Veritas report due tomorrow (Thursday) at midday re: Aimee Challenor

Mhairi Black had a significant background in politics, was completing a relevant degree, and was fully supported by her party. She's an extraordinary woman.

My point is that Aimee Challenor had none of the necessary experience to be a national politician. She was handed the role because she wanted it, is vocal and Trans. The desire to be woke overrode the party's due diligence.

A comparison of their wiki pages' sections on political career is pretty telling.

Black is sui generis because of the very particular circumstances of how she was elected. DND she was well mentored by a competent, modern political party which is in power in one jurisdiction and a significant force nationally. More generally, there is a good reason 19 year olds should not be exposed to national politics without good cause, because they are young, fragile and naive. As this case shows.

And the Greens are not a modern, competent political party. They are a bunch of amateur cranks more at hone running stalls at a fete. But be careful if you win a stuffed toy.

Show me another politician in a national (not youth) role within a political party, who got there while under 20.

Mhairi Black was elected to Westminster as an MP aged 20 years old. She has been a very effective MP.

(It is worth considering how similar 'errors of judgement', behaviours etc might be reported if made by her)

I would argue the actions of the GP is transphobic: they allowed her to fail catastrophically by not training and supporting her because she is Trans and for some reason they believed that to be enough to give someone a national position in the absence of any other measure of suitability.

I think the focus should be on those TRAs both individuals and orgnisations who empowered and enabled Aimee Challenor.

This is a cross party issue.

valleysval
The only reason you all so desperately wanted Aimee to get slaughtered is because she's trans - just admit it. If she was born female you'd all be 'poor thing, nasty dad but not her fault, shouldn't be blamed etc etc'. You're a bunch of hypocrites.

No. That isn't the point at all. The point is that because she is trans she's been put in senior positions, accelerated up the party, safeguarding has been overlooked, the party has been made to look ridiculous, and a dangerous man has been volunteering at local political events with no checks or balances in place. Because she is Trans the party overlooked her inexperience, her naivete, the fact that she didn't follow formal channels, until the shit hit the fan.
She wasn't supported by the party and was completely controlled by her Father. This would not have happened if the Green Party had not concentrated on her inclusion as a Trans woman to the detriment to actually supporting her to fulfil her role correctly, safely and appropriately.
Putting aside the fact that she and her father build the Terfblocker, that she has lots of ideas I don't agree with personally, I would argue the actions of the GP is transphobic: they allowed her to fail catastrophically by not training and supporting her because she is Trans and for some reason they believed that to be enough to give someone a national position in the absence of any other measure of suitability.
Show me another politician in a national (not youth) role within a political party, who got there while under 20.

The evidence which Andy Healey is sharing demonstrates how determindly and effectively Aimee Challenor pursued & attempted to silence him, not just within the Green Party but also on social media and using both the Police and civil prosecution.

Miranda Yardley (who is transsexual) was similarly targetted by all of the powers that Aimee Challenor was able to access.

Miranda Yardley wrote:
'Why I Am Permanently Banned From Twitter And Why This Should Make You Worry'
POSTED ON 24TH MAY 2018
(extract)
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

attributed to George Orwell

I have been permanently banned from Twitter. The reason for this ban is given as follows:

Violating our rules against hateful conduct.

You may not promote violence against, threaten or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability or serious disease.

What merits a permanent Twitter ban on the grounds of ‘hateful conduct’?

This: (see screenshot)

Aimee Challenor is the LGBTQIA+ spokesman for the Green Party. Aimee is a ‘trans woman’, which means Aimee is by definition male. s212 of the Equality Act defines “man”as follows:

"man means male of any age"

Aimee is also a grown-up, which makes Aimee an adult human male.

Aimee Challenor is a man.

According to the rules of Twitter, it is now ‘hateful conduct’ to call someone who is a man, a man. The implication of this is that the concept of proscribed speech, things we are now not allowed to say, now extends to the truth. This is fundamentally illiberal.

