldn't connect but it could be due to high traffic.

Mrcrumpswife Sun 04-Nov-12 13:20:33

Thanks tired

Someone must be very worried but its all too late, the 'plebbs' have seen it allangry

What is going on?

Nigella the interview with Leah was very telling. I'm glad John hemming is still plugging away even if he isnt getting very far yet.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:20:55

sorry Sonia Poulton is a great Daily Mail columnist rather than a reporter

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 13:20:59

Think David Ickes site is suffering overload. Plus threads which are 500 odd pages long don't help databases. It is working intermittently.

Arisbottle Sun 04-Nov-12 13:21:44

I thought Helena looked uncomfortable as Portillo was talking, but I could have been projecting as I felt uncomfortable. Everyone on the show must know of the rumours and even if they think they are false it must have felt uncomfortable.

FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 13:22:39

She is, claig, and one that hasn't engaged in demonising disabled benefit recipients. Quite the opposite, actually. That's why I like her.

FiercePanda Sun 04-Nov-12 13:24:38

I'm not a member on the DI site but have been reading the JS thread. It's been fine for me until today, now when I try to visit the site I get "database error" messages and have to refresh multiple times before getting back on. Posters on there are complaining about real trouble logging in, errors, and their peerblock software detecting issues. I would take a guess that "someone" isn't happy with what the forums are saying.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:25:05

John Hemming does lots of good work for people. Let's hope he gets some backing.

Threatening whistleblowers must be outlawed

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 13:25:27

So other than Lizzards, Savile and Heath what else has DI commented on?

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:26:53

Escatly, FrothyOM. She follows no party line, she says it as she says sees it - something that is all too rare.

Pinot Sun 04-Nov-12 13:26:58

agree, claig

clam Sun 04-Nov-12 13:28:38

I'm curious as to why the BBC invited Portillo on this morning.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:30:19

David Icke covers just about most of the political and financial conspiracy stuff and lots of it is true, but don't go believing everything he says, because his new age type stuff is off the wall, in my opinion, and I think is deception.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 13:31:45

What political and financial conspiracies?

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:38:52

Everything - global warming, deliberate financial crash, deliberate austerity, global government, vaccines etc. etc.

He is not the only conspiracy theorist. He says what many others have said years and years before him, except for the new age agenda deception.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 13:44:20

The new world order stuff, do you believe that?

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 13:51:30

I don't blame conspiracy for most of them. I do blame enormous incompetence and party politics for pandering to populist agendas and consistently shoving problems under the carpet and hoping and praying that they don't rear their ugly heads in their term in office.

We have an epidemic of people in authority being unwilling to take control of problems and take responsibility and instead playing a game of pass the parcel with the blame. A good leader should be able to hold hands up and say "hey I made a mistake, we need to try a different strategy", but modern politics does not allow for that which is a monumental failing.

Again I do think the public bears a certain amount of responsibility for this problem by being unwilling to accept bad news and difficult decisions. Greed and materialism can not solely be blamed on the elite and the system.

As for the site going down. Definitely don't see anything sinister about it, and its very very explainable. It just highlights the level of paranoia going on that people are automatically jumping to the worst conclusion.

AitchTwoOhOneTwo Sun 04-Nov-12 13:51:43

it's more likely that the DI servers can't cope with the workload at the moment.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 13:55:13

Do I believe that there is an elite who blackmail and control some corrupt and depraved individuals, so that they can push through their political agenda and control the "plebs". Yes, I think that is the case, but I am always open to the possibility that I may be wrong.

Hummingbirds Sun 04-Nov-12 13:57:29

The problem with Icke, as Claig has mentioned, is that he mixes up 90% truth with a good dose of bullsh*t to spice it up.

He has promoted Cathy O'Brien who is clearly a fraud. And that, in turn, taints the true victims of powerful paedophile rings and they end up being accused of fantasising -- as Sir Ronald Waterhouse proved.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 14:00:45

The elite won't go down, they never do. They change hats and change parties and faces and carry on as before. The "plebs" are manipulated. Sometimes there is a battle among the elite to gain control over a rival elite faction, and information is leaked to the "plebs" to put pressure on the opponents of one camp in the elite.

Now the BBC is taking a bashing, before it was riding high.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 14:03:22

Always going to happen whoever is in power imho though claig. I doubt that any system of leadership is immune from that. Its the very nature of power and power is always going to attract unpleasant individuals too.

I don't think the plebs need controlling a lot of the time. I think general apathy and simple satisfaction about the little bubble you live in is sufficient. Most people aren't interested in things beyond their little world, so as long as they are happy.

