Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Conservative MP Nigel Evans Arrested For Rape And Sexual Assault On Two Men

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
reply to post by andy1972
 


True Andy we cant take every thing as it seems.


Okay, I'll bite...

You know why Cameron said that? Because it's true, and you are actually being a good example of it. The list that was released at that time included men who had CONSENSUAL relations with MEN over the age of 18 - but at the time the law was unjust and was set at 21 for gay men. There were also harsh terms for men caught engaging in consensual activities outside too, given labels that actually make them sound like perverts - when in a actual fact they are no different to a heterosexual couple caught being amorous in an alley or a park.

So, people found themselves on a list being accused of being sexual predators and deviants when in actual fact the laws at the time were not equal, were vastly unfair, and have retrospectively been abolished.

You need to learn about what you are accusing people of before you post, because you come across as just another homophobic reactionary tabloid reader about to go and burn down the house of a pediatrician
edit on 5-5-2013 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 5 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   
The reason camoron said that was because of this case. He will be found not guilty and it will all have been a mistake. Its all part of a pysops to dicredit whistle blowers and other people who come forward to name MPs who are paedophiles. A bit like the mcalpine case were the police showed a victim his photo and he named him. Then it was all exposed that mcalpine was wrongly accused. More pysops by the nonces and their enablers in govt. Elm tree guest house is a tricky one for them at the moment. Were children from council care homes were taken to London from Wales, to be raped and a bused by these nonces. The children were also coming from a care home in Richmond.
All those who doubt the evidence should go and read that thread on Ickes site which exposes it all.
Heres the link if anyone wants to know the truth of this sordid sad tale.

www.davidicke.com...

Hey rocker I couldnt give a toss about homos. What riles me is the thought of people like cyril smith, or jimmy savil. Who for 50 years was raping children all over the country. The police knew all about it and covered it up. As did the BBC and MI 5/6 who must also have known. That is their job to vet people who come into contact with the royal family. Yet they never told the Queen? The mentor of charles? A child rapist?
edit on 5-5-2013 by illuminnaughty because: reply to rocker



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
The reason camoron said that was because of this case. He will be found not guilty and it will all have been a mistake. Its all part of a pysops to dicredit whistle blowers and other people who come forward to name MPs who are paedophiles.


This is clearly rubbish, because Nigel Evans was taking to one of the accusers last bloody week! So how did Cameron know about this story when the guys involved in it were hanging out as friends up until just a week ago?

You're not working with evidence, you're working with unfounded conspiracy, like so many others on ATS it seems.



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocker2013
 

Rocker
camoron knew all about this case in 2009

www.telegraph.co.uk... -behaviour.html



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
All those who doubt the evidence should go and read that thread on Ickes site which exposes it all.
Heres the link if anyone wants to know the truth of this sordid sad tale.

www.davidicke.com...


Also, I've just been looking through that, and it seems to be 99% BS too, more speculation and accusation from witch hunters who think the whole world is a pedo ring. There are some real strange people posting some real bizarre stuff there, and they are clearly ignoramuses too, repeating themselves over and over and making very little sense.

There are even posts in there from people pointing out all the complete inconsistencies and blatant errors in their accusations, and they just ignore them and carry on with their BS - exactly like people here on ATS ignoring evidence and believing the fantasy.

I agree there has been a lot of disgusting acts committed by some disgusting people, and it is coming to light. But I think you are going way over the top accusing people of child abuse when you know f-all about it.

Like I said, you come across as a tabloid reading reactionary.



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
reply to post by Rocker2013
 

Rocker
camoron knew all about this case in 2009

www.telegraph.co.uk... -behaviour.html


Okay, now did you actually READ THAT ARTICLE?




He was interviewed by Patrick McLoughlin, the then opposition chief whip who is now Transport Secretary, but the matter was not reported to police by either the Conservatives or the complainant.


He was talked to by other members of his party (not the police) about a complaint from an adult male (not a child) for making an unwanted advance (hitting on someone is NOT A CRIMINAL ACT).

He made someone feel uncomfortable because he came on to them, and the conservative party had a word with him about it. This is no more criminal than you being called into a meeting with HR for making an inappropriate joke that a colleague complained about.

Again, you are trying to make this into a bigger story, and to is the Telegraph.

We'll see if he has done anything criminal when he faces questions about those who have accused him. But what you are doing now is incredibly unfair, and I think you have an ulterior motive for it.



posted on May, 5 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocker2013
 


Rocker I dont read controlled media. News papers? lol Almost as bad as the BBC who covered up for nonces like savil, rolf harris, start hall, dave lee travis, jim davidson, eddie starr. Just some of nonces who worked there for years and it was all covered up.

[img]http://
[/img]

[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img163/9729/jimmysavileclaimedpolic.th.jpg[/IMG ]

[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img690/4589/jimmysavileandestherran.th.jpg[/IMG ]



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
reply to post by andy1972
 


True Andy we cant take every thing as it seems.


Okay, I'll bite...