“To tell the truth, to arrive together at the truth, is a communist and revolutionary act.”

Unsigned, written by Antonio Gramsci in collaboration with Palmiro Togliatti, L’Ordine Nuovo, 21 June 1919.

It’s interesting the rules about what is hateful appear not to extend to one glaringly obvious category – biological sex. And it is this that reveals the real agenda that lies behind this curtailment of freedom of speech and the ability to state the truth:

This is not about me. This is part of a much larger, broader attack on the rights of women.

If women are now no longer able to publicly acknowledge that an adult human male is a man, this takes away from women the ability to describe their own lived lives: they can no longer use meaningful language to describe their interactions with members of the dominant sex class:

Women lose the language and ability to differentiate between themselves and the dominant sex class;
Women lose the language and ability to describe themselves even as women;
Women lose the language, right and ability to describe the perpetrators and acts of sexual violence;
Women lose the right to challenge the sexual enslavement and exploitation of members of their own sex class." (continues)

* screenshots = embedded images in article

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3258983-Miranda-Yardley-permanently-banned-from-Twitter

threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3262965-Good-article-today-BBC-on-the-twitter-ban-on-womens-free-speech-on-trans-issues

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3286941-A-Transgender-Twitter-Fight

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3286600-BBC-World-Service-programme-about-Miranda-Yardley-and-Aimee-Challenor

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3260432-The-Shame-of-Twitter

People always know - gossip being what it is. So I assume they know but chose to whitewash over it for whatever reason (we can assume what sparkly reason that was).

I noticed that the report tried to push responsibility on to the police for not informing the Greens of Challenor senior's activities.

Nice way to evade responsibility, Greens, you fuckwits.

Verita are not safeguarding experts so there's probably a lot they're missing but they are giving it importance.

Not true. A quick look at the Verita library of reports shows
"Independent review of suicides and deaths of mental health
patients who attended the Whittington Health emergency
department"
"Report into sexual and physical assaults committed by rogue medical personnel"

I hope other groups are reading it properly and rapidly ensure their own houses are in order.

Paraphrasing. But very fair, and hardly hyperbole.

A quick question for those of you who have read the report.

Is 'if the party had given me proper support, what with me a helpless autistic person' a direct quote or is it paraphrasing/hyperbole?

Very true reflect that it is rare nowadays for people to get involved in local organisations and that new blood will be welcomed with open arms and few questions asked. So many long standing organisations are going under because they cannot get people to commit to serving others which then begs the question where is a debacle like the C family one going to happen next; in Girl Guide pack near you?

Is it realistic to expect the police to notify a political party about charges against a member who doesn't have a public role in the party (other than as an election agent using his nickname)? I'm not defending the police btw, just wondering if it's a fair point and whether it would be normal procedure.

The police may not have known he was in a political party, maybe bail conditions for some offences should include some restrictions on activities or force some form of disclosure.

It's quite common for restrictions to be made on where the accused lives and or who with ie not with children in the home.

Either AC’s stance over this is deliberately disingenuous and AC is a significant manipulator OR these organisations have utterly lost the plot. Possibly both?

I believe it was after the report was commissioned, when social media was awash with rumours, including reports of the attic where David Challonir tortured and raped a child, Amy took a selfie on the steps of an attic displaying a girl guide badge.

All of that may be true, but legally the person is an adult and hence has to be dealt with as such.

If you can’t be held legally responsible for your actions because of a medical condition, you sure as hell should not be standing for election to represent others or stand for the Deputy leadership of a major political party.

The two things are not compatible full stop.

Some people just diddle along as they please and don’t care about anyone else.

They have an absolute brass neck and will act and speak outrageously while defying anyone to challenge them as they rather enjoy an argument on the favourite subject (themselves).

