AIBU to think there would be more uproar If this was the Tory's

[trampstamp]

Have I missed something here why is no one bothered that labour pretty much lobbied for a group that would see that the age of consent is lowered to 4 years old ffs


If this was the Tory's there would be up roar and the fact red ed is silent on this is shocking

[Dawndonnaagain]

I think it's entirely possible that there would be more uproar if it were tories. However, not because all you Tories on here are persecuted by the left wing majority (your perception, not stating that there is a definite left wing majority) but because they are the party in power. They are the current government and are therefore answerable. Oh, and because it's looking increasingly likely that there were more Tories and Liberals involved in the nasty stuff in the seventies than there were Labour MPs. Although (yes, another caveat) I haven't looked at the actual figures and of course they may change as further information comes to light.

[TotallyBenHanscom]

Harriet Harman has responded:

www.harrietharman.org/nccl-statement---24022014

[bordellosboheme]

What's the story? I'm lost

[CFSKate]

When I look at this there seem to be stories about people from all three main parties

[slug]

So, an organisation that Harriet Harman was an employee of briefly had an association with a group that wanted to lower the age of consent to almost nil.

If you are going to start shouting about brief associations when an employee, how do you explain David Cameron's support of the Apartheid regime in South Africa? Is this less shocking or more? Given he was not an employee (and therefore bound by his employment contract) but a representative of the Conservative party at the time when the Govt had sanctions against SA, does this make his actions better or worse than Harriet Harman's?

The point is, no matter where you look, there is mud to be found. And the thought of the Daily Mail getting hot under the collar about the sexualisation of young children is a stark reminder of just how hypocritical that paper is.

[SeaSickSal]

So how come Harman personally signed a motion protesting against child pornography laws? It could for sexually explicit pictures of children not to be counted as pornography unless it could be proved that the children were physically harmed. So you can take pictures of kids doing sexual things or in overtly suggestive manners but as long as you don't hurt them it's okay.

She personally signed this, I don't see how she can deny it.

The statement she has made - it denies things they haven't accused her of but ignores the things she is actually supposed to have done. Possibly because she can truthfully deny the allegations they haven't made but not the ones they have.

It makes me angry the way they seem to be completely dismissive of people who are concerned about this as well.

Harman and her ilk have absolutely alienated Labour's traditional voters. I should be the very core of people who vote for them but I won't and mainly because of issues like this.

[SeaSickSal]

Slug, I think the point is that the left wing go absolutely tonto about David Cameron and apartheid and have made an awful lot of capital out of it, yet are prepared to overlook it when someone on their side does something similar.

[YouTheCat]

So Harriet Harman is associated with a group that once had an affiliate member (40 years ago) linked to paedophiles? Oh ffs

Two words: Ted Heath.

[BadLad]

No they wouldn't. They would keep quiet, just like the Conservatives are very sensibly keeping out of it, because there is no profit in slinging mud.

Perhaps in the real world, but not on here, and certainly in the politics forum, where someone would be posting with even more foam around her mouth than usual that the Tory Psychopaths were a bunch of pedophiles.

[Viviennemary]

There would be a lot more fuss and uproar and name calling if this was the Tories. No doubt about that.

[slug]

I suspect The Daily Mail, having not got the reception it wanted over the Ralph Milliband articles is having a go at another Labour leader. It's now a year until the next election, they are starting to lay the ground for the election campaign. It's almost exactly a year to the last day when the UK parliament must be dissolved before the General Election.

[Viviennemary]

Now on lunchtime news. Harriet Harman says she has done nothing wrong and hasn't anything to apologise for. Well there's a surprise. What an odious creature she is. If anything puts me off voting Labour it's folk like her.

[Oneglassandpuzzled]

it's looking increasingly likely that there were more Tories and Liberals involved in the nasty stuff in the seventies than there were Labour MPs. Although (yes, another caveat) I haven't looked at the actual figures

So how is it increasingly likely? On what grounds?

[itshardthinkingofanickname]

Viviienne

What do you think she has done wrong?

[Viviennemary]

She is associated with this group. She should resign. That's my opinion. If this gets rid of her it would be something. She has alienated a lot of potential Labour voters. She is one of the most hypocritical and self righteous people in politics. And that's saying something!

[itshardthinkingofanickname]

It's a very very tenuous association. From many years ago.

Do you really think she should resign for that when there is so much shit other people have done who have never resigned?

[flippinada]

I see the Daily Mail have raised their standards slightly, in that they are now smearing people who are at least alive to defend themselves.

[limitedperiodonly]

Has anyone called her Harriet Harperson yet? Seems about time.

[Dawndonnaagain]

On the grounds that the figures so far demonstrate that the greater number of politicians are from these parties, ergo, the likelihood is the trend will continue, but as stated, likelihood. I was brought up in a political environment in South London. I knew some of the people mentioned. Fortunately, I was never exposed to any of this stuff.

[nonmifairidere]

Vivienne You obviously have a considerable breath and depth of knowledge about this issue, judging by the vehemence of your comments. Please share it with us. I saw 'News night' last night and 'The Daily Politics' today and have drawn very different conclusions to yours. Was something new and deeply incriminating revealed on the lunchtime news, or are you basing your views on some insider knowledge we are not privy to?

[nonmifairidere]

This is such an obvious pre-pre-election Mail gambit, I am amazed so many are being exercised about it. Actually, I am not surprised. This type of muck sticks because insinuation, tenuous association and plain untuth are hoovered up blindly by the all to ready to be outraged. The Mail knows so well the easy hot buttons to push. It knows it's audience. It knows that those who ogle and revel in the sleb slush it peddles will not see it's glaring hypocrisy. They will be too busy congatulating themselves for their perspicacity in knowing all along that all those lefties are wrong 'uns.

[Viviennemary]

I wish I was privy to some news but sadly I'm not. But what I do know is that if this was a Tory male politician Harman would be at the front of the queue calling for resignations in her usual plummy self righteous tones. Sorry but I think the only media person that annoys me even more is our friend Rebekkah Brookes.

[limitedperiodonly]

I also saw this on the lunchtime news and my heart sank when saw Nadine Dorries lined up to comment. I'll have to learn not to rush to judgement.

Dorries stuck up for 'Harriet and her husband Jack' and said it was nonsense to suggest they would knowingly support paedophiles and spelled out the timeline of Harman's involvement with the NCCL and their constitution which allowed the affiliation of several groups .

She also said in the decade after the decriminalisation of homosexuality paedophiles felt that their kind of 'free love' was next, so actively campaigned for it.

I've no idea about her views on the age of consent for gay sex, but she was in no way equating being gay with wanting to abuse children and expressed distress and frustration with people who confuse the two.

They also had a guest who was the chairman of a charity representing adult survivors of abuse who backed Harman too. Apologies to him because I've forgotten his name and the name of his charity.

I think that like Ed Miliband, she's right to go on the attack over this.

[Morgause]

Have I missed something here why is no one bothered that labour pretty much lobbied for a group that would see that the age of consent is lowered to 4 years old ffs

No they didn't.

End of discussion.

You can't make up a lie and then expect people to discuss it FFS.

[Quangle]

Pleasantly surprised at Nadine Dorries.