BBC Panorama Attacks VIP Abuse Survivors

BBC1's Panorama is planning to attack survivors of child sex abuse and others who are uncovering evidence of a 'Westminster paedophile network'.

Panorama plans to smear abuse survivors, criticise Exaro and other media over their reports on VIP paedophiles, and undermine MP's who campaigned on the issue.

Panorama insiders say that the programme has to go ahead because so much has been spent on it.

Despite all the efforts, according to Panorama insiders, the production team realises that it does not have a story.

www.exaronews.com...

We are being forewarned of yet another attack on whistleblowers, survivors and witnesses. Such attacks are standard across the board. The paedophiles running the system ultimately control the training of investigators and the mechanism of the 'justice' machine. Commonly the whistleblower/survivor is made the victim of the investigation. This is terrifying for other survivors who will often then say "Nothing happened!" because they see where whistleblowing can lead to.

Victims will be intimidated, those who support them will be ridiculed...

This is an important announcement for all those who do not have relevant experience.
You have no idea how the system works. Those of us that have been there know the system is set up to fail. We who are telling you the system attacks the survivor and/or whistleblower are saying this because we have experienced it.

The system wants you to join in attacking. Just like the escaped monkey. Do you know that story? A pet monkey ran up a tree and wouldn't come back down. It's favourite treats were laid out at the base of the tree and it was spoken to sweetly, but still it wouldn't come down. Then someone made a suggestion. A servant was brought from a nearby house and everyone set about pretending to beat the servant. Immediately the monkey rushed down and joined in the attack.

Don't be the manipulated monkey.

This is just not right at all.

a reply to: Kester
covering things up is easy when you have been conducting it as long as they have. manipulation is easy when you have been conducting it as long as they have. Practice makes perfect.
Denial and complacency are crimes against humanity.

a reply to: Kester

S & F for sharing, not spotted this myself.

However, to be fair Kester mate, the "witnesses" and "victims" have absolutely no credibility. The main "victim" has been found to be a liar in court, has admitted guilt for things he had nothing to do with and shown to be a complete and utter fantasist. Moreover, there are links to Tom Watson making it appear that this may be politically motivated rather than just what it should be, ie an investigation into sickening practices.

If the whole thing does turn out to be made up and inspired by politics, heads should roll (metaphorically).

The whole Ted Heath thing with the "credibile madam" with notes, turned out to be procuring homosexual men when homosexuality was illegal. Which is what the madam's notes confirmed.

If there really is something to this story, i hope the Police and CPS take it as far as possible. However, if, as seemingly appears likely, it turns out to be made up nonsense, i would hope charges are brought against those that perpetrated the enquiry in the first place.

a reply to: Flavian

There was a quote aired recently saying roughly, "I've found the best tactic is to create some survivors/witnesses who will later be discredited. The other hundred witnesses will then be discredited by association".

a reply to: Flavian
To be honest my own opinion is, if it's getting publicity it must be BS.
Applied to everything.
Am I cynical?

a reply to: Kester

But as i understand it, there are actually only a couple of witnesses to Dolphin Square, the main one of which is "Nick" who is proven to be the liar. This makes the whole thing pretty unsafe.

Kincorra, etc is a completely different story and that and similar situations need serious investigations with extremely lengthy prison sentences.

However, a large part of this concerns Dolphin Square and what is coming out there is proving to be highly unreliable / made up.

a reply to: Kester

I wouldn't be surprised if this programme doesn't backfire completely on the BBC. People hate paedophiles, especially VIP ones who think its their privileged positions that protect their appalling behaviour.

The BBC unfortunately does have a staid audience of lounge lizards gullible to its propaganda. This is because in the past it was considered to be a neutral station which clearly it is not today.

Good on the people working there who are exposing these tactics. Its all about money today, nothing else and obviously who can screw who at whatever age etc.

I refuse to pay my TV license these days.

I wont have my money pay for this nest of pedophiles.

originally posted by: crazyewok
I refuse to pay my TV license these days.

I wont have my money pay for this nest of pedophiles.

How'd you get away with that? Kudos for doing so though.

originally posted by: MrCrow

originally posted by: crazyewok
I refuse to pay my TV license these days.

I wont have my money pay for this nest of pedophiles.

How'd you get away with that? Kudos for doing so though.

Plenty of loop holes out there

I would rather wait and see, rather than judge the comments of commentators who have not seen the programme, but are probably working of rumours and a particular worldview.

a reply to: crazyewok

Yeah me neither. Scum bags.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Flavian
To be honest my own opinion is, if it's getting publicity it must be BS.
Applied to everything.
Am I cynical?

Not necessarily!

However, you have to admit that the fact the main person in the inquiry (this Nick fellow) has been labelled both a liar and a fantasist by a Judge in a previous case (which was proven in law) doesn't really leave the inquiry with anywhere else to go, unless new witnesses / victims turn up. Essentially, the very foundations of the investigations cannot be trusted. From a legal standpoint you have practically lost before you have begun and this is important because justice could only ever be served legally.

The simple fact is that for a historic case like this, evidence is extremely unlikely. Therefore witness testimonies will carry a lot of weight and form a large part of any case brought. I cannot put it any clearer than to say that legally, the main accuser cannot be trusted.

