Cameron says people could start a witch hunt for homosexuals.

It is also very telling that the politicians wanted heads to roll immediately when they thought they could win points against the BBC but now the finger points at their little clique it is time to treat the subject delicately and take time.

I agree with freeborn that you should make sure of someone’s guilt before putting this label on them which is all the more reason for making this investigation quick and open to public scrutiny

reply to post by DrHammondStoat

Surely the police should re - look at those named in connection to the Welsh and Irish (Kincora) Boys homes abuse instead of silencing the victims as they did before.

Of course they should - but do you trust any UK Police force to investigate fairly and honestly and to openly report their findings?
I certainly don't - and the thing is, given the potentioal scope and extent of such enquiries I'm not sure who I'd trust.

If brave MP's such as Tom Watson and 'nutjobs' such as David Icke have already named those names after speaking to witnesses, why shouldn' t we discuss them? Afterall, they are not new accusations.

I understand - I personally want to know, and why shouldn't we all be informed of exactly who is being accused etc but that has got to be balanced by protecting the innocent - can you imagine the stain that has been cast on each and every one of those currently accused and no matter what that stain will always remain with them even if those allegations are proven unfounded on any of them.

I honestly don't know what the answer is.

Obviously we shouldn't be pointing the finger at people just based on personal opinion.

Obviously.
Unfortunately not everyone is as considerate.

Here is the link to the article I was speaking of - I don't think there's any great surprises in there - I have no idea how credible it is and I don't think any sources are given.

mountzion144.ning.com...

If as said in the article only a small percentage is true then it is truly staggering and who knows the true extent of these practices.

But none of that explains Cameron linking paedophilia to homosexuality - whatever is going on and whatever the extent of it Cameron appears to be trying to deflect away from it and sow the seeds of homophobia.

Thank you for that link Freeborn. It just goes to show you how big this scandal is. There are an awful lot more people that are involved. The entire system is riddled with it. From the top, right down to the bottom. Every one covering up for every one else. Justice system is a joke. The police covering up crimes of the govt/rich types (brother masons) Jim so-VILE was just the first domino to fall and this could bring the govt down. How does any normal thinking honest person. Condone these crimes? This is armageddon for our govt. They all knew about it Torys libs and labour and have done nothing. Except to rip us all off by robbing us, for any and every thing that they could. Duck houses? yes we are all f**king quackers.
Enough is enough. People should be out in the streets. Whats up with every one??

reply to post by Freeborn


I really do agree with what you say, it's difficult. Again, maybe Cameron brought out the gay witch hunt thing because he knows some of the names going around are of gay colleagues. If one of your colleagues was named you would probably want to protect them in some way and would have difficulty believing the allegations. On the other hand he could know they are guilty.

This is the mentaility of our government officials. Homosexuals, although disgusting imho, have nothing whatsoever to do with kiddy fiddlers which is far more grose.

Homosexuals are not innocents like children, they are consenting adults. These children were manipulated by power hungry monsters who wanted to take away the innocence of kids. If this is the attitude of people running society then its no wonder we are in such trouble.

reply to post by illuminnaughty


Pedophilia is deep, deep entrenched within various governments around the world. America, the U.K. and a slew of others. It's even deeply rooted within Hollywood. So of course, they will do absolutely anything to deflect the attention onto something else.

Our governments are archaic despite what we want to believe and I for one feel it needs a good "cleaning up". Those responsible for this atrocity should be taken out back and have a bullet put in them. There is no cure for pedophilia and those "in" to it will always be "in" to it.

The Guardian newspapers have named Lord McAlpine as being one of those outed on the list but it's all just a silly case of mistaken identity

www.guardian.co.uk...

On Thursday Keith Gregory, the Wrexham councillor who has been an eloquent spokesperson for the victims of abuse this week, said he believed a different member of the McAlpine family who lived locally may have been mistaken for Lord McAlpine. He said a man who children at the home believed to be a member of the McAlpine family would arrive at Bryn Estyn in an expensive car. "He was a right flashy thing," he said.

Lord McAlpine was exonerated by the 1997 Waterhouse inquiry of any involvement in the abuse of children in the north Wales homes but not named because of an order by the retired judge preventing the identification of either victims or alleged abusers. As a result he has been the subject of persistent smears, which resurfaced following the Newsnight allegations about a senior Tory. But the allegations made by Messham began to unravel after it emerged that he told the Waterhouse inquiry in 1997 that the McAlpine family member he believed to be his abuser was now dead. Lord McAlpine is alive and living in Italy.