I find it interesting that there is a tipping point for revolution. An unemployment rate of 30% is connected with massive shifts of power. Basically, when the masses are no longer happy with their lot in life...

It takes a lot for people to be upset enough to protest on mass.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 14:09:30

Agree, Hummingbirds, that's why Icke talks about lizards in order to discredit the real conspiracies. Lots of people believe he is a new age, New World Order proponent. Watch "David Icke Debunked" on youtube to see that some of his new age beliefs are simialr to teh elitist Theosophical views of Madame Blavatsky and Alice Bailey etc.

At the Oxford Union debate on youtube, you can see him sum up his speech with teh usual "all you need is love" lie that deceives teh people, where he says that teh problem with teh world is that it has been ruled by the head and not the heart. That is new age, touchy-feely, hug a hoodie propaganda that deludes naive people into abandoning reason so that they cannot see what is being done to them by those who do reason.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 14:14:17

I wondered if DI had a breakdown, knew about Savile from working at the BBC, learned other conspiracies along the way and wrapped it all up.

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 14:21:29

Isuppose I thought your long post was very good.

Mrcrumpswife Sun 04-Nov-12 14:32:47

What i dont understand is we have very articulate people blogging and naming names, dates and links with photos and stating that these people have committed the most heinous crimes and yet no one accused is suing these bloggers for slander or defamation.

We see celebritys running off to court for the most silly infractions on their character, yet nothing from the elite.

Does this mean innocence or arrogance?

isuppose i also thought your post was great.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 14:41:40

I think the reason is that it can't be stopped in the modern age with twitter and blogs. Icke was also never sued. If someone sues then it goes to court and there is even more publicity. The elite wants teh mainstream media not to report it because they know that is what teh "plebs" believe. The bloggers and twitterers are trerated as if they are all "lizard" believers and so are discounted by the "plebs".

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 14:43:22

Bloggers still lack credibility. And I'm sure that people who are very able in PR or have a background in politics perhaps have a much better understanding of the Barbara Streisand Effect than someone like Giggs or Starr.

Regardless of whether they are innocent or guilty, they are fully aware that commenting on it, or taking legal action would end their reputation due to the fact that it then means the mainstream press are free to report and they then become a story in their own right.

I think its akin to the propaganda technic 'controlling the agenda'. They loose that if they sue at this stage. Suing only become worth it when it hits the mainstream as the story has already got out of control and it then becomes about containment.

Not to mention as claig says, they can't sue everyone in the era of social media. And attempts to sue individuals creates martyrs and has the effect of fuelling anger of blog supporters.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 14:48:17

Excellent post, isuppose. That is it.

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 14:49:23

I've never really understood David Icke. Which is probably a good thing, in some ways.

I used to think that it was best to assume 'lizards' was some kind of metaphor for 'freemasons', or possibly for the whole wolf-in-sheep's-clothing concept. I can see why, if he knows enough that is vile and actually true, that it might send him off the deep end.

I mean, there actually have been horrific widespread cover-ups, since Heath and Thatcher. Through Major. Through Blair and Brown. And into Cameron.

Icke is looking fragile, but he is not looking like a deliberate liar.

Mrcrumpswife Sun 04-Nov-12 14:53:17

I hadnt looked at it like that before. A non story of guess work and conjecture becomes a real story if you sue. No wonder they havent bothered with DI.

Sally Bercow has just tweeted 'why is Lord McAlpine trending?' innocent face

Bet she will be in the dog house!

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 14:57:11

Sally Bercow isn't the sharpest tool in the drawer to be honest.

Mrcrumpswife Sun 04-Nov-12 14:59:24

Ooooooh, i love her! i dont think her brain engages before her mouth opens, reminds me of megrin

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 14:59:45

LineRunner, there is no need for Icke to use metaphors such as "lizards", because he already talks about freemasons and names people like Savile and others. The only reason to use "lizards" is if he really believes that, or more likely in order to be able to allow "lizards" to be used as a discredit mechanism so that the "plebs" don't believe bloggers, twitterers and those "crazy conspiracy theorists".

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 15:01:49

claig, excuse me if I appear obtuse on this but why would Icke want to discredit his own narratives?

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 15:06:15

'why would Icke want to discredit his own narratives?'

If he works for the elite in order to discredit conspiracy theories so that the "plebs" carry on watching soaps

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 15:18:55

Why would Icke want to discredit his own narratives?