Stonewall is one of the government's preferred 'providers' of LGBT training / advice to schools. They have a school's helpline and a school's education team. Many school are "Stonewall Champions' and they are currently involved in writing the new DfE guidelines for schools on Trans issues.
We have recently had some appalling scandals in the charity sector where Save the Children, Oxfam etc were found to be ignoring safeguarding practice at every level and employing people who were unsuitable for working with children and vulnerable people. Terrible things happened to vulnerable service users as a result of this. Given that Stonewall openly appointed someone under investigation for appointing a known paedophile, to their Trans Advisory group, Stonewall needs to urgently clarify what their current safeguarding procedures and standards are, how safeguarding is managed in their organisation and to what extent individual members of staff are able to influence practice and have access to children in schools.

Seems to me AC is very much a product of AC’s upbringing. Some children of appalling parents rise above the damage and go on to lead positive lives. Others never question their parents’ moral values, but instead embrace and employ them.

AC doesn’t appear from this report to have a moral compass or even the level of judgment required to hide that fact. Like others, my principle shock is at the number of organisations that have raised AC up into positions of responsibility, where AC can have influence over policy.

Either AC’s stance over this is deliberately disingenuous and AC is a significant manipulator OR these organisations have utterly lost the plot. Possibly both?

I see the Green Party didn’t release the summary of the report til about 7.30 last night.

Too late for today’s Press?

I can’t find any Press cover of it?

Oh dear.... Never mind!

So, Matt Hawkins was told in Nov 16 that DC was facing 22 charges mostly of a sexual nature , but didn’t realise he was a party member, and then watched DC become election agent in 2017 and 2018....

The report seems somewhat under-shocked by this detail.

And given the comments about the nature of unstructured environments being a risk in safeguarding terms, the report summary seems undershocked by the lack of due diligence generally in having been able to appoint someone pending trial for the rape and torture of a child.

I don’t think Matt H and Clare P have been scapegoated at all. Their totally negligent, ignorant and reputation-focussed response was the foundation upon which DC was able to swan in as election agent. Under their very noses. And after Matt H had deliberately anonymised AC in tne matter when communicating with the rest of the party.

I don’t think this thread is bullying AC because she is Trans, as alleged by a PP, I think AC is being vilified as someone who was at the centre of s massive breach in safeguarding protocol and yet is frenziedly involved in silencing and shutting down any voices that raise safeguarding concerns. Such as Helen from the guides, and anyone simply asking questions about self if. That is where her Trans status and Trans lobbying becomes very relevant and it is crucial to look at the relationship between a culture of shutting people down and vilifiying critics as transphobes, and the kind of transparency, openness and communication needed to ensure safeguarding.

To put a blunt analogy on it: safeguarding in Rotherham was sabotaged by people hissing ‘racist’.
Safeguarding in the Green Party, Stonewall, The Girl Guides, is compromised by people shouting ‘Transphobic’.

AC is not a problem because she is Trans. She is a problem because shutting people down is her modus operandi.

as a ‘get out’

I have not yet caught up on this thread, but ODD is not autism.
The use of autism here are a ‘get out’ is really concerning.

did stonewall, the Greens et al really think this person had something valuable to say, or was it a woke-point-gathering exercise?

Acceptance without Exception

AC is secretary of the Stonewall Trans advisory group - let's hope AC understands the importance of accurate minute taking and report writing.

This is a very telling Twitter feed from back in September last year.

twitter.com/clovis_liz/status/1043085353047998465

The Green party were well aware of this complete, disgusting affair long ago, and Veritas are seemingly not to be trusted.

Here is the report.

www.greenparty.org.uk/assets/images/national-site/Final%20report%20-%20Executive%20summary-%20cover.pdf

So much obfuscation, just like the Chilcot report into the Blair and the Iraq war.
Well, that is another political party which I cannot vote for - doesn't matter, I am getting old, so why should I get angry about things I cannot change. Let's just leave the lunatics in charge of the asylum.
If the Twitter feeds are anything to go by, then this could see the end of the Green party, not that it will cause any massive political waves because they are pretty insignificant anyway.