As this is the case, for me it means you have to find corrobating witnesses and victims, etc. There won't be any forensic evidence available.

What is being revealed suggests that it is more probable that this didn't happen (at least as far as Dolphin Square is concerned). Unfortunately, if it did happen, "Nick's" history of being a fantasist means he would be highly unlikely to ever see justice.

originally posted by: Flavian


However, you have to admit that the fact the main person in the inquiry (this Nick fellow) has been labelled both a liar and a fantasist by a Judge in a previous case (which was proven in law) doesn't really leave the inquiry with anywhere else to go, unless new witnesses / victims turn up. Essentially, the very foundations of the investigations cannot be trusted. From a legal standpoint you have practically lost before you have begun and this is important because justice could only ever be served legally.

The simple fact is that for a historic case like this, evidence is extremely unlikely. Therefore witness testimonies will carry a lot of weight and form a large part of any case brought. I cannot put it any clearer than to say that legally, the main accuser cannot be trusted.

There is another way to look at it ... The accused have the money and position

to employ the best barristers? ...

So if a case against their client is very strong bring on a victim who has already

been tried and accused and found to be a liar and an unreliable witness ...

Hey presto!! another paedophile gets away with it


The police had Jimmy Saville many times .... but couldn't get anything to stick.


For the *real victims* it is really hard to go to court and reopen all they have

had buried within themselves, Knowing that they will be pilloried and not

believed because one witness is found to be liar and unreliable.

a reply to: MrCrow

Don't pay, send a letter denying implied right of access if you think it will make you feel better, and when they turn up tell them you don't need a licence, when/if they ask to come inside to see if its connected to receive live tv tell them no.

They will come round every 2 years and every 2 years they will walk away heads down. They also hate it when you mention they are a private company working on commission for paedophiles.

I've been unlucky enough to meet some real b@$t4rds at my door, acting like police and giving it the big I am, but a calm approach and asking them questions usually works. A lot of people I know use the whole 'common law' argument that its not a law to have a license, but I find it unnecessary, just tell them you dont need one nor will you be needing one.

a reply to: Kester

Spineless f*ck*rs. They spend the licence fee fast enough when it comes to paying these...ahem... "celebs".....

I have an explosive idea, " Tell the God damn truth for once!"

Have no doubt in my mind whatsoever that there is/was a paedo conspiracy and cover up in Government.

However, the more I read of this "Nick" character's testimony - and especially Exaro's shaping of the story - the less convinced I am by it. Something isn't right. The fact that Exaro are hammering this story whilst controlling the drip-feed of information smacks of news agency profile building.

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm concerned that this could detract from the real story.

a reply to: Kester

It really should be starkly clear to all of us now how right wing biased the BBC is, they have been constanty tearing down the left wing politician's and sidelining left wing producers and reporters and all while they have becoming increasingly more openly biased in favour of Tory policy's so is it really that shocking that when a cover up is needed they will as they have with Mr Corbyn jump on the character assassination bandwagon.

How many people in our nation are poor, struggling and are often too ill to work but the BBC creates programs at the licence fee payers expense as does the tax payer owned channel 4 that constantly deride the welfare system and highlight a small number of individuals whom are fiddling the system almost like an anti welfare propeganda tool, if now then were are the program's showing those whom are dying, going to food bank's in the sixth wealthiest nation on earth and being made homeless, were are the interviews with these people or the reporter trawling the street's for personal story's, it is almost as if they have become the modern British Equivelent of what the Nazi Media engine of the 1930's and 40's in Germany was, a tool to manipulate the psychology and attitudes of society in order to enact even more right wing policy's.

But then look what happen's to true reporters whom start to make enquiries about public figures and child abuse, AKA Jill Dando, was it the establishment that had her murdered by an MI5 hitman?.

Let's look at there reporters and there background, most are very comfortable upper middle class so of coure have right wing view point's even though they are essentially civil servants as they work for the licence fee payer and of course they take there orders from a man whom was put in charge of them by David Cameron, a man whom was critical of them for being TOO LEFT WING--so what they hell is right wing to the tory viewpoint.

I have never seen a documentary made about the innocent miners whom suffered abuse and police brutality in the pickets when Tatcher was taking there livelihood's away though the BBC and other's highlighted the actions of a few rogue element's whom had been pushed too far such as the appalling death of an innocent taxi driver whom had a concrete block dropped on his car because he was taking strike breakers past the picket line, however what about all the fractured skull's caused by police trucheons, deaths related to these injury's some many years later after a lifetime of illness caused by these paramilitary police tactic's used against lawfully (and the unions were within the law) striking civilian's whom were merely trying to defend there community's.

The problem is we are all hypnotised by the crap the media feed's us and you have to remember that the media is controlled, it is a tool of state and of the vested interests whom of course are right wing.

I used to think the sun Shone out of the BBC's backside but now I see a corrupt right wing propeganda machine at work which seldom speaks unbiased truth.

It seems you have the foxes guarding the hen house. that's going to continue to be an issue.
Why is there not an outside entity investigating this? There has been plenty of evidence shown to prove that "something" happened. And since we are dealing with innocent children, I think it's warranted.

What do you do in this situation?