Because if everything he started to say was proved to be true and was straight down the line he becomes a target to be silenced. Not only that, if he conformed to the mainstream he stands to be accused of being part of the system and establishment himself.

Its a highly intelligent approach, and actually no where near as bonkers as people might think. Its a way that encourages a mentality of 'seeing the light' in a quasi-religious manner (think tv envanglists) to those who sign up to it.

Icke is looking fragile, but he is not looking like a deliberate liar.

If he is fragile and paranoid he is a danger with new found power and a worshipful following. Not just to elites but to normal people.

Great and sudden shifts of power create power vacuums which are always a worry.

Hence why I look at what he says with an enormous amount of caution and urge others to do so too.

Don't get me wrong, I think conspiracy theorists are very much needed, but I fear them gaining too much power especially is its too quickly too.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:19:02


I don't trust you one bit. Others beware.



Pagwatch Sun 04-Nov-12 15:24:14

What the jeff?

JakeBullet Sun 04-Nov-12 15:25:48

Yep...I don't understand that post either.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 15:26:46

Yeah ok mate.

Conspiracy theory teaches you to question everyone and everything. The moment you are incapable of critically being able to question your 'leader' you have crossed the line into worship.

If your principle and the thing you believe in is transparent and accountable leadership and government, then being unable to question Icke is dangerous and your post actually serves to prove the point brilliantly.

mignonette Sun 04-Nov-12 15:28:09
FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 15:29:21

I think she is right ha3782.

A lot of people are becoming disillusioned with the mainstream media. I know I am. If we are not careful that void could be filled by some dangerous individuals.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 15:29:39

ha3782 said they were a DI regular upthread.

I think he thinks I'm 'the enemy' tbh.

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 15:29:50

OK. I hadn't realised that there was such thinking about Icke.

MN tells me something new every day.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:30:06

I don't trust Icke anymore than I trust you.

FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 15:30:22

I think ha swallows eveything Icke says hook line and sinker.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:31:21

The Icke thread has desintegrated.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:32:22

One can use the Icke forum as research/info dump without trusting Icke himself.

FiercePanda Sun 04-Nov-12 15:33:09

The DI website is dead in the water now. Can't get a connection at all.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:33:11

Frothy, untrue. I trust no-one.

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 15:38:30

So, who does David Icke work for?

Pagwatch Sun 04-Nov-12 15:40:07

This thread is reaching into complete fruit loop territory.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:40:30

Not an Icke regular. I used it for the last month to get the information out as much as possible. I have been polite, engaging and have had some very interesting discussions. Now I have been banned. There is something going on with the genuine posters and many have left or been forced out. It seems to be full of people looking for violence or retribution. They are ruining the enormous amount of genuine hard work people have done. They are posting letters they've sent to Watson which I can only describe as damaging and disrespectful.

Apparently they are being attacked by computers with BBC ip addresses. So either the BBC are hijacking and infiltrating (risky and easy to find out) or the forum/mods have an agenda.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 15:41:36

Why is his site going down then if he is part of a conspiracy? His posters on the forum were saying their Pc's were being attacked too.

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 15:44:13

Pag, I didn't realise that it was a seriously held view that Icke was completely sane and made up his belief in lizards. I thought he just meant well and had gone off the deep end.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:47:01


Who knows? Do you think the BBC would be so obvious as to attack the site and leave IP address finger-prints all over it? I don't.

FrothyOM Sun 04-Nov-12 15:48:36

Pagwatch, it depends what you call fruit loop territory. Personally, I believe there is the media, politicians, high- ranking police and the super-rich. Then there is the rest of us. This elite has many corrupt people conspiring with one another.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 15:49:21

I find this all very odd this afternoon.

The past month has been very odd and distressing.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 15:49:25

'Why is his site going down then if he is part of a conspiracy?'

One possibility would be that it makes it look like he is for real. I don't believe that the elite are scared of Icke. In general Icke only says stuff that is already all over the web.

Remember that in Orwell's 1984, the villain who attracted teh "two minute hate" from the "plebs", worked for Big Brother all along.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 15:49:56

I'm going to step away from the paranoia for a bit.

If you want to build up enough steam to get people upset enough and to see what is going on, you don't do that by alienating them too much.

Just a thought.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:50:17

Linerunner, he's just a bloke, with ideas. Like everyone else. He's got books to sell, like Mumsnet have advertising space to sell (I assume, I use Adblock). Trust no-one.

For what it's worth, I take his lizard theory as an allegory. Does anybody really take the Bible literally?