So in this rather clever article they are ridiculing the claims of the victims and making them out to be confused and stupid. Lord McAlpine's name was hushed up, hardly exonerated!

Any decent person would be trying to find out WHO EXACTLY raped and tortured these victims instead of making them look stupid

reply to post by DrHammondStoat


Just makes sure any possible future allegations will remain quiet for fear of being treated the same way. This will all be covered up and a distant memory left for the likes of conspiracy websites to discuss.

No one can be trusted to investigate this properly. Every level of the British establishment is involved. It's just a really sad situation that I can't see the solution for. Well not a solution that does not involve some overthrow of the entire British Establishment and starting all over again. But that's not going to happen.

reply to post by milkyway12


It's time for you to leave your cave and join the 21st century!

reply to post by DrHammondStoat



The 'it was a different MacAlpine' narrative has been going on for a while now. It didn't originate with the Guardian and I'm not sure how or why the Guardian would benefit from this. They're one of the few media outlets that aren't really beholden to the Government.

Any "decent person"? Are you going round interviewing people making abuse claims? Are you doing detective work as to whereabouts of particular individuals at any given time?

We've currently got a massive media inquiry as to the role of the media and where journalists can draw the line. Are you suggesting that journalists - on the Guardian or wherever - do the police's job for them? The role of investigative journalism is to uncover stories and present stories. After that, it's the job of the police and the justice system. We are at the part where the story is pretty much understood, if not fully known: leads have been suggested, victims have come forward and prior discrepancies have been pointed out.

Whilst I appreciate your frustration, I'm not really sure what you expect journalists, or anyone other than the police, to do at this moment in time. I'm not the biggest fan of the police, but I'd rather they didn't jump the gun on this and do it right (this time). I've more faith in the police at the moment as, laughably, the Tories have even managed to upset their 'paramilitary wing' with their austerity policies. Their plans to increase the politicisation of the police is blowing up in their faces.

reply to post by woodwardjnr


Yes it's sad. There is even talk (on the web) about internet restrictions being applied because of what's happened. The only solution I can see is if the public don't let the information die and spread it everywhere....but then again most people are too caught up in the never ending cycle of day to day living and keeping the wolf from their door.

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
reply to post by DrHammondStoat

 

The 'it was a different MacAlpine' narrative has been going on for a while now. It didn't originate with the Guardian and I'm not sure how or why the Guardian would benefit from this. They're one of the few media outlets that aren't really beholden to the Government.

Any "decent person"? Are you going round interviewing people making abuse claims? Are you doing detective work as to whereabouts of particular individuals at any given time?

We've currently got a massive media inquiry as to the role of the media and where journalists can draw the line. Are you suggesting that journalists - on the Guardian or wherever - do the police's job for them? The role of investigative journalism is to uncover stories and present stories. After that, it's the job of the police and the justice system. We are at the part where the story is pretty much understood, if not fully known: leads have been suggested, victims have come forward and prior discrepancies have been pointed out.

I was really referring to journalists who wrote the article when I said 'any decent person'. They have the means and know how to investigate. Personally I have done a great deal of reading into this scandal, i'm not sure i could do 'everything' that is needed but I can contribute.

The point is that the Police and investigating bodies have swept things under the carpet, they are not to be trusted. The public can see this and are reacting in the only way they can.

It was journalists that uncovered and presented the testimony of the Jimmy Savile witnesses since the 60's after they had been dismissed by the police. Some of this is now being investigated by police again.

reply to post by DrHammondStoat


Yes but, as I said, all journalists can do is investigate in a limited sense, especially after the media hacking scandal. Many victims have come forward and without the use of a time machine I'm not sure what you expect journalists to do. How can journalists find out "WHO EXACTLY raped and tortured these victims". Names have already been named, victims have come forward. As you say yourself, journalists did much of the leg work back in the 1960s: it was the police who dropped the ball. So what are journalists meant to do exactly here?

Honestly, and no offence is meant, what you appear to be frustrated by and clamouring for, is a police (re)investigation and some harsh custodial sentences. All of that is way beyond the purview of a journalist.

As this is a conspiracy site.

The MP's took a hit from the press due to their coverage of the expenses scandal. They retaliated with phone tapping charges that they were happy to turn a blind eye to previously and now this outrage the papers never pursued in the past.

Is this Murdock’s revenge? Will they call a truce soon and again agree to bury the truth?

reply to post by colin42


"Murdoch's revenge" sounds like a euphemism for diarrhoea.