You know why Cameron said that? Because it's true, and you are actually being a good example of it. The list that was released at that time included men who had CONSENSUAL relations with MEN over the age of 18 - but at the time the law was unjust and was set at 21 for gay men. There were also harsh terms for men caught engaging in consensual activities outside too, given labels that actually make them sound like perverts - when in a actual fact they are no different to a heterosexual couple caught being amorous in an alley or a park.

So, people found themselves on a list being accused of being sexual predators and deviants when in actual fact the laws at the time were not equal, were vastly unfair, and have retrospectively been abolished.

You need to learn about what you are accusing people of before you post, because you come across as just another homophobic reactionary tabloid reader about to go and burn down the house of a pediatrician
edit on 5-5-2013 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)


Many on that list? Only a few names were mentioned, but how about all the people arrested since?
How many 21yr old men was molested by Jimmy Savile? (the reason this list even got press)

The list was specifically pedophiles, whether the age limit law changed is irrelevent the law WAS in place, consensual or not doesn't even enter the fray.
He jumped from one topic of pedophilia in the establishment due to the Savile scandal and jumped to sexuality.

You are obviously a conservative voter as I seen your comment further upon the 1st page calling them centrist, that is Daily Mail doublespeak. They are still the party of the rich and the continue to demonise the poor.
They are still the nasty party and they were never voted in yet are making wholesale changes to the country (which cost more!!) and they are falling to pieces, good riddens to them.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Taggart
 


Both the major parties in the UK are centrist, next to nothing between them


Saying they weren't voted in is a complete lie by the way. They had the most votes -under our first past the post system they won. The coalition was so that they would have enough votes to reasonably be able to pass legislation!

(Seriously pisses me off to hear poor losers lying about the election, if you don't like the way our system works thats fine fptp is a stupid system and I agree, but don't try and claim they weren't elected just because you don't like the result!)

Labour were voted out for a reason - say what you like about the tories they didn't sell all our gold off at the lowest price it had been for twenty years and bankrupt the country bailing out the banks like Gordon Brown did - he must have been one of the most inept leaders we've ever had.
edit on 6-5-2013 by MaxSteiner because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by MaxSteiner


Labour were voted out for a reason - say what you like about the tories they didn't sell all our gold off at the lowest price it had been for twenty years and bankrupt the country bailing out the banks like Gordon Brown did - he must have been one of the most inept leaders we've ever had.
edit on 6-5-2013 by MaxSteiner because: (no reason given)


Dont forget following the USA into a illegal war and the waste of billion of pounds on pointless govement schems and quangos.


Of course the conservatives are not much better



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Police don't arrest people randomly in the UK (yet), especially not Members of Parliament. For them to have arrested Mr Evans MP, means they feel they have strong physical evidence already, otherwise they would have just invited him in to ask him some questions.

The simple fact is, we are just onlookers. We don't have access to the body of evidence the police have. All we can do is speculate.

So given that, we should just let the police and the courts do their jobs, and not partake in a witch hunt, as we will never have access to the relevant body of evidence.

Admittedly, the cynic in me says that his political affiliations mean that the case will be "swept under the carpet" and will never see the inside of a courtroom, but again, that's just speculation on my part.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Well I definitely agree there



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
Yuck. Another Tory caught with his trousers down, but this time accused of rape instead of mere adultery. I guess that David Cameron must have his head in his hands as yet more bad press descends on him.


No one has been cuaght doing anything, he has been arrested, questioned and released.

It is also interesting to note that one of the accusers was socialising with the MP up until last week! Sounds to me like a stitch up.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by BMorris
Police don't arrest people randomly in the UK (yet), especially not Members of Parliament. For them to have arrested Mr Evans MP, means they feel they have strong physical evidence already, otherwise they would have just invited him in to ask him some questions.


No, it doesn't. You can be arrested from a simple allegation. The process of arrest guarantees certain process which protect the accused and the Police in trying to build a defence/case. Being arrested is, in no way, indicative of there being any evidence at all.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by wildtimes
Wait, a "Conservative" member of parliament is pushing for gay rights?
Guess I need to study up on the use of the term yet again, this time as used in the UK. It and the term "liberal" have various meanings in certain subjects.

That seems to be in direct opposition to what USA "Conservatives" are trying to do. Is there a different "conservativism" in the UK than there is in the USA?

Otherwise, yes, another disgusting politician being undressed....
while Israel bombs Syria. I get your point there, entirely.


Conservatives in the UK are really nothing like the USA. We don't generally have religious preaching from politicians, and although there is a "polite" Christianity in some aspects of the Conservative party it's nothing like the evangelical nature of American conservatives.

Basically, the UK the Conservative party has become more centrist in order to appeal to the majority, while in the USA the Republican party is holding on to the religious, judgemental and moralistic aspects and sinking in the polls as a result.

The Republican party will have to become more centrist and liberal in the future if it has any hope of gaining support in the youth of America, as opinions about gay marriage and equality are changing fast.

Basically, here the conservatives are more concerned with fiscal conservatism and less about morality and telling people how to live their lives.

As for this story, I think we should be a little cautious. There has been a lot of BS posted on the net about innocent people in the last couple of years. It would be worth watching this story unfold a little more before condemning an accused person.


You forgot the part that a majority of millennial Americans oppose gay marriage, and the over all a Majority of American's oppose gay marriage.






top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join