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:53:55

Paranoia can be very useful sometimes. It's natural. Use it. Everyone has an agenda. Once the damn breaks all and sundry will be adding their agenda to the mix so try to think clearly.

Sorry for the derail. I trust isupposeimabitofafraud no less than anyone else.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:55:06

Claig's thinking clearly.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 15:56:58

I have not read 1984, what's that all about? Like war of the worlds?

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 15:57:30

I feel like I've come late a party and am not quite getting the 'vibe'.

Ignore me. I clearly need time to ponger.

LineRunner Sun 04-Nov-12 15:57:47


ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 15:57:55


You're assuming Icke had anything to do with organising this. It was just a thread on his forum. That'd be like saying the owner of this site had threads deleted because she was married to the Dep Editor of the Guardian ;)

Pagwatch Sun 04-Nov-12 16:00:12

I am just constantly puzzled that what known, what is mainstream public information is not enough.
The child abuse scandals speak to terrible human weakness - a pathetic desire to hold celebrities as glamorous and benign and the fact that no one had the balls to speak clearly and openly about what was actually going on.

The more people go on about elite conspiracies to subordinate the plebs the more unrealistic it becomes. The capacity of humans to be shallow and self serving, spineless and amoral seems bottomless. But underground elites orchestrating some kind of sleek intellectual domination plan leaves me cold. Because people are fucking useless. They blunder and can't keep secrets and leave briefcases on trains and get found out.
My faith in the crapness of dull witted Brits leaves me hopeful.

My abuse wasn't hushed up because of a Masonic conspiracy. It just seems so dreadful and implausible to ordinary folk that no one could quite believe it. That disconnect was common in that era.

Pagwatch Sun 04-Nov-12 16:00:37

Ponger grin

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 16:02:35

isuppose, I think ha was being ironic.
No one can be trusted blindly or believed blindly because no one knows the real answer as to exactly how the system works. We can only guess and theorize from watching political events and trying to understand what is going on.

Iain Overton tweeted that a senior Tory political figure would be revealed on Newsnight. It didn't happen, but it was already all over twitter.

The Overton window has been shifted and what seemed incredible to the public a week ago, now is no longer incredible. But it didn't really take Newsnight to do it, because I think Newsnight had to say something since the Overton window had already shifted for millions of people who were landing on Icke's site and other sites for teh first time in their lives and were shocked.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 16:02:55

MrsjREwing, you should read it. Though you will find yourself going a bit potty afterwards with everything going on now!

Linerunner, I'm not surprised. Lots of 'Doublespeak' going on.

I wish media studies didn't get the ridicule it does. It has much purpose in every day life, even if you don't have a career in media, if it is taught well.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 16:06:22

MrsjREwing, 1984 is about Big Brother etc.
Jo Brand, I think, chose it as her favourite book of the 20th century. Orwell gave us an insight into how systems really work.

isupposeimabitofafraud Sun 04-Nov-12 16:06:47

In fact

ain't a bad summary and explanation of a huge amount of stuff going on right now.

Right, disappearing for a bit.

claig Sun 04-Nov-12 16:10:26

'I wish media studies didn't get the ridicule it does.'

I agree. I used to knock media studies in typical Daily Mail fashion, but I was wrong. I don't know exactly what it covers, but if it promotes critcial thinking and understanding of media agendas and messages, then it is very important for society and politics.

MrsjREwing Sun 04-Nov-12 16:12:11

I am too fick, I don't have a clue what that double speak is.

ha3782 Sun 04-Nov-12 16:12:16

Good post Pagwatch.

Unfortunately, as the BBC etc have shown, it has been proved that even us bumbling Brits can keep something dark secret if we're worried about losing our jobs or pensions. It's clear that conspiracies can be kept quiet, by humans. We may be blunderous as you say but we are selfish, greedy and manipulative.

But you are right, to conflate all incidents of abuse with Freemasonry is short-sighted. However, as the Sabvile/Broadmoor/HDLG shows there must have been something more than a bit of greed to keep it from being investigated.

I believe in certain conspiracies, but I can also see that getting too bogged down in them can have a negative effect on victims.

noblegiraffe Sun 04-Nov-12 16:20:25

Jon Ronson hung around with David Icke for a bit for his book Them: Adventures with Conspiracy Theorists
He tried to uncover what Icke meant by saying lizards ruled the world, whether it was a code word for Jews, the usual New World Order stuff. He came to the conclusion that Icke actually meant lizards when he said lizards.

I think if you want to establish credibility for your the