I'm not so sure about this as it's not really driven by the Murdock press alone. Also, on a lot of right wing blogs there's a lot of complaining that this is being driven by the BBC as a response to the Savile-specific BBC criticisms and that's why it's 'suddenly' opened-up to include Tory paedophiles.

Originally posted by Freeborn
Here is the link to the article I was speaking of - I don't think there's any great surprises in there - I have no idea how credible it is and I don't think any sources are given.

The credibility of that article is shot to hell, and I would not be surprised if there is a pending law suit against those operating that site.

To begin with, how is sexual activity between two consenting men proof of anything? The author seems to be more of a homophobe than anyone trying to get to the truth.

He states consensual sex as being some kind of evidence of abuse, when clearly what two men get up to is nothing to do with this case.

I think the person behind that page is a complete idiot, has other motives, and should probably face charges for making unfounded accusations against others.

At the very least, the author of that page should be detained for questioning so that any supposed evidence they have can be scrutinized.

Police informants suggesting one of those named is guilty of murder, and this persons failure to report that to the authorities, is considered a criminal offence. If the author has a person in the police force telling him that someone is guilty of child abuse or murder, he has a legal obligation to report it.

The fact that this accusation is not made elsewhere suggests that this person is full of BS and doesn't know what they are talking about.

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
reply to post by DrHammondStoat

 

Yes but, as I said, all journalists can do is investigate in a limited sense, especially after the media hacking scandal. Many victims have come forward and without the use of a time machine I'm not sure what you expect journalists to do. How can journalists find out "WHO EXACTLY raped and tortured these victims". Names have already been named, victims have come forward. As you say yourself, journalists did much of the leg work back in the 1960s: it was the police who dropped the ball. So what are journalists meant to do exactly here?

I agree to a point, but I also agree that journalists need to be pushing this, and they can keep investigating and opening a route for whistle-blowers who might feel that this is becoming another whitewash.

Of course, the journalists job is to present information for the public to assess, and they have been doing that job in this respect. But they should also keep the pressure on and provide information as the investigation continues. That is the best way, IMO, to better ensure that justice is actually being done.

On the subject of the media and tabloids etc, it all comes down to one thing for me when it comes to the legalities of their information gathering (the whole phone hacking scandal etc.)

The notion of "in the public interest" has been warped and redefined. The trashy tabloids like to pretend that "in the public interest" means anything they think anyone would have the slightest interest in, from the size of Jordan's boobs to the weight of a Hollywood star.

In reality, "in the public interest" means stories that the public has a RIGHT to know about, such as police and government corruption or instances where a cover-up has taken place.

The media should get back to actually reporting based on the idea of what is in the public interest, and that doesn't mean they have the right to hack phones to find out which celeb might be sleeping with another.

This case would be one of those that is most definitely in the public interest, as it involves the potential criminal activity of politicians and BBC staff (who are all paid to provide services to the public), and it involves criminal acts against children.

This is completely different to gossip, and true investigative journalism should continue unabated in this case. I would expect the press to use whatever legal methods they can to uncover the story, while doing so in a way that will not jeopardise the case or accuse innocent people.

"Originally posted by detachedindividual
Of course, the journalists job is to present information for the public to assess, and they have been doing that job in this respect. But they should also keep the pressure on and provide information as the investigation continues. That is the best way, IMO, to better ensure that justice is actually being done.

On the subject of the media and tabloids etc, it all comes down to one thing for me when it comes to the legalities of their information gathering (the whole phone hacking scandal etc.) .........

.......The media should get back to actually reporting based on the idea of what is in the public interest, and that doesn't mean they have the right to hack phones to find out which celeb might be sleeping with another."


I think you have expressed what I mean there. It's less a matter of people doing their jobs as dictated by job description ect. but people doing what is morally right. A large number of police and certain journalists have not wanted to stick their heads above the parapet. Pressure is what journalists could apply if they choose.

reply to post by detachedindividual


Which was kind of my point about unsubstantiated claims being made against innocent people tarnishing people's reputations etc - innocent until proven guilty.

The author seems to rely on rumour and innuendo and makes some massive assumptions based on them.

But, and it's a massive but, one suspect's there is more than just an element of truth contained in the article - some of the rumours have been around for quite some time and have never been completely disproven.

And do we the public have a right to know when serious questions are being asked about our elected officials, their aides and advisors and other's in senior positions of authority etc?

And be honest, do you trust the police and / or the judiciary to investigate these allegations and to report openly and honestly bearing in mind persistent rumours of their active involvement in both the practices and the cover-up and the history of deflection tactics, misleading and suppressing information, corruption etc?